Resurrection of Christ: Literal fact or spiritual reality?

[omega2xx]

You've read the gospels probably a hundred times. Are you looking for contradictions when you read them? Probably not. But what if you did.

Right, I do not read looking for contradiction. As a new Christian I usually found dome that appeared to be a contradiction. More study has cleared them all up so far. Most, probably all skeptics when they think they have found a contradiction stop and says, "see I am right." Nothing is eve cleared up that way.

What are the difference in the stories?<<

The only differences is that some gospels contain stories another gospel might not include. That is not a contradiction. Each gospel has a general them that presents Jesus in a different way. Matthew present Him as a king; Mark as a servant; Luke as a man and John as God. The different stories highlight the major them of the gospel.
For example Mark is the only gospel that includes Jesus saying "I came not to be served, but to serve." Phil 2:7 reinforces this by telling us that When Jesus came to earth, He came as a bond-servant.

What is the same?<<

God loves us. Jesus died for us to show God's love is the overriding them of all the Bible. It is hard to find sometimes, but it is there.

Why are there differences? Who is the only person mentioned in all four accounts? Mary. Did anyone ask her, "Hey, what happened?" If they did, and reported the story different, then are they adding or omitting information? Whatever the story was. In one wasn't there an angel or two. In one didn't they woman leave. In another didn't Mary leave and come back with Peter and John and then see saw Jesus? Come on, omitting information is how you're going to explain it?

The information is included. Why is it necessary to include everything in every gospel? Omitting information can't contradict anything.

On the "symbolic" thing, I don't know. That's what the Baha'i Faith says. Are they wrong? Do you believe Jesus rose physically from the dead? If you do then you disagree with the Baha'is... who claim their founder is the return of Christ, in a spiritual, symbolic way. Are they wrong on that too?

IMO any religion that has a non-Biblical view is a false religion. Any religion whose writing contradict the Bible is a false religion. From what I know about Baha'i it has some very good teachings. It has a very moral base, that is good but most religions have some good teachings in them. Most, probably all of Baha'i moral teaching can also be found in the Bible in some form. I highly respect Baha'i, but not enough to join them.

 

[Muffled]

It's been done many times, Christians just make absurd excuses for why a clear and present contradiction isn't really a contradiction, even though it appears in black and white.

I believe proper reasoning is never absurd so I have to believe that you don't believe in proper reasoning and prefer your fantasies.
Fiction appears in black and white,

 

[Muffled]

So, you believe in reincarnation? Doesn't that contradict what is claimed in the Bible/

I believe it does not but don't expect it to be the same as other religions view of it.

 

[Muffled]

Wouldn't your method of "study" be doing the same thing you are complaining about from the other side? By that I mean, you would be accepting the Bible as true/accurate and, with that in mind, try to reconcile any "contradictions"?

Wouldn't the best way to "study" it be to neither accept or reject the book as being true or false and see whether it seems plausible?

I believe anyone who has read the entire Bible and understands it, recognizes that God is consistent. I believe from debating long enough that those who don't like the Bible go out of their way to find flaws in it.

 

[omega2xx]

It's been done many times, Christians just make absurd excuses for why a clear and present contradiction isn't really a contradiction, even though it appears in black and white.

Talk is cheap----post the contradiction.

 

[CG Didymus]

Talk is cheap----post the contradiction.

Speaking of talk is cheap... Don't forget the OP. The Baha'i Faith proclaims their prophet is the return of Christ, and that Jesus only rose symbolically. I've said several times to them that if they are correct, then, from the beginning, Christianity has been teaching something false and has had a false hope of resurrection. But, if the NT tells the story correctly, and Jesus did rise physically from the dead, then the Baha'i Faith is wrong and a false religion.

So this OP is extremely important. We should either all believe and follow the Baha'i Faith, or follow Jesus. I gotta feeling which one you'll choose, but how about the uninformed that have never read the Bible for themselves? What do you tell them? Most of them are so turned off by Christianity that they won't even read the Bible for themselves. You tell them it's symbolic and they'll say, "Well yeah, obviously. Nobody rises from the dead."

But then we have many of the Baha'is that have read the gospel accounts of the resurrection and ascension and still think it's symbolic. What do you tell them?

