A difficult question for bible inerrancy? Why no other witnesses to dead men walking(Matt 27:53)?

Question

Christians!
4thX question and have NOT had the question answered seriously or convincingly yet. Where are bible scholars? Please make your case.

Did they all become atheists?



At Matt 27:52-54 (NEB) or Matt 27:52-53(KJV) A bible states" and many of God's saints were raised from their sleep,and coming out of their graves after the resurrection, they entered the Holy City, where many saw them."

So where is their testimony? Where are their stories? Why do not the other synoptic gospels record this amazing miracle? Josephus does not record this extraordinary event.

Did they return to their families? Why did they not join up with the other apostles and proclaim their resurrections to the world?
Why is there no record of this miracle anywhere else in the documents of the time?

Still no REAL credible answers yet!

This is a huge event--if it happened, yet not more than the single account!

Obfuscation so far....

Rat dog and Monique. Nice try but you are stepping deep into the BS but Siyanda gives the silliest so far. Siyanda, how do you know that all the books in the world could not contain jesus acts on earth? Are saying that there are words jesus that we do not know?

Answer 1

A difficult question, No it is not.

The text at Matthew 27:52, 53 concerning “the memorial tombs [that] were opened” as the result of an earthquake occurring at the time of Jesus’ death has caused considerable discussion, some holding that a resurrection occurred. However, a comparison with the texts concerning the resurrection makes clear that these verses do not describe a resurrection but merely a throwing of bodies out of their tombs, similar to incidents that have taken place in more recent times, as in Ecuador in 1949 and again in Bogotá, Colombia, in 1962, when 200 corpses in the cemetery were thrown out of their tombs by a violent earth tremor.

Epiphanius and other early Church Fathers taught that the holy ones literally came to life and went with the resurrected Jesus to heaven. Augustine, Theophylactus, and Zigabenus believed that these dead ones received a temporary resurrection but later returned to their tombs.

Matthew did not say they were raised up. He said their bodies, or corpses, were. Second, he did not say these bodies came to life. He said they were raised up, and the Greek verb e·gei′ro, meaning to “raise up,” does not always refer to a resurrection. It can, among other things, also mean to “lift out” from a pit or to “get up” from the ground. (Matthew 12:11; 17:7; Luke 1:69) The upheaval at Jesus’ death opened tombs, tossing lifeless bodies into the open. Such occurrences during earthquakes were reported in the second century C.E. by Greek writer Aelius Aristides and more recently, in 1962, in Colombia.

The corpses raised up at Jesus’ death could not have come to life in the way Epiphanius thought, for on the third day thereafter, Jesus became “the firstborn from the dead.” (Colossians 1:18)

Most Bible commentators have difficulty explaining verse 53, although several of them suggest that verse 52 describes the opening of tombs by the earthquake and the exposing of newly buried corpses. For example, German scholar Theobald Daechsel gives the following translation: “And tombs opened up, and many corpses of saints laying at rest were lifted up.”

Who were those that “entered into the holy city” a considerable time later, namely after Jesus had been resurrected? As seen above, the exposed bodies remained lifeless, so Matthew must refer to persons who visited the tombs and brought news of the event into Jerusalem.

Answer 2

Notice the scripture said ,and the earth quacked and the rock masses were split. Like back then it is fairly common for quakes to un-earth objects at that time it happened to be bodies that had been laid to rest . This happened in Columbia in 1962 200 bodies were thrown out of theior tombs .51 And, look! the curtain of the sanctuary was rent in two, from top to bottom, and the earth quaked, and the rock-masses were split. 52 And the memorial tombs were opened and many bodies of the holy ones that had fallen asleep were raised up, 53 (and persons, coming out from among the memorial tombs after his being raised up, entered into the holy city,) and they became visible to many people. 54 But the army officer and those with him watching over Jesus, when they saw the earthquake and the things happening, grew very much afraid, saying: “Certainly this was God’s Son.”

So as some might say it was a resurrection , the context and other evidence does not support this thought

regards
shakespeare

Answer 3

If all the things that Jesus did were all recorded, I suppose that the whole world would not be able to contain the books that would be written.

If all those people who rose from their graves were to say something concerning their resurrection - what would it be? Even Lazarus, who was raised from the dead after having been in the grave four days, didn't say anything. Yet those who were present did not doubt that Lazarus was raised from the dead. So, miracles are not necessarily a message - but are for the people of that period to be convinced that the message concerning Jesus Christ is true. Miracles simply bear witness that Jesus is who the Bible claims he is.

One might not believe the message preached, but when one sees the miracles accompanying the message - one is sure forced to believe, or rather one believes against ones' will.

Also, the fact that this event of the dead raied is not repeated in other gospel does not suggest it never happened. There many other things found in other gospel and absent in others. The gospel writers were not necessarily trying to copy each others' story. They were ministering to different people and different cultures, that's why the telling of events is slightly different. But even then, they are all common in the main issue - which is the key in the whole writing of the Bible. This is the identity of Jesus Christ. In all four gospel, the reader is never left questioning whether the writer presents Christ as the Son of God and the Savior. It is all clear in all four gospels.

And, yes - the Bible is inerrant in all its contents.

Answer 4

This is actually quite a few questions. While no one can be sure the exact answer to these questions (we didn't live then did we?) That is not necassary. What is important is if plausible answers can be thought of then likewise we can assume their is a reason for these things as well. Since none of us have a time machine, this is the best you can do.

