SavedByTheLord
Well-Known Member
Who are these people?
So the proteins need other proteins which needed RNA and other proteins to self-replicate?
-
Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.
Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:- Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
- Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
- Access to private conversations with other members.
We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!
Another irrefutable proof that God created all things using mathematical induction. And a proof that The Bible is the word of God.
- Thread starter SavedByTheLord
- Start date
So the proteins need other proteins which needed RNA and other proteins to self-replicate?
joelr
Well-Known Member
Yahweh? The God of the Israelites. Zeus, the God of Classical Greek religion. Inanna was a Mesopotamian deity, the earliest writings ever were scripture about Inana on tablets. Krishna is a demigod in Hinduism. Jesus is a demigod in Christianity. Demigod is earth mother, sky-god father.
Your proof that Yahweh is the creator obviously has been pointed out as an incorrect argument, but other creators were also postulated far earlier. The Persian creator God (which hugely influenced Israel during the Persian occupation) had scriptures from ~ 1600 BC, the creator God, Ahura Mazda created everything then created all the lesser deities (similar to angels in Judaism).
"for Ahura Mazda knew in his wisdom that if he became Creator and fashioned this world, then the Hostile Spirit would attack it, because it was good, and it would become a battleground for their two forces, and in the end he, God, would win the great struggle there and be able to destroy evil, and so achieve a universe which would be wholly good forever.
The heptad and the seven creations These teachings were fundamentally new; but it was the old cosmogony which provided the basis for Zoroaster's thought. So the first act which he conceived Ahura Mazda as performing was the evocation, through his Holy Spirit, Spenta Mainyu, of six lesser divinities, the radiant Beings of Zoroaster's earliest vision. These divinities formed a heptad with Ahura Mazda himself, and they proceeded with him to fashion the seven creations which make up the world. The evocation of the six is variously described in Zoroastrian works, but always in ways which suggest the essential unity of beneficent divinity. Thus Ahura Mazda is said either to be their 'father', or to have 'mingled' himself with them, and in one Pahlavi text his creation of them is compared with the lighting of torches from a torch. The six great Beings then in their turn, Zoroaster taught, evoked other beneficent divinities, who are in fact the beneficent gods of the pagan Iranian pantheon. "
From Mary Boyce,
Zoroastrians-Their-Religious-Beliefs-and-Practices-
Doctrines taken from Persia into Judiasm during the 2nd Temple Period -
fundamental doctrines became disseminated throughout the region, from Egypt to the Black Sea: namely that there is a supreme God who is the Creator; that an evil power exists which is opposed to him, and not under his control; that he has emanated many lesser divinities to help combat this power; that he has created this world for a purpose, and that in its present state it will have an end; that this end will be heralded by the coming of a cosmic Saviour, who will help to bring it about; that meantime heaven and hell exist, with an individual judgment to decide the fate of each soul at death; that at the end of time there will be a resurrection of the dead and a Last Judgment, with annihilation of the wicked; and that thereafter the kingdom of God will come upon earth, and the righteous will enter into it as into a garden (a Persian word for which is 'paradise'), and be happy there in the presence of God for ever, immortal themselves in body as well as soul. These doctrines all came to be adopted by various Jewish schools in the post-Exilic period, for the Jews were one of the peoples, it seems, most open to Zoroastrian influences - a tiny minority, holding staunchly to their own beliefs, but evidently admiring their Persian benefactors, and finding congenial elements in their faith. Worship of the one supreme God, and belief in the coming of a Messiah or Saviour, together with adherence to a way of life which combined moral and spiritual aspirations with a strict code of behaviour (including purity laws) were all matters in which Judaism and Zoroastrianism were in harmony; and it was this harmony, it seems, reinforced by the respect of a subject people for a great protective power, which allowed Zoroastrian doctrines to exert their influence. The extent of this influence is best attested, however, by Jewish writings of the Parthian period, when Christianity and the Gnostic faiths, as well as northern Buddhism, all likewise bore witness to the profound effect: which Zoroaster's teachings had had throughout the lands of the Acha
No, these amyloid protein structures are able to grow more amyloids. There are experiments every year that demonstrate self replicating compounds, nucleobases and all types of structures that are involved in forming life.
Amino acids don't even need to be grown,m they are found on countless asteroids and meteorites in space. So we know they are abundant in the universe.
Last edited:
SavedByTheLord
Well-Known Member
What a crock with that last paragraph.
The building blocks of life - electrons, protons and neutrons.
It is the very large specific sequences of nucleotides and amino acids that is impossible .
joelr
Well-Known Member
You didn't say what was a crock?
Why are you bringing quantum physics into this, moving the goalpost?
