Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
I certainly agree that the gospels in their present form were not written by eyewitnesses and the originals they used were Christian in tone and origin (dislike of Judaism, impatience with the law, partiality for gentiles, proof of divinity through prophecy and miracles), but I wonder whether John actually did have an eyewitness account?
I note that there is a basic story which actually agrees with the synoptic story, though the common text for Matthew Mark and Luke has a lot of Galilean material that John simply doesn't have, so the synoptic common text had already diverged from the story John had. But I wonder whether John also had an eyewitness to the Judean material.
John has certainly used it in a very free fashion, adding his sermons and moving text about, but I did find, when the synoptic discrepancies had been cleared up, John's Passion week material ..well, it looked intriguing, at least.
Yep, I wonder whether at least the Tacitus record of 'castus' executed by Pilate might at least be history and the apostolic hope for Jesus' return in the spirit, being reinvented to suit the gentiles by Paul was taken by the Greek Christians to be even - more divine and anti - Jewish that Paul could ever have intended?
Well, that's off the case of the three days and nights, which looks (in a very truncated form) more likely than Thursday to Sunday in the tomb.
Last edited by TRANSPONDER; 05-28-2012 at 10:46 AM..
Yeah, I'm starting to see that Jesus is said to die on Friday. If it's true that any part of the day, is considered a full day in Jewish count back then, that would explain the prophecy of three days and nights. I'll continue to look in on this.
Also, I do not believe Matthew and Luke made up nativities. There's astronomical proof of a star (conjuction of Jupiter and Venus), that would have appeared to be the brightest in the sky since that time. Because this star was actually planets, they could wander throughout the set of fixed stars in the sky, allowing for it to stop over Bethlehem. (Retrograde motion)
If Herod died in 1 BC, then this event fits in perfectly with Matthew's account. Now Luke's account explains why the family was in Bethlehem in the first place. Because Luke's account is so heavily vested in Mary's opinions, it is most likely that Luke used Mary for a source. If that is the case, I'm sure she would know exactly what was going on back then. (A first hand source) Obviously, the biggest problem with Luke's account, is the census issued by Augustus. Some have linked the census to Caesar Augustus' 25th Silver Jubilee in 2 BC. So there is some legitamcy there with these nativity accounts.
Also, Luke begins his account as a dedication to Theophilus. Who is most likely some kind of official, because Luke calls him "most excellent Theophilus". The title of "most excellent" was usually referred to Roman officials. So here is Luke claiming to put together an orderly account of Jesus' time on this earth, and how would it be for Theophilus to find out that good chunks of it were nothing but fables? So Luke had great reason to be truthful and accurate.
Oh, and a point about Matthew's account. In Matthew ch. 28 verse 15 it reads....
And they took the money and did as they had been instructed; and this story was widely spread among the Jews, and is to this day.
This verse is referring to the guards that were placed to keep watch over Jesus' tomb. The jewish priests wanted the guards to keep quiet about what really happened, and payed them off to say the disciples took the body. Matthew makes the claim that this report was widely spread among the Jews, and could even be verified to the day. So if I'm reading Matthew's account in 40-60 AD (don't know the exact time the Gospel of Matthew was written), I could verify whether that saying was true. So this point had to be true, that Jesus body was no longer in the grave. We also know that trained guards would not fall asleep on duty, that would result in death. So this is probably the hardest evidence there is, to Christ's resurrection.
Yeah, I'm starting to see that Jesus is said to die on Friday. If it's true that any part of the day, is considered a full day in Jewish count back then, that would explain the prophecy of three days and nights. I'll continue to look in on this.
Also, I do not believe Matthew and Luke made up nativities. There's astronomical proof of a star (conjuction of Jupiter and Venus), that would have appeared to be the brightest in the sky since that time. Because this star was actually planets, they could wander throughout the set of fixed stars in the sky, allowing for it to stop over Bethlehem. (Retrograde motion)
If Herod died in 1 BC, then this event fits in perfectly with Matthew's account. Now Luke's account explains why the family was in Bethlehem in the first place. Because Luke's account is so heavily vested in Mary's opinions, it is most likely that Luke used Mary for a source. If that is the case, I'm sure she would know exactly what was going on back then. (A first hand source) Obviously, the biggest problem with Luke's account, is the census issued by Augustus. Some have linked the census to Caesar Augustus' 25th Silver Jubilee in 2 BC. So there is some legitamcy there with these nativity accounts.
