A (0:00)

El char del grupo estaburrido Mandon video de TikTok tendencias memes tema virales rexiones al instante conversaciones in parar manteng la vibra activa the carga TikTok Ahora. This episode is brought to you by White Claw Surge. Nice choice hitting up this podcast. No surprises. You're all about diving into tastes everyone in the room can enjoy. Just like White Claw Surge. It's for celebrating those moments when connections have been made and the night's just begun. With bold flavors and 8% alcohol by volume. Unleash the night. Unleash White Claw Surge. Please drink responsibly. Hard seltzer with flavors. 8% alcohol by volume. White Claw Seltzer Works Chicago, Illinois. 2 billion people around the world build their faith around a single event. The resurrection of Jesus of Nazareth. The apostle Paul said it plainly, if Christ has not been raised, your faith is futile. But here's what most people don't know. The resurrection is told four separate times in the New Testament, once in each of the four gospels. But they don't all tell the exact same story. In one gospel, there is one angel at the tomb. In another, there are two. In one, Jesus appears in Galilee. In another, he appears in Jerusalem and tells the disciples not to leave. In one, the woman who finds the empty tomb tells everyone. And another, they run away and tell no one. One gospel ends with Jesus ascending into heaven. Another just kind of stops. And today, we're laying out all four accounts side by side, something most people, including many Christians, have never actually done. And we're not here to prove or disprove resurrection, obviously. Myself, as a Catholic, I believe in the resurrection of Christ. But we are here to read what Matthew, Mark, Luke, and John actually wrote and make sense of it all. So sit back, relax, and welcome to religion camp. What's up, people? And welcome back to religion camp. My name is Mark Cagnon, and thank you for joining me in my tent, where every single week, we explore the most interesting, fascinating, controversial stories from every religion from all time, forever. Yes, that is what I do here in the tent. I try to understand what every person believes. And I don't just go through my faith or one specific faith or Christianity itself. I go through every religion, whether it's Islam, Hinduism, Judaism, Christianity, and even some other little ones here and there. Now, what is the purpose of this channel? I'm trying to understand what everyone believes. I don't think that you can truly understand a person without knowing the God that They worship. And furthermore, I believe that all major religions that have been around for a long time have something to contribute and help us understand what it truly means to be human. So myself, I just try to pull the things I like from all of them and try to amalgamate ultimately whatever religion says and try to form, you know, a better understanding of what human beings actually need out of the faith. Now today is no exception because we're doing a great little deep dive for Easter. I just want to say happy Easter to all the Christians out there and to really all people. Christ is risen. And as they say in church, we are an Easter people. We are a people that are focused on the resurrection. A lot of people think that Christmas is the most important holiday because that's when Jesus was born. Eh? It's really all about Easter. That is the culmination of the calendar in the Catholic faith as well as basically every Christian denomination under the sun. Now, before we go any further, I just want to say thank you for clicking on this video. Every time you guys watch an episode, you know, you engage with the channel, you make my dreams come true. You keep the lights on in the tent and you keep the fire burning. And you obviously, you know, finance Christos summer house in Mykonos. Right, Christos. Thank you, fans. Yeah. All right, Christos, this is not time. All right, because you're Orthodox. It's true. You guys schismed. We're a week late. We still acknowledge the Eucharist in your faith. Correct. But you don't acknowledge ours. We do not. And that's pissing me off. It's not my fault. But look, I'm not going to let the rage and, you know, hate fill me up. Because today is not about that. Today is about the resurrection of Jesus Christ. America's Jesus, Italy's Jesus. We both believe that happened. We both believe it happened. And he died for both of our sins anyway. Now, if you don't know, throughout the Bible, you have the four gospels, Matthew, Mark, Luke and John. And each one has its characterization of the gospel, of the life of Jesus Christ, and specifically of the resurrection of Jesus. But there are subtle differences. Why are these differences present? What do they matter? And how do Christians make sense of this? And what are the differences? Anyway, don't worry, today we're going to go through all that. I do want to just point out I'm not a theologian. I'm a stand up comedian with a Wi Fi connection. And I'm deeply curious about all things, you know, of the faith, all divine mysteries. And so myself, as well as a few friends, have done research to bring you this episode to try to get to the bottom of it. But if I miss anything, please don't hesitate to drop a comment. I read all of them. Just be nice about it, all right? Drop a comment, let me know if I missed anything. I just want the truth. So if I glanced over anything at all, got something incorrect, please set the record straight. Now, where do we start? Let's start with the Gospel of Mark. This is typically acknowledged as the earliest account, but also the most abrupt account of the resurrection. Now, in order to understand what Mark says about the resurrection, let's talk about who Mark was as a writer and why his gospel matters so much to this conversation. So the Gospel of Mark is traditionally attributed to John, Mark, a companion of the apostle Peter. Now, according to early church tradition, specifically a quote from a church father named Papias around 130 A.D. mark served as Peter's interpreter and actually wrote down Peter's teachings about Jesus. Mark was not one of the twelve apostles. He was not an eyewitness to Jesus ministry. He was, according to tradition, recording what Peter told him. Now, most modern scholars are more cautious about this attribution. The gospel itself is technically anonymous. The name Mark was added later. But basically what all scholars agree on is that mark was the first gospel written, composed somewhere between like 65 and 75 A.D. roughly 35 to 45 years after the crucifixion. Some scholars push that date, maybe even earlier, perhaps around 60 A.D. others place it closer to 75. Regardless, the window that we're working with is, you know, the mainstream consensus. But it's worth knowing that, you know, the range is debated. This is important because Matthew and Luke both appear to have used Mark as a source. But we'll come back to that. Now, Mark's resurrection narrative is found in chapter 16, and it's pretty short. Here's basically what happens when the Sabbath is over. Three women, Mary Magdalene, Mary the mother of James and Salome, buy spices so that they can go anoint Jesus body. They arrive at the tomb very early on the first day of the week, just after sunrise. On the way, they're basically asking each other, who will roll away the stone for us from the entrance of the tomb? Because, you know, a large stone has obviously been placed in the front of the tomb. But when they look up, they see the stone has already been rolled away. They enter the tomb, they see a young man sitting on the right side, dressed in a white robe. Mark does not call him an angel, he calls him a young man, though most Christians interpret this as an angelic figure. The young man says to them, do not be alarmed. You seek Jesus of Nazareth who was crucified. He has risen. He is not here. See the place where they laid him. But go tell his disciples and Peter that he is going before you to Galilee. There you will see him just as he told you. And then comes what might be