• Starting today August 7th, 2024, in order to post in the Married Couples, Courting Couples, or Singles forums, you will not be allowed to post if you have your Marital status designated as private. Announcements will be made in the respective forums as well but please note that if yours is currently listed as Private, you will need to submit a ticket in the Support Area to have yours changed.

Matthew's Resurrection Account

Status
Not open for further replies.

TheConcierge

Newbie
Nov 3, 2008
5
0
✟22,617.00
Faith
Atheist
Marital Status
In Relationship
I recently found an essay online, pasted below. I would like people's thoughts on this. My main question is: Because of what this says, how can the rest of the Bible be a credible source for religion?

This -is- mainly written for a non-believing reader, but I think it is good for anyone to think upon.
_____

Consider the background

Before getting into Matthew’s account of the resurrection, I’d like to give you a brief background about the Gospels. The Bible has four accounts of the life of Jesus, written down in what are known as the Gospels of Matthew, Mark, Luke and John.

Each writer tells us of what he finds important about the life of Jesus.

If you read what the writer of Mark has to say about what he finds important about Jesus’ life, you’ll get a very different picture than what the writer of John finds important. The Gospels are anonymous, hence the “writer of Mark” wording. With this fact in mind, I’m going to switch to calling the Gospel writers by their customary names.

For example, Mark forgets to mention that Jesus had a miraculous virgin birth – and John doesn’t find this worth mentioning, either.

As far as the death and resurrection of Jesus are concerned, the differences between the accounts are pretty interesting, as well.

I recommend reading each account – there really isn’t much text involved. Let’s focus on Matthew’s account now.

Matthew’s outrageous detail

I’m going to talk about the account given by the Gospel according to Matthew because it has some particularly delicious details.

What do I find hard to believe about the Gospel according to Matthew account of the physical resurrection of Jesus?

As an atheist, you might think that the supernatural miracle of the physical resurrection of a dead body would be the most difficult for me to believe… but I keep a fairly open mind. These times were different… the Bible itself tells us that a person coming back from the dead is a fairly common explanation of events. Maybe this was a different time when miracles occurred more frequently.

I mean, as is reported, the crowds think that Jesus is John the Baptist, or Elijah, or Jeremiah, or other prophets back from the dead. Even King Herod exclaims that Jesus is John the Baptist – the man he had beheaded – back from the dead. These things were either happening all the time, or they were explanations that were thrown about quite a bit.
Matthew 14:1-2 (NRSV)
“At that time Herod the ruler heard reports about Jesus; and he said to his servants, ‘This is John the Baptist; he has been raised from the dead, and for this reason these powers are at work in him.’”
Matthew 16:13-14 (NRSV)
“Now when Jesus came into the district of Caesarea Philippi, he asked his disciples, ‘Who do people say that the Son of Man is?’ And they said, ‘Some say John the Baptist, but others Elijah, and still others Jeremiah or one of the prophets.’”
So no, I’m going to grant that perhaps these kinds of supernatural events occurred. So what’s difficult to believe about Matthew’s account, given that supernatural suspension of the natural order isn’t so hard?
It isn’t that the whole land was in darkness for three hours during midday (leading up to Jesus’ death).
It isn’t that the curtain of the temple tore in half, from top to bottom, by itself at the time of at Jesus’ death.

It isn’t that there was an earthquake that was strong enough to break rocks.

Or that tombs opened up and “many bodies of the saints who had fallen asleep were raised … [and] came out of the tombs and entered the holy city and appeared to many.” (Matthew 27:51-54). – See what I mean about how frequently people came back from the dead in these days?

These events, impressive though you might find them today, even after you realize that no other Gospel writer thought to mention ANY of these things, aren’t too hard to believe.

You read correctly, no other account of Jesus’ death and resurrection mentions that other saints were raised from the dead, came out of their tombs, and walked around being seen by many people. Here is an interesting part to ask any Christian that you’re engaged with… how this whole resurrection thing works.

If people died and came back to life before Jesus – saints, in their tombs, waking back up and walking around – what was it that made Jesus special? It’s a fun side-topic to explore.

I don’t believe, and it certainly is difficult to believe all of these admittedly ridiculous things – Jesus came back to life, curtain ripping, many saints also coming back to life and walking around, and earthquakes – and that no one else thought that any of these things were interesting enough to mention.

Yet, Matthew’s account includes something that I find even harder to believe.

