Strobel Under Fire - Part 2 of a Four-Part Series

[perichoresis7]

These 2 guys works separately as well, each expanding or altering where they see fit, but not damaging the integrity of the important aspects of the actual event. The loner who sat by himself takes his own approach to the "game" and gives an account that provides all the important details of the event but also uses some heavy symbolism throughout. Will all accounts be exactly the same? Will all provide every single detail exactly right? No, but the reader/hearer will know who won and how.

[perichoresis7]

@perichoresis7 work* separately. oops. 

[perichoresis7]

Suppose four people go to a Super bowl game; 3 of them sit together while 1 is sitting somewhere off by himself because he is weird and speaks in symbols all the time. After the game they all decide to write a detailed account of the game. 1 finishes his account quickly and leaves out quite a bit of info, but he gets the important highlights. The other 2 use the basics of the first account as a framework but feel some details are left out or need fixing but the core of it is the same...

[TruthSurge]

@perichoresis7 "Suppose four people go to a Super bowl game"

I'll be addressing this in an upcoming Excavating part. You might enjoy my explanation which will be much better laid out than I want to try here.

[perichoresis7]

@TruthSurge Looking forward to it.

[perichoresis7]

Again, the Gospels do not need to be factual on every historical detail. The finer details are not essential to communicate the desired truths: Jesus was God in the flesh, Jesus embodied the kingdom of God and its message in word and deed, Jesus was crucified for sociopolitical/religious reasons that upset the established order (both Jewish and Roman), Jesus was resurrected from the dead, and Jesus ascended into "heaven" (whatever that means).

[TruthSurge]

@perichoresis7 bottom line: they aren't factual on 90% of their details.  You simply haven't seen the magnitude of differences, errors, farcical claims then.

[DesignSound]

Great video, well done!

According to the Old Testament and Paul's letters "EVERY MATTER must be established by the testimony of two or three witnesses..." (2 Cor. 13:1)

That being the case, the gospel narratives discredit themselves as they don't agree on all matters synonymously and every gospel book contains details the others omit.

Apart from which, none of the gospel writers ever go to the trouble of naming themselves so they can hardly be construed as "witnesses" can they?

[TruthSurge]

@DesignSound thanks. good pt. of course they aren't witnesses. Witnesses don't write a clearly "story-based" account in the third person. They would say I saw Jesus do this or that, not "Jesus prayed while his disciples slept" stuff. The gospels are fiction as is acts. I really trust nothing in acts apart from the theology that simply is a reflection of its author(s).

[TruthSurge]

@DesignSound Have you seen my latest series? if not, it's featured on my channel so you can find part 1. I did another LONG series on the Jesus Myth theory and a 4 parter on dating the new testament using Mark as an example.

[DesignSound]

@TruthSurge = no not seen that one yet. Only got turned onto this info after listening to Bart Ehrman several months ago. Has been a huge revelation for me... Your vids are good; well made and easy to follow and more important, factual rather than straight-out propaganda ala Lee fucking Strobel :)

[TruthSurge]

@DesignSound yeah, strobel and that whole species of douchebags makes me ill to listen to for more than a few seconds. I just got so pissed off at his lies that I had no choice but to make these vids. :)

[TruthSurge]

@DesignSound he should be called Lie Strobel.

[TalonyPoo]

Here's what doesn't make sense.The four gospels all, supposedly eyewitness accounts of the event that supposedly happened, yet not one can get it all together.I would think if I hung out with a group of people and some events happened they would also know because they were friggin' there! How could they not sync with who were there, who he appeared to where they ate, etc. When they (the four, Mark, Matthew, Luke, John) were there for each event that took place? One remembers a quake...some don't

[TruthSurge]

@TalonyPoo yep. so the "eyewitness" belief has far too many holes in it to be true and further, the gospels are written (synoptics at least) like a fictional story, not like an eyewitness retelling things he personally saw. But for me, one killer fact is that the first of the 4 gospels, Mark, was not written until AFTER 70 CE which would mean "Mark" waited 40 years before writing it down? Bullshit.