It's a slow process and progress is made every year. Eventually the gap will close and creationists will have to scramble to find another argument.
But even if we cannot demonstrate abiogenesis, it doesn't mean any typical Near Eastern Deity was real and not mythology.
The conditions that led to the formation of the first organisms and the ways that life originates from a lifeless chemical soup are poorly understood. The recent hypothesis of “RNA-peptide coevolution” suggests that the current close relationship between amino acids and nucleobases may well have extended to the origin of life. We now show how the interplay between these compound classes can give rise to new self-replicating molecules using a dynamic combinatorial approach. We report two strategies for the fabrication of chimeric amino acid/nucleobase self-replicating macrocycles capable of exponential growth. The first one relies on mixing nucleobase- and peptide-based building blocks, where the ligation of these two gives rise to highly specific chimeric ring structures. The second one starts from peptide nucleic acid (PNA) building blocks in which nucleobases are already linked to amino acids from the start. While previously reported nucleic acid-based self-replicating systems rely on presynthesis of (short) oligonucleotide sequences, self-replication in the present systems start from units containing only a single nucleobase. Self-replication is accompanied by self-assembly, spontaneously giving rise to an ordered one-dimensional arrangement of nucleobase
A systems approach to the emergence of self-replicating molecules, where different compound classes (i.e., amino acids, peptides, and nucleobases) coexist has thus far received only little attention. Efforts directed at PNA-based replicators, in which an amino acid replaces the phosphate-sugar backbone of DNA/RNA, come closest. (44−46) However, PNA remains very similar to DNA/RNA in architecture and behavior.
We now report the spontaneous emergence of new self-replicating molecules from molecular networks in which nucleobases and amino acids are both present. We show that this leads to chimeric replicators, which rely on the assembly of peptides and nucleobases into fibrous aggregates (but do not rely on base-pairing) resulting in the autocatalytic formation of a one-dimensional arrangement of nucleobases. The two different systems constructed herein allow for a direct comparison between replicator mutations. The peptide-nucleobase system shows that mutations are easily accommodated during replication, while in the PNA system, replicator mutation is impeded as it requires a change in ring size. While the building blocks used were not selected for prebiotic relevance, they do illustrate the potential of the assembly driven replication mechanism that might well extend to other types of molecules.
For the first time, large self-replicating molecules win evolution
How can molecules evolve to become more complex, to the point that smaller ones might eventually become large, complex, biological organisms?.
sciworthy.com
For the first time, large self-replicating molecules win evolution
Self-replicating molecules provide clues to how life may have begun
A chance discovery of molecules that make copies of themselves could shed light on the age-old question of how life emerged on this...
Self-replicating molecules provide clues to how life may have begun
But mythology is still mythology, you like scholarship from fringe PhDs? Great. Then mainstream opinions are even better.
Francesca Stavrakopoulou PhD
9:00
The idea that the Israelite religion was extraordinary and different from religions of surrounding religions and cultures and this deity is somehow different and extraordinary and so this deity is wholly unlike all other deities in Southeast Asia. Historically this is not the case. Nothing unusual or extraordinary about Yahweh.
9:44 - Biblical ideas are based on ideas that Yahweh was unique. Nothing unique, find examples in much earlier religions, Yahweh is a local iteration of common deities
SavedByTheLord
Well-Known Member
You are moving the goal posts.You didn't say what was a crock?
Why are you bringing quantum physics into this, moving the goalpost?
It's a slow process and progress is made every year. Eventually the gap will close and creationists will have to scramble to find another argument.
But even if we cannot demonstrate abiogenesis, it doesn't mean any typical Near Eastern Deity was real and not mythology.
The conditions that led to the formation of the first organisms and the ways that life originates from a lifeless chemical soup are poorly understood. The recent hypothesis of “RNA-peptide coevolution” suggests that the current close relationship between amino acids and nucleobases may well have extended to the origin of life. We now show how the interplay between these compound classes can give rise to new self-replicating molecules using a dynamic combinatorial approach. We report two strategies for the fabrication of chimeric amino acid/nucleobase self-replicating macrocycles capable of exponential growth. The first one relies on mixing nucleobase- and peptide-based building blocks, where the ligation of these two gives rise to highly specific chimeric ring structures. The second one starts from peptide nucleic acid (PNA) building blocks in which nucleobases are already linked to amino acids from the start. While previously reported nucleic acid-based self-replicating systems rely on presynthesis of (short) oligonucleotide sequences, self-replication in the present systems start from units containing only a single nucleobase. Self-replication is accompanied by self-assembly, spontaneously giving rise to an ordered one-dimensional arrangement of nucleobase
A systems approach to the emergence of self-replicating molecules, where different compound classes (i.e., amino acids, peptides, and nucleobases) coexist has thus far received only little attention. Efforts directed at PNA-based replicators, in which an amino acid replaces the phosphate-sugar backbone of DNA/RNA, come closest. (44−46) However, PNA remains very similar to DNA/RNA in architecture and behavior.
