Please Make This Make Sense?

[POI]

According to John 20, Mary went to the tomb and finds it empty. It is clear that she is presented to be alone here, as John 20:1 only mentions Mary, and also that John 20:2 states that she ran, rather than stating that they ran. Alternatively, Matthew 28:1 states Mary was with another, and also that Matthew 28:8 states that they left.

Theists will argue, "well, some of these (small) details don't really matter. All that really matters is that Jesus was found missing and later appeared to others." For which a skeptic might reply... "It does matter because Christians argue that THIS collection of events is said to be the most important storyline presented within mankind's history. If the believers cannot even get the basic set of accounts consistent, then why should the skeptic lend credence to ANY of the Bible's claims?"

For debate: Since the Biblical accounting of events is not reliable, where it is argued to matter the most, (via the storyline surrounding a resurrection event), why should a skeptic still take this collection of books seriously?

[Jester]

It is clear that she is presented to be alone here, as John 20:1 only mentions Mary, and also that John 20:2 states that she ran, rather than stating that they ran.

This seems to be imposing a modern style of reading on an ancient text. My understanding is that premodern writers often omitted details that that they considered irrelevant to the central point (a common example would be a conquer stating "I defeated them" does not mean that the king was on the battlefield alone). Are you aware of a reason why this passage should be interpreted in such a way as to conclude that unmentioned people were definitely not present?

Theists will argue, "well, some of these (small) details don't really matter.

I suppose some theists would argue this. I expect that others would stress that differences in detail is generally taken as a sign of authenticity. Others still would stress something like my suggestion above.

If the believers cannot even get the basic set of accounts consistent, then why should the skeptic lend credence to ANY of the Bible's claims?

I'm not sure how a skeptic could lend credence to Biblical claims. Humans don't lend credence; arguments do that.
To be clear, that isn't a pedantic quibble. This mistake seems to be shifting the general question from weighing theistic and non-theistic accounts of reality against each other to setting up the "skeptic" as the judge of biblical claims.

For debate: Since the Biblical accounting of events is not reliable, where it is argued to matter the most, (via the storyline surrounding a resurrection event), why should a skeptic still take this collection of books seriously?

The claim that the biblical accounting of events is not reliable is question begging. This claim needs to be established before it can be taken as the basis for debate.

And, again, the "skeptic" does not need to take this collection of books seriously. Rather, the person who is skeptical of the bible should put forth an account of reality that he believes to be superior to the biblical account, and engage the person who is skeptical that it is superior.

After some discussion, one hopes that it will become clear which view is better supported.

[POI]

This seems to be imposing a modern style of reading on an ancient text. My understanding is that premodern writers often omitted details that that they considered irrelevant to the central point (a common example would be a conquer stating "I defeated them" does not mean that the king was on the battlefield alone). Are you aware of a reason why this passage should be interpreted in such a way as to conclude that unmentioned people were definitely not present?

All the Gospel accounts were premodern. And yet, according to (your) rationale, only John opted for the premodern, while the other Gospels opted for the modern?

The claim that the biblical accounting of events is not reliable is question begging. This claim needs to be established before it can be taken as the basis for debate.

So far, all the "begging" is coming from your side, as John clearly conflicts with Matthew; and your given apologetics demonstrates special pleading.

[Jester]

All the Gospel accounts were premodern. And yet, according to (your) rationale, only John opted for the premodern, while the other Gospels opted for the modern?

Are you making the claim that they all had the exact same intent—and, therefore, the style would have dictated the same exact linguistic treatment?

The claim that the biblical accounting of events is not reliable is question begging. This claim needs to be established before it can be taken as the basis for debate.

So far, all the "begging" is coming from your side, as John clearly conflicts with Matthew; and your given apologetics demonstrates special pleading.

I certainly want to avoid any special pleading fallacies. If "John clearly conflicts with Matthew", then simply explain why my suggestions about ancient writing techniques and discrepancies in detail being signs of authenticity are incorrect. So long as we have a clear reason to dismiss reasons like the ones I named, then I will agree that there is a contradiction here.

