Do the Gospels Contradict About When the Earthquake Occurred & the Stone Moved?
“I am struck by a certain consistency among otherwise independent witnesses in placing Mary Magdalene both at the cross and at the tomb on the third day. If this is not a historical datum but something that a Christian storyteller made up and then passed along to others, how is it that this specific bit of information has found its way into accounts that otherwise did not make use of one another? . . . all of our early gospels–not just John and Mark (with Matthew and Luke as well) but also the Gospel of Peter, which appears to be independent of all of them–indicate that it was Mary Magdalen who discovered Jesus’ empty tomb. How did all of these independent accounts happen to name exactly the same person in this role? It seems hard to believe that this just happened by way of a fluke of storytelling. It seems much more likely that, at least with the traditions involving the empty tomb, we are dealing with something actually rooted in history”—Peter, Paul, and Mary Magdalene, p 226, by Bart Ehrman
“Now after the sabbath, as it began to dawn toward the first day of the week, Mary Magdalene and the other Mary came to look at the grave, and behold, a severe earthquake had occurred, for an angel of the Lord descended from heaven and came and rolled away the stone and sat on it”—Matthew 28:1,2 NASB
Most translations render Matthew 28:2 like the following:
“And behold, there was a great earthquake, for an angel of the Lord descended from heaven and came and rolled back the stone and sat on it”—Matthew 28:2 ESV
The somewhat famous agnostic Bible scholar Bart Ehrman (quoted above) admits “that, at least with the traditions involving the empty tomb, we are dealing with something actually rooted in history.” But he also claims that the Biblical resurrection accounts are “hopelessly contradictory,” and the four gospel accounts of the earthquake and the rolling away of the stone by an angel early Sunday morning is one of these. He, and other critics, claim that Matthew’s account contradicts the gospels of Mark, Luke, and John. Let’s look at these other three inspired gospel accounts now:
“When the Sabbath was over, Mary Magdalene, and Mary the mother of James, and Salome, brought spices, so that they might come and anoint Him. Very early on the first day of the week, they came to the tomb when the sun had risen. Looking up, they saw that the stone had been rolled away, although it was extremely large”—Mark 16:1,2,4 NASB
“On the first day of the week, at early dawn, they came to the tomb bringing the spices they had prepared. And they found the stone rolled away from the tomb”—Luke 24:1,2 NASB
“On the first day of the week Mary Magdalene came early to the tomb, while it was still dark, and saw the stone already taken away from the tomb”—John 20:1 NASB
Critics, and some modern scholars, claim that Matthew says the earthquake and the stone being rolled away took place after the women arrived at the tomb, whereas Mark, Luke, and John say these events happened before the women got to the tomb. The popular scholar Bart Ehrman, who has quite a following, is one these. But he is vastly outgunned by the facts themselves, starting with accurate renderings of Matthew 28:2, such as the NASB. The fact is that Matthew does not say that the earthquake occurred before the women arrived, or that the women actually witnessed the rolling away of the stone. Let’s look at what various experts and scholars have to say about the issue of when the earthquake and the stone being rolled away occurred at Matthew 28:2:
“There was: The sense is ‘Now there had been.’ The parallel accounts (Mk 16:2-6; Lk 24:1-7; Jn 20:1) make it clear that the events of vv, 2-4 occurred before the women actually arrived at the tomb”—NIV Study Bible footnote
“The words imply , not they witnessed the earthquake, but that they inferred it from what they saw”—Ellicott’s Commentary
“There was a great earthquake — Rather there ‘had been.’ It does not mean that this was while they were there”—Barnes Notes on the New Testament
“And behold, there was — that is there had been, before the arrival of the women. Some judicious critics think all this was transacted while the women were approaching, but the view we have given, which is the prevalent one, seems more natural”—Jamison-Fauset -Brown Bible Commentary
“There was a great earthquake . . . or there had been one”—Gill’s Exposition
“The following event took place before their arrival . . . There was a great earthquake”—Pulpit Commentary
“The entire passage seems to be a parenthetical statement. The details concerning the angel and the stone are introduced with the Greek conjunction ‘gar’: ‘And behold, there was a great earthquake; for [Greek, ‘gar’] an angel of the Lord descended from heaven and came and rolled back the stone, and sat upon it’ (28:2, emphasis added). Such an explanatory conjunction is used to introduce a clarification of a previous part of the sentence. For Matthew, the angel rolling away the stone is his explanation for the earthquake, not to assert that the women witnessed a stone-moving spectacle. The answer could be further supported by Matthew’s use of an indicative mood in the aorist tense of ‘ginomai’: ‘And behold, there was [Greek, egeneto] a great earthquake’ (28:2, emphasis added]. The aorist verb tense in the indicative mood usually denotes the simple part. So a possible translation is ‘an earthquake had occurred,’ implying the women didn’t witness it. Even the angel’s descent can be described as having already occurred, since the aorist participle ‘katabas’ (“descended”) can be translated with English past perfect; ‘for an angel of the Lord has descended (28:2, ISV, emphasis added) . . . How did Matthew know about this stuff? . . . The empty tomb was part of guards story of all that had taken place’ (28:11), it’s possible the details in the parenthetical statement (2-4) were part of it as well”—Biblical Resurrection Actions Are Not ‘Hopelessly Contradictory’ at Catholic.com
With these scholarly comments on Matthew 28:1,2 in mind, let’s look at the verses again, from a very accurate translation:
“After the Sabbath, in the early dawn of the first day of the week, Mary of Magdala and the other Mary came to see the sepulchre. But to there amazement there had been a great earthquake; for an angel of the Lord had descended from Heaven, and had come and rolled back the stone, and was sitting upon it”— New Testament In Modern Speech, by Richard F. Weymouth
This Bible translation’s footnote to Matthew 28:2 says — “Had been . . . had come . . . was sitting] Or ‘was . . . came . . . sat.’ Either rendering is possible; but from the other Gospels we learn that the stone was already rolled back when Mary paid her first visit to the tomb (Mark xvi. 3,4; Luke xxiv. 2; John xx. 1).”
We thus have much solid evidence to prove that there is no contradiction between the account at Matthew 28:2-4 and the accounts of Mark 16:4-7; Luke 24:1-6; John 20:1 about when the earthquake occurred, and the stone was rolled away from Jesus’ tomb.
The inspired gospel accounts are not written to be all inclusive. John, for example, specifically states that his gospel account is not all-inclusive:
“Jesus performed many other signs in the presence of his disciples, which are not recorded in this book”—John 20:30 NIV
“Jesus did many other things as well. If every one of them were written down, I suppose that even the whole world could not have room for the books that would be written”—John 21:25 NIV
Notice that John mentions things being “recorded” and “written down,” and admits there are many omissions to his account.
If you were asked to write a very detailed account of all the things you did, saw, and experienced, during the past week, you could probably write volumes. Now, let’s suppose two very close spouses, who were together 100% of the time, were asked to do the same thing. While the experiences and events written down would likely be the same (not counting things forgotten), there would likely be some different details recorded between the two accounts. This helps to illustrate how the inspired four gospels are different in some details, but still 100% accurate.
If the events recorded in the four gospel were virtually identical, they would be suspect of collusion. The fact is that God “inspired” (2 Timothy 3:16 NASB) four different accounts of Jesus’ life to be accurately recorded.
“All mankind are like grass, and their glory is like wild flowers. The grass withers and the flowers fall, but the word of the Lord remains forever”—1 Peter 1:24,25 GNB
While its critics come and go throughout time, the Bible always wins and defeats its critics.
34 thoughts on “Do the Gospels Contradict About When the Earthquake Occurred & the Stone Moved?”
GW: I’ll have more to stay on this, but not today. For now, this is plenty.
BA: Is there a Contradiction Between the Gospels About When the Earthquake Occurred and the Stone Was Moved?
GW: Yes, the contradiction is between what three of the gospels say or imply and what one of them, Matthew or Mt, says or implies. The contradiction is this: According to Mt, the earthquake occurred and an angel moved the stone from the tomb when the women were present at the tomb on Sunday morning and so, they knew what was the cause of the moved stone. But according to the other gospels, an earthquake did not occur and an angel did not move the stone from the tomb when the women were present at the tomb on Sunday morning and so, they did not know what was the cause of the moved stone. The stone had already been moved before they arrived. So, there are actually three contradictions here – regarding the earthquake, the stone, and what the women knew.
BA: “I am struck by a certain consistency among otherwise independent witnesses in placing Mary Magdalene both at the cross and at the tomb on the third day. If this is not a historical datum but something that a Christian storyteller made up and then passed along to others, how is it that this specific bit of information has found its way into accounts that otherwise did not make use of one another? . . . all of our early gospels–not just John and Mark (with Matthew and Luke as well) but also the Gospel of Peter, which appears to be independent of all of them–indicate that it was Mary Magdalen who discovered Jesus’ empty tomb. How did all of these independent accounts happen to name exactly the same person in this role? It seems hard to believe that this just happened by way of a fluke of storytelling. It seems much more likely that, at least with the traditions involving the empty tomb, we are dealing with something actually rooted in history”—Peter, Paul, and Mary Magdalene, p 226, by Bart Ehrman
GW: More recently, Ehrman seems to have changed his view about the tomb narrative. He seems to think now that the entire narrative is a fabrication and that Jesus was buried in a common pit. But, if we tentatively accept the tomb narrative as correct, then I think we can conclude that Mary Magdalene was at the cross, outside the tomb when Jesus was buried, and at the tomb on Sunday morning. Why can we be confident about this? Because at least three of the four gospels attest to it. But these details are not the same as the details about the earthquake and the stone. Moving on.
BA: “Now after the sabbath, as it began to dawn toward the first day of the week, Mary Magdalene and the other Mary came to look at the grave, and behold, a severe earthquake had occurred, for an angel of the lord descended from heaven and came and rolled away the stone and sat on it”—Matthew 28:1,2 NASB
GW: The NASB is not widely accepted as authoritative by scholars, and so I have little confidence in it. The word “had” is not presented in other translations and it probably represents an interpretation of the translator. Every translation happens to also be an interpretation. The translator must decide what Greek words would mean in English and what the original author intended in meaning. But even with the “had,” the correct interpretation is still probably “while Mary was there at the tomb an earthquake had occurred and the angel had moved the stone.” This interpretation is made more likely by looking at the chronological context through the next verses from NASB: “3 And his appearance was like lightning, and his clothing as white as snow. 4 The guards shook for fear of him and became like dead men. 5 The angel said to the women, “[a]Do not be afraid; for I know that you are looking for Jesus who has been crucified. 6 He is not here, for He has risen, just as He said. Come, see the place where He was lying. 7 Go quickly and tell His disciples that He has risen from the dead; and behold, He is going ahead of you into Galilee, there you will see Him; behold, I have told you. 8 And they left the tomb quickly with fear and great joy and ran to report it to His disciples.
BA: Most translations render Matthew 28:2 like the following: “And behold, there was a great earthquake, for an angel of the Lord descended from heaven and came and rolled back the stone and sat on it”—Matthew 28:2 ESV
GW: This one is supportive of my interpretation.
BA: The somewhat famous agnostic Bible scholar Bart Ehrman (quoted above) admits “that, at least with the traditions involving the empty tomb, we are dealing with something actually rooted in history.”
GW: See my comment above about Ehrman.
BA: But he also claims that the Biblical resurrection accounts are “hopelessly contradictory,” and the four gospel accounts of the earthquake and the rolling away of the stone by an angel early Sunday morning is one of these. He, and other critics, claim that Matthew’s account contradicts the gospels of Mark, Luke, and John. Let’s look at these other three inspired gospel accounts now:
GW: On both the general point and the specific point here, I agree with Ehrman.
BA: “When the Sabbath was over, Mary Magdalene, and Mary the mother of James, and Salome, brought spices, so that they might come and anoint Him. Very early on the first day of the week, they came to the tomb when the sun had risen. Looking up, they saw that the stone had been rolled away, although it was extremely large”—Mark 16:1,2,4 NASB
GW: You see, in this gospel the women had no idea whatsoever about how the stone was rolled back. No earthquake, no angel, no cause of the stone moved are mentioned.
BA: “On the first day of the week, at early dawn, they came to the tomb bringing the spices they had prepared. And they found the stone rolled away from the tomb”—Luke 24:1,2 NASB
GW: Once again, in this gospel the women had no idea whatsoever about how the stone was rolled back. No earthquake, no angel, no cause of the stone moved are mentioned.
BA: “On the first day of the week Mary Magdalene came early to the tomb, while it was still dark, and saw the stone already taken away from the tomb”—John 20:1 NASB
GW: Once again, in this gospel Mary had no idea whatsoever about how the stone was rolled back. No earthquake, no angel, no cause of the stone moved are mentioned.
BA: Critics, and some modern scholars, claim that Matthew says the earthquake and the stone being rolled away took place after the women arrived at the tomb, whereas Mark, Luke, and John say these events happened before the women got to the tomb.
GW: By my interpretation, Matthew does say that the earthquake and angel rolling back the stone occurred AFTER the women arrived at the tomb, but the other three gospels say nothing about an earthquake or an angel rolling back the stone. At the least, the stories are inconsistent. The inconsistency is probably because the author of Matthew has FABRICATED many details of his story, including the earthquake, the angel rolling back the stone, and the guards. These details are not corroborated in the other gospels and so we should not believe that they occurred. Issues of interpretation of the meaning of a gospel story are not the same as issues of truth of the story. We have no good evidence that angels even exist, and so we should not assume that an angel rolled back the stone.
BA: The popular scholar Bart Ehrman, who has quite a following, is one these. But he is vastly outgunned by the facts themselves, starting with accurate renderings of Matthew 28:2, such as the NASB.
GW: Ehrman does have “quite a following,” and I am one of his “followers.” I think he is almost always correct, having based his conclusions on the facts according to rational thinking. The proper interpretation of Matthew leads to these probable conclusions: 1) The author meant that the earthquake and stone rolling by the angel occurred AFTER Mary arrived at the tomb. See above. 2) This interpretation is at least inconsistent with and probably contradictory to correct interpretations from the other gospels. 3) The story of the angel rolling back the stone is almost certainly false since there is no good evidence that angels exist and the other three gospels do not say how the stone was moved.
BA: The fact is that Matthew does not say that the earthquake occurred before the women arrived, or that the women actually witnessed the rolling away of the stone.
GW: The author implies that the women witnessed both the earthquake and the angel rolling back the stone AFTER the arrived at the tomb. Just look at the context. See above.
BA: Let’s look at what various experts and scholars have to say about the issue of when the earthquake and the stone being rolled away occurred at Matthew 28:2:
GW: Ok, let’s look.
BA: “There was: The sense is ‘Now there had been.’ The parallel accounts (Mk 16:2-6; Lk 24:1-7; Jn 20:1) make it clear that the events of vv, 2-4 occurred before the women actually arrived at the tomb”—NIV Study Bible footnote
GW: I disagree. See above. Also, if these events had occurred, the other gospels would have mentioned them, especially if the Bible is dictated, inspired, or approved by God, as you claim.
BA: “The words imply , not they witnessed the earthquake, but that they inferred it from what they saw”—Ellicott’s Commentary
GW: This makes no sense at all. How could the women infer that an angel had rolled back the stone?
BA: “There was a great earthquake — Rather there ‘had been.’ It does not mean that this was while they were there”—Barnes Notes on the New Testament
GW: But you must examine the chronological context in Matthew.
BA: “And behold, there was — that is there had been, before the arrival of the women. Some judicious critics think all this was transacted while the women were approaching, but the view we have given, which is the prevalent one, seems more natural”—Jamison-Fauset -Brown Bible Commentary
GW: No, it does not seem more natural. It seems less natural when you consider the chronological context and the fact that the women spoke to the angel, according to verses immediately following the angel’s rolling back the stone.
BA: “There was a great earthquake . . . or there had been one”—Gill’s Exposition
GW: But when? Before or after the women arrived? This one is ambiguous.