We now report the spontaneous emergence of new self-replicating molecules from molecular networks in which nucleobases and amino acids are both present. We show that this leads to chimeric replicators, which rely on the assembly of peptides and nucleobases into fibrous aggregates (but do not rely on base-pairing) resulting in the autocatalytic formation of a one-dimensional arrangement of nucleobases. The two different systems constructed herein allow for a direct comparison between replicator mutations. The peptide-nucleobase system shows that mutations are easily accommodated during replication, while in the PNA system, replicator mutation is impeded as it requires a change in ring size. While the building blocks used were not selected for prebiotic relevance, they do illustrate the potential of the assembly driven replication mechanism that might well extend to other types of molecules.
For the first time, large self-replicating molecules win evolution
How can molecules evolve to become more complex, to the point that smaller ones might eventually become large, complex, biological organisms?.For the first time, large self-replicating molecules win evolution
Self-replicating molecules provide clues to how life may have begun
A chance discovery of molecules that make copies of themselves could shed light on the age-old question of how life emerged on this...cordis.europa.eu
Self-replicating molecules provide clues to how life may have begun
But mythology is still mythology, you like scholarship from fringe PhDs? Great. Then mainstream opinions are even better.
Francesca Stavrakopoulou PhD
9:00
The idea that the Israelite religion was extraordinary and different from religions of surrounding religions and cultures and this deity is somehow different and extraordinary and so this deity is wholly unlike all other deities in Southeast Asia. Historically this is not the case. Nothing unusual or extraordinary about Yahweh.
9:44 - Biblical ideas are based on ideas that Yahweh was unique. Nothing unique, find examples in much earlier religions, Yahweh is a local iteration of common deities
Everyhing in your post is just false assumptions and reasonings.
joelr
Well-Known Member
No I was asking you, why are you bringing up particles when the question was about amino acids and abiogenesis? I didn't understand the point?
Everything in my post is either standard PhD historicity or scientific papers, peer-reviewed.
Which you had no problem using as a source several times and felt one fringe paper "debunked" mainstream science. Which makes no sense but regardless you used academic work, so you understand the value.
So now you are making no sense.
Please state specifically what you find to be a false assumption, why, and provide another source to back up your claim. If it's historical please use an actual historian. Mary Boyce is the best source on the Persian religion as she lived in Iran for years to do her work.
If you find a mistake, source it please and show an equal respected scholar pointing it out.
I can back up her claims with the Yale Divinity Lectures, Dr John Collins breaks down a few claims and shows exactly where they show up in Daniel and Isaiah and that they are very specific borrowings from Persian mythology. At the time Israel was occupied by Persia so the odds of it not being syncretism are almost zero.
Looks like you are completely uninterested in truth but rather just asserting that your beliefs are true. Your statement above is comically unfounded.
metis
aged ecumenical anthropologist
Not that I saw, plus it's virtually impossible to prove such events that supposedly happened thousands of years ago written by people whom we do not know and cannot verify.
metis
aged ecumenical anthropologist
True across the board?
OK, let me ask you a question: How many angels were at Jesus' tomb, what did he/they say from the four Gospel accounts?
SavedByTheLord
Well-Known Member
Here is Matthew 28, Mark 16, Luke 24, John 20-21, Acts 1:1-12 in order.
No words of mine.
Where is the contradiction?
From the below words, at least 4 angels. I bolded and underlined the references.
9 Now when Jesus was risen early the first day of the week …. - Mark 16:9
2 And, behold, there was a great earthquake: for the angel of the Lord descended from heaven, and came and rolled back the stone from the door, and sat upon it.
3 His countenance was like lightning, and his raiment white as snow:
4 And for fear of him the keepers did shake, and became as dead men. - Matt 28:2-4
1 The first day of the week cometh Mary Magdalene early, when it was yet dark, unto the sepulchre, and seeth the stone taken away from the sepulchre. - John 20:1
1 Now upon the first day of the week, very early in the morning, they came unto the sepulchre, bringing the spices which they had prepared, and certain others with them. - Luke 24:1
1 In the end of the sabbath, as it began to dawn toward the first day of the week, came Mary Magdalene and the other Mary to see the sepulchre. - Matthew 28:1
1 And when the sabbath was past, Mary Magdalene, and Mary the mother of James, and Salome, had bought sweet spices, that they might come and anoint him.
