THE SECOND BASIC DOCTRINE OF

MODERN CHRISTIANITY

  

This article also includes the following subtopics:

·        Did Jesus Die on the Cross?

·        Scrutinizing the GOSPEL Crucifixion Reports

 The second cardinal doctrine of Modern Christianity is that Jesus died on the Cross for the forgiveness of our sins this is the basis of the doctrine of Original Sin and the doctoring of Atonement.

 The Christians assert that God has a Son, who is His only Son. This Son of God incarnated himself in the womb of Mary. She and her husband Joseph, the carpenter was informed of this by an angel. In fullness of time, the Son of God was born in the form of a human child. He was brought up like human children and when he grew old, he worked miracles. The Jews, among whom he was born, persecuted him and at last killed him by suspending him on the Cross. Thus, the Son of God incarnate, died and after death descended into hell where he remained for three days. Then he rose from the dead and now sits in the heavens on the right hand of God. Though he was innocent yet he bore this pain and death for the sake of human beings, so that his sufferings may atone for the sins of man. Now man will not be punished for his sins provided he believes in Jesus for the latter has taken upon himself the sins of all men.

 This is what the Christian doctrine of Atonement means. According to Christian Belief, all children of Adam are sinful. Adam and Eve were expelled from heaven for their sin and all their children have inherited the sin and hence all are born sinful. It was for this reason that the Son of God did not cater the womb of Mary through the seed of man, but Mary conceived him without knowing a man, so that he may not inherit the sin of Adam, like the test of Adam’s children.

 This doctrine of Atonement raises the question: whether anyone except Jesus can be impeccable? In the Christian school of theology this dogma is of cardinal import. The Christians construct the premises and deduce Atonement along the following lines. Every man is under the sway of sin and its hold is universal A redeemer and savior is called for. Mankind cannot serve as its own redeemed since mankind is a race of wrongdoers. He assumed the body of man and therefore, he was whole and upright. Thus, he can make good the loss of man and offer Atonement.

 If one adduces evidence that a man-or for that matter men-had led the lives of absolute moral purity, the Christians view will fail instantly. The warp and woof of Atonement will disintegrate. The infallibility of prophets stands as anathema to Christians who trade in Atonement Many Christians believe what the Gospels seem to say that men are of two kinds; evil-doers and righteous. If this is so, to turn around and paint everyone with the brush of sin is tantamount to denouncing the explicit teachings of the Gospels Thus we read:

“Truly, I say to you, many prophets and righteous men longed to see what you see, and did not see it, and to hear what you hear, and did not hear it.”   [Matthew 13:17]

“So that you may be sons of your Father who is in heaven; for He makes His son rise on the evil and on the good, and sends rain on the just and on the unjust.”  [Matthew 5:45]

“As He spoke by the mouth of His Holy Prophets from the old.”   [Luke 1:70]

“Because no prophecy ever came by the impulse of man, but men moved by the Holy Spirit spoke from God.”   [Peter 1:21]

“There you will weep and gnash your teeth, when you see Abraham and Isaac and Jacob and all the Prophets in the kingdom of God and you yourselves thrust out.”    [Luke 13:28]

“We know that anyone born of God does not sin, but he who was born of God keeps Him and the evil one does not touch him.”   [I John 5:18]

 “Blessed at those who are persecuted for righteousness’ sake, for theirs is the kingdom of heaven...for so men persecuted the prophets v ho were before you.”   [Matthew 5:10-12]

The above verses testify to the righteousness and holiness of the prophets who were born of God and were inmates of His Kingdom.  Satan failed to obtain the least access to them. They were persecuted f or righteousness sake (peace and mercy of God be upon all of them). Exalted to a rank as high, they must be infallible. Satan can never prevail on them In view of these verses, one is persuaded to acknowledge that the progeny of Adam embraces vicious as well as virtuous men Not all of them are given to excesses. Once one accepts this truth, it will render the Christian faith outlined above untenable. The superstructure of the doctrine of Atonement will come down with a thud.

The prophets are sent by God as models of virtue to teach people through persuasion. It is written:

“Many years thou didst bear with them, and didst warn them by thy Spirit through thy Prophets.”   [Nehemiah 9:30]

How can a prophet taken as a model of good and a guardian people commit transgressions? His failing is inconsistent with his office. Any theory that brands prophets as sinners must be set aside as false.

 The Holy Bible testifies to a host of pious and holy men who ever were eve obedient to God and who abided by His command. Never did the prophets, some of whom I list below, rebel against God’s wish.

The first of them is John (Yahya) (peace be upon him). The Gospels speak of John the Baptist clad with chaste and undefiled conduct.

“For he will be great before the Lord, and he shall drink no wine nor strong drink, and he will be filled with the Holly Spirit, even from his mother’s womb.”    [Luke 1:15]

            “For the hand of the Lord was with him.”    [Luke 1:66]

 “And the child grew and became strong in Spirit, and he was in the wilderness till the day of his manifestation to Israel.”   [Luke 1:80]

“Herod feared John, knowing that he was a righteous and holy man, and kept him safe.”    [Mark 6:20]

“John the Baptist appeared in the wilderness, preaching a baptism of repentance for the forgiveness of sins.”    [Mark 1:4]

“Truly, I say to you, among those born of women there has risen no one greater than John the Baptist.”   [Matthew 11:11]

“For John came neither eating nor drinking, and they say, ‘He has a demon’ ; the Son of man came eating and drinking, and they, ‘Behold, a glutton and drunkard, a friend of tax collectors and sinners. Yet wisdom is justified by her deeds.”    [Matthew 11:18-19]

“The word of God came to John the son of Zechariah in the wilderness.”    [Luke 3:2]

 John is said in these verses to be an illustrious prophet far removed from all ills. God’s hand was on him. He is a recipient of His revelation He was filled with the Holy Spirit from the womb of his mother, a practitioner of baptism by repentance to deliver the infirm and unholy men, he was the greatest among those born of woman’s womb. Can such a man be a moral wreck? No Christian of sound mind can consider John lacking in goodness, particularly keeping in mind that Jesus himself had to have a special immersion from John. I challenge any Christian to find fault with John from the accounts contained in the Bible.

