The central story of Christianity is a claim that Jesus was a savior sent by God, was nailed to a Roman cross, died, and then after 2 or 3 days, rose from the dead in bodily form and eventually ascended up into the sky until clouds hid him from view. Christian stories claim that even though no one saw Jesus rise from the dead, he nonetheless appeared to some of his disciples soon after he died, though sometimes in an altered or even unrecognizable form, and told them to spread the message and that all who believed the message would be rewarded with eternal life in heaven.
Are such stories true? Why do stories of Jesus' resurrection sound suspiciously like so many other ancient myths about gods, heroes, saviors, and great men who died and came back to life and rose up into heaven and sometimes appeared to humans post-mortem? Why do surviving accounts of Jesus' resurrection contain so many discrepancies and contradictions? If Jesus loved humanity and really rose from the dead, why was he no longer present or available for fellowship, love, proof, questioning, teaching, leadership, patient guidance, etc. after his death and alleged ascension? Why is Jesus not here today, making himself available to humanity? Why would a loving "savior" hide from his supposedly beloved 'children' for thousands of years after allegedly promising a speedy return?
Where did such ideas and stories even come from? What does the best evidence suggest? Does it even matter whether the stories are true?
Christianity claims the stakes are rather high. The Christian Bible asserts that anyone who does not believe the story is condemned by God (Mark 16:16; John 3:16-18; 1 John 5:10; Hebrews 2:3; Luke 12:46; Revelation 21:8), despite lack of good evidence or proof. The sacred writings of Christianity teach that anyone not believing its message is:
automatically “wicked” and “dark” and “corrupted” (1 Corinthians 6:14; Titus 1:15),
blinded by an evil, angelic spirit (2 Corinthians 4:4), and
will be cast by the one true God into a lake of burning sulfur after death (Rev 21:8).
With threats like that coming from the Christian religion, alongside the religion's popularity and heavy impact on Western history, a person might wish to investigate the matter seriously.
What sources do these ideas come from?
Believers get their ideas regarding Jesus' alleged resurrection mostly from the New Testament in the Bible: specifically from a few lines of text attributed to the Apostle Paul and especially from the four gospels: Matthew, Mark, Luke, and John. Believers commonly make two major assertions:
that the New Testament gospel stories were written by eyewitnesses of Jesus' post-resurrection appearances, or at least by disciples of eyewitnesses, and
that the gospels are reliable documents, or some would say "the infallible word of God."
By far the majority of Christians believe these assertions simply because such is what they have always heard, such is what they are comfortable with, and they have never actually examined or analyzed the texts in detail. That is the power of tradition. I grew up as such a believer, devout to the extant that I dedicated my life to Christian ministry. However, as this essay will demonstrate, the claim that gospel stories are reliable is provably false, and the claim that they were written by eyewitnesses is not only groundless, but highly suspicious, and runs counter to available evidence and logic.
Even though I grew up earnestly religious and wanted to be a Christian minister, when I closely examined the Biblical stories of the resurrection of Jesus while in college in my 20s, I found that
they disagree in very many details, even some major details,
they are unreliable, and
they do not appear to have been written by eyewitnesses or trustworthy reporters of information, and
the stories sound very much like myths from other cultures associated with other ancient gods, demigods, heroes, and savior figures, and
the stories are illogical when analyzed more closely.
If a savior God had really become human and risen from the dead, and really loved humanity, it would be easy for such a being to remain on earth, show himself alive to ALL people, demonstrate his love and power routinely as a good person does, and create a better world. The logic is very simple, and the fact that this never happened / happens, when combined with all of the source problems regarding Jesus' alleged resurrection and ascension to heaven, basically destroys the credibility of traditional Christian religion.
What follows is a list of questions about the alleged resurrection of Jesus followed by answers taken directly from the Christian Bible, from each New Testament source individually. After the questions, I will offer some observations and comments in analysis and summary. No one examining the evidence in detail should continue to be misguided by the Christian religion, especially when this information is combined with other evidence regarding biblical falsehoods, as presented in other essays on this website.
The inspiration for the first portion of this paper came initially from chapter 24 of Dan Barker's book Losing Faith in Faith: From Preacher to Atheist (1992). He points out that the different gospel accounts of the resurrection and subsequent events are irreconcilable, and he has issued a challenge to all Christians:
In each of the four gospels, begin at Easter morning and read to the end of the book: Matthew 28, Mark 16, Luke 24, and John 20-21. Also read Acts 1:3-12 and Paul's tiny version of the story in 1 Corinthians 15:3-8. These 165 verses can be read in a few moments. Then, without omitting a single detail from from these separate accounts, write a simple, chronological narrative of the events between the resurrection and the ascension: what happened first, second, and so on; who said what, when; and where these things happened. Though many have tried this, his challenge is impossible to meet.
If YOU are a believer, can you meet that challenge?
I could not, and it was one of many reasons I found myself unable to believe in the bible as I had growing up.
I have tried to be more thorough than the book chapter which first inspired me. I have also regularly placed the gospels in chronological order (Mk, Mt, Lk, Jn) in case it may be easier to see how the story changes with time. Scriptural references are noted throughout, and I will comment and evaluate the whole exercise in fascinating detail at the end.
Who went to the tomb of Jesus that Sunday morning?
Mk-- "Mary Magdalene, Mary the mother of James, and Salome" (Mk 16:1)
Mt-- "Mary Magdalene and the other Mary" (28:1)
Lk-- "the women"(24:1); "Mary Magdalene, Joanna, Mary the mother of James, and the others" (24:10)
Jn-- "Mary Magdalene" alone (20:1-2,10-18); then Peter and John (20:2-8)
At what time did the women (or "woman" in John) visit the tomb of Jesus?
Mk-- "just after sunrise"
Mt-- "At dawn"
Lk-- "very early in the morning"
Jn-- "while it was still dark"
What was their purpose?
Mk-- they "brought spices" to "anoint Jesus' body" (16:1) and had already seen the tomb (15:47)
Mt-- "to look at the tomb" (28:1)
Lk-- they "took the spices" (24:1) and had already seen the tomb (23:55)
Jn-- the body had already been spiced before they arrived (19:39,40)
Was the tomb open when they arrived?
Mk-- Yes. When they arrived they saw that the stone "had been rolled away." (16:2-4)
Mt-- No. But then there was a violent earthquake and an angel came down and removed the stone.(28:2)
Lk-- Yes. "They found the stone rolled away from the tomb" (24:2)
Jn-- Yes. Mary saw "that the stone had been removed" (20:1)
* Speculate: Why might the author of Matthew have changed the story? What difference could it make if the tomb had already been opened before the followers arrived? Why might the writer prefer a different scenario? Is there anything else added to the Matthean plot that builds upon this change? (see Mt 27:62-66; 28:2, 4, 11-15)
If the tomb had been open when women arrived, people could say, "If the tomb was open, then someone opened it! So clearly someone, maybe even one or more of Jesus' followers themselves, removed the body. Why believe Jesus rose from the dead, just because a tomb was open and his body was no longer there? It does not make sense."
To counteract such a point, it seems believers simply continued to add layers to their story.
Who was at the tomb?
Mk-- A young man in a white robe. (16:5)
Mt-- An angel came down from heaven, and two guards stationed there passed out (28:2-4)
Lk-- Two men in clothes that gleamed like lightning. (24:4)
Jn-- Two angels in white (20:12)
* Why would even later Christian writers coming along after Mark's gospel change the earliest gospel version to place 2 men or angels at the tomb instead of one?!
I suspect it may have been to make the story sound just a bit more reliable. The Bible itself teaches a concept that "Every matter must be established by the testimony of two or three witnesses" (Mt. 18.16; 1 Cor. 13.1; Deut. 17.6, 19.15; John 8.17; Heb. 10.28). Yet, interestingly, even the Bible itself never claims any disciple saw Jesus rise up from the dead and leave his tomb! In the earliest version of the gospel of Mark (before verses 9-20 were added), there is no mention of any disciples seeing Jesus rise from the dead, but they only heard about it from a single source: "a young man dressed in a white robe." Perhaps subsequent Christians felt like this left the matter on shakier ground than would be preferred. For that reason or for another reason, later Christian writers, including the authors of Matthew, Luke, and John, changed the story to place two men (or angels) at the tomb, not just one! This way, at least they could claim that there had been two witnesses to Jesus rising from the dead and departing his tomb.
Where were these messengers situated?
Mk-- A young man sitting inside the tomb on the right (16:5)
Mt-- An angel sat on the stone outside the tomb (28:2-7)
Lk-- When the women entered the tomb, two men suddenly stood beside them (24:4)
Jn-- Two angels seated where Jesus' body had been (20:12)
What did the messenger(s) say?
Mk-- "Don't be alarmed. You are looking for Jesus the Nazarene, who was crucified. He has risen. He is not here. See the place where they laid him. But go, tell his disciples and Peter, 'He is going ahead of you into Galilee. There you will see him, just as he told you.'" (16:6-7)
Mt-- "Don't be afraid, for I know that you are looking for Jesus, who was crucified. He is not here; he has risen, just as he said. Come and see the place where he lay. Then go quickly and tell his disciples 'He has risen from the dead and is going ahead of you into Galilee. There you will see him.' Now I have told you." (28:5-7)
Lk-- "Why do you look for the living among the dead? He is not here; he has risen. Remember how he told you while he was still with you in Galilee, 'The son of man must be delivered into the hands of sinful men, be crucified, and on the third day be raised again.'" (24:5-7)
Notice that the Lukan story does NOT have the messenger tell the disciples to go north to Galilee to see Jesus! The author changed the wording from the story found in Mark and Matthew. In this version, the disciples actually never go to Galilee at all! In Luke, all post-resurrection appearances happen nearby, in or near Jerusalem, rather than 68-100 miles away in Galilee. The different versions may stem from factional conflicts early in the religion's development.
Jn-- "Woman, why are you crying?" (20:13) And only Mary M. was there.
Did the women tell what happened?
Mk-- No. "They said nothing to anyone because they were afraid." (16:8)
Mt-- Yes. They "hurried away" and "ran to tell his disciples." (28:8)
Lk-- Yes. "...they told all these things to the eleven and to all the others." (24:9)
Mk(b)1 -- A later appendage to Mark (see endnote 1) says Mary M. saw Jesus that morning and told about it. (16:9-10)
Jn-- Only Mary M. was there, and she didn't receive any message from the two angels. They just asked her why she was crying; then she saw Jesus and "went to the disciples with the news." (20:18)
Who first saw Jesus?
Paul-- Cephas (1 Cor 15:5).
1 Cor 15.3-5: 3. "For what I received I passed on to you as of first importance: that Christ died for our sins according to the Scriptures, 4. that he was buried, that he was raised on the third day according to the Scriptures, 5. and that he appeared to Cephas, and then to the Twelve."
Mk-- It only says that Jesus will see the disciples (plural) in Galilee. There is no "first" or special appearance to anyone.
Mt-- Mary Magdalene AND "the other Mary" (mother of James and Joses) (28:1,8-9).
Lk-- Two disciples, one named Cleopas and the other unnamed, were talking to each other as they were walking to Emmaus, about 7 miles outside of Jerusalem (24:13-31).
"24.15. And as they talked and deliberated, Jesus Himself came up and walked along with them. 16. But their eyes were kept from recognizing Him" ... "28. As they approached the village where they were headed, He seemed to be going farther. 29. But they pleaded with Him, 'Stay with us, for it is nearly evening and the day is almost over.' So He went in to stay with them. 30. While He was reclining at the table with them, He took bread, spoke a blessing and broke it, and gave it to them. 31. Then their eyes were opened and they recognized Jesus—and He disappeared from their sight."