the most debated ending in all of biblical literature. Mark 16, verse 8, it says. And they went out and fled from the tomb, for trembling and astonishment had seized them. And they said nothing to anyone, for they were afraid. And that is the earliest and, you know, most reliable manuscripts that we have. That's it. The Gospel of Mark ends right there. The woman kind of flee in fear. They don't tell anyone. There's no appearance of the risen Jesus, no great commission, no ascension. Just fear and silence. And some scholars read this and they say, you know, this part, they say nothing to anyone as describing their immediate reaction, a moment of terrified silence, not necessary permanent silence. Others take it at face value either way, kind of a startling place to end a gospel. But here's where things get interesting. If you open many modern Bibles, you'll find that mark continues for 12 more verses from 16:9 through 16:20. And this is what most scholars will call the longer ending of Mark. Now, in these verses, Jesus appears first to Mary Magdalene, then to two disciples walking in the country, and finally to the eleven remaining apostles. He commissions them to preach the Gospel to all creation, and then he ascends to heaven. Now, the problem is that these verses are debated, and it is hotly contested as to whether these verses are original to Mark. The two oldest and most respected Greek manuscripts of the New Testament, Codex Vaticanus and Codex Sinaiticus, both dating to the 4th century AD do not contain these verses. The writing style changes noticeably. The vocabulary is a little bit different. Early church fathers like Eusebius and Jerome noted that these verses were missing from the most accurate manuscripts available to them. Most modern Bible translations will include these verses, but with a footnote, something like the earliest manuscripts did not include mark 16, 9, 20. This is genuinely one of the biggest textual issues in the entire New Testament, and it matters for our comparison today. If Mark originally ended at verse eight, then perhaps the earliest Gospel we have contains no resurrection appearance at all, just an empty tomb and terrified women who don't tell anyone what they saw. Now we'll get into an analysis of really what this means and how these discrepancies kind of square with each other and how Christians typically interpret it and go through the main differences and similarities. But before that, let's just lay out the rest of the Gospels. Hey, we're going to take a break really quick because I need to talk to the fellows. All right, if you're a woman, you can skip forward. I don't really care. But guys, I want to talk about one of the most probably demoralizing things that can ever happen to you. All right? You're in the bathroom, you're brushing your teeth, you look up in the mirror and suddenly you realize, my forehead looks bigger than it did before. I get so many headaches every month. It could be chronic migraine, 15 or more headache days a month, each lasting four hours or more. Botox Onobotulinum toxin a prevents headaches in adults with chronic migraine. It's not for Those who have 14 or fewer headache days a month. Prescription Botox is injected by your doctor. Effects of Botox may spread hours to weeks after injection, causing serious symptoms. Alert your doctor right away as difficulty swallowing, speaking, breathing, eye problems or muscle weakness can be signs of a life threatening condition. Patients with these conditions before injection are at highest risk. Side effects may include allergic reactions, neck and injection site pain, fatigue and headache. Allergic reactions can include rash, welts, asthma symptoms and dizziness. Don't receive Botox if there's a skin infection. Tell your doctor your medical history, muscle or nerve conditions including als, Lou Gehrig's disease, Myasthenia gravis or Lambert Eaton syndrome, and medications including botulinum toxins as these may increase the risk of serious side effects. Why wait? Ask your doctor. Visit botoxchronicmigraine.com or call 1-844botox to learn more. Not sure how to tackle your taxes? Are you sweating the small print? You may be experiencing FOMO, the fear of messing up the answer using TurboTax on Intuit credit Karma. They help you get your biggest refund and then we help you do more with it with a personalized plan designed to help you hit your money goals. It's time to take your taxes to the max. Start filing today in the Credit Karma app. Well, the thing with that is that men don't go bald overnight. Right, Christos? Anyway, it's sneaky, okay? It's like, all right, well, the lighting here is a little weird. And then you're like, I just, I just, you know, took a shower. So of course, you know, I mean. Or maybe my barber just actually pushed it back and then one day someone tags you in a photo and you're like, what is going on? And the worst part is that most guys don't know what actually works. I mean, there's a million oils and, you know, all sorts of things like potions on the Internet basically are going to claim to help you out. But the reality is there are doctor trusted ingredients that have been trusted for decades. I mean, truly, they've been studied for years. And that's why a lot of guys are using hims. All right, Hims makes it incredibly simple to get personalized hair loss treatment online. You don't have to go to the doctor, you don't have to take off work, you don't have to drive across town, you don't have to sit in a waiting room thinking like, well, everyone knows why I'm here. You know what I mean? Through hims, you get access to prescription hair loss treatments with ingredients that actually work, like finasteride, minoxidil, the actual stuff that's going to actually help your hair loss. These are clinically studied ingredients that can stop further hair loss and even regrow hair in as little to three to six months. So it's amazing. And the best part is that's 100% online. You literally just go to the website, do like a little consultation, you explain your situation, and a licensed medical provider reviews it. And then if you qualify, they send you treatments directly to your door. No hidden fees, no surprise cost. It's not going to cost you an arm and a leg. You get real treatment designed around your goals. So for simple online access to personalized and affordable care for hair loss, weight loss and more, visit hims.comcamp that's hims h I m s.com camp c a m p for your free online visit hims.com camp featured products include compound drug products which the FDA does not approve or verify for safety, effectiveness or quality. Prescription required. See website for full details, restrictions and important safety information. Individual results may vary based on studies of topical and oral minoxidil and finasteride. Let's get back to the show. The next brings us to the Gospel of Matthew. Now, this is traditionally attributed to the apostle Matthew, also known as Levi, who was a tax collector before Jesus called him to be one of the 12 disciples. If this attribution is correct, Matthew would be a actual eyewitness to at least some of the events that he describes. However, a lot of modern scholars are skeptical of this tradition, primarily because Matthew appears to copy large sections of of the Gospel of Mark, which we believe to have been Written much earlier, often word for word. The question that scholars will ask is, why would an eyewitness, someone that actually saw these miraculous events, rely so heavily on the account of someone who wasn't there? The gospel itself is again, technically anonymous, and the scholarly consensus dates Matthew to approximately 80 to 90 AD, and most scholars believe the author was a Jewish Christian, writing for a predominantly Jewish audience. Which explains why Matthew constantly connects Jesus's life to Old Testament prophecies. Matthew's resurrection narrative is found in chapter 28, and it is noticeably more dramatic than Mark's. Matthew begins with many of the same elements. Mary Magdalene and the other Mary go to the tomb at