 

[Cephus]

Speaking of talk is cheap... Don't forget the OP. The Baha'i Faith proclaims their prophet is the return of Christ, and that Jesus only rose symbolically. I've said several times to them that if they are correct, then, from the beginning, Christianity has been teaching something false and has had a false hope of resurrection. But, if the NT tells the story correctly, and Jesus did rise physically from the dead, then the Baha'i Faith is wrong and a false religion.

So this OP is extremely important. We should either all believe and follow the Baha'i Faith, or follow Jesus. I gotta feeling which one you'll choose, but how about the uninformed that have never read the Bible for themselves? What do you tell them? Most of them are so turned off by Christianity that they won't even read the Bible for themselves. You tell them it's symbolic and they'll say, "Well yeah, obviously. Nobody rises from the dead."

But then we have many of the Baha'is that have read the gospel accounts of the resurrection and ascension and still think it's symbolic. What do you tell them?

That's exactly why talking about contradictions is pointless, other than not hijacking the thread. People are going to believe what they are going to believe, regardless of the evidence. People are emotionally attached to what they believe, to the point that if something comes up that disagrees with their beliefs, they will simply reject the new information because it makes them emotionally uncomfortable.

Besides, there is another option besides following Baha'i or following Jesus. It's following neither, because neither one make the slightest bit of sense.

 

[omega2xx]

Speaking of talk is cheap... Don't forget the OP. The Baha'i Faith proclaims their prophet is the return of Christ, and that Jesus only rose symbolically. I've said several times to them that if they are correct, then, from the beginning, Christianity has been teaching something false and has had a false hope of resurrection. But, if the NT tells the story correctly, and Jesus did rise physically from the dead, then the Baha'i Faith is wrong and a false religion.

You are right. Everyone get s to pick one and hope they picked the right one.

So this OP is extremely important.

Not to me. I made my choice 40+ years a go and I see no reason to switch.

We should either all believe and follow the Baha'i Faith, or follow Jesus. I gotta feeling which one you'll choose, but how about the uninformed that have never read the Bible for themselves? What do you tell them?

If you sincerely want to know. Pray to God to show you. Then get a Bible and ask God to help you understand it. Then start reading. That all I did and now I feel content that I made the right choice.

Most of them are so turned off by Christianity that they won't even read the Bible for themselves. You tell them it's symbolic and they'll say, "Well yeah, obviously. Nobody rises from the dead."

It is not my responsibility to convince them. My responsibility is to tell them what I believe and why I believce it. Only God can convert someone.

[/QUOTE]But then we have many of the Baha'is that have read the gospel accounts of the resurrection and ascension and still think it's symbolic. What do you tell them?[/QUOTE]

I ask them if an omnipotent God could cause someone to rise from the dead. The God of Christianity and Judaism is omnipotent, is any of yours?

If I get a chance, I point out where the writings of Baha'i contradicts the Bible and tell them that to use 2 sets of religions that have contradictions between them is illogical,

 

[CG Didymus]

That's exactly why talking about contradictions is pointless, other than not hijacking the thread. People are going to believe what they are going to believe, regardless of the evidence. People are emotionally attached to what they believe, to the point that if something comes up that disagrees with their beliefs, they will simply reject the new information because it makes them emotionally uncomfortable.

Besides, there is another option besides following Baha'i or following Jesus. It's following neither, because neither one make the slightest bit of sense.

I think the contradictions in the resurrection story are worth discussing here. For the Christians they have to find a way to harmonize the gospels. Omega2xx says that they don't contradict but each writer merely omitted things.

For the Baha'is, they have to show how a something that is being reported as an actual event is somehow to be taken as a symbolic story.

You are definitely right. Neither of them might be worth following. But then why are they here? If not from a supreme God, why would people make up this stuff?

 

[CG Didymus]

...Omitting information cannot be a contradiction. The resurrection is mentioned in all 4 gospels and several of the epistles...

I read the four accounts of the resurrection story and I still think there are contradictions. In Matthew: Mary Magdalene and the other Mary go to the tomb. An earthquake, apparently caused by an angel, moves the stone. One angel. The guards shook with fear and were like dead men. The two women leave and report that Jesus has risen to the disciples.