Also, what general view of reality avoids these kinds of pitfalls? I'd like to adopt the most reasonable view, but can't seem to think if any philosophical approach to life that has been expressed entirely without speech that could be interpreted as contradictory by some people. If you are aware of such a view, could you let me know what it is?

[POI]

Are you making the claim that they all had the exact same intent—and, therefore, the style would have dictated the same exact linguistic treatment?

Please do not shift the burden. I'm following your logic. You stated that there exist both (premodern and modern) linguistic treatments. You are stating that John opted for premodern, while (the other three Gospels) instead opted for modern? Can you prove that the author of John was actually going for a premodern explanation, as opposed to the other three; while all four accounts were written in the same exact era and gladly would want to present with all available eyewitnesses possible to the said event(s)?

So far, your one example given is not analogous, as you are speaking about war. Conquering heroes love to take credit. Alternatively, the purpose of John 20:1-2 is instead to establish the corroborated discovery of the empty tomb and set the stage for the resurrection of Jesus. Meaning, the more the marrier. The other three accounts do list more than one person, to witnessing a missing Jesus. It makes little sense to omit the other(s), as it lends to less "credibility". So, please try another apologetic. Or instead, just admit the contradiction and further relate to the skeptics who remain skeptical to this very extraordinary claim. Which is quite odd, being this event is the most important and you would THINK authors could AT LEAST get this one most important storyline straight?

[Jester]

Are you making the claim that they all had the exact same intent—and, therefore, the style would have dictated the same exact linguistic treatment?

Please do not shift the burden. I'm following your logic. You stated that there exist both (premodern and modern) linguistic treatments. You are stating that John opted for premodern, while (the other three Gospels) instead opted for modern?

Apologies, then! Please let me correct the confusion here. I meant to say that both John and the synoptics opted for premodern writing styles (that much is obvious). I, most emphatically, did not mean to suggest (let alone claim) that premodern styles always and everywhere require the exclusion of all people other than the central figure. I meant only to suggest that this is a common (not universal) feature of premodern writing.

But on the concept of shifting the burden, are you no longer claiming that these two passages contradict one another? If that is the case, then I certainly won't expect you to support a claim you're no longer making. Just let me know.

So far, your one example given is not analogous, as you are speaking about war. Conquering heroes love to take credit. Alternatively, the purpose of John 20:1-2 is instead to establish the corroborated discovery of the empty tomb and set the stage for the resurrection of Jesus. Meaning, the more the marrier. The other three accounts do list more than one person, to witnessing a missing Jesus. It makes little sense to omit the other(s), as it lends to less "credibility".

That's an interesting line of thought. As far as I can recall, the stock answer to this is that the synoptics were written with greater purpose to convince others, whereas John was written more for the purpose theological elaboration. I don't claim to know, but if that were the case, it would make sense that he'd be less interested in arguing for credibility.

On the other hand, he may simply have gotten his information from a different source, who used words that led him to assume that there was only one person present.

Either way, there seem to be a lot of possibilities here. I'm not claiming to know which of them is the case—it certainly could be that one or more of the writers just goofed. I'm simply wondering why we're so confident that this is definitely what happened—and skeptical that this is a reason to unilaterally dismiss everything all of them wrote.

Or instead, just admit the contradiction and further relate to the skeptics who remain skeptical to this very extraordinary claim -- which possesses inconsistency.

I already relate. You seem to think that I have no skepticism here.
My intent was to communicate not that I lack skepticism, but simply that I have it about other claims as well. I'm definitely skeptical that there's a better supported explanation on offer.

But I'm also skeptical of this method. For example: I'm re-reading Mackie's "Miracle of Theism". (If you aren't familiar, it's a very good book arguing against theism.) You seem to be suggesting that, regardless of what Mackie can argue anywhere else in the book, if I can find two sentences that seem on the surface to contradict one another, I'd be within my rights to dismiss the entire book as not worth taking seriously. Is that what you're arguing here?

If not, please explain how your approach is different.
If so, then it seems that we can dismiss not only the Bible, but any approach to life's big questions.

[POI]

Apologies, then! Please let me correct the confusion here. I meant to say that both John and the synoptics opted for premodern writing styles (that much is obvious). I, most emphatically, did not mean to suggest (let alone claim) that premodern styles always and everywhere require the exclusion of all people other than the central figure. I meant only to suggest that this is a common (not universal) feature of premodern writing.