The story goes that the temple priests are sufficiently worried about Jesus and his followers and his claims to be God incarnate and the messiah. They are especially worried that the claim that Jesus makes – that He will prove that He is God incarnate and the long awaited messiah by coming back to life three days after his death. So they get permission from Pontius Pilate to set a contingent of soldiers to guard the tomb from Jesus’ followers from stealing the body away and proclaiming that Jesus rose from the dead.

The soldiers seal the tomb of this false messiah and rabble rousing preacher who claims to be God incarnate – and claims to come back to life to prove it.

These soldiers are there guarding the sealed tomb of this impostor, and on the dawning of the first night that they’re guarding it a great earthquake occurs and an angel wearing dazzling white clothing descends from heaven like lightning. This angel single-handedly rolls away the stone of the sealed tomb revealing that it’s empty! The soldiers witness this, and are so terrified they fall to the ground “like dead men.”
Matthew 27:2-4 (NRSV)
“And suddenly there was a great earthquake; for an angel of the Lord, descending from heaven, came and rolled back the stone and sat on it. His appearance was like lightning, and his clothing white as snow. For fear of him the guards shook and became like dead men.”
These soldiers allegedly have front-row seats to the most important and impressive miracle of all time.

They don’t, however, start worshiping the obvious God-man whose death and resurrection bring about earthquakes, darkness in the middle of days and angels descending from heaven.

Instead, they return to the priests that sent them to guard this “impostor’s” tomb and tell them everything that happened.

These priests are now in quite a situation. They had to deal with all the stresses of organizing the Passover, and then they had to deal with this rabble-rousing Jesus character. And, as soon as they get Jesus sentenced to death, the trouble really begins.

There was an earthquake, the temple curtain being ripped from the ceiling to the floor, darkness that covered all the land, and now another earthquake.

On top of that there are all these reports of all kinds of dead saints that are walking around today, and to top it all off, the guards that the priests THEMSELVES had posted to guard the tomb came running back, terrified, telling them, “Hey! That guy that you sent to death for falsely proclaiming to be sent by God… Turns out, He is God! We were there, guarding the place… earthquake happens, angel comes blazing in from the sky rolls away the stone, Jesus came back to life just like he said would happen!”

At this point, if you don’t know how the story goes in Matthew, you might guess that the soldiers and priests became Christians and followed Jesus for the rest of their days.

You’d be wrong.

In Matthew’s account the priests gather together with the elders and they talk about what’s going on. They decide that they won’t change their opinion about Jesus, impressive though these miracles are. No, they decide that they’ll keep this whole “God-incarnate is back from the dead and appearing to many people” a secret by telling the soldiers to lie about it.

The soldiers are told, “Lie about what you saw…here’s some money, all you have to do is say, ‘His disciples came and stole his body away while we were asleep.’”
Matthew 27:11-15 (NRSV)
“While they were going, some of the guard went into the city and told the chief priests everything that had happened. After the priests had assembled with the elders, they devised a plan to give a large sum of money to the soldiers, telling them, ‘You must say, “His disciples came by night and stole him away while we were asleep.” If this comes to the governor’s ears, we will satisfy him and keep you out of trouble.’ So they took the money and did as they were directed. And this story is still told among the Jews to this day.”
What do the soldiers do?

They don’t throw the money down and join the Christian disciples and become a missionary to anyone who will listen to their first hand account of how they were the one guarding the tomb of Jesus when he was resurrected! That they saw the angel that rolled away the stone!

No, they agree to the request, and lie to everyone who asks them, that the disciples came and stole the body.

They don’t follow God-incarnate that they themselves saw resurrected and greeted by a lightning angel.

Maybe the soldiers who were terrified to the point of shaking and falling down like dead men weren’t all that impressed with God incarnate.

But, how about the chief priests of the temple?

These guys all got together, sentenced a guy who claimed to be God and the messiah to death, and were just given a ridiculous amount of evidence that what he said was true.

The guards that the priests THEMSELVES had posted came running to them and were told that every claim that Jesus made about Himself is true.

Would not a single chief priest think… uh-oh, we sentenced God to death! We better repent and fast!

Would these men of God really, when faced with undeniable evidence that the messiah has come and that God walked among us, work to cover it up?

Seriously?

Did the conversation go something like…
Ok Bob, our entire lives have been dedicated to serving the God of Israel — all-powerful creator of the universe — waiting for the Messiah. Turns out, we sentenced the Messiah, who turns out to be the all-powerful creator of the universe, to death, and He is now back to life, causing earthquakes and telling everyone that He, God incarnate is back. How are we going to deal with this?