Simon is mentioned later (24:33-35), and the story regarding Simon is awkward.
Luke 24.12. Peter, however, got up and ran to the tomb. And after bending down and seeing only the linen cloths, he went away, wondering to himself what had happened.
That is not an actual appearance, but Peter finding linens and no body. Then in Luke 24:33-34, the two Emmaus road disciples returned to Jerusalem:
"33. There they found the Eleven and those with them, gathered together 34. and saying, “The Lord has indeed risen and has appeared [ὤφθη / ōphthē] to Simon!”
This awkwardness makes it seem as if the "appearance" to Simon may have been more of a spiritual realization than a physical appearance.
Mk(b) -- Mary Magdalene, alone (Mk16:9-10).
Jn-- Mary Magdalene, alone (Jn 20:10-18).
20.14. "... she turned around and saw Jesus standing there, but she did not realize that it was Jesus. 15. ... Thinking he was the gardener, ..."
When did Mary Magdalene first see Jesus?
Mk-- Earliest surviving version does not have an encounter between Mary and Jesus, and it ends at 16:8.
Mt-- Before she returned to the disciples (28:9-10).
Lk-- Not before she returned to the disciples (24:1-10) And no special encounter between Mary and Jesus is mentioned.
Mk(b) -- Before she returned to the disciples (16:9-10).
Jn-- Not until after she ran to tell Peter and John of the empty tomb and they inspected it (20:1-18).
Could Jesus be touched after the resurrection?
Mk-- No mention is made in either version of Mark.
Mt-- Yes. "They came to him, clasped his feet and worshiped him." (28:9)
Lk-- Yes. "It is I myself. Touch me and see." (24:39)
Jn-- No. "Jesus said, 'Do not hold on to me, for I have not yet returned to the father.'" (20:17)
Yes. "Then he said to Thomas, 'Put your finger here..'" (20:27)
* Was the Thomas story added even later by someone who did not realize the minor inconsistency?
Not counting women, to whom did Jesus first appear?
Mk-- No appearances at all were recorded in the earliest copies of Mark.
Mt-- To the eleven disciples (28:10,16-17).
Lk-- To two disciples walking to Emmaus (24:13-31) and then possibly to Peter (24:12; 24:33-35), and then to the eleven and those with them.
Mk(b) -- "In a different form" to two disciples in the country (16:12-13) and later to the eleven as they were eating (16:14).
Jn-- To ten of the twelve, for Thomas and presumably Judas Iscariot were not there (20:24).
Paul-- To Peter, then to "the twelve" (was Judas there?), then to 5002 people at once, then to James, then to all the apostles, and last of all to Paul (1 Cor 15:3-8) (see endnote 2)
Where did Jesus first appear to the disciples?
Mk-- Earliest version does not record a meeting but says there will be one in Galilee (16:6-7).
Mt-- On a mountain in Galilee (68-100 miles away from Jerusalem) (28:16-17).
Lk-- Near Emmaus (about 7 miles from Jerusalem) Sunday evening, and to the rest in a room in Jerusalem later that night (24:13-36).
Mk(b) -- In the country to two disciples, then to the eleven as they were eating (16:12-14), presumably in Jerusalem, since no travel has occurred.
Jn-- In a room that Sunday evening, still in Jerusalem (20:18-19).
Did the disciples believe the two men who saw Jesus while out walking?
Lk-- Yes. The two returned to Jerusalem, and the eleven and others said that it was "true" -- that the Lord had risen and appeared to Simon, and the two told their story also (24:33-35).
Mk(b) -- No. The two "reported it to the rest; but they did not believe them" (16:13).
What happened at the appearance of Jesus?
Mk-- Early version does not record an appearance.
Mt-- "When they saw him, they worshiped him; but some doubted." Then Jesus tells them to go preach to all nations. (28:17-20)
Lk-- Appears to two men who did not recognize him (24:16) and vanishes when they recognize him (24:31); materializes in a room while disciples are talking, reprimands them for not believing, shows his scars (hands and feet), eats fish, leads them out near Bethany, blesses them, and is carried up into the sky. (24:36-53)
Mk(b) -- Appears "in a different form" to two. Later with the eleven, Jesus "rebuked them for their lack of faith" and for not believing Mary and the other two at first. Then he tells them to go preach, and he is taken up into the sky and sits at the right hand of God. (16:14-20)
Jn-- Appears to Mary who "did not realize" it was him at first, "thinking he was the gardener" (20:14-15); comes into room with locked doors, shows scars (hands and side), disciples happy, no reprimand, breathes on disciples (19-22); comes through locked doors again a week later, puts Thomas' finger in hands and side and tells him not to doubt, performs signs not recorded (20:26-30); later appears by Sea of Tiberias, but disciples "did not realize it was Jesus," tells them how to fish, John recognizes him, he feeds them breakfast, and reinstates Peter (21:1ff).
Where was the resurrected Jesus wounded?
Mk-- No wounds recorded.
Mt-- No wounds recorded.
Lk-- "He showed them his hands and feet" (24:39-40), wounds implied.
Jn-- Hands and side (20:20,25,27); Only the book of John records Jesus being wounded with a spear on the cross (19:34-35).
Notice that later authors added details to emphasize the physical nature of Jesus' resurrection. Why? Because some Christians believed the resurrection was a "spiritual" event, or in a "spiritual body," not a literal resurrection of a physical body. Some of the earliest claims may even have been mere "spiritual" visions, or even symbolic stories of risen messianic hopes. To counteract these Christian groups, the literalists (who eventually dominated Christianity) invented extra details to prop up their literalistic beliefs/ interpretations.
Did Jesus stay on the earth for a while?
Mk -- Unknown. No explicit resurrection/appearance stories.
Mt-- Unclear. After appearing to the woman on Sunday in Jerusalem, Jesus appears only once to the disciples on a mountain in Galilee, 68-100 miles away (where he and the angel had told the women to tell the disciples he would appear next). On the mountain he tells them to go into the world and preach and the story ends. Presumably he rose up into the sky.
Mk(b) -- No. He appeared to the eleven while they were eating, told them to go into the world and preach, and "after the Lord Jesus had spoken to them, he was taken up into heaven" (16:14-19) (John 20:19 says that the meeting in the room was the same Sunday.)
Lk-- No. It all happened on Sunday and into Sunday night and maybe early Monday morning. (24:13 "that same day", 24:29 "for it is nearly evening", 24:33 they "returned at once to Jerusalem" (about 7 miles, v13), and "There they found the eleven;" 24:36 "While they were still talking" Jesus "stood among them;" he ate some fish, gave them instructions, led them near Bethany (village on Mt. of Olives outside Jerusalem), blessed them and was taken up into the sky.
Jn-- Yes. At least more than one week. (Jn 20:26 "eight days later" or "a week later" in Jerusalem; then later in Jn 21:1-23 on the Sea of Tiberias. So probably over two weeks.)
Acts-- Yes. "He appeared to them over a period of forty days" (1:3)
Where did Jesus' ascension take place?
Mk-- Early version records no ascension; only says that disciples will see Jesus in Galilee (16:6,7).
Mt-- Book ends with the "great commission" on a mountain in Galilee.
Lk-- Near Bethany, very close to Jerusalem, after supper (24:50-51)
Note: A typical modern translation of Luke says something like, "While he was blessing them, he left them and was taken up into heaven" (24.51, NIV). However, the ascension reference ("and was taken up into heaven") actually did not appear in some early manuscripts of Luke. The Codex Vaticanus (300s CE) has the ascension reference, but the Codex Sinaiticus (300s CE) does not: "51. And it came to pass, as he blessed them, he was separated from them. 52. And they returned to Jerusalem with great joy, ..." Only a Bible with a critical apparatus will show the variant readings of the oldest manuscripts. So the "he was taken up into heaven" part may have been added at a later time, so that Luke's ending would look more like Acts 1.
Mk(b) -- Apparently in or near Jerusalem, after supper (16:14,19), which conflicts with the earlier, unaugmented version of Mark that suggested the disciples would go to Galilee, 16:6-7. The appendage to Mark (16:9-20), a separate account, does not record the disciples going to Galilee, and apparently places everything in Jerusalem on the same day, like Luke.
Jn-- No ascension recorded.
Paul-- No ascension recorded.
Acts-- Ascended from Mount of Olives, outside of Jerusalem (1:9-12)
The fact that the gospels both differ AND contradict one another in so many particular details about what happened after the alleged resurrection of Jesus raises many questions. Take the matter of the stone: it cannot have been removed both before and after the women arrived. Either Matthew is wrong or the other three gospels are wrong. Many elements of Matthew's story are doubtful enough anyway3 (be sure to see endnote 3), but this and other points are undeniably direct contradictions.
Contradictions are bad enough when they regard minor details, but the gospels even disagree in major ways concerning where Jesus first appeared to the disciples after the resurrection. We will only scratch the surface of these matters, but it will be enough for you to see that claims regarding the Bible being "God's word" cannot even possibly be true.
The Codex Sinaiticus and the Codex Vaticanus, which are the earliest surviving complete versions of the gospel of "Mark," from the 300s CE, end at 16:8 and do not contain 16:9-20. These manuscripts, along with other sources derived from these, say that a single messenger, a young man wearing white, tells the women at the empty tomb to tell the disciples, "He is going ahead of you into Galilee. There you will see him, just as he told you" (16:7). Then, "Trembling and bewildered, the women went out and fled from the tomb. They said nothing to anyone, because they were afraid" (16:8). End of story. With such a manuscript, the audience would have been left hanging, with a sense of mystery, suspense, perhaps confusion, and an anticipation of the risen messiah's likely appearance in Galilee very soon.
That's it!? Really? Yes, that's it. The author could have intended the story to end abruptly, with an air of mystery or suspense, and some scholars have argued he did. Or the original ending could have been lost or deliberately removed, and other scholars argue for that option.
However, what IS clear is that IF Mark DID once have an ending that was later lost or (more likely) cut off due to conflicts with other groups' desired storyline, that original ending surely would have continued the plot already laid out: the disciples would travel by foot to Galilee, 68-100 miles north of Jerusalem, and see the risen Jesus, just as the young man at the tomb said would happen (Mark 16:7).
The author of "Matthew," who copies most of "Mark" as his primary source, agrees with the earliest surviving versions of "Mark." In Matthew, Jesus first appears to his disciples on a mountain in Galilee and gives his last instructions there, often called "the Great Commission." The author says this was predicted by the angel (not merely a young man) at the tomb who told the women to tell the disciples, "He is going before you into Galilee, there you will see him" (28:7). Again, that sounds very much like Mark 16:7, the author's main source. But Matthew adds something major: Jesus himself met the women after they saw the angel, and Jesus himself told them, "Go and tell my brothers to go into Galilee; there they will see me" (28:10). "Then the eleven disciples went to Galilee, to the mountain where Jesus had told them to go" (28:16), and there in Galilee the disciples saw Jesus; he gave them instructions to go make disciples of all nations, and the story ends. Matthew adds even more plot elements to bolster the Galilean post-resurrection focus: he says Jesus himself told the disciples even earlier, back during the last supper, "But after I have risen, I will go ahead of you into Galilee" (26:32). The context of Matthew thus indicates, even heavily emphasizes, that Galilee is the first and last place Jesus appears to the eleven disciples, and Matthew has only one such appearance to the eleven, not multiple appearances. Additional support for Galilee being the very first encounter is that "some doubted" it was him (28:17). The doubting likewise suggests that the encounter in Galilee must be the very first and only encounter between the eleven and Jesus, for the doubting would be less likely if they had already seen him before, and the 3 different previous instructions to go to Galilee to see him would have been out of place and completely illogical IF he were planning to see them before Galilee.