2 And very early in the morning the first day of the week, they came unto the sepulchre at the rising of the sun. - Mark 16:1-2
3 And they said among themselves, Who shall roll us away the stone from the door of the sepulchre? - Mark 16:3
2 And they found the stone rolled away from the sepulchre. - Luke 24:2
4 And when they looked, they saw that the stone was rolled away: for it was very great. - Mark 16:1-4
5 And the angel answered and said unto the women, Fear not ye: for I know that ye seek Jesus, which was crucified.
6 He is not here: for he is risen, as he said. Come, see the place where the Lord lay.
7 And go quickly, and tell his disciples that he is risen from the dead; and, behold, he goeth before you into Galilee; there shall ye see him: lo, I have told you. - Matthew 28:5-7
3 And they entered in, and found not the body of the Lord Jesus. - Luke 24:3
5 And entering into the sepulchre, they saw a young man sitting on the right side, clothed in a long white garment; and they were affrighted.
6 And he saith unto them, Be not affrighted: Ye seek Jesus of Nazareth, which was crucified: he is risen; he is not here: behold the place where they laid him. - Mark 16:5-6
7 But go your way, tell his disciples and Peter that he goeth before you into Galilee: there shall ye see him, as he said unto you. - Mark 16:7
4 And it came to pass, as they were much perplexed thereabout, behold, two men stood by them in shining garments:
5 And as they were afraid, and bowed down their faces to the earth, they said unto them, Why seek ye the living among the dead?
6 He is not here, but is risen: remember how he spake unto you when he was yet in Galilee,
7 Saying, The Son of man must be delivered into the hands of sinful men, and be crucified, and the third day rise again.
8 And they remembered his words, - Luke 28:4-8
8 And they departed quickly from the sepulchre with fear and great joy; and did run to bring his disciples word. - Matt 28:8
8 And they went out quickly, and fled from the sepulchre; for they trembled and were amazed: neither said they any thing to any man; for they were afraid. - Mark 16:8
9 And returned from the sepulchre, and told all these things unto the eleven, and to all the rest. - Luke 24:9
2 Then she runneth, and cometh to Simon Peter, and to the other disciple, whom Jesus loved, and saith unto them, They have taken away the Lord out of the sepulchre, and we know not where they have laid him.
3 Peter therefore went forth, and that other disciple, and came to the sepulchre. - John 20:2-3
12 Then arose Peter, and ran unto the sepulchre; and stooping down, he beheld the linen clothes laid by themselves, and departed, wondering in himself at that which was come to pass. - Luke 24:12
4 So they ran both together: and the other disciple did outrun Peter, and came first to the sepulchre.
5 And he stooping down, and looking in, saw the linen clothes lying; yet went he not in.
6 Then cometh Simon Peter following him, and went into the sepulchre, and seeth the linen clothes lie,
7 And the napkin, that was about his head, not lying with the linen clothes, but wrapped together in a place by itself.
8 Then went in also that other disciple, which came first to the sepulchre, and he saw, and believed.
9 For as yet they knew not the scripture, that he must rise again from the dead. - John 20:4-9
11 But Mary stood without at the sepulchre weeping: and as she wept, she stooped down, and looked into the sepulchre,
12 And seeth two angels in white sitting, the one at the head, and the other at the feet, where the body of Jesus had lain.
13 And they say unto her, Woman, why weepest thou? She saith unto them, Because they have taken away my Lord, and I know not where they have laid him.
14 And when she had thus said, she turned herself back, and saw Jesus standing, and knew not that it was Jesus.
15 Jesus saith unto her, Woman, why weepest thou? whom seekest thou? She, supposing him to be the gardener, saith unto him, Sir, if thou have borne him hence, tell me where thou hast laid him, and I will take him away.
16 Jesus saith unto her, Mary. She turned herself, and saith unto him, Rabboni; which is to say, Master.
17 Jesus saith unto her, Touch me not; for I am not yet ascended to my Father: but go to my brethren, and say unto them, I ascend unto my Father, and your Father; and to my God, and your God. - John 20:11-17
9… he appeared first to Mary Magdalene, out of whom he had cast seven devils. - Mark 16:9
18 Mary Magdalene came and told the disciples that she had seen the Lord, and that he had spoken these things unto her. - John 20:18
9 And as they went to tell his disciples, behold, Jesus met them, saying, All hail. And they came and held him by the feet, and worshipped him.
