Dan Barker's Easter Challenge (for PinSeeker)

[Kapyong]

Gday all,

Here is Dan Barker's famous Easter Challenge for Christians :
https://ffrf.org/legacy/books/lfif/stone.php

'' I HAVE AN EASTER challenge for Christians. My challenge is simply this: tell me what happened on Easter. I am not asking for proof. My straightforward request is merely that Christians tell me exactly what happened on the day that their most important doctrine was born.

Believers should eagerly take up this challenge, since without the resurrection, there is no Christianity. Paul wrote, "And if Christ be not risen, then is our preaching vain, and your faith is also vain. Yea, and we are found false witnesses of God; because we have testified of God that he raised up Christ: whom he raised not up, if so be that the dead rise not." (I Corinthians 15:14-15)

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. ''

Are you up for the challenge, PinSeeker ?
Or any other Christian here ?

Let's be clear -
your account cannot OMIT anything from those source accounts.

Kapyong

[Kapyong]

Gday all,

Actually eyewitnesses (even Paul, who did encounter Christ Himself)...

Nope.
Paul had a VISION of a supernatural being, like some others.

...who didn't even tell the same story.

Mm-hmm. Because they didn't all use the same exact words. Gotcha.

Because the stories are totally contradictory in fact.

And two of them (Matthew and Luke) were simply repeating the original rumors that Mark started...

Speculation and hearsay...

Fact based on analysis of the text.

...and just each adding their own contradictory tales...

An opinion, and horribly flawed at that.

A fact demonstrated here over and over.

...including an ascension story that Mark never even told.

Just because he didn't tell it doesn't mean it didn't happen. At least you admit that he didn't contradict it; that's at least a small step in the right direction.

Apologists can believe in anything for any reason.

That's a pretty weak foundation for a religion.

Gotcha.

Yup.
You have failed dismally, almost every poster here has demolished your claims. You've been shown wrong many times (e.g. original fragments, no NT changes, Tekton answers the challenge - all wrong.)

Don't you CARE how many times you are shown wrong ?
Don't you realise your credibility is ZERO here now ?

Black = white, the sun rises in darkness, PinSeeker has answered the challenge.

Kapyong

[Kapyong]

Gday all,

You did not include the relevant detail that there is simply not enough time for the disciples to travel. What am I talking about, you may ask?
Why simply, the two disciples on the road to Emmaus. On Easter Sunday, they meet the Eleven in Jerusalem and then Jesus appears to them, frightening some of them, and asking them why they are afraid. He calms them, and convinces them that is indeed him, their master returned from death.
Thing is...what does Matthew tell us happened that very same day? Chapter 28 tells us in Galilee, about sixty miles away (and thus, too far to travel even on horseback), that Jesus appeared to the eleven disciples and that some doubted.

Which meeting happened first? The one at Galilee, or the one at Jerusalem? Why were the eleven disciples afraid, doubtful and confused at both meetings? Did it take two appearances from Jesus to convince them he had returned?
How did the disciples travel from Jerusalem to Galilee all in the one day? On horseback? To do that, they must have had super horses, ones that didn't tire in the 4 or 5 hours it would have taken to traverse the distance at full gallop, and trained horse riders will tell you that you just don't do this with horses, that you have to stop and/or slow down every so often. I suppose the disciples could have ridden their horses to the brink of, if not to actual death in order to make the journey on...but why would they have done so?

Indeed.
PinSeeker just dodged all that.

PinSeeker left out many of the details of the challenge about Easter Sunday - a challenge that requires NOTHING be OMITTED.

While arrogantly and falsely insisting he has answered it !

AND refusing to enter into debate about his mistakes, even while no-one here believes a word he says (apart from fellow apologist JW of course.)

Frankly, PinSeeker's answers are insulting to the intelligence of a twelve-year-old.

Kapyong

[rikuoamero]

[Replying to post 68 by JehovahsWitness]

Given the distances between the two locations the most reasonable assumption is that Matthew is not presenting the two encounters as taking place on the same day.

What reason do you have for thinking that this is what Matthew meant? Remember what I said in earlier posts - the only reason you are thinking this is because you are already aware of what is said in Luke. In other words, your reason for thinking that Matthew's Galilee event took place on a not-Easter-Sunday doesn't come from Matthew. It comes from elsewhere.
You're not letting the text speak for itself. You're forcing a meaning onto the text that just plainly isn't there.