Also, Luke begins his account as a dedication to Theophilus. Who is most likely some kind of official, because Luke calls him "most excellent Theophilus". The title of "most excellent" was usually referred to Roman officials. So here is Luke claiming to put together an orderly account of Jesus' time on this earth, and how would it be for Theophilus to find out that good chunks of it were nothing but fables? So Luke had great reason to be truthful and accurate.
Oh, and a point about Matthew's account. In Matthew ch. 28 verse 15 it reads....
And they took the money and did as they had been instructed; and this story was widely spread among the Jews, and is to this day.
This verse is referring to the guards that were placed to keep watch over Jesus' tomb. The jewish priests wanted the guards to keep quiet about what really happened, and payed them off to say the disciples took the body. Matthew makes the claim that this report was widely spread among the Jews, and could even be verified to the day. So if I'm reading Matthew's account in 40-60 AD (don't know the exact time the Gospel of Matthew was written), I could verify whether that saying was true. So this point had to be true, that Jesus body was no longer in the grave. We also know that trained guards would not fall asleep on duty, that would result in death. So this is probably the hardest evidence there is, to Christ's resurrection.
I am greatly impressed that you are looking at the arguments on their merits instead of dismissing them because they do not accord with certain beliefs.
As to the nativity, don't want to derail the thread but I can give a link to a thread where the subject was thrashed out fully with the Late C34, one of the toughest theist nuts to crack we have ever had.
Oh, and a point about Matthew's account. In Matthew ch. 28 verse 15 it reads....
And they took the money and did as they had been instructed; and this story was widely spread among the Jews, and is to this day.
This verse is referring to the guards that were placed to keep watch over Jesus' tomb.
If you read the sceptic annotated bible, this passage proves that it was written long after the fact and this phase appears in 27:8 too.
11 Now while they were going, behold, some of the guard came into the city and reported to the chief priests all the things that had happened. 12 When they had assembled with the elders and consulted together, they gave a large sum of money to the soldiers, 13 saying, “Tell them, ‘His disciples came at night and stole Him away while we slept.’ 14 And if this comes to the governor’s ears, we will appease him and make you secure.” 15 So they took the money and did as they were instructed; and this saying is commonly reported among the Jews until this day.
If you read the Jewish member comments here, they are not taught the body was stolen so it does not hold true.
WHY would this text be added this way if not to build in an apologetic? The Jewish messiah is supposed to bring peace to the world and be a conquering king type. No need for a virgin birth and no need for a resurrection.
There is enough other reasons to doubt jesus as messiah as a Jewish messiah would not claim a deity status, that is blasphemy in their laws.
Furthermore, it has been suggested, that the penalty for falling asleep on guard duty was punishable by death. How would anyone suggest that this was "normal" and all of the guards fell asleep. If you have ever been in the military, you do shifts while the others rest.
This is an embellishment and it suggests that the Jewish folk believed he would rise from the dead. It was not in their culture to believe this.
This is merely a good example of how the jesus story was embellished.
Think about it. If jesus knew that the religious Jews did not believe him, all he had to do was appear to them and they would have all converted there and then. Who does he appear to? Only his followers. How convenient?
This alone should tell you that the gospels were fabricated long "after the fact".
The only reason christianity made it out of the ME was because it was decreed a state religion. Christianity was declared to be the official religion of Rome by Flavius Theodosius in 380 CE.
When the whales beach...Johan brings a message to the lands the whale lands on...to change their evil ways...or else.....Something along those lines.....Whales still beaching alive today...and in great numbers others are following in their tail prints...means many messages have been sent symbolically speaking to the nations and kingdoms of this selfishly Human bent world....and they say they do not know why?.....Lies and liars....who would of thunk it?
Jesus died or rested on the Wednesday...and was raised up on a Saturday night or very early sunday morning.., as when the two women went on Sunday early morning before the sun came up...Jesus had already risen....The day starts when the sun rises...and ends when the sun goes down....thus the sabbeth starts friday at sunset, and ends Saturday at sunset....one day...in seven.....And Jesus said the Sabbeth is for man...not for God...God can work any day when he needs to work....and as long as it is for the betterment of all and for all...as the greator good is said to be the resulting factors....It is premissable by Jesus to work good deeds on every day!....no day is omitted from this amendment....We can do work, as long as it is good works we do in line with God's word and will.....or in line with the spirit of God...to this I see merit...and Jesus did do miracles on the sabbeth of healing and such...even making water into wine on celibatory holidays..where no work was to be done, as said by ?....That means the Sabbath although good for rest from works, is not necessarily forced, if one or many in the creation needs help...it is good to help...for the greator Good of all.....Yes?...and when all is in good estates...rest..and be merry in that....So first seek the fulfillment of the will and word of God...then rest....is it not so...that after God created everything...not before hand that he rested....so to fulfill and follow in those footsteps...first complete the work...then rest....as God did do himself.