 The second prophet is Abel son of Adam. Abel, from the loins of Adam was also truthful and pure in every walk of life He did not sin. The Gospels has the following to say about him:

“That upon you my come all the righteous blood she J on earth from the blood of innocent Abel to the blood Of Zechariah the son of Brachia, whom you murdered between the sanctuary and the altar.”   [Matthew 23:35]

“By faith Abel offered to God a more acceptable sacrifice than Cain, through which he received approval as righteous God bearing witness by accepting his gift.”    [Hebrew 11:4]

 “And not be like Cain who was of the evil one and murdered his brother. And why did he murder him? Because his own deeds were evil and his brother's righteous.”  [I John 3:12]

 The third is Prophet Daniel, who is also immune from any immorality Testimony of his infallibility abounds in the Bible. Kind Nebuchadnezzar describes him thus:

“In whom is the Spirit of the Holy God’s.”   [Daniel 4:8]

“Then the presidents and the satraps sought to find a ground for complaint against Daniel with regard to the kingdom: but they could find no ground for complaint for any fault, because he was faithful, and no error or fault was found in him.”    [Daniel 6:4]

 “The Daniel said to the King, “O King live for ever My God sent His angel and shut the lions’ mouths, and they have not him because I was found blameless before him; also before you, O King, I have done no wrong.”    [Daniel 6:21-22]

The fourth is Prophet Josiah about whom the Bible says:

“And he did what was right in the eyes of the Lord, and walked in all the ways of David his father, and he did not turn aside to the right or to the left.”   [II Kings 22:2]

The fifth prophet is Zechariah and his wife; according to Luke:

“And they were both righteous before, God, walking in all the commandments and ordinances of the Lord blameless.”   [Luke 1:16]

The sixth is the King Hezkiah according to the accounts in the Bible:

“He trusted in the Lord the God of Israel; so that there was none like him among all the Kings of Judah after him, nor among those who were before him. For he held fast to the Lord ; he did not depart from following him, but kept the commandments which the Lord commanded Moses, And the Lord was with him; where-ever he went forth, he prospered.”   [II Kings 18:5-7]

“Then Hezekiah turned his face to the wall, and prayed to the Lord-and said, “Remember now, O Lord, I beseech thee, how I have walked before thee in faithfulness and with a whole heart, and have done what is good in thy sight.”     [Isaiah 38:2-3]

The seventh person is Samson, son of Manoah. The Angels foretell the news of his birth to his mother:

‘Therefore beware and drink no wine or strong drink, and eat nothing unclean for lo, you shall conceive and bear a son. No razor shall come upon his head, for the boy shall be a Nazirite to God from birth to his death’.   [Judge 13:4-5,7]

 The eighth person is Samuel who made bold his righteous-ness before Israel, and the nation bore witness to his piety:

“Or whom have I defrauded? Whom have I oppressed? Or from whose hand I have taken a bribe to blind my eyes with? Testify against me and I will restore it to you. They said, “You have not defrauded us or oppressed us or taken anything from any man’s hand”. And he said to them, “The Lord is witness this day, that you have not found anything in my hand”. And they said, “He is witness”.  [Samuel 12:3-5]

The ninth person is Simeon about whom Luke writes: 

“Now there was a man in Jerusalem, whose name was Simeon and this man was righteous and devout, looking for the consolation of Israel, and the Holy Spirit was upon him.”    [Luke 2:25]

The tenth person is Joseph, the husband of Mary the Bible has this to say of him :

“And her husband, Joseph, being a just mm and unwilling to put her to shame resolved to divorce her quietly.”   [Matthew 1:19]

The above ten citations have been made to show that other prophets and righteous persons besides Jesus were endowed with divine grace and piety. There is quite a number besides them. It is said of Noah, Daniel and Job:

“Son of man, when a land sins against me by acting faithlessly and I stretch out my hand against it and break its staff of bread and send famine upon it, and cut off from it man and beast, even if these three men, Noah, Daniel, arid Job, were in it, they would deliver but their own lives by their righteousness says the Lord God.”  [Ezekiel 14:13-14]

The Christians always argue that Adam violated God’s Law as he ate from the forbidden tree: subsequently a fall ensued. Any one born of the seed of Adam will follow suit. All people except Jesus the Messiah are sinful because they are born of Adam.

This doctrine does great injustice to mankind. It is not in consonance with the Holy Bible either. That Adam sins and his whole progeny is saddled with his sin till dooms day one is contrary to the teachings of the Bible wherein one finds the following:

 “The fathers shall not be put to death for the children nor shall the children be put to death for the fathers; every man shall be put to death for his own sin.”      (Deuteronomy 24:16]

“According to what is written in the law, in the book of Moses, where the Lord commanded, “The fathers shall not be put to death for the children, or the children be put to death for the fathers; but every man shall die for his own sin.” [II Chronicles 25:4]

“In those days they shall no longer say: ‘The fathers have eaten sour grapes, and the children’s teeth are set on edge’. But every one shall die for his own sin; each man who cats sour grapes, his teeth shall be set on edge”    [Jeremiah 31:29-30]

“Behold, all souls are mine; the soul of the father as well as the soul of the son is mine the soul that sins shall die.”    [Ezekiel 18:4]

“The soul that sins shall die. The son shall not suffer for the iniquity of the father, nor, the father suffers for the iniquity of the son; the righteousness of the righteous shall be upon himself, and the wickedness of the wicked shall be upon himself. But if a wicked man turns away from all his sins which he has committed and keeps all my statues and does what is lawful and right, he shall surely live; he shall not die. None of the transgression which he has committed shall be remembered against him ; for the righteousness which he has done he shall live.”    [Ezekiel l8:20-22]

An interesting question is: “Is Mary the mother of Jesus a sinner since she was the seed of Adam?

 Some Christians argue that Mary is not innocent although the Messiah being her son does not inherit her sin as he the Messiah is innocent. The Christian religion attributes sin to the issue of Adam merely because they are Adam’s sons, why is it that owing to his mother’s sins, Jesus is not a sinner? Let us have another look. In eating the forbidden fruit Eve is also a partaker along with Adam, moreover, her sin is graver than that of Adam. It was she who ate first. Adam was seduced afterwards to follow her dictate. So it is written:

“So when the woman saw that the tree was good for food, and that it was a delight to the eyes, and that the tree was to be desired to make one wise, she took of its fruit and ate; and she also gave some to her husband, and he ate.”    [Genesis 3:6]

 “And Adam was not deceived” says Paul, ”but the woman was deceived and became transgressor.”    [I Timothy 2:14]

Eve’s fault, it would seem, is twice as great as that of Adam, if this hypothesis is warranted then a child conceived of cohabitation will carry half of man’s and half of woman’s guilt, thus, making up a mediocre sinner. A child conceived only of woman shall inherit her two-fold sin thus becoming a perfect sinner. On this ground, a man born only of woman instead of being innocent shall carry more than ordinary sin.