Mark: Mary, Mary, the mother of James and Salome come to the tomb. The stone was already moved. They went in and saw a young man, one young man. He tells them Jesus has risen and to go tell the disciples. But they tell no one. Now the long version of Mark, not there in the oldest manuscripts, says that Jesus appears to Mary and she does tell the others. Where'd this verse and the rest of chapter 16 come from?

Now Luke, who says that he is compiling an account just as they've been handed down from eyewitnesses. He says he investigated carefully, so I'd imagine what he says is the real story. He says Mary Magdalene, Joanna, the other Mary and some other women also. Where'd they all come from? They find the stone rolled away, enter the tomb and find two men. They leave and report to the disciples. Now verse 24:12 is omitted in some of the ancient manuscripts. How is that possible? But it says that Peter, only Peter, went to the tomb, saw it was empty and went home.

Now John, the only one the was even close to being an eyewitness himself. All the others were from second hand sources. John says that Mary, only Mary is mentioned, why would John omit the other woman? She saw the stone rolled away, no earthquake, not one young man, not two, nobody. She runs back and tell Peter. Peter and the "other" disciple, I presume John, runs to the tomb. They go in and see no body, just the linen wrappings. They leave. Mary then sees two angels. She turns and sees Jesus.

I don't care. It doesn't have to be the inerrant, infallible Word of God to me. It was men reporting the miracle of Jesus' resurrection... as if it really happened. That is the important and consistent thing here, Jesus was dead and now, somehow, God raised him up and it's the same Jesus, not a ghost, that keeps appearing.

How does all this fit into the Baha'i interpretation that the disciples were feeling down. And then, after three days remembered what Jesus had taught them, and they started spreading the Word about love. And thus, since they were the symbolic body of Christ, they resurrected themselves from being dead spiritually to being alive... or something to that effect?

So regardless of contradictions or "omissions" in the gospels, the greatest contradiction is how Christians interpret the resurrection and how Baha'is are told, by someone who for Baha'is is considered infallible, on how it really happened... that it didn't happen. The problem for me is that their interpretation doesn't fit with the rest of the gospel story that continues after the resurrection... Jesus keeps appearing. How do they explain away that? As visions? Jesus says, "touch me and see that I'm flesh and bone"? And that is a vision? I don't think so. So don't fret to much over your little contradictions. They've got a lot of explaining to do.

 

[Cephus]

I think the contradictions in the resurrection story are worth discussing here. For the Christians they have to find a way to harmonize the gospels. Omega2xx says that they don't contradict but each writer merely omitted things.

For the Baha'is, they have to show how a something that is being reported as an actual event is somehow to be taken as a symbolic story.

You are definitely right. Neither of them might be worth following. But then why are they here? If not from a supreme God, why would people make up this stuff?

No, they don't have to "harmonize" anything, they have to demonstrate why multiple supposed eyewitnesses got very important details of the exact same supposed account wrong. They cannot do so. They can only make excuses.

And people make stuff up all the time. When people are afraid, they invent reasons not to be. This is very common. None of it is demonstrably true.

 

[omega2xx]

I think the contradictions in the resurrection story are worth discussing here. For the Christians they have to find a way to harmonize the gospels. Omega2xx says that they don't contradict but each writer merely omitted things.

An omission can't be a contradiction.

For the Baha'is, they have to show how a something that is being reported as an actual event is somehow to be taken as a symbolic story.

In the Bible an actual event can also be symbolic or figurative. It is called and allegory---Gal 4:23-31.

 

[omega2xx]

I read the four accounts of the resurrection story and I still think there are contradictions. In Matthew: Mary Magdalene and the other Mary go to the tomb. An earthquake, apparently caused by an angel, moves the stone. One angel. The guards shook with fear and were like dead men. The two women leave and report that Jesus has risen to the disciples.

Mark: Mary, Mary, the mother of James and Salome come to the tomb. The stone was already moved. They went in and saw a young man, one young man. He tells them Jesus has risen and to go tell the disciples. But they tell no one. Now the long version of Mark, not there in the oldest manuscripts, says that Jesus appears to Mary and she does tell the others. Where'd this verse and the rest of chapter 16 come from?