Did you attempt my challenge from earlier? My challenge to read Matthew, and tell me what day Galilee took place on, and then to read Luke and tell me what day Jerusalem took place on?

In the absence of an explicit statement either way one is left with a choosing the most reasonable assumption.

In my eyes, the most reasonable assumption to make when reading Matthew Chapter 28 is that it takes place on Easter Sunday. That is what I read, what I take from the text.
You'll have to explain to me why that is not the most reasonable assumption. I've explained my reasoning several times now, but to reiterate it one last time: the fact that Easter Sunday is identified in verse 1 of the chapter, and no indication is given in the text that Galilee takes place on a different day.
Anecdote here (I fully acknowledge it) but earlier today, while I was waiting for the bus, I asked a complete stranger to read Matthew 28, and then I asked her a single question. "What day does the meeting in Galilee take place on".
I'll give you three guesses as to what day she gave me, and the first two don't count.

[JehovahsWitness]

Did the Aposltes travel to Galilee on the first Sunday?


ANSWER: Matthew makes no specific statement as to when the Galilean appearance (Mat 28:16-20) happened.

In the absence of an explicit statement either way one is left with a choosing the most reasonable assumption. Given the distances between the two locations the most reasonable assumption is that the events did not happen on the same day. This assumption neither conflicts with any explicit statement in Mattew's text nor does it conflict with anything in Luke's account, including his Bethany departure (Luke 24:50-53).





RELATED POSTS

Did the Apostles travel to Galilee on the first Sunday?
http://debatingchristianity.com/forum/v ... 77#p927277

Did Jesus stay on earth for a while?
http://debatingchristianity.com/forum/v ... 79#p926579

Why is there no mention in the gospels of 500 eyewitnesses of the risen Jesus?
http://debatingchristianity.com/forum/v ... 16#p970816

Was "Great Commission" given uniquely to the eleven Apostles?
viewtopic.php?p=937795#p937795

Where did the ascension take place?
http://debatingchristianity.com/forum/v ... 61#p926561

[JehovahsWitness]

INDEX (21)



When (what time) did the women visit the tomb?
http://debatingchristianity.com/forum/v ... 33#p926933

Why did the women visit the tomb
http://debatingchristianity.com/forum/v ... 41#p926941

Who were the women that visited Jesus tomb?
http://debatingchristianity.com/forum/v ... 31#p908331

How many women visted Jesus' tomb
http://debatingchristianity.com/forum/v ... 31#p908331

Was the tomb open when they arrived?
http://debatingchristianity.com/forum/v ... 35#p908335

Who was at the tomb when the women arrived?
http://debatingchristianity.com/forum/v ... 36#p908336

Where were these messengers (angels) situated when the women arrived?
http://debatingchristianity.com/forum/v ... 81#p926581

Where were the messengers (angels) situated at the tomb?
http://debatingchristianity.com/forum/v ... 81#p926581

What did the messenger(s) say?
http://debatingchristianity.com/forum/v ... 57#p926557

Did the women tell anyone what happened?
http://debatingchristianity.com/forum/v ... 95#p908395

When Mary returned from the tomb, did she know Jesus had been resurrected?
http://debatingchristianity.com/forum/v ... 68#p926568

When did Mary first see Jesus?
http://debatingchristianity.com/forum/v ... 69#p926569

Could Jesus be touched after the resurrection?
http://debatingchristianity.com/forum/v ... 06#p908706

After the women, to whom did Jesus "first" appear?
http://debatingchristianity.com/forum/v ... 74#p926574

Where and when did Jesus first appear to his disciples?
http://debatingchristianity.com/forum/v ... 76#p926576

Did the disciples doubt?
http://debatingchristianity.com/forum/v ... 40#p927240

Did the disciples believe the two men (Cleopus & his companion)?
http://debatingchristianity.com/forum/v ... 71#p926571

What happened at the appearance?
http://debatingchristianity.com/forum/v ... 77#p926577

Did the Apostles travel to Galilee on the first Sunday?
http://debatingchristianity.com/forum/v ... 77#p927277

Did Jesus stay on earth for a while?
http://debatingchristianity.com/forum/v ... 79#p926579

Where did the ascension take place?
http://debatingchristianity.com/forum/v ... 61#p926561

Synopsis
http://debatingchristianity.com/forum/v ... 83#p926583

Sequencing & Related Posts
http://debatingchristianity.com/forum/v ... 85#p926585

To learn more please go toother posts related to...