10 Then said Jesus unto them, Be not afraid: go tell my brethren that they go into Galilee, and there shall they see me. - Matt 28:9-10
9 And returned from the sepulchre, and told all these things unto the eleven, and to all the rest.
10 It was Mary Magdalene and Joanna, and Mary the mother of James, and other women that were with them, which told these things unto the apostles.
11 And their words seemed to them as idle tales, and they believed them not. - Luke 24:9-11
10 And she went and told them that had been with him, as they mourned and wept.
11 And they, when they had heard that he was alive, and had been seen of her, believed not. - Mark 16:10-11
10 Then the disciples went away again unto their own home. - John 20:10
11 Now when they were going, behold, some of the watch came into the city, and shewed unto the chief priests all the things that were done.
12 And when they were assembled with the elders, and had taken counsel, they gave large money unto the soldiers,
13 Saying, Say ye, His disciples came by night, and stole him away while we slept.
14 And if this come to the governor's ears, we will persuade him, and secure you.
15 So they took the money, and did as they were taught: and this saying is commonly reported among the Jews until this day. - Matt 28:11-15
12 After that he appeared in another form unto two of them, as they walked, and went into the country.
13 And they went and told it unto the residue: neither believed they them. - Mark 16:12-13
Luke 24:13-35
Mark 16:14
Luke 24:36-49
John 20:9-24
John 20:25-31
John 21
16 Then the eleven disciples went away into Galilee, into a mountain where Jesus had appointed them.
17 And when they saw him, they worshipped him: but some doubted.
18 And Jesus came and spake unto them, saying, All power is given unto me in heaven and in earth.
19 Go ye therefore, and teach all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost:
20 Teaching them to observe all things whatsoever I have commanded you: and, lo, I am with you always, even unto the end of the world. Amen. - Matt 28:16-20
15 And he said unto them, Go ye into all the world, and preach the gospel to every creature.
16 He that believeth and is baptized shall be saved; but he that believeth not shall be damned.
17 And these signs shall follow them that believe; In my name shall they cast out devils; they shall speak with new tongues;
18 They shall take up serpents; and if they drink any deadly thing, it shall not hurt them; they shall lay hands on the sick, and they shall recover. - Mark 16:15-18
Acts 1:1-11
50 And he led them out as far as to Bethany, and he lifted up his hands, and blessed them.
51 And it came to pass, while he blessed them, he was parted from them, and carried up into heaven. - Luke 24:50-51
19 So then after the Lord had spoken unto them, he was received up into heaven, and sat on the right hand of God. - Mark 16:19
12 Then returned they unto Jerusalem from the mount called Olivet, which is from Jerusalem a sabbath day's journey. - Acts 1:12
52 And they worshipped him, and returned to Jerusalem with great joy:
53 And were continually in the temple, praising and blessing God. Amen. - Luke 24:52-53
20 And they went forth, and preached every where, the Lord working with them, and confirming the word with signs following. Amen. - Mark 16:20
metis
aged ecumenical anthropologist
Because 2 is not the same as 1, the words spoken are different, and what they did immediately after leaving and speaking to others is not exactly the same.
There are literally thousands of what theologians' call "variations", in the scriptures. To the literalist, this is a problem; but for those who accept the reality of variations, it's generally not.
SavedByTheLord
Well-Known Member
And you have nothing to show a single contradiction.
Esteban X
Active Member
Biblical Contradictions
It is a central dogma of all fundamental Christians that the Bible is without error. They teach this conclusion by “reasoning” that god cannot be the author of false meaning and he cannot lie. Is this true? If written by a perfect being, then it must not contradict itself, as a collection of...
www.atheists.org
SAB Contradictions
Take your time, I'll wait
joelr
Well-Known Member
Bart Ehrman has a whole book of them. Jesus Interrupted
Other Differences in the Passion Narratives
These then are just some of the key discrepancies in the accounts of
Jesus’ last week of life, his death, and his resurrection. They are by
no means the only differences, but instead of listing them all I point
out here a few of the more interesting ones that you would find if
you were to do a complete analysis. I can give these in rapid-fire suc¬
cession by asking just five simple questions.
1. When Jesus entered Jerusalem during the Triumphal Entry, how
many animals did he ride? It seems like there should be an obvious
answer: he rode one animal, a donkey or a colt. And that in fact is
what is said in three of the Gospels, including Mark 11:7. In Mat¬
thew’s Gospel, however, this triumphal act is said to fulfill proph¬
ecy; as we have seen, Matthew sets great store on the fulfillment of
Scripture, and in 21:5 he states, quoting Zechariah 9:9:
Behold, your king is coming to you,
humble, and mounted on a donkey,
and on a colt, the foal of a donkey
Scholars of the Hebrew Bible recognize this kind of poetic proph¬
ecy: the third line of the text restates what is said in the second
line. This is called “synonymous parallelism”—where two lines of
poetry say basically the same thing in different words. But Matthew
evidently did not understand this poetic convention in this place,
leading to some rather bizarre results. In Matthew, Jesus’ disciples
procure two animals for him, a donkey and a colt; they spread their
garments over the two of them, and Jesus rode into town straddling
them both (Matthew 21:7). It’s an odd image, but Matthew made
Jesus fulfill the prophecy of Scripture quite literally.