Now Luke, who says that he is compiling an account just as they've been handed down from eyewitnesses. He says he investigated carefully, so I'd imagine what he says is the real story. He says Mary Magdalene, Joanna, the other Mary and some other women also. Where'd they all come from? They find the stone rolled away, enter the tomb and find two men. They leave and report to the disciples. Now verse 24:12 is omitted in some of the ancient manuscripts. How is that possible? But it says that Peter, only Peter, went to the tomb, saw it was empty and went home.

Now John, the only one the was even close to being an eyewitness himself. All the others were from second hand sources. John says that Mary, only Mary is mentioned, why would John omit the other woman? She saw the stone rolled away, no earthquake, not one young man, not two, nobody. She runs back and tell Peter. Peter and the "other" disciple, I presume John, runs to the tomb. They go in and see no body, just the linen wrappings. They leave. Mary then sees two angels. She turns and sees Jesus.

All of the things you mention are not nee and they can be explained, but it takes more time than I care to use since you will not believe what I say anyhow.

I don't care. It doesn't have to be the inerrant, infallible Word of God to me. It was men reporting the miracle of Jesus' resurrection... as if it really happened. That is the important and consistent thing here, Jesus was dead and now, somehow, God raised him up and it's the same Jesus, not a ghost, that keeps appearing.

That is the only bottom line anyone needs.

 

[BilliardsBall]

I don't think it has expired. I don't think it is fulfilled, yet.

God seems to indicate that when Israel will be reunited, the israelis will be His people, again.

My question is: can you be His people if you do not believe for a second that Jesus was His son?

Ciao

- viole

Israel is God's Chosen People in BOTH testaments and even all Israel will be saved - Romans 11:26.

 

[BilliardsBall]

I did, and I still can't see anything about "multiply by seven" or "seven times". It just seems like a reach to make something that isn't an accurate prediction seem accurate. Just a staunch case of confirmation bias.

What if someone said, "It's confirmation bias, but not staunchly so, since the math calculated EXACTLY to May 15, 1948!"?

Isn't that a little too coincidental for your taste?

 

[Kilgore Trout]

The resurrection of Christ is a historical fact. I know this to be the case because I am unable to distinguish what I want to be true from what is actually true. However, this causes me no cognitive dissonance, so it works for me. Since it works for me, and I have what amounts to a very limited theory-of-mind and an unchecked ego, it should also work for you.

 

[leibowde84]

What if someone said, "It's confirmation bias, but not staunchly so, since the math calculated EXACTLY to May 15, 1948!"?

Isn't that a little too coincidental for your taste?

No, because the math doesn't add up to that date. It only does when certain assumptions are made, and those assumptions are pretty significant.

 

[viole]

Israel is God's Chosen People in BOTH testaments and even all Israel will be saved - Romans 11:26.

Ergo, you do not necessarily need to accept Jesus as Lord and Saviour in order to be saved.

The right passport might make the above mentioned requirement redundant.

Right?

Ciao

- viole

 

[BilliardsBall]

No, because the math doesn't add up to that date. It only does when certain assumptions are made, and those assumptions are pretty significant.

Let me understand:

1. I said some versions say seven times over and some say seven times. (One of the issues is you are seeking a multiplication word nonexistent in ancient Hebrew to my knowledge... there are words for "divide" meaning separate, but the Bible isn't a math text per se.)

2. If you multiply seven times the length of the diaspora, which inception date is verifiable in history outside the Bible via archaeology, you get May 15, 1948, which is the EXACT date and 12:01 AM when Israel again became a Jewish nation.

3. No one knew that putting those prophecies together yielding May 15, 1948 until AFTER the UN declaration and ratification.

4. The Bible further says God will show His power and foreknowledge by making Israel a Jewish nation in one day, TWICE. (1: The exodus from Egypt with wealth and empowerment. 2. The May 1948 reformation where it was named a nation at 12:01 AM.)

