Matthew's "mass resurrection" account

[Josh]

This is probably in the realm of apologetics, since this argument was presented to me by an atheist friend, and I was wondering how to best answer him on this. In Matthew 27:51-54, Matthew makes a rather interesting addition to the account of Jesus' death on the cross.

At that moment the curtain of the temple was torn in two from top to bottom. The earth shook, the rocks split and the tombs broke open. The bodies of many holy people who had died were raised to life. They came out of the tombs after Jesus’ resurrection andwent into the holy city and appeared to many people. When the centurion and those with him who were guarding Jesus saw the earthquake and all that had happened, they were terrified, and exclaimed, “Surely he was the Son of God!â€


According to Matthew, when Jesus died, there was a huge earthquake, and the tombs of many dead people opened and the occupants came out and started walking around meeting up with the townsfolk. My friend is skeptical because there seems to be no contemporary historical record of that happening, other than Matthew's account. Why would all of the other historians living at the time have overlooked the thousands who must have witnessed the resurrection of the dead en mass, and not written anything about it? Even Mark, Luke, and John didn't mention it.....just Matthew.

I offered a speculation that maybe this was an urban legend of some kind, and that Matthew was using this as verbal imagery, for us to get a feel for just how significant an event Jesus' death was (this and his resurrection were the two most important events in all of history). But this doesn't seem to satisfy him, saying that if Matthew is telling about something that didn't actually happen, then how can he trust anything else Matthew says?

Is there anyone on this forum who might be able to help me out on this? This is one issue that I admittedly haven't looked into very thoroughly, and I was wondering if anyone else here has. Is there a better explanation than the one I offered my friend?

 

[Hitch]

This is probably in the realm of apologetics, since this argument was presented to me by an atheist friend, and I was wondering how to best answer him on this. In Matthew 27:51-54, Matthew makes a rather interesting addition to the account of Jesus' death on the cross.

At that moment the curtain of the temple was torn in two from top to bottom. The earth shook, the rocks split and the tombs broke open. The bodies of many holy people who had died were raised to life. They came out of the tombs after Jesus’ resurrection andwent into the holy city and appeared to many people. When the centurion and those with him who were guarding Jesus saw the earthquake and all that had happened, they were terrified, and exclaimed, “Surely he was the Son of God!â€


According to Matthew, when Jesus died, there was a huge earthquake, and the tombs of many dead people opened and the occupants came out and started walking around meeting up with the townsfolk. My friend is skeptical because there seems to be no contemporary historical record of that happening, other than Matthew's account. Why would all of the other historians living at the time have overlooked the thousands who must have witnessed the resurrection of the dead en mass, and not written anything about it? Even Mark, Luke, and John didn't mention it.....just Matthew.

I offered a speculation that maybe this was an urban legend of some kind, and that Matthew was using this as verbal imagery, for us to get a feel for just how significant an event Jesus' death was (this and his resurrection were the two most important events in all of history). But this doesn't seem to satisfy him,

Good

saying that if Matthew is telling about something that didn't actually happen, then how can he trust anything else Matthew says?

exactly

Is there anyone on this forum who might be able to help me out on this? This is one issue that I admittedly haven't looked into very thoroughly, and I was wondering if anyone else here has. Is there a better explanation than the one I offered my friend?

Why explain it? Can you explain the resurrection of Christ which is also missing from secular history?
Up to that moment no one who had been dead more than a few days had ever been raised. Dont forget the disciples had raised the dead as well as Jesus, so it was unusual but not unheard of. So it seems, I say seems because I dont know of any passage saying so specifically, these 'saints' were not long dead, were raised like Lazerus, as testimony to the veracity of Christ's teaching, and are now in the grave waiting final resurrection.

 

[Elijah674]

Hi the Lord's verse has it saying as you put it.. but note the time frame again?
'The bodies of many holy people who had died were raised to life. They came out of the tombs after Jesus’ resurrection andwent into the holy city and appeared to many people.'

Ok, Matt. 27:51-53, now check out Acts 1:1-3.
[1] The former treatise have I made, O Theophilus, of all that Jesus began both to do and teach,
[2] Until the day in which he was taken up, after that he through the Holy Ghost had given commandments unto the apostles whom he had chosen:

[3] To whom also he shewed himself alive after his passion by many infallible proofs, [[being seen of them forty days,]] and speaking of the things pertaining to the kingdom of God:

Surely these were first fruits.

--Elijah

 

[Josh]

Why explain it? Can you explain the resurrection of Christ which is also missing from secular history?

Well, despite the lack of secular documentation for the resurrection, there are credible historical accounts other than just Matthew, attesting to Jesus' resurrection.... by honest, trustworthy sources (some of whom were eyewitnesses) such as Mark, Luke, John, and Paul. I guess what's really stumping me on this one is: why didn't they mention this mass resurrection of holy people? Why just Matthew?

