Jesus Resurrection

Jesus was sentenced to be crucified by the Roman governor, Ponchos Pilate. In a sense Jesus was vindicated of his charge against the Chief Priest. Using the brutality of the Romans to silence a fellow Jew for his religious belief was really a vivid evidence for abuse of power by the Chief Priest. Jesus mischief was not a violent crime. Jesus did not hurt anybody physically. According to the Jewish law the maximum punishment should have been monetarily restitutions.

Jesus showed no fear. He knew he was right, and the Chief Priest had committed a vicious act against a devoted Jew and as a result against God's Commandment. Jesus was absolutely confident that his action was purely for the glory of God, and revealing and exposing the Chief Priest wickedness. Jesus was confidant that God would not allow such a flagrant injustice to take place. Jesus had full trust in God's mercy. He felt that, his faith had been tested by Jehovah, and he should control his fear and trust Jehovah. If he fully trusts Jehovah, then Jehovah eventually would strike down against these evil deeds. Jesus did not falter at all. He was firm on his conviction and on his Faith. Jesus showed great courage and endured all the trauma of the procession to the crucifixion site, and the crucifixion. On the cross finally Jesus realized that there would be no divine interventions and he was dying in vain, then he complained to God:

Mathew Gospel 27:46 At about three o'clock Jesus shouted with a loud voice, "Eli, Eli, lema sabachthani?" that is, "My God, my God, why have you forsaken me?" "Oh God you have forsaken me!"

This verse clearly shows the mindset of Jesus few moments before his death. According to Roman customs there was no burial for the crucified victims. This was meant to maximize the effect and the terror of the crucifixions. The longer the victim remained on the cross, more fear would be inflected on the public. The historians reported that Romans crucified their victims on both sides of Appian Way. Appian Way was the main highway to the city of Rome. The historians mentioned that the Appian Way was stinking from miles away because of all the rotten corps on the crosses.

The crucified Jesus stayed on the cross until all his flesh was consumed by vulchers and crows or was rotten and destroyed by bacteria. There was a documentary on PBS which was suggesting Existence of a tomb under Church of the Holy Sepulcher in Jerusalem. To me that suggestion was incorrect because Jesus did not have a burial, or a tomb. So maybe this lack of a tomb was a good opening for the idea of the resurrection story later on!

* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *

In all gospels the emphases are that Jesus body was resurrected from the tomb. This means Jesus body in human form was revived and his hands and his feet still had the holes which the nails had made in his body. Jesus in all shape and form was back to a normal man. He talked with people and he ate like a normal person:

Luke Gospel 24:42 So they gave him a piece of broiled fish, 24:43 and he took it and ate it in front of them.

So the resurrected Jesus looked like any live man. But strangely at first nobody recognized this resurrected Jesus. People saw a man and they talked to him, but they did not recognize Jesus face, until Jesus told them that he was Jesus. Even though people did not know anything about the Jesus revival, but at least they should have recognized that the man was at least "Jesus look alike". In John Gospel even at the third meeting with Jesus, at the beach, first they pointed out Jesus at the beach and Peter Jumped into water, presumably to reach to Jesus first, then the others came to the shore to join Jesus then we read the following verse which makes the whole scenario very incoherent:

John Gospel 21:12 "Come, have breakfast," Jesus said. But none of the disciples dared to ask him, "Who are you?" because they knew it was the Lord.

These kinds of stories make the resurrection story very odd and totally illogical. Of course, I am not questioning whether God could have revived Jesus, but the problem lays on the stories which the eyewitnesses have reported about their encounter with the resurrected Jesus. These stories are not part of the supernatural phenomenon of the resurrection. These stories are supposed to be the usual interaction of the normal people with the resurrected Jesus. So these routine stories has to be absolutely logical and consistent, especially, that the Christian Church insist these verses have been reported by God.

