If Jesus ACTUALLY rose the the DEAD then why..... [read below]?

Question

Did the gospel writer 'Mark', write nothing about it? Was that like the boring part for him? Did he run out of ink?
Mark 16:9 to the end of 'Mark' are clearly later church additions, I guess they felt the whole ending of 'Mark' was well ........ a bit of an anticlimax?
Such a public crucifiction(about 2 chapters on it at least),and ummm .... no ..... you know .... RESURECTION!
was 'Mark' just over the whole thing already?
Mark , the oldest of the gospels, doesnt seem to think the virgin birth is any biggy either.
Was every girl having a virgin birth back then, that he thought it wasnt worth mentioning?
How do christians deal with this 'mess'?
How do you fixer it upper?

the rest of the bible..was not written by 'MARK"
maybe you should tink before you answer.

Christians.try and read the question again. Im asking about 'MARK' not the other writers.
It was supposed to be a Far out miracle,but MARK doesnt seem to be aware that it was. He is the oldest of the gospels.

'LooneyDude'
no mention of a woman in my bible version buddy
NIV
How do you expect to be trusted, when you lie or are easily mislead

Actually "LooneyDude' I did screw up.. I thought you were refering to the begining of Mark. so sorry about that
Now
Mark still does not mention this 40-50 days walking around doing stuff, visiting people etc. Mark has nothing more than an allegorical message. empty tomb, dont alarmed "he is going ahead of you into galilee" ..... THATS IT?
Thats his "resurection from the dead" story??
apparently Mark didnt think the so called hanging around and showing off to everyone was all that big a deal. No ascension, no out pouring of the holy spirit. The book of ACTS IS CLEARLY much much later, and has historical inaccuracies.Hardly trust worthy. So whos lying. My bet is Mark had a simple allegorical story. Mixing greek mythology with Jewish tradition.
You might wonder why the women were going to annoint a dead body. Even they didnt think of resurection. Suprise! he has risen
Mark has reversal of expectations throughout the book. check it out. Its a Story

Excellent "LooneyDude"
have a good sleep..
Im sure youll confuse me tomorow :)

Answer 1

Gosh, dude, too bad you didn't read the first 8 verses of Mark 16, where the angel tells the women that Christ had risen and was on His way to Galilee.

Oops. Your bad.

1st Edit: Are you truly that dumb? Here you go, NIV even.

(1)When the Sabbath was over, Mary Magdalene, Mary the mother of James, and Salome bought spices so that they might go to anoint Jesus' body. (2)Very early on the first day of the week, just after sunrise, they were on their way to the tomb (3)and they asked each other, "Who will roll the stone away from the entrance of the tomb?" (4)But when they looked up, they saw that the stone, which was very large, had been rolled away. (5)As they entered the tomb, they saw a young man dressed in a white robe sitting on the right side, and they were alarmed. (6)"Don't be alarmed," he said. "You are looking for Jesus the Nazarene, who was crucified. He has risen! He is not here. See the place where they laid him. (7)But go, tell his disciples and Peter, 'He is going ahead of you into Galilee. There you will see him, just as he told you.' " (8)Trembling and bewildered, the women went out and fled from the tomb. They said nothing to anyone, because they were afraid.

Oops, your bad again. No mention of women? Then what would you call them. You know a lot of guys named "Mary?" Come on, you're going to have to do better than this.

2nd Edit: Well, I didn't think you were man or woman enough to admit you screwed up. I'll keep checking though... you never know.

3rd Edit: All right, I take it back. Sometimes I'm too sharp of tongue anyhow. Please don't close out the question yet. I've got to get to sleep, but I have some comments about what you wrote. Thanks.

4th Edit: Hey, back. First, there is nothing to indicate that Mark 16:1-8 is allegorical. There are usually some clear earmarks to allegorical language in the scripture. Yet here, Mark is simply relating that the women went down to the tomb. To them, Jesus was dead and staying dead. The gospels are pretty clear that the disciples didn't truly understand that Jesus was going to rise again until after it happened, and even then Thomas needed proof. But back to Mark...

I do feel like the story sort of gets cut off, like there's a missing chapter, which may be why some later folks probably tried to tack on vs. 9-20, to finish the story and add their own agenda. There are a couple possibilities. 1) There is simply part of the manuscript missing that was never recovered when the documents were first being gathered together. 2) It really does end there, perhaps because the audience that Peter intended when retelling or dictating to Mark (one possibility, of course) already was more familiar with the rest, sort of like getting to the end of the story and saying, "And the rest is history." Even if Mark ended it there just because he was simply done, it's important to note that it says what it says, that He has risen. Whether you actually believe that it could have happened or not, there is nothing there to indicate allegory. It's a linear relation of an event, nothing more.