I'm wondering if I may be able to argue for Matthew's account using lack of refutation by anyone else. Matthew says that these dead holy people were seen alive by many people. The book of Matthew was most likely written before A.D. 70 (when Jerusalem was destroyed), so that would mean that most of these eyewitnesses would still be alive at that time. And yet, no one ever stepped forward to publicly correct Matthew and set the record straight. Surely if Matthew was making this up, someone....ANYONE....could have very easily ruined his credibility by negating this part of his story.

It's likely that the centurion and/or some of the other guards who reportedly saw all this were still alive about 30-35 years later, when Matthew wrote all this down. They could have stepped forward and said "That's a lie! We were those guards, and we didn't see any such thing after Jesus died! Don't believe a word that tax collector says!" But there is no evidence of any refutation of Matthew's account by any of his contemporaries.

I don't know.....does this argument sound solid or shaky?

 

[Hitch]

Well, despite the lack of secular documentation for the resurrection, there are credible historical accounts other than just Matthew, attesting to Jesus' resurrection.... by honest, trustworthy sources (some of whom were eyewitnesses) such as Mark, Luke, John, and Paul. I guess what's really stumping me on this one is: why didn't they mention this mass resurrection of holy people? Why just Matthew?

I'm wondering if I may be able to argue for Matthew's account using lack of refutation by anyone else. Matthew says that these dead holy people were seen alive by many people. The book of Matthew was most likely written before A.D. 70 (when Jerusalem was destroyed), so that would mean that most of these eyewitnesses would still be alive at that time. And yet, no one ever stepped forward to publicly correct Matthew and set the record straight. Surely if Matthew was making this up, someone....ANYONE....could have very easily ruined his credibility by negating this part of his story.

The notion that Mat has embellished the story is out of the question

It's likely that the centurion and/or some of the other guards who reportedly saw all this were still alive about 30-35 years later, when Matthew wrote all this down. They could have stepped forward and said "That's a lie! We were those guards, and we didn't see any such thing after Jesus died! Don't believe a word that tax collector says!" But there is no evidence of any refutation of Matthew's account by any of his contemporaries.

I don't know.....does this argument sound solid or shaky?

The Gospels have some things in common and some things singularly, I cant grasp why this is a problem. Is it any stranger that turning water into wine?
There are a great many things 'made up' about Jesus and his exploits, and they were carefully excluded from the canon of Scripture.

 

[for_his_glory]

Comparing Matthew 27:50-53 and Ezekiel 37:1-14 we can see that both accounts of the dry bones in Ezekiel and those who were raised from their graves in Matthew as being much the same as they are Spiritual and not literal. Ezekiel was in the Spirit much like John in Revelation when the prophecies were shown to him and Matthew as being an eyewitness to those teachings of Christ being once dead in the spirit, but made alive again by the renewing of Gods Spirit on the day of Pentecost. Matthew gave us a Spiritual account of those being raised from their tombs and not a literal account.

In Ezekiel these men (dry bones) were more swayed by their attempts to practice the law, but yet Spiritually dead to the law giver (God) as the law became their schoolmaster, but yet not receiving the Spiritual things of God through the law. Only those like Abraham, Issac, Jacob etc.etc who obeyed the law, but yet knew Gods Spirit in them were kept Spiritually alive unto their own physical death knowing they would be with the Lord forever.

Matthew was saying pretty much the same thing as it was not a literal Temple veil that was being torn in half, but that of the law being fulfilled in Christ resurrection that Gods Spirit (Holy Spirit) would now be made renewed in us to be taken up from our dry bone grave as those in Ezekiel were raised from theirs by that earthquake that represents that of Gods power and authority that raised Christ from his literal tomb. We are made alive again Spiritually by the power of the word of God to be raised from our dry bone grave to become Spiritual witnesses in all the earth and also partakers in Christ life, death and resurrection as we yield ourselves to him.

 

[Elijah674]

Well, despite the lack of secular documentation for the resurrection, there are credible historical accounts other than just Matthew, attesting to Jesus' resurrection.... by honest, trustworthy sources (some of whom were eyewitnesses) such as Mark, Luke, John, and Paul. I guess what's really stumping me on this one is: why didn't they mention this mass resurrection of holy people? Why just Matthew?

I'm wondering if I may be able to argue for Matthew's account using lack of refutation by anyone else. Matthew says that these dead holy people were seen alive by many people. The book of Matthew was most likely written before A.D. 70 (when Jerusalem was destroyed), so that would mean that most of these eyewitnesses would still be alive at that time. And yet, no one ever stepped forward to publicly correct Matthew and set the record straight. Surely if Matthew was making this up, someone....ANYONE....could have very easily ruined his credibility by negating this part of his story.