[perichoresis7]

@TruthSurge The author of Mark did not "wait" 40 years to write it down. Immediately after Jesus ascended there was most likely a buzz going around about Jesus and his life/death/resurrection. It was probably transmitted orally for a few years. Then some "Christ" hymns were written about Jesus out of these actually events. Then some individual events here and there. THEN, after 30 or so years, someone got it in their mind to start writing down a "full" account of Jesus' life.

[TruthSurge]

@perichoresis7 "Immediately after Jesus ascended there was most likely a buzz going around about Jesus and his life/death/resurrection"

Yes, not one writing about Jesus is known in the 1st century outside the New Testament. No one wrote about darkness at his death, earthquakes at his death and resurrection, thousands of babies slaughter by Herod, tons of people fed, many raised from death, ad nauseum. Not one word was spoken about all that apparently.

[perichoresis7]

@TruthSurge Kings and leaders keep no records of their failings. And I am sure quite a few "nobodies" (I say that meaning "none leader/important person"; I believe everyone is important) wrote stuff down somewhere but it was not in a community that kept rewriting it over and over again in order to spread the true story of Jesus the Christ. Communities protect and distribute what is important.

[TruthSurge]

@perichoresis7 "Kings and leaders keep no records of their failings. "

But others do. And with all the messianic pretenders Josephus mentions, not a peep about our Nazareth lad. Nothing is mentioned that we'd demand and expect to be mentioned if the gospels were true. How does ALL of the mediterranean miss an eclipse at Jesus' time of death? etc.

[rianpop]

@TruthSurge excuse me Josephus DID mention Jesus. in not so great detail, but he wasn't a Christian, so why would he?

[TruthSurge]

@perichoresis7 "Communities protect and distribute what is important. "

If 5000 or 10000 people were miraculously fed, lots of people healed miraculously, people raised from the dead, et al, you'd have seen this spread like wildfire across the region in NO time. But there is complete silence. Not just that he lived and was a rebel. NOTHING. But beyond that, the earliest Christian authors paint a MUCH diff pic of Jesus. In fact, one who was never on earth.

[rianpop]

@TruthSurge The Jews were a very distinct people in the Roman Empire. highly distrusted. its a miracle Christianity survived at all. It is recorded in the Gospels that eyewitnesses to the miracles didn't even believe them but covered them up in unbelief and hatred.

[perichoresis7]

@TruthSurge It was a popular thing during this time to speak in narrative form (as we see in Jesus' use of parables), so naturally someone was eventually going to put these actual events into written, story form.

[TruthSurge]

@perichoresis7 That it's written in story form is not the problem. :( It fits with a fictional character/plot/setting but not really a problem. It's WHAT is being told that's the problem. (yeah, i won't say it because it'd be like a broken record... watch.... my.... ETET!!!!!!!!! hahhahah)

[1probtest]

this is moronic

[GodsSeer]

This narrator is adding, subtracting words. He said the word ,''only.'' that was not there. Typical trick of liars. His ability to forget the facts that there were more than one occasion in some of these accounts, And one witness reported what he saw and did not report what the others saw, just proving there is no collusion. The narrator is not good at investigation. This man is not wise.

[TruthSurge]

Are you a real person or just a robot programmed to post a quick hit-n-run comment?

[Eskon2]

Jesus first in Lucas to the two of Emmaus?

He doesnt claim that at all.

So 11 went to the tomb 2 ran John and Peter.

Peter run faster so he made the discovery as stated in Luke 24:12

As you an read in Luke 24 and John 21 He appeared multiple times.

[Eskon2]

There were multiple persons going to the tomb. John describes only what happened to Mary Magdalene, what in other text seems to be because she went apart from the others. And if you see John 20:1 it is confirmed M M went up front probaly only felt the effects of this earthquake. Mathew speaks of the early arrival of M M Mark speaks about more woman as you can read. For the angels its the same time. Mary Magdalene is the first one to spot Jesus. And soon Mary got greeted Rejoyce.