As mentioned above, the 2 earliest copies of Mark from the 300s end abruptly at 16:8, with the women afraid and telling no one. The original ending of Mark may well have depicted the disciples traveling to Galilee in accordance with the message given by the young man dressed in white (16:7), but that original ending was lost or removed, and the appended ending we now have does NOT mention Galilee at all, which is extremely odd, suspicious even! In addition to our manuscript evidence, this fact is but one of the many clues that 16:9-20 was not the original ending. Instead, verse 9 abruptly begins a separate account of post-resurrection events, in which everything appears to take place in or near Jerusalem around the same day, just like in Luke. It is also critical to note that Galilee is 68-100 miles away from Jerusalem, and the disciples travel by foot in the stories. So this is not a minor discrepancy.
"Luke" has two messengers at the tomb instead of one, and they give a different message than what is given in Mark and Matthew. It is not possible that both versions, both messages, could be true. It is already a necessary conclusion at this point that the gospels are not reliable accounts. Further, Luke contradicts Matthew and early Mark by having Jesus appear to the disciples in and around Jerusalem, not Galilee, and in Luke (and the late appendage to Mark) nobody goes to Galilee at all. In fact, Luke has Jesus appear to Peter in Jerusalem (24:33-34), but in Mark the messenger had told the women to tell the "disciples AND PETER, 'He is going ahead of you into Galilee. There you will see him'" (16:7). Furthermore, not only does the context of Luke indicate that Jesus appeared only in the immediate vicinity of Jerusalem, in 24.49 the author makes his Jesus character explicitly tell the disciples to stay in Jerusalem until they receive the holy spirit (and then Jesus was taken up into heaven at Bethany, 1.5 mi east of Jerusalem on a slope of the Mount of Olives),
"I am going to send you what my Father has promised; but stay in the city until you have been clothed with power from on high."
So the author of Luke did the following: 1. changed the message given at the tomb, 2. made Jesus appear only in and around Jerusalem, and 3. emphasized this by having Jesus tell the disciples not to go anywhere else until the coming of the holy spirit, which according to Acts, happens at Pentecost (50 days after the Passover, 40-something days after the crucifiction and alleged resurrection of Jesus).
"John," like Luke, has two messengers at the tomb instead of one, and in John they strangely have no message to give. John, too, contradicts early Mark and Matthew by having the first appearance to the disciples in Jerusalem. But John, probably the latest version of the story to be invented/written, also adds a subsequent account of the disciples seeing Jesus on the Sea of Tiberias, where he helps them catch fish and reinstates Peter; and this appearance, which Jn 21:14 says was the 3rd appearance to the disciples, is the last meeting recorded in John. 4 (see endnote 4)
The most important point to see is this: Over time, Christians created multiple versions about where Jesus appeared after the resurrection, early Mark and then Matthew placing events in Galilee, and Luke placing events explicitly and only in and around Jerusalem, a completely different part of the country. It looks as though the appendage to Mark (16:9-20) may have been added to try to combine the two versions to avoid contradictions, ??? ... but if so, the work of the editor was not good enough to go undetected since
(A) the appendage is a bit out of joint with what precedes it -- i.e. as mentioned, early Mark has a messenger tell the disciples to go see Jesus in Galilee, but the early version is cut off abruptly and the appendage avoids any reference to Galilee and instead appears to give a more Lukan version of the story; and
(B) The earliest surviving complete manuscripts of Mark (Codex Sinaiticus and Codex Vaticanus, from the 300s CE), do not contain the last twelve verses, 16:9–20,
The problems with Mark's altered ending, in and of themselves, prove that Christians were modifying their manuscripts and deliberately changing their story over time. We are fortunate to be able to detect such manipulations, and there must have been many instances even earlier than this one, instances to which we unfortunately no longer have access.
The author of "John" came along after Mark, Matthew, and Luke had been written, and finding multiple versions of events, he placed his post-resurrection events first at one location and later at another, possibly trying to combine conflicting claims into a unified narrative. However, his new account still disagrees with the other gospels.
Paul, or at least a letter said to have been written by Paul, claimed that Jesus appeared to Peter, then to the twelve (Did he think Judas was there?), then on several other occasions, and he seems to think Peter was the first to see Jesus (1 Cor. 15:5). But Mark 16:6-7 has the messenger at the tomb send instructions to the disciples and specifically to Peter that Jesus was headed for Galilee and that everyone should go there to meet him. In Matthew, even Jesus himself tells the women to tell the disciples to go to Galilee to see Jesus, and Matthew says they went to Galilee and Jesus appeared there and gave his final instructions. The writers of Matthew, Mark, and John were apparently unaware of any story of a special appearance to Peter alone. Of the gospels, only Luke mentions it (24:33), and it happens in Jerusalem, not Galilee, and it is awkward, since in the narrative, Peter does not actually see a risen Jesus, but merely sees an empty tomb and some linens (Luke 24:12: "Peter, however, got up and ran to the tomb. And after bending down and seeing only the linen cloths, he went away, wondering to himself what had happened."). In John, Jesus does have a conversation with Peter in which he "reinstates" him, but John is also nearby, and this takes place on the shore of the Sea of Tiberias, not in Jerusalem!
How long did Jesus stay on the earth? In Luke, everything happens that first Sunday: He appears "that same day" to two of the disciples on the way to Emmaus, seven miles from Jerusalem (24:13); he walks with them and when it is "nearly evening" (24:29) he stops and sits with them, but they realize it's him and he disappears; the two disciples "got up and returned at once to Jerusalem" (24:33); when they arrive, they tell the other discipls what happened, and "while they were still talking about this" (24:36) Jesus stands among them, eats, gives them their final instructions, takes them out near Bethany on the Mount of Olives, and is taken up into the sky (24:36-52).
The Markan appendage gives little indication of time: Jesus rises "on the first day of the week", appears first to Mary M., then "afterward" to two in the country, then "later" to "the Eleven" as they're eating; he tells them to go preach everywhere, then he is taken up into heaven. While it is not specific, it seems to be like Luke's version, in which Jesus is only around that Sunday. In Matthew, just as in the Mark appendage and in Luke, Jesus appears only once to the group of disciples (except it's in Galilee), giving them instructions to go preach. Matthew gives no indication of time, except that the disciples needed time to get to Galilee and meet Jesus on a mountain for the "great commission", and that would take more than a day, since Galilee is 68 to 100 miles away. In John, Jesus appears Sunday night to the disciples (except for Thomas) in Jerusalem (20:19), then again in Jerusalem a week later (20:26), then a third time by the Sea of Tiberias sometime "afterward" (21:1). It is not clear how long he stayed.
Acts says Jesus "appeared to them over a period of 40 days" (1:3). But the use of the number 40 is suspicious, because it is one of those mythic and/or astrological numbers, like 3, 7, and 12, and it is used esoterically, or symbolically.
Noah endures the Flood = 40 days & 40 nights
Israel suffers in Egypt = 400 years, or 4 generations
Moses fasts on the mountain = 40 days & 40 nights
Israel suffers in the wilderness = 40 years
Elijah fasts in the wilderness = 40 days & nights
Jonah gives Nineveh an ultimatum = 40 days
Jesus fasts in the wilderness = 40 days & nights
Jesus appears resurrected = 40 days
That Luke disagrees with Matthew and John and the un-appended early Mark is a significant discrepancy. But it is even more interesting to me that Luke and Acts disagree, especially since Acts was traditionally supposed to have been written by the same person. IF it really was written by the same person, did the author forget to go back and change his first scroll when he decided that he wanted to depict Jesus as staying on earth for 40 days after the resurrection? Or did he not care? Or did he create a discrepancy on purpose to hide a secret for careful readers -- that the story should not be taken to be literally true at face value?
Jesus' death with 3 hours of darkness on the cross and 3 days in grave, his resurrection, his appearances for 40 days and nights, and his ascension were mythically constructed to match the numbers and symbolism of the Exodus story:
3 days of darkness over Egypt = 3 hours of darkness, Mt 27:45, and 3 days in tomb
death of 1st-born + passover sacrifice = death + sacrifice of firstborn "son of God"
the Exodus = the "resurrection"
40 years in wilderness/people doubt = Jesus on earth 40 days after resurrection, followers doubt and are tested
Israel enters Promised Land = Jesus ascends to heaven, the Christian "promised land".
The same numbers appear in the Jonah story too: the prophet is in the depths of darkness in the fish's belly for 3 days and 3 nights, and then re-emerges from the depths, and Niniveh is given 40 days to repent.
These numbers are no accident, and they are not mere history; they are very mythically significant.
The Gospel of Matthew has Jesus say the following:
"For as Jonah was 3 days and 3 nights in the belly of a huge fish, so the Son of Man will be 3 days and 3 nights in the heart of the earth" (12.40).
Everybody should know or be able to count that there are NOT 3 days AND 3 nights from good Friday to Easter Sunday (using synoptic chronology)! So who could take this completely literally, even as a fundamentalist?
What is much, much more fascinating is that this 3 days of death before a resurrection/triumph is a literary, mythological motif that runs through the history of human literature, even long before Christianity or even the Jewish god had been invented yet.
The number 3 had been associated with death/darkness probably since prehistoric times, when people noticed that the moon 'dies'/disappears for 3 days out of every lunar cycle. In every 29/30 day lunar cycle, for 3 days between the death of the waning moon and the birth of the waxing moon, the moon is invisible to the naked eye due to its position between the earth and the sun. And like in the Jesus story, it is not actually a full 3 days AND 3 nights.
Here are some examples of how this nature symbolism using 3 associated with death and rebirth was used in myths as far back as the oldest human literature, long before the bible:
Long before the time of Jesus, and long before the Jewish/Hebrew people even existed, there was already a story of a goddess, Inanna (the Sumerian heavenly Venus/Aphrodite), who descended 7 levels to the underworld, was dead for 3 days and 3 nights (as she herself had predicted), but rose again after receiving the bread and water of life and regaining all her power. Her love Dummuzi/Thammuz took her place in the underworld, but his sister would take his place for part of the year. Yearly, women would mourn for the death of Dummuzi, when the crops fail, but he always returned again. This and the Osiris story of Egypt are the oldest stories of dying and reviving gods. The Inanna story also includes substitutionary sacrifice. Both stories are inspired by nature. All the most essential elements of the Jesus story were already present in other cultures' stories more than 2,000 years before the Jesus story was created. [A translation of the Sumerian Inanna story: http://www-etcsl.orient.ox.ac.uk/section1/tr141.htm]
Ancient Egyptians mourned the death/disappearance of king Osiris on the 17th day of the month of Athyr, and they celebrated with joy his being found again on the 19th day of Athyr, that is, on the 3rd day after his disappearance/death (Plutarch On Isis and Osiris 13, 39, and 42; Moralia 356b-d, 366e-f, 367e). Osiris was cut into pieces by Set, but Isis brought Osiris back to life, conceived Horus by him, and then Osiris became lord of the afterlife. He was called "Lord of love," and "He Who is Permanently Benign and Youthful," among other titles. Osiris' power of eternal life was celebrated in Old Kingdom Egypt in the Pyramid Texts (3rd millennium BCE), rituals whereby the Pharaoh became unified with Osiris in his death so that he might, as Osiris, live forever.