BA: “The following event took place before their arrival . . . There was a great earthquake”—Pulpit Commentary
GW: I disagree.
BA: “The entire passage seems to be a parenthetical statement. The details concerning the angel and the stone are introduced with the Greek conjunction ‘gar’: ‘And behold, there was a great earthquake; for [Greek, ‘gar’] an angel of the Lord descended from heaven and came and rolled back the stone, and sat upon it’ (28:2, emphasis added). Such an explanatory conjunction is used to introduce a clarification of a previous part of the sentence.
GW: This could be, but probably wasn’t the case. If the author meant for the reader to infer that the earthquake and angel rolling back the stone occurred BEFORE the women arrived, he would have SAID SO and would have said it BEFORE he described the women waking up and traveling to the tomb. He might have said “Before any human person came to the tomb on Sunday morning, an earthquake occurred as an angel rolled back the stone. Later that same morning, the women…” What we have is not consistent with a perfect book inspired by a perfect supernatural being. But it is consistent with different books written by fallible human authors using different sources and capable of embellishment and outright fabrication! I don’t know why you can’t see this. Oh wait, yes I can.
BA: For Matthew, the angel rolling away the stone is his explanation for the earthquake, not to assert that the women witnessed a stone-moving spectacle.
GW: I disagree. My interpretation is more likely to be correct than yours for ALL the reasons I have given.
BA: The answer could be further supported by Matthew’s use of an indicative mood in the aorist tense of ‘ginomai’: ‘And behold, there was [Greek, egeneto] a great earthquake’ (28:2, emphasis added]. The aorist verb tense in the indicative mood usually denotes the simple part. So a possible translation is ‘an earthquake had occurred,’ implying the women didn’t witness it. Even the angel’s descent can be described as having already occurred, since the aorist participle ‘katabas’ (“descended”) can be translated with English past perfect; ‘for an angel of the Lord has descended (28:2, ISV, emphasis added) . . .
GW: Pure gobbledygook.
BA: How did Matthew know about this stuff? . . . The empty tomb was part of guards story of all that had taken place’ (28:11), it’s possible the details in the parenthetical statement (2-4) were part of it as well”—Biblical Resurrection Actions Are Not ‘Hopelessly Contradictory’ at Catholic.com
GW: So, years or decades after the incident one or more guards told Matthew this story and he accepted it as fact and included it in his narrative? Not likely. None of the other three gospels mention any guards! Angels probably don’t exist. Any guards probably would not believe in angels and they would not report that they were afraid of any intruders. Instead, they would have reported that they fought against any intruders, as they were fulfilling their sentry duties. It is highly likely that Matthew is a great FABRICATOR!
BA: With these scholarly comments on Matthew 28:1,2 in mind, let’s look at the verses again, from a very accurate translation:
GW: Which translation? Are you now doubting that the NASB is accurate?
BA: “After the Sabbath, in the early dawn of the first day of the week, Mary of Magdala and the other Mary came to see the sepulchre. But to there amazement there had been a great earthquake; for an angel of the Lord had descended from Heaven, and had come and rolled back the stone, and was sitting upon it”— New Testament In Modern Speech, by Richard F. Weymouth
GW: How would these women know that a great earthquake had occurred BEFORE they arrived? In the story neither the angel nor the guards tell them. How would these women know that an angel descended from Heaven and rolled back the stone BEFORE they arrived? In the story neither the angel nor the guards tell them. It is more likely that the earthquake and the angel rolling back the stone were observed by the women themselves, all things considered.
GW: Again, what we have are several different books written by fallible human authors who are prone not only to error but to fabrication. We don’t have perfect books inspired by a perfect supernatural creator of the world.
BA: This Bible translation’s footnote to Matthew 28:2 says — “Had been . . . had come . . . was sitting] Or ‘was . . . came . . . sat.’ Either rendering is possible; but from the other Gospels we learn that the stone was already rolled back when Mary paid her first visit to the tomb (Mark xvi. 3,4; Luke xxiv. 2; John xx. 1).”
GW: And in the other gospels we are not told who rolled back the stone or how it was rolled back or how Jesus left the tomb. The gospels are not consistent and are sometimes contradictory because they were written by fallible human authors, using different sources, and prone to embellishment and fabrication. There was no supervisory supernatural editor! Duh.
BA: We thus have much solid evidence to prove that there is no contradiction between the account at Matthew 28:2-4 and the accounts of Mark 16:4-7; Luke 24:1-6; John 20:1 about when the earthquake occurred, and the stone was rolled away from Jesus’ tomb.
GW: No, your evidence is very weak and does not support your conclusion. Your interpretation is designed to support your preconceived notion that the gospels could not possibly disagree with each other.
BA: The inspired gospel accounts are not written to be all inclusive.
GW: Why not? It they were inspired by God, then they would be perfect, consistent, and “all inclusive.”
BA: John, for example, specifically states that his gospel account is not all-inclusive:
“Jesus performed many other signs in the presence of his disciples, which are not recorded in this book”—John 20:30 NIV “Jesus did many other things as well. If every one of them were written down, I suppose that even the whole world could not have room for the books that would be written”—John 21:25 NIV Notice that John mentions things being “recorded” and “written down,” and admits there are many omissions to his account.
GW: Did he? So says John. He is the worst of the authors to rely on since he wrote his gospel last and decades (probably as much as 80 years) after the alleged incidents he describes. And he presents some uncorroborated details and outrageous claims. Besides, all four gospel stories should be consistent and noncontradictory for the narrative beginning with the arrest of Jesus until 40 days after his crucifixion.
BA: If you were asked to write a very detailed account of all the things you did, saw, and experienced, during the past week, you could probably write volumes.
GW: Probably not. I could probably write about 25 pages.
BA: Now, let’s suppose two very close spouses, who were together 100% of the time, were asked to do the same thing. While the experiences and events written down would likely be the same (not counting things forgotten), there would likely be some different details recorded between the two accounts. This helps to illustrate how the inspired four gospels are different in some details, but still 100% accurate.
GW: But the gospel details are not always consistent and are sometimes contradictory. This is not what we would expect if all the writers were guided in any way by a supernatural editor, namely God. In fact, this is more evidence against the existence of God, as if we needed any more.
BA: If the events recorded in the four gospel were virtually identical, they would be suspect of collusion.
GW: Or they would have been suspected of supernatural editing, especially if each author described the exact circumstances of the supervision, along with witnesses to that.
BA: The fact is that God “inspired” (2 Timothy 3:16 NASB) four different accounts of Jesus’ life to be accurately recorded.
GW: And why would he do that? He wouldn’t! He would have enabled several first-person, author-identified, low-bias, promptly-written eyewitness reports of all the events from the time of Jesus’ arrest to 40 days after his crucifixion. But what do we have? Not a single report like this. Furthermore, he would have enabled Jesus to present himself to the Jewish Sanhedrin and Pilate after the crucifixion. Once again, you underestimate God, if he were to exist. I am convinced that you worship a lesser god.
BA: “All mankind are like grass, and their glory is like wild flowers. The grass withers and the flowers fall, but the word of the Lord remains forever”—1 Peter 1:24,25 GNB
GW: It is too bad that we don’t have “the word of the Lord.” In fact, it is sad that God does not exist. What a wonderful world we would have if he did.
BA: While its critics come and go throughout time, the Bible always wins and defeats its critics.
GW: Pure nonsense! The Bible is not a person. It is a collection of writings by many authors, all human, all fallible.
As you’ve seen, scholarly consensus is that the earthquake and rolling away of the stone at Matthew 28:2 occurred BEFORE the woman arrived at the tomb.
It seems like you’re not familiar with the NASB, so here is some information to help you:
“The NASB . . . is known for preferring a literal translation style that generally preserves the structure of the original languages when possible (formal equivalence rather than an idiomatic style that attempts to match natural English usage . . . The New American Standard Bible is considered by some sources to be the most literally translated of the major 20th century English Bible translations’—Wikipedia
You show your ignorance when you label the Koine’ Greek language technical terms used and explained at Catholic.com in Matthew 28:2 as “gobbledegook.”
Other translations that use the past tense tense at Matthew 28:2 are:
‘A great earthquake had occurred”–Amplified Bible
“there had been a great earthquake”—Anderson New Testament; Worsley New Testament
“Now there had been a great earthquake”—Mace New Testament
BA: As you’ve seen, scholarly consensus is that the earthquake and rolling away of the stone at Matthew 28:2 occurred BEFORE the woman arrived at the tomb.
GW: Most of the sources you have cherry picked and presented support your own view, and I do not agree with it. What percentage of agreement within a sample of persons constitutes a “consensus”? What criteria should be established for persons to be in a sample to determine if there is a consensus? Have you thought about these things?
GW: There are three intertwined questions: 1) What meaning did the author intend to convey? 2) What was the interpretation by the translator of what the author said? 3) What is the truth value of what the author intended to say and did say? You kind of conflate these three questions to produce your own messy interpretation.
GW: The English translations of the original Greek DO NOT AGREE on their translations of Matthew 28:2 and there are different accounts or interpretations of the facts of the matter. This is a strong reason to believe that the authors were fallible, the authors used different sources, the translation of ancient Greek is difficult and an interpretive process in itself, and some authors add fabrications. It is also evidence that God had no role in the process of the writing, translating, or interpretation. If God did exist, this confusion would not exist. He would prevent it, and we know how he would do that.
BA: It seems like you’re not familiar with the NASB, so here is some information to help you:
GW: It seems like you are not familiar with critical thinking and rationality. I have been trying to help you.
BA: “The NASB . . . is known for preferring a literal translation style that generally preserves the structure of the original languages when possible (formal equivalence rather than an idiomatic style that attempts to match natural English usage . . . The New American Standard Bible is considered by some sources to be the most literally translated of the major 20th century English Bible translations’—Wikipedia
GW: The “literal” translation may not be what the author intended. All translators of the Bible think their work is accurate, the best, and should be used.
BA: You show your ignorance when you label the Koine’ Greek language technical terms used and explained at Catholic.com in Matthew 28:2 as “gobbledegook.”
GW: What you presented is gobbledegook because you are I are not experts in the Greek language. We must start with the numerous English translations and think rationally about them.
BA: Other translations that use the past tense tense at Matthew 28:2 are:
‘A great earthquake had occurred”–Amplified Bible
“there had been a great earthquake”—Anderson New Testament; Worsley New Testament
“Now there had been a great earthquake”—Mace New Testament
GW: So what? There are translations which do not do this. Your interpretation of the author’s intent and accuracy hinges a great deal on the use of one word, i.e. “had.” Another possibility is that the author meant that the earthquake occurred BEFORE the women arrived, but an angel rolled back the stone AFTER the women arrived. The “had” does not necessarily refer to the stone rolling. Also, as I said before, it appears that the author of Matthew INSERTED the story of the earthquake, angel, stone rolling, and guards INTO the narrative of Mark which does not mention these elements. And neither do Luke and John. This is sometime called “INTERPOLATION.”
GW: Where are the first-hand eyewitness reports? There is not a single one!
GW: The earthquake is really not an important detail. I don’t know why God, if he existed, would cause an earthquake to occur at that moment. I don’t know why the author Matthew would fabricate an earthquake. What purpose does it serve? On the other hand, the other details we are contesting – the use of guards and the rolling back of the stone by an angel – are extremely important details! If they had occurred, as Matthew claims, then surely they would have been mentioned by all four gospel writers. Your theory does not explain this deficiency. And, if God did exist, he would ensure that all four gospels described these details in the narrative. Your theory does not explain this either.
GW: The main questions we are interested in are these: “Did Jesus die on the cross, and if so, did he come back to life within three days?” None of what you said about the verses in Matthew, which we have been discussing, helps you to give a Yes answer to these questions. There is no story of anybody observing Jesus come back to life, get up, push back the stone, and exit the tomb. ZERO!
GW: I built a time machine the other day. I traveled back to the tomb and observed what really happened. On Friday night, after Joseph, Nicodemus, and the women left the tomb, some family members and friends came to the tomb, rolled back the stone, and took Jesus body with them to bury it in the family tomb. So, there you have it! The poor gospel writers simply did not know what they were talking about.
The gospels provide four different reports of events about Jesus’ life, death and resurrection, each one is independent of the others, yet they all tell the same story, with different details. When combined, they paint a detailed portrait of Jesus, that, combined with the rest of the Bible, tells us all we need to know about God and salvation, etc.
You’re not in any position to dictate to God how he is supposed to operate. God makes the rules, not you.
Matthew 28:2-4 is a parenthetical statement. Combined with the other three gospels, we can be sure that the earthquake and the rolling back of the stone occurred prior to the women’s arrival at the tomb.
Jesus was “put to death in the flesh, he was brought to life in the spirit” (1 Peter 3:18 NAB). No one saw Jesus exit the tomb, because he was a spirit at that point, and spirits are invisible.
With your “Time Machine,” your imagination is running wild!
Jesus’ followers “did NOT YET UNDERSTAND the scripture THAT HE HAD TO RISE FROM THE DEAD”–John 20:9 NAB
When the women reported to the apostles that Jesus had been resurrected, “their story seemed like nonsense and they did not believe them” (Luke 24:11 NAB). Jesus’ disciples had no clue that Jesus would be resurrected.
Besides that,”they rested on the Sabbath [6 PM Friday to 6 PM Saturday], according to the commandment” (Luke 23:36 NAB). As strict Sabbath observers, there is no way that Jesus disciples and apostles would be out doing anything on Friday night.
BA: The gospels provide four different reports of events about Jesus’ life, death and resurrection, each one is independent of the others, yet they all tell the same story, with different details.
GW: Your set of claims here is mostly false. It is unwarranted for you to say that the gospels are “reports.” You don’t know that. They are narratives or stories. They are probably built upon some reports in a long chain of communication, speculations, fantasy, embellishment, and fabrication. Also, you are begging the question when you speak of a “resurrection.” That is just speculation for which there is insufficient supporting evidence. The gospels certainly are not independent of each other. It is well known that Matthew and Luke borrowed from or copied from Mark, the first to be written. Some of the details are similar and some are different for the different gospels. And there are inconsistencies, contradictions, and falsehoods in the gospels. The most important fact to keep in mind here that there are NO first-person, author-identified, low-bias, promptly-written, eyewitness reports of any of the events of Jesus’ life and its immediate aftermath. These are the five features on a checklist which you must consider in evaluating each of the gospels.
BA: When combined, they paint a detailed portrait of Jesus, that, combined with the rest of the Bible, tells us all we need to know about God and salvation, etc.
GW: False. Nothing written in the gospels can be absolutely trusted. See what I said above about them. God does not exist, and this has already been proven. And so, there is no such thing as “salvation.” If God did exist, he would not save anyone! He would implement perfect justice which nobody would escape, not even you.
BA: You’re not in any position to dictate to God how he is supposed to operate. God makes the rules, not you.
GW: God does not exist! This has been proven. I am in a very good position to describe how God COULD, WOULD, AND SHOULD operate, if he did exist. You are in a very poor position to do that. You have not been properly trained in rational thinking and you have received early indoctrination into theism and Christianity.
BA: Matthew 28:2-4 is a parenthetical statement. Combined with the other three gospels, we can be sure that the earthquake and the rolling back of the stone occurred prior to the women’s arrival at the tomb.
GW: False. You cannot and should not “be sure” of that. In fact, I have given a strong argument why 1) Matthew was suggesting that the earthquake and the angel rolling back the stone occurred during the time the women were at the tomb, and 2) Matthew had fabricated these details anyway! The only persons who would have KNOWN who rolled back the stone were Jesus (if he were alive) and any persons (probably two or three) who actually rolled back the stone. And we have no REPORTS from any of these people! Duh. Your confidence in your conclusions is way out of alignment with the evidence. But that is the nature of FAITH, which you rely on so much.
BA: Jesus was “put to death in the flesh, he was brought to life in the spirit” (1 Peter 3:18 NAB). No one saw Jesus exit the tomb, because he was a spirit at that point, and spirits are invisible.