2. What did Jesus tell the high priest when questioned at his tidal?
My sense is that historically, this is something we could never know.
Jesus was there, and the Jewish leaders were there, but there were
no followers of Jesus there, taking notes for posterity. Nevertheless,
Mark gives us a clear account. The high priest asks Jesus if he is
the “Messiah, the Son of the Blessed One” (14:61), and Jesus gives a
straightforward reply, “I am. And you will see the Son of Man seated
at the right hand of Power and coming with the clouds of heaven”
(Mark 14:62). In other words, in the near future God would be send¬
ing a cosmic judge of the earth, in fulfillment of the predictions of
the Old Testament (Daniel 7:13—14). In fact, it was so near that the
high priest himself would see it happen.
What if it doesn’t happen? What if the high priest were to die
before the Son of Man arrived? Wouldn’t that invalidate Jesus’
claim? Maybe. And that may be why Luke, writing some fifteen
or twenty years after Mark—presumably after the high priest has
died—changes Jesus’ answer. Now when he replies he says nothing
about the high priest being alive when the Son of Man arrives in
judgment: “I am, and from now on the Son of Man will be seated at
the right hand of the power of God” (Luke 22:69).
3. Why does Matthew quote the wrong prophet? When Matthew
indicates that Judas betrayed Jesus for thirty pieces of silver, he notes
(as by now we expect of him) that this was in fulfillment of Scrip¬
ture: “Then was fulfilled what had been spoken through the prophet
Jeremiah, And they took the thirty pieces of silver . . . and they gave
them for the potter’s field’ ” (Mathew 27:9—10). The problem is that
this prophecy is not found in Jeremiah. It appears to be a loose quo¬
tation of Zechariah 11:3.
4. When was the curtain in the Temple ripped? The curtain in the
Temple separated the holiest place, called the “holy of holies,” from
the rest of the Temple precincts. It was in the holy of holies that
God was thought to dwell here on earth (he obviously is reigning
in heaven as well). No one could enter that room behind the curtain
except once a year, on the Day of Atonement (Yom Kippur), when
the high priest could go in to offer a sacrifice, first for his own sins
and then for the sins of the people. According to Mark’s Gospel,
after Jesus breathes his last, the curtain of the Temple is torn in
half (15:38). This has long been recognized as a symbolic statement,
for there is no historical evidence to suggest the curtain was ever
destroyed before the Temple itself was burned to the ground forty
years later in the war with the Romans. For Mark, Jesus’ death
means the end of the need for Temple sacrifices. In his son’s death
God is now available to all people; he is no longer separated from
them by a thick curtain. Jesus’ death makes people one with God: it
is an atonement (at-one-ment) for sin.
Luke’s Gospel also indicates that the curtain in the Temple was
ripped in half. Oddly enough, it does not rip after Jesus dies but is
explicitly said to rip while Jesus is still alive and hanging on the
cross (23:45—46). I will speak about the significance of this discrep¬
ancy in the next chapter, as this change is directly tied to Luke’s
understanding of Jesus’ death.
joelr
Well-Known Member
All four Gospels
agree that on the third day after Jesus’ crucifixion and burial, Mary
Magdalene went to the tomb and found it empty. But on virtually
every detail they disagree.
Who actually went to the tomb? Was it Mary alone (John 20:1)?
Mary and another Mary (Matthew 28:1)? Mary Magdalene, Mary
the mother of James, and Salome (Mark 16:1)? Or women who
had accompanied Jesus from Galilee to Jerusalem—possibly Mary
Magdalene, Joanna, Mary the mother of James, and “other women”
(Luke 24:1; see 23:55)? Had the stone already been rolled away from
the tomb (as in Mark 16:4) or was it rolled away by an angel while
the women were there (Matthew 28:2)? Whom or what did they see
there? An angel (Matthew 28:5)? A young man (Mark 16:5)? Two
men (Luke 24:4)? Or nothing and no one (John)? And what were
they told? To tell the disciples to “go to Galilee,” where Jesus will
meet them (Mark 16:7)? Or to remember what Jesus had told them
“while he was in Galilee,” that he had to die and rise again (Luke
24:7)? Then, do the women tell the disciples what they saw and
heard (Matthew 28:8), or do they not tell anyone (Mark 16:8)? If
they tell someone, whom do they tell? The eleven disciples (Matthew
28:8)? The eleven disciples and other people (Luke 24:8)? Simon
Peter and another unnamed disciple (John 20:2)? What do the disci¬
ples do in response? Do they have no response because Jesus himself
immediately appears to them (Matthew 20:9)? Do they not believe
the women because it seems to be “an idle tale” (Luke 24:11)? Or do
they go to the tomb to see for themselves (John 20:3)?