When the Greek virgin-born hero Herakles defeats death and brings Alcestis back from the dead, she is unable to speak for 3 days (Euripides Alcestis, 400's BCE). During one of his other labors, Herakles also descended himself to Hades, the underworld, death, and overcame the 3-headed dog of Hades, Kerberos/Cerberus. Hades means the "unseen," according to ancient Greek writers. Herakles went to hell and back. Also, when he died, he ascended into heaven and became fully divine. Sound familiar?
It was a Roman custom to call 3 times the name of the deceased. Two examples occur in the Roman Aeneid -- once in book 11, at the funeral of Pallas, another at Aeneid 6.477-547.
Hebrew myth makes similar use of the number three. Here are some of the more salient examples:
Abraham travels 3 days to sacrifice Isaac. (Gen 22.4)
3 days of darkness in Egypt before the Exodus. (Ex 10.22-23)
3 times Delilah fails to trick Samson (& his 7 braids of hair) (Jdg 16).
3 times Elijah lies on top of the son of the widow in order to bring him back from the dead (1 Kings 17.21)
After a chariot of fire and horses of fire separate Elijah and Elisha and Elijah goes up to the sky / heaven (shamayim) in a whirlwind, men search for the risen Elijah for 3 days, but they cannot find him.
3 days and 3 nights Jonah is in the belly of the sea creature (Jonah).
Christian literature uses 3's for the same symbolic effects. Here are some of the more interesting parallel examples:
3 days Jesus is lost from his parents at age 12 (Luke 2:39-52).
3 hours of darkness "over the whole land" at the crucifixion (Mk 15:33).
3 days Jesus in the tomb, dead, or "in the heart of the earth" (Mt 12:40).
3 times Peter denies Jesus (Mk 14:30, 72; Mt 26:34, 75; Lk 22:34, 61).
3 days Paul is blind and fasting after the Damascus incident, before the scales fall from his eyes (Acts 9:9).
On the 3rd day, Jesus turns water into wine (John 2). [symbol of resurrection/transformation]
Knowledgeable modern authors use the same symbolism. For example, in J.K. Rowling's Harry Potter series, in the final book, during the Battle of Hogwarts just before Harry faced Voldemort (whose name means "Will of Death") for the last time (and then died and was resurrected), he turned the Resurrection Stone over in his hand 3 times. The Resurrection Stone was one of the 3 Deathly Hallows. An owner of the 3 Deathly Hallows becomes the Master of Death.
Who can look seriously upon the number 3 used in this symbolic manner throughout the entire history of literature and fail to realize that the New Testament uses the number in the very same way, and that it is no more historical than any of the older myths that employed the same symbolism?
Why did ancient authors use the number 3 this way? It all goes back to astronomy. Ancient sky-watchers noticed that the moon would shrink over time, "die"/disappear, then reappear as a crescent, and then grow again to full size and beauty. For how long in each lunar cycle would the moon disappear? The moon would die/disappear for 3 days, and then would be reborn / resurrected! It still does so today. (This 3 is counted inclusively, as the ancients did. It is not always 3 full days and nights, just as the Jesus story does not have 3 full days and nights from Good Friday to Easter.) The number over time became applied to the annual death of the sun as well, and all of nature seemed to follow a similar pattern of death followed by rebirth. The Jesus story seems to be deliberately constructed to match this same pattern which other ancient myths followed.
For a more thorough list of 3's used this way in ancient literature and beyond, see my paper "Easter Fun: Jesus' 3 Days in the Tomb is a Mythic Symbol."
For much more on bible numbers and symbolism in general, beyond the number 3, see "Numerology - The Use of Special Numbers in the Bible and Other Ancient Myths."
The four gospels do not represent eyewitness testimonies of a resurrection. Rather they attempt to record, modify, improve upon stories that had been crafted and/or handed down by word of mouth in various and even conflicting versions over at least two generations, allowing 41 years from about 29 to 70 CE (from the presumed death of Jesus at age 33 to the estimated date for the writing of Mark, believed to be the earliest gospel, with the other accounts being written even later). Christian leaders had developed various tales and traditions differing on such points as who saw the resurrected Jesus, where he appeared, when he appeared, how long he stayed around, and what happened in what order. If we read the details closely, we can see how the stories were evolving.
The gospels do not even claim to be written by eyewitnesses. In fact the synoptic gospels were completely anonymous, and even John was not written by John -- it was called "John" because whoever wrote it referred to John and then wrote, "This is the disciple who testifies to these things and who wrote them down. We know that his testimony is true" (21:24). Who is the "we"? Apparently, the people who wrote it claimed that they got their information from John, who supposedly wrote his story down. But these people are no more trustworthy than the Christians who were making up other gospels and stories and claiming they were written by disciples. Even if these writers, the "we," were listening to an old man who claimed to have been with the real Jesus, they had no way of knowing whether the story was true or not. They were not eyewitnesses. Matthew contains 91 percent of the un-appended version of Mark (Luke contains 53 percent of it), which leads scholars to solid conclusion that the author of Matthew used Mark as a source and then added information from other sources or from his own imagination. If Matthew had been an eyewitness, you would think he could have remembered things for himself, and that he could have written in the first person. Instead, Matthew is written from the perspective of one who did not participate in the events.
The simple truth is that all accounts of the resurrection are at their very best hearsay, with lots of political-religious symbolism, and worse than that, in all likelihood owe their existence to fabrication or the literal distortion of "spiritual" / symbolic parables. Unless you yourself see and have experiences with a bodily resurrected Jesus in the flesh, you must either rely on what is at best contradictory and suspicious hearsay, or else you cannot believe.
IF Jesus rose from the dead, physically, bodily, as an immortal being, why is he not here now? Why did he not hang around a while, openly, and show himself clearly to all of humanity and give his message directly to humanity himself, rather than leaving such a critically important task to the spreading of mere unsubstantiated, unverifiable rumors about merely alleged appearances to a few cult leaders in suspicious ways and circumstances, unknown to the world outside the cult, and unknown to / uncorroborated by historians, writers, or authoritative figures outside of the messianic cult?
The very idea actually makes no logical sense whatsoever, if taken literally.
It should be obvious to anyone who thinks about the idea of someone rising from the dead as an immortal, that IF a god/ demigod/ savior could really rise physically from the dead, and IF he really loved humanity and wanted to establish a good, loving kingdom, and IF he really were "the son of God," we would expect him simply to show himself to everyone and to present his message to humanity in his own words, in person.
The fact that such never happened, the fact that no personal "God" has ever presented itself/himself/herself to all of humanity clearly, lovingly, honestly, without guile or dubious circumstances, is one of the strongest logical arguments against the validity of Judeo-Christian, Muslim, Egyptian, Sumerian, Persian, Hindu, Greek, Roman, Celtic, Germanic, Norse, and other tribal claims regarding various alleged personal Gods, demigods, saviors, dying and rising heroes, and such.
Why would a real, personal, loving God be afraid or hesitant to show itself plainly to all, spreading love and goodness, joy, creativity, wisdom, and the unvarnished, non-compromised, unsuspicious truth to all, in person? A real God would not behave in the manner alleged by various religions, including Christianity. The story is unrealistic in the extreme.
Given the unrealistic nature of the stories, especially in light of modern science and historical / archaeological knowledge, IF we were going to believe such an absurd proposal, we should at least expect good evidence and known, reputable, consistent sources. That ... we certainly do not possess.
And the case for Christian resurrection/ascension claims looks even worse when combined with the fact that other nations had been making similar claims about their own leaders, heroes, sons of Gods, etc., and that the Roman Empire, the very enemy of the messianic Jews initially spreading Christianity, made the claim that their emperors Julius and Augustus Caesar had risen up to heaven and become divine after death. It becomes clear to a good student of history that Judeo-Christian religious claims should be seen in the context of similar Greco-Roman religious claims, and both sets of religious claims should be soundly rejected in terms of literal veracity.
And not only does Jesus / YHWH not reveal himself to all humanity, but he does not even show up for "believers" themselves, who -- in psychological confusion and pressure as heirs of two millennia of cultic tradition and manipulation who feel compelled to make claims of sensing "God's presence" in their lives, must resort to the most ambiguous and empty kinds of claims regarding a "personal relationship" with Jesus.
Notice the altered appearance of the risen messiah in some of the stories, the way some disciples doubted [meant to embody the doubt of the evangelist's audience], the way certain characters did not even recognize that it was Jesus at first, until their spiritual / symbolic "eyes" were opened.
What happened at the appearance of Jesus?
Mk-- Early version does not record an appearance.
Mt-- "When they saw him, they worshiped him; but some doubted." Then Jesus tells them to go preach to all nations. (28:17-20)
Lk-- Appears to two men who did not recognize him (24:16) and vanishes when they recognize him after reflecting on scriptures and after the breaking of bread together and (24:31); materializes in a room while disciples are talking, reprimands them for not believing, shows his scars (hands and feet), eats fish, leads them out near Bethany, blesses them, and is carried up into the sky. (24:36-53)
Mk(b) -- Appears "in a different form" to two. Later with the eleven, Jesus "rebuked them for their lack of faith" and for not believing Mary and the other two at first. Then he tells them to go preach, and he is taken up into the sky and sits at the right hand of God. (16:14-20)
Jn-- Appears to Mary who "did not realize" it was him at first, "thinking he was the gardener" (20:14-15); comes into room with locked doors, shows scars (hands and side), disciples happy, no reprimand, breathes on disciples (19-22); comes through locked doors again a week later, puts Thomas' finger in hands and side and tells him not to doubt, performs signs not recorded (20:26-30); later appears by Sea of Tiberias, but disciples "did not realize it was Jesus," tells them how to fish, John recognizes him, he feeds them breakfast, and reinstates Peter (21:1ff).
It is noteworthy that so much doubt, mystery, altered form, etc. is included in various stories. Some characters realize their vision of the resurrected messiah through scripture or through the ritual of breaking bread together. Only when their eyes are opened can they recognize the messiah when he is in a different form. This could possibly be a holdover from an early, mystery-religion type of stage of Christianity's evolution, when the resurrected messianic hope was said to appear in visions, through reflection on scripture, and even in different forms of other people.
This is the symbolic meaning of the breaking of the bread together. The idea is that the messiah's body (the hope of Israel) is broken into many pieces, as Israel [Judea] was crushed by Roman oppression, but the messiah / "Son of Man" is the vision of a restored Israel, the loaf, the whole bread, the people collectively, and the body of the messiah / messianic hope IS collectively the people who believe in the coming kingdom. Only when people's "spiritual" (symbolic / metaphoric) eyes are opened can they look around and see the arisen messiah (messianic hope) IN EACH OTHER, in fellow believers, in the gardener, in companions along the road reading scripture. This may well have been the secret meaning behind various parables (symbolic stories), expressions, and sayings, like:
Galatians 2:20: "I have been crucified with the messiah and I no longer live, but the messiah lives in me." [In all quotations from Greek, I will render Χριστός / christos as "messiah," to make the meaning clearer, since that is what was intended.]
Ephesians 5:30: "For we are members of his body, of his flesh, and of his bones."
Ephesians 3:6: "This mystery is that through the gospel [good news] the Gentiles are fellow heirs, fellow members of the body, and fellow partakers of the promise in messiah Jesus ["YHWH saves"].
Ephesians 4:4: "There is one body and one Spirit, just as you were called to one hope when you were called."
The "body" is the collective group of believers in messiah; the "spirit" is the idea/ dream/ vision/ hope, the animating/driving principle of the organization.
Ephesians 4:12: "... to equip the saints for works of ministry and to build up the body of messiah."