Well, if we were discussing an autobiography written by Nepoleon, or maybe talking to a general contractor who states 'he built those homes', then I could relate. However, it makes little sense to omit key participant(s) in such a story where numerical eyewitnesses are key.

But on the concept of shifting the burden, are you no longer claiming that these two passages contradict one another?

I'm asking you not to ask me to disprove that the author of John didn't go rogue, by instead opting for premodern, while the other three instead went modern. That was your response to support, not mine. That's all.

If that is the case, then I certainly won't expect you to support a claim you're no longer making. Just let me know.

My position has not changed, and nothing you have offered challenges the OP position.

That's an interesting line of thought. As far as I can recall, the stock answer to this is that the synoptics were written with greater purpose to convince others, whereas John was written more for the purpose theological elaboration. I don't claim to know, but if that were the case, it would make sense that he'd be less interested in arguing for credibility.

On the other hand, he may simply have gotten his information from a different source, who used words that led him to assume that there was only one person present.

Either way, there seem to be a lot of possibilities here. I'm not claiming to know which of them is the case—it certainly could be that one or more of the writers just goofed. I'm simply wondering why we're so confident that this is definitely what happened—and skeptical that this is a reason to unilaterally dismiss everything all of them wrote.

Again, we are addressing the asserted "greatest story ever told". The most pivotal part to the Bible would be (this part), in the storyline surrounding Jesus's resurrection event(s). If the facts do not even align here, then what does that say about the rest of the Bible? Failing to even get these minor but important details correct, raises more than one eyebrow.

I already relate. You seem to think that I have no skepticism here. My intent was to communicate not that I lack skepticism, but simply that I have it about other claims as well. I'm definitely skeptical that there's a better supported explanation on offer.

Fair enough. Are you a theist, deist, other? If so, care to share which one? Knowing this may save me a lot of back and forth, as I do not know your "worldview"?

But I'm also skeptical of this method. For example: I'm re-reading Mackie's "Miracle of Theism". (If you aren't familiar, it's a very good book arguing against theism.) You seem to be suggesting that, regardless of what Mackie can argue anywhere else in the book, if I can find two sentences that seem on the surface to contradict one another, I'd be within my rights to dismiss the entire book as not worth taking seriously. Is that what you're arguing here?

This is not my argument. However, many Christians seem to have adopted the 'minimal facts' approach. Meaning, all that really matters is that Jesus rose, presented to humans, and saved humanity. "Many of the apparent inconsistencies are of little concern". Even if this was my approach, the details directly surrounding the events of his claimed resurrection would still need to align. Just imagine if there was a claim to a rotting corpse which popped out of its grave and you stumble upon (4) claimed eyewitnesses. John (20:1-2) states that one woman saw it (before dawn) and ran. Matthew (28:1 & 8) states that two women saw it (after dawn) and left. Mark (16 1 & 2 & 8) instead states that three women saw it (after dawn) and left. And Luke (24 1 & 10) alternatively states that there was maybe four women, (early morning), and then left.

Four separate accounts, with four differing perspectives in both numbers and timeframes. Being that this is not just some mundane claim, in where maybe it did happen, but no one really cares to remember any of the details, we are instead talking about THE most important event in human history. And yet, the 'facts' are all over the place.

If so, then it seems that we can dismiss not only the Bible, but any approach to life's big questions.

No, I'm not going after the small stuff; just the claimed given eyewitness details surrounding the largest and most historical event in human history, is all.

[Jester]

Well, if we were discussing an autobiography written by Nepoleon, or maybe talking to a general contractor who states 'he built those homes', then I could relate. However, it makes little sense to omit key participant(s) in such a story where numerical eyewitnesses are key.

I'm not sure why they are key, here. I keep trying to find the argument that your interpretation is the correct one, but am at a loss for what it is.
I once (honestly) told a person that I went to a particular concert. I mentioned enjoying a certain song (using the singular pronoun "I"). Come to think of it, I never mentioned that I didn't go alone.
Is my "contradiction" there proof that I was never at that concert?