There are many differences between the resurrection stories in four accepted Gospels which create even more serious doubts in the validity of the story:

Mathew Gospel 28:1 Now after the Sabbath, at dawn on the first day of the week, Mary Magdalene and the other Mary went to look at the tomb. 28:2 Suddenly there was a severe earthquake, for an angel of the Lord descending from heaven came and rolled away the stone, and sat on it. 28:3 His appearance was like lightning, and his clothes were white as snow. 28:4 The guards were shaken and became like dead men because they were so afraid of him. 28:5 But the angel said to the women, "Do not be afraid; I know that you are looking for Jesus, who was crucified. 28:6 He is not here, for he has been raised, just as he said. Come and see the place where he was lying. 28:7 Then go quickly and tell his disciples, 'He has been raised from the dead. He is going ahead of you into Galilee. You will see him there.' Listen, I have told you." 28:8 So they left the tomb quickly, with fear and great joy, and ran to tell his disciples. 28:9 But Jesus met them, saying, "Greetings!" They came to him, held on to his feet and worshiped him. 28:10 Then Jesus said to them, "Do not be afraid. Go and tell my brothers to go to Galilee. They will see me there."

Mary Magdalene and mother Mary saw the stone was rolled away but they did not see the resurrected Jesus to come out of the tomb. They were told by the angel that Jesus was not there. And presumably Jesus had been resurrected before. Then, one would ask what was all those points about the Earthquake and the appearance of the angle from heaven to roll the Stone and so forth? Was it just to show to the women that the tomb was empty!? God went through all that supernatural show just to show the tomb was empty!? And yet Jesus failed to show any miracle at his trial when everybody was looking to see just one miracle!? Some might argue that Jesus did not want to show off and he wanted to be discreet. But didn't Jesus show off his power when he fed few thousand people just with few loaf of bread!?

Also, when Jesus met Mary Magdalene and Mother Mary the two women hold on to Jesus feet and worshipped Jesus. But in John Gospel Jesus only appeared to Mary Magdalene, and Jesus told her do not touch him.

John Gospel 20:16 Jesus said to her, "Mary." She turned and said to him in Aramaic, "Rabboni" (which means Teacher)20:17 Jesus replied, "Do not touch me, for I have not yet ascended to my Father.

These are totally two different stories! In John Jesus met only Mary Magdalene in the cemetery and he could not be recognized and he could not be touched, but in Mathew women hold Jesus feet and worshiped him. How we suppose to reconcile these two stories!? Maybe the writers of these two stories made a mistake and did not describe the situation accurately! But the Church is saying these are word of God, so how God could make such mistakes!? Then, the credibility and the accuracy of God's knowledge become questionable! And, is this the God which we supposed to believe his knowledge is the Truth!? And, is this the theology which it supposed to satisfy and enlighten our powerful brain? This theology is pushing back the human's intelligence to the Dark Ages.

In Mathew Gospel the women did not see Jesus in cemetery but Jesus appeared to Mary Magdalene and Mother Mary at some where. In Luke Gospel Jesus did not appear to Mary Magdalene at all. Jesus appeared to two men who were going to village called Emmaus, about seven miles from Jerusalem.

To me in order the resurrection stories to be valid all these versions should be in harmony and precise. Especially when the Christian Church is emphasizing that the Gospels are word of God, then that is more reason that no discrepancies should be between these stories. As we see there are so many differences between these stories which make them very hard to accept the resurrection as a true story.

* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *

Now let us examine the resurrection story from another angle:

If the resurrection story of Jesus was a true event then the divinity of Jesus should have been crystal clear at least for all the apostles and Mary Magdalene, since they saw the resurrected Jesus in person, no hearsay for this group. At that point it was proven to this group beyond any doubt that Jesus was absolutely divine. Now after the resurrection I expect those people to give full attention to Mother Mary, after all she was the only person who had given birth to Jesus. Not just an ordinary birth but a Virgin Birth. She had nurtured Jesus in her womb. So she must be very holy herself, as this is the position of the Christian Church. According to Catholic Church; God restored her virginity and she remained virgin and without a sin for the rest of her life, the same as Jesus. After Jesus, Mother Mary is the Holiest person that has ever lived on this Earth. So after Jesus' resurrection and his ascension to Heaven Mother Mary was the Holiest person, in flesh, amongst all the Apostles and all the other followers of Jesus. And all the Apostles had full knowledge of this fact that she was the Virgin Mary and indeed very Holy person.