Well Steve… we were clearly wrong about the messiah, and God incarnate, but we have to save face, but we should brace ourselves as we are now up against a formidable force…

An all-powerful deity is going around proving that He is indeed the messiah that we have been waiting for. We don’t have many resources to fight this kind of power. But, how about this: Let’s lie about whether God incarnate is back from the dead, and that he will save us from eternal damnation.

Oooo, Bob, I like it. You’re right, God incarnate could put on an impressive show to convince the entire world that this miracle has occurred… but I bet if we could pay off these soldiers to say that “no no, nothing happened…” we could keep the vast majority of our fellow Jews in the dark about the true nature of God and the messiah!

That way, although we are condemning ourselves and the Jewish people to everlasting rejection of God, we will retain our jobs as temple priests.

Oh yeah…the rest of our lives will be devoted to an endeavor that is anti-God.

True, but we won’t have to repent or admit that we’re wrong.
Asking me to believe in supernatural miracles is one level of ridiculousness.

But to say that people experienced and saw the things that Matthew claims they saw, and that these people were so monumentally unimpressed — to the point of completely ignoring it — suggests that, perhaps, these people didn’t actually see what Matthew thinks they saw.

I should phrase that differently, the soldiers, apparently, not only witnessed the most important and impressive miracle of all time – they had the BEST front row seats to the most important miracle of all time — and THEY were unimpressed?

And years later, this story of how unimpressed these first hand witnesses were is supposed to impress me?

Even allowing for all the supernatural events to occur, this story doesn’t convince me of anything except the absolutely ludicrous nature of the story itself.

By Conversational Atheist at ConversationalAtheist.com
 
Last edited:

Chesterton

Whats So Funny bout Peace Love and Understanding
Site Supporter
May 24, 2008
26,237
21,445
Flatland
✟1,082,664.00
Faith
Eastern Orthodox
Marital Status
Single
The Roman soldiers were of a pagan culture. They held all manner of polytheistic, supernatural beliefs. That they saw a supernatural event does not at all mean they should immediately accept what later came to be the Christian explanation (even if they understood- how could they? - Christ's own disciples did not fully understand what was going on until after seeing Christ in person after the resurrection, and they had heard him predict it), especially when, for the Roman soliders, accepting it could mean a death sentence.

I don't know what you're getting at here?
 
Upvote 0

TheConcierge

Newbie
Nov 3, 2008
5
0
✟22,617.00
Faith
Atheist
Marital Status
In Relationship
So, a Christian's view of this would be that:

"If -I- had been one of those Roman soldiers, believing in however many gods, but I heard amazing accounts of who this person was supposed to be, and then I see that it was true, whether or not I 'understood'...........nah, I'd go back to my normal life and pretend nothing happened. I mean, I'd be a pagan Roman, right? so it's not like this would affect -me-...."

I find that difficult to believe.

Accepting it could, and did, mean a death sentence for Jesus' disciples but they did so anyway, didn't they? Why would it be that different for a Roman soldier who sees this amazing thing with his own eyes?

There are two choices or angles here.

1.) The Roman soldiers who were guarding Jesus' tomb had an amazing experience involving an angel, an earthquake, etc. and they did not change their views. This makes the idea of anyone today reading this chapter and then accepting Christ a seemingly preposterous idea.

If the soldiers who had this amazing experience did not change their views, than why should anyone change, or be more convinced in, their views based only on -faith- that is based upon this, and other, stories?

2.) The Roman soldiers who were guarding Jesus' tomb -did not- have any sort of experience. Matthew embellished the idea of the resurrection in order to convince people more thoroughly. Apparently Matthew didn't see the weak points in his story or else he would have written that the soldiers then began to follow Christ. And we would have other historic texts to prove this actually happened.
 
Upvote 0

AV1611VET

SCIENCE CAN TAKE A HIKE
Site Supporter
Jun 18, 2006
3,855,650
52,516
Guam
✟5,129,449.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
Baptist
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Republican
Let me touch on a couple points here, and hopefully you won't go away thinking these are "design flaws":
The Bible has four accounts of the life of Jesus, written down in what are known as the Gospels of Matthew, Mark, Luke and John.
The rule of thumb in determining what information is unique vs. what information is synoptic is this:

  • Where Matthew and Mark are synoptic --- Luke is unique.
  • Where Mark and Luke are synoptic --- Matthew is unique.
  • Where Luke and Matthew are synoptic --- Mark is unique.
  • John is not considered a synoptic Gospel.
For example, Mark forgets to mention that Jesus had a miraculous virgin birth...
Mark didn't "forget" --- he left it out on purpose.