I'm asking you not to ask me to prove that the author of John went rogue, and opted for premodern, while the other three went modern. That was your response to support, not mine. That's all.

It certainly would be my responsibility to support if I were insisting that this is what happened. But I've already clarified that I wasn't insisting on anything of the sort and that I didn't even suggest the thing you describe me as having said.

If, at some point, I claim what you've written above, then I'll be sure to support it.

If that is the case, then I certainly won't expect you to support a claim you're no longer making. Just let me know.

My position has not changed, and nothing you have offered challenges the OP position.

In that case, could you please support the claim that these two passages should be read in the way that you've insisted on, rather than any of the possible alternatives? I'd genuinely like to know what the correct reading is here.

Either way, there seem to be a lot of possibilities here. I'm not claiming to know which of them is the case—it certainly could be that one or more of the writers just goofed. I'm simply wondering why we're so confident that this is definitely what happened—and skeptical that this is a reason to unilaterally dismiss everything all of them wrote.

Again, we are addressing the asserted "greatest story ever told".

I didn't realize that we were. I thought we were treating these texts the way we'd treat any historical document.

The most pivotal part to the Bible would be (this part), in the storyline surrounding Jesus's resurrection event(s). If the facts do not even align here,

Are we sure that the facts don't align? How do we know that your reading is the correct one?
Again, I'm not saying that it isn't, but you sound really confident. What is the reason that none of the other readings are possible?

[W]hat does that say about the rest of the Bible?

I can't think of much it would say. Even assuming an error, is one error in a book a reason to dismiss every book in a collection? I'm trying to think of a syllogism that would support that claim, but can't seem to come up with one.

I already relate. You seem to think that I have no skepticism here. My intent was to communicate not that I lack skepticism, but simply that I have it about other claims as well. I'm definitely skeptical that there's a better supported explanation on offer.

Fair enough. Are you a theist, deist, other? If so, care to share which one? Knowing this may save me a lot of back and forth, as I do not know your "worldview"?

I'm not sure why that matters. Are we doing the team sports thing—where we charitably consider challenges, but only if we're on the same "side"?
I'm asking about a specific pair of claims: that this is the correct reading, and that it means something catastrophic for the Bible.

Whether I'm a passionate Christian set on defending the Bible, an atheist trying to improve the quality of my fellow atheists' arguments, or something else entirely, the reasoning is the same.

But I'm also skeptical of this method. For example: I'm re-reading Mackie's "Miracle of Theism". (If you aren't familiar, it's a very good book arguing against theism.) You seem to be suggesting that, regardless of what Mackie can argue anywhere else in the book, if I can find two sentences that seem on the surface to contradict one another, I'd be within my rights to dismiss the entire book as not worth taking seriously. Is that what you're arguing here?

This is not my argument. However, many Christians seem to have adopted the 'minimal facts' approach.

I'm aware of the "minimal facts" apologetic. I'm not defending that. I'm asking how your view differs from the one I described.
You seem to be saying that an apparent contradiction in a detail around a central claim is a reason to dismiss the claim. I find myself skeptical of that method, quite apart from any theological claim.
For instance, if I were to find that some historical accounts spoke of Rutherford performing an experiment where "he" fired alpha particles at a piece of gold foil, but others mentioned that his assistants were present, and that "they" did it, should I dismiss the claim that this experiment happened, that anything else mentioned in either book mentioning this experiment happened, and also dismiss a collection of books about the discoveries of quantum mechanics?

That seems a weird approach, but I honestly have no idea how it is different from the method we're taking to the Bible.

If so, then it seems that we can dismiss not only the Bible, but any approach to life's big questions.

No, I'm not going after the small stuff; just the claimed given eyewitness details surrounding the largest and most historical event in human history, is all.

I wouldn't have thought that any generalized view of life's big questions is "small stuff".
But I honestly have no idea why that should matter. From the irrelevant to the monumental, I can't think of any claim I couldn't dismiss with this method.

That being the case, I remain skeptical about the method itself. It seems less a problem for some particular view than a general use attack for whatever view one happens to dislike.

