christian@topaz.UUCP (01/30/87)
Recently here at U.C. San Diego, we've been attacked
by fundamentalists. First Brother Jed & family, and now a
guy named Cliffe. All this has got me thinking, and I've got
several major questions on Christianity which could use some
rational answers.
Among those beliefs crucial to Christianity few are of
greater importance than the Resurrection. Paul went so far as
to allege that the very foundation of Christianity rests upon
its occurance.
"And if Christ be not risen, then our preaching
vain and your faith is also vain."
---I Cor. 15:14
Yet why should the Resurrection itself be of such importance??
Elijah raised a child from the dead (I Kings 17:17,21-22); Samuel said
to Saul, "Why hast thou disquieted me, to bring me up?" (I Sam. 28:7,
11,15);Elisha raised the dead son of a Shunamite (2 Kings 4:32,34-35);
a dead man being lowered into a grave revived when he touched the
bones of Elisha (2 Kings 13:21); Moses and Elijah revived at the time
of the Transfiguration (Luke 9:28,30); the saints arose at the time of
Jesus' death (Matt. 27:52-53); Jairus' daughter rose from the dead
(Matt. 9:18,23-25); the widow Nain's son rose from the dead (Luke
7:11-15); and Lazarus rose from the dead (John 11:34). All of these
people ascended from death and all did so before Jesus. So why
attribute so much importance to the event? By the time Jesus rose
from the dead, this had become a rather common occurrance. Moreover,
people not only rose before Jesus, but after him as well. Peter raised
Tabitha and Paul raised Eutychus. Some Christians argue that except
for Jesus, all of the above-mentioned people eventually died again.
But Paul says that its the resurrection, per se, that matters; not
the fact that Jesus never died again.
A second major difficulty associated with the Resurrection lies
in the contradictory accounts in the four gospels of what occurred.
The following is just a sample of SOME of the major disagreements
surrounding the events connected with the resurrection.
A) At what time in the morning did the women visit the tomb?
At the rising of the sun (Mark 16:2) vs. when it was
still dark (John 20:1).
B) Who came? Mary Magdalene alone (John 20:1) vs. Mary
Magdalene and the other Mary (Matt. 28:1) vs. Mary Mag-
dalene, Mary the mother of James and Salome (Mark 16:1)
vs. Mary MMagdalene, Joanna, Mary the mother of James and
other women. (Luke 24:10)
C) Was the tomb opened or closed when they arrived?
Open (Luke 24:2) vs. cclosed (Matt. 28:1-2)
D) Whom did they see at the tomb? The angel (Matt. 28:2)
vs. a young man (Mark 16:5) vs. two men (Luke 24:4) vs>
two angels (John 20:11-12).
E) Were these men or angels inside or outside the tomb?
Outside (Matt. 28:2) vs. inside (Mark 16:5,Luke 23:3-4,
John 20:11-12).
F) Were they standing or sitting? Standing (Luke 24:4)
vs. sitting (Matt. 28:2,Mark 16:5,John 20:12).
G) Did Mary Magdalene know Jesus when he first appeared to
her? Yes she did (Matt. 28:9) vs. no she did not (John 20:14).
If the stories were consistent, one could write one long,
continuous narrative, incorporating all the four versions without fear
of divergencies. But this has never been done without adding, altering
or omitting key verses.
Apologists often submit the witnesses-at-an-auto-accident
argument, which is quite irrelevant because two diametrically opposed
and mutually exclusive versions of the same event can not be simul-
taneously true. One or the other is false. Moreover, witnesses at
auto acccidents, unlike gospel writers, are not claiming inerrancy.
And lastly, others participated in even more momentous events.
Adam was never born to begin with (Gen. 1:27); he came into the world
as a full-grown adult. Enocch (Gen. 5:22-24) and Elijah (2 Kings 2:11)
never died. The latter went straight to Heaven.
In fact, what did Jesus ever do that had not already been
accomplished? He rose from the dead, but only after others. He
perfomed miracles, but so had others. He raised people from the dead,
but so had Old Testament prophets. He healed, but so had others.
What then, did Jesus DO that was different, that had not already been
done? In blunt language, "What makes him stand out from the crowd?"
Assertions alone prove nothing. Anyone can claim to be a savior or
messiah, and throughout history, thousands have!
"Eli, lama sabachthani?"--'My God, my God, why hast Thou
fosaken me." (Matt. 27:46)
How could Jesus be the savior of all mankind when he couldn't
even save himself? These aren't the words of a man who went to the
cross willingly to die for our sins. They are the words of a man
who could think of a thousand places he'd rather be. During the
Last Supper, he also showed fear of his imminent death! This is the
savior?
Comments, anyone?