1 Corinthians 6:15: "Do you not know that your bodies are parts of the messiah?"
1 Corinthians 10:16-17: "16. Is not the cup of thanksgiving for which we give thanks a participation in the blood of messiah? And is not the bread that we break a participation in the body of messiah? 17. Because there is one loaf, we, who are many, are one body, for we all share the one loaf."
When the messianic cult gathered to break bread and share wine [communion, "Eucharist"/ Greek for "Thanksgiving"] it was a symbolic declaration that they collectively WERE the risen messiah of Israel. That is the real meaning of the resurrection of the messiah, and anyone who eventually adopted a literalistic interpretation, whether to manipulate others or whether in failure to grasp the symbols and parables, was distorting the original meaning.
1 Corinthians 12:12: "The body is a unit, though it is composed of many parts. And although its parts are many, they all form one body. So it is with messiah."
1 Corinthians 12:20; 27: "20. As it is, there are many parts, but one body. ... 27. Now you all collectively are the body of messiah, and individually you are members/parts of the body."
1 Corinthians 11:26: "For whenever you eat this bread and drink this cup, you proclaim messiah’s death until he comes."
Romans 12:4-5: "For as we have many parts in one body, and not all parts have the same function, so in messiah we who are many are one body, and each member belongs to one another."
Romans 6:3-5; 8: "3. Or aren’t you aware that all of us who were baptized into messiah Jesus were baptized into His death? 4. We were therefore buried with Him through baptism into death, in order that, just as messiah was raised from the dead through the glory of the Father, we too may walk in newness of life. 5. For if we have been united with Him like this in His death, we will certainly also be united with Him in His resurrection." ... 8. Now if we died with Christ, we believe that we will also live with Him. 9. For we know that since messiah was raised from the dead, He cannot die again; death no longer has dominion over him."
Notice the rituals and symbols. The messiah's death and resurrection is a past, present, and future event. All joining the cult are dying to self, burying their own selfish ego / individuality to become immortal by embodying the resurrection of the undying messianic hope. The messiah's resurrection is brought about through the ego-death and resurrection of the messianic cult members themselves, collectively, and the second coming of the messiah will be the triumph of the messianic cult itself, which hopes to usher in a new kingdom of Israel.
Colossians 3:15: "Let the peace of messiah rule in your hearts, for to this you were called as members of one body."
Colossians 3:4: "When messiah, who is your life, appears, then you also will appear with Him in glory."
Notice how the appearance of messiah can be spoken of as a past event or a future event. Messiah IS the life of the members of the cult. When messiah appears in glory, it will be because the messianic cult triumphs in glory.
Colossians 2:12-13: "Buried with messiah in baptism, wherein also ye are risen with messiah through the faith of the operation of God, who hath raised him from the dead."
Matthew 18:20: "For where two or three gather together in My name, there am I with them. ”
Matthew 28:20: "And surely I am with you always, even to the end of the age."
Matthew 25:34-46: "34. Then the King will say to those on his right, ‘Come, you who are blessed by my Father; take your inheritance, the kingdom prepared for you since the creation of the world. 35. For I was hungry and you gave me something to eat, I was thirsty and you gave me something to drink, I was a stranger and you invited me in, 36. I needed clothes and you clothed me, I was sick and you looked after me, I was in prison and you came to visit me.’ 37. Then the righteous will answer him, ‘Lord, when did we see you hungry and feed you, or thirsty and give you something to drink? 38. When did we see you a stranger and invite you in, or needing clothes and clothe you? 39. When did we see you sick or in prison and go to visit you?’ 40. “The King will reply, ‘Truly I tell you, whatever you did for one of the least of these brothers and sisters of mine, you did for me.’ 41. “Then he will say to those on his left, ‘Depart from me, you who are cursed, into the eternal fire prepared for the devil and his angels. 42. For I was hungry and you gave me nothing to eat, I was thirsty and you gave me nothing to drink, 43. I was a stranger and you did not invite me in, I needed clothes and you did not clothe me, I was sick and in prison and you did not look after me.’ 44. “They also will answer, ‘Lord, when did we see you hungry or thirsty or a stranger or needing clothes or sick or in prison, and did not help you?’ 45. “He will reply, ‘Truly I tell you, whatever you did not do for one of the least of these, you did not do for me.’ 46. “Then they will go away to eternal punishment, but the righteous to eternal life.”
Mark 3:33-34: “Who are my mother and my brothers?” he asked. Then he looked at those seated in a circle around him and said, “Here are my mother and my brothers! Whoever does God’s will is my brother and sister and mother.”
Matthew 12:48-50: "48. But Jesus replied, “Who is My mother, and who are My brothers?” 49. Pointing to His disciples, He said, “Here are My mother and My brothers. 50. For whoever does the will of My Father in heaven is My brother and sister and mother.”
Who is the mother of the messiah? Who gives birth to the messiah, brings the risen messianic hope into being? Who are the siblings of the messiah? ... The believers, collectively. Those who maintain the vision which -- being an idea -- cannot die or be killed so long as there are those who maintain hope.
John 11:24-26: "24. Martha replied, 'I know that he will rise again in the resurrection at the last day.' 25. Jesus said to her, “I am the resurrection and the life. Whoever believes in Me will live, even though he dies. 26. And everyone who lives and believes in Me will never die. Do you believe this?”
In other words, the earliest layers of the religion may not even have involved a literal resurrection of a physical body of Jesus, but a metaphorical realization that the messiah lives on in those who maintain faith. THAT is eternal life -- the very idea / hope of the messiah. So long as there are believers to maintain the ideal, it cannot die, but has "eternal life." This is also why, in order to obtain the kind of "eternal life" Christianity really offered, one could not simply believe a story, but had to "die to self," crucify the self, die to ego. Why? Because Jewish messianic hopefuls wanting revolution and independence needed to draw dedicated followers. Because they knew that self / ego is not actually eternal, but if one were to give up one's identity and one's life for the sake of the dream, the ideal, the vision of the coming messianic Jewish kingdom, then one would become part of a larger whole, an ideal that had no end, no death (so long as belief was maintained). It may have been another version of "It's harder to kill an idea than to kill a person." And it proved successful as Christianity/messianism spread, especially in the Pauline form friendly to Gentiles, even though the symbols and parables would unfortunately come to be interpreted in a far more literal manner, and that mode of interpretation became more popular than the original symbols,
Again, for Paul and the earliest Christians, it was not important to distinguish between a visionary and a physical encounter with the risen Christ. Only later, in response to anti-Christian polemics, did it become important to emphasize that the appearances were physical and not visionary. Clearly, the appearance stories grew in the telling, and the telling may well have obscured their original nature.
(Parsons, Keith M. in Ch. 13 of The Empty Tomb: Jesus Beyond the Grave, edited by Robert Price and Jeffery Jay Lowder, 2005, Amherst NY: Prometheus Books.)
Paul, or the writer of 1 Corinthians 15:50, talking about the difference between one's physical body and one's spiritual/ resurrection body, wrote, "Now I declare to you, brothers, that flesh and blood cannot inherit the kingdom of God, nor does the perishable inherit the imperishable." This implied that the resurrection body was a special spiritual body, not a resurrected physical body.
Acts 1:9-11: After he said this, he was taken up before their very eyes, and a cloud hid him from their sight. They were looking intently up into the sky as he was going, when suddenly two men dressed in white stood beside them. 'Men of Galilee,' they said, 'why do you stand here looking into the sky? This same Jesus, who has been taken from you into the sky, will come back in the same way you have seen him go into the sky.'
The ancient people believed God, or the Gods, lived up in the sky. In Hebrew (the Old Testament), the word for sky is shamayim; in Greek (the New Testament) the word is ouranos. People did not have two different words for sky and heaven; they were the same place. So when English Bibles translate shamayim and ouranos sometimes as sky and sometimes as heaven, they mislead modern readers. In the Bible, the sky/heaven (shamayim or ouranos) is a place:
where god lives
where the angels live
where the sun, moon, and stars move around
where rain, thunder, and lightning come from
where the clouds are
where birds fly
The ancient people, including Jews and Christians and the Bible, believed in a 3-tiered universe:
the heavens/sky above,
the stationary earth below (a flat circle/disk or a flat square),
Now we know that this is incorrect. But instead of giving up belief in heaven and hell, people simply began to imagine them as existing in some invisible dimension instead of "above" or "beneath" the earth. But that is not the way the Bible teaches it. In Acts, Jesus is depicted as rising into the sky (into heaven) until the clouds hid him from view. And in Revelation 1:7 a Christian writer says, "Look he is coming with the clouds, and every eye will see him, even those who pierced him..." Such descriptions are clues that the ascension and other stories are made up. It would be pointless for Jesus to have gone up into the sky; nothing is up there but air! And if heaven were in some other dimension (although I see no reason to think it is), Jesus could have simply disappeared into that other dimension. The fact that the Christian story depicts him going up into the air to heaven simply betrays their ancient world view that heaven was the upper sky; and this is one of the many clues that the story is a fabrication.
Also, according to typical interpretations of Revelation 1:7, they thought he would come back in the clouds and that everyone would see him (and they claimed it would happen in that generation). They did not know the earth was a sphere (although many believed it was flat circle), so they did not have a problem thinking everyone would be able to see him come down from heaven. Today, those Christians who still hold this belief resolve the issue by saying maybe it will somehow be a spiritual event that all will see in the spirit. Then there are those, believe it or not, who think this was a prophecy of satellite television--i.e. We'll all see him on television when he returns (a view at times advocated by fundamentalist evangelist Pat Robertson)!
Is Jesus still in the air floating above Jerusalem, sitting on a throne beside the Jewish god Yahweh?
If so, do Jesus and Yahweh spin around as the earth spins?! Is Jesus moving through space, revolving around the sun as the earth does?!
If a Christian in India or China lifts his hands skyward to pray toward heaven, is he looking in the wrong direction?!
Hopefully these questions now seem silly, in light of modern knowledge of the solar system, the galaxy, the universe/'multiverse.' But ancient people really thought the gods were right up there in the sky, and Christians were no different. The ascension story with Jesus going UP in a cloud should not be taken as historically true by an educated, modern person.
One additional note is worth making on this point. A typical modern translation of Luke says something like, "While he [Jesus] was blessing them, he left them and was taken up into heaven" (24:51, NIV). However, the ascension reference ("and was taken up into heaven") actually did not appear in some early manuscripts of Luke. The Codex Vaticanus (300s CE) has the ascension reference, but the Codex Sinaiticus (300s CE) does not: "51. And it came to pass, as he blessed them, he was separated from them. 52. And they returned to Jerusalem with great joy, ..." Only a Bible with a critical apparatus will show the variant readings of the oldest manuscripts. So the "he was taken up into heaven" part may have been added at a later time, so that Luke's ending would look more like the passage in Acts 1. Such variants in the oldest surviving manuscripts do not help Christianity's case at all, and there are no "original" manuscripts of any biblical books.
Only people who believed that heaven was up in the sky would invent such a story of an ascending savior god.
Ancient people invented MANY other such stories before they invented the Jesus version, and plenty of rather naive common people in the ancient world accepted such stories as historical truth.
For example, in the first century BC, both the Roman historian Livy and the Greek writer Dionysius of Halicarnassus preserved in their writings a traditional Roman account of the ascension of Romulus (Livy 1.16; Dionysius of Halicarnassus 2.56.1-6; 2.63.3-4; see also Plutarch's Numa 2.1-3).