dawn on the first day of the week. But notice Matthew only has two women, not three. Salome is gone, and they're not coming to anoint the body. Matthew doesn't mention spices at all. They're simply coming to see the tomb, potentially to anoint it. But again, he doesn't specify why. And then Matthew adds something that no other gospel contains. A great earthquake. Yeah. An angel of the Lord descends from heaven, rolls back the stone and sits on it. His appearance is like lightning. His clothing is white as snow. The guards who had been stationed at the tomb, and we'll come back to those guards in a second, shook with fear and became like dead men. Now the angel speaks to the women, and his message is very similar to Mark's. He says, do not be afraid, for I know that you seek Jesus, who was crucified. He is not here, for he has risen, as he said. Come see the place where he lay. Then go quickly and tell his disciples that he has risen from the dead. And behold, he is going before you to Galilee. There you will see him. The women leave the tomb with fear and great joy, a noticeable difference from the Gospel of Mark, where they leave only with fear and they run to tell the disciples. And then on the way, Jesus himself meets them. He says greetings, and they come up to him, clasp his feet and worship him. Jesus tells them not to be afraid, and you tell his brothers to go to Galilee where they will see him. Now, here's a detail that is unique to Matthew. The guards at the tomb. Matthew is the only gospel that actually places Roman guards at the tomb. Back in chapter 27, Matthew describes how the chief priests and the Pharisees go to Pontius Pilate and ask him to secure the tomb, because they remember Jesus said that he would rise after three days, and they're worried that the disciples are going to go in there and steal the body and claim that there's a resurrection or, you know, they were going to do some funny business. So Pilate basically puts a guard there and they set the stone and the guards are, you know, commanded to defend the tomb and make sure no one does any funny business. After the resurrection, Matthew tells us that some of the guards go to the chief priests and report what happened. The chief priests then bribed the soldiers, telling them to say his disciples came by night and stole him while we were sleeping. Matthew adds that this story has been spread amongst the Jews to this day, giving us a window into the apologetic debates that were already happening between early Christians and their Jewish critics in the late first century. Matthew concludes with what's known as the great commission. The 11 disciples go to a mountain in Galilee, the specific mountain Jesus had designated, and then they see him, they worship him. But some doubt it. That's a fascinating and often overlooked detail. Even in the moment of seeing the risen Christ, Matthew admits that some of them had doubts. Their faith was challenged. Jesus then delivers his famous final words. All authority in heaven and on earth has been given to me. Go therefore and make disciples of all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit, teaching them to observe all that I have commanded you. And behold, I am with you always to the end of the age. And that's where Matthew ends again. No ascension scene in the traditional sense, but there is a resurrection and a sighting of the Jesus incarnate, you could say after his death by crucifixion. And as well, Jesus promises to be with them always. Now, once again, we'll do an analysis in a little bit, but let's move on to the Gospel of Luke. Now, who wrote the Gospel of Luke? You would assume it's this guy Luke, a physician and a travel companion of the apostle Paul. Luke is mentioned by name in Paul's letters. In Colossians 4:14, Paul calls him the beloved physician. If this attribution is correct, Luke was not an eyewitness to Jesus's life either. He was a Gentile, likely the only non Jewish author, maybe in the entire New Testament. And he wrote his gospel as a careful, researched account. In fact, Luke opens his Gospel by explicitly stating his methodology. He says that he carefully investigated everything from the beginning and is writing an orderly account for someone named Theophilus. Luke also wrote the Book of Acts, which serves as a sequel to his gospel. Scholars generally date Luke to like 80 to 90 AD, roughly the same period as Matthew, though the dating is, you know, Partly inferred from how the book of Acts ends, Acts closes kind of abruptly with Paul under house arrest in Rome, without describing the fall of Jerusalem in 70 A.D. some scholars argue that this means that, like Luke and Acts were written before 70 A.D. others see this omission as a literary choice, not like a chronological clue. And it's one of the ongoing debates to the day. Regardless, Luke's resurrection narrative is found in chapter 24, and it is the longest and most detailed of all four gospels. Luke tells us that on the first day of the week, at early dawn, a group of women go to the tomb carrying the spices that they had prepared. Luke names three of them, Mary Magdalene, Joanna and Mary, the mother of James, but then adds, and the other woman with them. So Luke has the largest group going to the tomb, at least four, possibly more. Notice that Salome from the Gospel of Mark is gone. Joanna, not in any of the other Gospel and. Or not in any of the other, you know, Gospel of Resurrection accounts is now appeared and is one of the women going to the tomb. They find the stone rolled away and they enter the tomb, but they do not find the body of Jesus. While they are, you know, very perplexed and confused by this, suddenly two men stand beside them in dazzling apparel. Not one man as in Mark, not one angel descending in an earthquake as in Matthew, two men already there. The women kind of bow their faces to the ground in fear and the two men say, why do you seek the living among the dead? He is not here, but he has risen. Remember how he told you while he was still in Galilee that. That the Son of Man must be delivered into the hands of sinful men and be crucified and on the third day rise. Notice something critical here. In Mark and Matthew, the women are told to go to Galilee to see Jesus. In Luke, the message is different. There's no instruction to go to Galilee. Instead, the angels tell the women to remember what Jesus said while he was still in Galilee. Now this matters because in Luke's account, all of the resurrection appearances happen in or around Jerusalem, never in Galilee. This is one of the most significant kind of geographical contradictions between the Gospels. The women return and tell all of this to the eleven apostles and kind of everyone else. But the apostles don't really believe them. Luke says that their words seem to them an idle tale. However, Peter gets up and runs to the tomb, looks in, sees the linen cloths lying by themselves, and goes home marveling at what had happened. Some manuscripts include this verse about Peter. Some early ones do not, it's another kind of textual variant that's worth bringing up. And then Luke gives us one of the most beloved and unique stories in all four Gospels. This is the road to Emmaus. That same day, two disciples, one named Cleopas, the other one unnamed, are walking to a village called Emmaus, about seven miles from Jerusalem. Jesus himself joins them on the road, but they don't recognize him. Luke says their eyes were kept from recognizing him. Maybe he's like some type of disguise or something. Or they couldn't see the Spirit of God. Who knows? Jesus asks them what they've been discussing, and Cleopas basically recounts the entire story. How Jesus of Nazareth was a mighty prophet, how the chief priests had him crucified, how they had hoped he was the one to redeem Israel, and basically how some women from the group went to the tomb that morning and found it empty and saw a vision of angels who said he was alive. So Jesus responds by calling them foolish and slow of heart, and then walks them through the entire Old Testament, explaining