[MrMakavellii]

I stopped listening to this moron once I realized he was twisting the bible verses around to support his theories. He added and took away words from the Bible to make himself look like he has a Case !

What a loser !

[TruthSurge]

Yes, Strobel is quite a loser.

[MrMakavellii]

No you're quite the loser !

[TruthSurge]

No you're quite the loser !

[MrMakavellii]

The narrator of this video says "John said the ONLY Mary Magdalene went to the tomb." It dose not say that in John, It simply says Mary went to the tomb. And the fact that John didn't name everybody who went to the tomb doesn't mean it's inaccurate. These Atheist will try and grasp on to anything they can in an effort to debunk Jesus,

[TruthSurge]

"The narrator of this video says "John said the ONLY Mary Magdalene went to the tomb." It dose not say that in John, It simply says Mary went to the tomb."

And what would anyone think when they read John's gospel? That MORE women actually went when John couldn't be bothered to mention them? Or that only Mary went? You won't answer because you know it makes too much sense. 4 accounts, major differences in each = unreliable.

[Eskon2]

Nope in a police interogation people giving the same statements is odds. Because someone noticed the length another the hair. All 4 wrote with different vieuws and from different angles. You have to put those 4 storys on each other to get it complete.

[MrMakavellii]

Just because the number of women that went to the tomb varies , it does not prove that it's false.

5 people can witness an event and give 5 different stories , most stuff "Major details" will match in each story , but smaller details will vary from story to story.

[TruthSurge]

The only thing that matches is that SOMEONE went to a tomb and saw SOMEONE there that wasn't Jesus. All other details contradict or are different. It's unreliable. Especially when the first gospel, Mark, wasn't even written until at least 40 years AFTER the alleged events. You need to educate yourself in a bad way.

[Eskon2]

If i remember correctly maria of Magdala is in 3 of the 4 storys. Mainly because she didnt believe that much she needed 2 angels to believe. The diciples were pretty busy preaching and dealing with the council. Them couldnt just write because of their education alone Lucas as a doctor and Judas who already died who could be a nobleman.

[zmart4ever]

It's obvious that the gospels are fictious.

One writers borrowed from the other and "improved" his version.

[TruthSurge]

But it wasn't too obvious to everyone because 1900 years later, you have over 2 billion people that would tell you that the gospels are reliable history. I think only someone who ISN'T a Christan can really approach them from a naturalistic slant and study them w/o undo bias.

But once you compare them together and compare them with the OT and Homer and pagan gods, etc, then it becomes evident that they are literary fiction.

[Krumbz2003]

Truth - thanx for the friend invite and I'm here now checking out your videos! First... great quality. Love the way you approach these issues... please don't change it!

Now for this video... I do agree that these events are not in perfect harmony with each of the 4 books. There are characters left out and in some cases... put in.

But couldn't this just be "semantics"... because it's not necessarily wrong for leaving characters out?

Like to hear your opinion!

[TruthSurge]

If I didn't know too much, I might agree. :) But unfortunately... I know too much. The reason they contradict is that the authors (mostly the synoptics here) were not at all writing history and they knew it. Mark wrote first and his is based on a merging of the odyseey and the Iliad and the Jesus cult of the 1st century. A bring Jesus to earth and basing his adventures in part on Odesseus. Matthew copied Mark almost verbatim but made editorial changes. Luke the same. more in a sec...

[TruthSurge]

So, if Matthew felt the need to improve Mark, he did! That's why you get more bang for your buck with Matthew. earthquake at the tomb, and the young man has now morphed into an angel that rolls the stone away, etc. How could you be a disciple who either wrote these or dictated them and NOT remember if ONE woman was at the tomb or FIVE? But wait! There's more! The gospels weren't written until after 70CE - at least 40 years after Jesus' alleged death. hmmmm

[TruthSurge]

So, accounts may differ and be considered reliable overall. These are not reliable for they differ on almost every detail. That is not the earmark of eyewitnesses but of willful storytelling in an attempt to IMPROVE the previous gospel. Mark -> Matthew -> Luke (John even copies from Mark).