Romulus, like the Jesus of later Christian imagination,
was a son of a God (Mars);
had a miraculous birth (He was born to a virgin sacred to the goddess Vesta after the God Mars came to her in secret);
rose into heaven at the end of his earthly life;
appeared later to at least one "trust-worthy person" (Julius Proculus); and
was himself called a God after his earthly life was over.
In the first century BC, some highly-educated men, like Livy and Dionysius, doubted the truthfulness of such traditions, considering them unlikely. But these two historians reported the old story anyway.
According to the tradition, while Romulus was addressing his men out in the open, a sudden darkness came down out of a clear sky and a violent storm erupted. Romulus was caught up into heaven by his father Mars. After the dark clouds passed, he was nowhere to be seen (Dionysius of Halicarnassus 2.56.2).
Not only that, but both at Romulus' miraculous conception AND at his "death"/ascension, darkness like night covered the earth, and the sun was blocked out (D.H. 2.56.6). It is no accident that the later inventors of the various miraculous Jesus stories made similar claims for their hero. The writer of Mark 15.33-34 claims that darkness came over the whole land for 3 hours when Jesus died, and the writers of Matthew 27:45-46 and Luke 23.44-46 repeated the claim, Luke adding that the sun was blocked out. [I already explained above the importance of the number 3.]
After his ascension, Romulus appeared alive to an old senator, Julius Proculus, in the countryside and told him to “Go” and give the people his message that Rome would one day rule the world. Dionysius says that Julius Proculus was a man of such blameless character that he would never have lied for personal gain (D.H. 2.63.3-4). According to Livy, Julius Proculus bore witness to the Roman Assembly as follows:
"Romulus," he declared, "the father of our city descended from heaven at dawn this morning and appeared to me. In awe and reverence I stood before him, praying for permission to look upon his face without sin. 'Go,' he said, 'and tell the Romans that by heaven's will my Rome shall be capital of the world. Let them learn to be soldiers. Let them know, and teach their children, that no power on earth can stand against Roman arms.' Having spoken these words, he was taken up again into the sky." (Livy 1.16, translated by Aubrey de Selincourt, Livy: The Early History of Rome, p.51 in the 1971 Penguin edition)
The various inventors of Christianity would repeat a very similar (and equally fictitious) story about Jesus (e.g. See the "Great Commission" in Matthew 28).
More skeptically-inclined educated Romans might believe that the Roman senators actually conspired against Romulus, killed him, and subsequently invented the story of his apotheosis in order to placate the common people in their shock at the death of their beloved leader. Dionysius reports an alternative skeptical version to the effect that senators cut Romulus' body into pieces (2.56.4). This last detail sounds suspiciously like the Osiris myth from Egypt. Osiris was cut into pieces by set, but with Isis' help he was resurrected and became the ruling God of the afterlife, with whom pharaoh's identified upon their death, as is recorded in various pyramid texts.
Romulus is but one example of an ascending savior. There are plenty of other Greek stories of
saviors
born of virgins to divine fathers,
performing amazing feats,
descending to Hades and returning,
ascending to heaven, etc.
Hercules was born of a human woman impregnated by Zeus. He once descended to Hades, overcame the 3-headed Kerberos/Cerberus, and returned to the land of the living. He also once brought the woman Alcestis back from the dead as a favor to her husband Admetos, king of Pheres in Thessaly. Hercules performed many other miraculous deeds and upon his death, he ascended to heaven and became an immortal God. To the Greeks, Heracles/Hercules had been a real man, a historical person. Spartan kings and others claimed descent from his children. Greeks could claim knowledge of relics, places, and monuments from his life, just as Christians would eventually claim regarding Jesus.
Romans claimed that Julius Caesar ascended to heaven. They additionally claimed that a comet, seen for seven days starting the first day of his official funeral celebration, was proof of his ascension and apotheosis/deification (Suetonius The Twelve Caesars: Julius Caesar 88; Ovid Metamorphoses 15). Romans also claimed that Augustus Caesar ascended to heaven. A former praetorian guard gave sworn testimony that he had seen Augustus' spirit ascending to heaven (Suetonius The Twelve Caesars: Augustus 100). Nobody doubts that the Caesars were real, historical men. Note the number symbolism explained earlier, and then note that Suetonius explains how Augustus was conducted after his death by an honorary praetorian guard of 40 members (Suetonius The Twelve Caesars: Augustus 99).
Also comparable to Christianity's Jesus stories are the stories of
Perseus,
Theseus,
Orpheus,
Egyptian Osiris,
Asclepius,
Apollonius of Tyana,
Empedocles,
etc.
Many cultures created such miraculous stories, and the common people believed they had really occurred.
And then there is the symbolism of the solar cycle on which the resurrection story is likely based. The solar myth may be summarized as follows (for the northern hemisphere): The sun is the ruler of heaven, the god of goodness and righteousness, giver of life and light to the earth. Yet light and life (the forces of good) everywhere appear to be in a cosmic struggle with darkness and death (the forces of "evil").
Every spring and summer, the sun is winning the cosmic battle: days are longer than nights, the sun is high in the sky, animal and plant life thrives on the earth. On June 21-22, the summer solstice, the longest day of the year, the sun is at its highest point in the sky, ruling in majesty over a warm, fruitful earth. But as the summer proceeds, each day the sun is just a bit farther south, or lower in the sky, and the days shorten and nights lengthen bit by bit.
Then by September 22, the autumn equinox (Latin meaning "equal night"), a serious event happens: the sun, the great good god of light and life, ruler of heaven and earth, comes under the power of the forces of darkness, which take him captive. On Sept. 22, day and night are equal, darkness is beginning to overcome the light, and each day the hours of light decrease as the nights lengthen. And as the forces of darkness take over and autumn proceeds, the weather begins to change, the air cools, vegetation begins to die, and each day the sun sinks lower and lower on the horizon.
The sun sinks day by day until finally, on Dec. 21-22, the longest night, the winter solstice, the sun is dead, killed by the forces of darkness and at its lowest point on the horizon. The sun is dead and the powers of darkness, cold, and death have triumphed. For three days, the sun of god lies at its death point, but on Dec. 25, the birthday of the new savior of the world, the sun is born as Sol Invictus, the unconquered sun. After this point, each day for 3 months the sun gains power and moves higher on the horizon, the days begin to lengthen bit by bit as light battles darkness. Finally, on March 22, the vernal/spring equinox, day is equal to night again and the sun triumphs over darkness and death; spring is born, and plant life that was dead is resurrected.
So we celebrate the resurrection of the sun/son of god on Easter, at DAWN on the first SUNday after the first full moon after the spring equinox -- the time when all life is renewed, even the moon and the sun. And in what sign of the Zodiac has the sun triumphed over death for the last 2,000 years? Pisces, the fish -- fittingly a symbol of Christianity from the beginning. Other points: Jesus + 12 disciples = Sun + 12 houses (signs of the Zodiac); Dec. 25 was the birthday of Mithras (the unconquered sun), savior in Mithraism, before it was adopted as the birthday of Jesus ("the light of the world").
The image to the left is an early Christian depiction of Christ as the sun/Helios/Sol, riding in the solar chariot (the other 2 horses were not preserved). It is an ancient mosaic from the Vatican grottoes under St. Peter's Basilica, from the tomb of the Julii, 200's CE.
The death and rebirth of the sun and vegetation was a central theme of so many ancient religions. John 12:24 "...unless a kernel of wheat falls to the ground and dies, it remains only a single seed. But if it dies, it produces many seeds." The Christ is not only the sun, which dies and is reborn, he also embodies all life on the planet, the cycle of death and rebirth. The inventors of Christianity constructed the story of Jesus in such a way that it embodied not only symbolism from Jewish legend and tradition (ex. the numbers and symbols from the canonical Exodus myth), but also astronomy, astrology, and the greatest symbols of nature religion.
Even the idea that Jesus was crucified and then buried is historically problematic.
According to surviving references to Roman crucifixion, the Romans did not allow criminals to be taken down by fawning supporters or seditious persons and buried decently in graves. The Romans left the bodies of crucified criminals hung up on their crosses to decompose and to be eaten by scavenging animals. This was part of the punishment. The Romans designed crucifixion to shock and terrify rebelliously inclined people, making them afraid to engage sedition or subversion. Roman punishment did not end with pain on the cross. It continued after death, as animals and the process of decay ravaged the corpse of the criminal.
New Testament scholar Bart Ehrman, Distinguished Professor of Religious Studies at the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, provides a brief tour of the historical evidence, saying:
Evidence for this comes from a wide range of sources. We have an ancient inscription found on the tombstone of a man who was murdered by his slave, in the city of Caria, on which we learn that the murderer was “hung … alive for the wild beasts and birds of prey.” The Roman author Horace says in one of his letters, that a slave was claiming to have done nothing wrong, to which his master replied, “You shall not therefore feed the carrion crows on the cross” (Epistle 1.16.46-48). The Roman satirist Juvenal speaks of “The vulture [that] hurries from the dead cattle and dogs and corpses, to bring some of the carrion to her offspring” (Satires 14.77-78). The most famous interpreter of dreams from the ancient world, a Greek Sigmund Freud named Artemidorus, indicates that it is auspicious for a poor man in particular to have a dream about being crucified, since “a crucified man is raised high and his substance is sufficient to keep many birds” (Dream Book 2.53). And there is a bit of gallows humor in the Satyricon of Petronius, a one-time advisor to the emperor Nero, about a crucified victim being left for days on the cross (chs. 11-12).
Ehrman, Bart. "Did Romans Allow Decent Burials for Crucified Criminals?" Bart Ehrman Blog, July 25, 2023. https://ehrmanblog.org/did-romans-allow-decent-burials-for-crucified-criminals/
Dr. Ehrman also quotes the German historian Martin Hengel, who wrote,
“Crucifixion was aggravated further by the fact that quite often its victims were never buried. It was a stereotyped picture that the crucified victim served as food for wild beasts and birds of prey. In this way his humiliation was made complete.”
The Hellenistic Jewish philosopher Philo, living from around 20 BCE to around 50 CE, wrote an account saying that the Romans did sometimes allow dead bodies to be removed for burial, but only on the Emperor's birthday.
... it is the custom to punish no one, even of those who have been lawfully condemned, until the famous festival and assembly, in honour of the birth-day of the illustrious emperor, has passed. ... I have known instances before now of men who had been crucified when this festival and holiday was at hand, being taken down and given up to their relations, in order to receive the honours of sepulture, and to enjoy such observances as are due to the dead; for it used to be considered, that even the dead ought to derive some enjoyment from the natal festival of a good emperor, and also that the sacred character of the festival ought to be regarded.
(Philo. "A Treatise against Flaccus." In The Complete Works of Philo . Translated by C.D. Yonge. 1855. Digireads.com Publishing. Kindle Edition. 2016.)
So the Christian story of Joseph of Arimathea being allowed by the Romans to bury Jesus' body appears to be a late fabrication.
Below are some challenging resurrection-related questions that I and others have posed, along with a few sample answers. Many of these answers have been given by people who were being very serious; some of the answers were given in jest, and some readers may find them offensive, but I decided to include them, since I think they may offer insight at times. You may not like any of the answers. You should try to answer each question honestly for yourself. If you are pressed for time, skip the sample answers, and just consider the questions. I have put serious answers in bold font.
Q. IF a real Jesus rose from the dead and allegedly loved humanity, why would Jesus have to leave the world at all? Why could he not stay around, show his resurrected body to the world, and establish world peace?
A1- God works in mysterious ways, and people should not ask questions. You should just believe what your preacher, parents, or culture tells you.