Some Christians have supported their argument that all men are sinners by relying on the following words from Psalms:

“The Lord looks down from heaven upon children of men, to see if there are any that act wisely, that seek after God. They have all gone astray, they are all alike corrupt; there is none that does good, no, not one.”    [Psalms 14:2-3]

It is submitted that the above quotation is confined to a particular nation and age. On the occasion of taunt and reproach the usage of language demands words which are common and General in scope. Hence the verse following immediately reads:

“Have they no knowledge, all the evildoers who eat up my people as they eat bread, and do not call upon the Lord? There they shall be in great terror, for God is with the generation of the righteous.”   [Psalms 14:4-5]

Others have supported their argument that all men are sinners by referring to David. David was a prophet, they argued yet, he took possession of the wife of Urias and eventually had her engaged in illicit intimacy with him. These Christians never ponder before they tax David with immodesty seeing that the Gospels opens with the verse:

            “Jesus Christ, the son of David...”   [Matthew 1:1]

If these Christians bold David liable to unchastity (God’s refuge), what of Jesus then?

These Christians who hold this view should ponder a while. David is God’s chosen prophet. He held communion with him. How come then, that a person no less than God’s prophet could be subject to such an abominable deed? God has endowed us with intellect. We can discern fake from genuine, false from true. The Bible itself is replete with hints which acquit David. This story is a fabrication in the Bible. No decent man will fall so low; certainly not a great prophet. The Gospel contains allegations pertaining to the sins of Jesus as follows:

       1.         Jesus took immersion from John. John’s baptism was for the “forgiveness of sins”.     [Mark 1:4]

        2.         Jesus offered wine to people - [John 2:8]. It is written about wine:

“Wine and new wine take away the understanding.”   [Hosea 4:11]

       3.         The Gospel also tells of Jesus’ lies. On the feast of the tabernacles, Jesus replied to his brothers :

“Go to the feast yourselves; I am not going up to the feast,” and after his brothers were gone he also went up, not publicly but in private.    [John 7:8-10]

       4.         Jesus addressed, it is evident from the Gospel, to his mother with contempt:

“O woman; what have you to do with me? My hour has not yet come.”     [John 2:4]

There are many things derogatory to the eminence of Jesus. The only way out from these allegations is to renounce them as distortions and believe David and Jesus to be innocent prophets as is the belief of Muslims.

Some other Christian theologians accused Samson of adultery by referring to the Book of Judges:

Samson went to Gaza, and there he saw a harlot and he went in to her. The Gazites were told, “Samson has come here,” and they surrounded the place.   [Judge 16:1-2]

It is submitted that the verse in question goes to suggest only this: Samson in order to protect himself from his enemies took refuge in a house. This house happened to be that of a lewd woman. A story corresponding to this one is in the book of Joshua:

And Joshua the son of Nun sent two men secretly from Shittim as spies, saying. “Go, view the land, especially Jericho”. And they went, and came into the house of a harlot whose name was Rahab, and lodged there.    [Joshua 2:1] 

Those two men had no affairs with the woman. They merely used as a hide-out the house of a prostitute. Samson was in the same situation. If we assume Samson to be an adulterer, the prophecy of God that  “the boy shall be a Nazirite to God from birth” will no longer hold. In the epistle to Hebrews it is written:

“And what more shall I say ? For time would fail me to tell of Gideon. Barak, Samson, Jephtha, of David and Samuel and the prophets...who through faith conquered kingdoms, enforced justice, received promises, stopped the mouths of lions.”  [Hebrews 11:32-33]

Samson, from the account above, had faith, was righteous, and received the promises of God. If these Christians who accused Samson would strain their mind but little, the case of Samson will appear less embarrassing than that of Jesus which Luke puts as follows:

“And behold, a woman of the city, who was a sinner, when the learned that he was sitting at table in the Pharsee’s house, brought an alabaster flask of ointment, and standing behind him at his feet, weeping she began to wet his feet with tears and wiped them with the hair of her head, and kissed his feet, and anointed them with the ointment.”    [Luke 7:37-38]

It is not warranted to condemn Samson whose action is less serious than that of Jesus. Unless, if those who condemn Samson are equally prepared to bring a charge of sin against Jesus.

The Bible at least proclaims that John the Baptist. Zechariah and his wife, Daniel, Josiah, Hezekiah and Abel as righteous men and there was no sin attached to them in the Bible. Therefore, the Christians claim that all people except Jesus are sinful has no foundation. This, therefore, repudiates the doctrine of Atonement.

Did Jesus Die on the Cross?

This question is a hot-bed of controversy between Christians and Muslims. From the very outset of discussion on this subject, the Christian will commence the conversation in this familiar fashion: Christians and Jews, despite their discords, are at one that Jesus died on the Cross. The chronicles of the Roman Empire are in accord with this fact.

Six hundred years after Jesus, a man from the Arabian desert made his appearance and proclaimed contrary to the entire world:

            “They slew him not nor crucified him.”      [Qur’an 4:158]

This claim is a standing miracle of Muhammad the unlettered Prophet of the Arabian Peninsula  (the choicest blessings of God be upon him). Its vindication by subsequent modern research constitutes a valid argument for the truth of Muhammad’s claim.

Islam insists that God saved Jesus from death on the Cross. Joseph was gagged and thrown into a well but God saved him. Similarly, God saved the three companions of Daniel who were gagged and pushed into a furnace. In the same manner, the Jews attempted to kill Jesus on the Cross in order to render him accursed. God delivered him from the accursed death and brought him closer than ever to Him.

The death of Jesus on the Cross is not sustained by convincing evidence from the Gospel and in fact, there is a convincing evidence that Jesus did not die on the Cross. The following are some of the arguments to prove ‏ that Jesus did not die en the Cross:

       1.         The Old Testament says about the impostor prophet :

“…. but that prophet or that dreamer of dreams shall be put to death, because he has taught rebellion against the Lord your God, who brought you out of the land of Egypt and redeemed you out of the house of bondage, to make you leave the way in which the Lord your God commanded you to walk. So you shall purge the evil from the midst of you…”    [Deuteronomy 13:5]

And again:

“And if a man has committed a crime punishable by death and he is put to death, and you hang him on a tree, his body shall not remain all night upon the tree, but you shall bury him the same day, for a hanged man is accursed by God; you shall not defile your land which the LORD your God gives you for an inheritance.”   [Deuteronomy 21:22-23]

Jesus was a claimant to prophethood. Granted that no Muslim would dub him an impostor; but the Jews impliedly regard him an impostor, or granted that the Jews crucified him and be he subsequently died on the Cross, the logical conclusion will be (God’s refuge), that Jesus is accursed. Yet, crucifixion and ‘accursedness’ became part and parcel of the Christian cult.  It is written:

“Christ redeemed us from the curse of the law, having become a curse for us-for it is written, ‘Cursed be everyone who hangs on a tree’.”   [Galatians 3:13]

This is the most erroneous belief of the Christians. For it portrays Jesus to be false in his claim to prophethood. His crucifixion negates truth-that indeed, was the Jews’ design. Jesus was a true prophet and therefore, his death on the Cross is a myth.