It's likely that the centurion and/or some of the other guards who reportedly saw all this were still alive about 30-35 years later, when Matthew wrote all this down. They could have stepped forward and said "That's a lie! We were those guards, and we didn't see any such thing after Jesus died! Don't believe a word that tax collector says!" But there is no evidence of any refutation of Matthew's account by any of his contemporaries.

I don't know.....does this argument sound solid or shaky?

I did not read on further yet but most likely some have said that these were resurected in new bodies for translation. (some first/fruits) 1 Cor. 15:18-23

[20] But now is Christ risen from the dead, and become the firstfruits of them that slept.
[21] For since by man came death, by man came also the resurrection of the dead.
[22] For as in Adam all die, even so in Christ shall all be made alive.
[23] But every man in his own order: [Christ the firstfruits; afterward they that are Christ's at his coming].

(as was noted, that the graves opened, yet the bodies did not come out until when?)

---Elijah

 

[reba]

Comparing Matthew 27:50-53 and Ezekiel 37:1-14 we can see that both accounts of the dry bones in Ezekiel and those who were raised from their graves in Matthew as being much the same as they are Spiritual and not literal. Ezekiel was in the Spirit much like John in Revelation when the prophecies were shown to him and Matthew as being an eyewitness to those teachings of Christ being once dead in the spirit, but made alive again by the renewing of Gods Spirit on the day of Pentecost. Matthew gave us a Spiritual account of those being raised from their tombs and not a literal account.

In Ezekiel these men (dry bones) were more swayed by their attempts to practice the law, but yet Spiritually dead to the law giver (God) as the law became their schoolmaster, but yet not receiving the Spiritual things of God through the law. Only those like Abraham, Issac, Jacob etc.etc who obeyed the law, but yet knew Gods Spirit in them were kept Spiritually alive unto their own physical death knowing they would be with the Lord forever.

Matthew was saying pretty much the same thing as it was not a literal Temple veil that was being torn in half, but that of the law being fulfilled in Christ resurrection that Gods Spirit (Holy Spirit) would now be made renewed in us to be taken up from our dry bone grave as those in Ezekiel were raised from theirs by that earthquake that represents that of Gods power and authority that raised Christ from his literal tomb. We are made alive again Spiritually by the power of the word of God to be raised from our dry bone grave to become Spiritual witnesses in all the earth and also partakers in Christ life, death and resurrection as we yield ourselves to him.

Tell me did the earth physically quake?
Did the physical veil rent spiritually or physically?
What scriptures do you use for backup in your view of Mathew story not being physical?

Have i miss understood your reply?

 

[for_his_glory]

Tell me did the earth physically quake?
Did the physical veil rent spiritually or physically?
What scriptures do you use for backup in your view of Mathew story not being physical?
Have i miss understood your reply?

I read the Bible as being very Spiritual teachings in parts and literal in others and what I have studied here has been revealed in the Spiritual to me and not the literal and I already gave the scriptures for this.

The cross and the resurrection were real, but when studying the scriptures I posted in Ezekiel and Matthew I feel the description of the dry bones and the graves being opened in Matthew were a Spiritual analogy of the power of God like us being dead in Christ, but made alive again by His Spirit. We were once dry without receiving the Holy Spirit, but now made renewed, refreshed by Gods Spirit. The earthquake, although could have been a real one, could also have been another analogy of the fierceness and power of God upon the cross. As for the veil being torn in half, yet possibly another analogy of Jesus fulfilling the law when he gave up the Ghost.

 

[Elijah674]

I see the timing even of the Highpriest in the Sanctuaries killing of the lamb as done. (but not Christ's work as our High Priest) And I see the vail being actually torn down from top to bottom. With finding the earthly sanctuary that was patterened after heaven original typified the last work of Christ in the Most Holy Place in heaven itself. And what was & still IS IN THE MOST HOLY PLACE THERE IN HEAVEN?? That IS MANDATORY TO UNDERSTAND for Reba's questions.

BUT,;) 'i' will not correspond any more to her postings because it takes to much time to just have them miss/understood but quickly censored.

--Elijah

 

[reba]

for_his_glory

Thank you for your reply.

 

[smaller]

At that moment the curtain of the temple was torn in two from top to bottom. The earth shook, the rocks split and the tombs broke open. The bodies of many holy people who had died were raised to life. They came out of the tombs after Jesus’ resurrection and went into the holy city and appeared to many people. When the centurion and those with him who were guarding Jesus saw the earthquake and all that had happened, they were terrified, and exclaimed, “Surely he was the Son of God!”