[1213]

According to John 20, Mary went to the tomb and finds it empty. It is clear that she is presented to be alone here, as John 20:1 only mentions Mary, and also that John 20:2 states that she ran, rather than stating that they ran. Alternatively, Matthew 28:1 states Mary was with another, and also that Matthew 28:8 states that they left.

Theists will argue, "well, some of these (small) details don't really matter. All that really matters is that Jesus was found missing and later appeared to others." For which a skeptic might reply... "It does matter because Christians argue that THIS collection of events is said to be the most important storyline presented within mankind's history. If the believers cannot even get the basic set of accounts consistent, then why should the skeptic lend credence to ANY of the Bible's claims?"

For debate: Since the Biblical accounting of events is not reliable, where it is argued to matter the most, (via the storyline surrounding a resurrection event), why should a skeptic still take this collection of books seriously?

Since your arguments are not reliable, why should anyone take them seriously?

John only tells that Mary ran to the tomb, found it empty. John doesn't say there was no other people. Apparently the women went next to the tomb, Mary went in and found it empty and left to tell to other disciples, while the other women stayed there near the tomb and after some time went in. And while Mary was on her way, the other women saw the "young man" and heard the message and left. Soon after the other women had left, Mary came with Peter and John to the tomb. After finding it empty, others went away, but Mary stayed near the tomb and saw Jesus.

For those who are interested, here is the four Gospels combined:

