The Zombie Invasion of Jerusalem

[RedEye]

The gospel of Matthew 27:51-53 tells us what happened right after Jesus Christ died:

• Then, behold, the veil of the temple was torn in two from top to bottom; and the earth quaked, and the rocks were split, and the graves were opened; and many bodies of the saints who had fallen asleep were raised; and coming out of the graves after His resurrection, they went into the holy city and appeared to many.

Let's think about how monumental an event this must have been. Dead and rotting corpses rose up through the rocks and dirt of their graves and descended on the city of Jerusalem. The news of such an event (unprecedented in the history of the world) must have spread throughout the Roman Empire like wildfire. It was possible to die, rot in the ground and then return to life! Next to alien contact I can't think of a more electrifying event which could occur.

So why is there no secular record of this? No contemporary historian knows anything about it. There is no Roman record of it. Did Pontius Pilate not think it worth mentioning in his correspondence with Rome? There is no word on what happened to these zombies either. Did they live for a while and die again later? How did they walk around with ruined bodies? Did anyone bother to examine them? It's almost like the story is complete fiction. But the Bible doesn't lie, does it?

[Divine Insight]

It's almost like the story is complete fiction.

Almost?

By the way, not only did Pontius Pilate not bother reporting it, but neither did Mark, Luke, John, Paul, or any other authors of the New Testament save for Matthew. Apparently he was the only one who knew about it. As you point out, if the others knew about it they most certainly would have mentioned it. This would have been a major event to report for sure.

But the Bible doesn't lie, does it?

The Bible doesn't do anything. But the people who wrote it may have done just that.

[rikuoamero]

There are those Christians who say something like that the different gospels are different versions of what happened, all with a presupposition that something actually happened.

Thing is, what they say does not jell with reality. We are humans, and we know how humans react to various stimuli. In the General Reading subsection, I talked for a bit about a Superman fanfiction, where in the story, the actions of the people in the world actually changed in reaction to the existence of a being with super sight and super hearing. In the story, people start building lead-lined houses and talking in code so as to evade Superman's sight and hearing. This means that, if a thousand years on in that world, a historian were to ask "Did a Superman really exist, with super sight and super-hearing?", the existence of lead-lined houses would act as evidence to that fact, as there wouldn't be a demand for such houses otherwise.

In our world, to get back to the topic...what should have been the reaction to a zombie invasion? Christians, tell me what in your eyes should be the reaction to an actual zombie invasion?
Apparently, according to them, it's a brief mention in a single gospel...and that's it. Apparently, according to them, the reaction they'd expect of people 2,000 years ago towards a zombie invasion is to not mention or talk about it at all! Why...it's almost like the zombie invasion never happened?

I'd actually like to hear from the Christians what they think the proper response (for lack of a better word or term) should be towards a zombie invasion, and then to explain why all we have is what's in Gospel Matthew.

[Elijah John]

The gospel of Matthew 27:51-53 tells us what happened right after Jesus Christ died:

• Then, behold, the veil of the temple was torn in two from top to bottom; and the earth quaked, and the rocks were split, and the graves were opened; and many bodies of the saints who had fallen asleep were raised; and coming out of the graves after His resurrection, they went into the holy city and appeared to many.

Let's think about how monumental an event this must have been. Dead and rotting corpses rose up through the rocks and dirt of their graves and descended on the city of Jerusalem. The news of such an event (unprecedented in the history of the world) must have spread throughout the Roman Empire like wildfire. It was possible to die, rot in the ground and then return to life! Next to alien contact I can't think of a more electrifying event which could occur.

So why is there no secular record of this? No contemporary historian knows anything about it. There is no Roman record of it. Did Pontius Pilate not think it worth mentioning in his correspondence with Rome? There is no word on what happened to these zombies either. Did they live for a while and die again later? How did they walk around with ruined bodies? Did anyone bother to examine them? It's almost like the story is complete fiction. But the Bible doesn't lie, does it?

I think nowadays we would call it "poetic license". I would like to hear an advocate of Bible infallibility defend/explain this passage.

