12 thoughts on “HE IS RISEN!

  1. Matthew 28:1-2 “Now after the Sabbath, as the first day of the week began to dawn, Mary Magdalene and the other Mary came to see the tomb. 2 And behold, there was a great earthquake; for an angel of the Lord descended from heaven, and came and rolled back the stone from the door,[a] and sat on it.”

    Luke 24:1-4 “Now on the first day of the week, very early in the morning, they, and certain other women with them,[a] came to the tomb bringing the spices which they had prepared. 2 But they found the stone rolled away from the tomb. 3 Then they went in and did not find the body of the Lord Jesus. 4 And it happened, as they were greatly[b] perplexed about this, that behold, two men stood by them in shining garments.”

    Mark 16: 1-5 “Now when the Sabbath was past, Mary Magdalene, Mary the mother of James, and Salome bought spices, that they might come and anoint Him. 2 Very early in the morning, on the first day of the week, they came to the tomb when the sun had risen. 3 And they said among themselves, “Who will roll away the stone from the door of the tomb for us?” 4 But when they looked up, they saw that the stone had been rolled away—for it was very large. 5 And entering the tomb, they saw a young man clothed in a long white robe sitting on the right side; and they were alarmed.”

    John 20: 1-2 “Now on the first day of the week Mary Magdalene went to the tomb early, while it was still dark, and saw that the stone had been taken away from the tomb. 2 Then she ran and came to Simon Peter, and to the other disciple, whom Jesus loved, and said to them, ‘They have taken away the Lord out of the tomb, and we do not know where they have laid Him.'”


  2. Four scriptures and a vague question. What kind of thoughts are being inquired of? “Those are great scriptures. Happy Easter everybody!”. These kind thoughts? Or “Tell the story different. The Bible was written by man. Jesus never existed.” (compliments of Karl) those kind of thoughts?

    • Wondering how you address the inconsistencies? Eg do you think one was telling the truth and the rest were based on heresay, is it an ‘allegory’? Etc. Very strange that four stories which tell the same event have inconsistencies.

      • Dave,

        Those who study scripture and have bothered to learn about the many translation issues and the way things need to be understood in relation to the Hebrew culture know that there are no “inconsistencies” in the Bible.

        As for 4 people giving an account of the same event and telling it slightly differently, I’m sure the police will be happy to hear that witnesses will forever more be 100% consistent in their accounts because DAVE decreed it to be so. Unfortunately, the police will now have to “unlearn” the practice of viewing 100% agreement as a sure sign of collusion and fabrication.

        In other words, the fact that the main points are agreed to but details differ slightly is actually an indication of FACTUAL EVENTS — not fabrication. But then, we all understand you’re working from an agenda, and understanding isn’t on that page. 😉

  3. Thats strange Dave from Oz, I see consistencies here. All records state the event happening on the same exact day, at the same exact time of day. All records state Mary Magdalene being present. The Luke account is obviously referring to Mary Magdalene, as the term “certain” could only apply to three women, one of which would have been Mary Magdalene, as she is the most prominent non-family woman in the Gospel accounts. All records state that the stone was rolled away. All records state that the tomb was empty. All records state that there was a supernatural experience. What we have is four different witnesses, all giving a consistent account. You really are nitpicking minor details. In any kind of investigation, witnesses are going to have slightly different versions of a story. Why? Because they perceive events from different perspectives. Furthermore, witnesses are not going to state EVERY single detail verbatim. Everything we need to know is consistently recorded in all four accounts. But wait! it’s not that simple, I know; we’re not that stupid here. We see the ulterior motive. You seek to create an implicit dichotomy that ends up discrediting the resurrection accounts either way. Either the Resurrection accounts are inconsistent and thus false, or the accounts are all consistent, thus written all at the same time by the same author, being made up. Thanks, but no thanks. Good try though!

    Then again, this must be the reasoning standard in Oz…

    • libercrite,

      Dave also ignores that the Pharisees agreed the body was gone, which is why they told people to say it had been stolen. And we know it wasn’t stolen because the Roman guards were not put to death. This is as powerful a testimony to the truth of Christ’s resurrection as the eyewitness recounting — but it requires people to know and understand history. I’m not sure Dave cares about understanding… 😦

      • Joe,

        I fear Dave and Kommie Karl share the same reasoning defficiency. Attack the parts that you see fit to attack, attack it erroneously, ignore everything else. All bets are in that Dave pseudo-wittingly reasons that Jesus never existed, because you can’t create mass and energy with you mind; while conversely defending the Da Vinci Code account with a seemingly religious fervor.

        • libercrite,

          I’ll agree with you on this point: they do not reason well, and they apply that faulty reasoning to further their agenda — not to pursue the truth.

Talk Amongst Yourselves:

Please log in using one of these methods to post your comment:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.