how these scriptures pointed to the Messiah suffering and entering his glory. When they arrive at Emmaus, Jesus acts as if he's going to walk further, but they urge him to stay. He sits down to eat with them, takes bread, blesses it, breaks it, and then gives it to them. And at that moment, their eyes are opened and they recognize him. And immediately he vanishes. They rush back to Jerusalem and find the 11 disciples gathered together, who tell them the Lord has risen indeed and has appeared to Simon, a resurrection appearance to Peter that Luke mentions but never actually describes. Then, while they're all talking about this, Jesus himself appears among them. He says, peace to you. And they are terrified, thinking that they're seeing, like, a ghost or something. And here is where Luke emphasizes the physical, bodily nature of the resurrection more than any other gospel that we have. Jesus says, why are you troubled? See my hands and my feet? This, that it is I myself. Touch me and see. For a spirit does not have flesh and bones as you see that I have. He shows them his hands and feet, and then, in a wonderfully human detail, he says, have you anything here to eat? They give him a piece of broiled fish, and he eats it in front of them. Jesus then opens their minds to kind of understand the Scriptures explains that repentance and forgiveness of sins should be proclaimed to all nations, beginning from Jerusalem, and tells them that they are witnesses of these things. He tells them to stay in the city until they are closed with power from on high, a reference to the Coming of the Holy Spirit at Pentecost. And then Luke gives us something that neither Mark or Matthew include the Ascension. Jesus leads the disciples out to Bethany, lifts his hands, blesses them, and while he is blessing them, he parts from them and ascends into heaven. The disciples worship him and return to Jerusalem with great joy. It's worth noting that some early manuscripts of Luke do not include the words and and was carried up into heaven Again, another textual variant. But Luke clearly describes the Ascension more fully in his sequel, the Book of acts. Specifically, Acts 1, verse 3 states that Jesus appeared to the apostles over a period of 40 days before being taken up, a detail found nowhere in the gospel itself. In the Gospel, Luke's narrative almost reads as though the ascension happens on the same day as the resurrection Easter Sunday itself. This apparent compression of time from 40 days in Acts seemingly to one day in the Gospel is just another point of scholarly discussion. Now that brings us to the fourth and final Gospel, the Gospel of John, perhaps the most theological account. So who wrote the Gospel of John? If you guessed a dude named John, you're basically right. It's traditionally attributed to the apostle John, the son of a guy named Zebedee. And the Apostle John is one of Jesus closest disciples, part of the inner circle along with Peter and James. Tradition holds that John was the beloved disciple mentioned throughout the Gospel. If that attribution is correct, John would be an eyewitness. However, a lot of modern scholars believe that the Gospel went through multiple stages of composition and editing, possibly originating with the beloved disciples testimony, but reaching its final form through a community of followers. Sometimes called the Johannine community. The Gospel is generally dated to approximately 90 to 100 AD, making it the latest of the four canonical gospels. John's Gospel is dramatically different from the other three in structure, theology and style. So different that Matthew, Mark and Luke are collectively called the Synoptic Gospels, meaning seen together, while John stands significant and apart from the rest. John's resurrection narrative spans chapters 20 and 21, and it's the most theologically rich and dramatically detailed of all four accounts. John tells us that on the first day of the week, Mary Magdalene goes to the tomb while it was still dark, earlier than any other gospel. And here's a significant difference. John mentions only Mary Magdalene. She's alone. However, when Mary runs to tell the disciples, she says, we do not know where they have laid him. Now that we suggests that she may not have been alone. Even though John doesn't name anyone else, Mary finds the stone removed and immediately runs to tell Simon Peter and the other disciple, the one whom Jesus loved traditionally understood to be John himself. She says they have taken the Lord out of the tomb and we do not know where they have laid him. Notice at this point, Mary doesn't assume resurrection. She assumes that the body's been moved, the grave has been robbed, or something has happened. Then comes a famous scene. Peter and the beloved disciple race to the tomb. The beloved disciple outruns Peter and arrives first, which is kind of funny that if we believe the beloved disciple is John, that John's like, yeah, you know, I beat Peter in a race. You know, I dusted him in a hundred meter. It's kind of funny. First score more with the college branded Venmo debit card and earn up to 5% cash back with Venmo stash Got paid back with the Venmo debit card you can instantly access your balance and save. Spend on what you want like game day, snacks, gear, tickets and more. The more you do, the more cash back you can earn. Plus there's no monthly fee or minimum balance. Sign up now@venmo.com collegecard the Venmo Mastercard is issued by the Bancorp Bank NA Select Schools available Venmo Stash terms and exclusions apply at Venmo me stash terms max $100 cash back per month. So good, so good, so good. New spring arrivals are at Nordstrom Rack stores now. Get ready to save big with up to 60% off rag and bone, Marc Jacobs free people and more. How did I not know rack has Adidas? Because there's always something new. Join the Nordic Club to unlock exclusive discounts. Shop new arrivals first and more. Plus buy online and pick up at your favorite rack store for free. Great brands, great prices. That's why you rack. Yeah right. Like if you're going to if basically anyone that comments first on this video is just on some John vibes. Yep. Now he bends down, looks in and he sees the linen cloths laying there. But he doesn't go in. Peter arrives, goes straight in and sees the linen cloths and the face cloth which had been on Jesus head, not lying on the linen cloth but folded up in place by itself. The beloved disciple then enters, sees and believes. Literally that word quote believes. Though John adds the curious note that quote as yet they did not understand the scripture that he must rise from the dead. The two disciples then go home, but Mary stays. She stands outside the tomb weeping. She bends down to look into the tomb and sees two angels in white sitting where the body of Jesus had laid one at the head, one at the feet. They ask her, woman, why are you weeping? And she says, they have taken away my Lord. I do not know where they have laid him. She turns around and sees Jesus standing there, but she doesn't recognize him. She thinks that he's a gardener. Jesus asks her a question. Woman, why are you weeping? Whom are you seeking? Mary says, sir, if you have carried him away, tell me where you have laid him and I will take him away. Then Jesus says one word, mary, and she turns to him and says in Aramaic, rabboni, which literally means teacher. It's one of the most intimate and emotionally powerful moments in the entirety of the New Testament. Jesus then says something that appears only in John, do not cling to me, for I have not yet ascended to the Father. Some older translations read this as touch me, not the Latin noli me tangier, which has become one of the most famous phrases in Christian art. But most modern scholars translate it as do not hold on to me or stop clinging to me. Suggesting that Mary had already taken hold of him, Jesus tells her to go to his quote brothers and say, I am ascending to my Father and your father, to my God and your God. That evening, the disciples are gathered behind locked doors, afraid. Jesus appears among them, seemingly through the locked door, and says, peace be with you. He shows them his hands and his side, but Thomas is not there. When the others tell Thomas that they've seen the Lord, he delivers his famous response. Unless I see in his hands the marks of the nails and place my fingers into the mark of the nails and place my hands into his side, I will never believe. Eight days later, the disciples gather again, and this time Thomas is with them. The doors are locked again, and Jesus appears and says directly to Thomas, put your finger here and see my hands and put out your hand and place it in my side. Do not disbelieve, but believe. Thomas responds with what might be the highest, you know, Christological confession in the entirety of the Gospels and says, my Lord and my God. Jesus says to him, have you believed because you have seen me. Blessed are those who have not seen and yet they believe. Many scholars see this as a message directed not just at Thomas, but at really any audience, any person reading the Gospel, future believers who have not had the luxury of physical proof of the resurrection of Christ and basically encouraging them to say, you know, if you have the proof, it's great that you believe, but it's extra good to believe without the physical proof. What's up, people? We're going to take a break really quick because I got to give a shout out to the good folks at Dylan Optics. I mean, for the longest time, I've been wanting a sunglass partner, and I'm so glad that it's a great sunglass brand. All right, if you've ever seen me on stage, ever, or just on this podcast with my hair down, I always have sunglasses. I use them to keep my hair back. But now with Dylan Optics, I can also use them on my eyes because I swear, when I put these things on, life was in hd. All right, They've got this patented matte lens technology that kills internal reflections. My least favorite thing is when you're putting on glasses, you can, like, see glare on the side. And these are amazing. There's no glare, no weird, like, seeing your own face thing. When the sun hits it just right, it is a clean, crisp vision. The founder is the most American dude ever. He was literally in the Air Force, and then after he started experimenting with lenses because he didn't like the sunglasses that he had and literally was baking the lenses in his mom's oven. I mean, that's America. And now they design and manufacture by hand, and they've got these matte lenses and stabilized resolution lenses that adjust to light and make everything a little sharper. So if you want sunglasses that actually make you see better, that look great and also rock with us over here at the campsite, you're going to go to Dylan Optics.com, that's D I L O N Optics.com and if you use the promo code Camp CP, you're going to save 10% off. So go check it out. Thank you, Dylan Optics, for making this possible. And let's get back to the show. John, chapter 21 adds an additional resurrection appearance by the Sea of Galilee, sometimes called the Sea of Tiberius, where Jesus appears to seven of the disciples while they're actually out fishing. He helps them make a miraculous catch of fish, cooks breakfast for them on shore, and has a deeply personal conversation with Peter, asking him three times, do you love me? Mirroring Peter's three denials, many scholars believe Chapter 21 perhaps is an appendix added later, possibly by a different hand, as chapter 20 seems to have its own conclusion in verses 30 and 31. Now that is a summary of the four Gospels. Now that we've kind of walked through each one individually, let's lay them side by side and look at the specific points where they diverge. And to be clear, these aren't obscure, hard to find discrepancies. These are Differences that you can see just by reading the text. Who went to the tomb? In Mark, it's Mary Magdalene, Mary, the mother of James and Salome, three women. In Matthew, it's Mary Magdalene and the other Mary, two women. In Luke, it's Mary Magdalene, Joanna and Mary, the mother of James and the other woman, four or more. And then in John, it is Mary Magdalene alone. Although at some point she does say we. So perhaps there's another person. Now, when did they arrive? In Mark it says very early, when the sun had risen. In Matthew it says towards the dawn. At Luke it says early dawn. And in John it says while it was still dark, was the stone already moved? In the Gospel of Mark, yes. They get there, they look up and they see that it's been rolled away. In the Gospel of Matthew, no. They witness an angel descend and roll it away with an earthquake. In Luke, it's already rolled away. And in John, yes, it is already removed. Who did they find at the tomb? Or what rather in Mark, one young man in a white robe sitting inside the tomb, interpreted often as an angel. In Matthew, it's one angel whose appearance was like lightning, sitting on the rolled away stone outside the tomb. In Luke, it's two men in dazzling apparel who appear while the women are inside. And then in John, it's two angels in white sitting inside the tomb. But Mary sees them only after Peter, the beloved disciple, have left. Now, what were the women told to do? In the Gospel of Mark, they were supposed to tell the disciples to go to Galilee, and that's where Jesus will meet them. In Matthew, they're supposed to tell the disciples to go to Galilee and Jesus is going to meet them there, same as Mark. In Luke it says, remember what Jesus told them in Galilee. No instruction to go there, just to remember what he had said when they were all in Galilee together. And then in John, there's no geographic instruction from the angels. Jesus tells Mary to tell the disciples that he is ascending. Now, did the women actually tell anyone? In the Gospel of Mark it says no, they didn't say anything to anyone because they were afraid. In Matthew, yes, they ran to tell the disciples with fear and great joy. Now let me just say in Mark, that's the kind of what's accepted as the original ending. There's of course, the longer ending. Now, in Matthew, yes, they go and tell the disciples. In Luke, yes, they told the 11 and all the rest. And then in John, yes, Mary Magdalene went and told the disciples. Where did Jesus appear to them? In Mark, no appearance in the Original ending. And then of course, in the longer ending, it's an unspecified location. In Matthew, it's on a mountain in Galilee. In Luke, it's in Jerusalem, the road to Emmaus, then in a room in Jerusalem, and the disciples are told to stay in Jerusalem. And then in the Gospel of John, it's in Jerusalem in a locked room twice. And then later in Galilee by the sea of Tiberius. Is there an ascension in Mark? Yes, but only in the longer ending. In Matthew, no, there is no ascension in Luke, yes, there is an ascension at Bethany. And in John, there is no explicit ascension, though Jesus tells Mary that he has not yet ascended, once again, kind of implying that there will be an ascension. Now, these are not, you know, trivial differences. These are, you know, very legitimate and I think worth asking the question of these contradictions. Right. The geographical ones alone, like Galilee versus Jerusalem, has occupied scholars for centuries. They have debated and discussed what these discrepancies mean. Some narrative critiques argue that the geography isn't just incidental, but it is theological. In Galilee, you know, that's referenced in Mark and Matthew, it represents the place of the universal mission and new beginnings, while Jerusalem in Luke represents the fulfillment of God's promises to Israel. Each author may have placed the resurrection appearances where they did for reasons that just go beyond simple reporting, but rather to hit the people that are reading it in the time. But here's the thing. For all their differences, the four gospels agree on a remarkable number of core details. And these agreements are arguably just as significant as the disagreements. I mean, of course, the empty tomb. All four gospels agree that when the women arrive at the tomb on Sunday