#1- "So where is their testimony? Where are their stories? Why do not the other synoptic gospels record this amazing miracle?" -

This same question can be put to any number of Biblical (or non-Biblical) events. Just take your pick. Ever wondered why if there was thousands of witnesses of Christ's miracles, there would only be Matthew, Mark, Luke and John given as biographers of his mission? Surely there was more. But in each Gospel there are certain events that are unique to that Gospel. It could be that the Lord wanted each of the four writers to be blessed with certain unique events in their particular gospel. Or perhaps at one time there was more than one witness but it was taken out. Many many things have been changed from the original text, and many things are not translated correctly. Such is life. Since no one has the original aramaic/hebrew texts we will never know whether whether this even was recorded more then once or not.

2# - "Josephus does not record this extraordinary event."

Josephus was a Mosiac law living Jew and did not believe in Christ as being the Messiah. Like all of us, he saw the world through his own biased point of view. So unless he saw them himself, it is very unlikely he would've given any credence to the eye-witness accounts of the believers. And the Bible doesn't say specifically whom the resurrected people visited. But I highly doubt they went to everyone and made themselves known. That would destroy the whole point of having to have faith in God. That would be knowledge. Knowledge comes after Faith, not before. Yes God could've sent all those resurrected people to come and convert everyone. In fact, God Himself could come down and do an even better job, unfortunately that would destroy the need for faith, and thus destroy His own plan. Not a good idea.

#3- "Did they return to their families?"

Probably some of them got to visit their families briefly.
But texts from that time period are hard to find. Especially pro-Christian texts. Remember 300 years was spent trying to destroy everything even remotely related to Christiananity before Constintine came around and legalized it. It's unlikely even if texts did survive, that they would not be hidden very well, perhaps even gone forever.


#4- "Why did they not join up with the other apostles and proclaim their resurrections to the world?"

As I said that would destroy the need for having faith. Resurrected beings are not the same as mortals. They can do things that other mortals cannot, and they cannot get sick, or die.
It would be too much to give to people, it would be making it far to easy for people to believe. Besides these people had earned a right to rest with their Savior. The Lord provided all the proof He thought necassary in the miracles and doctrines provided by His mortal apostles.

#5- Why is there no record of this miracle anywhere else in the documents of the time?

There's no record of alot of things from that time. And remember
history is written by the winners. It is very very likely that anything having to do with Christianity was destroyed out of hand, much likely Hitler burned books that offended him. Perhaps something exists like more Dead Sea scroll type articles that are just waiting for someone to find them.

Answer 5

You are correct. There is no testimony and stories of the people who were raised from the dead. Because just them raising from the dead is story enough. If that is the case then where is the testimony of Lazurus? None of the Gospels record his personal testamony after this exciting event. Because it isn't as important as the Person who caused them to raise from the dead. The true story is that Jesus Christ came back from the dead and you do have His story written by 4 different authors. 2 of them eyewitnesses. In a court of law that is all you need to convict some one. Why not focus on the fact that Jesus is the main character in the gospels?
Should this stop you from believing? It shouldn't but you have free will to accept it or reject it. Its your choice. Why are you worried about people who rose from the dead and you have many eyewitnesses who saw the Risen Christ? Even Josephus confirms this story. Why focus on people who we don't know and don't really care about? The point of the Gospels is Jesus Christ. Not the minor characters. If they were the focus, what happened to the woman at the well after she met Jesus? What about the blind man who was made to see where is His book? We could go on and on. But the point is focus on the main character of the story, Jesus.

Answer 6

Context = After Jesus' death.

Here are the verses surrounding it.

50And when Jesus had cried out again in a loud voice, he gave up his spirit.

51At that moment the curtain of the temple was torn in two from top to bottom. The earth shook and the rocks split. 52The tombs broke open and the bodies of many holy people who had died were raised to life. 53They came out of the tombs, and after Jesus' resurrection they went into the holy city and appeared to many people.

54When the centurion and those with him who were guarding Jesus saw the earthquake and all that had happened, they were terrified, and exclaimed, "Surely he was the Son[e] of God!"

55Many women were there, watching from a distance. They had followed Jesus from Galilee to care for his needs. 56Among them were Mary Magdalene, Mary the mother of James and Joses, and the mother of Zebedee's sons.


The only thing I have to say: Maybe some of the other authors of the Gospels did not hear about it. There are namy other things in the Bible that do not show up in many places, and I don't hear you questioning them.

Josephus is not an accepted author of an accepted book of the Bible.

I do not have a "solid" answer, but I think it's important to look at the context of a verse and not just pulling on verse out.

Answer 7

Couple notes. 1, because its only recorded once does not make it a difficult question for inerrancy. If proof to the opposite existed then a problem may exist but because you lack proof that this event did not take place the problem lies with you, not the scriptures.
2. There are many other testimonies of people being raised from the dead by not only Jesus but also His Apostles and Prophets. These events are not to bring undue attention to the event itself but to testify that these men were indeed from God. There were many works of Jesus that He did that were not even written yet enough were written to clearly demonstrate that He is the Son of God. Even if many books were written and many Histories recorded it would not make any difference. Those who are of God hear His voice and they need no more.

Answer 8

Josephus was born many years after that event would have taken place. Second there is not much of any written accounts still intact from 2000 years ago. Even our oldest copies of the bible are from 250-300 A.D. I would suggest you take a history class.

Answer 9

Now who would admit to talking to Lincoln in the oval office along with oh G. Washington, and not sound like they need a small room with rubber walls and dim lights.

I can here it now from Bill C. Well Abe told me it would most likely be that if I said I did it I would be in trouble and George said what If I were to make a big deal out of the meaning of IS...

Can we then say NUT CASE!

Answer 10

I believe a Resurrection took place. Resurrected beings may have been seen by people, but they would have been accepted into Heaven.