JESUS RESURRECTION , RESSURECTION CHRONOLOGY and ....THE RANSOM[/

[rikuoamero]

[Replying to post 74 by JehovahsWitness]

Post 74 is just a repeat of what you said earlier, a cut and paste job. I've already responded to this, so why do it?

[JehovahsWitness]

[Replying to post 76 by rikuoamero]

It's a revision; I want a complete up to date post indexing all my posts in chronological order for easy reference.

No need to respond if you don't want to.


Regards,

JW

[rikuoamero]

[Replying to post 76 by rikuoamero]

It's a revision; I want a complete up to date post indexing all my posts in chronological order for easy reference.

No need to respond if you don't want to.


Regards,

JW

My questions from earlier still stand. Why say you cannot assume a date/day when the start of the chapter does give us one, and there is no further indication that the author is thinking of a different day?
Admit it - your objection to Matthew's Easter Sunday is not because of anything Matthew has written but because Luke writes that the disciples are in a different location the same day. Instead of following the evidence where it leads, you're trying to mash the two together.

I will give you an analogy. Read the following two accounts

"From the Pen of Alan Smith, Sunday 20th July 1800.
I arrived in London, to meet with the esteemed Rothschild banking family. The master of the family spread a spectacular dinner, and he recommended an excellent vintage of Cabernet Sauvignon wine from the southern parts of France.
I met with some factors, and successfully established a business contract, one that I hope returns a profit. With the Lord's grace, my endeavours will prove fruitful. "

"Written by Gregory Rothschild, Sunday 20th July 1800
I arrived in St. Petersburg in the heartland of Russia. Several powerful merchant families were on my list to meet, in my capacity as head of the Rothschild bankers of London. We have suffered some setbacks before, but I hope to bounce back and restore glory to my family.
Late in the evening, I received an invitation from the Czar himself. I cannot ignore it, and so must prepare myself. This will be my first encounter with royalty, so pray God that I do not make a fool of myself".

Did Alan Smith meet Gregory Rothschild on the 20th July 1800? What about his meeting with factors of the clan? Is it reasonable to think that that happened on the 20th?

I want to know your reasoning for why, upon reading Matthew 28, it is somehow not reasonable to think Matthew says/intimates/implies that the Galilee meeting with Jesus took place on Easter Sunday.

[rikuoamero]

[Replying to post 47 by PinSeeker]

From Post 47, I see a submission to the challenge put forth by Dan Barker/Kapyong.
viewtopic.php?p=927013#927013

To reiterate the challenge from the OP…

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

To condense that, the challenge is
1)To read the following verses
2) Write down a single narrative, in chronological order of what happened that day.
3) Most importantly, the submitter is to not leave out a single detail from any of the verses.

Obviously, Pinseeker’s submission has left out details.

Let’s examine it shall we?

On the morning of day one (Easter Sunday) 
* Very early in the morning a group of several women, including Mary Magdalene, approaches the tomb to complete burial customs on behalf of Jesus (Matthew 28:1; Mark 16:1; John 20:1). They behold the tomb opened and are alarmed. 

There are problems right here off the bat. Pinseeker says that the purpose of the women was to complete burial customs. However, this is not what Matthew 28 says. Matthew 28 says they go there to look at the tomb. John makes no mention of why the women go to the tomb.
Also, Pinseeker leaves out the detail that Matthew mentions two Marys; Mark says the two Marys and Salome; Luke doesn’t give names at all; and John says Mary Magdalene, giving no hint that he is even aware of any other women.
Another problem in PS’s narrative is that he says the women see the tomb opened. Matthew mentions an earthquake, with an angel descending from heaven and rolling away the stone. Pinseeker makes no mention of this earthquake, so that’s another detail he has left out.

 Mary Magdalene runs to Peter and John with distressing news of likely grave robbers (John 20:2).

Here, Pinseeker leaves out the detail from Mark 16 Verse 8, where it says the women fled the tomb and most importantly, said nothing to anyone.
Also of note is the fact that PS says it is Mary Magdelene alone who runs to talk to Peter and John. PS does not mention that Mary Mag leaving on her own is not mentioned by any of the other sources.

 The women who remain encounter an angel who declares to them that Jesus had risen and that they should tell this to the brethren (Mark 16:5; Luke 24:4; Matthew 28:5). 