Additionally, the Bible says this new, reformed Jewish nation will appear and be made in the midst of its enemies. ALSO on May 15, six Arab nations opened a war against the new nation. Muslim nations neighbor Israel in Europe, Asia and Africa. (You may have wondered how these mostly European Jews fleeing the Holocaust suddenly had enemies when they opened a peaceful nation. There are reasons including fulfilled prophecy--like Abraham's children being in perpetual war. That has CERTAINLY been proven true SINCE 1948. You are trifling with modern prophecy fulfillment, not ancient unverified news.)

Additionally beyond that, you can do a Google search and find dozens of other prophecies made over modern Israel, all fulfilled since 1948, some of them tricky to fulfill and specific (like fruitful Israel will become a desert and then bloom richly - and the Romans plowed Jerusalem with salt and wrecked the place, and then modern Jewry replanted enough trees in Israel to change the water table of the entire nation so that Israeli fruit and flowers are coveted exports worldwide!).

I want to be VERY clear with you. You, regardless of who else reads this post. I don't care. You have identified yourself to me as an open-minded Christian. If you haven't trusted Christ, my belief system is that you or anyone else is risking eternal perdition.

I recommend that you read this post again, slowly and carefully. You are looking for words in the Hebrew that don't exist. Unfortunately for you--or fortunately, depending on perspective, the odds of Israel being made a desert and then bloom again and a Jewish nation being rebirthed in a day in the midst of its enemies on one exact date thousands of years after the prophecies are made is quite astronomical. AND THERE ARE DOZENS OF OTHER PROPHECIES.

You are playing with fire. PLEASE, please read this post as carefully as you know how--and then say a prayer.

Thanks.

 

[leibowde84]

Let me understand:

1. I said some versions say seven times over and some say seven times. (One of the issues is you are seeking a multiplication word nonexistent in ancient Hebrew to my knowledge... there are words for "divide" meaning separate, but the Bible isn't a math text per se.)

2. If you multiply seven times the length of the diaspora, which inception date is verifiable in history outside the Bible via archaeology, you get May 15, 1948, which is the EXACT date and 12:01 AM when Israel again became a Jewish nation.

3. No one knew that putting those prophecies together yielding May 15, 1948 until AFTER the UN declaration and ratification.

4. The Bible further says God will show His power and foreknowledge by making Israel a Jewish nation in one day, TWICE. (1: The exodus from Egypt with wealth and empowerment. 2. The May 1948 reformation where it was named a nation at 12:01 AM.)

Additionally, the Bible says this new, reformed Jewish nation will appear and be made in the midst of its enemies. ALSO on May 15, six Arab nations opened a war against the new nation. Muslim nations neighbor Israel in Europe, Asia and Africa. (You may have wondered how these mostly European Jews fleeing the Holocaust suddenly had enemies when they opened a peaceful nation. There are reasons including fulfilled prophecy--like Abraham's children being in perpetual war. That has CERTAINLY been proven true SINCE 1948. You are trifling with modern prophecy fulfillment, not ancient unverified news.)

Additionally beyond that, you can do a Google search and find dozens of other prophecies made over modern Israel, all fulfilled since 1948, some of them tricky to fulfill and specific (like fruitful Israel will become a desert and then bloom richly - and the Romans plowed Jerusalem with salt and wrecked the place, and then modern Jewry replanted enough trees in Israel to change the water table of the entire nation so that Israeli fruit and flowers are coveted exports worldwide!).

I want to be VERY clear with you. You, regardless of who else reads this post. I don't care. You have identified yourself to me as an open-minded Christian. If you haven't trusted Christ, my belief system is that you or anyone else is risking eternal perdition.

I recommend that you read this post again, slowly and carefully. You are looking for words in the Hebrew that don't exist. Unfortunately for you--or fortunately, depending on perspective, the odds of Israel being made a desert and then bloom again and a Jewish nation being rebirthed in a day in the midst of its enemies on one exact date thousands of years after the prophecies are made is quite astronomical. AND THERE ARE DOZENS OF OTHER PROPHECIES.

You are playing with fire. PLEASE, please read this post as carefully as you know how--and then say a prayer.

Thanks.

My belief is that God does not want me to take anything on blind faith. It is morally dangerous to do so. Everything should be questioned. Everything should be investigated. And, nothing should be taken for granted.