My take!

[GenRev1611]

Only Mary Magdalene? Wow, I love the spin!!! Is that what the passage on the screen says?

[TruthSurge]

GenRev, are you willing to listen or will you just close your ears because you cannot accept something that contradicts your current beliefs? Just hate to waste my time replying if it's going to be a case of the proverbial "pearls before swine".

[GenRev1611]

Actually, I plan on studying things like this and...oh...there's Bart Ehrman's book as well that I plan on getting. Misquoting Jesus. I'll be making it an issue to study these issues from your side as well. I just think that it was improper to insert the word only into the text. I plan on studying the literary laws of non contradiction. Not the least bit offended by all of this. I'm all smiles TruthSurge. Appreciate the post actually:-). How else can I sharpen my sword?

[TruthSurge]

Good. Now, it is a fair objection if I had actually INSERTED the word into the text. Unfortunately, the word was simply a logical conclusion I made based on the text.

Now, let me quickly ask some easy questions and then I'll let ya go. :)

1) How many women went to the tomb according to the gospel of John?

2) How many saw the angels in the tomb per John?

3) How many were there when Jesus appeared?

4) Why would John report JUST that one woman while Luke claims no less than 5 were there?

[TruthSurge]

As for your sword... stick around me and it's going to get dull VERY quickly. :)

[GenRev1611]

I love your confidence, I hope to read some Earl Doherty.

[TruthSurge]

I just have seen it FAR too many times not to be confident. But I will let you go do some reading and see what you come up with. Feel free to try and defend the religion but the more you dig, the worse it gets. :(

[mrkurt13]

"Also, I'll study secular historical accounts"\

LOL. There are almost no secular historical accounts of anything in the Bible and there is next to nothing written about Jesus. I think there is maybe one author referring to a 'Christ' but there were dozens of those.

[GenRev1611]

First let me ask this, I won't even turn to the Gospel accounts only because, and correct me if I'm wrong, believe that you presuppose that the the Gospels are not legit. If so, is it because you believe it contains contradictions? If so, how do the contradictions violate any specific law of literary contradiction? I do plan on studying this. Can you also prove interpolations in the texts of Josephus or Tacitus in a textual critical manner?

[mrkurt13]

The thing i Like about the gospels isnt the contradiction, but the story getting more and more fantastic and altered as you progress through them. You can see things being added from Mark to John. Like please tell me who Baptized Jesus.

Im not going to get into a Debate on Josephus or Tacitus. Many people think they are BS. Christians think they aren't. Big surprise. Look up both sides for yourself.

Also notice that NOTHING was written about Jesus until about 2 decades after he died.

[mrkurt13]

I mean about his life, and what not. Paul may have been with in that window, but his writings hardly have anything to do with Jesus, just his interpretation of Jesus' message.

But if you want to study this stuff, really look at all sides. The origin of the Bible and the early church is an awesomely f'ed up story. The Christian dogma today is only here because it killed off the opposing views(often literally).

[mrkurt13]

Oh and contradictions in the Bible are fine. But most Christians thing the book is divinely inspired. Honestly, the Bible is crap... Even the Koran has far less contradictions in it.

If Jesus existed, his message was similar to that of say, someone like Buddha, but he got killed after teaching only 3 years. Christians are working with 2nd grade spirituality texts and think they have a PhD. This leaves them confused and causes all sorts of divisive bullshit.

[GenRev1611]

Actually, I just finished going through Bart Ehrman's "Misquoting Jesus" once, that's right once. I plan on writing a critique on his book so I hope to read it several times before I critique it. I'm also reading the "Christ Myth" by Arthur Drews. I hope to read some more on this. But you made charges of contradictions in scripture. What laws of literary contradiction do these texts violate?

[TruthSurge]

LOL!