According to Matthew, when Jesus died, there was a huge earthquake, and the tombs of many dead people opened and the occupants came out and started walking around meeting up with the townsfolk. My friend is skeptical because there seems to be no contemporary historical record of that happening, other than Matthew's account. Why would all of the other historians living at the time have overlooked the thousands who must have witnessed the resurrection of the dead en mass, and not written anything about it? Even Mark, Luke, and John didn't mention it.....just Matthew.

I offered a speculation that maybe this was an urban legend of some kind, and that Matthew was using this as verbal imagery, for us to get a feel for just how significant an event Jesus' death was (this and his resurrection were the two most important events in all of history). But this doesn't seem to satisfy him, saying that if Matthew is telling about something that didn't actually happen, then how can he trust anything else Matthew says?

Is there anyone on this forum who might be able to help me out on this? This is one issue that I admittedly haven't looked into very thoroughly, and I was wondering if anyone else here has. Is there a better explanation than the one I offered my friend?

No urban legend required.

Matthew spoke similarly to this matter also spoken by Jeremiah. It is similar in principle to the blood of Abel speaking from the ground to this day. The accounts of these holy people, their kings and their members come to life by the Light of His Spirit and are seen in the holy place, that is 'within' those who are led to practice and they will also be led to see.

Jeremiah 22
1 Thus saith the LORD; Go down to the house of the king of Judah, and speak there this word,
2 And say, Hear the word of the LORD, O king of Judah, that sittest upon the throne of David, thou, and thy servants, and thy people that enter in by these gates:
3 Thus saith the LORD; Execute ye judgment and righteousness, and deliver the spoiled out of the hand of the oppressor: and do no wrong, do no violence to the stranger, the fatherless, nor the widow, neither shed innocent blood in this place.

The above is the command. This is followed below by 'the reward' of practice, which reward remains in effect today:

4 For if ye do this thing indeed, then shall there enter in by the gates of this house kings sitting upon the throne of David, riding in chariots and on horses, he, and his servants, and his people.

Then the penalty for non-compliance:

5 But if ye will not hear these words, I swear by myself, saith the LORD, that this house shall become a desolation.

Those who do not practice will not see, nor can they. The understanding is locked out of the house of desolation and the door is shut, by God.

s

 

[reba]

Eze 37:1 The hand of the LORD was upon me, and carried me out in the spirit of the LORD, and set me down in the midst of the valley which was full of bones,

Ezekiel tells us plainly he was in the 'spirit'.

I see nothing of the sort in Matthew's account of the Cross.

Personally I believe it happened as God's Word says it did.

I dont need God's Word verified by historical accounts. Its nice when they show up but God's Word doesn't need mans support...
Talking to the unsaved, answering their challenges we often find difficult to describe what we accept in faith...

God has away of taking care of His Word...

Isa 55:11 So shall my word be that goeth forth out of my mouth: it shall not return unto me void, but it shall accomplish that which I please, and it shall prosper in the thing whereto I sent it.

I tend to spit it out and let the chips fall...

 

[Free]

I read the Bible as being very Spiritual teachings in parts and literal in others and what I have studied here has been revealed in the Spiritual to me and not the literal and I already gave the scriptures for this.

The cross and the resurrection were real, but when studying the scriptures I posted in Ezekiel and Matthew I feel the description of the dry bones and the graves being opened in Matthew were a Spiritual analogy of the power of God like us being dead in Christ, but made alive again by His Spirit. We were once dry without receiving the Holy Spirit, but now made renewed, refreshed by Gods Spirit. The earthquake, although could have been a real one, could also have been another analogy of the fierceness and power of God upon the cross. As for the veil being torn in half, yet possibly another analogy of Jesus fulfilling the law when he gave up the Ghost.

This is a very dangerous way to approach biblical interpretation. There is nothing in Matthew's account to suggest it was something other than a literal event so it should be understood as such.

Eze 37:1 The hand of the LORD was upon me, and carried me out in the spirit of the LORD, and set me down in the midst of the valley which was full of bones,

Ezekiel tells us plainly he was in the 'spirit'.

I see nothing of the sort in Matthew's account of the Cross.

Personally I believe it happened as God's Word says it did.

 

[woodlandapple]

I read somwhere about the link of these holy men and the elders sitting in Gods throne room in Rev.4

I would look it up further but I need to study more of my own work, maybe later.

in response to answering a question, there is not enough information given in this small section to adequetly research its historical basis. how many people where resurrected? who where they? where were they buried? how long did it take them to get to Jerusalem? how long did they stay? where did they go?

without more information they have probably faded into history like many other events. just because there is no record of it outside of Matthew doesnt mean it didnt happen.