Vasu Murty
(HASA)
ln63wmp, sdcc7
UC San Diegochristian@topaz.UUCP (02/11/87)
This is a response to some of the issues raised by Vasu Murty recently. It is in addition to the letter by Charles Hedrick, which I enjoyed and highly recommend. I will attempt to refrain from extended discourse, but instead state points succinctly, considering that this group is moderated. Vasu, I enjoyed your letter and respect your questions. I believe you are truly looking for answers, and I will try to be a resource to you. I apoligize for the attacks you have suffered from Christians. I hope that this letter does not have that tone, but if it does in any way, please let me know. First, regarding the differences in the gospel accounts of the resurrection, I would just like to briefly state that they are like four stereo soundtracks, each slightly different from the others, but together giving a much greater depth and reality than a single account could have. Now, I am not such a Bible student that I can answer all of your questions here about the differences. I will give what I can, but I don't know all the answers. However, may I suggest that the points you raise are actually fairly small and tangential to the main thrust of the story? I don't mean that they are unimportant, at least for establishing the veracity of the observers, but they are not central to the main event of the resurrection. Do you understand what I am trying to say? I do not want to evade your questions, and I will try to answer them as best I can in a moment. But I want you to have a sense of proportion, of perspective, and to see that we are discussing details, not themes. A) At what time in the morning did the women visit the tomb? In both the Mark and John accounts, the tense of the Greek verb translated "came" is the historical present. The following is from the New American Standard Bible: "In some contexts the present tense seems more unexpected and unjustified to the English reader than a past tense would have been. But Greek authors frequently used the present tense for the sake of heightened vividness, thereby transporting their readers in imagination to the actual scene at the time of occurrence." Most translations will indeed translate these historical present tense verbs as past tense. But here, if one considers the picturing of the women *coming* to the tomb, then is it not possible that they began their walk to the tomb while it was still dark, and by the time they had gotten there, that the sun had just risen? Also, in the Luke account, the tense of the Greek is past tense, and the time given there is "at early dawn" (Luke 24:1). B) Who came? Well, at least everyone agrees Mary Magdalene was there! Actually, it appears to have been a group of women of those who followed Jesus (Luke 23:55) and I expect that each of the various gospel writers named only some of the women involved. Thus I would suggest taking the union of the various sets, and leaving room for possibly others as well. No gospel says that Mary the mother of James was NOT there! C) Was the tomb opened or closed when they arrived? I think that it was open. In the Matthew account, it says that at the time they arrived, an earthquake had already occurred, and that this earthquake was a consequence of an angel of the Lord coming down from Heaven and rolling away the stone. It does not specifically say that the women saw the rolling away of the stone, but that the guards did, and were terrified. (Wouldn't you be? :-) Presumably the writer of Matthew learned of this event from the guards talking about what they had seen. "And behold, a severe earthquake had occurred, for an angel of the Lord descended from heaven and came and rolled away the stone and sat upon it." (Matthew 28:2, NASB). Keep an eye out for those tenses, they can really test you! D) Whom did they see at the tomb? I believe that it was two angels, and that one spoke to the women. Angels apparently can look very much like men, and some people are said to have entertained angels unaware (Hebrews 13:2, Genesis 18:1-3). So the use of "man" or "men" should be taken to describe their appearance, not their nature. As for the number, as in question B above, it appears the Matthew and Mark accounts only mention one, but there could have been another one there that they do not write about. I would not be surprised, by the way, if these were the same angels that appear at Jesus's ascension, in Acts 1:10-11. E) Were these men or angels inside or outside the tomb? Inside, I think. The description of the angel in Matthew rolling away the stone and sitting on it I believe happened before the women arrived, and by that time, the angels had gone inside the tomb. F) Were they standing or sitting? Well, this is one I can't answer. Could it be that they were sitting when the women entered, and later stood, or vice versa? Does it really matter? Actually, I don't think the Matthew account makes the angel stand or sit necessarilly at the time the women enter, and the John account refers to a later entry of Mary Magdalene to the tomb after Peter and John had visited it. So the only reconciling need be between Mark and Luke. I told you I didn't have all the answers. G) Did Mary Magdalene know Jesus when he first appeared to her? No, not immediately, although after He greeted her and called her "Mary!" she knew Him (John 20:16). The brevity of the Matthew account probably precluded the detail about her delayed recognition of the Lord. Well, I hope that helped the discussion. Now I would like to return to the primary question, which is the distinction of Jesus's resurrection as compared with all others. As Vasu stated, the Resurrection of Jesus is of primary importance to Christians. Why, considering "by the time Jesus rose from the dead, this had become a rather common occurrance"? Well, hardly an everyday bit of news, but it had occurred several times before. The virtue of the resurrection of Jesus is shown in that it has several differences from these others: 1. Unlike the others, Jesus did not die again later. This was mentioned by Vasu, but not connected as an implication of a better resurrection. 