Featured Mark chapter 8 says Jesus would rise after three days, but Resurrection is later described as closer to a day and a half

[Scooter]

For example, maybe Christianity started with just one person, the Apostle Peter, having a vision and being emphatic about it and being enthused about it and telling a lot of people.

Peter was one of 12 that followed Jesus. In fact, it was Peter’s brother Andrew who introduced Pete to Jesus. Andrew and John were the first two to follow Jesus.

If the Gospels are not true; if Peter did concoct the whole Jesus stuff, why aren’t there contemporaneous writings that refute the claims? For instance if Jesus did not feed the 5000, why don’t we have something from someone who was there that could state it never happened? Why didn’t someone come forward who was at the tomb when Jesus raised Lazarus from the dead, and counter the claims? Why didn’t someone refute the resurrection of Jesus? Why didn’t the Pharisees exhume the dead body of Jesus and destroy all claims of His resurrection? If all these claims about Jesus are false, why didn’t someone prove them false?

 

[Multicolored Lemur]

Blasphemy of the Holy Spirit and the Unforgivable Sin

Blasphemy against the Holy Spirit is the sin of rejecting Christ. Learn more about the context and whether believers can be guilty of it.

www.focusonthefamily.com

“Before anything else, we want to assure you: If you’re worried that you might have committed the sin of “blasphemy against the Holy Spirit,” then you haven’t.

“We’re glad for the chance to explain.”

— — — — —

[ not connected, but I also wanted to show a young man deep in prayer ]

And they go on to say, “blasphemy against the Holy Spirit” is a hardening of the conscience and a stiffening of the neck.

And I've heard other sources say, you can only be guilty of this if you're already dead!

 

[Multicolored Lemur]

The Greek word translated as "after" is the word "Meta". This word is most often translated as "with" in the Bible.

Scooter might also be on to something if we look up the word in the Greek.

So, we have to do a deep dive on the ancient Greek or Aramaic. And each verse has 20% flex, maybe more?

 

[AgnosticBoy]

So, you're saying there's more than than a kernel of truth? And that's fine if you are.

Yes. But before people label me a Christian I think it should also be known that I don't accept all of the theology surrounding the resurrection. That part may as well just be a way to make Jesus into a religion the same way people made the Sun and other stars into religions and gods just because they were awestruck by them.

Now, I don't know for sure, of course. I'm just saying that people can take a small amount and run a long way.

Agreed. I think we're both on the same track with the difference being where we say that the legend/exaggeration starts in the story or how much of it there is. I just think at least the resurrection itself it legit from a historical standpoint.

 

[Scooter]

So, we have to do a deep dive on the ancient Greek or Aramaic. And each verse has 20% flex, maybe more?

Doing research in the Greek does help. This is a part of doing proper Bible study.

 

[AgnosticBoy]

Doing research in the Greek does help. This is a part of doing proper Bible study.

Agreed. When I get home I'll look up the passage with a Greek and English interlinear Bible.

 

[AgnosticBoy]

The following is from a New Testament interlinear Bible.. the English follows the Greek word for word including the Greek's word order... Decided to use it to see what magic the English translators might have worked out to make sense of the Greek...

"And He began to teach them that it is necessary for the son of man _ many things to suffer and to be rejected by the elders and the chief priests and the scribes and to be killed and after three days to rise

Source: https://biblehub.com/interlinear/mark/8-31.htm

Hmm.. doesn't shed much light. It's pretty much identical in meaning to what we find in regular English Bibles.

 

[Multicolored Lemur]

if Peter did concoct the whole Jesus stuff,

The word “concoct” implies that it's a deliberative lie. And no, usually a rumor is NOT a deliberate lie. It's instead that people tend to remember the “juicy” parts of a story, that they put together a partial story or partial facts in a way which makes sense for them, etc, etc.

As an analogy . . .

Some churches really emphasize the spiritual gift of “speaking in tongues.” They won't directly say people who do this are more spiritual than other people, but they do kind of imply that. So, a person might think there's something wrong with them, or at least missing. They watch other people. They think about what it might be like if “it happens“ to them. In a sense, they are being “primed” for the experience.

And so, when the feel the early stirrings, they may go for it.

As an outsider, I might think they're trying too hard. But they are not faking it.

 

[Scooter]

Whether it was a deliberate lie, or just juicy embellishment, why are there no contradictions to the claims from the time period? The truth is there is not a single counter to the Biblical accounts. If Jesus did not arise from the dead, then why aren't there records to refute this claim? It would be very easy to present a dead body to silence the resurrection story.

 

[Multicolored Lemur]

If Jesus did not arise from the dead, then why aren't there records to refute this claim? It would be very easy to present a dead body to silence the resurrection story.

too much time

Jesus was executed murdered by the Romans using crucifixion in 33 AD. Or, at least 33 AD is the traditional date given.

Mark is the earliest gospel written in 70 AD. Or, that's the traditional date. And the earliest versions do not call it “Mark.”

And besides, the Jesus movement started out among poor people and rural people.