Mark wrote to the Romans, and presented Jesus as a servant; thus you see a lot of words like "anon", "immediately", and "straightway" in his Gospel, which is the way a servant would respond.

Neither would you be prone to see a servant's lineage.
Acts 20:4 said:
And there accompanied him into Asia Sopater of Berea; and of the Thessalonians, Aristarchus and Secundus; and Gaius of Derbe, and Timotheus; and of Asia, Tychicus and Trophimus.
Note that Secundus is a servant here --- just a number (two).
 
Upvote 0

OldChurchGuy

Regular Member
Feb 19, 2007
195
24
✟23,252.00
Faith
Presbyterian
Marital Status
Married
I recently found an essay online, pasted below. I would like people's thoughts on this. My main question is: Because of what this says, how can the rest of the Bible be a credible source for religion?

This -is- mainly written for a non-believing reader, but I think it is good for anyone to think upon.
_____

Consider the background

Before getting into Matthew’s account of the resurrection, I’d like to give you a brief background about the Gospels. The Bible has four accounts of the life of Jesus, written down in what are known as the Gospels of Matthew, Mark, Luke and John.

Each writer tells us of what he finds important about the life of Jesus.

If you read what the writer of Mark has to say about what he finds important about Jesus’ life, you’ll get a very different picture than what the writer of John finds important. The Gospels are anonymous, hence the “writer of Mark” wording. With this fact in mind, I’m going to switch to calling the Gospel writers by their customary names.

For example, Mark forgets to mention that Jesus had a miraculous virgin birth – and John doesn’t find this worth mentioning, either.

"Forgets" may be too strong a word. It is presupposing that Mark was aware of Matthew's writing or that there was a universally accepted understanding of the resurrection.

As far as the death and resurrection of Jesus are concerned, the differences between the accounts are pretty interesting, as well.

I recommend reading each account – there really isn’t much text involved. Let’s focus on Matthew’s account now.

Matthew’s outrageous detail

I’m going to talk about the account given by the Gospel according to Matthew because it has some particularly delicious details.

What do I find hard to believe about the Gospel according to Matthew account of the physical resurrection of Jesus?

As an atheist, you might think that the supernatural miracle of the physical resurrection of a dead body would be the most difficult for me to believe… but I keep a fairly open mind. These times were different… the Bible itself tells us that a person coming back from the dead is a fairly common explanation of events. Maybe this was a different time when miracles occurred more frequently.

I mean, as is reported, the crowds think that Jesus is John the Baptist, or Elijah, or Jeremiah, or other prophets back from the dead. Even King Herod exclaims that Jesus is John the Baptist – the man he had beheaded – back from the dead. These things were either happening all the time, or they were explanations that were thrown about quite a bit.
Matthew 14:1-2 (NRSV)
“At that time Herod the ruler heard reports about Jesus; and he said to his servants, ‘This is John the Baptist; he has been raised from the dead, and for this reason these powers are at work in him.’”

Matthew 16:13-14 (NRSV)
“Now when Jesus came into the district of Caesarea Philippi, he asked his disciples, ‘Who do people say that the Son of Man is?’ And they said, ‘Some say John the Baptist, but others Elijah, and still others Jeremiah or one of the prophets.’”

So no, I’m going to grant that perhaps these kinds of supernatural events occurred. So what’s difficult to believe about Matthew’s account, given that supernatural suspension of the natural order isn’t so hard?
It isn’t that the whole land was in darkness for three hours during midday (leading up to Jesus’ death).
It isn’t that the curtain of the temple tore in half, from top to bottom, by itself at the time of at Jesus’ death.

It isn’t that there was an earthquake that was strong enough to break rocks.

Or that tombs opened up and “many bodies of the saints who had fallen asleep were raised … [and] came out of the tombs and entered the holy city and appeared to many.” (Matthew 27:51-54). – See what I mean about how frequently people came back from the dead in these days?

These events, impressive though you might find them today, even after you realize that no other Gospel writer thought to mention ANY of these things, aren’t too hard to believe.