Here in PS’s narrative, there is one angel to talk to the women, and he does not clarity that it is a young man who talks to the women according to Mark; that Luke mentions two men in clothes gleaming like lightning (no clarification that Luke’s men are angels); that it is Matthew alone who mentions a single angel.
Again, what goes unmentioned is Mark 16:8, where the women do not tell what they have been told to anyone. Is this because this is a contradiction to the narrative in Pinseeker’s mind, one that must go so as to not jeopardise what he has presupposed is the “true� story?

 They are filled with fear at first and depart from the tomb afraid to speak (Mark 16:8).

Not just afraid to speak, but they in fact do not speak. What is PS reading? I checked on biblehub.com
http://biblehub.com/mark/16-8.htm
and only one translation says that Mark’s women talked to anyone.

Some time later, they recover their courage somewhat and decide to go to the disciples.  (Luke 24:9; Matthew 28:8). 

Here, PS is being disingenuous. Luke does not mention a period of time where the women are afraid, then regain their courage. Luke’s narrative has the women bowing down to the two men (not angels), and then leaving immediately to tell the disciples.
Matthew is much the same, except unlike Luke, it is one angel, not two men who talk to the women.

At about the same time, Peter and John have gone out to the tomb to investigate Mary’s claim.

A reminder to readers. PS’s narrative is that Mary Mag left on her own to talk to Peter and John. This is not mentioned at all by Matthew, Luke or Mark.

 Mary Magdalene follows Peter and John back out to the tomb, and they arrive before the other women have left.

Also of note is that Gospel John does not identify who the second disciple is that follows along with Simon Peter and Mary Mag. This disciple is identified only as the disciple whom Jesus loved.

At this time, Peter and John discover the tomb empty though they encounter no angel. John believes in the resurrection. Peter’s conclusion is not recorded. 

 Meanwhile, the other women (Mary Magdalene is not with them) report what the angels say to the other disciples.  Peter and John have not yet returned, and these remaining disciples are dismissive of the women’s story at first

Here, PS does not mention that Mark says the women told no-one. Also, neither Matthew, Mark or Luke say that Mary Mag had left the other women.
What also goes unmentioned by PS is that in Matthew, the disciples do go to Galilee. There is no mention of the attitude of the disciples in Mark, because they are not told in Mark.
I also have to point out – here PS made a mistake that I think he didn’t catch. Here, he mentions what the angels, plural, command the women to report to the disciples. So far in PS’s narrative, there has only been the one angel. I don’t think it was a typo on his part, because if he had meant to say angel singular, he would have said “report what the angel says�, instead of “report what the angels say�

During this time, Mary, who is lingering at the tomb, weeps and is fearful. Peering into the tomb she sees -- this time, as opposed to when she first approached the tomb -- two angels, who wonder why she is crying.

They are two men, not identified as angels. Also, PS’s narrative almost implies (at least this is the gist that I get from him) is that this is the first appearance of the two angels, and again, another gist that I get, is that these two angels are seperate from the other(s).

 At any rate, Jesus then calls her by name, and Mary, recognizing his voice, recognizes him. Filled with joy, she clings to him (APPEARANCE NUMBER 1, John 20:16).

Here, a contradiction with Paul’s account in 1 Corinthians. Indeed, Paul seems to be entirely unaware of what happened (if anything) at an empty tomb. Paul lists a number of appearances by Jesus, and nowhere in the list is Mary Mag. Peter Cephas is the first appearance listed by Paul.

 Subsequently, Jesus sends her back to the disciples with the news to prepare them for His appearance later that day (John 20:17). 

Of note is that according to PS’s narrative, the women (sans Mary Mag) are told by the angels to report to the disciples, and then (or shortly after or during) Mary Mag is told by Jesus alone to report to the disciples. There is no mention by PS of Luke 24:10, where the women as a single group, Mary Mag among them, report what Luke’s two men wearing robes like lightning had told them to say. As far as Luke is concerned, these two men told Mary Mag (and the other women) what to do, and not Jesus.

After His encounter with Mary, Jesus then appears to these other women (Matthew 28:9). Just as He had with Mary, He also sends the other women back to the disciples with the news that He had risen and that He would see them (APPEARANCE NUMBER 2). 

No explanation is given for how PS thinks is the second appearance, nor is any thought given for Paul’s list in Corinthians.
Also of note is that PS does not mention what it says in Verse 10 of Matthew 28. The command by Jesus is for the disciples to go to Galilee, which is where he plans to meet them. Matthew’s Jesus is at odd’s with Luke’s Jesus, where the meeting takes place in Jerusalem.

