Who were these eyewitnesses?

Paarsurrey says:
There were no eye-witnesses of the event of the Crucifixion from the sinful scribes of the four gospel writers.;none for the resurrection of Jesus. I agree with you here.

I contributed following post on this topic.



    1. “But then Mark originally didn’t feature the resurrection either. ”

      Resurrection was later added to the creeds of Christianity by Church; instead of finding where Jesus and Mary had secretly moved from Judea; they preferred to invent resurrection of Jesus. Jesus and Mary journeyed to India; later some of the other disciples also joined them.

            • Hypotheses on how to explain the textual variations include:
              Mark intentionally ended his Gospel at 16:8, and someone else (later in the transmission-process) composed the “Longer Ending” as a conclusion to what was interpreted to be a too-abrupt account.
              • Mark did not intend to end at 16:8, but was somehow prevented from finishing (perhaps by his own death or sudden departure from Rome), whereupon another person finished the work (still in the production-stage, before it was released for church-use) by attaching material from a short Marcan composition about Jesus’ post-resurrection appearances.
              • Mark wrote an ending which was accidentally lost (perhaps as the last part of a scroll which was not rewound, or as the outermost page of a codex which became detached from the other pages), and someone in the 100′s composed the “Longer Ending” as a sort of patch, relying on parallel-passages from the other canonical Gospels.
              • Verses 16:9–20 were written by Mark and were omitted or lost from Sinaiticus and Vaticanus for one reason or another, perhaps accidentally, perhaps intentionally. (Possibly a scribe regarded John 21 as a better sequel to Mark’s account, and considered the “Longer Ending” superfluous.)
              • Mark wrote an ending, but it was suppressed and replaced with verses 16:9–20, which are a pastiche of parallel passages from the other canonical Gospels.
              James H. Charlesworth, repeating Metzger’s descriptions of some of the external evidence, has pointed out that the Syriac Sinaiticus manuscript (from the 400′s), Codex Vaticanus (c. 325), and Codex Bobbiensis (c. 430) are all early witnesses that exclude the Marcan appendix. In addition to these, over 100 Armenian manuscripts, as well as the two oldest Georgian manuscripts, also omit the appendix. The Armenian Version was made in 411-450, and the Old Georgian Version was based mainly on the Armenian Version. One Armenian manuscript, Matenadaran 2374 (formerly known as Etchmiadsin 229), made in 989, features a note, written between 16:8 and 16:9, Ariston eritzou, that is, “By Ariston the Elder/Priest.” Ariston, or Aristion, is known from early traditions (preserved by Papias and others) as a colleague of Peter and as a bishop of Smyrna in the 1st century CE.


  • “I am sure that only those people with biscuits for brains still consider this eyewitness claim to be true and even less so that the names tagged on to them were real people.”

    Now this is clearly a ridicule; not appropriate for a humanist; men/women equipped with reason should not do it, in my opinion.

  1. “The fallacious claim that the Gospels were written by eyewitnesses is one of those things that has a habit of popping up every now and then and begins knocking. “Hello, Ark..you might like to think about this…””

    It is absolutely correct that the Gospels were not written by eyewitness; “Matthew”- an anonymous writer of Gospel of Bible, mentions very clearly that all disciples had run away from the scene of the Crucifixion in fear; they abandoned him crying/praying in agony on the Cross to Yahweh whom he used to address as God-the-Father who heard his supplications/prayers and Jesus was delivered from the Cross in near-dead position, nevertheless alive as he had prophesied to show the Sign of Jonah.

  2. [Arkenaten

    July 24th, 2013 at 3:41 pm
    “Be my guest. You may know stuff that I have missed and I am never one to shy away from learning something new, believe me.”]

    Thanks for inviting me as a guest. I will thankfully write here in your blog.



Tags: , , , ,

One Response to “Who were these eyewitnesses?”

  1. hd pvr pas cher Says:

    hd pvr pas cher

    Who were these eyewitnesses? | paarsurrey

Leave a Reply

Please log in using one of these methods to post your comment:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: