Bible "Studies" - Matthew

I don't believe being a minister is defined as preaching the gospel. I believe that to minister is to care for, to help, to teach. I've done that most of my life, long before I was ordained. On the ministers' board I frequent, I often post questions or comparisons of bible quotes, and sometimes I mock church doctrine. A fellow minister posted directly to me a link to a video. I don't remember in response to what, if anything. It's entirely possible it was a response to my asking for evidence or explanation of some dogma or another. It's rare that anyone will actually answer any questions I pose, so I was interested in seeing this video. I'd never seen the video nor heard the points made but I was delighted. I didn't know that anyone had ever addressed the "darkening of the sun" nor the "shaking of the earth" nor the "opening of the graves" except to call it a metaphor or parable or simply demand I accept it "on faith". When I read this stuff in Matthew untold years ago, I thought there should be evidence of these events but found none. That was long before the internet and like so many bible and church teachings, it fell out of my consciousness until this minister's post. So thanks, David, for re-bringing it to my attention. The video provided describes some apologists' points on these supposed events. Reader, you should probably watch the 20 minute (or so) video to know what the rest of this post is talking about.  

The sky darkening as an "eclipse" is mentioned by Thallus in 52 CE and by Phlegon sometime after 100 CE as a "supernatural" event (both of whose original writings are gone). Both Thallus and Plegon are addressed by Julius Africanus sometime after 221 CE. Julius argues against Thallus' natural argument, knowing a solar eclipse cannot occur during a full moon (as would exist during Passover). Julius further argues that a supernatural event is very highly unlikely but only ok if you suspend disbelief. Celsus around 175 CE wrote The True Doctrine wherein he posits, among other things, that the earthquake and eclipse stories are "inventions". Celsus may be responding to Justin Martyr, then recently deceased Christian apologist. Celsus' works were condemned, then banned by the church in 448 CE, but his writings survive in quotes made by Origen in his writings. Celsus is refuted by Origen of Alexandria around 248 CE (Against Celsus or Contra Celsum). Among Origen's rebuttal arguments, he quotes Phlegon. Sometimes quoting, sometimes paraphrasing, sometimes merely referring, Origen reproduces and replies to Celsus' arguments. Since accuracy was essential to his refutation of The True Doctrine, most scholars agree that Origen is a reliable source for what Celsus said. 

As an aside, Origen seems an interesting character. He had different ideas on the gods, the trinity, and what Christianity should be, but was condemned by "the church" (Second Council of Constantinople) about 553 CE, and most of his writings were ordered burned. Celsus, the critic of the christians, was an interesting character as well. "Celsus was only one among many, including Lucian, who wrote against Christianity as a breakaway cult of Judaism... Most modern scholars are in agreement that Celsus did not rely on the "rumors and hearsay evidence" that many other Christian detractors of the time period used, but rather drew upon his own observations and displayed knowledge of both the Hebrew Bible and New Testament of the Christian Bible, as well as other Jewish and Christian writings". We must keep in mind that the "New Testament" of now is not the "New Testament" of 150-200 CE. We must also keep in mind that the main Roman objection to the new religion was not religion per se. The "Christian's" refusal to recognize the Emporer and government as legitimate authorities was a threat to the stability of the Empire and society. 

I found the current NOAA site that your video narrator emphasizes multiple times is "a government site". On this results page, an excerpt from one of the sources is provided as a note; "These earthquakes arc (sic) mentioned only by one Evangelist and by chroniclers who used St Matthew as their sole source." and "The fact that these earthquakes in Jerusalem are not mentioned by contemporary pagan writers, or by three out of the four Evangelists, suggests that they may have been inspired by the topos of Nature's reflecting events of great importance, and hence must not be considered to refer to historical earthquakes.". Seems to me a bible story as the sole source for an entry on "a government site" doesn't actually validate the bible story. There is no geological evidence of an earthquake in that area around that time. One "geologist" tried running a GoFundMe and Kickstarter campaign some years ago to raise funds for further exploration on the earthquake and the darkening of the sun. A piece in HuffPo from 2012 quotes Williams, Scwab and Brauer (who examined 3 cores) "... point out that the earthquake implied in the gospel could be allegorical, referring to the earthquake that occurred sometime before or after the crucifixion. ... This earthquake would have been powerful enough to break apart the sediments of Ein Gedi but not enough to have warranted “a still extant and extra-biblical historical record.”", and quoting from maybe one of the journal artcles mentioned in the video "“If the last possibility is true, this would mean that the report of an earthquake in the Gospel of Matthew is a type of allegory,” they write in the International Geology Review." That doesn't sound to me like what the video presenter said. 

In summary, there is no evidence of an earthquake. The "talk" around the 15-minute mark in the video where they seem to be saying the unsettled pollen and silt in the water is evidence of this particular earthquake, I find laughable. I'm not a geologist, but that cross-section seems to be evidence of an extremely small disturbance -- not earthquake size and not at that time? I think this is the same "evidence" discussed in the HuffPo piece, above. The video's previous couple slides of published geology journals don't really provide enough information to check, but I wouldn't be surprised if they were also quoting Matthew. I don't know enough about those publications. The people of the area knew what an eclipse was but only bible stories no one else mentioned a "darkening of the sun". The people of the area knew what an earthquake was and certainly would have noticed dead people walking about town. Someone would have made note of that. No one did. A conversion of a Roman soldier because of these events? Where is that written, besides Matthew? The "Pontius Pilate" letter is translated and/or interpreted by all but apologists as "according to the Jews" or "the Jews say" these things happened. 

There's no evidence of an earthquake or solar eclipse at that time in that area. The remaining options are a literary device for a more exciting story or "magic" (also called supernatural or miracle). In accordance with Occam's Razor, which of those is most likely? The earth is not flat, a human male did not live 3 days inside a large fish, the sun and moon did not stand still in the sky while Joshua(?) took revenge (amusing to me apologetic entry on this, debunked by of all places AIG), and we are not descended from a dirt man and a rib woman.