'Cold-Case Christianity'

[Gordon]

But the evidence from Matthew's account suggests that the authorities were aware even the day after the crucifixion that the disciples would claim he had risen.
Luke may have written decades after the eventts but he refers to accounts that had already been written.

If so, how can you be sure the Matthew account is true?

As a notorious philosopher once said 'he would say that, wouldn't he'.

[NicholasMarks]

If so, how can you be sure the Matthew account is true?

As a notorious philosopher once said 'he would say that, wouldn't he'.

Jesus said many things that are proving to be true...things like all this invisible energy that builds all the stars is superabundant, indestructible and is a force we can harness if we follow him, accurately.

This is supported by millions who have indeed tried to follow him.

It doesn't take an incredibly clever person to realise that if the universe is carved out of an indestructible force then if we can harness that force in a useful way we become indestructible as well...hence resurrection. The alternative isn't so nice but that is down to the individual that doesn't want loving, caring, upbuilding, righteous laws in their life, and who hide behind the confusion that they themselves create to hide the wonderful teaching that offers us this.

This is why Jesus will not argue with dissenters...he will just allow them to be cut-off by their own  insistence that he didn't do what God's Judgment demands we all do as well for our own salvation. 

[bluehillside Retd.]

Sparky,

Jesus said many things that are proving to be true...things like all this invisible energy that builds all the stars is superabundant, indestructible and is a force we can harness if we follow him, accurately.

You've made this assertion many times now, so it's time to put up or shut up: where exactly does Jesus talk about this superabundant whotsit of yours? As you're fond of telling us that you've studied the Bible, presumably it'll be no effort for you to quote chapter and verse on this.

[Spud]

If so, how can you be sure the Matthew account is true?

As a notorious philosopher once said 'he would say that, wouldn't he'.

Hopefully you agree that the gospels are distinguishable from fiction. It is near impossible that the authors and early Christians endured persecution, without attempting to resist (documented in the NT, as well as by early church historians) all for a work of fiction.

One thing to note (though it doesn't prove the truth of the account) is that Matthew purposely includes the priests' claim that the disciples stole the body. Why would he do this if their claim went against, and on the surface, disproved, his claim? The answer must be because he is convinced Jesus rose.

Likewise, Mark seems to anticipate suggestions that Jesus wasn't dead when he was taken off the cross: in Mark 15:45 he uses the word ptoma which means corpse, as opposed to soma (a body, either living or dead).

Luke tells us that Jesus ate something to prove he wasn't a ghost.

So these authors went to great lengths to cover every possible criticism, emphasizing for example that:

Jesus was truly dead
The women went to the right grave
The body was not stolen (tomb sealed and guarded)
The risen Jesus was not a ghost (ate food)

Why were they so confident that some would believe that they went ahead despite persecution and death?

John gives an answer: the (Old Testament) scriptures say that the Messiah had to rise from the dead (John 20:9). For those who could see this, it was basically what the world had been waiting for.

But the main argument for the truth of the gospels is the change effected in the authors by their experience, which becomes evident as you read. The author of Matthew (Matthew) resigning not only his job as a tax-collector, but his identity as a Jew, for example.