OrthodoxChristianity.net
July 28, 2014, 06:45:53 AM *
Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
News: Reminder: No political discussions in the public fora.  If you do not have access to the private Politics Forum, please send a PM to Fr. George.
 
   Home   Help Calendar Contact Treasury Tags Login Register  
Pages: 1   Go Down
  Print  
Author Topic: One angel 2 angels, 2 men inside outside ! What realy happened.  (Read 606 times) Average Rating: 0
0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.
megaa
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Faith: Greek Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Greek Orthodox
Posts: 7


« on: April 07, 2012, 08:11:32 PM »

First of all sorry if this is not the right thread to post this on - if theirs a more appropriate one then i dont mind if the site boss / webmaster moves it.

Details of the resurection account differ from each account. In Mathews version of the gospel the two Marys go to visit the tomb. The see the tomb which has a angel sitting on the rock who speaks to them.

In Marks account we see three women go to the tomb. In this acocunt they notice the rock rolled away however do not notice a angel sitting on the rock and only notice a man on the right of the tomb once inside the tomb.

Lukes account states that women went to the tomb - this ticks the right box and agrees with both the above as it does not specify. Now it is only after they enter the tomb, do not see the body, they begin to wonder where the body is - it is only after this point that two men appear to them. So no mention of a angel sitting on the rock, or no vision of this person once inside but after a certain time period has elapsed in the  tomb. A litttle different from both the above.

In Johns account - Mary goes to the tomb, sees the empty tomb yet no mention of any communication with anybody about what has happened to Jesus instead she runs back to the desciples. The 3 desciples run to the tomb see it empty and leave for their homes. Mary is outside weeping and eventualy looks inside to see two angels.


To me this appears to be four different versions of the one story instead of one versionb  of a story told by 4 different people.


I do not wish to offend but my poiint here is to see what other people have to say about this.



Logged
Benjamin the Red
Recovering Calvinist
OC.net guru
*******
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Catholic
Jurisdiction: Orthodox Church in America, Diocese of Dallas and the South ||| American Carpatho-Russian Orthodox Diocese
Posts: 1,601


Have mercy on me, O God, have mercy on me.


« Reply #1 on: April 07, 2012, 09:58:24 PM »

They're remembering it differently. I'm not surprised. Luke wasn't there at all, Mark gets his info from Peter, I don't think Matthew supposedly went at all himself, and John was a young guy when it happened, and very old when his Gospel was written.

Essentially, not only do we have a different perspective, but we have second-hand accounts, and not only second-hand, but accounts being given several decades after the fact of an event that was very abnormal. There are actually a lot of psychology studies and experiments that test the ability of individuals to remember such details in similarly bewildering experiences. We aren't very good at it.

Do the account conflict? Yep. Absolutely. Can they be harmonized? Nope, because they are very different. However, the core message of the Gospel of the risen Christ is maintained.
Logged

"Hades is not a place, no, but a state of the soul. It begins here on earth. Just so, paradise begins in the soul of a man here in the earthly life. Here we already have contact with the divine..." -St. John, Wonderworker of Shanghai and San Francisco, Homily On the Sunday of Orthodoxy
Babalon
Resident Occultist
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Faith: Gnosis
Jurisdiction: A.'.A.'.
Posts: 233


I am everywhere the centre.


WWW
« Reply #2 on: April 07, 2012, 10:05:52 PM »

They're remembering it differently. I'm not surprised. Luke wasn't there at all, Mark gets his info from Peter, I don't think Matthew supposedly went at all himself, and John was a young guy when it happened, and very old when his Gospel was written.

Essentially, not only do we have a different perspective, but we have second-hand accounts, and not only second-hand, but accounts being given several decades after the fact of an event that was very abnormal. There are actually a lot of psychology studies and experiments that test the ability of individuals to remember such details in similarly bewildering experiences. We aren't very good at it.

Do the account conflict? Yep. Absolutely. Can they be harmonized? Nope, because they are very different. However, the core message of the Gospel of the risen Christ is maintained.

Bravo. Intelligent, and honest.

I can dig it.
Logged

Iconodule
Uranopolitan
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: OCA (Diocese of Eastern Pennsylvania)
Posts: 6,861


"My god is greater."


« Reply #3 on: April 07, 2012, 10:28:06 PM »

As I recall, St. Theophylact argues that if the four gospels all gave the exact same account, things would look a bit suspicious.
Logged

"A riddle or the cricket's cry
Is to doubt a fit reply." - William Blake

Quote from: Byron
Just ignore iconotools delusions. He is the biggest multiculturalist globalist there is due to his unfortunate background.
PeterTheAleut
The Right Blowhard Peter the Furtive of Yetts O'Muckhart
Section Moderator
Protospatharios
*****
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: OCA
Posts: 31,532


Lord, have mercy on the Christians in Mosul!


« Reply #4 on: April 07, 2012, 11:02:16 PM »

As I recall, St. Theophylact argues that if the four gospels all gave the exact same account, things would look a bit suspicious.
Yes, they'd appear as if they all came from one source. Four accounts that differ on a number of details actually show that multiple witnesses saw the evidence of the Resurrection, which gives their stories more credibility, not less.
« Last Edit: April 07, 2012, 11:02:34 PM by PeterTheAleut » Logged
Gamliel
Archon
********
Offline Offline

Faith: Greek Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Metropolis of San Francisco
Posts: 2,000



« Reply #5 on: April 08, 2012, 01:54:09 AM »

As I recall, St. Theophylact argues that if the four gospels all gave the exact same account, things would look a bit suspicious.
You recall correctly.  I go with a crowd to the store.  One source says, "Gamliel went to the store."  Another says, "Gamliel, Tom, Dick, and Harry" went to the store."  Another says, "A crowd went to the store."  Is there a conflict?
Logged
megaa
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Faith: Greek Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Greek Orthodox
Posts: 7


« Reply #6 on: April 11, 2012, 05:54:39 AM »

Gamliel - the women / number of women that went to the tomb is the least of concerns about the differences in each account. Its the other differences that are more of a worry than this re.