        2.         In the Christian view, crucifixion is a ‘must’ because by this fantastic method they will be forgiven. From the gospels’ viewpoint, crucifixion is not instrument at all to forgiveness. Jesus announces:

“But that you may know that the Son of man has authority on earth to forgive sins-he then said to the paralytic- ‘Rise, take up your bed and go home’.”    [Matthew 9:6]

This statement was made by Jesus himself when he was alive. It shows that for the forgiveness of sins, death on the cross is not necessary.

       3.         Jesus was killed-the Christians hold-for their sake, that is to expiate their sins. Had he not been crucified, the mission of Paul and the faith of Christians would become void of meaning. It seems to me that Jesus did not die on the Cross and that the Christian preaching of the crucifixion is wrong since it was opposed both to God’s will and to his mission. God says:

“For I desire steadfast love and not sacrifice.”    [Hosea 6:6]

and Jesus says:

“Go and learn what this means, ‘I desire mercy, and not sacrifice,’ For I came not to call the righteous, but sinners.”    [Matthew 9:13]

God desires mercy and love, not sacrifice. Repentance is the sole means to absorb His mercy. Jesus preached repentance - was concerned throughout his life to invite people to repent. Redemptive death is contradictory to God’s plan and a disservice to the office of Jesus.

       4.         In the book of Matthew we read:

“But he answered them, ‘An evil and adulterous generation seeks for a sign : but no sign shall be given to it except the sign of the prophet Jonah. For as Jonah was three days and three nights in the belly of the whale, so will the Son of man be three days and three nights in the heart of the earth’.”    [Matthew 12:39-40]

To investigate whether prophet Jonah was alive in the belly of the whale or dead, we have only to study the book of Jonah where we find the following:

“And the LORD appointed a great fish to swallow up Jonah; and Jonah was in the belly of the fish three days and three nights. Then Jonah prayed to the LORD his God from the belly of the fish.”    [Jonah 1:17; 2:1]

There are only two ways left for the Christians. They can either refuse Jesus’ crucifixion and believe that he was protected from death on the Cross as the Muslims believe. This way, the prophecy of Jesus is proved true that his miracle came to pass; or they can stick to his death on the Cross-at the cost of rejecting his miracle.

       5.         When Jesus came to know of the crucifixion and the evil design of the Jews, he is reported by Luke to pray:

“And he withdrew from them about a stone’s throw, and knelt down and prayed, ‘Father, if thou art willing, remove this cup from me; nevertheless not my will, but thine, be done’. And there appeared to him an angel from heaven, strengthening him.”    [Luke 22:41-43]

Without the least shadow of doubt Jesus prayed in great humbleness only to be saved from this dreadful and disgraceful death. The cup was the cup of death. One question that arises here is, “Was Jesus’ prayer heard?” If it was heard and granted it follows that the myth of Jesus’ death on the Cross is false. If it went unheard then the truth of Jesus is questionable.  The book of Proverbs states:

“The LORD is far from the wicked, but He hears the prayer of the righteous.”   [Proverbs 15:29]

The truth of it is that God listened to his cries and wailing as-such is the way of God-and delivered Jesus from the grip of an accursed death on the tree.

       6.         In the letter to Hebrews it is stated:

“In the days of his flesh Jesus offered up prayers and supplications, with loud cries and tears, to him who was able to save him from death, and he was heard for his godly fear.”   [Hebrews 5:7]

This is a premonition and statement of an actual event. This prophecy is attested to in Proverbs.

“The fear of the LORD prolongs life, but the years of the wicked will be short.”    [Proverbs 10:27]

This prophecy cannot be fulfilled unless we recognize that Jesus did not die on the Cross. It was due to the glad tidings of God that Jesus sustained the satisfaction that he could not die on the Cross. Therefore, when agony on the Cross intensified he cried: 

            “My God, my God, why hast Thou forsaken me?”

 It was to recollect the promise of God, God keeps His word; therefore, He saved Jesus from death on the Cross.

       7.         The Gospels reveal that in order to protect Jesus from the jaws of death, God brought extraordinary causes into play. One incident described in the Gospels is that God caused Pilate’s wife to dream and she let her husband know:

“Besides, while he was sitting on the judgement seat, his wife sent word to him, ‘Have nothing to do with that righteous man, for I have suffered much over him today in a dream’.”    [Matthew 27:19]

It was God’s decree that Jesus should survive, Who is there to obstruct God’s plans?

       8.         Jesus was the shepherd of Israel.

        9.         Jesus used to rebuke the Jews:

“… that upon you may come all the righteous blood shed on earth, from the blood of innocent Abel to the blood of Zechariah the son of Barachiah, whom you murdered between the sanctuary and the altar.”      [Matthew 23:35]

Had Jesus also been slain by the Jews and had his blood been spilled, he should have foretold about it, It was a decisive factor. His marked silence on the occasion of his crucifixion signifies that he was not going to be killed on the Cross by the Jews or else the mentioning of his blood should have taken priority.

     10.        In his explicit sayings in the Gospels, Jesus refers mostly to his own suffering:

“….So also the Son of man will suffer at their hands.”    [Matthew 17:12]

“….But first he must suffer many things and be rejected by this generation.”   Luke 17:24-25]

“….I have earnestly desired to eat this Passover with you before I suffer;”    [Luke 22:15]

After the event of the crucifixion Jesus says:

“… O foolish men, and slow of heart to believe all that the prophets have spoken! Was it not necessary that the Christ should suffer these things and enter into His glory?”    [Luke 24:25-26]

“And you, O Bethlehem, in the land of Judah, are by no means least among the rulers of Judah; for from you shall come a ruler who will govern my people Israel.”  [Matthew 2:6]

Jesus himself says:

“I was sent only to the lost sheep of the house of Israel.”   [Matthew 15:24]

When Jesus made his appearance, the Jews were in exile and ’the sheep of the house of Israel’ were lost. Thus, Jesus says:

            “I have some other sheep which are not of this house, I have to bring them too”.