morning, the body of Jesus is not there. The tomb was open and empty. This is the foundational claim that is shaped across all four accounts. Of course, another similarity is that women are the first witnesses. All four gospels agree that women, specifically Mary Magdalene, in every account, were the first to discover the empty tomb. This is a detail that many scholars consider highly significant because in first century Jewish and Roman culture, women's testimony were generally regarded as less reliable than men's. If you were inventing a resurrection story to convince people in the ancient world, making women your primary witness would be a strange strategic choice. And this is often cited as an argument for the authenticity of the tradition that you know, the claim being that no one would have made this up, because why would you make up something that is less credible? Now, another similarity is that there's like an angelic or a supernatural announcement. All four gospels include some type of heavenly messenger or Multiple messengers at the tomb who declare that Jesus has risen. Now, of course, the stone moves or is already moved. All four accounts mention that the large stone sealing the tomb is rolled away or removed. Another is that Jesus physically appears after his death. Setting aside Mark in the original ending, all four gospels, including the longer ending of Mark, contain accounts of Jesus appearing in the bodily form to his followers after his crucifixion. In the accounts that include these appearances, Jesus is not described as a ghost or as a vision. He's physical, like with actual skin and bone and can be touched and eats food and has conversations and has wounds that can be actually felt. And then of course, there's a broader textual tradition that exists, right? Like you have the four canonical gospels, but they're not the only ancient texts that describe the resurrection. So non canonical works like the Gospel of Peter, which includes a dramatic scene of Jesus emerging from the tomb with these two giant angels with a, you know, talking cross that follows behind. And then of course, the Gospel of Mary, which presents Mary Magdalene is receiving this special post resurrection revelation that, you know, it shows that early Christians told the story in an even more varied way than what made it into the New Testament. And we're obviously focusing on the, you know, canonical four gospels today. But the tradition is wider than, you know, I at least thought at first. Now, of course, what I mentioned before, the Gospel of Mary, this is not considered to be divinely inspired by God. It's not actually included in the Bible. They're just manuscripts that exist in that time period. Now, another similarity is that the resurrection happened on the first day of the week. All four gospels agree on this. This is what Christians would typically call Sunday. This is consistent across every account. Another is that the disciples were initially skeptical or afraid across all four Gospels. The initial reaction to the resurrection is not like, let's go, we did it. It's fear and confusion and doubt. In Mark, the woman flee in terror. In Luke, the apostles think that the women's report is kind of nonsense. And John, Thomas refuses to believe without physical proof. Even in Matthew, some of the disciples doubt when they have seen the risen Jesus. And this pattern of initial disbelief is consistent across all four texts. So how do Christian theologians and apologists and general Christians, if you're Christian like you're, you know, you watching right now, how do we deal with the fact that the four resurrection accounts don't all have the exact same details? Well, this is a question that has been addressed for nearly 2,000 years, going all the way back to the very early Church fathers like Tatian, who in the second century AD Created the Diatessaron, a single harmonized narrative that basically wove all four gospels together into one continuous story. Here is the most common theological defense, the independent witness argument. This is the most frequently cited defense. The argument basically goes like this. If four witnesses to a car accident gave police statements that were word for word identical, that would actually be kind of suspicious. It would reveal that they had coordinated their stories, that, you know, they would have all gotten together and shared homework and just written down everything exactly like the other person had written. Real eyewitness accounts of the same event naturally differ in details while agreeing on the big picture. The fact that the Gospels differ in details like the number of angels or the exact time of the arrival, or, you know, how many women, things like that, but they agree on the core facts. You know, that there's an empty tomb, that Jesus is resurrected, or that there's an ascension. That women are the first witnesses is exactly what you would expect from independent, authentic testimony, right? If you and four of your friends saw a bank robbery, you might be like, oh, there was two robbers, or there was three robbers, or they had this type of weapon, or they had this ski mask color. There might be little discrepancies, but of course, the big picture is the bank got robbed. Now there's of course, the different audiences argument. Each gospel writer was writing for a different community with different needs. Mark was writing for persecuted Christians in Rome who needed a raw, urgent faith. Matthew was writing for Jews who needed to see Jesus as the fulfillment of the Old Testament prophecy. Luke was writing for educated Gentiles who valued careful, orderly accounts. And of course, John was writing for a later generation that needed to understand the deeper theological meaning. Each author selected and emphasized different details based on what their audience needed to hear. The differences, they're not contradictions or, you know, proof that the whole thing is invalid. They're editorial choices. And then there's, of course, the complementary details argument. This basically says that the accounts aren't actually contradictions, that they're complementary. For example, Mark says that there was one young man at the tomb. Luke says that there were two men. The argument is that if there were two, then there certainly was also one. Mark didn't say that there was only one. Similarly, John mentions only Mary Magdalene going to the tomb, but he doesn't say that she went alone. And her use of the term we suggests that she didn't. From this perspective, each Gospel gives a partial picture, and they can be assembled into a coherent whole. I mean, once again, if you were to say, you know, the guy with the orange ski mask ran into the bank, that doesn't mean that the guy with the orange ski mask and also a guy with a black ski mask didn't run into the bank. And so by the omission of details, that doesn't invalidate one or the other, that would be that defense. And then there's the oral tradition argument. The Gospels are written decades after the events that they describe, and the stories circulated orally before being written down. And of course, in a oral, traditional storytelling culture, the core of a story remains stable, while kind of the details on the side will shift with each retelling. The theological claim is really what matters. The resurrection itself. And this remained consistent while the less essential details varied in a way that, you know, oral traditions typically do. And then there is the Galilee, Jerusalem question. On this specific issue of whether the appearances happened in Galilee or Jerusalem, many apologists argue that both happened. Jesus appeared first in Jerusalem as Luke and John describe, and then later in Galilee as Matthew and John chapter 21 describe. Luke's instructions to stay in Jerusalem, they argue, referred to the period before Pentecost, not the entire post resurrection period. And again, that kind of goes along with the complementary understanding of how these Gospels work. But now, what is the other side? What do critics and skeptics