GW: Most Christians strongly disagree with you on this point. They believe that the body of Jesus was resurrected by God and that the body (along with its spirit) exited the tomb. If your speculation is correct, then where are the bones of Jesus? There are Christian apologists, like William Lane Craig, who say that if the bones of Jesus were found, this would disprove the resurrection. I think he is correct.
BA: With your “Time Machine,” your imagination is running wild!
GW: I used my good imagination to design and produce the time machine. It is very precise. It will take you to the exact place and time you want to go.
BA: Jesus’ followers “did NOT YET UNDERSTAND the scripture THAT HE HAD TO RISE FROM THE DEAD”–John 20:9 NAB
GW: He didn’t have to come back to life, and he didn’t. Duh. You have not proven so. My evidence from the time machine is better than your evidence from the gospels.
BA: When the women reported to the apostles that Jesus had been resurrected, “their story seemed like nonsense and they did not believe them” (Luke 24:11 NAB). Jesus’ disciples had no clue that Jesus would be resurrected.
GW: But, keep this in mind: “The two oldest manuscripts of Mark 16 (from the 300s) conclude with verse 8, which ends with the women fleeing from the empty tomb, and saying “nothing to anyone, because they were too frightened”.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mark_16#:~:text=The%20earliest%20extant%20complete%20manuscripts,%2C%20%22according%20to%20Mark%22.
GW: Let’s look closely here at Mark 16:8, NIV: “Trembling and bewildered, the women went out and fled from the tomb. They said nothing to anyone, because they were afraid.” The original Mark was the first gospel. It had no story about Jesus coming back to life. I believe that a few friends or family members took the corpse of Jesus from the tomb and re-buried it in a family tomb, probably in Nazareth. All the stories about Jesus coming back to life were probably fabricated, especially if one or two disciples had grief hallucinations.
BA: Besides that,”they rested on the Sabbath [6 PM Friday to 6 PM Saturday], according to the commandment” (Luke 23:36 NAB). As strict Sabbath observers, there is no way that Jesus disciples and apostles would be out doing anything on Friday night.
GW: Ok, that may be a good point. So, it is more likely that the friends and family members removed Jesus from the tomb between 6 PM Saturday and 6 AM Sunday before the women arrived at the tomb.
GW: We would not be debating any of this and there would be no Bible, if God did exist. Here is my newest argument, fresh off the presses today:
Argument Against the Existence of God Based on Absence of Universal Communication: 3-18-2024
1. Definition: God is 1) the hypothetical, unique, exclusive, supernatural, independent, spiritual, normally invisible person, conscious intelligent agent, or sentient entity. He is OMNI lasting (eternal), present, knowing, powerful, intelligent, rational, creative, and resilient (invincible). He is also OMNI loving, compassionate, and moral with respect to other persons. He fills the roles of cosmos designer and producer (creator), occasional interventionist in the world, and afterlife manager who decides the favorable or unfavorable disposition of human souls after they die. or 2) the greatest imaginable possible person (the “GIPPer”) who, if he existed, would possess all desirable traits to their highest degrees and no undesirable traits, and who would be worthy of our greatest respect, admiration, and worship.
2. If God did exist, then he could and would regularly meet with all persons in the cosmos at the same time.
A. Nature of the Meetings
1) God would clone himself to be in all locations in a human form.
2) God would speak to everyone in their own language.
3) God would identify himself.
4) God would perform three miracles. Examples:
a. Create an entire human person from a handful of dirt.
b. Resurrect a human person who had been dead for at least a year from bones or ashes of that person.
c. Withstand destruction from firearms, explosives, heat, cold, or radiation.
5) God would specify at least one morally justified reason why he allowed the Holocaust which would be understood by all present. This would essentially be a fourth miracle.
6) God would specify Correct Universal Ethics for Persons (CUE-P).
7) God would specify enforcement of CUE-P.
8) God would provide digital or printed copies of his lecture to all persons who wanted one.
9) God would have one of these meetings at least once every seven years in human time.
B. Reasons for the Meetings
1) God would be motivated to present the three most important sets of facts to all persons so that this knowledge would benefit them.
2) God would be motivated to present moral rules for proper behavior to all persons so that they would have a clear understanding of how to behave and not behave.
3) God would be motivated to forewarn all persons of the rewards and punishments for compliance and noncompliance, respectively, with moral rules.
4) God would be motivated to establish a “level playing field” so that all persons would have the same basic knowledge of the universe and life with which to work. God would not show favoritism to some people over others in providing the basic knowledge.
5) God would be motivated to minimize punishment.
6) God would not take away free will (if it even exists) by clearly presenting himself, CUE-P, and enforcement policy, but would be providing good information to help all persons make better decisions in the exercise of their free will.
7) God would be motivated to preclude confusion, disagreement, and conflict about himself, CUE-P, and enforcement policy. He would want one authority and authoritative text.
8) God would have no need for messengers, assistants, children, prophets, or angels to do his communication for him.
9) God would be the perfect teacher, judge, and enforcer.
10) God would be all-knowing, all-powerful, and perfectly moral.
3. This kind of meeting of God with all persons has never occurred.
4. Therefore, God does not exist.
The gospels are indeed reports in every sense of the word. Matthew, Peter (1 Peter 5:13 [Mark]) and John were “eyewitnesses” to much that they wrote about. The physician (Colossians 4:14) Luke was not an eyewitness, but, reported that, “Inasmuch as many have undertaken to compile an accurate account of the things accomplished among us, just as they were handed down to us by those who from the beginning were eyewitnesses and servants of the word, it seemed fitting for me as well, HAVING INVESTIGATING EVERYTHING CAREFULLY from the beginning to write it out for you in consecutive order” (Luke 1:1-3 NASB). You cannot prove anything in the gospels false.
There is no evidence that Matthew and Luke borrowed from or copied Mark, nor that Mark even wrote first. There are no proven inconsistencies, contradictions, or falsehoods in the gospels, NONE!
Matthew does not say that the tomb was shut when the women arrived. As the NIV STUDY BIBLE reports, “The sense is ‘Now there had been.’ It is clear from the parallel accounts (Mk 16:2-6; Lk 24:1-7; Jn 20:1) that the events of v 2-4 occurred BEFORE the women actually arrived at the tomb.” The guards were at the tomb prior to the arrival of he women, when these events occurred (Matthew 27:62-66; 28:11-15).
No matter what others may think, the Bible is very clear that Jesus was “put to death in the flesh, he was brought to life in the spirit” (1 Peter 3:18 NAB), and, at that point, became “a life-giving spirit” (1 Corinthians 15:45 NAB). Spirits are invisible. No one could see Jesus exit the tomb because he was an invisible spirit.
How about Jesus’ bones? “Taking the body, Joseph wrapped it [in] clean linen and laid it in his new tomb that he has hewn out of rock” (Matthew 28:59,60 NAB). “They found the stone rolled away from the tomb, but when they entered, they did not find the body of the Lord Jesus” (Luke 24:2,3 NAB). There was nothing there, except “the burial cloths there and the cloth that covered his head” (John 20:6,7 NAB) – no body, no bones! Why was it that “they did not find the body of the Lord Jesus” (Luke 24:3 NAB)? Because,”We have been made holy through the sacrifice of the body of Jesus Christ once for all” (Hebrews 10:10 NIV). According to the context (Hebrews 10:1-9), Jesus’ body was a ‘burnt offering.’ ‘Burnt offerings’ were “consumed” (Leviticus 1:11-13; 9:24 NIV). There was nothing left. God consumed Jesus’ entire body, including his bones.
You want to believe that Jesus’ body was stolen between 6PM Saturday and 6AM Sunday?–No way!–The tomb was was shut tight, with an official seal over it, and securely guarded (Matthew 27:59-66). Grave robbing was a serious crime in Israel.
There is no doubt whatsoever that Mark’s inspired report ends at 16:8, and that everything after this is spurious. The are a couple of articles on this website about it. However, Mark’s inspired gospel does indeed report that Jesus’ resurrection an accomplished fact. “You are looking for Jesus the Nazarene, who was crucified. He has been resurrected. He is not here! See the place where they put Him” (Mark 16:6 HCSB), that is, empty.
Your ideas about how God should/shouldn’t act remind us of: “You turn things upside down, as if the potter were thought to be like the clay! Shall what is formed say to the one who formed it, ‘You did not make me!’ Can the pot say to the potter, ‘You know nothing’?” (Isaiah 29:16 NIV).
BA: The gospels are indeed reports in every sense of the word.
GW: False. Not even close. Prove your claim.
BA: Matthew, Peter (1 Peter 5:13 [Mark]) and John were “eyewitnesses” to much that they wrote about.
GW: First, 1 Peter is not classified as a gospel, so we may ignore it. Your claim is about the gospels – Mark, Matthew, Luke, and John. Secondly, none of the authors of those books was an eyewitness to any events in the life of Jesus and its immediate aftermath. Thirdly, use the checklist I gave you to evaluate each of the gospels. Here are the questions you must answer for each: 1) Does the author write in the first person? 2) Does the author clearly identify himself in the oldest manuscript of the gospel? 3) Is the author a person of low bias, like a journalist or historian? (Is the author NOT a follower of Jesus?) 4) Did the author write about the events of Jesus in the few days following those events? 5) Did the author himself observe the events he describes? Use that checklist and then you will come to the same conclusions as I did after years of study.
BA: The physician (Colossians 4:14) Luke was not an eyewitness,…
GW: Yes, Luke was not an eyewitness, and so we can immediately cross out that gospel.
BA: but, reported that, “Inasmuch as many have undertaken to compile an accurate account of the things accomplished among us, just as they were handed down to us by those who from the beginning were eyewitnesses and servants of the word, it seemed fitting for me as well, HAVING INVESTIGATING EVERYTHING CAREFULLY from the beginning to write it out for you in consecutive order” (Luke 1:1-3 NASB). You cannot prove anything in the gospels false.
GW: Here Luke claims that he is using reports of eyewitnesses “handed down” through a chain of communication. But should we believe him? He does not identify the eyewitnesses. He does not precisely describe the chain. Since he does not give this information, I am skeptical of his claim to have investigated carefully. I don’t need to prove anything in Luke false. You need to prove everything in Luke true! The burden of proof is on you. And you can’t meet that burden. Right from the beginning we may exclude Luke because he was not an eyewitness. Move on.
BA: There is no evidence that Matthew and Luke borrowed from or copied Mark, nor that Mark even wrote first.
GW: False. It is well known among the experts that Matthew and Luke both borrowed from or copied from Mark and that Mark was written first.
BA: There are no proven inconsistencies, contradictions, or falsehoods in the gospels, NONE!
GW: False again! I have presented many to you. One falsehood in all the gospels is that God exists. He doesn’t. We know this. I have presented many proofs to you of this.
BA: Matthew does not say that the tomb was shut when the women arrived.
GW: Matthew implies that an angel rolled back the stone when the women arrived. We’ve been over this. I don’t think we are going to agree. But even if your position on what Matthew intended is correct, it doesn’t really matter because his account is not credible. It is not corroborated by the other gospels and there is no good evidence that angels exist. Also, Matthew was not an eyewitness either.
BA: As the NIV STUDY BIBLE reports, “The sense is ‘Now there had been.’ It is clear from the parallel accounts (Mk 16:2-6; Lk 24:1-7; Jn 20:1) that the events of v 2-4 occurred BEFORE the women actually arrived at the tomb.” The guards were at the tomb prior to the arrival of he women, when these events occurred (Matthew 27:62-66; 28:11-15).
GW: Where are the reports of Jesus, God, the angel, the guards, and the women? You have none. ZERO! You lack a solid foundation for any of your beliefs about Jesus. You aren’t doing history. You are doing theological speculation.
BA: No matter what others may think, the Bible is very clear that Jesus was “put to death in the flesh, he was brought to life in the spirit” (1 Peter 3:18 NAB), and, at that point, became “a life-giving spirit” (1 Corinthians 15:45 NAB). Spirits are invisible. No one could see Jesus exit the tomb because he was an invisible spirit.
GW: You are just relying on an ancient dualist myth about the body containing a spirit or soul. This idea has been thoroughly debunked by modern science and philosophy. Some of the Bible authors still believed in this myth. They had a reasonable excuse, but you don’t. Most Christians believe that Jesus left the tomb in body AND spirit. Your position is in the minority.
BA: How about Jesus’ bones? “Taking the body, Joseph wrapped it [in] clean linen and laid it in his new tomb that he has hewn out of rock” (Matthew 28:59,60 NAB). “They found the stone rolled away from the tomb, but when they entered, they did not find the body of the Lord Jesus” (Luke 24:2,3 NAB). There was nothing there, except “the burial cloths there and the cloth that covered his head” (John 20:6,7 NAB) – no body, no bones!
GW: Yes, that is the gist of the four gospels. But if your hypothesis is correct, then what happened to the body and the bones of Jesus?
BA: Why was it that “they did not find the body of the Lord Jesus” (Luke 24:3 NAB)? Because,”We have been made holy through the sacrifice of the body of Jesus Christ once for all” (Hebrews 10:10 NIV). According to the context (Hebrews 10:1-9), Jesus’ body was a ‘burnt offering.’ ‘Burnt offerings’ were “consumed” (Leviticus 1:11-13; 9:24 NIV). There was nothing left. God consumed Jesus’ entire body, including his bones.
GW: First, Hebrews is not a gospel, so we may ignore it. Secondly, the passage from Hebrews you cited does not say that Jesus body was cremated after the crucifixion. Thirdly, the four gospels say nothing about the cremation of Jesus’ body. And lastly, God would never arrange for his own son to be humiliated, tortured, murdered, and cremated by the Romans or the Jews. The fact is that nobody to this day knows how Jesus was removed from or left the tomb. We have no eyewitness reports on that. Some people speculate about what happened, and that is fine. But some people fabricate stories about what happened, and that is not fine; that is dishonest.
BA: You want to believe that Jesus’ body was stolen between 6PM Saturday and 6AM Sunday?–No way!–The tomb was was shut tight, with an official seal over it, and securely guarded (Matthew 27:59-66). Grave robbing was a serious crime in Israel.
GW: The placement of guards at the tomb was almost certainly a fabrication by Matthew. It is not corroborated by the other gospels, and so we may ignore that story. It doesn’t matter how tightly the tomb was shut. With enough men, probably two or three, the stone could be rolled back and the body removed. Serious crimes are sometimes committed. Probably those who took the body thought they were behaving ethically, even if it was against the law.
BA: There is no doubt whatsoever that Mark’s inspired report ends at 16:8, and that everything after this is spurious. The are a couple of articles on this website about it.
GW: Great! We finally agree on something!
BA: However, Mark’s inspired gospel does indeed report that Jesus’ resurrection an accomplished fact. “You are looking for Jesus the Nazarene, who was crucified. He has been resurrected. He is not here! See the place where they put Him” (Mark 16:6 HCSB), that is, empty.
GW: I don’t accept the HCSB; it is not commonly used by the experts. Also, the last verse of the original Mark manuscript is this: Matthew 16:8 NIV: “Trembling and bewildered, the women went out and fled from the tomb. They said nothing to anyone, because they were afraid.” So, how does the claim of crucifixion and resurrection of the man inside the tomb get into Mark’s gospel? You don’t know, do you? Well, very probably, the author fabricated this part of the story. He didn’t know either and so he made up a story that satisfied both his own and others’ religious desires and wishful thinking.
BA: Your ideas about how God should/shouldn’t act remind us of: “You turn things upside down, as if the potter were thought to be like the clay! Shall what is formed say to the one who formed it, ‘You did not make me!’ Can the pot say to the potter, ‘You know nothing’?” (Isaiah 29:16 NIV).
