Douggg,
Well it looks like Thomas came to your rescue. I hope you read my reply, which was: To me, the difference I see is this; MT specifically uses Hebrew biblical quotes and verses to substantiate it's claims whereas most of your backup is based on "possible solutions" or "suggested resolutions". Now I'm not trying to be mean and I do respect your opinion, but I just wanted to show you the contrast.

It is all possibilities and suggestions. Your comment referenced something about "100%". How can I believe 100% in possibilities and suggestions? To me 100% would be concrete evidence, don't you agree?


Let's be specific. I said 100% of the disciples experienced Jesus after the resurrection - which I did provide the verses.

You have raised questions to disproved my statement with a series passages. We have responded with several possibilities to those passages. We, Thomas and I, cannot be 100% sure of our explanation to every one is the right one, not because the nt is in conflict, but because we are trying to be objective in saying there are many possibilities. We just don't know which one. The nt is still true, with any of those. Meaning that 100% of the disciples did experience Jesus after the resurrection according to the nt.

It is unfortunate but all of my posts don't make it through, whereby I state IMHO how the point of impasse will be breeched based upon information in the nt and ot.

Peace,

Doug L.