A2- God did not want to make it easy on people by being too open, honest, or up-front. He wanted instead to disappear into heaven to test everyone except the disciples just to see if they would believe stories without evidence. He rewards those who believe (child-like faith, as in Mt 18:3) by letting them go to heaven, while he punishes those who have trouble believing the story by sending them to punishment/destruction. People should just believe stories and not question them.
A3- Jesus was tired of hanging around stupid humans, so he gave the job of converting the whole world to his disciples. This gave him the opportunity to go to heaven and rest with his father for 2,000 years after the pain he had endured that weekend.
A4- He survived crucifixion, but he died again shortly afterward and told his disciples that if they told everybody he rose again and went into heaven, they could really get back at the Romans who killed him and were ruling the Jews' country, and they could start a great new religion and gain lots of power.
A5 Joseph of Arimathea stole and hid Jesus' dead body and got all the disciples high. On their "trips" they all saw Jesus again, thought they were enlightened. When sober again, Joe convinced them it really happened, and they started a new religion.
A6- He could have stayed on earth and done great things IF he had really been resurrected and loved humanity, but he never rose again in the first place; the story is a fabrication. Since he was not really alive, but some people were claiming he was, the ones who made the story up had to explain what happened to this allegedly resurrected man. They said he rose up into the sky (ouranos), just like Hellenistic Jews claimed regarding Elijah and Moses, and just like Greeks and Romans claimed regarding various Gods and heroes, and just like the Romans were claiming regarding their emperors. It was a theme which plenty of superstitious, religious people could readily believe at that time in history, and it was a symbol that could rival and inspire resitance to Roman imperial propaganda.
Q. Why did Jesus not show himself to Pilate or the Roman government after he rose again?
A1- God works in mysterious ways, and only the Devil askes such questions to make people doubt the truth.
A2- That would have made salvation too easy, and heaven would have been too crowded.
A3- God was too angry with Pilate and the Romans to appear to them.
A4- Jesus only showed himself to those he thought worthy. He did not want Pilate or the Romans or anybody else in the whole world to have the same privilege and opportunity that his favorite Jewish followers had.
A5- If Jesus really had been resurrected with an immortal body and really did love humanity and wish to set up a kingdom of God on earth, then of course he would have shown himself to everyone, the whole world, and set up a kingdom based on his reformed Jewish ideology. However, but the resurrection story is merely an unrealistic fabrication, like so many any the ancient world.
Q. Why does the Bible teach that all believers will one day be resurrected bodily? If people are really spirits, why can people not simply live forever without bodies?
A1- Many Jews who sided with the Pharisees, who -- having been influenced by Persian Zorastrianism -- came to believe that a bodily resurrection would occur at the last day; until then people would sleep in the earth (Dan 12:2). 6 (see endnote 6) Early Jews thought you needed a body to really live; that is why their stories depict Elijah (and later Moses and Jesus) ascending bodily into heaven. Many Greeks believed that after death, the spirit/soul continued to live and did not need a body. Mithraists taught that at death, the children of light would ascend spiritually through the 7 heavens to be reunited with their savior Mithras. Some Jewish groups and Christianity combined these two different ideas, because they already had tradition and the book of Daniel which told of a bodily resurrection. Hence, the New Testament often refers to the dead as "asleep" (Mt 27:52-53; Mt 9:24; Mk 5:39; Jn 6:40;11:11-14; 1Cor 11:30; 1Cor 15:18,20,51; 1Thess 4:13-17; cf. Dan 12:2); this is quite a Jewish view. Yet most Christians also came to believe, like many Greeks, that at death you do not fall asleep, but you go right away as a spirit/soul into heaven. But even the Christians who adopted the more Greek view, especially modern Christians, retained the Jewish element by believing they would get a body again at a future resurrection. If one accepts the Greek view, there is really no good reason why a bodily resurrection would be necessary. It is merely a fossil left over from Pharisaic Judaism.
A2- God thought we would have more fun if we had bodies, and he wanted us to be able to eat food, because he knows how much we like it. Spirits cannot eat or have sex, and that would be no fun.
Q. Where was Jesus' spirit between the crucifixion and the resurrection? Christians disagree.
A1- Paradise: In Lk 23:43 he tells a criminal on a cross, "I tell you the truth, today you will be with me in paradise."
A2- Hades: Mt 12:40 says "the son of man will be 3 days and 3 nights in the heart of the earth." Likewise 1 Pt 3:18-21 says, "He was put to death in the body but made alive by the spirit, through which also he went and preached to the spirits in prison who disobeyed long ago . . . in the days of Noah." Also, in Jn 20, when Mary Magdalene tried to touch him after the resurrection, he told her he had not yet been to the father. Lk 23:43 really means, "I tell you the truth today, you will be with me in paradise."
A3- He stayed with his body.
A4- He went to the bosom of Abraham, a holding station for people who have died (like Lazarus, see Lk 16:19-26).
A5- He was dead and he decayed like everyone else.
A6- His body was stolen, but he eventually died and decayed.
A7- It is a nonsensical question.
Q. If people get resurrected, will it be the same body or a different one? Christianity is unclear.
A1- Same one, still flesh and bones but imperishable and able to vanish and materialize. Jesus still has the wounds in his hands and feet. In Lk 24, he has everyone look at him and touch his hands and feet, he tells them he is "flesh and bones", and he eats fish; and in Jn 20, Thomas sees and feels his wounds. Ancient Christians even kept their bones because they knew they would need them at the resurrection. We must need our bones, or else why do we use coffins instead of just throwing our bodies in the ground to join the soil?
A2- Although our same bodies do get resurrected, they are changed into glorious, powerful, spiritual bodies and are no longer physical; "flesh and blood cannot inherit the kingdom of God"; the bones and flesh are changed into something different (1 Cor.15:42-54). Luke and John say that even close friends did not even recognize Jesus when they saw him after the resurrection (Lk 24, Jn 20). He could appear in different forms (Mk 16), and he could just vanish, materialize, and float up into the sky (Lk 24). Even though Jesus still had his wounds, he could have made them disappear if he wanted to. That's how we will be.
A3- If the body is going to be changed, why couldn't God just forget about the old body and make a new one? The whole idea of your decayed body being brought back to life is a foolish hold-over from Pharisaic Judaism. Even Jews like the Sadducees did not believe it because they knew it was not originally part of their religion. And the words "spiritual body" are an oxymoron; the whole idea behind spirit is that it is not material, which was a bad idea to begin with. If spirits have bodies, and they move and eat and see each other (light and sight are physical phenomena) and sense and think, then you might as well say that spirits are physical, just more developed and advanced, and that the spirit/matter duality idea is bogus.
Q. Where do people go when they die? Christianity is unclear.
A1- "You go straight to heaven or hell in a spirit dimension." This is the popular Christian answer, but many verses in the Bible support answer A2, and some support A5.
A2- You sleep in the dust of the earth until the resurrection. (Mt 27:52-53; Mt 9:24; Mk 5:39; Jn 6:40; 11:11-14; 1Cor 11:30; 1Cor 15:18,20,51; 1Thess 4:13-17; Dan 12:2) Judgement does not happen until the last day (Mt 7:22; 13:37-43,49-50; 25:31-46; Jn 12:48; 1Cor 15:22-23, 26, 52-54; Daniel 12:2) when some go to heaven and others to hades.
A3- You go to a holding station, a purgatory. Some people even get to be reincarnated for a while, like Elijah, who was reincarnated as John the Baptist.
A4- Your soul lives on in the emotional, mental, spiritual and more subtle planes, and most souls get reincarnated, until they more fully develop their higher consciousness.
A5- Just like the animals, "all go to the same place; all come from dust and to dust all return", just as Yahweh taught Moses and the Jewish forefathers. The breath returns to Yahweh who gave it, and the body decays. (Ecc 3:18-20; 6:6; 9:2-10; 12:7-8; Gen 3:19; Job 7:9; Ps 6:5; Ps 30:9; Ps 39:5-6,13)
A6- All your parts decay into tiny pieces that become parts of other things. Since your consciousness is made of the same energy and atoms as everything else, it dissolves with the body -- just like the consciousness of other animals. Humans no more have souls or spirits than chimpanzees, dolphins, dogs, or cats do; we just have DNA that is more complex. Your energy goes on forever, constantly changing, as it has been since you were born and even before. Energy always has been and always will be.
How do you answer these questions?
Matthew Kruebbe
7-24-2001, augmented over the years. Last significant additions: 4-17-2014.
bodhi7442 ... hotmail.com
The gospels are certainly not reliable on the topic of Jesus' alleged resurrection; the stories cannot even possibly all be "true" (which means it is certain that believers were fabricating stories); a physical bodily resurrection is unnatural, illogical, and extremely unlikely; and the stories sound like numerous other ancient myths.
Since Jesus did not really rise from the dead, what could have happened and why were such stories told?
What follows is speculation on possible theories and motives to account for the creation of the various Jesus stories.
1. It is interesting to me that many gnostic Christians believed the resurrection was a spiritual event and not in a physical body. In fact, some believed that the spiritually resurrected Jesus could still appear to them, and sometimes he appeared to them in different forms: an old man, a baby, even the image of the very person having the vision. If the gnostics held more authentic/original Christian beliefs on this issue, belief in a physical resurrection should not even be considered necessary to be a Christian. Was there a real, historical Jesus, whose biography was enhanced to resemble other standard ancient myths of life from death? Was the movement more spiritual at first, but eventually transformed as more people started interpreting the stories literally, at face value, rather than spiritually and symbolically?
It is important to recognize the significance of gnostic Christian views and the possibility that their more spiritual interpretation of resurrection may have been a more original approach, but it is also possible that this gnostic view may not have been the more original view. It is certain that early Christianity was not a doctrinally unified movement. If the 'resurrected' Jesus appeared only in dreams, trances, or 'spiritual' visions, the historical aspect of the faith would not have been so important.
For more on Gnostic Christianity, see professor Elaine Pagels' book, The Gnostic Gospels (1989).
2. Another possibility that many have considered is that the whole resurrection story, even most of the story of Jesus' life as now told, was created as a symbolic myth that embodied the highest ideals and beliefs of a Jewish sect influenced by Greek philosophy and mystery religions. The resurrection could even have been reenacted in initiation rituals, and perhaps the different versions of resurrection events in the first century come from different descriptions of these rituals, all the details of which would not have been considered of utmost importance. The Christ could have been a symbolic figure, the goal of the initiate's spiritual development and transformation. So much of Christianity fits in with the mystery religions that existed at the time: ideas of purification, initiation, death and rebirth, securing a better afterlife, the communion meal, the brotherhood. In this scenario, higher initiates would have known better that the story was not literally true, but spiritual myth/symbol. It seems that the spread of the new religion was not always well-organized at all. Even the NT shows that there was widespread disagreement regarding doctrines and interpretations. Over time, those inclined to interpret the stories literally (or at least to promote such interpretations, to their personal advantage) dominated church politics and eventually turned on the gnostics and declared all non-literal interpretations to be heretical. (See, for example, "The Jesus Mysteries," by Timothy Freke and Peter Gandy, 1999.)
3. Yet another potential explanation is that the resurrection stories were originally invented partly as a political move to retaliate against the Romans for dominating Judea and killing Jesus and other revolutionaries. It was like saying to the Romans,
"No matter what you do or whom you kill, you cannot destroy us and our God Yahweh is more powerful than you and your 'gods.' You claim your emperor Augustus was a child of a god, a fulfillment of prophecy, bringing peace to the world and then rising up into heaven as divine, but your culture is evil and you have oppressed us unrighteously. You killed our leader, but our God brought him back to life. 'Where is he, then?' you ask. God took him up to heaven, but he has fulfilled our old prophecies, and those who follow this messiah and Yahweh will also be resurrected and taken up, and he is coming back with the armies of heaven and your civilization will fall."