GW: You do the same – you present your ideas and the ideas of the Bible authors about what God can and cannot do, what he would and would not do, and what he should or should not do. So, I just do the same as you and the authors do, with one big difference. I think rationally about these inferences and predictions, but you don’t. I’ll give you two quick examples. I think that if he did exist, God would not use angels, even an angel to roll back the stone. But you think that he would. I think that if he did exist, God would prevent the Holocaust. But you think that he would allow it. My inferences are rational and yours are irrational.
GW: You have said nothing about my new argument which I presented to you yesterday. It lays out how God would communicate to us, if he did exist.
The 4 basic facts about Jesus that are most substantiated by both friends and foes of Christianity are:
1. He died publicly and was buried (1 Corinthians 15:3,4)
2. His tomb was empty and no one ever produced his body (Mt 27:57-28:6; Mk 15:42-16:6)
3. Jesus’ disciples believed they saw Jesus after his resurrection from the dead (Lk 24; Jn 20,21; 1 Cor 4-8)
4. Jesus’ disciples transformed after their alleged resurrection experiences (1 Cor 15:9-11)
None of minimal evidences necessitates that Jesus was resurrected, but given the extant facts, these are the bare-bones facts necessary if he was resurrected.
BA: The 4 basic facts about Jesus that are most substantiated by both friends and foes of Christianity are:
GW: Are they facts? I don’t think so. Are they substantiated? I don’t think so. I think they are beliefs or alleged facts popular among friends and foes of Christianity. The evidence on which they rely is so poor that nobody is justified in saying they are facts. Remember: There are no first-person, author-identified, low-bias, promptly written, eyewitness written reports of any event in the life of Jesus or its immediate aftermath. If details are not corroborated in at least three of the four gospels, we should consider them unlikely to be true.
BA: 1. He [Jesus] died publicly and was buried (1 Corinthians 15:3,4)
GW: I believe that Jesus existed and was crucified in a public space. I’m not confident that he died from the crucifixion. And if he did die from it, I am not confident that he was buried in a tomb. Ehrman and others now believe that probably Jesus was crucified, died on the cross, and then was buried in a common pit, not a tomb. This was the typical procedure and outcome for crucified persons. It is possible that the tomb story, although mentioned in all four gospels, is a pure fabrication either to fill a knowledge gap or to minimize the dishonor stemming from the burial of Jesus in a common pit with other criminals.
BA: 2. His [Jesus’] tomb was empty and no one ever produced his body (Mt 27:57-28:6; Mk 15:42-16:6)
GW: I believe that if Jesus was placed in a tomb, as the gospels say, then the tomb was found to be empty on Sunday morning and nobody who really knew what happened to Jesus, dead or alive, made any reports about it. Today, I would search for the ossuary containing the bones of Jesus in Nazareth, not Jerusalem.
BA: 3. Jesus’ disciples believed they saw Jesus after his resurrection from the dead (Lk 24; Jn 20,21; 1 Cor 4-8)
GW: I think it is likely that one or two disciples had grief hallucinations in which they “saw” and possibly “heard” Jesus, and it is possible that these experiences plus learning about an empty tomb led them to a delusion that Jesus had come back to life. Grief hallucinations occur in about 15% of cases of a loving relationship. I had a grief hallucination associated with the death of my first wife. These hallucinations seem quite real, and I can understand how some people would infer that the dead one had come back to life or was now a ghost.
BA: 4. Jesus’ disciples transformed after their alleged resurrection experiences (1 Cor 15:9-11)
GW: I think the grief hallucinations of Jesus for the one or two disciples probably transformed their lives. The lives of the others may have been transformed to varying degrees.
BA: None of minimal evidences necessitates that Jesus was resurrected, but given the extant facts, these are the bare-bones facts necessary if he was resurrected.
GW: I agree that none of these alleged facts necessitates that Jesus came back to life. I think it is important to ask this question: “If God did exist and he were to cause a human person to come back to life, then WHY would he do this and HOW would he do it? So first, WHY? I think he might do it to prove his identity, power, authority, and credibility. (In fact, I think he would do it every seven years before all persons.) So secondly, HOW? He would ask that the bones of a buried person or the ashes of a cremated person, having been dead for at least ONE YEAR, be brought to him. And then he would cause the person to be reconstituted and come back to life in front of all persons. What a glorious miracle that would be! The alleged resurrection of Jesus was nothing like that: 1) God himself did not obviously and directly participate. 2) Jesus was allegedly dead only 30 minutes to 36 hours, not a year. 3) The resurrection occurred in front of no known witnesses. God did not arrange for everyone to actually observe it.
GW: If a resurrection requires God, then there have been no resurrections ever! Why? Because God does not exist, and this has been proven.
GW: Let’s take a closer look at comparable passages from Mark (MK) and Matthew (MT) in the NIV.
Mark 16:1-8, NIV:
“1 When the Sabbath was over, Mary Magdalene, Mary the mother of James, and Salome bought spices so that they might go to anoint Jesus’ body. 2 Very early on the first day of the week, just after sunrise, they were on their way to the tomb 3 and they asked each other, “Who will roll the stone away from the entrance of the tomb?” 4 But when they looked up, they saw that the stone, which was very large, had been rolled away. 5 As they entered the tomb, they saw a young man dressed in a white robe sitting on the right side, and they were alarmed. 6 “Don’t be alarmed,” he said. “You are looking for Jesus the Nazarene, who was crucified. He has risen! He is not here. See the place where they laid him. 7 But go, tell his disciples and Peter, ‘He is going ahead of you into Galilee. There you will see him, just as he told you.’” 8 Trembling and bewildered, the women went out and fled from the tomb. They said nothing to anyone, because they were afraid.”
Matthew 28:1-8, NIV:
“1 After the Sabbath, at dawn on the first day of the week, Mary Magdalene and the other Mary went to look at the tomb. 2 There was a violent earthquake, for an angel of the Lord came down from heaven and, going to the tomb, rolled back the stone and sat on it. 3 His appearance was like lightning, and his clothes were white as snow. 4 The guards were so afraid of him that they shook and became like dead men. 5 The angel said to the women, “Do not be afraid, for I know that you are looking for Jesus, who was crucified. 6 He is not here; he has risen, just as he said. Come and see the place where he lay. 7 Then go quickly and tell his disciples: ‘He has risen from the dead and is going ahead of you into Galilee. There you will see him.’ Now I have told you.” 8 So the women hurried away from the tomb, afraid yet filled with joy, and ran to tell his disciples.”
My conclusions about these two passages from the same NIV version:
1. Same: The passages both cover the same time period from when the women leave to go to the tomb to when they depart from the tomb. We would expect them to say pretty much the same thing.
2. Difference: Salome is mentioned in MK, but not in MT.
3. Contradiction: The purpose of the women in MK is to anoint, but their purpose in MT is to just look.
4. Same: The women went to the tomb on the first day of the week, i.e. Sunday.
5. Difference: In MK the women wondered how they would move the stone, but this is not mentioned in MT.
6. Big Difference: In MT, the women experienced an earthquake at the tomb, but not in MK. An earthquake is such a major detail that if it had really occurred, MK would have mentioned it too.
7. Contradiction: In MK, the women saw that the stone had already been rolled back, but in MT the women saw the stone being rolled back by an angel.
8. Big Difference: In MK no guards are mentioned, but in MT there were guards at the tomb. Presence of guards is such a major detail that if it had really occurred, MK would have mentioned it too.
9. Same: In MK and MT the women entered the tomb.
10. Contradiction: In MK the person the women met at the tomb was a man, but it MT it was an angel. A man is not an angel.
11. Contradiction: In MK the person the women met was inside the tomb, but in MT he was outside the tomb.
12. Same: Jesus was not in the tomb.
13. Same: The person whom the women met said that Jesus had risen and was going to Galilee.
14. Difference: In MK the man tells the women to go tell the disciples what they saw, but the angel does not give this instruction in MT.
15. Contradiction: In MK the women tell nobody about their experience, but in MT they tell the disciples.
16. I believe that the account from MK (the first gospel) is more likely to be correct than the account from MT (written later) which is probably fabricated to some degree. I believe that MT fabricated the earthquake, the guards, the angel, and the angel rolling back the stone.
A If God did exist, he would have no good reason to cause an earthquake at this moment. An earthquake would probably be rare in Jerusalem, but it would not be miracle if it occurred.
B. Probably the story of the guards was invented to squash the speculation that grave robbers stole the body.
C. There is no good evidence that any angels exist.
D. Neither God nor Jesus (if he had supernatural powers) would need an angel to roll back the stone. What a ridiculous idea! A supernatural Jesus would roll back the stone or push back the stone himself or he would just pass through the walls of the tomb. Duh. (But perhaps Jesus was a human person (not divine) and never died but revived in the tomb. Then he would need somebody from the outside to let him out.)
17. I believe the person at the tomb, either man or angel, was fabricated as a literary device to present a reason for the empty tomb. The person is actually the narrator for the story. Nobody knew how the tomb became empty so somebody had to invent an explanation which was pleasing and wish fulfilling – Jesus came back to life and left the tomb on his own.
18. If God did exist, he would never have produced a resurrection like what is described in these gospels (see earlier comments) and he would never allow the differences, big differences, and contradictions we see in these two accounts of the same time period. Either God does not exist or he had no role in the writing of these gospels or both.
Based on the criteria you list as necessary proof, we have no history of anyone or anything from the ancient world.
However, in the case of Jesus, we do have much low-bias, writer identified, first-person, eyewitness evidence.
His public execution, death, tomb burial, and post-resurrection appearances are in at least 3 gospels. Even Mark’s account mentions that Jesus was “resurrected” (Mark 16:6 HCSB). We don’t care what your opinion of the HCSB is, it is a very good translation.
“They did not find the body of the Lord Jesus” (Luke 24:3 NIV)
“Seated where Jesus’ body had been, one at the head and the other at the foot” (John 20:12 NIV)
Jesus’ dead “body” was “consumed” by God in the tomb (Hebrews 10:1-10; Leviticus 9:24) very neatly, with nothing left (Luke 24:12; John 20:2-11), no ashes or bones.
Hundreds of eyewitnesses of the resurrected Jesus were still alive over 20 years later (1 Cor 15:6), and could be interviewed.
Jesus said to “examine the evidence of the works themselves” (John 14:11 NIV), without bias, and preconceived ideas.
“After Jesus’ resurrection,” “he presented himself to them and gave many convincing proofs that he was alive” (Matthew 27:53; Acts 1:1-3 NIV).
Individuals may have hallucinations, but there are no proven examples of large groups of people having the exact same hallucination.
A short, momentary group hallucination might seem reasonable, but long, sustained, detailed hallucinations have no historical support, and are intuitively unreasonable.
The resurrected Jesus was seen on multiple occasions by a number of different groups (and subsets of groups). All these diverse sightings would have to be additional group hallucinations of one nature or another, if the hallucination theory were correct.
Not all the disciples were favorably disposed toward hallucinations. “Some doubted” (Matthew 28:17 NIV). Thomas did (Lk 24:41; Jn 20:20-29).
If Jesus’ resurrection was simply a hallucination, what became of his corpse? The absence of Jesus’ body is unexplainable under the hallucination scenario.
BA: Based on the criteria you list as necessary proof, we have no history of anyone or anything from the ancient world.
GW: Absolutely false. You are making a “false equivalence” argument which holds no water. We have good evidence for many events in the ancient Roman world. There are actually some good documents and artifacts, unlike for what we find for the Jesus stories.
BA: However, in the case of Jesus, we do have much low-bias, writer identified, first-person, eyewitness evidence.
GW: Nope! Not a single document about Jesus meets all FIVE of the criteria. (There are five, not four.)
BA: His public execution, death, tomb burial, and post-resurrection appearances are in at least 3 gospels.
GW: But none of the gospels meets all five criteria for a good report, and so we cannot be confident of any conclusions we draw. However, I think if at least three of the four gospels present the same detail, then we can conclude that maybe it is valid. I think we can say that the crucifixion and post-crucifixion appearances fall into this category. BTW, execution is not the same as crucifixion. With an execution, you are sure the person died, which is not the case with Jesus. Crucifixion is a METHOD of torture with the intent to execute. Also, when you use the term “post-resurrection appearances” you are engaged in begging the question. You can’t just assume that a resurrection occurred. But, if for the sake of argument, we temporarily assume that Jesus lived, was crucified, died on the cross, was placed in a tomb, the tomb was found empty, and some followers believed they saw him or even believed that he came back to life, even if we assume all of that, it is hardly sufficient to conclude BEYOND A REASONABLE DOUBT that Jesus came back to life! Not even close. On the other hand, if God did exist and resurrected somebody, we would have evidence sufficient to conclude BEYOND A REASONABLE DOUBT that a human person came back to life! We must consider what did not happen as much as what happened.
BA: Even Mark’s account mentions that Jesus was “resurrected” (Mark 16:6 HCSB). We don’t care what your opinion of the HCSB is, it is a very good translation.
GW: I don’t care that you don’t care that I reject the HCSB. If you want to have a meaningful conversation with me, then use the NIV. I have consistently used it. You just cherry pick your translations, and that is unethical.
BA: “They did not find the body of the Lord Jesus” (Luke 24:3 NIV)
GW: Let’s temporarily assume that this is correct. I believe that the story of resurrection was FABRICATED to help explain the empty tomb, as was the story of the angel at the tomb.
BA: “Seated where Jesus’ body had been, one at the head and the other at the foot” (John 20:12 NIV)
GW: Temporarily assumed.
BA: Jesus’ dead “body” was “consumed” by God in the tomb (Hebrews 10:1-10; Leviticus 9:24) very neatly, with nothing left (Luke 24:12; John 20:2-11), no ashes or bones.
GW: Now you are inappropriately piecing together verses from different books in a desperate attempt to defend your indefensible position. We are discussing the gospels, Hebrews and Levitus are not gospels, and so I reject them for this conversation. Luke and John may say that the body was missing from the tomb, but they do not say the body was cremated.
BA: Hundreds of eyewitnesses of the resurrected Jesus were still alive over 20 years later (1 Cor 15:6), and could be interviewed.
GW: Uncorroborated by any of the gospels. This detail is almost certainly a fabrication. We have no eyewitness reports from any of these alleged eyewitnesses.
BA: Jesus said to “examine the evidence of the works themselves” (John 14:11 NIV), without bias, and preconceived ideas.
GW: Yes, that is what I am doing, but you are not.
BA: “After Jesus’ resurrection,” “he presented himself to them and gave many convincing proofs that he was alive” (Matthew 27:53; Acts 1:1-3 NIV).
GW: Acts is not a gospel. You are begging the question again. We are trying to determine if Jesus came back to life. You cannot assume that he did from the start. Nothing stated in the gospels rises to the level of a proof.
BA: Individuals may have hallucinations, but there are no proven examples of large groups of people having the exact same hallucination.
GW: Yes, there are. I gave you one example – Fatima. Check it out. The story of 500 seeing Jesus is a fabrication, not a report of a mass hallucination. I already said that probably one or two disciples had grief hallucinations of Jesus. Two is not a large group. It is possible that two disciples had a grief hallucination of Jesus at the same time! Their hallucinations would have been similar, but not identical. When I went took my trip in the time machine, I had the two write down a description of their experience, and sure enough, they were similar, both including Jesus, but not identical.
BA: A short, momentary group hallucination might seem reasonable, but long, sustained, detailed hallucinations have no historical support, and are intuitively unreasonable.
GW: False. See above.
BA: The resurrected Jesus was seen on multiple occasions by a number of different groups (and subsets of groups).
GW: Begging the question. And there is a good naturalistic explanation for every story of a sighting of Jesus post-crucifixion. I’ve done that work.
BA: All these diverse sightings would have to be additional group hallucinations of one nature or another, if the hallucination theory were correct.
GW: No, they wouldn’t! Some of the alleged sightings were by individuals, not groups. Some of the stories are pure fabrications. Some of the stories are based on false identifications, memory problems, misunderstandings, or hallucinations.
BA: Not all the disciples were favorably disposed toward hallucinations.
