The consistent events from Jesus' burial to His ascension

[RBD]

Here is the consistent timeline in order from the burial of Jesus, to His ascension 40 days later.

Many women from Galilee follow Joseph and Nicodemus to see Jesus laid in the tomb. Magdalen and the other Mary are specifically mentioned. (John 19) (Mark 15) Afterward that evening, some of the other women go home to prepare spices and ointments for Jesus' body. (Luke 23)

The next day on the high Sabbath, the chief priests go to Pilate for a guard on the tomb. (Matthew 27)

In the night, there's another earthquake, and an angel in appearance as lighting rolls away the stone, making the soldiers become as dead. (Matthew 28) Jesus either resurrects at this time, or any time during the night beforehand. At some time in the night, the guards awaken and depart the empty tomb, to report to the chief priests.

Magdalen comes later in the dark before dawn, and finds the tomb empty. She tells Peter and the other disciple, and they come running to see the tomb empty. They enter to see and depart. (John 20)

Magdalen remains behind and sees two angels in the tomb, and then Jesus Himself alive outside the tomb. She is the first person on earth to see Him after His resurrection. While still dark, she returns again to tell the disciples of His resurrection, and they don't believe it. (John 20) (Mark 16)

Magdalen, the other Mary, Salome, and the other women from Galilee, including Joanna, arrive at the tomb in the morning light. One group arrives with their prepared spices and ointments, while Magdalen's group arrives with bought sweet spices. They find the tomb empty. (Mark 16) (Luke 24)

Magdalen, the other Mary, and Salome are met by the angel that rolled away the stone, and are told to see in the tomb where the Lord had lain. Another angel sitting therein tell them to tell the disciples to go to Galilee to see Jesus. (Matthew 28) (Mark 16) The other women including Joanna enter the tomb and see no one, and while standing outside are met by two more angels, that send them also to the disciples to go to Galilee to meet Jesus. (Luke 24)

All the women depart and en route meet Jesus, and hold His feet in worship. He also sends them all to tell the disciples to meet Him in Galilee. They all then tell the disciples these things, and they don't believe it. (Matthew 28)

Peter runs to the tomb a second time and ponders these things. (Luke 24)

Jesus next appears to Cleopas and another disciple on the road to Emmaus, and later toward evening they recognize Him at table, and He vanishes from their sight. In that hour, they go to the eleven to tell them of Jesus' resurrection. They don't believe it. Luke 24) (Mark 16) Peter has now also seen the Lord Jesus. Paul reports that Jesus also appeared to James at some time.

At evening, Jesus now first appears to the disciples with the others in the their midst, and shows He is indeed resurrected bodily from the dead, and not only a spirit, by showing His hands and side, and eats some fish. Thomas is not with them. (Luke 24) (John 20)

8 days later, He appears to the eleven with Thomas as they sat at meat, and upbraids them for their unbelief, and also challenges Thomas to insert His fingers into his hands, and his hand into Jesus' side. (Mark 16) (John 20)

Afterward on another day, Peter goes a fishin' at the sea of Galilee with 6 other disciples, including Thomas, Nathanael, the sons of thunder, and 2 other disciples. For the third time after His resurrection, Jesus meets His disciples on the Galilee shore with food on a fire. They all know Him. (John 21)

Afterward on another day, all the disciples meet Jesus at the Galilee mount, that He had appointed them, and worshipped Him. Some doubted what to do. (Matthew 28)

On the 40th day after His resurrection, He leads all the disciples and many others to Bethany on Mt Olivet. (Luke 24) (Acts 1) There He gives His great commission with promise of the Holy Ghost, and ascends to heaven to be recieved up in a cloud. The disciples remain standing and looking upward for Jesus, until two angels come to remind them to go to Jerusalem, and wait for the promise of the Father.

These are a consistent order of events from the 4 gospels and Acts 1.

Paul confirms Peter saw the Lord first before the other apostles, on the evening of the first day of His resurrection, and that above 500 saw Him during the 40 days after. He was also seen by James after the evening of the first day, either before His second appearance to them on the 8th day, or afterward before the sea of Galilee for the third time.

[Athetotheist]

[Replying to William in post #119]

Nor ought we think that there should be such an account. The inference to that is if we take all accounts as true, then yes - we can deduce that MM visited the tomb in the night, and from her encounter, she went off to report what she had experienced to Peter.

Later, that same night /early in the morning, she is reported to be with a group of women heading for the tomb (fir MM the second time in the space of a couple of hours or so) to anoint the body...so barring the notion that in those few hours Mary M forgot her first experience, we can deduce that she kept that information from the other women.

