User Menu Search
Close

Do the Narratives of Jesus's Resurrection conflict?

Dan Barker, many years ago issues a challenge to Christians to take the 4 gospels and build a reasonable narrative of them. Presumably, he feels it is difficult, when in fact, the 4 gospels harmonize nicely without adding any commentary at all. 

The conditions of the challenge are simple and reasonable. 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 I Corinthians 15:3-8. These 165 verses can be read in a few moments. Then, without omitting a single detail 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. ...His premise is that the gospels contradict and cannot be reconciled. 

The Search for the Missing Corpse

In 33 AD, Palestine was the Roman name for the geographical region encompassing Judea and Galilee at that time over which the Romans were firmly in control of their Jewish and other Levantine subjects. I call this a CSI story because it focuses on the human capacity and function of forensic reason that is required to solve perplexing crimes such as some murders, abductions and others are. Based on actual historical events of the early first century and documented by histor- ians of the day, that's the kind of story this is. It masterfully depicts the reality of worldview presuppositions at work, and the application of both inductive and deductive reason that are unavoidably relied upon to unravel mysteries of this nature within the complex Judeo-Roman milieu.

  • 10 April 2019
  • Author: Scott Cherry
  • Number of views: 52
  • Comments: 0

If Jesus was replaced, then WHO rose from the dead?

by Scott Cherry

In this article I will talk about a famous event of history without naming the person to whom it is attributed. At least for a while. 
The event is a resurrection, or THE Resurrection. In theory, a resurrection is when a dead person comes back to life. THE Resurrection is when a particular dead person was purported to have come back to life. But who? Was it the Buddha? Was it Muhammad? How about Achilles? Could it be Osiris? Abraham Lincoln? Or maybe Superman?
  • 10 April 2019
  • Author: Scott Cherry
  • Number of views: 36
  • Comments: 0

Why We Can Have Justified Confidence in Knowledge We Gain From Experience

What is Reality?

It sometimes strikes me how much disparity there is among philosophers, even within the same 
stream. And this has always been true.  It reaches all the way back to the dawn of Greek philosophy with the Milesians. But it is captured especially well by the relationship of the two most significant Greek philosophers who were not only contemporaries but master and pupil no less—Plato and Aristotle.  Since then, rather than reaching eventual consensus among themselves, the disparities have continued through history to more recent eras with their prominent thinkers such as Descartes, Leibniz, Kant, Berkeley, Spinoza, and Hume to name just a few. Today’s students of philosophy might be hard-pressed to choose which if any one system is true as a whole.  The neophyte may be plunged into utter confusion until he/she can sort through the plethora of arguments for and against every conceivable belief they once held, not to mention the ideas they have never even considered.  (As I see it, the university seems to relish in this.)  On the other hand, as seen from another perspective and through different lenses it is very impressive to note how much commonality there actually is.  It really depends on what one is looking at.  Philosophical disparities are every bit as pronounced today as ever they were, but I will focus much more on the commonalities.
  • 1 April 2019
  • Author: Scott Cherry
  • Number of views: 76
  • Comments: 1

The Most Extreme Faster Teaches us the Principles of Fasting that God Accepts.

Today there was a fastathon at UM Dearborn sponsored by the Muslim Student Association. But it isn't Ramadan, it's Lent. "Why do only the Muslims host fastathons?" I wondered.  Anyway, last week my young friend Emad was signing other students and staff up for the event and we had this conversation. When Jesus was about 30 Jesus went into the desert to fast for 40 day. At the end Satan presented Jesus with three strong temptations to get him to compromise his mission and his faithfulness to God. Apparently Satan had only one premise which he used all three times. It's recorded in the narratives as follows: "If you are the Son of God..." (Gospels according to Apostle Matthew 4:3, 6 and the historian Luke 4:3, 9, New Testament, Injeel).  Unfortunately, these narratives are not contained in the Qur'an. My inquiry here is, Why did Satan use this particular premise to tempt Jesus? Where would he have gotten that notion?

The first temptation the devil presented to Jesus is revealed to us here: https://www.esv.org/Matthew+4/ (vv. 3-4)

  

 

Just a stone, with a suggestion to make it bread. But what's so bad about that? Was it merely that to eat bread would break the Messiah's fast (and his record)? No, it was bad because of who offered it and with what pretense. It was offered by Evil personified as a test of Jesus's resolve--to use his innate power for his own gratification or not. But the Lord did not succumb. Rather, he thwarted the devil by quoting holy scripture from the Tawrat (Old Testament, Holy Bible).

  • 20 March 2019
  • Author: Scott Cherry
  • Number of views: 129
  • Comments: 0
RSS

Article Search

Terms Of UsePrivacy StatementCopyright 2019 by Advance Ministries
Back To Top