It is a fact that the Jews were dispersed from India to Ethiopia:

“…an edict was written according to all that Mordecai commanded concerning the Jews to the satraps and the governors and the princes of the provinces from India to Ethiopia – and also to the Jews in their script and their language…”   [Esther 8:9]

If Jesus died on the Cross at thirty-three and the chapter closed there, then this is tantamount to discrediting his prophethood. Thus, the only safe thing is to believe that he did not die on the Cross.

From the above elucidation it is clear as dawn that Jesus was due only to undergo sufferings. References to death and killing are too fragmentary. Where death or killing is mentioned clearly, the description is exaggerated. The two kinds of text can be reconciled; by saying that in the Bible suffering and agony is often termed ‘death’. Paul says:

“I protest, brethren, by my pride in you which I have in Christ Jesus our Lord, I die every day!”      [I Corinthians 15:31]

Scrutinizing the GOSPEL Crucifixion Reports:

The onus is on a writer like myself to settle the value of the Gospel narratives. It should be borne in mind that none of the four Gospel writers was an eye-witness to the crucifixion. For, the disciples of Jesus deserted him when the enemies hemmed in on him [Matthew 26:56].  It is likely that the Gospel writers were not even his disciples. Their editing, therefore, is mere hearsay. Their evidence is based on second-hand reporting. In the reporting of only one event, over twenty discrepancies more than suffice to discredit the evidence. I request my readers to sit in judgment on the case of the murder of one of the great among prophets. This case is of enormous consequence; for if murder was committed according to the Christians and Jews alike, the victim is accursed. The Christians who claim that the Messiah was killed, have no eye-witness at their disposal. They rely on the speculations and hearsay of the editors of the Gospels whose testimony is at variance.  It is the law of all the courts of the world that when witnesses are at variance their evidence cannot be relied upon.

Below are listed the discrepancies among the Gospels:

        1.         Who shouldered the cross to Golgatha - Jesus or Simon?

According to Mark:

“And they compelled a passerby, Simon of Cyrene....to carry his cross....”     [Mark 15:21-22]

 According to Luke:

“....they seized one Simon of Cyrene......and laid on him the cross to carry it behind Jesus.”   [Luke 23:26]

According to Matthew:

“...they carne upon a man of Cyrene, Simon by name; this man they compelled to carry his cross.”    [Matthew 27:32]

John-in sharp contrast to these three-narrates:

“So they took Jesus, and he went out, bearing his own cross, to the place....called in Hebrew Golgatha.”    [John 19:17]

       2.         Did the Messiah taste wine mixed with myrrh or vinegar before he was put on the cross?

According to Matthew:

“And when they came to a place called Golgatha .... they offered him wine to drink, mingled with gall, but when he tasted it he would not drink it.”     [Matthew  27:33-34]

 According of Mark:

“And they offered him wine mingled with myrrh; but he did not take it.”   [Mark 15:23]

Matthew reports that Jesus tasted the “wine mingled with gall”, but would not drink it. In the latter report, he did not at all take the “wine mingled with myrrh”. Luke and John emit the incident altogether.

       3.         The story of vinegar on the Cross.

Luke keeps mute on it. According to John:

  “After this Jesus, knowing that all was now finished, said (to fulfil the scripture), ‘I thirst’. A bowl full of vinegar stood there; so they put a sponge full of the vinegar on hyssop and held it to his mouth.......”     [John 19:28-30]

According to Mark:

“…. and one ran and, filling a sponge full of vinegar, put it on a reed and gave it to him to drink, saying......”   [Mark 15:36]

According to Matthew:

“...... and one of them at once ran and took a sponge, filled it with vinegar, and put it on a reed, and gave it to him to drink.......”    [Matthew 27:47-49]

The three testimonies clash. John reports that by saying “I thirst”, Jesus let his wish be known to slake his thirst.  According to the other two, neither did he ask for water nor did he say, “I thirst”. John states, “they” held the sponge to Jesus’ mouth. Matthew and Mark however reduce “they” to just one person.

Again Mark and Matthew are in dispute; Mark has it that the one man who gave Jesus the drink said, “Wait, let us see whether Elijah will come to take him down”. Whereas in Matthew, it is not the one man but “the others” who utter it.

       4.         At what time was the Messiah put on the tree?

Matthew and Luke leave out the hour of Jesus being put on the Cross. John reports:

  “Now it was the day of Preparation for the Passover; it was about the sixth hour. He said to the Jews, ‘Here is your King!’ ...Then he handed him over to them to be crucified.”    [John 19:14-16]

It was about the sixth hour, i.e. afternoon, that Jesus was nailed on the Cross. Mark has another time to tell:

            “And it was the third hour, when they crucified him.”      [Mark 15:25]

In one report it is the sixth hour and in the other the third hour. How can we put our trust in such evidence?

       5.         Was it one thief or both who reviled Jesus?

According to Matthew:

“And the robbers who were crucified with him also reviled him in the same way.”    [Matthew 27:44]

 According to Mark:

“.....Those who were crucified with him also reviled him.”    [Mark 15:32]

 Luke, the third witness, belies the former two:

“One of the criminals who were hanged railed at him saying, ‘Are you not the Christ? Save yourself and us!’ But the other rebuked him saying, ‘Do you not fear God since you are under the same sentence of condemnation’?”   [Luke 23:39-40]

The three of them are in flagrant disagreement, the first two claiming that both the thieves reviled Jesus, the third testifying that one thief reviled and the second acquitted Jesus. John, the fourth one, reserves his say!

       6.         Where and how many were the women on this occasion?

“…but standing by the cross of Jesus were his mother and his mother’s sister, Mary the wife of Clopas, and Mary Magdalene.”    [John 19:25]

“And all his acquaintances and the women who had followed him from Galilee stood at a distance and saw these things.”    [Luke 23:49]

“There were also women looking on from afar, among whom were Mary Magdalene, and Mary the mother of James the younger and of Josses and Salem, who when he was in Galilee followed him and ministered to him; and also many other women who came up with him to Jerusalem.”    [Mark 15:40-41]

“There were also many women there, looking on from afar, who had followed Jesus from Galilee, ministering to him; among whom were Mary Magdalene and Mary the mother of James and Joseph and the mother of the sons of Zebedee.”    [Matthew 27:55-56]

John reports that they were “standing by the Cross” and they synoptic Gospels state: “stood at a distance and saw”. John is the only one aware of Jesus’ mother being present. The synoptic Gospels are not aware of this. John spots Mary Magdalene near by the cross. Synoptic Gospels place her far off. There is a world of difference between the two reports. There is a difference in the number of women present-three, four of several women?