Mark. 16:1 And the sabbath passing, Mary Magdalene and Mary the mother of James and Salome, bought spices, so that coming they might anoint Him.
Note! There was two Shabbat days. The Shabbat day of feast of unleavened bread and weekly Shabbat. Apparently after first Shabbat, Friday, spices were prepared and after second Shabbat they were brought to the tomb.
Mark. 16:2 And very early on the first of the week, the sun having risen, they came upon the tomb.
Matt.28:1 But after the sabbaths, at the dawning of the first of the sabbaths, Mary Magdalene and the other Mary came to see the grave.
(Mark. 16:3 And they said to themselves, Who will roll away the stone from the door of the tomb for us?)
(Luke 24:1 But on the first of the sabbaths, while still very early, they came on the tomb, carrying spices which they prepared; and some were with them.)
Matt.28:2 And, behold! A great earthquake occurred! For descending from Heaven and coming near, an angel of the Lord rolled away the stone from the door and was sitting on it.
Matt.28:3 And his face was as lightning and his clothing white as snow.
Matt.28:4 And those keeping guard were shaken from the fear of him, and they became as dead.
Note! Apparently, the earthquake and rolling of the stone was seen only by the guards, not the women that vent to the tomb.
Mark. 16:4 And looking up, they saw that the stone had been rolled back; for it was very large.
Luke 24:2 And they found the stone having been rolled away from the tomb.
John:20:1 But on the first of the week, Mary Magdalene came early to the tomb, darkness yet being on it . And she saw the stone had been removed from the tomb.
John:20:2 Then she ran and came to Simon Peter, and to the other disciple whom Jesus loved, and said to them, They took away the Lord out of the tomb, and we do not know where they laid Him.
Luke 24:3 And going in, they did not find the body of the Lord Jesus.
Note! Apparently, Mary left the tomb, while other women stayed at the tomb.
Mark. 16:5 And entering into the tomb, they saw a young man sitting on the right, having been clothed in a white robe. And they were much amazed.
Luke 24:4 And it happened, as they were perplexed about this, even behold, two men in shining clothing stood by them.
Luke 24:5 And they becoming terrified, and bowing their faces to the earth, they said to them, Why do you seek the living with the dead?
Matt.28:5 But answering, the angel said to the women, You must not fear, for I know that you seek Jesus who has been crucified.
Matt.28:6 He is not here, for He was raised, as He said. Come, see the place where the Lord was lying.
(Mark. 16:6 But He said to them, Do not be amazed. You seek Jesus the Nazarene who has been crucified. He was raised. He is not here. See the place where they put Him?)
(Luke 24:6 He is not here, but was raised. Remember how He spoke to you, yet being in Galilee,)
Luke 24:7 saying, The Son of man must be delivered into the hands of sinful men, and to be crucified, and the third day to rise again.
Luke 24:8 And they remembered His words.
7 And going quickly say to His disciples that He was raised from the dead. And behold! He goes before you into Galilee. You will see Him there. Behold! I told you.
Mark. 16:7 But go, say to the disciples and to Peter, He goes before you into Galilee. You will see Him there, even as He told you.
Matt.28:8 And going away from the tomb quickly, with fear and great joy, they ran to report to His disciples.
Mark. 16:8 And going out quickly, they fled from the tomb. And trembling and ecstasy took hold of them. And they told no one, not a thing, for they were afraid.
Note!, some think that this means they never told about the matter to anyone ever. If that would be the case, we would not have this story. That is why it is reasonable to think they only didn’t tell on their way about it.
John:20:3 Then Peter and the other disciple went out and came to the tomb.
John:20:4 And the two ran together, and the other disciple ran in front more quickly than Peter and came first to the tomb.
John:20:5 And stooping down, he saw the linens lying; however, he did not go in.
John:20:6 Then Simon Peter came following him, and went into the tomb and saw the linens lying.
John:20:7 And the grave cloth which was on His head was not lying with the linens, but was wrapped up in one place by itself.
John:20:8 Therefore, then the other disciple also entered, he having come first to the tomb, even he saw and believed.
John:20:9 For they did not yet know the Scripture, that it was necessary for Him to rise from the dead.
John:20:10 Then the disciples went away again to themselves.
John:20:11 But Mary stood outside at the tomb, weeping. Then as she wept, she stooped down into the tomb.
John:20:12 And she saw two angels in white, sitting one at the head, and one at the feet, where the body of Jesus had lain.
John:20:13 And they said to her, Woman, why do you weep? She said to them, Because they took away my Lord, and I do not know where they put Him.
John:20:14 And saying these things, she turned backward and saw Jesus standing, and did not know that it was Jesus.
Note! Apparently, the other women had left some other route from the tomb, because didn’t see Peter and May on their way. Also, the disciples that came with Mary, left and Mary stayed alone there for a while.
(Mark. 16:9 And rising early on the first of the week, He first appeared to Mary Magdalene, from whom He had cast out seven demons.)
John:20:15 Jesus said to her, Woman, why do you weep? Whom do you seek? Thinking that it was the gardener, she said to Him, Sir, if you carried Him away, tell me where you put Him, and I will take Him away.