Benjamin the red - thanks for your honest answer and thanks for not attempting to convince me that these accounts compliment and harmonize with one another. I think when you find 4 stories like these that contradict one another then it leaves the readers with alot of concerning questions in their head. Of most concern would be the reader would say to themselves - only one of these accounts is true therefore as I've decided that not all of the bible is accurate - what partsof the bible can Itrust and what part may be mistaken.

It may even make many question the whole lot.
« Last Edit: April 11, 2012, 06:01:54 AM by megaa » Logged
akimori makoto
Archon
********
Offline Offline

Faith: Non-heretical Christian
Jurisdiction: Fully-sik-hektic archdiocese of Australia, bro
Posts: 3,126

No-one bound by fleshly pleasures is worthy ...


« Reply #7 on: April 11, 2012, 05:58:56 AM »

As I recall, St. Theophylact argues that if the four gospels all gave the exact same account, things would look a bit suspicious.

A court would give no weight to four such accounts in any hearing of a matter: civil or criminal.
Logged

The Episcopallian road is easy and wide, for many go through it to find destruction. lol sorry channeling Isa.
Theophilos78
Warned
Archon
********
Offline Offline

Faith: pro-Israeli Zionist Apostolic Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: Adonai Yeshua
Posts: 2,043



« Reply #8 on: April 11, 2012, 06:31:55 AM »


Details of the resurection account differ from each account. In Mathews version of the gospel the two Marys go to visit the tomb. The see the tomb which has a angel sitting on the rock who speaks to them.

In Marks account we see three women go to the tomb. In this acocunt they notice the rock rolled away however do not notice a angel sitting on the rock and only notice a man on the right of the tomb once inside the tomb.

Matthew was the only Evangelist to talk of an angel sitting on the stone because he was also the only Evangelist to relate how the Jewish authorities got the tombtone sealed and secured in order to prevent the fulfillment of Christ's prediction.

http://answering-islam.org/authors/masihiyyen/rebuttal_paine.html

Lukes account states that women went to the tomb - this ticks the right box and agrees with both the above as it does not specify. Now it is only after they enter the tomb, do not see the body, they begin to wonder where the body is - it is only after this point that two men appear to them. So no mention of a angel sitting on the rock, or no vision of this person once inside but after a certain time period has elapsed in the  tomb. A litttle different from both the above.

This is because Luke did not follow Mark's and Matthew's outline. If you read all the Gospels carefully, you see that Matthew's account is more similar to Mark's whilst Luke's to John's. These four Gospels can be divided into two groups of two. Notice that an angel of the Lord in Matthew and Mark told the women that the disciples would see the risen Lord in Galilee whereas in Luke and John's accounts risen Christ appeared to His disciples first in Jerusalem!

We can infer that the men in white/bright clothing in Mark and Luke were angels although Matthew explicitly used the word angel probably because he also recounted how the tombstone was rolled through a divine intervention and manifestation.

In Luke and John the number of these men talking to women was said to be two in contrast to the one reporter in Matthew and Mark. This was probably because Luke and John wanted to associate these messengers with the fact that Jesus had sent His messengers two by two. More, two people's testimony were required in Judaism. Note that in Acts similarly two men appeared to the apostles at the time of the Lord's ascension.

In Johns account - Mary goes to the tomb, sees the empty tomb yet no mention of any communication with anybody about what has happened to Jesus instead she runs back to the desciples. The 3 desciples run to the tomb see it empty and leave for their homes. Mary is outside weeping and eventualy looks inside to see two angels.

First, there were two different groups of women going to the tomb. Second, John did not say that only Mary Magdalene went to see the tomb. While informing the disciples she said "WE do not know where they laid the Lord's body". Third, John the Evangelist wanted to relate Jesus' first appearance from Mary Magdalene's perspective, making her play the leading role. Her male counterpart among the disciples was Thomas.
Logged

Longing for Heavenly Jerusalem
megaa
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Faith: Greek Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Greek Orthodox
Posts: 7


« Reply #9 on: April 11, 2012, 06:59:36 AM »

Theophilo thanks for your response re.
Logged
yeshuaisiam
Protokentarchos
*********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox, Anabaptist, Other Early Christianity kind of jumbled together
Posts: 4,100


A pulling horse cannot kick.


« Reply #10 on: April 11, 2012, 12:41:55 PM »

As I recall, St. Theophylact argues that if the four gospels all gave the exact same account, things would look a bit suspicious.
Yes, they'd appear as if they all came from one source. Four accounts that differ on a number of details actually show that multiple witnesses saw the evidence of the Resurrection, which gives their stories more credibility, not less.

This is how I see it.  More witnesses, more credibility.   Conflict is a harsh word because a conflict is often a direct "butting of heads".  The details are somewhat different on the same account.

Hypothetical - Car crash
Witness #1, yes he ran the red light and hit that truck.  His two passengers were okay.
Witness #2, yes he ran the red light and hit that truck.  The passenger next to him was fine.

There technically is not a "CONFLICT" but just small details are different.
Logged

I learned how to be more frugal and save money at http://www.livingpress.com
Tags:
Pages: 1   Go Up
  Print  
 
Jump to:  

Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Powered by SMF 1.1.18 | SMF © 2013, Simple Machines Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!
Page created in 0.09 seconds with 38 queries.