       7.         Did darkness engulf the whole world?

“Now from the sixth hour there was darkness over all the land until the ninth hour.”  [Matthew 27:45]

“And when the sixth hour had come, there was darkness over the whole land until the ninth hour.”    [Mark 15:33]

“It was now about the sixth hour, and there was darkness over the whole land until the ninth hour.”    [Luke 23:44]

This is the evidence of the synoptic Gospels. John is non-committal and his silence stirs bewilderment. It is illogical that John who is given to exaggeration should keep silent about such an important miracle. Who told the three simpletons that the whole world was covered with darkness? They were simple and ignorant and regarded their own tiny village as “the whole world”. Even this much cannot be proved until we know that there was darkness in Jerusalem. Unfortunately, history lends no support to this either.

       8.         The story of Jesus crying aloud and the tearing of the curtain of the temple.

Matthew reports;

“And about the ninth hour Jesus cried with a loud voice, ‘Eli, Eli, Lama sabachthani?’ And Jesus cried again with a loud voice... And behold, the curtain of the temple was torn in two, from top to bottom; and the earth shook, and the rocks were split; the tombs also were opened and many bodies of the saints who had fallen asleep were raised. ...”   [Matthew 27:46-52]

Mark reports:

“And at the ninth hour Jesus cried with a loud voice, ‘Eloi, Eloi, lama sabachthani?’ ...And Jesus uttered a loud cry,... And the curtain of the temple was torn in two, from top to bottom.”     [Mark 15:34-38]

Luke says:

“... While the sun’s light failed; and the curtain of the temple was torn in two, then Jesus, crying with a loud voice said, ‘Father, into thy bands I commit my spirit! ..”      [Luke 23:45-46]

John vouches for none of these fantastic things. The omission of such significant incidents when they are called for discredits the evidence. Besides, there are conflicting statements in the synoptic Gospels. Mark confines himself to the loud cry of Jesus and to the tearing of the curtain of the temple from top to bottom. Luke’s version is that the curtain was torn into two from between-not from top to bottom. Matthew is not content and adds that the earth shook and the rocks were split, the tombs were thrust open and saints who had been dead and buried became alive and went home. If Matthew’s rendering holds good then the others are guilty of suppressing important events of history. On the other hand, if the rest are true then Matthew’s evidence is nothing but myth. It was only a freak, a trick of thought devoid of any reality. The latter picture, according to Chronicles, is true. Thus mutual conflict, untruth and contradictions annul the evidence.

       9.         Did Jesus give piercing cries prior to the curtain being torn or vice-versa?

In Matthew and Mark, Jesus cries out twice; in Luke only once. The first two records Jesus as saying “Eloi, Eloi, lama sabachthani?” while on the cross. Luke does not incorporate it. John leaves it out entirely. Thus, two of them agree on Jesus crying twice. Luke reports instead Jesus saying, “Father, into thy hands I commit my spirit!” But this is not mentioned in the other two reports! The reporters are at divergence on whether Jesus’ second cry and committing his soul was first or the tearing of the curtain of the temple happened first. In Luke, the curtain is torn asunder first and Jesus cries second. In Matthew and Mark, the curtain is torn not only after Jesus’ cries but also after he died.

     10.        Testimony of the centurion:

Luke says after the temple curtain was torn:

“Now when the centurion saw what had taken place, he praised God, and said, ‘Certainly this man was innocent!’...”    [Luke 23:47]

“And when the centurion, who stood facing him, saw that he thus breathed his last, he said, ‘Truly this man was a son of God!’”    [Mark 15:39]

“When the centurion and those who were with him, keeping watch over Jesus, saw the earthquake and what took place, they were filled with awe and said, ‘Truly this was a son of God!’”     [Matthew 27:54]

These remarks are from the synoptic Gospels. John gives no account of this matter. First of all, the omission of this event in John’s report is quaint. Secondly, several differences appear in the reported version of the event. Mark says that the centurion passed his remark when he saw that Jesus had breathed his last. Luke first reports the centurion praising God and then making his remarks. Matthew incorporates many others with the centurion. They ‘saw the earthquake’ and ‘were filled with awe’ and exclaimed afterwards.

Apart from this, their testimonies differ widely from one another. In Matthew, the centurion is reported to remark, “Truly this was a son of God” According to Mark, the centurion says, “Truly this man was a son of God”. Luke’s version makes the centurion say, “Certainly this man was innocent” In Matthew, the centurion’s utterance is: “son of God” not ”man”. In Mark, both ”man” and ”son of God” are used. In Luke, there is “man” and “innocent”, and “son, of God” is omitted. This gradual variation is interesting. Now the Christians are in a fix; if they discredit one report the rest will be dropped too. If all of them are harping on the same, then it should be admitted that “son of God” and “innocent” are only synonyms expressing the same idea. The Gospel writers used “son of God” in the sense of “innocent”-which answers the question of the sonship of Jesus.

     11.        Were people or the Jews aware of Jesus’ death when he cried?

Matthew and Mark made no contribution to this problem.

In Luke we find:

“And all the multitudes who assembled to see the sight, when they saw what had taken place, returned home beating their breasts. And all his acquaintances and the women who had followed him from Galilee stood at a distance and saw these things.”   [Luke 23:48-49]

In John:

“Since it was the day of Preparation, in order to prevent the bodies from remaining on the cross on Sabbath (for that Sabbath was a high day), the Jews asked Pilate that their legs might be broken and that they might be taken away.”    [John 19:31]

It is evident from the report of John that the Jews demanded the ‘breaking of legs’ because they thought, until the last moment that Jesus had not expired, otherwise, the demand is senseless. In the eleventh hour, such a brutal and barbarous demand on the part of the Jews explodes the myth of the earthquake, the springing open of graves, the rising of the dead and the ripping of the temple curtain. In such circumstances, the Jews would never have made such a savage demand. At least Pilate would have upbraided them that despite their having seen awe-inspiring miracles, they still had the audacity to demand the breaking of Jesus’ legs and he would have told them to fear God.