John:20:16 Jesus said to her, Mary! Turning around, she said to Him, Rabboni! (that is to say, Teacher).
John:20:17 Jesus said to her, Do not touch Me, for I have not yet ascended to My Father. But go to My brothers and say to them, I am ascending to My Father and your Father, and My God, and your God.
John:20:18 Mary Magdalene came bringing word to the disciples that she had seen the Lord, and that He told her these things.
(Mark. 16:10 That one had gone and reported to those who had been with Him, who were mourning and weeping.)
Mark. 16:11 And those hearing that He lives, and was seen by her, they did not believe.
Mark. 16:12 And after these things, He was revealed in a different form to two of them walking and going into the country.
Matt.28:9 But as they were going to report to His disciples, behold, Jesus also met them, saying, Hail! And coming near, they seized His feet and worshiped Him.
Note! Worship = to kiss the hand, or to kneel and show homage to superior rank, for example high priest.
Matt.28:10 Then Jesus said to them, Do not fear. Go tell your brothers that they may go into Galilee, and there they will see Me.
Luke 24:9 And returning from the tomb, they reported all these things to the Eleven, and to all the rest.
Mark. 16:13 And going, those reported to the rest. Neither did they believe those.
Luke 24:10 And they were Mary Magdalene, and Joanna, and Mary mother of James, and the rest with them, who told these things to the apostles.
Luke 24:11 And their words seemed like foolishness to them, and they did not believe them.
Luke 24:12 But rising up, Peter ran to the tomb, and stooping down he saw the linen lying alone. And he went away wondering to himself at what had happened.
Matt.28:11 And they, having gone, behold, some of the guard coming into the city reported to the chief priests all things that occurred.
Matt.28:12 And being assembled with the elders, and taking counsel, they gave enough silver to the soldiers,
Matt.28:13 saying, Say that his disciples came and stole him by night, we being asleep.
Matt.28:14 And if this is heard by the governor, we will persuade him and will make you free from anxiety.
Matt.28:15 And taking the silver, they did as they were taught. And this report was spread by the Jews until today.
Note! Matt. 28:11-15 is a separate story line that seems to have happened as the same time with other events. Apparently guards told what they had witnessed in the city, while many disciples did other things.
Luke 24:13 And, behold, two of them were going on the same day to a village being sixty stadia distant from Jerusalem, which was named Emmaus.
Luke 24:14 And they talked to each other about all these things taking place.
Luke 24:15 And it happened, as they talked and reasoned, coming near, Jesus Himself traveled with them.
Luke 24:16 But their eyes were held so as not to recognize Him.
Luke 24:17 And He said to them, What words are these which you exchange with each other while walking, and are sad of face?
Luke 24:18 And answering, one of them whose name was Cleopas, said to Him, Are you only one who resides in Jerusalem and do not know the things happening in it in these days?
Luke 24:19 And He said to them, What things? And they said to Him, The things concerning Jesus the Nazarene, who was a man, a prophet mighty in deed and word before God and all the people;
Luke 24:20 and how the chief priests and our rulers delivered Him to the judgment of death, and crucified Him .
Luke 24:21 But we were hoping that He is the One going to redeem Israel. But then with all these things, this third day comes today since these things happened.
Luke 24:22 And also some of our women astounded us, having been early at the tomb,
Luke 24:23 and not finding His body, they came saying to have seen a vision of angels also, who say Him to be alive.
Luke 24:24 And some of those with us went to the tomb, and found it so , even as the women also said; but they did not see Him.
Luke 24:25 And He said to them, O foolish ones, and slow of heart to believe on all things which the prophets spoke!
Luke 24:26 Was it not necessary for the Christ to suffer these things, and to enter into His glory?
Luke 24:27 And beginning from Moses, and from all the prophets, He explained to them the things about Himself in all the Scriptures.
Luke 24:28 And they drew near to the village where they were going, and He seemed to be going further.
Luke 24:29 And they constrained Him, saying, Stay with us, for it is toward evening, and the day has declined. And He went in to stay with them.
Luke 24:30 And it happened as He reclined with them, taking the loaf, He blessed, and breaking He gave to them.
Luke 24:31 And their eyes were opened, and they knew Him. And He became invisible from them.
Luke 24:32 And they said to one another, Was not our heart burning in us as He spoke to us in the highway, and as He opened up to us the Scriptures?
Luke 24:33 And rising up in the same hour, they went back to Jerusalem, and they found the Eleven, and those with them, having been gathered,
Luke 24:34 saying, The Lord really was raised and appeared to Simon.
Luke 24:35 And they related the things in the highway, and how He was known to them in the breaking of the loaf.
Matt.28:16 But the eleven disciples went into Galilee, to the mount where Jesus appointed them.
Mark. 16:14 Afterward, as they reclined, He was revealed to the Eleven. And He reproached their unbelief and hardness of heart, because they did not believe those who had seen Him, having been raised.
(Luke 24:36 And as they were telling these things, Jesus Himself stood in their midst, and said to them, Peace to you!)