[mrkurt13]

and one more thing. Lets assume that the Bible is 100% true... At least what it says about God. Do you really think its a good plan?  Watch this video.

watch?v=cnPWWbePeb8

also if you want to get into deep Bible stuff Check out the channel ProfMTH

[GenRev1611]

What plan? Salvation you mean?

[mrkurt13]

Watch the video. Tell me what parts are wrong. Its called "Gods Check List" by Theoreticalbullshit if you just want to search for it. I dunno.  Tell me who Baptized Jesus. I'm not going to pretend to know the 'Laws of Literary Contradiction'. I'm a molecular/Developmental Biologist

[TruthSurge]

As for inserting words into the text... Ever hear of the NIV translation? They inserted the word "just" (same as only) here:

Jeremiah 7:22

For when I brought your forefathers out of Egypt and spoke to them, I did not just give them commands about burnt offerings and sacrifices,

The word is NOT in the Hebrew at all. They added it to remove a glaring contradiction because god most certainly DID speak to them of burnt offerings. :) So, I'd definitely bone up b4 making too many claims. :)

[GenRev1611]

Now that gets into the subject of textual criticism. Sorry but I'm currently more knowledgeable in New Testament Textual Criticism.

[TruthSurge]

No, it doesn't. Textual criticism has nothing to do with translators inserting a word that is not there and has no business there and the context gives no reason to insert it there. The ONLY reason they did so was to remove a contradiction. It's not the only one the NIV has deliberately altered to remove a "problem". Just FYI, bra. :)

[TruthSurge]

And a distinction that ONLY arises because of the contradictory nature of the different accounts. Paul wrote apart from the written gospels and they apart from Paul but with knowledge of the basic idea. So, hence the contradictions. It's really that simple. Different humans wrote what they believed at different times. No deity had anything to do with it. It's a simple, elegant solution that answers all those "difficulties" that you struggle with.

[TruthSurge]

You leave out the most plausible possibility ref gospel accts: the authors KNEW they were writing FICTION with no intention of misleading anyone. This certainly applies to Mark, Matthew, and Luke but I am going to say that Luke KNEW he was writing fiction as did Mark and Matthew (I can support this with much evidence) AND was trying to deceive people via his edits and his fictional account of the time just after Jesus' alleged ascension.

This is what I believe. Mark's gospel was a story.

[TruthSurge]

No, I'm saying that because most places giving out degrees are going to be Christian in nature and therefore cannot usually teach things that violate the core beliefs (ie, that Jesus existed and the did miracles etc.).

But I don't need a degree to understand  something. Just an open mind.

[TruthSurge]

As for the unity of early Christian CORE doctrines, they couldn't even agree on the nature of salvation.

Paul claimed that faith ALONE was sufficient.

Jesus claimed that the LAW was still in effect even AFTER his death (Matt 5:17-18) and countless times in John he says to keep the commandments.

James says explicitly that "faith without works is dead".

So much for the unity of Christian doctrine. It's no wonder there are thousands of denominations today.

[TruthSurge]

We are approaching this from entirely different perspectives. I am an ex-Christian atheist who is a strong proponent of the Jesus Myth Theory. Our underlying assumptions and knowledge base are not equal. Our level of bias are not equal. Our vested interests are not equal.

Finally, can one be objective about studying something when the protagonist is the object of one's adoration and worship? I claim, NO!

[TruthSurge]

It isn't an insult for someone to tell the truth is it? I was shocked because I thought you had a Masters degree in theology. I was going to ask "What did you learn in college? What do you know about the formation of the Bible and early Christianity? That is what I am guessing you did not get in college/university.  Much discussion about Tertullian and Justin Martyr but nothing about how the religion really came about."

But you're off the hook now! So, let me respond once more.

[TruthSurge]

Paul was teaching A gospel that he felt was THE gospel (but one God had given directly to him).

Romans 2:16

in the day when God will judge the secrets of men by Jesus Christ, according to MY gospel.

Romans 16:25

Now to Him who is able to establish you according to MY gospel...