say when they look at these differences? Well, there is the literary dependence argument. Many scholars and skeptics believe that Matthew and Luke both use Mark as a primary source. This is called Markan priority, and it's one of the most widely accepted findings in New Testament scholarship. If Matthew and Luke are both working from Mark's text, then they're not fully independent witnesses. They are editors, and they are revising and expanding on an earlier source. And the differences between them from this perspective aren't natural variations of independent witnesses. They're the deliberate changes of later authors reshaping the story for their own theological purposes. Scholars call this approach redaction criticism, the study of how Matthew and Luke edited Mark to serve their specific theological emphasis. When Matthew adds the earthquake and the guards, skeptics argue that he's not reporting additional facts. He's creating a more dramatic and apologetically useful version of the story. Now, there's also the argument that's known as the legendary development argument. When you arrange the Gospels in order that most scholars believe that they were actually written Mark, then Matthew, then Luke, then John, some critics see a pattern of increasing elaboration. Mark's account is kind of sparse. You have an empty tomb, one young man, terrified women, no appearances. Matthew then adds an earthquake and an angel descending from heaven, and there's guards and, you know, there's a brief appearance. Then Luke adds two angels, multiple detailed appearances. The road to Emmaus, a meal and ascension. And then John adds a foot race to the tomb. This encounter with Mary, the doubting Thomas saga, the extended post resurrection dialogues. Skeptics argue that this trajectory from more simple and kind of basic to more elaborate is what you would expect if the story was growing and developing over time through basically legend building, not through access to, you know, additional historical information. If one person wrote a story and then the next people took that story and added onto it, it would have the same core and then just continue to grow and grow and grow, and the tale would become more detailed, more elaborate, more dramatic is what they would argue. Now, it's fair to note, however, that not all scholars who observe this pattern conclude that it reflects some type of fictional account. Some see it as theological elaboration, where later authors kind of drew out implications that they believe were already present in the event and in the original tellings, rather than inventing details from scratch. Now, this distinction between elaboration and invention is itself one of the central debates in resurrection scholarship. Now another argument is known as the contradiction argument. Some critics argue that the differences are actual contradictions that cannot be harmonized without some type of, you know, special mental gymnastics. The most pointed example is, you know, Mark's original ending. The woman tells no one. In Luke, they tell everyone. These details are not complimentary. They can't tell no one, but also have told everyone. They are directly opposing claims about the same event. Similarly, Luke's Jesus tells the disciples to stay in Jerusalem and to not leave until they receive the Holy Spirit. Matthew's Jesus tells them to go to Galilee, a completely different place. And you can try to harmonize these. But critics and skeptics will argue that doing so requires reading things into the text that just aren't there. Again, the complementarian would say, you can go to Jerusalem and then to Galilee, or vice versa. These events are not mutually exclusive. Whereas the skeptic would say, it never says that one happens and then the other. It just says in one account that A happens and the other account B happens, and at no point does it say A and B, so it seems like a contradiction. And then, of course, there is the theological invention argument. Some skeptical scholars will basically say that certain details in the resurrection account were invented for theological or apologetic reasons rather than, you know, from being legitimately remembered from history. Matthew's guards at the tomb, for instance, directly countered the Jewish accusation that the disciples stole the body, which makes it look like, you know, this apologetic creation, basically a defense of the faith designed to address a specific criticism that was happening in that time. You know, people at the time were saying, this guy is not actually Lord and he never actually resurrected. His body was just taken by his followers and buried somewhere hidden, thrown into the sea. And of course, then they say he was resurrected. But if they are able to point to the Roman guards that were there that were third party defenders of the body, all of a sudden has much more legitimacy, is what these people would say. Luke's emphasis on Jesus eating fish and showing his hands and feet may be a response to early Docetus Christians who believed that Jesus only appeared to have a physical body, but was actually spirit and not actually physical. From this perspective, the Gospels are not just recording what happened. They're actually constructing a narrative to serve the theological needs of their community in order to push back on different philosophies that contradict what they're teaching at the time. Now, you also have comparative parallels. This is basically the idea that some scholars point out that the resurrection genre itself, empty tombs and appearances and a vindicated hero returning from death, has parallels in Jewish and Greco Roman traditions. And they would argue that stories of heroic figures being taken up by the gods or of a righteous sufferer being vindicated after death, existed in the ancient world before and alongside Christianity. And skeptics see these parallels as evidence that the resurrection narrative draws on a familiar literary pattern. Believers counter that God's action in history might naturally resemble patterns that humans already recognize. Either way, the comparative background is, you know, worth considering. And then, of course, you have the silence of Paul. This is something that skeptics and critics bring up all the time, that I think, as Christians, it's worth acknowledging. Now, this is basically saying that scholars like Paul, writing in the 50s AD roughly a full decade or more before any gospel was composed, never mentions an empty tomb. In First Corinthians 15, Paul gives the earliest known account of the resurrection, listing appearances to Peter, the 12, 500 people, James, all the apostles, and finally to Paul himself. But he says nothing about women at the tomb, nothing about angels, nothing about an earthquake or guards. Some skeptics argue that the empty tomb tradition may have developed later and was actually not a part of the earliest Christian proclamation. So where does this leave us? I mean, you have four different gospels. They all are, you know, have subtle discrepancies and there's a ton of similarities like the big picture, which some people think actually make it more credible. But critics will say that the discrepancies make it such that one, if not multiple, of these Gospels are fictional, or rather just elaborations on earlier sources. So what does it mean? Here's the truth. I mean, in my opinion, whether you find the similarities or the differences more compelling, it really says a lot about the assumptions that you or me are bringing to the text. If you start with the premise that the Gospels are divinely inspired, that God had a hand in the creation, the curation of the text, the differences are puzzles to be solved. And they can be solved, often quite reasonably, if you already have faith. If you start with the premise that the Gospels are human documents produced in a specific historical circumstance in order to persuade a specific audience, the differences are, you know, pretty clear. And, you know, they basically show evidence that the story evolved over time in order to fit an agenda. And