The questions multiply. You can read horizontally to do a cross-
Gospel comparison yourself of what happens next: to whom Jesus ap¬
pears (if anyone) and when, what he says to them, and what they say in
response. On virtually every issue at least one Gospel is out of step.
One point in particular seems to be irreconcilable. In Mark’s ac¬
count the women are instructed to tell the disciples to go meet Jesus
in Galilee, but out of fear they don’t say a word to anyone about it.
In Matthew’s version the disciples are told to go to Galilee to meet
Jesus, and they immediately do so. He appears to them there and
gives them their final instruction. But in Luke the disciples are not
told to go to Galilee. They are told that Jesus had foretold his resur¬
rection while he was in Galilee (during his public ministry). And
they never leave Jerusalem—in the southern part of the Israel, a
different region from Galilee, in the north. On the day of the res¬
urrection Jesus appears to two disciples on the “road to Emmaus”
(24:13—35); later that day these disciples tell the others what they
have seen, and Jesus appears to all of them (24:36—49); and then
Jesus takes them to Bethany on the outskirts of Jerusalem and
gives them their instructions and ascends to heaven. In Luke’s next
volume, Acts, we’re told that the disciples are in fact explicitly told
by Jesus after his resurrection not to leave Jerusalem (Acts 1:4), but
to stay there until they receive the Holy Spirit on the Day of Pen¬
tecost, fifty days after Passover. After giving his instructions, Jesus
then ascends to heaven. The disciples do stay in Jerusalem until
the Holy Spirit comes (Acts 2). And so the discrepancy: If Matthew
is right, that the disciples immediately go to Galilee and see Jesus
ascend from there, how can Luke be right that the disciples stay in
Jerusalem the whole time, see Jesus ascend from there, and stay on
until the day of Pentecost?
SavedByTheLord
Well-Known Member
I put them in order for you,
Mary Madeleine went to the tomb first by herself.
After that the was a number of women at the tomb.
The stone has already been rolled away before any of the women got to there.
There were at least 4 angels at the tomb.
And of course you have filled in your own false reasoning.
You have assumed that when one set of words is recorded it means all the words were recorded .
You have also assumed that multiple events were really just one event.
Why not just use quotes and put 1,2, or several in a post and refer just to the words of the quote.
You failed pretty bad in this attempt as you have no quotes at all.
Where are you getting that there were 4 angels in the tomb from ?
metis
aged ecumenical anthropologist
I did but you just ignored the obvious variations of the women's visit to the Tomb. 1 =/= 2, just as one example that deals with the angels. Inside is not the same as outside. Etc.
SavedByTheLord
Well-Known Member
There were at least 4 angels,
No where does any of the 4 gospels say there was ONLY 1 angel or 2 angels.
So, no contradiction there.
No where in the 4 gospels does it say that is was ONLY these women.
So, no contradiction there.
joelr
Well-Known Member
Speaking of failing pretty bad, your only attempt is to write another gospel that says something different than all 4? I'll show you a contradiction, you wrote a gospel that doesn't match ANY OF THE OTHERS??????
You also did not answer any of the issues raised such as when was the curtain ripped? Or how can Luke be right that the disciples stay in
Jerusalem the whole time, see Jesus ascend from there, and stay on until the day of Pentecost?
A new gospel is totally blasphemous. As if the authors cannot write a story properly? The angel of the Lord came down and opened the rock, and sat on it. Very clear. No other angels. Except in your new gospel, which is heretical because the gospels are supposed to be gods words. You are only acknowledging contradictions by having to create a new gospel.
Different words have different meanings and combining all of them makes for a completely different gospel with different meaning.
"
5. What did the centurion say when Jesus died? Again the answer
may seem obvious, especially to those who remember the great bibli¬
cal epic on the silver screen, The Greatest Stoiy Ever Told, and the
immortal words of the centurion played by John Wayne: “Truly this
man was the Son of God.” And that is, in fact, what the centurion
says in the Gospel of Mark (15:39). But it is worth noting that Luke
has changed the words. In his account the centurion says, “Truly
this man was innocent” (23:47). There have always been interpret¬
ers who have wanted to insist that this comes to the same thing: of
course if he’s the Son of God he’s innocent. But the words are differ¬
ent and have different meanings. If a potential criminal is declared
“not guilty” by the court, that is certainly not the same thing as
being declared the Son of God. Did the centurion say both things?
