1 edit
Originally posted by Proper KnobOnly in the aspect that a strong and dramatic event told from many witnesses whose lives were considerably influenced by the event, in a court of law, could sometimes have confusing aspects.
You're comparing the gun battle at the OK Coral with the inspired word of God?
And any experience judged presiding over such a case would look for evidence of collusion and conspiracy.
Had Mark recorded verbatim what Luke said or John recorded verbatim what Mark and Matthew said, then we might assume collusion.
As it stands we have something which rings of authenticity.
Now as I contemplated the issues I think what you could have in Matthew is eyewitness testimony of one of the guards along with that of some of the women. Some of the things about the fear that came upon the guards and the earthquake sound to me like that portion of the account MAY have been contributed by one of the guards.
But I do not know this.
I don't know this for sure.
The other thing I noticed for perhaps the first time is that Mary the Magdalen at least twice went to the tomb according to John.
Some details of the first visit may have been omitted. But again, I do not know this. It is interesting.
"Now on the first day of the week, Mary the Magdalene came early to the tomb while it was yet dark and saw the stone taken away from the tomb.
She ran therefore and came to Simon Peter and to the other disciple whom Jesus loved and said to them, They have taken away the Lord out of the tomb, and we do not know where they have laid Him." (John 20:1,2)
The other thing I would draw attention to is that historians see authenticity in embarrassing details.
The fact that the MEN were off sleeping or depressed and afraid, while the FIRST witnesses of Christ having been raised were WOMEN would be an embarrassing detail for the MEN apostles to have to admit.
The inclusion of this scandalous detail, that the men folks were not the first witnesses of His being raised but some women were, to the astute historian would have the ring of authenticity.
The 11 original apostles of the Christian church would have no honor in being forced to admit that the WOMEN discovered Christ had been raised before they did.
Food for thought.
Anyway, Mr Knob, I am hopelessly a believer. Jesus Christ is to me a believable Person.
2 edits
Originally posted by sonshipI was just imagining immediately after that earthquake shook the ground that the stone began slowly rolling away from the opening of the tomb by itself, in appearance, because the angels remained invisible to the guards. It would be a funny sight to see the reaction of those Roman guards. I would bet that most of those Roman guards were making a dash out of there.
Only in the aspect that a strong and dramatic event told from many witnesses whose lives were considerably influenced by the event, in a court of law, could sometimes have confusing aspects.
And any experience judged presiding over such a case would look for evidence of collusion and conspiracy.
Had [b]Mark recorded verbatim what Luke s ...[text shortened]... Anyway, Mr Knob, I am hopelessly a believer. Jesus Christ is to me a believable Person.[/b]