Evidence

I was well aware of the many arguments regarding resurrection evidence (see eg Lee Strobel, The Case for Christ > ; a good summary but IMHO not convincing).
The most interesting piece of evidence to me (but still not compelling) had been the accounts regarding Mary Magdalene, who is said to have been the first to see Jesus alive after the crucifixion (Mark 16:9 and John 20[1]).

Now, in an age when the testimony of women was not trusted, this is unusual, to say the least. To credit the first witness of the resurrection to a woman, and one of questionable character at that, doesn't make a lot of sense if you are trying to win an audience in the ancient world.[2] (See more about Mary Magdalene here >)

Then I learned something astounding from Luke Timothy Johnson that I hadn't heard before but should have known (and maybe you already do): Paul doesn't mention Mary Magdalene. He mentions Cephas, over five hundred brethren, James, and the apostles (and himself), but no Mary (I Cor 15:3-8[3]).

Why not?

Paul's first letter to the Corinthians was written 53-57 AD. It's among the earliest of the New Testament books, and probably earlier than Mark >, the earliest gospel.

Here's what is interesting to me #1:

Paul doesn't say who saw Jesus first. He let's you think it was Cephas simply because he's mentioned first, and if you don't know Mark's account, you'd be forgiven for thinking so.

It's likely Paul had formal training in rhetoric (we'd call it classical training today) and adjusted his narrative in a way to better persuade his audience. I think Paul was aware of the accounts that Mary Magdalene was first to see Jesus and simply omitted it, but he didn't write anything that conflicted with it, either, knowing that his audience was probably well aware too. But written words had even more power then than they do now (being less common and the domain of the wealthy and educated), and Paul was aware his letter would carry more authority by virtue of being written down and would be read by many others who didn't know about Jesus and would likely respond better to this version of events.

(Multiple accounts of the same event can be true and one might sound better, just as multiple photographs of the same recipe might be accurate but one may look more appetizing.)


Here's what is interesting to me #2:

Nobody came back from the dead in those days anymore then than they do today; and just as importantly, no one believed people came back from the dead in those days anymore than they do today.

There were segments in the early Church that denied bodily resurrection at all (like the Sadducees), and it sounds like Paul is talking to them. (Paul had been a Pharisee and Pharisees did accept resurrection of the dead, but not the kind that allows a man to walk among the living as a ghost might.)

If you were going to leave out one teensy weensy detail that could really discredit your story about a man who claimed to be God, the resurrection would be a good place to start. Just as Paul "saw the light" and came to Jesus without any witnesses (except unnamed companions), the early Church could have easily filled in the gaps with something more believable.

But not only does Paul leave out Mary (who wouldn't have helped his case), he says lots of folks saw Jesus, and many of them are still alive. He couldn't have said that if there weren't quite a few to verify it.


Here's what is interesting to me #3:

Whether John's account of Mary Magdalene was independent or borrowed from Mark, he decided to include it for a reason. You wouldn't include unhelpful evidence twice. Women didn't become suddenly more trustworthy in the few years between Mark and John. Why not just say Cephas saw him first? Or just say all those apostles that saw the empty tomb were there with Mary when Jesus appeared?


The only thing worse than citing bad evidence is citing it twice. If your audience didn't believe you the first time, they're not going to believe you the second time, but they will get annoyed with you. (Just ask Mitt Romney, who apparently hasn't figured out that releasing one year of tax returns is only one year of tax returns no matter how many hundreds of pages it runs).


Here's what is interesting to me #4:
Totally unrelated to anything above: The apostle St. Bartholomew allowed himself to be skinned alive rather than deny the risen Jesus.

Now I know there are many folks that are really convinced they are right but unfortunately they are really wrong, and that runs the spectrum from Birthers to 9/11 conspiracists.


Me talking to myself: Don't you think, Clarence, if Bartholomew had any doubt at all, as his tormentors began to remove his skin, he just might have said "Wait wait, okay, you're right, Jesus didn't really rise from the dead, he's hiding at so-and-so's house."[4]


None of the above is new; I'm sure you and many others have considered these things, but they are fresh to me.

[1]
Mark 16:9 (WEB)
Now when he had risen early on the first day of the week, he appeared first to Mary Magdalene, from whom he had cast out seven demons.
John 20:1-16 (WEB)
1 Now on the first day of the week, Mary Magdalene went early, while it was still dark, to the tomb, and saw the stone taken away from the tomb.
2 Therefore she ran and came to Simon Peter, and to the other disciple whom Jesus loved, and said to them, “They have taken away the Lord out of the tomb, and we don’t know where they have laid him!”
3 Therefore Peter and the other disciple went out, and they went toward the tomb.
4 They both ran together. The other disciple outran Peter, and came to the tomb first.
5 Stooping and looking in, he saw the linen cloths lying, yet he didn’t enter in.
6 Then Simon Peter came, following him, and entered into the tomb. He saw the linen cloths lying,
7 and the cloth that had been on his head, not lying with the linen cloths, but rolled up in a place by itself.
8 So then the other disciple who came first to the tomb also entered in, and he saw and believed.
9 For as yet they didn’t know the Scripture, that he must rise from the dead.
10 So the disciples went away again to their own homes.
11 But Mary was standing outside at the tomb weeping. So, as she wept, she stooped and looked into the tomb,
12 and she saw two angels in white sitting, one at the head, and one at the feet, where the body of Jesus had lain.
13 They told her, “Woman, why are you weeping?” She said to them, “Because they have taken away my Lord, and I don’t know where they have laid him.”
14 When she had said this, she turned around and saw Jesus standing, and didn’t know that it was Jesus.
15 Jesus said to her, "“Woman, why are you weeping? Who are you looking for?”" She, supposing him to be the gardener, said to him, “Sir, if you have carried him away, tell me where you have laid him, and I will take him away.”
16 Jesus said to her, "“Mary.”" She turned and said to him, “Rabboni!” which is to say, “Teacher!”

[2]
It's easy for us to gloss this over 2,000 years later, but update the events to something simple and set it in a modern context and you'll see what I mean:
Let's say there's a scruffy emo kid down the street who's been in and out of trouble a lot. In fact, he's been admitted and discharged seven times from a home for troubled teens. He's friends with your son. Your son is accused of shoplifting. Two witnesses say your son is innocent. One of them is this emo kid. The other is the class president with a rich father, respected member of the community, all that. The police come to your door and ask if there's anyone who can clear your son.
Who do you tell them to talk to?
The emo kid is Mary Magdalene.

[3]
Paul's account:
1 Corinthians 15:3-8 (WEB)
3 For I delivered to you first of all that which I also received: that Christ died for our sins according to the Scriptures,
4 that he was buried, that he was raised on the third day according to the Scriptures,
5 and that he appeared to Cephas, then to the twelve.
6 Then he appeared to over five hundred brothers at once, most of whom remain until now, but some have also fallen asleep.
7 Then he appeared to James, then to all the apostles,
8 and last of all, as to the child born at the wrong time, he appeared to me also.

[4]
Thank you to Fr John Riccardo for this. The whole world knows who St Bartholomew> is, but this was all new to this evangelical; in the tradition I come from, putting "saint" in front of someone's name more or less makes them invisible. You might see it in front of a name the top of a bible book, eg, "The Gospel According to St Matthew," but not often, and only in very old bibles.

Started: 2012-08-01