One could say yes if one’s goal were to reconcile the Gospels, and
thereby create yet a third version of the scene, unlike either Mark or
Luke. But it is probably better to consider why the later Luke might
have changed the words. For Luke it was important to stress that
Jesus was completely innocent of the charges against him. In John,
for example, as in Luke, three times Pilate tries to release Jesus by
declaring him innocent (unlike in Mark). And at the end, so, too,
does the centurion. The Romans all agree on Jesus’ innocence. Who
then is guilty for his death? Not the Romans, but the Jewish authori¬
ties, or the Jewish people themselves.
The discrepancies between Paul and Acts get worse.
Last edited:
joelr
Well-Known Member
You cannot combine the Passion in Mark and Luke because the author is saying two completely different things. To add Luke to Mark destroys his story and build up to when Jesus quotes Psalms. He clearly has a different attitude and emotional state in both. combining them creates a new gospel which alters the story either way. Actually it destroys the narrative 100%.
Jesus' Death in Mark
In Mark’s version of the story (Mark 15:16—39), Jesus is condemned
to death by Pontius Pilate, mocked and beaten by the Roman sol¬
diers, and taken off to be crucified. Simon of Cyrene carries his cross.
Jesus says nothing the entire time. The soldiers crucify Jesus, and
he still says nothing. Both of the robbers being crucified with him
mock him. Those passing by mock him. The Jewish leaders mock
him. Jesus is silent until the very end, when he utters the wretched
cry, “Eloi, Eloi, lama sabachthani,” which Mark translates from the
Aramaic for his readers as, “My God, my God, why have you for¬
saken me?” Someone gives Jesus a sponge with sour wine to drink.
He breathes his last and dies. Immediately two things happen: the
curtain in the Temple is ripped in half, and the centurion looking on
acknowledges, “Truly this man was the Son of God.”
This is a powerful and moving scene, filled with emotion and
pathos. Jesus is silent the entire time, as if in shock, until his cry at
the end, echoing Psalm 22.1 take his question to God to be a genuine
one. He genuinely wants to know why God has left him like this. A
very popular interpretation of the passage is that since Jesus quotes
Psalm 22:1, he is actually thinking of the ending of the Psalm,
where God intervenes and vindicates the suffering psalmist. I think
this is reading way too much into the passage and robs the “cry of
dereliction,” as it is called, of all its power. The point is that Jesus has
been rejected by everyone: betrayed by one of his own, denied three
times by his closest follower, abandoned by all his disciples, rejected
by the Jewish leaders, condemned by the Roman authorities, mocked
by the priests, the passersby, and even by the two others being cruci¬
fied with him. At the end he even feels forsaken by God Himself.
Jesus is absolutely in the depths of despair and heart-wrenching
anguish, and that’s how he dies. Mark is trying to say something by
this portrayal. He doesn’t want his readers to take solace in the fact
that God was really there providing Jesus with physical comfort. He
dies in agony, unsure of the reason he must die.
But the reader knows the reason. Right after Jesus dies the cur¬
tain rips in half and the centurion makes his confession. The cur¬
tain ripping in half shows that with the death of Jesus, God is made
available to his people directly and not through the Jewish priests’
sacrifices in the Temple. Jesus’ death has brought an atonement (see
Mark 10:45). And someone realizes it right off the bat: not Jesus’
closest followers or the Jewish onlookers but the pagan soldier who
has just crucified him. Jesus’ death brings salvation, and it is gentiles
who are going to recognize it. This is not a disinterested account of
what “really” happened when Jesus died. It is theology put in the
form of a narrative.
Historical scholars have long thought that Mark is not only ex¬
plaining the significance of Jesus’ death in this account but also
quite possibly writing with a particular audience in mind, an audi¬
ence of later followers of Jesus who also have experienced persecu¬
tion and suffering at the hands of authorities who are opposed to
God. Like Jesus, his followers may not know why they are experienc¬
ing such pain and misery. But Mark tells these Christians they can
rest assured: even though they may not see why they are suffering,
God knows, and God is working behind the scenes to make suffering
redemptive. God’s purposes are worked precisely through suffering,
not by avoiding it, even when those purposes are not obvious at the
moment. Mark’s version of the death of Jesus thus provides a model
for understanding the persecution of the Christians.