1 Thessalonians 1:5

For OUR gospel did not come to you...

Odd if there was only ONE gospel.

Gal 2:11 Paul rebukes Peter publicly for his inconsistent view on circumcision. Arguments left and right.

[TruthSurge]

Actually, he violated the law since he claimed to be under it. See matthew 5:17-18. On NUMEROUS occasions Jesus says to keep the commandments (laws) and he explicitly says the law is NOT done away with until heaven and earth pass away.

What will daveindurham do with this? Prob ignore it and continue as he is.

[TruthSurge]

No sarcasm. Sarcasm is when you say something you do not believe. I am really amazed that anyone could get a masters in theology and not know that there were major divisions among the early Christians - ON CORE DOCTRINES! It's what caused Paul to harp on it so often and call it ANOTHER GOSPEL and what caused John to harp on it saying that those who went out from them were ANTI-Christ (against Christ).

I'm done for now. See ya later.

[TruthSurge]

1 Corinthians 3:3

For ye are yet carnal: for whereas there is among you envying, and strife, and ****divisions****, are ye not carnal, and walk as men?

1 Corinthians 11:18

For first of all, when ye come together in the church, ****I hear that there be divisions among you; and I partly believe it.****

Geez. I would have thought a masters in theology would have included intense studies of early Christianity - especially the earliest writings we have, those of Paul.

[TruthSurge]

More evidence for the perfect unity of early Christianity.

Romans 16:17

Now I beseech you, brethren, mark them which cause divisions and offences ****contrary to the doctrine which ye have learned;**** and avoid them.

1 Corinthians 1:10

Now I beseech you, brethren, by the name of our Lord Jesus Christ, that ye all speak the same thing, and ****that there be no divisions among you;****

And in my next post, another two verses showing that Paul was aware of no divisions of doctrine.

[TruthSurge]

Wow! A masters? That's amazing. So, you have a masters but don't understand anything I've been telling you?

RIGHT! John did NOT witness the empty tomb account. Neither did any of the other gospel authors. So, if the women came running back and told ALL the disciples the same story, how'd the FOUR of them come up with four different versions of it? Why does Mark say that they did NOT tell anyone? The only answer is that the gospels are complete fiction.

[TruthSurge]

You don't want to learn. No biggie to me.

Incidentally, the epistles represent the earliest form of CHristianity and the gospels and acts represent the orthodox form that came onto the scene about 70 years later. Two very different versions of Christianity. Paul's of a heavenly son of god who nullified the law and the Gospels depicting a Jesus explicitly teaching that the law would not become void until heaven and earth passed away.

Catch ya later.

[TruthSurge]

There were other versions of Christianity contending for supremacy. Paul would not have spent so much ink railing against them if they did not exist. What does "another gospel" mean to you?

2 Corinthians 11:4

Galatians 1:6-7

[TruthSurge]

Let's see how unified the author of the Johanine epistles thought it was.

1 John 2:19

19 They went out from us, but they were not of us; for if they had been of us, they would have continued with us; but they went out that they might be made manifest, that none of them were of us.

Early Christians were divided left and right because it didn't begin with a historical man. It began in many places by many different people and there were no solid doctrines upon which to base it all.

[TruthSurge]

More about the "unified" early "church".

1 Cor 1:11-13

11 For it has been declared to me concerning you, my brethren, by those of Chloes household, that there are contentions among you. 12 Now I say this, that each of you says, I am of Paul, or I am of Apollos, or I am of Cephas, or I am of Christ. 13 Is Christ divided? Was Paul crucified for you? Or were you baptized in the name of Paul?

In the FIRST part of the FIRST letter to Corinth, Paul is noting divisions.

[TruthSurge]

"the original Church was unified."

Oh really? You display your sheer ignorance of the Bible once more. Allow me to educate you.

1 Cor 1:10-13

10 Now I plead with you, brethren, by the name of our Lord Jesus Christ, that you all speak the same thing, and that there be no divisions among you, but that you be perfectly joined together in the same mind and in the same judgment.

continued in next post...