Now, one would expect after Jesus resurrection Mother Mary's life should have been well documented. Amazingly there is no documentation about Mother Mary and what happened to her after the resurrection. Even the Gospels are quiet about her fate and they offer no passage for her fate. Isn't this ironic that even her tomb is obscure? Absolutely, there is no documentation to tell us; how Holy Mother Mary lived her life? Apostle Paul aggressively was changing the Old Testament's strict laws regarding the kosher food and circumcision. Apostle Paul wanted to abandon the Jewish doctrine of Race and preservation of Jewish blood in favor of accepting everybody, especially the Romans, to the Jesus movement.

How did Mother Mary respond to these changes and consumption of Pork? Consumption of Pork is absolutely forbidden in Judaism. Jesus with his absolute devotion to the Old Testament I imagine Jesus would be horrified to see that his followers are consuming Pork. That would be ultimate betray of Judaism and violating God Commandment which he sacrificed his life for. Isn't this an odd thing that when Jesus was alive he preached so strongly against consumption of Pork and after his death he has approved totally the opposite?

Consumption of pork was an impotent item in Roman food diet. It is plausible to assume in order to facilitate the conversion of the Romans elite into the Christianity the Churched made this important rule change about the pork consumptions. The Christian Church was not concern with the God's Commandments at all; they were more concern how to make their Church successful. I do believe without the changes in requirement of the circumcision and the consumption of pork the Christian Church would have not succeeded.

Did Mother Mary condone these changes to the Judaism?

Did Mother Mary live among the Jesus followers?

Did she perform any miracles?

Isn't this odd that we do not have any documentation about such a Holy Person, that these days a NOVAL such as the Da Vinci Code could fascinate some people? Those Apostles knew Mother Mary's unique stature amongst themselves, and yet they totally ignored her. How could that be?

We have some stories about John the Baptist, James (Jesus brother), Paul, and Peter. We know how they lived and where they were buried, but nothing about Holy Mother Mary! And no one could tell us with any certainty where Mother Mary was buried! At least nobody claimed that Mother Mary's body was ascended to heaven! If Jesus resurrection was a true story then there would have been tremendous interest in Mother Mary. This lack of interests by the apostles and the others in Mother Mary's life clearly suggests to me that there was no Jesus resurrection. That is the only reasonable conclusion I could make out of this scenario.

Well, here I see only two possibilities; either those Apostles, who were looking for righteousness, they were such morons that they all totally ignored Holy Mother Mary. Although I do reject this possibility; since I can not accept any human in whole human history could be that dumb. The other possibility would be; we are the morons to believe in such Fairytales for the salvation of our souls.

The resurrection story is a fairytale which was made up by the Gospel writers to boost Jesus image and gave boost to the Gospel writers' movements. All the evidences suggest that the miracle stories about Jesus were manufactured to create a divine stature for Jesus. Elevating the status of some powerful men to a deity was the trend in the ancient world; people were regarding Pharaohs, Alexander, and Cesar as Gods. So the Christians followed the same doctrine about Jesus. You see we ignorantly have yielded to some faulty doctrine without properly examining them!

* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *

The material of this site may be reproduced in any medium, without applying for permission. (Provided they are unedited, and retain the original author/ copyright information.)

God and Reason

Holy Koran and Facts

Bahaullah's Claims

Christianity in Crisis

Adam and Eve Story of Paradise

Moses Story is a Fiction

Ancient Jewish Communities

Jesus Life and His Beliefs

Jesus Message and Jesus Miracles

Jesus and Judas Plan

Jesus Movement after Jesus Crucifixion

Apostle Paul and Brotherhood Communities

Destruction of the Jewish Temple and Start of Christianity

Paul's Vision on the Road to Damascus

Home Page

E-mail: Unes Gollestani