Jews could have seen the effectiveness of Roman religious propaganda, and wishing to counter it with something more suited to their own tastes, one sect created their own propaganda. The creators of such propaganda in any society almost always pass it off as if it is literally true, even though the creators know better. In order to spread the movement more widely, some Jews (e.g. Saul/Paul) became willing to compromise traditional Jewish standards. The movement became increasingly popular among people disillusioned with Rome, and over time, especially after the destruction of Jerusalem and the original heart of Jewish Christianity, the more gentile version of the religion (a literally-interpreted one) dominated the scene.
4. It is also possible that the Jesus character was originally either invented or shaped to conform to a symbolic embodiment of the nation of Israel itself. After all, the Jesus character was called the "Son of Man," which is a reference to Daniel, and in the original writings of Daniel, the "Son of Man" figure was a dream symbol; it was not an actual human, but a representation of the nation of Israel itself (Daniel 7.13-14).
In the dream in Daniel 7, there appear 4 beasts followed by a human-like symbol; the 4 beasts and the image "like a son of man" all represent nations, and the dream was intended as a prophecy of the future greatness of the nation of Israel. Although the original hopes of the author of Daniel were squashed, many Jews continued to hope for some kind of fulfillment of those ideas. 200 years later, many Jews were hoping to revolt against Rome, to win their freedom, and to have a glorious, independent kingdom again, as in the legends their ancestors created about David and Solomon. The earliest stories of the death, resurrection, and expected imminent return of Jesus could have been a revolutionary teaching among a Jewish sect claiming that the nation of Israel was the metaphorical child of Yahweh, sent to bring Yahweh's light and healing to the world, ruthlessly crucified/oppressed by the Romans, but that this chosen offspring of Yahweh was about to rise from the dead, defeat its enemies, and rule in glory. Spreading the message could have originally been politically motivated, an attempt to win broad support for revolution. Perhaps over time, people kept expanding the stories, letting them absorb more and more elements from standard Mediterranean myths in such a way as to create a cultural rival to Roman religion and propaganda, which was at that very time claiming that Augustus had been a promised child, son of Apollo, a fulfillment of ancient prophecies, and had lived a miraculous life, had brought the good news of peace to the world, and had died and ascended to heaven as a divine being. (See my essay "Caesar and Christ" for an in-depth comparison of the overwhelming similarities between Roman and Christian religious propaganda, with plentiful primary source citations.)
5. Of course another common idea is that there really was a historical Jesus, an apocalyptic preacher who wanted to be the messiah/king and hoped for the imminent coming of Yahweh's renewed Israel, and this original obscure desert preacher found himself in trouble and was crucified by the Romans. The body of this Jesus was either decayed and consumed by birds and wild animals (as typically happened to victims of Roman crucifixion) or was otherwise lost or was stolen by some disciples, or by someone else, or was misplaced. Any realistic option like this is far more likely than an actual bodily resurrection, especially considering that no historical Jesus was brave enough to stick around on planet earth after death, show himself to the Romans, establish a real kingdom, or prove his resurrection, status, or power. It could have happened that some disciples deliberately started the rumor that Jesus had risen again and would return to rule a free and united Israel. Or it could have happened that in their fear, in their emotional hysteria after the death of their leader, and in their confusion over the missing body, their uneducated, superstitious minds became increasingly agitated and suggestible, and some began to have dreams or visions of their departed leader, claiming to have seen him. (After all, people have claimed to see the Virgin Mary, Elvis, big foot, fairies, demons, various ancient gods and goddesses, ghosts, aliens.) Mass hysteria is a real phenomenon. Perhaps these disciples started a new religion, at first maybe even hoping to see a political revolution against Rome (which was tried in 66-70 CE), but as the movement spread and became popular, it evolved in many different ways, and when Jerusalem was destroyed by the Romans in 66-70 CE, the Jerusalem leadership of the Jewish "Christian" church was wiped out, leaving Christianity to follow a more Gentile, Greco-Roman, path of evolution without its original leaders.
- - - - -
Whether deliberate propaganda, misguided faith, or some mixture of both, the new religion was potent and popular among people disaffected with the Roman Empire. But naturally, different members of the new movement would have different ideas about doctrine and practice. There were many different groups, arguments, and debates in early Christianity within a very short time. In the divisions that followed, perhaps some wanted to present the resurrection as a symbolic or more spiritual story to win the more intellectual Greek types to their movement, while others felt the need to hold to the literal version and the Pharisaic Jewish view of bodily resurrection, which was also more revolutionary and a bigger threat to the Romans, at least at first. Even if it was an invented religion, initiates at the lowest levels would have been told the literal version, especially at the beginning of the movement in Jerusalem, if the initial desire was to inspire Jews to have faith in their national god Yahweh and to continue to resist Roman ways.
Who knows?
All of the above is speculation.
What CAN be seen, demonstrated, and known is that the stories -- as presented by the bible or by early Christian leaders -- are inconsistent, unreliable, and unrealistic. And it would not make any sense at all that a loving God would actually throw people into fiery destruction / Gehenna after death for honestly not being able to believe a set of old stories this unreliable, as the early Christians claimed? Christianity was not a good or truly loving religion.
1 The most reliable early manuscripts of Mark and other ancient writers referring to the story in Mark do not have or show any awareness of Mark 16:9-20. Was there an original ending that was lost? Was an earlier ending deleted by editors because it presented a different, unacceptable, or conflicting account?
Mark 16:9-20 is a separate account appended to the earlier text. It starts abruptly with its own setting, "Early on the first day of the week ...," which is awkward, breaks the flow, and is unnecessary. It does not even mention a trip to Galilee which Mark 16:7 calls for! -- a very telling sign. And while the un-appended Mark says the women (including Mary M.) fled from the tomb and "said nothing to anyone," the appendage says Jesus appeared to Mary M. and she told the others. It seems obvious, then, that the ending we now have was attached in order to make the Markan story seem to agree more with the other stories.
2 1 Corinthians15:6 is the only place in the Bible that records an appearance to 500 people at once. Why did not a single gospel writer mention this event? Would it not have been impressive to their readers? Would it not have helped their case, at least in the minds of credulous readers? Should one suspect that they were unaware of any such account, since surely they would have told it if they had only known of such a story? Did Paul make it up to comfort the Corinthians, who evidently had lots of doubts about the resurrection. Or, did 1 Corinthians originally contain no such story, but a later editor made up the story and added it to create additional "evidence" to convince people of his religion? Is this story comparable to the scattered modern claims by devout Catholics of appearances of the Virgin Mary?
3 While they are not a matter of contradiction, there are other elements of Matthew's account that are suspicious. Matthew says there was an earthquake when Jesus died (27:51), whereas the other gospels do not. It also says that tombs broke open, and that many dead bodies came to life and appeared to people in Jerusalem after Jesus' resurrection (27:52-53). You would think that events of this magnitude would be important enough for Jews and Romans both to write about, yet not only do Jews and Romans not mention them, even the other Christian evangelists do not write about them. Of course, as I said, these are not contradictions, and they don't disprove Matthew, but the author does make some outrageous claims that are unsupported by contemporaries.
To make matters more interesting, the Matthean account sounds suspiciously like Roman stories circulating about the death of Julius Caesar! Ovid wrote in the Metamorphoses (finished 8 CE) concerning the death and ascension of Julius Caesar as well as the divinity of Augustus (15.745-870).
Venus foresaw what was going to happen to her descendent Julius, and she cried throughout heaven. The Gods were moved, but nothing could alter Fate (15.779-81). Still, the Gods gave sure signs of the grief to come on earth. People heard trumpets in the sky and weapons clashed in black clouds. The sad image of the sun offered only a lurid light to the worried lands (785-6). Drops of blood fell among the clouds; the Morning Star was spattered with darkness; the Moon was spattered with blood; ivory statues cried in a thousand places (788-92). "They say that ghosts of the silent dead wandered around and that the city was moved by earthquakes" (797-8, umbrasque silentum erravisse ferunt motamque tremoribus urbem). Yet the forewarnings of the Gods could not stop the treachery or fated events. Venus tried to hide Julius in a cloud, but Jove read her the fates and explained that Julius had completed the time and finished the years he owed to the earth (816-7, hic sua conplevit ... tempora, perfectis, quos terrae debuit, annis). Venus and Julius' son Augustus will make it so that Julius will accede to heaven and be worshiped in temples (818-19, ut deus accedat caelo templisque colatur, tu facies natusque suus). "Meanwhile, make this spirit, taken from its murdered body, into the heavenly brightness (iubar) of a star, so that from his exalted dwelling place the divine Julius may always look down upon our Capitol and Forum" (840-2, 'hanc animam interea caeso de corpore raptam / fac iubar, ut semper Capitolia nostra forumque / divus ab excelsa prospectet Iulius aede!'). And immediately Venus came to earth unseen and took Julius' spirit from his body and bore him aloft to the celestial stars. He rose as a comet and shone as a star (843-850).
It should be noted that the Christians basically copied Roman claims about Julius and Augustus Caesar (similar to earlier Greek and Roman stories too) and crafted them into a more Jewish version for their literary hero Jesus of Nazareth. See my paper "Caesar and Christ" for details: https://sites.google.com/site/investigatingchristianity/home/caesar-and-christ.
4 Was the gospel of John making an attempt to include two rumored locations in a single story? If so, the author was perhaps aware of stories set in different locations, but was he aware that contradictory versions had actually been recorded? ( ... since his account does not actually solve the problems and even presents its own difficulties.)
5 The Bible teaches that just as the sky/heaven is above the earth, so is hell below/within the earth. Consider the following:
Mt 11:23: "You will go down to Hades." (also Lk 10:15)
Mt 12:40: "For as Jonah was 3 days and 3 nights in the belly of the sea creature, so the son of man will be 3 days and 3 nights in the heart of the earth."
1Pt 3:18-20: "He was put to death in the body but made alive by the spirit, through whom also he went and preached to the spirits in prison who disobeyed long ago..."
Php 2:10: "at the name of Jesus every knee should bow in heaven and on earth and under the earth"
Eph 4:9-10: "What does 'he ascended' mean except that he also descended to the lower parts of the earth? He who descended is the very one who ascended far above all the heavens in order to fill all things."
2Pt 2:4: "God did not spare the angels when they sinned, but sent them to Tartarus, putting them into gloomy dungeons to be held for judgement." (Tartarus is the lowest region of the underworld in Greek mythology.)
Rev 5:3: "no one in heaven or on earth or under the earth"
Rev 5:13: "every creature in heaven and on earth and under the earth and in the sea"
The early Christians and their Bible along with other ancient people thought hell was under the ground, the earth was flat, and God was up in the sky. It has only been in the last 400 years (since Copernicus, d.1543, and Galileo, d.1642, whose theory the Church condemned) that science has slowly driven ancient cosmology from people's minds.
6 The belief in the resurrection of the dead did not appear in Judaism until after the Jews had made contact with the Persians (539 BCE and onward), whose Zoroastrian religion taught this doctrine. Because the concept of an end-time bodily resurrection from the dead entered Judaism at a late date, not all Jews believed it. For example, the Sadducees rejected this doctrine, saying that Moses did not teach it and that it, therefore, did not belong to the religion of Yahweh and the law.
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
What do you think of the details presented in this examination of the resurrection? Send me an email, whether you find any errors or simply want to say that you enjoyed this information.