And ain't it strange that only Matthew records the event? Such a monumental happening?

[marco]

How did they walk around with ruined bodies? Did anyone bother to examine them? It's almost like the story is complete fiction. But the Bible doesn't lie, does it?

One of the most disturbing things about this historical event, in biblical shock terms, is the fact that these poor souls would have been naked. It is one thing to rise from the dead but quite another, in biblical terms, to go around unclothed. How could God have allowed this? While we can readily accept that on the momentous occasion of Christ's crucifixion it would have been a small matter for pious folk to quit their tombs, especially if they hadn't been buried too deeply, it cannot be possible that God allowed naked people to shuffle around and shock decent folk. This proves Matthew made the whole thing up.



On a related point Jesus too would have been in his birthday suit, having thoughtfully folded up his funeral garments before politely pushing the stone away and going for a drink.

[marco]

But the Bible doesn't lie, does it?

Given the Bible lieth not, it is fun to find plausible explanations for Matthew's shock news. There was an earthquake and it disturbed bodies which had been lying peacefully in the ground. These bodies were pushed up and this is what Matthew meant.

It is a tiny bit harder to explain how Matthew came to know the disturbed corpses were all those of "holy men." Do bones reveal this?

To think as a boy I considered the Bible a good book, not a joke book.

[marco]

I think nowadays we would call it "poetic license". I would like to hear an advocate of Bible infallibility defend/explain this passage.

And ain't it strange that only Matthew records the event? Such a monumental happening?

I think you've to write in verse to claim that licence, EJ. As for excuse, there is absolutely nothing in the bible, however absurd, that cannot be explained away. And we've had 2000 years to think of good answers.


Of course when we discard Matthew in part, we start shredding biblical pages.....

[Jubal]

Hello,

Funny story isn't it ?

Consider this happens at the moment Jesus dies :

50 Then Jesus cried again with a loud voice and breathed his last. 51 At that moment the curtain of the temple was torn in two, from top to bottom. The earth shook, and the rocks were split. 52 The tombs also were opened, and many bodies of the saints who had fallen asleep were raised.

The bodies of the saints were raised at the moment of the crucifixion - on the Friday.

Then -

53 After his resurrection they came out of the tombs and entered the holy city and appeared to many.

So these raised saints didn't go into Jerusalem until the resurrection - on the Sunday.

Which means they must have spent all weekend hanging aound (yes, naked) their tombs and/or graves. Suddenly those places of the dead must have become quite lively places. With dead parents, grand parents, great grandparents, etc. all coming back together - it must have made for some great family re-unions. Local familes would rush to their tombs to greet their long lost relatives - abusing them for past mistakes, or asking where they hid that gold.

Not to mention the famous persons buried in Jerusalem - like David, Zedekiah, Haggai, Malachi, and two Zechariahs. King David is back ! What a stir that must have caused - especially when many persons were his descendants.

Imagine raised King David himself triumphantly arriving in Jerusalem on Sunday morning - as naked as dancing before the ark - leading a congregation of raised naked saints into town.

How excited the people would be to explain to the raised prophets Haggai, Malachi, and Zechariah how their prophecies had come true ! (Or not.) After cleaning the dirt off their bodies, and giving them new clothes of course.

Truly amazing times !

Jubal

[marco]

How excited the people would be to explain to the raised prophets Haggai, Malachi, and Zechariah how their prophecies had come true ! (Or not.) After cleaning the dirt off their bodies, and giving them new clothes of course.

Very amusing and yet clever people died at the hands of those who took such as this seriously. Change names and add more absurdity and we get a winged horse heading for heaven with Muhammad on its back. Laugh, and you die today. Christianity has learned to blush at its own absurdity but we are a long way from being safe from religion. And God, bless him, never intervenes.

[polonius]

Hebrews 9:27 NRSV

"And just as it is appointed for mortals to die once, and after that the judgment,"

And every fundamentalist will probably tell you that this is inspired by God?

But Matthew will show you that God got it wrong!