GW: That’s probably true. Only about 15% have grief hallucinations about their dead loved ones.
BA: “Some doubted” (Matthew 28:17 NIV). Thomas did (Lk 24:41; Jn 20:20-29).
GW: Some people are well trained in critical thinking, rationality, and science, and they are less disposed to superstitions and delusions.
BA: If Jesus’ resurrection was simply a hallucination, what became of his corpse?
GW: Good question! I believe it was transported to the family tomb, probably in Nazareth. Then after a year, the bones were placed in an ossuary and kept in the tomb or by the family. The bones have never been found, yet.
BA: The absence of Jesus’ body is unexplainable under the hallucination scenario.
GW: False. I just gave you a reasonable explanation.
On this website, we use the the entire 66 book Bible canon, which includes “the Law of Moses, the Prophets and the Psalms” (Luke 24:44 NIV), the 39 book Old Testament, and “Paul . . . all his letters [and] the rest of the scriptures” (2 Peter 3:16,17 HCSB), including the 27 book New Testament. This is “the faith that was once for all handed down to the holy ones” (Jude 3 NAB).
The 4 gospels are wonderful and 100% true, however, the other 62 Bible books are also God’s “inspired” Word (2 Timothy 3:16 (NASB), and we use them as such. If you don’t like it, you don’t have to visit this website.
We may address some of your other issues in other posts.
Another issue we’d like to help you to understand is the quality of the HCSB translation:
” . . . the translation is a mediating translation in the stream of the NIV and similar, but slightly more literal”—Wikipedia, under “Notes”
Matthew, Peter (Mark wrote for Peter (1 Peter 5:13) [Against Marcion, by Tertullian]) and John (John 20:35; 21:24; 1 John 1:1-3) were eyewitnesses to much of what they recorded. Luke developed his report based on many eyewitness accounts (Luke 1:1-3).
Divergent independent witness accounts are not necessarily contradictory. Eyewitness accounts can be reliable in spite of what may, on the surface, at least, appear to be contradictions. The gospels do record divergent information, but, surprisingly, none of it is contradictory, upon close examination.
Even though Matthew, Mark and Luke recorded large blocks of similar information, there is no proof that they colluded, or copied one another.
John wrote much later in time, and fills in with a lot of information that Matthew, Mark and Luke did not record.
FYI – Crucifixion IS a type of execution that was used by the Romans. Just as so as lethal injection of drugs, firing squad, gas chamber, and electric chair, etc., are terms for various forms of execution that have been used.
The 4 gospels record the fact of Jesus’ death by crucifixion execution (Matthew 26:50-66; Mark 15:37-47; Luke 23:46-56; John 19:31-20:42).
We have numerous Biblical statements of, and about, “witnesses” ‘testifying’ of these events (1 Pt 5:5; 2 Pt 1:16,17; Jn 21:24; 1 Jn 1:1; Acts 1:21,22; 2:32; 3:15; 4:13,33; 10:39; 1 Cor 15:7,8).
Jesus’ body was NOT CREMATED!!!! It vanished from the tomb because God “consumed” it (Lev 9:24; Heb 10:1-10), and it was never seen again. He was resurrected as an invisible “spirit” (1 Cor 15:45; 1 Pt 3:18).
If you carefully study the details of the Fatima “apparitions” you’ll see that it doesn’t harmonize with anything in the Bible, and likely was a deception of Satan (2 Cor 11:13-15; 2 Th 2:3-12), and not a hallucination.
Jesus’ tomb was blocked by a large stone, sealed and guarded (Mt 27:62-66), so your ‘Saturday night theft’ theory doesn’t fit the facts. In fact, Jesus’ enemies were so convinced of his resurrection that they bribed the soldiers to lyingly claim Jesus’ body was stolen (Mt 28:11-15).
Your ‘Jesus’ family swiped his body from the tomb’ theory doesn’t fit, either, because, (1) women couldn’t move the stone (Mk 16:1-3), and (2) Jesus’ “own brothers did not believe in him” (Jn 7:5), until after his resurrection.
BA: On this website, we use the the entire 66 book Bible canon,…
GW: That’s fine. You are the owners of the website and so you are entitled to define the domain of the site. No problem.
BA: The 4 gospels are wonderful and 100% true,…
GW: Of course they are not 100% true. I have demonstrated how some verses cannot be true and how some other verses are probably false. The verses were written by men who were fallible.
BA: however, the other 62 Bible books are also God’s “inspired” Word…
GW: False. None of those books was inspired, authored, dictated, authorized, or approved by God. Why? Because God does not exist, as I have proven many times.
BA: If you don’t like it, you don’t have to visit this website.
GW: I like it. However, I will let you know when I believe the verses are IRRELEVANT to the current topic or FALSE.
BA: We may address some of your other issues in other posts.
GW: I hope you do. While you are at it, address my Holocaust argument against the existence of God. If God does not exist, then every verse in the Bible which mentions God is false, and your whole enterprise of Bible Authenticity is invalid.
BA: Another issue we’d like to help you to understand is the quality of the HCSB translation: ” . . . the translation is a mediating translation in the stream of the NIV and similar, but slightly more literal”—Wikipedia, under “Notes”
GW: Your Wikipedia quote says nothing about the QUALITY of the translation of the HCSB, and so the quote is not supportive of your claim about QUALITY.
GW: I want to use the best translation, not necessarily the most “literal” one. Sometimes translating literally does not capture the intended meaning of the author. It is helpful to translate and interpret words according to CONTEXT. I don’t use the HCSB because it is not one of the top translations used by the EXPERTS in Biblical scholarship. I encourage you to avoid the HCSB if you want to be persuasive with your readers. And I encourage you to use the NIV if you want to be persuasive with me in particular.
GW: But even worse is when you cherry pick your translation – picking one translation over another because it seems to support the point you are trying to make in a particular discussion or debate at the moment. This is actually unethical.
BA: Matthew, Peter (Mark wrote for Peter (1 Peter 5:13) [Against Marcion, by Tertullian]) and John (John 20:35; 21:24; 1 John 1:1-3) were eyewitnesses to much of what they recorded. Luke developed his report based on many eyewitness accounts (Luke 1:1-3).
GW: You don’t know any of that. You can’t prove any of it. Does the author of the Gospel write in the first person? Does the author identify himself within the text? Does the author describe situations to which he could not have been an eyewitness? Does the author write in the same language used by the people he describes? Bart Ehrman has said many times that the authors of the gospels are anonymous. I believe him.
BA: Divergent independent witness accounts are not necessarily contradictory. Eyewitness accounts can be reliable in spite of what may, on the surface, at least, appear to be contradictions.
GW: I agree. But some of them are NECESSARILY CONTRADICTORY. When this is the case, I try to point it out to you. Your assumption that NO VERSES are contradictory because the Bible is inspired by God is totally unwarranted, irrational, and false. First, God does not exist, and this has been proven. Secondly, even if God did exist, he did not inspire the Bible. There are too many problems with the Bible for it to have been inspired by God who would have prevented those problems. And lastly, some contradictions are clear and obvious.
BA: The gospels do record divergent information, but, surprisingly, none of it is contradictory, upon close examination.
GW: False. On close examination, it is clear that some verses are contradictory. I even identified several in a recent comment and you have not responded to them.
BA: Even though Matthew, Mark and Luke recorded large blocks of similar information, there is no proof that they colluded, or copied one another.
GW: False. There is good evidence, not “proof” (as there is proof that God does not exist), that Matthew and Luke copied or used material in Mark. This fact is well known by a consensus of the experts.
BA: John wrote much later in time, and fills in with a lot of information that Matthew, Mark and Luke did not record.
GW: Yes, John wrote much later in time than the other gospel writers. According to the experts, he probably wrote his gospel between 90 and 110 CE, which is approximately 60 to 80 years after the crucifixion of Jesus. His gospel is likely to have the greatest number of errors, if they be called errors. It appears that John did a great deal of fabricating to fill knowledge gaps and respond to critics. I’ll give you one good example of this. A common question might have been “How do you know that Jesus was dead when removed from the cross? No physician or Roman soldier examined him.” John didn’t know, so he invented a detail – something that didn’t happen. He fabricated the idea that a Roman soldier pierced the side of Jesus with a spear, and watery blood spilled out. John felt compelled to persuade people that Jesus was surely dead when removed from the cross so that Jesus could come back to life later. None of the other gospel writers said anything at all about a spear piercing. This would be a major detail that they would have mentioned if it had happened. John just invented it out of thin air.
BA: FYI – Crucifixion IS a type of execution that was used by the Romans.
GW: Not exactly. Crucifixion is one method intended to humiliate, torture, and kill people. Although this method usually succeeded in fulfilling those intentions, it didn’t always. You must make a distinction between method, intention, and outcome.
BA: Just as so as lethal injection of drugs, firing squad, gas chamber, and electric chair, etc., are terms for various forms of execution that have been used.
GW: All of them are methods intended to kill, but they don’t always succeed. In the case of Jesus we do not have proof that he died on the cross. He probably did, but we have no proof of this. I think there is at least a .25 probability that Jesus did not die on the cross, he went into a coma, and then he came out of the coma inside the tomb. This would very well explain the subsequent “sightings.”
BA: The 4 gospels record the fact of Jesus’ death by crucifixion execution (Matthew 26:50-66; Mark 15:37-47; Luke 23:46-56; John 19:31-20:42).
GW: Here you did not quote just the specific verses which refer to a death, so I am hardly persuaded by your claim. But at any rate, none of the gospels provide sufficient evidence for a PROOF that Jesus died by crucifixion. See my earlier comments on this. (Also, I cover this topic in depth in my first book – God Wants You to be an Atheist.)
BA: We have numerous Biblical statements of, and about, “witnesses” ‘testifying’ of these events (1 Pt 5:5; 2 Pt 1:16,17; Jn 21:24; 1 Jn 1:1; Acts 1:21,22; 2:32; 3:15; 4:13,33; 10:39; 1 Cor 15:7,8).
GW: False. They are not statements OF eyewitnesses, as you here claim. Please note that no gospel author even claims that there was an eyewitness in the tomb who saw Jesus dead and then come back to life. Your evidence is really weak for a resurrection.
GW: When I took my recent trip in my time machine, I saw a group of four men remove Jesus’ corpse from the tomb at midnight on Saturday and then carry it to Nazareth for proper burial. I don’t think you have better evidence than I have.
BA: Jesus’ body was NOT CREMATED!!!! It vanished from the tomb because God “consumed” it (Lev 9:24; Heb 10:1-10), and it was never seen again. He was resurrected as an invisible “spirit” (1 Cor 15:45; 1 Pt 3:18).
GW: You are the one who implied it was cremated, not me. We agree that if Jesus was placed in a tomb, he was already gone on Sunday morning when the women arrived. NONE of the gospel writers knew how Jesus left or was removed from the tomb, and so they fabricated stories to fill in the knowledge gap.
GW: What do you even mean when you say “God consumed” the body of Jesus? Did he cremate it? Did he eat it? Did he cause it to become nothing? (Would it even be possible for God to cause something to become nothing?) There is no good evidence that spirits even exist. And the clincher – we now know that God doesn’t even exist! This has been proven. Rejoice in the truth!
BA: If you carefully study the details of the Fatima “apparitions” you’ll see that it doesn’t harmonize with anything in the Bible,…
GW: Fatima was not intended to harmonize with anything in the Bible. People there had a similar visual hallucination at the same time. Carefully study the details.
BA: and likely was a deception of Satan (2 Cor 11:13-15; 2 Th 2:3-12), and not a hallucination.
GW: Satan? Are you trying to be funny? There is no good evidence that Satan exists. If God doesn’t exist, then Satan would not exist. And if God did exist, Satan would not exist. God would never allow such a horrible person to exist. And so, we can be very confident that Satan does not exist, never did exist, and never will exist. If you believe that Satan and God exist, then arrange a meeting of them with us and some of our friends. It should be a very interesting meeting and clear up a lot of doubts.
BA: Jesus’ tomb was blocked by a large stone,…
GW: If Jesus was placed in a tomb, then let’s just assume for the sake of argument that the tomb was blocked by a large stone.
BA: sealed and guarded (Mt 27:62-66),…
GW: Only one gospel, Matthew, reports sealing and guarding, and so it is very likely a fabrication. I don’t accept that the tomb was guarded. The story is ridiculous.
BA: so your ‘Saturday night theft’ theory doesn’t fit the facts.
GW: It fits our mutually assumed facts very well. Jesus was likely removed from the tomb by unknown persons between 6 PM on Saturday and 6 AM on Sunday, before the women arrived.
BA: In fact, Jesus’ enemies were so convinced of his resurrection that they bribed the soldiers to lyingly claim Jesus’ body was stolen (Mt 28:11-15).
GW: Uncorroborated story. Very likely a fabrication by Matthew. Would the soldiers ever admit to anybody that they were bribed? Do we have an eyewitness report of the bribery? No and No.
BA: Your ‘Jesus’ family swiped his body from the tomb’ theory doesn’t fit, either, because, (1) women couldn’t move the stone (Mk 16:1-3),…
GW: It wasn’t the women who moved the stone or took Jesus from the tomb. It would have been other friends or family members of Jesus. We may assume that it took at least two strong men to roll back the stone.
BA: and (2) Jesus’ “own brothers did not believe in him” (Jn 7:5), until after his resurrection.
GW: Do you have an eyewitness report from any of the brothers? Of course you don’t. Would the brothers admit that they had taken Jesus out of the tomb? Of course they wouldn’t. But the removal could have been by other friends and/or family members. Or the removal could have been “contracted” by Jesus’ mother or some other family member who wanted Jesus properly buried in Nazareth in the family tomb. Which is more likely? That Jesus came back to life and then flew to heaven? Or that Jesus died on the cross, his body was placed in a tomb, some unknown people removed his body from the tomb during the time I specified, and they buried it in Nazareth? Ah, the latter is far more probable.
GW: The idea that Jesus died and came back to life is among the top five most ridiculous ideas in the history of ideas. Never happened.
As one Bible writer said, ‘The spirit of Yahweh speaks through me” (2 Sam 23:2 NJB), which is true of all Bible writers. The books they wrote were all “inspired by God” (2 Tim 3:16 NASB).
We use critical thinking to decide which translations to quote, and, while the NASB and the HCSB are not the main ones we use, we do quote the the HCSB and the NASB, and will continue to do so.
Since no translation can be precisely exact, there are often a variety of ways (within certain parameters) to render the original Bible languages into modern English. There is no rule prohibiting the use of multiple transactions, as long as it is done honestly. We abide by the principle, “An honest witness does not deceive” (Pr 14:5 NIV).
Some have chosen to use the KJV exclusively, either due to ignorance or deception.
You choose to use the NIV exclusively. Is it wrong for a party in a legal dispute to use more than one lawyer? By choosing to use the NIV exclusively for every quote, you’re still making a choice. It is also an ethical choice to use multiple transactions, when used honestly. We will continue to do this.
All the earliest manuscripts of the gospels attribute them to Matthew, Mark, Luke and John, respectfully. This is very similar to a newspaper article that carries the writer’s byline, but the writer is not mentioned in the text of the article.
While there are many very assertive peculations, there is no evidence that Matthew and Luke copied from Mark, the so-called “opinions of experts” notwithstanding.
“No Roman soldier or physician examined him when he was removed from the cross”?—You’re writing fiction!
“Pilate was amazed that HE WAS ALREADY DEAD. He summoned the centurion and asked him if Jesus had already died. And when HE LEARNED OF IT FROM THE CENTURION, he gave the body to Joseph” (Mk 15:44,45 NAB).
Regarding John’s recording of the spear thrust into Jesus’ side and watery blood flowing out (Jn 19:34), the mere fact of the single witnesses recording an event does not in and of itself invalidate the claim. There is no evidence of any fabrication, or contrary facts.
