50) And when Jesus had cried out again in a loud voice, he gave up his spirit.
51) At that moment the curtain of the temple was torn in two from top to bottom. The earth shook, the rocks split
52) and the tombs broke open. The bodies of many holy people who had died were raised to life.
53) They came out of the tombs after Jesus’ resurrection and went into the holy city and appeared to many people.
Steefen said
50) And when Jesus had cried out again in a loud voice, he gave up his spirit.
51) At that moment the curtain of the temple was torn in two from top to bottom. The earth shook, the rocks split
52) and the tombs broke open. The bodies of many holy people who had died were raised to life.
53) They came out of the tombs after Jesus’ resurrection and went into the holy city and appeared to many people.
Well, let’s look at the verses.
50) Jesus died.
51a) The curtain of the Holy of Holies was damaged. Historically, this definitely happened during the Jewish Revolt.
51b) There was an earthquake during the Jewish Revolt, before high priests Ananus and Jesus were killed by the Idumeans.
52) This is a literary device/flourish, a mythologizing of Jesus’ death and a mythologizing device to associate Jesus with resurrection and to play up the character-building rule that if one is holy, one will resurrect. Apparently this is done by the power of the God of Israel glorifying Jesus as the Lord of Resurrections. This assumption would be wrong because Jesus parted ways with the God of Israel by way of the cannibalistic remembrance, eating his body and blood. The God of Israel turns away from this and keeps the children of the God of Israel separated from those who eat/drink blood, metaphorically or via transubstantiation.
53) It is interesting that they came to life at the moment of Jesus’ death but did come out of THEIR tombs until Jesus resurrected on Sunday, leaving his tomb, appearing to people also.
I don’t think any reasonable person could believe dead saints came out of their graves and appeared to many people or even one. Its another pick and mix text that was clearly myth that was swallowed by the first century believers, many who went to their deaths on a lie, when they need not have. Its a strange thing to say but Jesus was responsible for thousands, maybe millions of deaths by spouting things that were clearly untrue. The worst was telling people to repent as the kingdom of God was near and he was coming back for them in that generation. Paul was the chief aider and abetter to that lie.
I keep saying it.
One person who dies because of a religious belief is one too many! Jesus and Paul and many Popes and Bishops since has much blood on their collective hands. The veil being torn was clearly another gentile myth to try and say that it showed that the elect in God now have access to Jehova/God that hithertoo was only the High Priest. Can you see ANY Jew believing that?
Steefen said
50) And when Jesus had cried out again in a loud voice, he gave up his spirit.
51) At that moment the curtain of the temple was torn in two from top to bottom. The earth shook, the rocks split
52) and the tombs broke open. The bodies of many holy people who had died were raised to life.
53) They came out of the tombs after Jesus’ resurrection and went into the holy city and appeared to many people.
This has nothing to do with false memories of a historical Jesus.
Religious people have always had a need to understand the present and the future. In old times – before written language arose – nature and stars were systematically used to form a picture of the will of the gods. When written language arose, there was a change. The religious focus shifted from searching for answers in nature to searching for answers in their now sacred texts. This is a religious exercise that also takes place today – among other with the Watchtower.
Back to Matthew. This text is based on a few lines from the prophet Hosea.
Hosea 6:1;“Come, let us return to the LORD. For He has torn us, but He will heal us; He has wounded us, but He will bandage us. ** you do not have permission to see this link **“He will revive us after two days; He will raise us up on the third day, That we may live before Him.
Prophecies of Hosea was important for the first Christians for many reasons. This just shows a subtle example. Prophecies were often combined with important David Hymns. For the early Christians Psalm 18 was one of the most important:
The cords of death entangled me; the torrents of destruction overwhelmed me.
The cords of the grave coiled around me; the snares of death confronted me.
In my distress I called to the LORD; I cried to my God for help. From his temple he heard my voice; my cry came before him, into his ears.
The earth trembled and quaked, and the foundations of the mountains shook; they trembled because he was angry.
Smoke rose from his nostrils; consuming fire came from his mouth, burning coals blazed out of it.
moose said
Steefen said
50) And when Jesus had cried out again in a loud voice, he gave up his spirit.
51) At that moment the curtain of the temple was torn in two from top to bottom. The earth shook, the rocks split
52) and the tombs broke open. The bodies of many holy people who had died were raised to life.