You read correctly, no other account of Jesus’ death and resurrection mentions that other saints were raised from the dead, came out of their tombs, and walked around being seen by many people. Here is an interesting part to ask any Christian that you’re engaged with… how this whole resurrection thing works.

If people died and came back to life before Jesus – saints, in their tombs, waking back up and walking around – what was it that made Jesus special? It’s a fun side-topic to explore.

I don’t believe, and it certainly is difficult to believe all of these admittedly ridiculous things – Jesus came back to life, curtain ripping, many saints also coming back to life and walking around, and earthquakes – and that no one else thought that any of these things were interesting enough to mention.

Yet, Matthew’s account includes something that I find even harder to believe.

The story goes that the temple priests are sufficiently worried about Jesus and his followers and his claims to be God incarnate and the messiah. They are especially worried that the claim that Jesus makes – that He will prove that He is God incarnate and the long awaited messiah by coming back to life three days after his death. So they get permission from Pontius Pilate to set a contingent of soldiers to guard the tomb from Jesus’ followers from stealing the body away and proclaiming that Jesus rose from the dead.

The soldiers seal the tomb of this false messiah and rabble rousing preacher who claims to be God incarnate – and claims to come back to life to prove it.

These soldiers are there guarding the sealed tomb of this impostor, and on the dawning of the first night that they’re guarding it a great earthquake occurs and an angel wearing dazzling white clothing descends from heaven like lightning. This angel single-handedly rolls away the stone of the sealed tomb revealing that it’s empty! The soldiers witness this, and are so terrified they fall to the ground “like dead men.”
Matthew 27:2-4 (NRSV)
“And suddenly there was a great earthquake; for an angel of the Lord, descending from heaven, came and rolled back the stone and sat on it. His appearance was like lightning, and his clothing white as snow. For fear of him the guards shook and became like dead men.”

These soldiers allegedly have front-row seats to the most important and impressive miracle of all time.

They don’t, however, start worshiping the obvious God-man whose death and resurrection bring about earthquakes, darkness in the middle of days and angels descending from heaven.

Instead, they return to the priests that sent them to guard this “impostor’s” tomb and tell them everything that happened.

These priests are now in quite a situation. They had to deal with all the stresses of organizing the Passover, and then they had to deal with this rabble-rousing Jesus character. And, as soon as they get Jesus sentenced to death, the trouble really begins.

There was an earthquake, the temple curtain being ripped from the ceiling to the floor, darkness that covered all the land, and now another earthquake.

On top of that there are all these reports of all kinds of dead saints that are walking around today, and to top it all off, the guards that the priests THEMSELVES had posted to guard the tomb came running back, terrified, telling them, “Hey! That guy that you sent to death for falsely proclaiming to be sent by God… Turns out, He is God! We were there, guarding the place… earthquake happens, angel comes blazing in from the sky rolls away the stone, Jesus came back to life just like he said would happen!”

At this point, if you don’t know how the story goes in Matthew, you might guess that the soldiers and priests became Christians and followed Jesus for the rest of their days.

You’d be wrong.

In Matthew’s account the priests gather together with the elders and they talk about what’s going on. They decide that they won’t change their opinion about Jesus, impressive though these miracles are. No, they decide that they’ll keep this whole “God-incarnate is back from the dead and appearing to many people” a secret by telling the soldiers to lie about it.

The soldiers are told, “Lie about what you saw…here’s some money, all you have to do is say, ‘His disciples came and stole his body away while we were asleep.’”
Matthew 27:11-15 (NRSV)
“While they were going, some of the guard went into the city and told the chief priests everything that had happened. After the priests had assembled with the elders, they devised a plan to give a large sum of money to the soldiers, telling them, ‘You must say, “His disciples came by night and stole him away while we were asleep.” If this comes to the governor’s ears, we will satisfy him and keep you out of trouble.’ So they took the money and did as they were directed. And this story is still told among the Jews to this day.”

What do the soldiers do?

They don’t throw the money down and join the Christian disciples and become a missionary to anyone who will listen to their first hand account of how they were the one guarding the tomb of Jesus when he was resurrected! That they saw the angel that rolled away the stone!

No, they agree to the request, and lie to everyone who asks them, that the disciples came and stole the body.

They don’t follow God-incarnate that they themselves saw resurrected and greeted by a lightning angel.

Maybe the soldiers who were terrified to the point of shaking and falling down like dead men weren’t all that impressed with God incarnate.

But, how about the chief priests of the temple?