Your “coma theory” flies in the face of the facts. It’s fails to explain what the Roman soldiers and Jesus’ disciples experienced as his body was pulled off the cross. The first people to to come upon a dead body check for any signs of life. Dead bodies quickly experience loss of breathing, temperature loss, rigidity, lividity. The soldiers carrying out the crucifixion were experienced with such executions, and would not have been fooled. Dead people feel cold to the touch, their bodies become rigid. Purple discoloration begins. dead people don’t respond to their injuries. They don’t flinch when touched. Roman guards faced execution themselves if they allowed a prisoner to survive execution. Jesus disappeared from the historical record following his resurrection and ascension and was never sighted again.
The Bible reports numerous eyewitnesses of Jesus’ death, and after his resurrection, “he presented himself alive to them by many proofs after he suffered, appearing to them during forty days” (Acts 1:3 NAB).
No one could have gotten past the guards Saturday night to roll back the stone and steal Jesus’ body. As late as Sunday morning, even Jesus’ closest apostles “did not yet understand the scriptures that he had to rise from the dead” (Jn 20:9 NAB). The women who visited the tomb “told this to the apostles, but their story seemed like nonsense to them” (Lk 24:10,11 NAB). Jesus’ most intimate associates had not the slightest clue that his resurrection had been predicted, or that he would be resurrected.
“Some unknown people removed his body from the tomb [Saturday night] and they buried it at Nazareth”? – You’re writing fairy tales! – First, they couldn’t have gotten past the armed guards, and, second, if his body had been buried somewhere, that fact would have become public knowledge, and his supposed resurrection exposed as a hoax.
Jesus’ resurrected is the best documented event from ancient times!
BA: As one Bible writer said, ‘The spirit of Yahweh speaks through me” (2 Sam 23:2 NJB), which is true of all Bible writers. The books they wrote were all “inspired by God” (2 Tim 3:16 NASB).
GW: I think these Bible writers are delusional about this. How would anyone ever prove that they were inspired by God? Please describe a valid test of inspriation.
BA: We use critical thinking to decide which translations to quote, and, while the NASB and the HCSB are not the main ones we use, we do quote the the HCSB and the NASB, and will continue to do so.
GW: Your decisions on this point are mostly irrational. I will continue to either ignore or disparage those translations. Most experts don’t use them.
BA: Since no translation can be precisely exact,…
GW: If God did exist, he could and would produce “precisely exact” translations for all persons. But humans are fallible, they won’t produce “precisely exact” translations, and so they will disagree on what is a proper one. But since you are very interested in scholarship in this area, I think you should use what the experts use.
BA: there are often a variety of ways (within certain parameters) to render the original Bible languages into modern English. There is no rule prohibiting the use of multiple transactions, as long as it is done honestly. We abide by the principle, “An honest witness does not deceive” (Pr 14:5 NIV).
GW: But your cherry picking of translations is unethical, as I have asserted many times.
BA: Some have chosen to use the KJV exclusively, either due to ignorance or deception.
GW: Bad translation, almost never used by the experts.
BA: You choose to use the NIV exclusively. Is it wrong for a party in a legal dispute to use more than one lawyer? By choosing to use the NIV exclusively for every quote, you’re still making a choice. It is also an ethical choice to use multiple transactions, when used honestly. We will continue to do this.
GW: Bad analogy. It’s good for the lawyers to all speak the same language. You are making bad choices on translations, but you will probably continue to do so.
BA: All the earliest manuscripts of the gospels attribute them to Matthew, Mark, Luke and John, respectfully. This is very similar to a newspaper article that carries the writer’s byline, but the writer is not mentioned in the text of the article.
GW: An author would not title their own piece as “The Gospel According to Mark.” That would be a title added later by somebody not the author. The original authors of the gospels, whoever they were, did not identity themselves. This is one box on the checklist not met. Here is a good video about who wrote the gospels: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Du-Ucq5QrAc
BA: While there are many very assertive [s]peculations, there is no evidence that Matthew and Luke copied from Mark, the so-called “opinions of experts” notwithstanding.
GW: You are just mistaken on this point. I will accept the expert opinion over yours.
BA: “No Roman soldier or physician examined him when he was removed from the cross”?—You’re writing fiction!
GW: No, I am describing the fiction which was written.
BA: “Pilate was amazed that HE WAS ALREADY DEAD. He summoned the centurion and asked him if Jesus had already died. And when HE LEARNED OF IT FROM THE CENTURION, he gave the body to Joseph” (Mk 15:44,45 NAB).
GW: NAB – bad choice. Pilate was amazed by the report of the centurion that Jesus was already dead. Why? Because crucified victims did not usually die on the cross so quickly, in just a few hours as it was alleged for Jesus. Since the centurion had not removed Jesus from the cross and had not examined him “up close and personal,” he was only speculating or predicting that Jesus was dead. It is quite possible that Jesus was just in a coma and that the centurion was either mistaken or was bribed to be dishonest to Pilate. Here is something for you to ponder which I have pondered before: What are the eight signs of death which could be observed and verified by people at the time of Jesus’ alleged death?
BA: Regarding John’s recording of the spear thrust into Jesus’ side and watery blood flowing out (Jn 19:34), the mere fact of the single witnesses recording an event does not in and of itself invalidate the claim. There is no evidence of any fabrication, or contrary facts.
GW: It is still possible that John is relaying a fact (which he did not observe), but it is more likely that he fabricated the spear thrust. John was not “a single witness.” He was a single author and his story of the spear thrust is not corroborated by the other gospel authors. The spear thrust is a major detail, and if it had occurred at all, it would have been mentioned by three or four of the Gospel authors. The story is fishy. If the centurion already thought that Jesus was dead, and if Pilate gave the body to Joseph, then the centurion would not have returned to the cross and pierced the body. That would go against his belief and testimony that Jesus was already dead. And Joseph would have vehemently objected to further desecration of the body. Finally, upon return to the cross the centurion did not already believe the other two prisoners were dead. So what did he do? He broke their legs. If he had thought that Jesus was not dead, then he would have broken Jesus’ legs also. But he did not do that. So, John messed up. He didn’t even write a good fabrication.
BA: Your “coma theory” flies in the face of the facts.
GW: False. It fits well with what are mostly likely to be the facts.
BA: It’s fails to explain what the Roman soldiers and Jesus’ disciples experienced as his body was pulled off the cross.
GW: The Roman soldiers apparently did not examine Jesus when he was removed from the cross. BTW, who removed him? The 12 disciples were not at the cross. Joseph and Nicodemus probably thought that Jesus was dead when he might have been in a coma. They were in a hurry to get Jesus in the tomb before sunset which was approaching, and they might not have paid close attention to Jesus’s state of being. (Have you ever read the book – The Passover Plot? The author hypothesizes that Jesus was given a drug as he hung on the cross which put him into a coma. Could have happened.)
BA: The first people to to come upon a dead body check for any signs of life.
GW: In modern times that is the case, but this is irrelevant to the case of Jesus. He hung on the cross for hours. At some point he appeared to stop moving. People assumed he was dead.
BA: Dead bodies quickly experience loss of breathing, temperature loss, rigidity, lividity.
GW: Yes, those are among the eight signs of death. But there is no record that anybody checked for these WHEN Jesus was removed from the cross.
BA: The soldiers carrying out the crucifixion were experienced with such executions, and would not have been fooled.
GW: But soldiers are fallible human beings also. They make mistakes and they can be bribed. I did not say they were fooled, although that is also a possibility.
BA: Dead people feel cold to the touch, their bodies become rigid. Purple discoloration begins. dead people don’t respond to their injuries. They don’t flinch when touched.
GW: Yes, these are included in the eight signs of death. See above.
BA: Roman guards faced execution themselves if they allowed a prisoner to survive execution.
GW: Maybe. Evidence? If there were guards, then they would probably be punished if Pilate discovered that Jesus survived. Who did Pilate punish for allowing Jesus to survive the cross or escape from the tomb? Do you have any evidence of that? Maybe Jesus survived and Pilate never found out.
BA: Jesus disappeared from the historical record following his resurrection and ascension and was never sighted again.
GW: You are begging the question. It is most likely that Jesus was never sighted again because he died on the cross, his body was removed from the tomb by family, friends, or “moving contractors,” and he was buried in Nazareth. That is far more likely than that Jesus came back to life and flew to heaven. Ha.
BA: The Bible reports numerous eyewitnesses of Jesus’ death, and after his resurrection, “he presented himself alive to them by many proofs after he suffered, appearing to them during forty days” (Acts 1:3 NAB).
GW: These are stories of alleged eyewitnesses, but unfortunately for you, there are no written reports from these alleged eyewitnesses. The stories are either based on rumors from a long verbal chain, speculations, fabrications, or a combination of these. There are no “proofs.”
BA: No one could have gotten past the guards Saturday night to roll back the stone and steal Jesus’ body.
GW: Sorry Charlie, but there were no guards. That story was fabricated by the author of Matthew.
BA: As late as Sunday morning, even Jesus’ closest apostles “did not yet understand the scriptures that he had to rise from the dead” (Jn 20:9 NAB).
GW: The scriptures are not proper predictions. They do not state names of people and places, dates, or times, or other crucial details.
BA: The women who visited the tomb “told this to the apostles, but their story seemed like nonsense to them” (Lk 24:10,11 NAB).
GW: This contradicts Mark which says the women told no one.
BA: Jesus’ most intimate associates had not the slightest clue that his resurrection had been predicted, or that he would be resurrected.
GW: Didn’t Jesus hint that he would come back to establish his kingdom? Couldn’t or wouldn’t this entail a resurrection? Isn’t it claimed that Jesus himself resurrected people before he died? I don’t agree with your “slightest clue” hypothesis.
GW: “Some unknown people removed his body from the tomb [Saturday night] and they buried it at Nazareth”?
BA: You’re writing fairy tales!
GW: False. I’m writing hypotheses which could be true. The fairy tales were written by the gospel authors.
BA: First, they couldn’t have gotten past the armed guards,…
GW: Sorry Charlie, there were not guards. See above.
BA: and, second, if his body had been buried somewhere, that fact would have become public knowledge,…
GW: No, not necessarily. The family would have kept that secret. Jesus has already been humiliated, tortured, and murdered. His corpse had been placed in the “wrong” tomb. The family would not risk further disrespect.
BA: and his supposed resurrection exposed as a hoax.
GW: You are confusing fabrication with a hoax, and they are not the same thing. Because of two or three facts (the empty tomb, report of grief hallucinations, and Jesus’ hints of resurrection prior to his death), some people SPECULATED that Jesus came back to life. Of course they were mistaken. But other people FABRICATED stories to reinforce the speculations. The fabricators were engaged in wishful thinking and persuasive pitching.
BA: Jesus’ resurrected is the best documented event from ancient times!
GW: False. Not even close. There are many events in Roman history which were well documented, while the story of Jesus is very poorly documented. In fact, if God existed and had resurrected Jesus, it would be the best documented event in history. Why? Because the resurrected Jesus would have presented himself to his opponents (Pilate, the Romans, and the Jews) and their journalists and historians would have documented this extensively.
GW: If God does not exist, then God did not resurrect Jesus. God does not exist. This has been proven. Therefore, God did not resurrect Jesus. That would be impossible. A nonexistent person cannot do anything to or for a real person or a dead corpse.
‘How would anyone prove the Bible writers were inspired by God? What would be a valid test?’, you ask.
Jesus gave us a principle to follow — it is in “the evidence of the works themselves” (John 14:11 NIV).
Just one of innumerable ‘evidences’ is the fact that, until the mid 1800’s, critics claimed the Bible’s mention of the Assyrians, their kings, their cruelty in warfare, their main city Nineveh, etc., never existed. But the critics were proved wrong, and the Bible proved right.
See the article on this site, “The Lachish Reliefs Prove the Bible True.”
The fact remains that all extant NT mss carry the bylines of Matthew, Mark, Luke, and John as the gospel writers. All early church historians attribute the gospels to them. The evidence for this is far too powerful to overcome.
All the early church historians stated that Matthew wrote his gospel first.
The “Mark wrote first” theory wasn’t even invented until the 1800’s. During the first two decades of the 21st century, the “Mark first” theory has come under increasing attacks.
The centurion overseer of the execution had indeed examined Jesus “up close and personal,” and was not ‘speculating or predicting that Jesus was dead.’
“When the centurion, who was standing right there in front of Him, saw the way he breathed His last, he said , ‘Truly this man was the Son of God!”—Mark 15:39 NASB
“The soldiers . . . when they came to Jesus and found that he was already dead, they did not break his legs. Indeed, one of the soldiers pierced Jesus’ side with a spear, bringing a sudden flow of blood and water”—John 19:32-34 NIV
The centurion saw all of this obvious evidence of Jesus’ death “up close and personal.”
This experienced centurion did not make a mistake in certifying Jesus’ death to Pilate (Mk 15:44,45).
As can be seen, by examining Jn 19:31-42, the piercing of Jesus’ side was done by “one of the soldiers,” not the centurion, and it took place prior to the time when “Joseph of Arimathea asked Pilate for the body of Jesus” (Jn 19:38 NIV).
Since there were numerous other witnesses to Jesus’ public execution, conspiracy theories fall fail the facts test.
GW: ‘How would anyone prove the Bible writers were inspired by God? What would be a valid test?’
BA: Jesus gave us a principle to follow — it is in “the evidence of the works themselves” (John 14:11 NIV).
GW: Jesus, that’s too general! Please explain to us what you mean.
BA: Just one of innumerable ‘evidences’ is the fact that, until the mid 1800’s, critics claimed the Bible’s mention of the Assyrians, their kings, their cruelty in warfare, their main city Nineveh, etc., never existed. But the critics were proved wrong, and the Bible proved right.
GW: This does not prove that the Bible writers were inspired by God. It just proves that the Bible writers may have been correct about some historical facts and that the critics up till the mid 1800s may have been incorrect. In this context, “inspired” implies a communication or direct influence from God to the Bible writers. How would you prove that occurred? How would you even prove that God inspired a currently living author?
BA: See the article on this site, “The Lachish Reliefs Prove the Bible True.”
GW: Here you are making the same mistake as above. Proving a historical claim of the Bible to be true is not the same thing as proving that the claim in the Bible was inspired by God. We believe the latter is impossible because God does not exist. Since he has never existed, God could never inspire anyone! Duh.
BA: The fact remains that all extant NT mss carry the bylines of Matthew, Mark, Luke, and John as the gospel writers.
GW: But these extant manuscripts aren’t the originals and it is highly likely that the bylines were added to copies by people who were not the authors. The evidence supports this view. Come on, what author would write “The Gospel According to Mark”? That would not happen unless in the text he wrote something like this: “I am Mark. I live in Palestine during the local reign of Pontius Pilate. I am one of the twelve disciples of Jesus of Nazareth. I am going to tell you what I have observed of Jesus over the past three years.”
BA: All early church historians attribute the gospels to them. The evidence for this is far too powerful to overcome.
GW: This is almost certainly another one of those cases of “Fabricate to fill the knowledge gap.” The early “church fathers,” not “historians,” did not know who wrote these gospels which they liked so much, and critics would say “But we do not know who wrote them, so we can disregard them.” And so, the early church fathers turned speculation into fact through fabrication. It is possible that their speculation was based on rumors, but they didn’t know. The success of their movement depended on making up things to satisfy the general public and the critics.
GW: “Fabricate to fill the knowledge gap” is a common game played by religious people, especially leaders, authors, and apologists.
BA: All the early church historians stated that Matthew wrote his gospel first.
GW: What was their evidence for their statements? Was it good evidence? Were their statements warranted? Did you watch that video I recommended to you?
BA: The “Mark wrote first” theory wasn’t even invented until the 1800’s. During the first two decades of the 21st century, the “Mark first” theory has come under increasing attacks.
GW: In this case it doesn’t matter WHEN it was “invented” or “discovered.” It matters if it is correct. The consensus of experts is that Mark was the first written of the four gospels. You know this. It is also the consensus that Matthew and Luke borrowed or copied from Mark. You know this also.