Answer 2

People will quote people like Josephus but they are really only quoting from other websites that do not say that some of the quotes are frauds and some of the mentions of Jesus are not clearly the Jesus of the NT. Jesus was a common name. If you want to determine if any account is accurate you will have to do a lot of research. It can be just about impossible to determine what really happened 2000 years ago. It's hard enough for police and CSI labs to determine the truth about current situatons. If JK Rowling wrote that Harry, Ron and Hermione witnessed something, it doesn't mean there were 3 witnesses. One person can say there were thousands of witnesses, but the whole thing could have been fabricated. However, with faith you can be certain that the invisible pink unicorn will bless you with her holy hooves.

Answer 3

No mess here. There is more than one Gospel account, you know.

Mark, being the disciple of Peter, is said to have written down the things that Peter taught, "accurately though not in order". It is not meant as a complete work or biography of Jesus' life, apparently just the "highlights".

No big deal. Why don't you read the rest of the Gospels? You will get a fuller picture there. Matthew noticed how Jesus was the most complete Jew, Mark did the "reader's digest version" of the Gospel, Luke noticed the little things and how Jesus reached out to the "unwanted" (lepers, women, gentiles) and INTERVIEWED HIS MOM, John really noticed the Son of God. For kicks, you might want to check out some of the deuterocanonical Gospels too. Have a ball!

Answer 4

What a fun question!

I remember hearing that, if you put the 4 Gospels in the order in which they were written, that each succeeding Gospel contains more details that support Jesus as a candidate for Messiah.

Remember that the O.T. had several attributes that would mark the Messiah, so he would be known; so, to certify the new worship of Jesus, it was necessary to show that he was, in fact, the Messiah.

P.S. The idea of the Disciples splitting up who was to write about what is laughable. Imagine, waiting 75 YEARS until it was "your turn" to write. Not only that, but imagine seeing a real resurrection...is there any force that could STOP you from mentioning it ("No, Mark, I get to write about the Resurrection. You write about something else.")!?

Answer 5

Each of the gospel writers were given to write to a specific group of people from a specific perspective. Mark was the youngest of those to follow with Jesus Christ. The fact that he doesn't mention some things, may just attest to the fact that he wasn't witness to it. It's not a mess, it's God way of letting each of see the same event and only be a witness of the part of it we see.

Perfect example: you are in the middle of a car wreck - you're version of what has taken place is going to be different that the person's version three cars back and the person's version 5 cars back - but are any of you wrong? No, you just had a different role and perspective of what was taking place.

Answer 6

Well when I get to heaven I will ask him.

Mark, represented by the winged lion, references the Prophet Isaiah when he begins his gospel: “Here begins the Gospel of Jesus Christ, the Son of God. In Isaiah the prophet it is written: ‘I send my messenger before you to prepare your way: a herald’s voice in the desert, crying, “Make ready the way of the Lord, clear Him a straight path.’” “The voice in the desert crying” reminds one of a lion’s roar, and the prophetical spirit descending to earth reminds one of a “winged message.” The lion also signified royalty, an appropriate symbol for the Son of God.

Because of this Mark thought the Royalty of Christ was what is most important. He focused on what he thought His readers were interested in and didn't feel the need to include the parts YOU feel are so neccessary probably because he wrote so soon after these events that he assumed everyone already knew those things he wanted to focus on other things. (remember Mark may be second in the bible but was written first probably only a dozen years after the resurrection)

Answer 7

Did you finish reading Mark or just end wherever you wanted to. Mark 16:6 is an angel talking with the women who came to the tomb early Sunday morning. He told them that Jesus was risen from the dead.

Answer 8

You really don't have to do a lot of textual analysis to determine people don't get born of virgins or rise form the dead. That stuff is obvious mythology to anyone not inculcated in the Christian cult, and wouldn't even matter if the gospel writers actually claimed to be eyewitnesses (which they don't, and couldn't have been).

...sorry Novagirl, the birth story is in Matthew.

Answer 9

WELL, you'd better get your bible out and re read the book of Mark. Chapter 16 :9 very clerly states the story about the ressurection.

Answer 10

IF you read the New Testament than you would see that all the Gospels have different things in them. Luke is the only one who wrote about Jesus' child hood for instance.