[TruthSurge]

Gee. where do I start? How does one who professes to know it all but is clearly ignorant of the basics of Bible 101 learn anything?

Question: Was John an eyewitness to the events of the women finding the empty tomb?

[TruthSurge]

Okay. go watch my "Inventing Jesus" vids. parts 1 and 2. You might start to see just how "historical" the gospels are.

[TruthSurge]

All right. Follow me here. John writes about how many women? ONE. He writes the entire passage using how many women. ONE. This pointedly ignores ALL the other women and has John reporting in a manner that would lead his readers to believe something false (that only 1 woman went). Why would he pointedly ignore 4 or 5 other women AND their actions if he was truly trying to record what he saw? No one does that. I must run. Read up on the origins of the NT.

[TruthSurge]

Man, pardon my bluntness here, but you've got your head so far up Strobel's lower colon that you cannot begin to even discuss this. You've got it all figured out.

"If the others saw blatantly false things in the Gospel of their teachers they would have corrected it and said,"thats not what Matthew taught us"

The fact that early Christians were splintered and arguing over the core gospel is evident in Paul's letters and the epistles of John.  There WERE no disciples - only apostles like Paul.

[TruthSurge]

"If all this was complete bullshit than the real witnesses would have torn them apart. "

There were no real witnesses. There was no Jesus. It is all myth and fiction. I could spend years showing you but the starting pt is for you to doubt. Here's how it works. Hmmmm. I wonder if Matthew did copy Mark verbatim and if he made deliberate editorial changes to increase Jesus' power. If that's true, it invalidates Matthew's "witness". Etc.

[TruthSurge]

You have obviously not read ANYTHING about the synoptic problem and how these documents came to be. Please do some reading on this topic because your core belief doesn't fit the facts. An eyewitness (Matthew) doesn't copy a previous account verbatim and then make editorial changes to it that directly contradict the previous acct.

[TruthSurge]

Further, if we only read John's version, how many women would we think went to the tomb?

You don't find it the least bit odd that all 4 gospels give differing accounts of which women went to the tomb?

Combine that with the other details that do contradict and such, add to that the fact that these were not even written until 40 or more years AFTER the alleged events (anonymously, at that) and you have four unreliable witnesses.

[GodsSeer]

After studying the Bible for 60 years, the apparent contradictions were solved and there are none. The accounts are different from different perspectives only. Not all say the exact thing, but they do not contradict. They really fit.

[TruthSurge]

Well, let me ask you a question, then. When Mark says the fig tree withered overnight (they didn't notice it withered until the next morning) and Matthew says it withered as they watched, how is that not a direct contradiction?

[GodsSeer]

Matthew has the cursing of the fig tree after the temple. Mark has it before. Jesus cursed the tree on His way to the temple as Mark said, this does not mean that Matthew's account is mistaken. Christ made two trips to the temple, He cursed it on His second trip.

Mark 11: 12 says 'Now the next day,'This day, Christ threw out those in the temple. Matthew addresses the two trips to the temple as though they were one event.

Mark gives more detail.

[TruthSurge]

LOL. The lengths one will go to to maintain a pet belief are truly astounding. Matthew reordered Mark's account so that the tree withered immediately instead of overnight. You see, Matthew didn't care for a Jesus who couldn't wither the tree instantly so.. he changed it! Same for the blind man. Matthew didn't care for a Jesus who took two tries to heal him. So... he changed it! Same with his hometown. Mark says "could do no great work" Matthew says "DID no great work".

[MMA4Christ]

I've also studied the Bible for many decades and it can be trusted. The day-long cursing may have brought glory to God. Also individuals are judged, not groups, that's why Jesus cursed the other fig tree the next day. Another scholarly theory is that some living things have more sin than others of their kind and so require longer punishment.

[TruthSurge]

Really? The Bible can be trusted? Okay, so, when God commands children to be stoned for becoming rebellious or for hitting their parents, can I trust that that commandment is okay to follow since it's from God?