 Later that day, two men on their way to Emmaus are pondering what they have heard about rumors of his resurrection. Jesus comes up behind them and joins them in travel and conversation, but they are prevented from recognizing Him. First Jesus breaks open the Word for them (while they are walking). Some time later, continuing their conversation, they arrive at their destination and He sits down to dinner with them.

So according to PS, this is still Easter Sunday, the same day as what he’s been talking about so far with the women and disciples at the tomb (although maybe I should ask Jehovah’s Witness? According to him, these things are not explicitly dated)

Anyway, this is evening of Easter Sunday, perhaps getting close to night time, what with the mention of dinner. Note that in PS’s narrative, the meeting in Galilee has yet to be mentioned (either as taking place or as something that has yet to happen). It would be very unlikely, to the point of impossibility for the disciples to go from Jerusalem to Galilee after having an evening dinner with Jesus. The distance is too great (about 60 to 100 miles from what I have been told) and of course, travel would have been hard and dangerous.

 At some point, they celebrate Communion, and their eyes are "opened" and they recognize Him in the breaking of the bread. (APPEARANCE NUMBER 3, Luke 24:13-30) This is actually their conversion experience. 

Okay, so at least two disciples now know Jesus is back.

The two men return later that evening to Jerusalem and go to the disciples. At first, the disciples don't believe them, just as they had not believed the women (Mark 16:13). Nevertheless, the two men continue to relate what they had experienced. 

What PS does not mention is a curious thing the two said to the others. ““There they found the Eleven and those with them, assembled together 34 and saying, “It is true! The Lord has risen and has appeared to Simon.��
At no point while the two were walking with Jesus were they told he had appeared to Simon. About the only place where this could possibly have fit in is when Jesus “And beginning with Moses and all the Prophets, he explained to them what was said in all the Scriptures concerning himself.�
But I don’t think so, since the scriptures (Old Testament) don’t mention Simon.
At no point prior to this meeting of the two with the other nine disciples has Jesus appeared to Simon. The only times it is mentioned that Simon sees Jesus is when he is amongst all the other disciples, in Matthew, verse 38 of Luke 24 and verse 19 of John 20.
I do have to mention that Paul does list Simon Peter as having had a singular encounter with the risen Jesus, but that is part of a list, and as I mentioned before, that would make it the first appearance by Jesus. Either way, Paul does not give any information as to when that happened.

At some point in this conversation, Peter draws apart from the others for some unknown reason. I think this was orchestrated by the Lord, but that's just speculation on my part. While Peter is by himself, Jesus appears to him (APPEARANCE NUMBER 4, Luke 24:34; 1 Corinthians 15:5). 

This is a non-sequitur. Luke does not mention Peter drawing apart from the others to have his singular encounter with Jesus. Neither does Paul, as I just explained up above, who lists Peter’s singular encounter as the first vision of the risen Jesus, and not the crowd of disciples in Jerusalem. Indeed, according to Paul in Corinthians, he says “that he appeared to Cephas, and then to the Twelve. 
First Simon Peter, THEN the twelve. Also of note is something that PS doesn’t catch and likely Paul is unaware of: namely that Paul says Jesus appeared to the Twelve. How can this be? Surely Paul knew that Judas Iscariot, the traitor, was no longer counted as a disciple/apostle, and that his position had been filled by Matthias (who was chosen after Jesus had returned to heaven after Act’s 40 days)? Surely Paul should have said eleven? Or just eleven on its own, with no mention of Simon Peter (Cephas) on his own?

 Subsequently, Peter goes back and informs the other disciples, who then believe.

Since PS for all intents and purposes made up that Peter drew away from the rest of the disciples, this too is made up. There is no citation given for Peter returning to tell the disciples anything.
As far as the texts are concerned, (apart from Corinthians), Peter only ever saw Jesus as part of the group of disciples and never on his own.

At some point in the men's recounting of the afternoon's events, Jesus appears to the small gathering of disciples and the two men from Emmaus (APPEARANCE NUMBER 5). Thomas was absent. 

Where does it say Thomas was absent? Luke does not say. He calls this the eleven.

 There is no biblical data that Jesus appeared to them during the week that followed. The next account of the resurrection says, “Eight days later� namely the following Sunday. 

Eight days later would mean the second Monday after Easter Sunday…
I must also remind readers that Luke and John have the disciples meeting with Jesus in Jerusalem.
They are not at Galilee, where Matthew has them.