53) They came out of the tombs after Jesus’ resurrection and went into the holy city and appeared to many people.
This has nothing to do with false memories of a historical Jesus.
Back to Matthew. This text is based on a few lines from the prophet Hosea.
Hosea 6:1;“Come, let us return to the LORD. For He has torn us, but He will heal us; He has wounded us, but He will bandage us. ** you do not have permission to see this link **“He will revive us after two days; He will raise us up on the third day, That we may live before Him.
Thank you. We need to know this connection between Easter and the probability of literature manufactured from Hebrew scripture. We need to know the debt there is to the Hebrew scripture.
This part of your post is 5 stars plus.
Fearguth said
Professor Ehrman may have discussed this passage somewhere, but I haven’t seen it. It is one of the strangest passages in the entire New Testament.
It is possible that verse 53 is a later gloss, because verse 52 became an embarrassment to Pauline theology, since it implies that some people were raised before Jesus was raised.
Lawyerskeptic said
Consider the story from Caiaphas’ point of view. If the tombs of Jewish saints opened on Friday, why would Caiaphas ask Pontius Pilate on Saturday to place a guard on Jesus’ tomb? Were guards placed on all the open tombs?
I think it is a waste of time to muster rationalist arguments against the historicity of the guarded tomb. The question is why this obvious legendary story came about. It is an obvious propaganda story to secure the belief that the disappearance of the body was supernatural, a legendary extension of the guarded execution, which no doubt is historical.
gavriel said
Lawyerskeptic said
Consider the story from Caiaphas’ point of view. If the tombs of Jewish saints opened on Friday, why would Caiaphas ask Pontius Pilate on Saturday to place a guard on Jesus’ tomb? Were guards placed on all the open tombs?I think it is a waste of time to muster rationalist arguments against the historicity of the guarded tomb. The question is why this obvious legendary story came about. It is an obvious propaganda story to secure the belief that the disappearance of the body was supernatural, a legendary extension of the guarded execution, which no doubt is historical.
Agreed.
However, Fearguth raised an interesting point in his original post when he said that Matthew 27:50-53 is one of the strangest passages in the Bible. There are a lot, maybe as many as 90 million, evangelical Christians in America who believe in the complete inerrancy of the Bible, and Matthew 27:50-53 is a subject of great controversy among the believers. I copied the following from the Wikipedia entry on Michael Licona.
In a passage in his 2010 book, The Resurrection of Jesus: A New Historiographical Approach, Licona questioned the interpretation of the story of the resurrection of the saints in Matthew 27, and suggested the possibility that it might be apocalyptic imagery.[12] This led to controversy with fellow Evangelical scholars Norman Geisler and Albert Mohler, who both accused Licona of denying the full inerrancy of the Bible in general and the gospel narratives in particular.[13] Licona maintained that adjusting an interpretation on a text is not a denial of inerrancy. In the course of events, Licona resigned in 2011 from his position as research professor at Southern Evangelical Seminary and as apologetics coordinator for the North American Mission Board (NAMB).[14] Other Evangelical scholars such as William Lane Craig, J.P. Moreland, and Gary Habermas voiced their support for Licona by signing an open letter to Geisler.[15] In a round table discussion on the issue, Craig Blomberg urged that another educational institute of similar prestige offer him a teaching role.[16] Licona was hired shortly afterward by Houston Baptist University.
Most of us may consider this a tempest in a teapot, but I’m reminded of Prof. Ehrman’s February 21, 2015 post “On Debating a Fundamentalist.” He wrote eloquently of not wanting to convert people to any particular view, but to encourage people to think. Matthew 27:50-53 makes fundamentalists think. It is not a waste of time to discuss something that can get fundamentalists to think.
Trivia question. There are many film adaptations of the Gospels, from big-budget Hollywood to educational films for believers. Have any of them ever shown the resurrection of the Jewish saints? Some things just look too silly to portray in film.