[MMA4Christ]

That was for a particular time and place, the people back then were WITHOUT Jesus, people were dangerous (the nature of man). Sometimes we don't fully understand God's wisdom, how can we? We are a momentary vapor when compared to God's infinite glory. Thats why faith is so important and powerful, having Jesus cleanses us from those times long ago.

[TruthSurge]

"That was for a particular time and place, the people back then were WITHOUT Jesus, people were dangerous (the nature of man). "

Who told you that? Your preacher? I can't find that in the Bible and furthermore, JESUS himself said that everyone (believers) was bound by the law until heaven and Earth passed away (ie, forever).

So, am I going to believe your hearsay that you were taught to use as an explanation or Jesus' own words? Your mind is clouded and vacuous.

[nonthiestnc]

hello gods: can you give me some examples of how they were solved, besides just writing about it. evidence is best

[TruthSurge]

Technically, if you wanted to quibble, that's your prerogative but when someone is reporting the same event and is able to somehow know that Magdalene went but not able to know that four others went if you believe Luke (and what do you do with Mark and Matthew? They don't mention the ones Luke does) then it is simply another piece of evidence that these tales were fiction and each author chose the version he wanted. Matthew adds an earthquake to make it more dramatic.

[TruthSurge]

Pt is, let's assume I'm right. EVEN if any early CHristian died for their beliefs, it doesn't validate IN ANY WAY their beliefs! It means they believed it. Just like 9/11.  You get it, right?

[TruthSurge]

1) The gospel writers did NOT see anything. The gospels were written no earlier than about 74CE and as late perhaps as 120 or so. The authors could NOT have witnessed anything.

2) Acts is not a historical account of what happened but fiction. It contradicts Paul's authentic letters, it borrows from Homer's fiction (see Eutychus pericope) and even contradicts the gospels.

3) There is no evidence therefore that anyone died for CHristianity but my pt is some people die for beliefs. 9/11

[TruthSurge]

Yeah, against my urge to be hateful toward Christians, I realize that they are under a strong delusion and are operating on things they have heard through the grapevine instead of what is actually in the Bible. So, I got lucky and found my way out. I hope you get lucky.

[TruthSurge]

"If the Gospel writers wrote deliberate fiction why did they give their lives for some made up story? Find me another example of this."

9/11

[TruthSurge]

"Mary Magdeline and other women went to Jesus' tomb"

Nope. You can't say "other women" because John mentions only Magdalene and to think 3 or 4 women went and John only mentions one doesn't add up. Luke says that at least 5 women went.

"and found it open and empty." Nope. One acct says it was open already. Another says an angel rolled the stone away after they arrived.

"They went back and told the disciples. "

Nope. Mark says they told no one. Did you watch the vid?

[TruthSurge]

Yeah, good luck in life.

[TruthSurge]

If 4 people gave these accounts in court, the whole case would be thrown out. The resurrection accounts are an embarrassment to anyone with any sense at all. The best explanation is that the gospel authors were writing deliberate fiction and willfully changed the previous story details to improve the story. It explains why Matthew's Jesus doesn't have to spit in the blind man's eyes and try twice to heal him. It explains why the fig tree withered instantly in Matthew and overnite in Mark etc

[TruthSurge]

You clearly don't get it. Almost ALL of the resurrection details contradict. Do you really believe Matthew observed a violent earthquake and the other three did not? Worse, if the women were the only ones at the tomb (uh, woman or women) then neither Matthew, Mark, Luke or John could have been an eyewitness to any of those details. Perhaps that's why they all contradict each other. Minor details? Angels at the tomb are minor details? The delusion runs deep.

[U4godlike]

Nice video :)

[TruthSurge]

Thanks.

[TruthSurge]

Well, he's under MY fire of cross-examination. And to think, Strobel has a law degree!

[74BobLilly]

How does your disagreement with what Strobel believes make him "under fire"?

[confluential]

I wouldn't say "Under Fire," I'd just say that Strobel is off in his analysis.