BA: The centurion overseer of the execution had indeed examined Jesus “up close and personal,” and was not ‘speculating or predicting that Jesus was dead.’
GW: No. That is not supported, documented, or proven by any of the gospels.
BA: “When the centurion, who was standing right there in front of Him, saw the way he breathed His last, he said , ‘Truly this man was the Son of God!”—Mark 15:39 NASB
GW: We don’t accept the NASB. “Standing right there” is not “up close and personal” which would entail examining Jesus after his removal from the cross, including touching him. Also, continued absence of breathing is only one of the eight signs of death.
BA: “The soldiers . . . when they came to Jesus and found that he was already dead, they did not break his legs. Indeed, one of the soldiers pierced Jesus’ side with a spear, bringing a sudden flow of blood and water”—John 19:32-34 NIV
GW: Yes, this is the fabrication of John. I have already explained the absurdity of this story and shown that it was not corroborated by the other three gospels. And yet you continue to irrationally believe it is true. That is how faith works.
BA: The centurion saw all of this obvious evidence of Jesus’ death “up close and personal.”
GW: False. See above.
BA: This experienced centurion did not make a mistake in certifying Jesus’ death to Pilate (Mk 15:44,45).
GW: You didn’t quote Mark, so we could ignore this. But centurions were real human people! They were fallible, like you and me. And they could make mistakes and even be bribed. I think that it is at least .25 probable that Jesus was still alive and in a coma when he was placed in the tomb.
BA: As can be seen, by examining Jn 19:31-42, the piercing of Jesus’ side was done by “one of the soldiers,” not the centurion, and it took place prior to the time when “Joseph of Arimathea asked Pilate for the body of Jesus” (Jn 19:38 NIV).
GW: I will accept that within the fiction it was a soldier and not the centurion who pierced Jesus’ side.
GW: It appears that the author of John fabricated the story of the spear piercing (31-37) and inserted it before the story of the centurion going to Pilate.
BA: Since there were numerous other witnesses to Jesus’ public execution, conspiracy theories fall fail the facts test.
GW: You do not know there were witnesses! The stories just say there were witnesses. Do you have any written reports from eyewitnesses? No, you don’t. Your case is a “house of cards” easily destroyed by a puff of air. Your own story is a conspiracy theory! You have the absurd and irrational belief that God, Jesus, and some angels CONSPIRED to cause Jesus to be killed, brought back to life, and appear to a few followers. Pure malarkey!
GW: Mark, Matthew, and Luke don’t even mention the breaking of the legs of the other two crucified prisoners, and so we won’t even believe that claim of John.
GW: “50 Now there was a man named Joseph, a member of the Council, a good and upright man, 51 who had not consented to their decision and action. He came from the Judean town of Arimathea, and he himself was waiting for the kingdom of God. 52 Going to Pilate, he asked for Jesus’ body. 53 Then he took it down, wrapped it in linen cloth and placed it in a tomb cut in the rock, one in which no one had yet been laid.” Luke 23:50-53, NIV. This contradicts your claim that the centurion (or any soldier) examined Jesus “up close and personal.” It was Joseph of Arimathea (and apparently his assistant Nicodemus) who removed Jesus from the cross and took him to the tomb. The more I learn, the more I see the absurdity of your resurrection story.
Your “Passover Plot” book’s speculation that Jesus on the cross was given a drug which put him into a coma is in stark contradiction with the facts.
While Jesus was on the cross, “they gave him wine drugged with myrrh, but he would not take it” (Mk 15:23 NAB). “They gave Jesus wine to drink mixed with gall. But when he had tasted it, he refused to drink” (Mt 27:34 NAB). “cf. Mk 15:23 where the drink is ‘wine drugged with myrrh,’ a narcotic” (NAB Study Bible note). “Wine . . . mixed with gall. A drink given to victims to help deaden their pain. Jesus refused it, preferring to meet His death with all His faculties unimpaired” (NASB note on Mt 27:34).
The details of the 4 gospel accounts must be analyzed together to see that the women ‘didn’t say anything to anyone’ (Mk 16:8) while on the way to report to the disciples about Jesus’ resurrection. When they reached them, they told them (Mt 28:8; Lk 24:9,10).
BA: Your “Passover Plot” book’s speculation that Jesus on the cross was given a drug which put him into a coma is in stark contradiction with the facts.
GW: No, it is actually consistent with the alleged facts presented in the gospels. It is a legitimate hypothesis, more likely to be true than the resurrection hypothesis.
GW: Here is the Amazon link to the book (although I read the original edition):
https://www.amazon.com/Passover-Plot-Hugh-Schonfield-author/dp/1999869133/ref=sr_1_2?crid=3UPAIV6HAZDNV&dib=eyJ2IjoiMSJ9.j-W_FpEm64o2hGsmBcOQsBUUvaWu2sRgiF9TFn_7oTta84Jk5ndklfrq3bdZBZn-oDHJN6f3VqNYyz_Rus7hkQs0DQQtGSU_imQ8nZVxqAg_WjGohSdlu-DaF4NHre9OvaclrVjHfaMRtqhi90L3xDfUu8Wr_dgQ56vYJD086mED9nROY6BQKF4XQCkRKDsJ0UbIv7P2EwCzOYIi_jD2UG_hM3d-6Pk2uWlfPABXJfo.Djy8m64CU8goIJ4GjnBhDQDjBq93ormNZNxxioN4KnY&dib_tag=se&keywords=Passover+Plot&qid=1711209983&s=books&sprefix=passover+plot%2Cstripbooks%2C152&sr=1-2
BA: While Jesus was on the cross, “they gave him wine drugged with myrrh, but he would not take it” (Mk 15:23 NAB). “They gave Jesus wine to drink mixed with gall. But when he had tasted it, he refused to drink” (Mt 27:34 NAB). “cf. Mk 15:23 where the drink is ‘wine drugged with myrrh,’ a narcotic” (NAB Study Bible note). “Wine . . . mixed with gall. A drink given to victims to help deaden their pain. Jesus refused it, preferring to meet His death with all His faculties unimpaired” (NASB note on Mt 27:34).
GW: We don’t use the NASB. Also, you are quoting verses referring to the offering of drink before Jesus was put on the cross, not the drink he was offered while on the cross. Here are some other verses which are consistent with Schonfield’s hypothesis:
Mark 15:36, NIV: “Someone ran, filled a sponge with wine vinegar, put it on a staff, and offered it to Jesus to drink. “Now leave him alone. Let’s see if Elijah comes to take him down,” he said.”
Matthew 27:48, NIV: “Immediately one of them ran and got a sponge. He filled it with wine vinegar, put it on a staff, and offered it to Jesus to drink.
John 19:28-30, NIV: “28 Later, knowing that everything had now been finished, and so that Scripture would be fulfilled, Jesus said, “I am thirsty.” 29 A jar of wine vinegar was there, so they soaked a sponge in it, put the sponge on a stalk of the hyssop plant, and lifted it to Jesus’ lips. 30 When he had received the drink, Jesus said, “It is finished.” With that, he bowed his head and gave up his spirit.”
The last of these is powerful support for the hypothesis of the Passover Plot. Jesus may have wanted to take the drug which would put him into the coma before he went unconscious involuntarily or died. And so he asked for something to drink.
BA: The details of the 4 gospel accounts must be analyzed together to see that the women ‘didn’t say anything to anyone’ (Mk 16:8) while on the way to report to the disciples about Jesus’ resurrection. When they reached them, they told them (Mt 28:8; Lk 24:9,10).
GW: The 4 gospels must be examined to see ALL the DIFFERENCES, INCONSISTENCIES, and CONTRADICTIONS among them. Mark says that the women told no one, but another gospel says that they told the disciples. This is a clear CONTRADICTION! If one author says 2+2=4 and another author says 2+2=5, then they are contradicting each other. Both cannot be correct. If God did exist (he doesn’t BTW) and he inspired the Bible authors, as you claim, then there would be NO CONTRADICTIONS within and among the gospels. But there are many. So, either God does not exist (True), or God did not inspire the authors (True), or both (True). That’s how you do rational analysis.
You’re confusing two different occasions during the several hours of Jesus’ crucifixion. At the start of the crucifixion, Jesus was offered the drugged wine, which he refused. At the end of the crucifixion, Jesus was offered wine vinegar on a sponge, which he accepted. The point is that Jesus refused anything would impair his faculties, and that there is no contradiction in gospels.
The women told no one anything until they reached Jesus’ apostles. No contradiction.
BA: You’re confusing two different occasions during the several hours of Jesus’ crucifixion.
GW: I don’t think so.
BA: At the start of the crucifixion, Jesus was offered the drugged wine, which he refused. At the end of the crucifixion, Jesus was offered wine vinegar on a sponge, which he accepted.
GW: I agree that the relevant verses say this.
BA: The point is that Jesus refused anything would impair his faculties, and that there is no contradiction in gospels.
GW: You are missing the point here. In regard to this point, I did not cite a contradiction. You said that Shoenfield’s hypothesis was not consistent with the evidence of the gospels and you cited the verses which showed Jesus refusing drink. But the hypothesis IS consistent with the gospels. Jesus did refuse drink early on, but later he accepted it (3 of 4 gospels say this). On the second occasion, the drink he accepted may have contained a drug which put him in a coma. He may or may not have been aware of the drug. He may or may not have been complicit in putting the drug in the drink. The Shoenfield hypothesis is completely consistent with the instance of Jesus accepting the drink on the second occasion. In fact, according to John, Jesus asked for the drink.
BA: The women told no one anything until they reached Jesus’ apostles. No contradiction.
GW: False. The contradiction is right in front of your face. The gospel of Mark does not say “until.” You are attempting to add that to Mark. Sorry, you can’t do that.
GW: What we have are four different “accepted” gospels. They are not identical. They have differences, inconsistencies, and even some contradictions. This is not what we would have, if God did exist.
If God did exist, then what options could he and would he implement in producing gospels about the resurrection of Jesus? There are at least four options.
1. He could and would produce, present, and distribute just one gospel himself and prevent any others from being written. This would be a miracle.
2. He could and would dictate just one gospel to one human person and prevent any others from being written. This would be a miracle.
3. He could and would simultaneously dictate just one gospel to four human persons in four different locations and prevent any others from being written. So, the different editions would be identical. This would be a miracle.
4. Also, although he might allow copies to be made from the original gospel, all copies would be identical to the original because God would prevent deviations.
Nearly all the theologians and apologists (including those of BA) do not take seriously the idea that God exists and would be all-powerful and perfectly moral. If they took it seriously, i.e. if they actually believed it, then they would realize that the four different gospels which we have would be IMPOSSIBLE!
Who given. the drugged wine at he start of the crucifixion, “when he had tasted it, he refused to drink” (Mt 27:34 NAB).
He did not ask for a drink. In the moment before he died, “Jesus said, ‘I am thirsty. A jar of wine vinegar was there, so they soaked a sponge in it, put the sponge on a stalk of the hyssop plant, and lifted to Jesus’ lips. when he had received the drink . . . ” (Jn 19:29,30 NIV). A sponge of vinegar in his mouth did not constitute an actual drinking of an alcoholic beverage.Your speculation of a narcotic added is unsupported by any evidence.
Combining the 4 gospel accounts, without any additions, it’s obvious the women told no one until they reached the apostles.
Hugh Schonfield’s “Passover Plot,” and your speculations based on it, are fiction.
BA: Who given. the drugged wine at he start of the crucifixion, “when he had tasted it, he refused to drink” (Mt 27:34 NAB).
GW: “34 There they offered Jesus wine to drink, mixed with gall; but after tasting it, he refused to drink it.” Mt 27:34 NIV. Yes, this is the first occasion when he does not drink.
BA: He did not ask for a drink.
GW: Read this please: “28 Later, knowing that everything had now been finished, and so that Scripture would be fulfilled, Jesus said, “I am thirsty.” 29 A jar of wine vinegar was there, so they soaked a sponge in it, put the sponge on a stalk of the hyssop plant, and lifted it to Jesus’ lips. 30 When he had received the drink, Jesus said, “It is finished.” With that, he bowed his head and gave up his spirit.” John 19:28-30, NIV. Jesus said he was thirsty; this is equivalent to asking for drink. He was offered a drink. And he consumed it. How do you not understand this? It is at this moment that Jesus could have been given a drug causing him to slip into a coma, as Shonfield hypothesized. Of course the text does not say there was a drug, but there could have been.
GW: Two other gospels corroborate this last drink:
Mark 15:36, NIV: “Someone ran, filled a sponge with wine vinegar, put it on a staff, and offered it to Jesus to drink. “Now leave him alone. Let’s see if Elijah comes to take him down,” he said.”
Matthew 27:48, NIV: “Immediately one of them ran and got a sponge. He filled it with wine vinegar, put it on a staff, and offered it to Jesus to drink.
BA: In the moment before he died, “Jesus said, ‘I am thirsty. A jar of wine vinegar was there, so they soaked a sponge in it, put the sponge on a stalk of the hyssop plant, and lifted to Jesus’ lips. when he had received the drink . . . ” (Jn 19:29,30 NIV). A sponge of vinegar in his mouth did not constitute an actual drinking of an alcoholic beverage.Your speculation of a narcotic added is unsupported by any evidence.
GW: I don’t know why you can’t understand this. The evidence here is CONSISTENT WITH the hypothesis that there was a drug in the final drink which put Jesus into a coma. I cannot prove there was, and you cannot prove there wasn’t. There could have been! The evidence here is also CONSISTENT WITH the resurrection hypothesis, which is far less likely than the coma hypothesis. I don’t believe either your hypothesis or his. I have my own hypothesis which is far more likely than either his or yours.
BA: Combining the 4 gospel accounts, without any additions, it’s obvious the women told no one until they reached the apostles.
GW: You can’t cancel a CONTRADICTION by combining! The CONTRADICTION is obvious by comparing! My goodness, you deny the CONTRADICTION right in front of your face! The last verse of Mark is this “8 Trembling and bewildered, the women went out and fled from the tomb. They said nothing to anyone, because they were afraid.” Mk 16:8, NIV. But Luke says this: “10 It was Mary Magdalene, Joanna, Mary the mother of James, and the others with them who told this to the apostles. 11 But they did not believe the women, because their words seemed to them like nonsense.” Lk 24:10-11, NIV. It is impossible to tell X and not tell X at the same time. Duh. Those of us trained in logic, reason, and philosophy know what a contradiction is. Religious people just wave their hands and don’t believe their own eyes and brains.
BA: Hugh Schonfield’s “Passover Plot,” and your speculations based on it, are fiction.
GW: Absolutely not! Speculation and fiction are not the same thing! In this context speculation is a statement about what could have happened. Fiction is a narrative known to be false but created for entertainment or persuasion. You are confused.
GW: Also, as I said last time, if God did exist, we would not have FOUR different gospels which have similarities, differences, inconsistencies, and contradictions, as we now have. Instead God would have done one or more of these:
1. He could and would produce, present, and distribute just one gospel himself and prevent any others from being written. This would be a miracle.
2. He could and would dictate just one gospel to one human person and prevent any others from being written. This would be a miracle.
3. He could and would simultaneously dictate just one gospel to four human persons in four different locations and prevent any others from being written. So, the different editions would be identical. This would be a miracle.
4. Also, although he might allow copies to be made from the original gospel, all copies would be identical to the original because God would prevent deviations.
GW: Like most religious people, you don’t take the nature of God seriously. You don’t rationally infer how he would and would not behave, if he did exist. And that is why you, the Bible authors, and theologians reach fallacious conclusions.
The burden of proof is on those who claim there was a drug in the wine vinegar on the sponge that Jesus put in his mouth just before he died (Jn 19:29,30), but there is no evidence to support such a claim.
The evidence we do have of Jesus during his hours of execution, is that he refused drugs (Mt 27:34; Mk 15:23).
Atheists try desperately to claim the gospels contradict, but they can’t do it.
The evidence for the harmony of the 4 gospels is too strong, and cannot be overcome.
