Skeptic Tank Text Archive File

---
Master Index Current Directory Index Go to SkepticTank Go to Human Rights activist Keith Henson Go to Scientology cult

Skeptic Tank!

Back Page: summer 1992 DID... tell "the things that happened in the way, and how he was known of them in the breaking of the bread" (v:34). So why would the apostles have disbe- lieved the report of the Emmaus disciples if by then they themselves were proclaiming that Jesus had risen and appeared to Simon? What we have in the Marcan Appendix, then, is an obviously bungled attempt to harmonize the ending of Mark's gospel with other accounts of postresurrection appearances. The failure is so apparent that the authentici- ty of the appendix must be rejected. So the did-they-or-didn't-they problem is still with us. As far as we know, "Mark" wrote nothing about postresur- rection appearances and possibly ended his gospel at 16:8. At that point, he said that the women ran from the tomb so frightened that they "said nothing to anyone." Matthew, Luke, and John all disputed that. So what is the truth in this matter? Did the women go tell the disciples what they had seen or didn't they? Both versions of the story can't be right. Somebody has to be wrong, and the inerrantists can take their pick. The version of Matthew, Luke, and John or the one by Mark--it doesn't matter. If either version is wrong, then the Bible is not inerrant. One thing is sure: the four resurrection accounts are certainly not inerrant. ************************************ SAINTS... Since then there is no such prophecy, but a pretended prophecy of an old coat ["They parted my garments among them..."], the proper deduction is, there were no such things... (An Examina- tion of the Passages in the New Testament... Called Prophecies concerning Jesus Christ, pam., 1807). Bible believers boast that Thomas Paine's best known work, The Age of Reason, has been repeatedly and soundly refuted, but in reality his ar- guments against belief in divine inspiration of the Bible have never been satisfactorily rebutted. In 1776, he wrote a political tract that he entitled Common Sense. Bibliolaters would do well to apply that title to the matters referred to in Paine's pamphlet just quoted. The omniscient Yahweh had his prophets predict such piddling crucifixion events as casting lots for the Messiah's garments and giving him vinegar on a sponge but didn't have the prophets predict an earthquake that would resurrect many dead saints! Who can believe it? Inerrantists may cry argument from silence as loudly as they wish, but in all that he has said about these resurrected saints, Babinski has addressed some very serious problems in the inerrancy doctrine. They deserve a re- sponse, not flippant dismissal. (Readers wishing to contact Tom Fishbeck about this subject or his news- letter may do so at P. O. Box 105, Pasadena, MD 21122. Ed Babinski's address is 109 Burwood Drive, Simpsonville, SC 29681-8768.) ********************************* IF YOU MOVE... If you wish to continue receiving TSR, change of address notices must be sent to us when you move. Our nonprofit bulk rate does not provide for forwarding to new addresses. We pay an address correction fee to keep us informed of those who have moved so that future issues will not be mailed to noncurrent addresses, where postal clerks will discard them. 1 This fee lets us know only that addressees have moved, at which time we remove their names from our mailing list. To have your copy forwarded to your new address would add 52 to the original mailing fee. The cost is prohibitive. ************************************** BACK ISSUES All ten back issues of TSR are available at $1 per copy. ******************************** FREE SUBSCRIPTION: A free one-year subscription to The Skeptical Review can be obtained by writing to P. O. Box 617, Canton, IL 61520-0617. 2

---

E-Mail Fredric L. Rice / The Skeptic Tank