I get why people come to that conclusion if they don't have faith. Regardless of where you land, something happened in the decades after Jesus's crucifixion that transformed this small group of frightened, defeated followers into founders of what would become the world's largest religion. Within 20 years of the crucifixion, Paul is writing letters to communities across the Roman Empire who believe that Jesus had risen from the dead within 40 years. Mark is writing it down within 70 years. Four separate accounts of the resurrection exist, each one telling the story a little differently, but all agreeing on the central earth shaking claim that the tomb is empty and that Jesus is alive. The four Gospels don't tell the resurrection story in perfect harmony. They never have. And Christian scholars have acknowledged and talked about this for nearly 2000 years. But that fact has been used by believers as evidence of authenticity and by critics as evidence of invention. And both sides have real arguments. And I think regardless of what side you're on, you should be aware of what the other side is saying, and it's worth being honest about something. Both harmonization and contradiction readings rely on a lens that you bring to it, an interpretive framework. What you conclude about these texts depends on method as much as it does evidence. And the assumptions that you bring to the table really shape how you take these accounts. And now what we've tried to do today is simply lay out the text in a honest way so that you can see for yourself what Matthew, Mark, Luke, and John actually wrote. Because whatever you believe about the resurrection of Jesus, understanding these four accounts, their agreements and tensions and the extraordinary claims is essential to understanding not just Christianity, but your neighbor that's Christian, or even your own faith as a Christian. And of course, 2,000 years of human history on top of that. And that more than anything is why we compare these texts. Not to win an argument or, you know, to destroy someone's faith or to build it up or whatever, but because these are among the most important and most debated documents in the history of the world. And with that, I think they deserve to be read carefully. And it's crunch time at work and you need to bring wings to your workday. Visit redbull.com K Getting it done and answer a couple questions about your work style to get a Spotify customized playlist tuned to your productivity. Plus, score a can of Red Bull on us while you go from to do to done. And remember, Red Bull gives you wings. Supplies are limited. Terms apply. Visit the website for more information. Going outside is so in. During spring fest at Lowe's for a limited time, get extra big deals on some select Holland pavers. Three for $1 plus save $70 on a char broil performance four burner grill now $179. And chef up shareables for your whole crew. Picture perfect patios and good food. Yes, please. Our best lineup is here at Lowe's, valid through 3:30, while supplies last selection varies by location. Paver offer excludes Alaska and Hawaii. You know, compared honestly and taken seriously, whether you believe every word, some of them or none of them. And that, ladies and gentlemen, is a short interpretation of the discrepancies and similarities of the gospels of the resurrection of Jesus Christ. I mean, fascinating. I mean, again, as a Catholic, I just choose to believe. You know what I mean? As a Christian, I just say I believe it. Do I have the evidence? Was I there? No. But again, I just think about, like, why did these people put their life on the line? Why did these apostles. I mean, that part is, you know, historically verifiable to my estimation that you have these apostles that are intimately connected to Jesus that then go off to spread the gospel and they, most of them die in the process. They risk their lives. I mean, they're flayed alive, they're shot with arrows in India. I mean, there's all sorts of crazy stories that happen to them and they do it for Jesus Christ. Now, I know my Muslim friends will say, well, Jesus never claimed to be the Lord, that he was just a prophet and that Christology was put upon him and that you can never find a verse that says it. I would disagree. I think there are some verses that are, you know, somewhat clear that Christ is proclaiming lordship in the Bible at least. But with that said, we still need to explain why these disciples chose to worship him as a God and spread his gospel in the way that they did in the years following his death. To me, I'm like, they must have felt that there was something there, something to fight for, something worth dying over. And, yeah, as a Catholic, I just choose to believe that that's resurrection, that they believe that the Lord came, died for our sins, and resurrected on the third day in fulfillment with the Scriptures. And that is why we celebrate Easter. But I don't know. What do you guys think? I mean, there are discrepancies that I think should be accounted for. Were the woman told or not? Was the tomb open or was it not? Did they see it open or was it already open when they got there? Did Christ appear to them afterwards or not? Was it in Jerusalem or Galilee? These are things that I think as a Christian, you kind of got to be like, all right, I have some framework for this. Either you're a, you know, compatibilist. You think that they're complementary and that they all work together. Maybe you think that there's a metaphorical use and that that doesn't necessarily contradict with the legitimate happenings that you believe occurred. But I think it's worth interrogating your own faith and to really get to the bottom of what you truly believe. As a Christian or a Muslim or a Hindu, or just as a secular person that's interested in religion, what do you think actually happened? And to really analyze the other side's points to, you know, formulate a stronger devotion to your ideology or perhaps to change it altogether. But drop a comment if you're a theologian, if you study this way more than I have, please let me know in the comments. I read all of them. Just be nice and civil about it, okay? And if you have never heard of this before, you've never really seen the discrepancies and, you know, refined detail. To be honest with you, I didn't really. Until we started working on the script, I never really thought deeply about all the discrepancies because oftentimes Christians don't like to bring it up. They're like, let's just. We don't need to. Come on, we don't need to get into all that. But this is our faith. This is the book that we read. This is the Bible we proclaim. I think we need to know what's in there and at least to have some idea of how you think about it. Right? That's at least what I think. Do whatever you want, but if there's something you learned, please drop a comment now. A couple things going on. Great news. We have a Patreon. This is the campfire. This is the place where people in the camp gather. Yes. This is the inner sanctum. We have additional episodes every single month. We have zoom calls with the good people every single month. We have internal chats and people like you that are all talking with each other about episodes and things related to the show. And I think it's a great place if you want to join and feel more like yourself, that is patreon.com campgaignon Also, we have History Camp. We do deep dives on all the craziest stuff that's ever happened in history. We also have Camp Gagnon. That is the channel where I talk to people way smarter than me about all the craziest stuff going on in the world right now. Conspiracies, geopolitics, all that kind of stuff. And of course, you can see me on the road. Camp Gagnon. Nope. Mark Gagnon Live. You can also get the merch, Camp R D. And if you just like to rock with the religion vibe, great news. We do these episodes every single Sunday. This is Religion Camp, and I will see you next Sunday in the tent to discuss more matters of the divine. Thank you so much. God bless you. Happy Easter and peace be with you.