2. Jesus when raised had his glorified, transformed body. He now had superior abilities to those of the body He had when crucified. This body was capable of passing through locked doors without opening them (John 20:19) and of rising through the air (Luke 24:51). Lest He seem too much like a spirit and not a man, let me stress that He also ate fish with His disciples after He was resurrected (Luke 24:42-43, John 21:12-15). This kind of glorified body is promised to all believers, and is described in 1 Corinthians 15:35-57. 3. The resurrection of Jesus declares Him to be indeed who He said He was, the Son of God, in a way distinct from and superior to all other men. (Romans 1:1-4) It is a declaration by God's power that the Father endorses not only the words and deeds of Jesus, but also the special quality of His Sonship. If Jesus had not pleased the Father, if Jesus had been a liar or a madman, God who honors the humble and honest would not have raised Jesus from the dead. 4. Other than the saints being raised at the time of Jesus's death and the man who touched Elisha's bones, all the other resurrections occurred because some man of God prayed that they would rise. But there was no such prayer at Jesus's resurrection. It was purely a demonstration of the Father's will. Please note that the appearance of Samuel was his spirit, without a body, and he did not continue on the face of the earth. Also, the appearances of Moses and Elijah with Jesus on the Mount of Transfiguration were not resurrections, and they went back to heaven afterwards. As for the saints who came out of the tombs at the time of the crucifixion, without pretending to know exactly what was happening let me just say that the fact that these resurrections were also not prayed for attests to the special nature of Jesus's death, that it was accompanied by such an outpouring of restored life. If you asked me for an explanation, I would say that it appears that the age-altering power of Jesus's sinless sacrifice on the Cross, breaking the power of death and sin over men, exploded in the spiritual arena and spilled over into this realm like sparks spun off from a fireball, breaking the power of death over many who had died and were buried locally. 5. Jesus's resurrection was prophesied long before; see Psalm 16:10-11 and Isaiah 53:10-12. The others were graces given by God at the time, but the resurrection of Jesus had significance that the prophets had forseen and welcomed. 6. Jesus's resurrection opens a door for us who believe in Him. As we identify ourselves with Him, by accepting Him as our Lord and Savior, we also identify ourselves with His death and resurrection (1 Corinthians 15:20-26) This is a very profound truth which I forsee may be difficult to understand, but I will try to describe it as clearly as I can. Jesus taught that all men would someday come out of the graves and be judged by God for the things that they have done in this life (John 5:28-29). So in some sense all men have a resurrection coming. But those who have trusted in Christ will not be condemned by the Father, for the sacrifice of Jesus on the Cross has already paid the punishment for their sins (John 5:24). So their resurrection is not to condemnation, but to an expanse of new life and opportunity. It is as we humble ourselves and let our pride and self-sufficiency die, as Jesus died on the Cross, that we can become child-like enough to enter the Kingdom of God, and to rise up in newness of life, just as Jesus was raised to new life. The resurrection of Jesus holds not just a declaration of God's favor upon one man, but also by implication God's favor upon all who identify themselves with that man. And just as Jesus was raised by God's power out of the grave, we also who have taken Him as our Lord are promised the same power to bring us up out of all that holds us captive, all that holds us down, both the inevitable darkness of physical death and also the personal darkness of a sick and wounded soul and body. For the resurrection of Jesus becomes our experience, as a hope of Heaven someday and also a certainty of a changed life today, with power available to mend broken bones and broken hearts, miraculously. Vasu, thank you for posing some truly valuable questions. I really enjoyed doing this bible study, and hope it is helpful to you. I realized that I had asked myself some of those questions about the various accounts of the Resurrection a while ago, but just pushed the questions away without considering them in depth. Thank you for the prompting! Peter Homeier ______ Arpanet: homeier@aerospace / o \_/ UUCP: ..!ihnp4!trwrb!aero!homeier \___)__/ \
christian@topaz.UUCP (02/15/87)
> "And if Christ be not risen, then our preaching > vain and your faith is also vain." > ---I Cor. 15:14 > > [...List of people besides Jesus who rose from the dead] > > All of these >people ascended from death and all did so before Jesus. So why >attribute so much importance to the event? Because Jesus made some pretty big claims. He claimed to be the Son of God making himself to be divine. If he were lying, he would be guilty of blasphemy. He claimed to the the Messiah or God's annointed one. If he were lying, God would surely have not raised him from the dead. Jesus promised great things for his believers after he would rise from the grave. He said that because he lived, his believers would live. He claimed that if we believed in him, we would live forever and ever through out eternity with him and his Father in his glorious kingdom where there is no pain or sorrow or weeping. Can you imagine the extreme joy