John’s statement concerning the Jews puts it correct that Jesus had not died. In Luke, people are reported to have returned home beating their breasts when they observed the tragedy of Jesus. These people along with women saw it all standing at a distance! At this juncture, it seems pertinent to ask one question; assuming there was pitch darkness “from the sixth hour until the ninth”, - the sun was covered, the earth quaked, the rocks were riven - how did the people standing ‘far off ’ observed these incidents? Either their watching is a cooked up thing or the story of darkness all over the world is a lie. In the light of sound enquiry, both of these assumptions are wrong. To some extent, the silence of Matthew and Mark on the matter and John’s omission of the spreading of darkness, lends support to our view.

     12.        Were Jesus’ legs broken?

The synoptic Gospels impart no information. After relating the Jews’ demand, only John transmits:

“So the soldiers came and broke the legs of the first and of the other who had been crucified with him ; but when they came to Jesus and saw that he was already dead, they did not break his legs.”    [John 19:32-33]

Since it was the day of Preparation for the Sabbath, the Jews could watch no longer. The Messiah was not dead yet. In the latter part of the same day, they had demanded from Pilate the breaking of Jesus’ legs, the permission for which he readily granted. Afterwards, the Jews went home. The matter of breaking the legs of Jesus was left completely in Pilate’s hands. As we have noted, Pilate in his heart of hearts wanted Jesus to outlive these tortures. Probably, when he dispatched his centurion, he let his intention be known to him that the soldiers should omit breaking Jesus’ legs. The legs of the two thieves were crushed and those of Jesus were left intact.

John describes why Jesus’ bones were not broken: “when they came to Jesus and saw that he was already dead, they did not break his legs”, (the words “came to Jesus” repudiate the report of Luke that people saw Jesus dead while at a distance and darkness enveloped the ground; since the centurions could know of his death only when they “came to Jesus” at a very close range). This is John’s own interpretation of the event and he was absent on the occasion. His testimony is only a hearsay, therefore, it does not stand the test of history and carries no weight, particularly when the other three witnesses possess no knowledge of it. Granting that some centurion did utter these words, more than once unconscious men have been taken for dead and this is his own mistake.

The fact of the matter is; if some one really has said, he might have been an officer in whom Pilate confided, he would have said it deliberately to distract the attention of the centurions lest some insincere persons would have become suspicious and tip off the authorities. It is also obvious from the Gospels’ reports that to save Jesus, Pilate had thought out a good plan. On this occasion, he and his subordinates had recourse to some maneuvers. At any rate, according to John’s report, the bones of Jesus were not broken and the synoptic Gospels are silent on the subject.

     13.        Gushing forth of blood and water from the sides of Jesus.

 The synoptic Gospels are uncommunicative. Only John has this to say:

“But one of the soldiers pierced his side with a spear, and at once there came out blood and water.”    [John 19:34]

From this act on the part of the centurion, it appears that he doubted whether Jesus was dead.  He was not aware of Pilate’s’ tactics; when he pierced the side of Jesus, blood and water rushed forth, and it is evident that the flow of blood and water is a pointer to life and pulsation.

     14.        Who took possession of Jesus’ body and who placed it in the tomb?

“And Joseph took the body, and wrapped it in a clean linen shroud, and laid it in his own new tomb which he had hewn in the rock; and he rolled a great stone to the door of the tomb, and departed.”    [Matthew 27:59-60]

“And when he learned from the centurion that he was dead, he granted the body to Joseph. And he bought a linen shroud, and taking him down, wrapped him in the linen shroud, and laid him in a tomb which had been hewn out of the rock; and he rolled a stone against the door of the tomb.”    [Mark 15:45-46]

“Then he took it down and wrapped it in a linen shroud, and laid him in a rock-hewn tomb, where no one had ever yet been laid.”    [Luke 23:53]

“...So he came and took away his body. Nicodemus also, came. They took the body of Jesus, and bound it in linen cloths...as the tomb was close at hand, they laid Jesus there.”    [John 19:38-42]

In the Synoptics only Joseph of Arimathea is seen to take Jesus’ body and winds it in winding sheets, after which he deposits it in the grave. John puts Nicodemus along with Joseph of Arimathea in this performance.

     15.        Who was Joseph of Arimathea?

“When it was evening, there came a rich man from Arimathea, named Joseph, who was also a disciple of Jesus.”   [Matthew 27:57]

“Joseph of Arimathea, a respected member of the council, who was also himself looking for the kingdom of God, took courage and went to Pilate, and asked for the body of Jesus.”    [Mark 15:43]

“Now there was a man named Joseph from the Jewish town of Arimathea. He was a member of the council a good and righteous man, who had not consented to their purpose and deed, and he was looking for the kingdom of God.”    [Luke 23:50-51]

“After this Joseph of Arimathea, who was a disciple of Jesus, but secretly, for fear of the Jews…”    [John 19:38]

In Mark and Luke he is seen as a member of the Jews’ sanhedrin, a courageous and righteous man. In John, he is shown as being fearful of the Jews thus he keeps his allegiance to Jesus secret. Matthew tells us that he was openly a disciple of Jesus. Whatever the case may be, the question is how Joseph of Arimathea, who was cowardly enough not to let his faith be known for fear of the Jews, in such a critical situation when all the disciples of Jesus had betrayed him, had the audacity to demand Jesus’ body from Pilate? This narrative of the Gospels seems irrational.  It is baffling to see that Pilate did not ask him what relation he had with Jesus and why he asked for his body; instead he rushed to hand over the body to him. From this incident alone, the Christians should think it over and conclude that all of it was due to Pilate’s well-engineered plan. It was but proper to select such a person for the removal of the body whose membership of Jesus’ community was not known.

On the encouragement of Pilate, he could take heart to carry out the plan swiftly.

     16.        Who dug Jesus’ sepulchre, and where?

“Now in the place where he was crucified there was a garden, and in the garden a new tomb, where no one had ever been laid...they laid Jesus there.”    [John 19:41-42]

“…and laid him in a rock-hewn tomb, where no one had ever yet been laid.”    [Luke 23:53]

“…and laid him in a tomb which had been hewn out of the rock; ...”    [Mark 15:46]

“And Joseph took the body...and laid it in his own new tomb, which he had hewn in the rock;...”    [Matthew 27:59-60]

The first three witnesses do not say under whose behest the grave was dug. From Luke's account, it is not clear if the grave had been there long. Thanks to Matthew who describes in clear terms that it was Joseph of Arimathea who had the grave dug. The foregoing passages are pregnant with the following facts:

                      1.         The garden where the grave was situated was in the immediate neighborhood of the place of the crucifixion.

                      2.         It was hewn in a rock; i.e., it was spacious.

                      3.         It was not occupied by any one previously. Thus, the air was not polluted.

                      4.         It was freshly dug. 

                      5.         Joseph of Arimathea had it hewn out purposely.

To these five points may be added that Nicodemus, who had joined hands with Joseph of Arimathea in this adventure, had called on Jesus the night before the crucifixion [John 19:39], and keeping in view that the whole strategy was also known to Jesus, the matter is made as clear as daylight. If anyone reflects with due care, he will admit that Pilate, in order to have his scheme become a success, provided Joseph and Nicodemus with the wherewithal to collaborate. They had stored in advance the needed spices and the like. Pilate also dropped hints as to where the grave should be hewn and succeeded in his plan and Jesus was thus saved from death.