Lawyerskeptic said
However, Fearguth raised an interesting point in his original post when he said that Matthew 27:50-53 is one of the strangest passages in the Bible. There are a lot, maybe as many as 90 million, evangelical Christians in America who believe in the complete inerrancy of the Bible, and Matthew 27:50-53 is a subject of great controversy among the believers. I copied the following from the Wikipedia entry on Michael Licona.In a passage in his 2010 book, The Resurrection of Jesus: A New Historiographical Approach, Licona questioned the interpretation of the story of the resurrection of the saints in Matthew 27, and suggested the possibility that it might be apocalyptic imagery.[12] This led to controversy with fellow Evangelical scholars Norman Geisler and Albert Mohler, who both accused Licona of denying the full inerrancy of the Bible in general and the gospel narratives in particular.[13] Licona maintained that adjusting an interpretation on a text is not a denial of inerrancy. In the course of events, Licona resigned in 2011 from his position as research professor at Southern Evangelical Seminary and as apologetics coordinator for the North American Mission Board (NAMB).[14] Other Evangelical scholars such as William Lane Craig, J.P. Moreland, and Gary Habermas voiced their support for Licona by signing an open letter to Geisler.[15] In a round table discussion on the issue, Craig Blomberg urged that another educational institute of similar prestige offer him a teaching role.[16] Licona was hired shortly afterward by Houston Baptist University.
Most of us may consider this a tempest in a teapot, but I’m reminded of Prof. Ehrman’s February 21, 2015 post “On Debating a Fundamentalist.” He wrote eloquently of not wanting to convert people to any particular view, but to encourage people to think. Matthew 27:50-53 makes fundamentalists think. It is not a waste of time to discuss something that can get fundamentalists to think.
Trivia question. There are many film adaptations of the Gospels, from big-budget Hollywood to educational films for believers. Have any of them ever shown the resurrection of the Jewish saints? Some things just look too silly to portray in film.
I have for years enjoyed debating fundamentalists on this and similar weird bible passages. They always come up with hypothetical “historical” contexts that can unite seemingly contradicting verses. In verse 27:53 the risen saints politely wait within their graves in order to not become “first fruits”, which would be very annoying to Pauline theologians. Or may be it was too late and they already have to be considered as first fruits? Anyhow, 53 is a clear interpolation as it interrupts the narrative flow. For the rest of the context, Raymond Brown just laconically states that it “reflects apologetics meant to refute Jewish polemic against the resurrection” (Introduction, p. 202).
Lawyerskeptic opined:
There are many film adaptations of the Gospels, from big-budget Hollywood to educational films for believers. Have any of them ever shown the resurrection of the Jewish saints? Some things just look too silly to portray in film.
Good point. It occurs to me that if you weren’t constrained by the need not to offend the pious you could make one helluva movie out of the gospels. I’ve always wanted someone to film the Gospel of Mark, just as is. Add nothing; delete nothing. It would immediately become the most controversial Jesus movie ever made! Let the good folks see what their Bible really says. All the Jesus movies produce what Prof Ehrman calls the “Fifth Gospel”, made when they smash all the gospel stories together, include all the famous stories and ignore all the problematical parts.
What would be the response to Jesus telling his disciples he has secret teachings he hides from the multitudes cause they won’t understand? When he tells his disciples they will be alive when the Kingdom comes? And speaking of the Empty Tomb… What about the ending? Let the Passion of the Christ crowd get a load of Mary and the other women reacting to the Resurrection in terror…and silence! You advertise the movie as faithful to the Bible and then just sit back when the shitstorm starts.
But I won’t hold my breath. Could be a terrific movie though.
gavriel said
I have for years enjoyed debating fundamentalists on this and similar weird bible passages. They always come up with hypothetical “historical” contexts that can unite seemingly contradicting verses. In verse 27:53 the risen saints politely wait within their graves in order to not become “first fruits”, which would be very annoying to Pauline theologians. Or may be it was too late and they already have to be considered as first fruits? Anyhow, 53 is a clear interpolation as it interrupts the narrative flow. For the rest of the context, Raymond Brown just laconically states that it “reflects apologetics meant to refute Jewish polemic against the resurrection” (Introduction, p. 202).
Crabtree’s Bludgeon complements Occam’s Razor and states: “No set of mutually inconsistent observations can exist for which some human intellect cannot conceive a coherent explanation, however complicated.”