As for this topic, I'm still reviewing the prophecy of three days and three nights. In the last link SeekerSA posted which showed Jesus dying on Friday. It mentioned the the people saw three days as inclusive, so any part of the day was considered a full day. Even in my "double Sabbath" theory, it is inclusive. Yet the difference is, the double Sabbath theory clearly shows the three days and three nights specifically. If Jesus' only intention was to be in the grave for three days, why not just say three days. He specifically states "three days and three nights". I just can't help but think this saying is referring more to just three days in itself, but that Christ fulfilled a very specific time period.
When the whales beach...Johan brings a message to the lands the whale lands on...to change their evil ways...or else.....Something along those lines.....Whales still beaching alive today...and in great numbers others are following in their tail prints...means many messages have been sent symbolically speaking to the nations and kingdoms of this selfishly Human bent world....and they say they do not know why?.....Lies and liars....who would of thunk it?
Jesus died or rested on the Wednesday...and was raised up on a Saturday night or very early sunday morning.., as when the two women went on Sunday early morning before the sun came up...Jesus had already risen....The day starts when the sun rises...and ends when the sun goes down....thus the sabbeth starts friday at sunset, and ends Saturday at sunset....one day...in seven.....And Jesus said the Sabbeth is for man...not for God...God can work any day when he needs to work....and as long as it is for the betterment of all and for all...as the greator good is said to be the resulting factors....It is premissable by Jesus to work good deeds on every day!....no day is omitted from this amendment....We can do work, as long as it is good works we do in line with God's word and will.....or in line with the spirit of God...to this I see merit...and Jesus did do miracles on the sabbeth of healing and such...even making water into wine on celibatory holidays..where no work was to be done, as said by ?....That means the Sabbath although good for rest from works, is not necessarily forced, if one or many in the creation needs help...it is good to help...for the greator Good of all.....Yes?...and when all is in good estates...rest..and be merry in that....So first seek the fulfillment of the will and word of God...then rest....is it not so...that after God created everything...not before hand that he rested....so to fulfill and follow in those footsteps...first complete the work...then rest....as God did do himself.
I wish I could address this post, but I truly can only say that it is incoherent rambling. A few snippits from Bible text as a peg to hang a one liner preacher exhortation on...I see no point in discussing this.
As for this topic, I'm still reviewing the prophecy of three days and three nights. In the last link SeekerSA posted which showed Jesus dying on Friday. It mentioned the the people saw three days as inclusive, so any part of the day was considered a full day. Even in my "double Sabbath" theory, it is inclusive. Yet the difference is, the double Sabbath theory clearly shows the three days and three nights specifically. If Jesus' only intention was to be in the grave for three days, why not just say three days. He specifically states "three days and three nights". I just can't help but think this saying is referring more to just three days in itself, but that Christ fulfilled a very specific time period.
I'll continue to look on this.
This does of course raise the questions mentioned before. Is the three days a prophecy fulfilled? Is the three days a prophecy predicted and the gospels were written to claim that it was true? Was the three days what actually happened and a prophecy was based on three days to fit it? All three could work.
Let me run this past you
You suggest, Thursday (day of preparation) morning the trial and crucifixion resulting in Jesus' death in the afternoon or evening. Jesus is dead in the tomb on Friday Passover and Saturday sabbath. by dawn on Sunday, he has risen.
How many days is that in the 'whale's belly?' All Friday and all Saturday -TWO days. Half of Sunday, to morning and you have to add on the tail -end of Friday to make it even approaching three days.
It has to be fiddled to make it three days, and even then you have ask - if Jesus is dead all Friday and Saturday - why? Why not rise Friday night, or saturday? Why wait until Sunday?
If we take the mainstream chronology, Jesus is tried and crucified on Friday (day of preparation) and in the tomb on Saturday and gone by dawn Sunday. If we call that three days -Friday afternoon, Saturday and Sunday until dawn, it goes over three days and if it is not complete, then neither is the Thursday to Sunday scenario - not full days, certainly.
The fact is that if it works at all, a Friday Passover isn't needed and doesn't actually fulfill the prophecy that much better than a Saturday (Sabbath) Passover.
I know I said that Jesus was up after a day and a half, but then I would think that a day dead would be long enough. Why stay dead all Friday and Saturday?
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