Interlude 2 
* The disciples receive some instructions to return to Galilee (Matthew 28:10; Mark 16:7), where they would see Jesus. Thus they spend some of the week journeying 60 miles to the north. This would have taken some time. We can imagine them making the trek north during the intervening days. 

Here, PS is implying that it is only AFTER the meeting(s) in Jerusalem that the disciples are then told to go to Galilee. He has not yet mentioned this instruction until now. Also, he makes a mistake citing Mark 16:7. The very next verse, Verse 8, says that the women who are meant to relay the instructions...do not do so.

Some time later 
* The time frame of the next appearance is somewhat vague; John merely says “After this...� Likely, it is a matter of days, or a week at best. The scene is at the Sea of Galilee.

No mention given that this could possibly be Matthew’s meeting of the disciples with Jesus.

Not all the Twelve are present. They have gone fishing and Jesus summons them from the lakeside. They come to shore and see him (APPEARANCE NUMBER 7).

Here PS makes a mistake and does not take heed of what is written in John 21. Verse 14 says “This was now the third time Jesus appeared to his disciples after he was raised from the dead.� By my reckoning, PS’s narrative has Jesus appearing to the disciples four times so far (the two men on the road to Emmaus, PS’s insistence that Peter saw Jesus alone after drawing away, Jesus appearing to the full body of disciples where PS says Thomas was absent, and then on Sunday number two where Jesus appears to all the disciples, Thomas included).
If we are to take Verse 14 at its word, this would mean that the only encounters with Jesus by the disciples that count are when all of them are present.

The Appearance to the 500...(1 Corinthians 15:6; APPEARANCE NUMBER 8).

How does PS figure that this is the eighth appearance? He does not say. It is third on Paul’s list.

The Bible is not a history book in the conventional sense, but a selective telling of what took place, and not a complete account; the resurrection and following time period is similar to the creation account in this respect. The Bible makes no pretenses to be something it is not. It is quite clear that it is a selective book, as John tells us in verse 30 of his Gospel account

That is something Gospel John tells us about Gospel John. Does that apply to the entire Bible?

The Appearance to James 
* Here again we do not have a description of this appearance, but rather only a remark by Paul that it did in fact happen: "Then he appeared to James" (1 Corinthians 15:7; APPEARANCE NUMBER 9). The time frame is not clear; all we can say for sure is that it happened after the appearance to the five hundred and before the final appearance to the disciples. 

So Pinseeker is indeed reading Paul’s list in Corinthians chronologically. It then raises the question of why Paul lists Peter as the first appearance, and not the women in Matthew, or Mary Mag in John.

During this time period, we can also attribute another appearance as recorded by Matthew (28:16-20) and Mark (16:14-18). It takes place an “a mountaintop in Galilee.� Mark adds that they were reclining at table. The time frame is uncertain, but this is APPEARANCE NUMBER 10. It is here that Jesus gives the Great Commission. 

Here is another major blunder by Pinseeker. Matthew has Jesus, via the women, telling the disciples to go to Galilee. Matthew gives no indication of any kind of meeting in Jerusalem.
The verses in Mark that PS cites are additions to the text. Indeed, the page I have open on Biblegateway says “[The earliest manuscripts and some other ancient witnesses do not have verses 9–20.]�
Why is PS using additions to the text? Especially additions that cannot be true, given that the additions also say that believers who are baptized can handle snakes without harm, drink poison without dying and heal people by laying on of hands.
As far as Matthew is concerned, Galilee is the second appearance by Jesus, not the tenth. The additional verses in Mark do not mention Galilee as where Jesus meets with the disciples.

The events described in verses 19-20 did not immediately follow those events described in verses 14-18. 

The events in Mark’s narrative do follow on as described. It is Gospel Luke and Acts that talk about the forty days, a period of time every other Gospel author is completely unaware of.

[Divine Insight]

[Replying to post 79 by rikuoamero]

Christianity is a religion that is based on the rumors of a mere handful of men who can't even get their stories straight. And many of their claims are in extreme self-contradiction to the claims made by others.

No one but Matthew mentions a bunch of saints climbing out of graves that were physically opened by an earthquake during this event.

Clearly a belief in Christianity requires an acceptance of incompatible rumors told by a mere 5 people.

That's a pretty sketchy foundation for a religion.

The least that Christian theists can do is accept this obvious fact. Pretending that it isn't a fact amounts to nothing more than living in denial.