     17.        Where were the women hen Jesus was laid in the tomb?

“Mary Magdalene and the other Mary were there, sitting opposite the sepulchre.”    [Matthew 27:16]

“Mary Magdalene and Mary the mother of Jesus saw where he was laid.”    [Mark 15:47]

“The women who had come with him from Galilee followed, and saw the tomb, and how his body was laid.”    [Luke 23:55]

John dose not comment on this incident.

The synoptics are at variance again. Matthew and Mark report two Marys. Luke says that all women of Galilee who were there, were present. There is also a difference between ‘sitting before the tomb’ and ‘seeing where he was laid’.

     18.        The Jews demand the tomb to be watched.

 Matthew reports the Jews saying to Pilate:

“…. and said, ‘Sir, we remember how that impostor said, while he was still alive, ‘After three days I will rise again’. Therefore, order the sepulcher to be made secure until the third day, lest his disciples go and steal him away, and tell the people, ‘He has risen from the dead’ and the last fraud will be worse than the first’. Pilate said to them, ‘You have a guard of Soldiers; go, make it as secure as you can.”    [Matthew 27:63-65]

Besides Matthew, no other editor has filed that incident. The silence of the other three narrators on this important issue is one of the Gospels secrets. At any rate, Pilate looked down upon the Jews’ demand and curtly answered, “Go, make it secure as you can”. Pilate was laughing at the Jews’ untoward activities, for they came on the second day after the crucifixion, even after the Sabbath and Jesus’ body was no longer there!

      19.        Who visited Jesus’ tomb first? When and why?

The narratives of the Gospels vary considerably:

“Now after the Sabbath, toward the dawn of the first day of the week, Mary Magdalene and the other Mary went to see the sepulchre.”    [Matthew 28:1]

“And when the Sabbath was past, Mary Magdalene, and Mary the mother of James, and Salome, bought spices, so that they might go and anoint him. And very early on the first day of the week they went to the tomb when the sun had risen.”    [Mark 16:1-2]

“But on the first day of the week, at early dawn, they went to the tomb, taking the spices which they had prepared.”    [Luke 24:1]

“Now on the first day of the week Mary Magdalene came to the tomb early, while it was still dark….”    [John 20:1]

The above narratives reveal the following:

                       i.                      Mary Magdalene was the first to appear at the tomb, according to John. According to Luke, the women of Galilee and the men with them, were the first to visit the tomb. Mark reports that it was Mary the mother of James and Salome, and Mary Magdalene all together who came first. This conflict cannot be set at rest.

                      ii.                     Matthew says, the women came only to ‘see the sepulchre.’ In the views of Mark and Luke, they came with the set purpose to smear Jesus with spices. John does not bother to say anything about it

                     iii.                    The time of arrival is given by the narrators in contradiction to each other:

John says, ‘early, while it was still dark’; Mark says ‘very early’-, ‘-when the sun had risen’. There are great differences concerning the persons who came first, the purpose of their visit and the time of it.

     20.        What happened next to those who came first to the tomb?

 This is a long story reported in [John 20:1-10; Luke 24:2-7; Mark 16:3-7; and Matthew 28:1-7]. If we quote verbatim all the relevant references, the subject will be lengthy and they abound in divergences. First of all, I wish to draw the readers’ attention to John’s account of the disciples of Jesus:

“For as yet they did not know the scripture that he must rise from the dead.”     John 20:9]

This statement controverts all other reports in respect of Jesus foretelling his resurrection from the dead (Matthew 27 : 63). It also runs counter to all the sayings of the scriptures employed to prove that Jesus will come to life a second time. This Jesus did not tell his disciples; had he told them, they would have been expecting to see him in his second life (since Jesus’ death on the Cross was not foredoomed, the question of a second life does not arise).

It will suffice to consider only one among the aforesaid divergences.

John writes that Mary Magdalene went to peter and the other disciples who had a way with Jesus, and delivered the news. She found neither angels nor others there. That was the first time. The second time she saw two angels, one at the head, the other at the feet of Jesus in the tomb. In Luke, we find the women of Galilee entering the tomb and seeing two men in white garments. These two men gave no message to the women for the disciples of Jesus. In Mark, the women see a young man sitting on the right and he told them to go to the disciples and tell them to go to Galilee.

Finally, we read in Matthew that both Marys saw a great quake and a descending angel who asked them, to tell the disciples that the Messiah will be in Galilee before them.

The foregoing is only a summary of the controversy as there is no scope for detailed account.

     21.        Did the women deliver the message of the angel or angels to the disciples?

 Matthew and John give no account of the women informing the disciples of the message. Mark and Luke are not in agreement with each other.

Mark writes:

“They went out and fled from the tomb; and they said nothing to anyone, for they were afraid.”    [Mark 16:8]

Luke writes:

“And returning from the tomb they told all this to the eleven and to all the rest.”    [Luke 24:9]

     22.        To whom and in what way did Jesus first appear?

 According to Mark, he first appeared to Mary Magdalene (Mark 16:9). John verifies the statement of Mark (John 20:13-17). Luke’s account is contradictory to the rest; as he reports that Jesus first appeared to two men who were going from Jerusalem to Emmaus. They said while they were talking together:

“Some of those who were with us went to the tomb and found it just as the women had said; but him did they not see.”   [Luke 42:24]

Is there any possibility of reconciling these texts?

      23.        Did the disciples believe in the news of Jesus’ rising on the third day?

John and Matthew do not enlighten us on the subject. Mark informs us that twice they refused to accept it.    [Mark 16:11-13]

Luke transmits as follows:

“…but these words seemed to them an idle tale, and they did not believe them.”    [Luke 24:11]

Such grave contradictions in only one incident affirm that these assertions are not from God. The witnesses whose ‘evidence’ Christians not only believe, but insist on making others believe too, have no basis from what we have examined above to stand on. No sound judge will accept these statements as foundation for a decision since they are wrong. It is evident that Christian claims on these matters are false