Are the accounts of Jesus' resurrection in the Christian bible believable?

Question

Would you base even the simplest decision upon reports which were so obviously inconsistent and contradictory? Does it make sense to do so when your eternal salvation is at stake?

BETWEEN CRUCIFIXION AND RESURRECTION, WHERE DID JESUS GO?
Was he in heaven, in accordance with his promise to the crucified thief that "today you shall be with me in paradise (Lk. 23:43)? If so, how can we account for his post-resurrection statement to Mary Magdalene, "touch me not, for I have not yet ascended to the Father" (Jn. 20:17)?

RESURRECTION MORNING: THE WOMEN'S TALE(S)
(1) Who first approached the empty tomb: was it Mary Magdalene alone (Jn. 20:1) or Mary M. and "the other Mary" (Mat. 28:1) or the two Mary's and Salome (Mk. 16:1) or the two Mary's and Joanna (Lk. 24:10)?
(2) On first reaching the tomb, were they greeted by an angel sitting outside (Mat. 28:2,5), by two men standing inside (Lk. 24:4), by one man sitting inside (Mk. 16:5), or no one at all (Jn. 20:1,2)?
(3) Did Mary Magdalene receive word of the resurrection before her actual encounter with Jesus? Although Matthew (28:5), Mark (16:6), and Luke (24:5) answer in the affirmative, John disagrees, maintaining that it was Jesus himself who first revealed to the grief-stricken Mary that he was alive (Jn.20:14-17).
(4) Did the resurrected Jesus first appear to a joy-filled Mary Magdalene on the road (Mat. 28:8-9) or to a grief-stricken Mary Magdalene in the tomb (Jn. 20:14-17)?
(5) When the women were first informed that Jesus had rise

(5) When the women were first informed that Jesus had risen, did they fearfully keep the news to themselves (Mk. 16:8) or did they rush to inform the disciples (Lk. 24:9; Mat. 28:8)?

(6) Was Mary Magdalene's initial report to the disciples a hearsay account of what she had been told by two men (Lk. 24:9) or a first-person account of an actual visitation by the risen Jesus (Jn. 20:18)?

THE DISCIPLES' TALE(S)
Did Jesus first reveal himself in Galilee to the eleven remaining disciples (Mat. 26:16, Mk. 16:7,14), in Jerusalem to the eleven (Lk. 24:33,36), in Jerusalem to the ten, with Thomas absent (Jn. 20:10,19,24), or to Peter and then to the twelve (1 Cor. 15:15) -- and since Judas was already dead (Mat. 27:5), and his successor had not yet been chosen (Acts 1:26) -- who was number twelve??

rlam73, I have read that book...twice.
Please go read
Challenging the Verdict: A Cross-Examination of Lee Strobel's "The Case for Christ" by Earl Doherty

Answer 1

Anybody that actually READS the Bible will realize that those accounts cannot be fact-based. The Romans never recorded anything about Jesus' resurrection and there are NO RECORDS of any miracles he performed.
The answer is no.

"I would recommend that you read "The Case for Christ" by Lee Strobel. He discusses some of the arguments in detail."

Detail is not something many Christian like to get into.
If they got into 'detail' about the contradictions in the bible, they would have NO OTHER CHOICE than to have to re-think their whole outlook on their faith.
But no. Instead they make up nonsense, whatever they can, to continue on with the fantasy that they call 'Christianity'.

"Fear doesn't mean 'AFRAID'"
One of you crazies said this earlier and it proves my point that you will do and say anything to help keep your cocoon of lies intact. You don't want to hear anything that could change your views because of your fears. Fears that make you say silly things like, "Fear doesn't mean 'AFRAID'".
The definition of afraid is: Filled with fear

rlam73:
I recommend that YOU read, Challenging the Verdict: A Cross-Examination of Lee Strobel's "The Case for Christ"

Answer 2

1

Answer 3

The contradictions and inconsistencies in the gospels are all over the place. Its not at all surprising that they would exist in the resurrection verses as well.

Most Christians don't realize how much disparity there is between the gospels. Their churches tend to present the "gospel" story as sort of a smeared together amalgamation of all four gospels. In essence, they are really creating a whole new "fifth gospel" that is a syncretized version of the original four.

It's sort of humorous how the fundamentalists and evangelicals that have the "strongest faith" in the Bible tend to also be the people that are the most ignorant about it. But, of course, they would have to be to claim that it is the "inerrant world of God".

Answer 4

What about the Ascension? A bread eating 3D material man left the earth in a vertical direction and disappeared into the clouds (Acts). Where did he go? Did he hit warp 16, because even then he is not all that far away and still in our space. He might even be contactable. Large telescopes anyone?

To Adam's Rib. See below. How do you tell the 'man made' doctrines from the true ones? How do you know that you are the perfect reader of the perfect book?