These guys all got together, sentenced a guy who claimed to be God and the messiah to death, and were just given a ridiculous amount of evidence that what he said was true.

The guards that the priests THEMSELVES had posted came running to them and were told that every claim that Jesus made about Himself is true.

Would not a single chief priest think… uh-oh, we sentenced God to death! We better repent and fast!

Would these men of God really, when faced with undeniable evidence that the messiah has come and that God walked among us, work to cover it up?

Seriously?

Did the conversation go something like…
Ok Bob, our entire lives have been dedicated to serving the God of Israel — all-powerful creator of the universe — waiting for the Messiah. Turns out, we sentenced the Messiah, who turns out to be the all-powerful creator of the universe, to death, and He is now back to life, causing earthquakes and telling everyone that He, God incarnate is back. How are we going to deal with this?

Well Steve… we were clearly wrong about the messiah, and God incarnate, but we have to save face, but we should brace ourselves as we are now up against a formidable force…

An all-powerful deity is going around proving that He is indeed the messiah that we have been waiting for. We don’t have many resources to fight this kind of power. But, how about this: Let’s lie about whether God incarnate is back from the dead, and that he will save us from eternal damnation.

Oooo, Bob, I like it. You’re right, God incarnate could put on an impressive show to convince the entire world that this miracle has occurred… but I bet if we could pay off these soldiers to say that “no no, nothing happened…” we could keep the vast majority of our fellow Jews in the dark about the true nature of God and the messiah!

That way, although we are condemning ourselves and the Jewish people to everlasting rejection of God, we will retain our jobs as temple priests.

Oh yeah…the rest of our lives will be devoted to an endeavor that is anti-God.

True, but we won’t have to repent or admit that we’re wrong.

Asking me to believe in supernatural miracles is one level of ridiculousness.

But to say that people experienced and saw the things that Matthew claims they saw, and that these people were so monumentally unimpressed — to the point of completely ignoring it — suggests that, perhaps, these people didn’t actually see what Matthew thinks they saw.

I should phrase that differently, the soldiers, apparently, not only witnessed the most important and impressive miracle of all time – they had the BEST front row seats to the most important miracle of all time — and THEY were unimpressed?

And years later, this story of how unimpressed these first hand witnesses were is supposed to impress me?

Even allowing for all the supernatural events to occur, this story doesn’t convince me of anything except the absolutely ludicrous nature of the story itself.

By Conversational Atheist at ConversationalAtheist.com


Interesting analysis. Considering we do not have any of the original manuscripts, it is hard to say with certainty what the original version of Matthew actually said. Further, this interpretation seems to suppose a literal understanding of the story is correct.

It is my understanding the author of Matthew was writing to a Jewish audience and it was written about 40 to 50 years after the fact. If that theory is correct, then it could be that the story of collusion between the Chief Priests and the Roman soldiers was to discredit both.

There probably was a rumor that the body of Jesus was stolen from the tomb. To counter this, Matthew may have created the above story to discredit those who are most likely to say Jesus' body was stolen.

Just an alternate interpretation to consider.

Sincerely,

OldChurchGuy
 
Upvote 0

aiki

Regular Member
Feb 16, 2007
10,874
4,352
Winnipeg
✟251,568.00
Country
Canada
Gender
Male
Faith
Baptist
Marital Status
Married
An atheist has a vested interest in approaching the gospel accounts of the resurrection as this one has. It is vital to their worldview that they find some alternate interpretation of what happened to that of a Christian. Does this atheist's spin on things hold water?

Nope.

For example, Mark forgets to mention that Jesus had a miraculous virgin birth – and John doesn’t find this worth mentioning, either.

How does this atheist know Mark "forgot to mention" Jesus' virgin birth? There are alternative and more plausible reasons for Mark's omission than this. What this remark reveals, however, is the writer's antagonistic disposition toward his subject matter.

And saying "John doesn't find this (Christ's virgin birth) worth mentioning" assigns a negative motive for John's omission that is pure assumption.

These events, impressive though you might find them today, even after you realize that no other Gospel writer thought to mention ANY of these things, aren’t too hard to believe.

You read correctly, no other account of Jesus’ death and resurrection mentions that other saints were raised from the dead, came out of their tombs, and walked around being seen by many people. Here is an interesting part to ask any Christian that you’re engaged with… how this whole resurrection thing works.