MikeyS said
I don’t think any reasonable person could believe dead saints came out of their graves and appeared to many people or even one. Its another pick and mix text that was clearly myth that was swallowed by the first century believers, many who went to their deaths on a lie, when they need not have. Its a strange thing to say but Jesus was responsible for thousands, maybe millions of deaths by spouting things that were clearly untrue. The worst was telling people to repent as the kingdom of God was near and he was coming back for them in that generation. Paul was the chief aider and abetter to that lie.I keep saying it.
One person who dies because of a religious belief is one too many! Jesus and Paul and many Popes and Bishops since has much blood on their collective hands. The veil being torn was clearly another gentile myth to try and say that it showed that the elect in God now have access to Jehova/God that hithertoo was only the High Priest. Can you see ANY Jew believing that?
Your argument would work better if your presentation didn’t conflate everything.
” Its a strange thing to say but Jesus was responsible for thousands, maybe millions of deaths by spouting things that were clearly untrue. The worst was telling people to repent as the kingdom of God was near and he was coming back for them in that generation. “
I don’t see the problem there. I don’t see any claim that “he was coming back for them in that generation”
I fail to see how that claim would be “The worst” or even bad. He certainly could not be blamed for how people took those words or better yet how they used them to justify their behavior.
I don’t even see how the statement is a lie. Are you arguing Jesus didn’t believe God’s kingdom was imminent? If so what made it clearly untrue? And why is it you find people can believe in a ressurected Jesus, but not in saints rising?
I don’t really see a meaningful difference?
Stephen said
Lawyerskeptic opined:There are many film adaptations of the Gospels, from big-budget Hollywood to educational films for believers. Have any of them ever shown the resurrection of the Jewish saints? Some things just look too silly to portray in film.
Good point. It occurs to me that if you weren’t constrained by the need not to offend the pious you could make one helluva movie out of the gospels. I’ve always wanted someone to film the Gospel of Mark, just as is. Add nothing; delete nothing. It would immediately become the most controversial Jesus movie ever made! Let the good folks see what their Bible really says. All the Jesus movies produce what Prof Ehrman calls the “Fifth Gospel”, made when they smash all the gospel stories together, include all the famous stories and ignore all the problematical parts.
What would be the response to Jesus telling his disciples he has secret teachings he hides from the multitudes cause they won’t understand? When he tells his disciples they will be alive when the Kingdom comes? And speaking of the Empty Tomb… What about the ending? Let the Passion of the Christ crowd get a load of Mary and the other women reacting to the Resurrection in terror…and silence! You advertise the movie as faithful to the Bible and then just sit back when the shitstorm starts.
But I won’t hold my breath. Could be a terrific movie though.
It would be amusing to hear them talk about how UNBIBLICAL it was. DAMNED Hollywood!!!
Lawyerskeptic said
However, Fearguth raised an interesting point in his original post when he said that Matthew 27:50-53 is one of the strangest passages in the Bible. There are a lot, maybe as many as 90 million, evangelical Christians in America who believe in the complete inerrancy of the Bible, and Matthew 27:50-53 is a subject of great controversy among the believers. I copied the following from the Wikipedia entry on Michael Licona.In a passage in his 2010 book, The Resurrection of Jesus: A New Historiographical Approach, Licona questioned the interpretation of the story of the resurrection of the saints in Matthew 27, and suggested the possibility that it might be apocalyptic imagery.[12] This led to controversy with fellow Evangelical scholars Norman Geisler and Albert Mohler, who both accused Licona of denying the full inerrancy of the Bible in general and the gospel narratives in particular.[13] Licona maintained that adjusting an interpretation on a text is not a denial of inerrancy.
This has got to be one of the worst situations (although J.R Daniel Kirk has recently suffered worse) in recent history. It’s instructive that Gary Habermas and others defended Licona on the grounds that if Matthew was waxing poetic; trying to stress the signifigance of the ressurection, then his view doesn’t deny”full inerrancy” It seems to me the only inerrancy in question was that of Geisler et al. Giesler’s retrement being long over due
In verse 27:53 the risen saints politely wait within their graves in order to not become “first fruits”, which would be very annoying to Pauline theologians.
notice they want people to be around jesus’ tomb and know it’s location, but when saints are waiting in a tomb for 1 + days , nobody notices and knows the locations of the tombs. they want many passerby’s for jesus’ tomb , but no passerby for the tombs which held dead saints.
BDEhrman
FreedomBen
evgendob
Robert
1 Guest(s)