of finding out that what Jesus said was true? Jesus also promised great things for his believers during their life on earth. For all those who would receive him, he would give them the power to become children of God. He will give them a new life and make them a whole new creation. He promised that he himself would come to them and dwell *within* them. He promised that a "river of life" would flow from within their inner being. Now you can see how much was depending on His resurrection. >In fact, what did Jesus ever do that had not already been accomplished? He was the only one ever to live a sinless life and thus *earn* his salvation. And because God loved those he created so much, he allowed Jesus' victory over sin to be victory for those who believe in him. Think of it, God only required that *one* man ever live without sin. Jesus earned salvation for us. John Emery __|__ ARPA: fluke!emery@uw-beaver.ARPA | My Boss was a UUCP: {uw-beaver,sun,allegra,sb6}!fluke!emery | Jewish carpenter
christian@topaz.UUCP (02/15/87)
In article <8763@topaz.RUTGERS.EDU> ln63wmp@sdcc7.UUCP (Vasu Murty) writes: All this has got me thinking, and I've got >several major questions on Christianity which could use some >rational answers. > > Among those beliefs crucial to Christianity few are of >greater importance than the Resurrection. > "And if Christ be not risen, then our preaching > vain and your faith is also vain." > ---I Cor. 15:14 > >All of these >people ascended from death and all did so before Jesus. So why >attribute so much importance to the event? Some Christians argue that except >for Jesus, all of the above-mentioned people eventually died again. First of all I realize that the organization HASA's (Heathen and Atheistic SCUM Alliance) goal is not interested in furthering the gospel of Jesus Christ but for those who have been somewhat confused by the attached submission I submit my explanation of your questions. I would like to help you understand that Jesus was the only one to be Resurrected into HEAVEN to sit at the right hand of God. All of the others that were brought back to life were just brought back to this EARTHLY LIFE. Only Elijah (2 Kings 2:11) was taken into the presence of God but he did not die an earthly death. He was "Raptured". All of the other forms of "resurrection" you mention just brought people back to life on earth only to die earthly deaths again. The Resurrection is significant also because it proves Jesus was who He said He was. If you were to dig up the graves of all of the other 'gods' their remains would still be there. Jesus has risen!!! He is ALIVE!!! > A second major difficulty associated with the Resurrection lies >in the contradictory accounts in the four gospels of what occurred. If every account of the life of Jesus was word for word exactly the same from book to book, chapter to chapter would that make the testimony more believable? I think not. The fact that the Bible has human type discriptions instead of absolute perfection give MORE credibility to the Word rather that less. Besides, it is not important who saw the angel sitting or the dawn breaking. They saw that Jesus was missing and then later were reveled to that He had risen. That is the important part of the scripture. > In fact, what did Jesus ever do that had not already been >accomplished? >In blunt language, "What makes him stand out from the crowd?" There are many many miricles that Jesus did while here on Earth that no prophet had done before. For instance where ALL of the former "resurrections" were done by someone other than the person resurrected. Jesus first fortold of his emminent Resurrection and then He with His Godly power, Resurrected Himself! He didn't need a prophet to stand or lay over Him. Jesus was the only virgin birth on Earth. "...what is conceived in her is from the Holy Spirit" (Matthew 1:20) The Old Testament is full of prophesy about Jesus coming as a Lamb and as a Lion. He came as the Lamb in the New Testament and will come as the lion at His second coming. Jesus came back and appeared to hundreds of people after His resurrection and even had a little humor when He did it when He appeared and walked with the two men on the way to Emmaus. (Luke 24:13-35) Most importantly He died for the sinners of the world who would turn to Him and repent of their sins. "He made Him who had no sin, to be sin on our behalf, so that we might have the righteousness of God in Him" (2 Corinthians 5:21) > "Eli, lama sabachthani?"--'My God, my God, why hast Thou > fosaken me." (Matt. 27:46) > > How could Jesus be the savior of all mankind when he couldn't >even save himself? These aren't the words of a man who went to the >cross willingly to die for our sins. They are the words of a man >who could think of a thousand places he'd rather be. Yes Jesus, the man, would have liked to skip the sacrifice for all of us sinners. He even asked God if it be possible. (Mark 14:36) But Jesus, the Son of God, chose to stay because He knew that this was the only way that we could be saved. The blood of bulls and goats does not take away our sins. But the blood of the Lamb took millions of sinners to the Judgement Throne with a clean slate! At the few moments prior to His death, the full load of the sins of the world fell upon Jesus. So corrupt was this sin that God had to turn His back on Jesus for those few moments and Jesus cried out to Him to not leave Him. God kept His promise to Jesus just as He will keep His promises to those who "take the free gift of the water of life." (Revelation 22:17) Jesus stayed on the cross until the end. If Jesus would have stepped down from the cross there would have been no hope for mankind. But He stayed for you and me. >This is the savior? Hallelujah!!!!! He sure is!!!! > Vasu Murty > (HASA) Bill Landsborough ----- "Greater is He that is in me than he that is in the world." 1John 4:4