If people died and came back to life before Jesus – saints, in their tombs, waking back up and walking around – what was it that made Jesus special? It’s a fun side-topic to explore.

This is a question only one who has not studied the Bible's doctrine well would pose. Here are some simple answers to such an ignorant question:

1. None of those who were also raised from the dead had made any claim before dying that they would rise again three days after their death.

2. None of those who died returned in the glorified state that Christ did.

3. All those who were resurrected eventually died - again. Only Christ's resurrection has been permanent.

I don’t believe, and it certainly is difficult to believe all of these admittedly ridiculous things – Jesus came back to life, curtain ripping, many saints also coming back to life and walking around, and earthquakes – and that no one else thought that any of these things were interesting enough to mention.

Here is another comment that reveals the writer's strong prejudice against the claims of the gospel account. I'm sure people who were witness to these events had a great deal to say to one another about them. That 2000 years later there aren't any available written records outside of the Bible of the events described in the gospel of Matthew doesn't necessarily, or even probably, mean that "no one else thought these things were interesting enough to mention."

These soldiers allegedly have front-row seats to the most important and impressive miracle of all time.

They don’t, however, start worshiping the obvious God-man whose death and resurrection bring about earthquakes, darkness in the middle of days and angels descending from heaven.

Instead, they return to the priests that sent them to guard this “impostor’s” tomb and tell them everything that happened.

Perhaps this writer is unaware that the soldier's failure to guard the tomb could have meant their death. This would seem to me to be a very strong motive for the soldiers returning quickly to the priests to make an explanation for the empty tomb.

The gospel account says that the soldiers were so afraid when the angel appeared they passed out. When they revived, Christ was gone. Who then would they have to worship?

As well, why would the soldiers assume the events they were witnessing were as Matthew explains them? Certainly, what they saw was astonishing, but what it all meant would not necessarily have been immediately plain to them.

What do the soldiers do?

They don’t throw the money down and join the Christian disciples and become a missionary to anyone who will listen to their first hand account of how they were the one guarding the tomb of Jesus when he was resurrected! That they saw the angel that rolled away the stone!

There is nothing in any of the gospel accounts that suggests that the soldiers truly understood what they had seen. Not only had they witnessed the most mind-boggling and terrifying thing in their lives, but their failure to guard the tomb successfully carried its own terror: their execution. Not knowing what to make of what they had seen and keenly aware of the jeopardy they were in by failing to keep the tomb secure, the soldiers did what seems to me to be the perfectly rational thing to do: take the money and lie. It was certainly a much better choice than dying for something they neither understood nor could have opposed.

But, how about the chief priests of the temple?

These guys all got together, sentenced a guy who claimed to be God and the messiah to death, and were just given a ridiculous amount of evidence that what he said was true.

The guards that the priests THEMSELVES had posted came running to them and were told that every claim that Jesus made about Himself is true.

Would not a single chief priest think… uh-oh, we sentenced God to death! We better repent and fast!

Would these men of God really, when faced with undeniable evidence that the messiah has come and that God walked among us, work to cover it up?

Seriously?

The Pharisees had had many demonstrations of Christ's miraculous power before his death and resurrection. It hadn't made any difference. Their positions of power were threatened and that was all that mattered to them. It isn't so hard to believe. People are doing essentially the same thing 2000 years later.

Asking me to believe in supernatural miracles is one level of ridiculousness.

But to say that people experienced and saw the things that Matthew claims they saw, and that these people were so monumentally unimpressed — to the point of completely ignoring it — suggests that, perhaps, these people didn’t actually see what Matthew thinks they saw.

Only an ignoramus would make such a statement. The impact of Christ's life and death transformed the Roman Empire! There were many who did see the risen Christ and they were so profoundly affected by him that they gave their lives in defense and advancement of his name and teachings. Their faith in the resurrected Christ radically changed their world!

I should phrase that differently, the soldiers, apparently, not only witnessed the most important and impressive miracle of all time – they had the BEST front row seats to the most important miracle of all time — and THEY were unimpressed?

Unimpressed? Good grief! What a silly, biased, strawman spin this writer has given to Matthew's account!

And years later, this story of how unimpressed these first hand witnesses were is supposed to impress me?

Even allowing for all the supernatural events to occur, this story doesn’t convince me of anything except the absolutely ludicrous nature of the story itself.

Well, with the foolish and biased approach this writer has taken to the matter, I'm not at all surprised!

Peace.
 
Upvote 0
Status
Not open for further replies.