Answer 5

I would actually say they are credible to believe. I think one thing you must point out that witnesses accounts differ even in a court of law. Most times, when people have a completely identical account of something they witnessed you would often think it was rehearsed. you have heard of the accounts of professors setting up a crime during their classes where a man comes in and steals then he leaves and the students give an account, which all seem to have inconsistencies. did the man not come into the room then? of course he did! this is not a good reason to say, well, i dont think there was even a robber.
secondly, in the book of acts i believe it is stated that 500 people saw Jesus risen from the dead. if it were not so dont you think someone would have spoken up? and the roman catholic church wasnt formed until 300 years later or more, so you cant say there was a fear factor there at all.
i think the contradictions of a witnessed story are natural, and seriously, if you were going to make a lie that was going to be perpetuated throughout hundreds of centuries, dont you would have made it so that your stories all matched up and were as believable as possible? really?
i think the endurance of the Word of God through the centuries is great proof of Christ resurrection.

Answer 6

Yes, I do believe it and yes I am staking my eternal Soul on it. To begin with, if you would do some further study, you would see that the term Paradise, was a part of Hell, Not the fire side , but a holding room for the believers in Christ to Come. Once Jesus gave up his life and died, the sin debt was paid for all believers, past, present and future. Once the Tomb was closed Jesus immediately went to Paradise and got the believers and the believers went to Heaven, Just as it had been fortold in the Prophecy. Jesus Christ is our Redeemer and Saviour.

Answer 7

As long a s there are People there will be oppossing views. Each of the Gospel writers wrote from Different perspectives. Witnesses generally see different things when things happen now, don't they? It's the Same with the Bible.

Answer 8

They certainly are believable and true. There are many arguments that show the validity of the resurrection of Jesus. It would take more time and a ton of space to highlight them all. If you're honestly interested in an answer to this question, I would recommend that you read "The Case for Christ" by Lee Strobel. He discusses some of the arguments in detail. I have no doubt that the resurrection of Jesus is a factual historical event.

Answer 9

These are all easy questions to answer if you actually READ and study the text instead of being a parrot of someone else who is just parroting someone else who was a parrot of etc. etc. etc.

The account of Jesus in Luke 23:43 Jesus is referring to Abraham's bossom (side) commonly refered to "paradise" NOT Heaven. He also referred to it in the account of Lazarus :
22 The poor man died and was carried by the angels to Abraham’s side. The rich man also died and was buried, 23 and in Hades, being in torment, he lifted up his eyes and saw Abraham far off and Lazarus at his side. 24 And he called out, ‘Father Abraham, have mercy on me, and send Lazarus to dip the end of his finger in water and cool my tongue, for I am in anguish in this flame.’ 25 But Abraham said, ‘Child, remember that you in your lifetime received your good things, and Lazarus in like manner bad things; but now he is comforted here, and you are in anguish. 26 And besides all this, between us and you a great chasm has been fixed, in order that those who would pass from here to you may not be able, and none may cross from there to us.’

So when Jesus sais "Today you will be with me in paradise" he was telling him that he would go to Abrahams bossom UNTIL Jesus took all those on Abraham's side to heaven in the Ascention. So when he said "Touch me not, it is because he hasn't gone to heaven, but the man on the cross WAS in paradise. NO CONTRADICTION.

Unless you are so simple minded, you know that in any account with multiple witnesses you can have different stories that are not contradictory, just told from a different point of view depending on what you want to highlight. First of all it didn't say that Mary Mag. went ALONE. It just states that she went to the tomb. This WOULD be a contradiction if it said that she went ALONE... but it doesn't. It is just a simple indicative statement that Mary went. This does not exclude anybody else that went with her, it is just John singled out Mary Mag. that's all. I can say I went to the football game Sunday, that doesn't mean I went alone or I was the only one at the stadium. Matthew in the same account included the other Mary, again this is NOT an exclusive statement. Again, if it said JUST Mary M. and the other Mary, then you would have a descrepancy. Again, the same situation with Mark and Luke. NONE of them are discrepancies. None of them made an emphatic exclusivatory statement that would not allow the others to be correct.

Matthew does not say there was ONLY one angel. John says there were two, and whrever there are two there is always one; it never fails! The critic has to add the word "only" to Matthew's account in order to make it contradictory. But in this case, the problem is not with what the Bible actually says, but with what the critic adds to it. Matthew probably focuses on the one who SPOKE and "said to the women, "Do not be afraid" (Matt 28:5. John referred to how many angels they SAW, "and she SAW two angels" (John 20:12)

The same goes with the rest of these "so called" contradictions....

You brought up a good point though, if your eternal salvation is at stake you would think that you would do the homework to find out that these ARE NOT contradictions at all. I thought my salvation was worth it, and found the correct answers and did not just listen to one side and not the other and found out that these don't in anyway contradict each other. Do you actually think that these arguments have not been done away with? That they have not been carefully examined? Simon Greenleaf who is the official authority on what evidence IS verified ALL of these accounts as the most evidential accounts in history. This was a man who created the law program at HARVARD. So before you start "clicking and pasting" you might want to actual study the subject matter before you pretend to think you are bringing up something substantial. And I highly suppose that no one on this board has the investigatory education than THE professor of Law at Harvard did.

Earl Doherty? Please. Bart Ehrman wanna be. He handles the historical accounts horribly. For a real critique of the "Historicity" of Jesus try Richard Bauckham's "Jesus and the Eyewitnesses"

Answer 10

the only part i think is beleivable is when he disappeared from age 12 to 30.