b3ta.com board
You are not logged in. Login or Signup
Home » Messageboard » Message 10574054 (Thread)

# not sure
there's not much more evidence you could have for a zombie who can turn himself invisible. no body? check. frightened disciples running around shouting 'he's alive! ALIVE!'? check. an odd cloud going up to heaven? check. not too much else there. it doesn't look like he needed to eat after resurrection.
(, Mon 17 Oct 2011, 14:31, archived)
# i meant
there would be more than just one account of the events. as it is, all the accounts that were supposed to be written all wound up either actually in the bible or were referred to by the bible. i want to see the fucking parchments!
(, Mon 17 Oct 2011, 14:36, archived)
# there's loads of accounts
they just weren't chosen for the bible. (www.earlychristianwritings.com has collected the vast bulk of it.) and also probably not written down for more than a hundred years after he died. the ones in the bible are from probably two sources (the markian and the, err, johnian). but i just read the resurrection and mark and luke aren't in *that* great an agreement with matthew. i mean, you can justify it without breaking too much sweat but they look like two sources, as well. so maybe three. unless you read a book written by someone who actually knows what he's talking about (unlike me) who say sit was two, in which case be inclined to beleive him.

anyway, the romans wouldn't have given a toss about the unmarked grave of a crucified man, i don't think they did much with the bodies except chuck them in a ditch. so they won't have written it down.
(, Mon 17 Oct 2011, 14:46, archived)
# so
anything relevant to the exact time and place was written by his mates, anything else was written long enough afterwards to succumb to chinese whispers. got it.
(, Mon 17 Oct 2011, 14:52, archived)
#
(, Mon 17 Oct 2011, 15:31, archived)