Notice that this hinges entirely on "if we take all accounts as true". We are under no obligation, either intellectual or moral, to do so. These accounts can and should be subjected to the same critical analysis that any mainstream Bible believer would apply to the Quran, the Book of Mormon etc. They don't warrant any circular argument just to accept them out of personal favoritism.

[JehovahsWitness]

Word play is a last resort to change the simple meaning of a verse, that any child can understand.

It is not "word play" to present an analysis of the Koine Greek that John wrote.

Jhn 20:1
The first day of the week cometh Mary Magdalene early, when it was yet dark, unto the sepulchre, and seeth the stone taken away from the sepulchre.

*cometh from the Greek "erchomai"

If you are going to erect an entire thesis based on a single statement in John's gospel it is not unreasonable to look closely at that statement. You propose that Mary M visited the graveside for the first time alone during the darkness of night, but as I explained (see post #106) the Greek [ *cometh : erchomai] allows for her to have set out in the dark, just before the break of dawn. In that case she could well have been with the other women (albeit unmentioned by John) when they all arrived as day was breaking. Whether that was the case is a matter of opinion but it is reasonable to look closely the Greek , which is what I have done. Should you wish to address the "erchomai" issue, feel free to do so and I will be happy to respond.


JW

[William]

[Replying to Athetotheist in post #121]

Notice that this hinges entirely on "if we take all accounts as true". We are under no obligation, either intellectual or moral, to do so.

Therefore, if you choose to go down that track, we still ought not think that there should be such an account.

[Athetotheist]

[Replying to Athetotheist in post #121]

Notice that this hinges entirely on "if we take all accounts as true". We are under no obligation, either intellectual or moral, to do so.

Therefore, if you choose to go down that track, we still ought not think that there should be such an account.

If you choose to go down that track you won't think that there should be such an account, but we still should assume that there should be since----again----the narratives are inconsistent without it.

[William]

[Replying to Athetotheist in post #121]

Notice that this hinges entirely on "if we take all accounts as true". We are under no obligation, either intellectual or moral, to do so.

Therefore, if you choose to go down that track, we still ought not think that there should be such an account.

If you choose to go down that track you won't think that there should be such an account, but we still should assume that there should be since----again----the narratives are inconsistent without it.

Can you explain why you think this is the case, or if you have already explained this in a past post in this thread, direct my to that?

[Athetotheist]

[Replying to William in post #125]

Can you explain why you think this is the case, or if you have already explained this in a past post in this thread, direct my to that?

"Yet even then their testimony did not agree."
(Mark 14:59)

The principle here is that if the testimony against Jesus should be considered unreliable because it was inconsistent, then the testimony of his resurrection should be treated in the same manner.

[William]

[Replying to William in post #125]

Can you explain why you think this is the case, or if you have already explained this in a past post in this thread, direct my to that?

"Yet even then their testimony did not agree."
(Mark 14:59)

The principle here is that if the testimony against Jesus should be considered unreliable because it was inconsistent, then the testimony of his resurrection should be treated in the same manner.

Mark 14:59 Context

56For many bare false witness against him, but their witness agreed not together. 57And there arose certain, and bare false witness against him, saying, 58We heard him say, I will destroy this temple that is made with hands, and within three days I will build another made without hands. 59But neither so did their witness agree together. 60And the high priest stood up in the midst, and asked Jesus, saying, Answerest thou nothing? what is it which these witness against thee? 61But he held his peace, and answered nothing. Again the high priest asked him, and said unto him, Art thou the Christ, the Son of the Blessed? 62And Jesus said, I am: and ye shall see the Son of man sitting on the right hand of power, and coming in the clouds of heaven.

So, are you arguing that those who bore witness re the one they had followed and whom had witnessed his execution, were behaving in the same way as those who were part of the plot to try and get him executed? Telling lies?

[Athetotheist]

[Replying to William in post #127]

So, are you arguing that those who bore witness re the one they had followed and whom had witnessed his execution, were behaving in the same way as those who were part of the plot to try and get him executed? Telling lies?

I'm arguing that what the gospel authors wrote down about one incident should be held to the same standard as what they wrote down about the other.

[William]

So, are you arguing that those who bore witness re the one they had followed and whom had witnessed his execution, were behaving in the same way as those who were part of the plot to try and get him executed? Telling lies?

I'm arguing that what the gospel authors wrote down about one incident should be held to the same standard as what they wrote down about the other.

So, you are really arguing that there should have been one gospel/all gospels should have been the same.

[Athetotheist]

[Replying to William in post #129]

So, you are really arguing that there should have been one gospel/all gospels should have been the same.

I'm arguing that however many gospels there are, they shouldn't contain any details which are mutually exclusive.