(John:20:19 Then it being evening on that day, the first of the sabbaths, and the doors having been locked where the disciples were assembled, because of fear of the Jews, Jesus came and stood in the midst and said to them, Peace to you.)
Luke 24:37 But being terrified and filled with fear, they thought they saw a spirit.
Matt.28:17 And seeing Him, they worshiped Him. But they doubted.
Luke 24:38 And He said to them, Why are you troubled? And why do reasonings come up in your hearts.
Luke 24:39 See My hands and My feet, that I am He? Feel Me and see, because a spirit does not have flesh and bones, as you see Me having.
Luke 24:40 And saying this, He showed them His hands and feet
(John:20:20 And saying this, He showed them His hands and side. Then seeing the Lord, the disciples rejoiced.)
Luke 24:41 But yet they not believing from the joy, and marveling, He said to them, Have you any food here?
Luke 24:42 And they handed a broiled part of a fish to Him, and from a honeycomb.
Luke 24:43 And taking these before them, He ate.
Luke 24:44 And He said to them, These are the words which I spoke to you yet being with you, that must be fulfilled all the things having been written in the Law of Moses, and the Prophets, and the Psalms, concerning Me.
Luke 24:45 Then He opened up their mind to understand the Scriptures,
Luke 24:46 and said to them, So it is written, and so the Christ must suffer, and to rise from the dead the third day. No OT passage
Luke 24:47 And repentance and remission of sins must be preached on His name to all the nations, beginning from Jerusalem.
Luke 24:48 And you are witnesses of th48 And you are witnesses of these things.
Matt.28:18 And coming up Jesus talked with them, saying, All authority in Heaven and on earth was given to Me.
Mark. 16:15 And He said to them, Going into all the world, preach the gospel to all the creation.
Matt.28:19 Going, then, disciple all nations, baptizing them into the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit,
Matt.28:20 teaching them to observe all things, whatever I commanded you. And, behold, I am with you all the days until the completion of the age. Amen.
Mark. 16:16 The one believing and being baptized will be saved. And the one not believing will be condemned.
Mark. 16:17 And signs will follow to those believing these things: they will cast out demons in My name; they will speak new languages;
Mark. 16:18 they will take up snakes; and if they drink anything deadly, it will in no way hurt them; they will lay hands on the sick, and they will be well.
Luke 24:49 And, behold, I send forth the promise of My Father on you. But you sit in the city of Jerusalem until you are clothed with power from on high.
Luke 24:50 He led them out as far as to Bethany. And lifting up His hands, He blessed them.
John:20:21 Then Jesus said to them again, Peace to you. As the Father has sent Me, I also send you.
John:20:22 And saying this, He breathed on them and said to them, Receive the Holy Spirit.
John:20:23 Of whomever you forgive the sins, they are forgiven to them. Or whomever you may retain, they are retained.
Luke 24:51 And it happened as He blessed them, He withdrew from them and was carried into Heaven.
Mark. 16:19 Then indeed, after speaking to them, the Lord was taken up into Heaven, and sat off the right of God. Psa. 110:1
Luke 24:52 And worshiping Him, they returned to Jerusalem with great joy,
Mark. 16:20 And going out, they preached everywhere, the Lord working with them and confirming the word by the signs following. Amen.
Luke 24:53 and were continually in the temple, praising and blessing God. Amen.
John:20:24 But Thomas, one of the Twelve, the one called Twin, was not with them when Jesus came.
John:20:25 Then the other disciples said to him, We have seen the Lord. But he said to them, Unless I see the mark of the nails in His hands, and thrust my finger into the mark of the nails, and thrust my hand into His side, in no way will I believe.
John:20:26 And after eight days, His disciples were inside again, and Thomas was with them. The door having been locked, Jesus came and stood in the midst, and said, Peace to you.
John:20:27 Then He said to Thomas, Bring your finger here and see My hands, and bring your hand and thrust into My side, and be not unbelieving, but believing.
John:20:28 And Thomas answered and said to Him, My Lord and my God!
John:20:29 Jesus said to him, Because you have seen Me, Thomas, you have believed. Blessed are the ones not seeing and believing.
John:20:30 Then truly Jesus did many other miracles in the presence of His disciples, which are not written in this book.
John:20:31 But these have been written that you may believe that Jesus is the Christ, the Son of God, and that believing you may have life in His name.

[POI]

[Replying to POI in post #7]

So far, you've been pretty good at responding to everything I say. I have to wonder why you skipped THIS part?

Just imagine if there was a claim to a rotting corpse which popped out of its grave and you stumble upon (4) claimed eyewitnesses. John (20:1-2) states that one woman saw it (before dawn) and ran. Matthew (28:1 & 8) states that two women saw it (after dawn) and left. Mark (16 1 & 2 & 8) instead states that three women saw it (after dawn) and left. And Luke (24 1 & 10) alternatively states that there was maybe four women, (early morning), and then left.

Four separate accounts, with four differing perspectives in both numbers and timeframes. Being that this is not just some mundane claim, in where maybe it did happen, but no one really cares to remember any of the details, we are instead talking about THE most important event in human history. And yet, the 'facts' are all over the place.