Gretta, Doug,

A problem exists with what you just stated. Go back and look at Matthew 28:16-18.

In this area of the Christian text, it states that the eleven disciples went to Galilee and to the mountain where their leader, Jesus, had told them to go. Now, it says that when they--referring to the eleven--saw him, they worshipped him. However, noticed that it says that some doubted.
No where in this area does it say that more than the eleven went to the mountain--only the eleven disciples went. Also note that not all of them 100% believed according to Matthew.


28:16 Then the eleven disciples went away into Galilee, into a mountain where Jesus had appointed them. 28:17 And when they saw him, they worshipped him: but some doubted. 28:18 And Jesus came and spake unto them, saying, All power is given unto me in heaven and in earth.

There are many opinions on "but some doubted". I try toenvision being there. My own view is that Jesus approached them and while he was still not real close, but coming toward them, some with good eyesight were overtaken by joy and began worshipping him because they were able to physically recognize him and realize who he was.

The ones who doubted, IMHO, are those who couldn't quiet make Jesus out visually. My eye sight would have me not sure, if weren't for my glasses, until he was really close. Anyone who wears glasses and is near sighted will know what I mean.

When Jesus came closer in verse 18, close enough for those who could not see that well, within speaking distance, they all would have recognized him at that point.

In my opinion, it was either a question of eye sight or some didn't recognize, realizing it was him.

No matter. It is not a case of unbelief in Jesus's resurrection.

Which one has more authority to you Matthew or Acts? Matthew is assumed to have been written around 60 to 65 C.E. Also it is reported as being written by Matthew Levi. Acts is assumed to have been written around 63-70 C.E. And the reported author is Luke.

To me, Matthew and Acts are of equal authority.

Also look at Mark 16:19-20. It says that the disciples then went out and preached everywhere. Notice that the meeting in Acts that you have mentioned to us is not discussed. According to Acts, the disciples were supposed to stay in Jerusalem. Mark is reported to have been written around 55 65 C.E.

16:19 So then after the Lord had spoken unto them, he was received up into heaven, and sat on the right hand of God. 16:20 And they went forth, and preached every where, the Lord working with them, and confirming the word with signs following. Amen.

I don't see any conflict between Mark's description of Jesus meeting with them and the account in Acts 1 before Jesus ascended to heaven.

Now, also look at Luke, which Acts is suppose to be a sequel to.
What does it say in Luke 24:51?
Jesus left them, didn't he?
Go back to the previous text in this chapter. Does the recorded teaching line up with the recorded teaching in Acts 1:4-5? It doesn't, right? The author is the same for both texts, right? How come the two teachings are not the same?
Was Luke a disciple?
How did Luke know all of this? Wasn't he a friend of Paul's {as recorded by Christians}?


The account in Luke is the same account in Acts 1. You can know that by comparing Jesus's words for them to stay in Jerusalem until they had received the indwelling of the Holy Spirit that Jesus had promised them before he was crucified, who would be a comforter in his physical absence.

Here are the verses...

Luke 24:49 And, behold, I send the promise of my Father upon you: but tarry ye in the city of Jerusalem, until ye be endued with power from on high.

Acts 1:4 And, being assembled together with them, commanded them that they should not depart from Jerusalem, but wait for the promise of the Father, which, saith he, ye have heard of me.


Doug L.