BA: The burden of proof is on those who claim there was a drug in the wine vinegar on the sponge that Jesus put in his mouth just before he died (Jn 19:29,30), but there is no evidence to support such a claim.
GW: I don’t believe or claim that there was a drug in it. I claim that there COULD have been a drug in it. There is no evidence that anybody at the time claimed there WASN’T a drug in it. I have met the burden of proof for claiming that it is a natural possibility that there was a drug in it. This possibility is consistent with what happened, as described in the gospels. Schonfield has presented us with a legitimate hypothesis.
BA: The evidence we do have of Jesus during his hours of execution, is that he refused drugs (Mt 27:34; Mk 15:23).
GW: False. There is no evidence for that. You are overgeneralizing. There is evidence that he refused a particular drink offered to him, apparently before he was nailed to the cross.
BA: Atheists try desperately to claim the gospels contradict, but they can’t do it.
GW: I can’t speak for all atheists, but I can speak for one – myself. I am not desperate to claim the contradictions. They are there for anyone to easily see. I have presented several to you. You are desperate to deny them because if you acknowledged then you would have to conclude that the gospels were not inspired by God. God would not allow any contradictions. But God would also not allow any inconsistencies and differences in the narratives between the gospels, so your hypothesis of inspiration is already falsified.
GW: Two of the reasons that people are leaving Christianity (or never adopting it in the first place) are that 1) They see the contradictions, inconsistencies, and differences in the gospels for themselves. And 2) They see theologians and apologists rigidly and adamantly denying these facts and lose respect for them. This is particularly true when the doubters are young people and the deniers are old people.
BA: The evidence for the harmony of the 4 gospels is too strong, and cannot be overcome.
GW: A contradiction is not harmonious. Even an inconsistency is not harmonious. For you to think so is to contradict yourself because you are implying that a contradiction is not a contradiction.
GW: It boils down to selecting the most probable scenario over the others. Here is what I believe to be the most likely one: Jesus entered Jerusalem intending to stir up trouble. There he preached what was considered to be heresies and he caused a disturbance in the temple. Because of these behaviors he attracted the negative attention of the Jewish authorities. They tried him and convicted him and wanted to execute him, but execution by the Jews was against Roman law. So, they pleaded with Pilate to execute Jesus. Pilate was reluctant at first, but then agreed. He ordered the crucifixion of Jesus and the Roman soldiers carried out Pilate’s command. Jesus died on the cross. This is where it gets iffy, but lets just assume that Joseph and Nicodemus took the corpse off the cross and quickly put it in a tomb before sunset on Friday. Then between about 6 PM on Saturday and 6 AM Sunday, friends and/or family of Jesus removed Jesus from the tomb or they hired contractors to do it. The corpse was taken to Nazareth to be buried in the family tomb and treated according to Jewish custom. The bones, the ossuary, and the tomb have never been located. Meanwhile the women went to the tomb on Sunday morning and found it empty. Later, some of Jesus’ followers believed they saw him after learning of the crucifixion, death, placement in the first tomb, and then absence from this tomb. These beliefs about seeing Jesus were delusional and have naturalistic explanations such as grief hallucinations, grief dreams, mistaken identities, illusions, hoaxes, or fabrications. Stories of a resurrection were told and passed on. Three to eight decades later, these stories were written up by the gospel authors who remain anonymous. That is most likely what happened.
GW: We can now know that a resurrection of Jesus did not occur. I propose this argument:
1. If a resurrection of Jesus did occur, then it would have occurred and been documented in a “perfect manner,” as managed by God.
2. But, there was no perfect occurrence or documentation.
3. Also, God does not exist.
4. Therefore, the resurrection of Jesus did not occur.
Happy Easter!
There “could” have been a drug in the sponge that Jesus put in his mouth just before he died. However, the evidence for that idea is lacking, and, in fact, weighs against it. Hypothesees are not facts.
The evidence we do have is that Jesus refused drugs (Mt 27:34; Mk 15:23). While it is theoretically possible that Jesus was drugged on the cross before he died, it is not evidentially reasonable.
The evidence we have is that Jesus’ tomb was sealed with an official seal and securely guarded (Mt 27:62-66), and no theft of his body occurred (Mt 28:1-15). Speculating that it was stolen is not evidentially reasonable.
Acts does not report the release of Paul from his prison house (61 CE), death of Jesus’ brother James (62 CE), the death of Paul (65 CE), the siege of Jerusalem (66 CE), the death of Peter (67 CE), or the destruction of Jerusalem (70 CE). These men and Jerusalem are prominent in Acts, so these things would have been reported in Acts had they occurred prior to the book being written. Acts had to have been written prior to 61 or 62 CE.
Luke opens the book of Acts with a reference to his “first book” (Acts 1:1 NAB), the gospel of Luke, which was written a few years before Acts, around 56-58 CE.
After his release from house arrest in Rome, in the early 60’s, Paul wrote to Timothy, and quoted from the gospel of Luke (1 Tim 5:17,18; Lk 10:7).
Mark is considered by many to have been written before Luke, perhaps in the late 40’s or early 50’s.
Before his death about 67 CE, Peter referred to Paul’s letters (2 Pt 3:15,16), which means that at least many of Paul’s letters were written before then.
All extant ancient copies of the gospels are attributed by name to Matthew, Mark, Luke and John. There is no alternative ancient tradition attributing the 4 gospels to anyone else. While it is theoretically possible that the 4 gospels were not written until much later by someone other than Matthew, Mark, Luke and John, it is not evidentially reasonable.
This is some of the abundant evidence that the New Testament was written during the 1st century by eyewitnesses and with eyewitness testimony (Lk 1:1-3; Jn 20:35; 21:24; 1 Pt 5:1; 2 Pt 1:16-19; 1 Jn 1:1-3), and is 100% reliable.
BA: There “could” have been a drug in the sponge that Jesus put in his mouth just before he died.
GW: Thank you for finally acknowledging that possibility! Yes, it could have happened, and it could have been a drug intended to temporarily put Jesus into a coma, as hypothesized by Schonfield. Jesus could have known this or not.
BA: However, the evidence for that idea is lacking, and, in fact, weighs against it. Hypothesees are not facts.
GW: Yes, hypotheses are not facts, and they should not be held as beliefs, UNLESS there is sufficient evidence to do so. In the present case I do not think there is sufficient evidence to believe that Jesus was given a coma-inducing drug on the cross. I don’t know if Schonfield believed his own hypothesis, and that is really not that important. It is still something that could have happened. There is no DIRECT evidence that it happened, but I think we can say that there is INDIRECT evidence, albeit not sufficient for belief. What is the INDIRECT evidence? 1) Jesus was given drink and accepted drink on the cross before he became unconscious, consistent with going into a coma. 2) It was believed that an alive and conscious Jesus met with people days after the crucifixion, consistent with coming out of a coma. I’ll give you an analogy which you will probably accept: The existence of the universe is INDIRECT evidence that God created it. However, it is neither DIRECT nor SUFFICIENT evidence that God exists.
BA: The evidence we do have is that Jesus refused drugs (Mt 27:34; Mk 15:23).
GW: The evidence is that he refused drink BEFORE being placed on the cross. We don’t know why he refused it when offered.
BA: While it is theoretically possible that Jesus was drugged on the cross before he died, it is not evidentially reasonable.
GW: I disagree with your term “evidentially reasonable.” It is reasonable to hypothesize that Jesus was given and accepted a drink which contained a coma-inducing drug while on the cross, but it is not reasonable to believe this actually happened. See above for a full explanation.
BA: The evidence we have is that Jesus’ tomb was sealed with an official seal and securely guarded (Mt 27:62-66), and no theft of his body occurred (Mt 28:1-15).
GW: This story is uncorroborated and is ludicrous in itself, as I have demonstrated before. Therefore, this evidence is INSUFFICIENT to believe that guards were placed at the tomb and the tomb was sealed. And so, we can and should just ignore the story.
BA: Speculating that it was stolen is not evidentially reasonable.
GW: Under my hypothesis, Jesus’ corpse was not “stolen” since it was removed from the tomb by people who OWNED it – the family. It is reasonable to believe this hypothesis. Why? 1) The corpse was placed in a tomb which was not observed from about 6 PM on Friday till at least 6 AM on Sunday, according to the consensus of the gospels. 2) If the family removed the corpse, they would have done it between 6 PM on Saturday and 6 AM on Sunday in order to comply with Jewish law to not work on the Jewish Sabbath. 3) The family would have owned the corpse and would have taken rightful control of the corpse from Joseph of Arimathea who did not own the corpse. 4) The family would not have considered the shroud and head napkin used by Joseph as proper and would have removed and replaced them with their own wrappings. And so, according to the gospels the wrappings used by Joseph were left in the tomb. 5) The family would have moved the corpse to Nazareth or to wherever the family tomb or burial place was. 6) People removing a corpse from a tomb is the ONLY known way by which corpses can depart a tomb. Corpses don’t get up, walk, and push back a stone. And 7) No other competing hypothesis is a better explanation for the empty tomb.
BA: Acts does not report the release of Paul from his prison house (61 CE), death of Jesus’ brother James (62 CE), the death of Paul (65 CE), the siege of Jerusalem (66 CE), the death of Peter (67 CE), or the destruction of Jerusalem (70 CE). These men and Jerusalem are prominent in Acts, so these things would have been reported in Acts had they occurred prior to the book being written. Acts had to have been written prior to 61 or 62 CE.
GW: Huh? What does this have to do with the alleged coming back to life of Jesus? You are not making any clear connection.
BA: Luke opens the book of Acts with a reference to his “first book” (Acts 1:1 NAB), the gospel of Luke, which was written a few years before Acts, around 56-58 CE.
GW: So what if Luke wrote the gospel of Luke before Acts? This doesn’t mean that the stories in either are true. Our issue is about the quantity and quality of evidence for a resurrection.
BA: After his release from house arrest in Rome, in the early 60’s, Paul wrote to Timothy, and quoted from the gospel of Luke (1 Tim 5:17,18; Lk 10:7).
GW: So what? What does this have to do with truth of the alleged resurrection?
BA: Mark is considered by many to have been written before Luke, perhaps in the late 40’s or early 50’s.
GW: Yes, the consensus of experts is that Mark was the first written gospel and that Matthew and Luke copied from it.
BA: Before his death about 67 CE, Peter referred to Paul’s letters (2 Pt 3:15,16), which means that at least many of Paul’s letters were written before then.
GW: I believe that some of Paul’s letters were written before the gospel of Mark, but Paul never gives any detailed account of the trial, crucifixion, death, and alleged resurrection of Jesus, as is given in the gospels. He either complies a set of rumors or makes up stuff out of thin air or both.
BA: All extant ancient copies of the gospels are attributed by name to Matthew, Mark, Luke and John.
GW: False or unproven attribution is worthless. The consensus of experts is that authorship of the gospels is anonymous. We don’t know who wrote them. Why are you so uncomfortable with “We don’t know”?
BA: There is no alternative ancient tradition attributing the 4 gospels to anyone else.
GW: So what? Nobody knew who wrote the gospels (except the authors themselves who never identified themselves) and so somebody else decided to fill in the knowledge gap and fabricated authors and titles for the gospels. This gap filling practice is very common with religious people. For example, we don’t know how life got started on the Earth, but religious people fill the gap by asserting “God did it.” We sometimes call this “The God of the Gaps,” but we could also call it “The Supernatural of the Gaps.”
BA: While it is theoretically possible that the 4 gospels were not written until much later by someone other than Matthew, Mark, Luke and John, it is not evidentially reasonable.
GW: I’ll stick with the consensus of the experts – authorship of the gospels is anonymous. It is not reasonable for you or anyone else to believe otherwise.
BA: This is some of the abundant evidence that the New Testament was written during the 1st century by eyewitnesses and with eyewitness testimony (Lk 1:1-3; Jn 20:35; 21:24; 1 Pt 5:1; 2 Pt 1:16-19; 1 Jn 1:1-3), and is 100% reliable.
GW: False. As I have said many times, there is not a single first-person, author-identified, low-bias, promptly written, eyewitness report of any event in the life of Jesus or its immediate aftermath. The evidence is to weak to draw any firm conclusions, especially about alleged supernatural events. As Carl Sagan said, “Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence.” (I had the pleasure of hearing Sagan lecture three times. And I have read several of his books.)
GW: Here is a new argument for you:
Argument Against the Resurrection of Jesus I: 3-27-2024
1. If Jesus came back to life, then he was caused to come back to life by God.
2. But if God caused anyone to come back to life, he would have done it in a perfect manner with perfect documentation.
3. The hypothetical coming back to life of Jesus, described in the Bible, did not occur in a perfect manner with perfect documentation.
4. Therefore, Jesus did not come back to life.
GW: Here is another one:
Argument Against the Resurrection of Jesus II: 3-27-2024
1. If Jesus came back to life, then he was first killed by crucifixion by the Romans.
2. But Jesus could not, would not, and should not be killed at all.
3. Nevertheless, Jesus was killed by crucifixion by the Romans.
4. Therefore, Jesus did not come back to life.
GW: Happy Easter! May the Easter Bunny deliver abundant chocolate eggs to you and your family.
1 Corinthians 15:3-8 mentions resurrection appearances, and 1 Cor 11:20-26 mentions details of the Lord’s Supper.
Some think 1 Corinthians was written before Matthew, Mark and Luke.
Modern consensus opinion about who wrote the gospels, and when, does not overcome ancient manuscript evidence, and the testimony of early Church historians.
So, we know for 100% certain who wrote the gospel – Matthew, Mark, Luke in the 40″s and 50’s, and John in the 90’s.
BA: 1 Corinthians 15:3-8 mentions resurrection appearances, and 1 Cor 11:20-26 mentions details of the Lord’s Supper.
GW: Except for one, all of these are NOT reports of eyewitnesses. The only one which is happens to be Paul’s statement: “…and last of all he appeared to me also, as to one abnormally born.” 1 Corinthians 15:8 And if you look at the three different and inconsistent descriptions of Paul’s experience to which he is referring (Damascus Road episode), it is almost certainly the case that he experienced a hallucination.
BA: Some think 1 Corinthians was written before Matthew, Mark and Luke.
GW: I agree that it probably was. It is a collection of rumors and/or fabrications. Nobody should believe that a miracle occurred on the basis of that type and quality of evidence. It is not rational. It is just faith.
BA: Modern consensus opinion about who wrote the gospels, and when, does not overcome ancient manuscript evidence, and the testimony of early Church historians.
GW: It certainly does! Nobody should trust the writings of the early church fathers on this subject. Their data is just as poor as ours, but we have better tools to think about the data. We have tools of Reason, Science, and textual criticism which they didn’t have.
BA: So, we know for 100% certain who wrote the gospel – Matthew, Mark, Luke in the 40″s and 50’s, and John in the 90’s.
GW: False. The consensus of experts is that authorship is anonymous. I’m going to go with that consensus rather than with your amateur opinion.
GW: You didn’t respond to my new arguments. Evading again?
Argument Against the Resurrection of Jesus I: 3-27-2024
1. If Jesus came back to life, then he was caused to come back to life by God.
2. But if God caused anyone to come back to life, he would have done it in a perfect manner with perfect documentation.
3. The hypothetical coming back to life of Jesus, described in the Bible, did not occur in a perfect manner with perfect documentation.
4. Therefore, Jesus did not come back to life.
Argument Against the Resurrection of Jesus II: 3-27-2024
1. If Jesus came back to life, then he was first killed by crucifixion by the Romans.
2. But Jesus could not, would not, and should not be killed at all.
3. Nevertheless, Jesus was killed by crucifixion by the Romans.
4. Therefore, Jesus did not come back to life.
GW: Again, Happy Easter! May the Easter Bunny deliver abundant chocolate eggs to you and your family. Or maybe you would like chocolate crosses. I saw those in Walmart today. Imagine having reverence for a Roman cross used for crucifixions.