Who Moved the Stone? - Examines the Evidence of the Resurrection

Product Information

It is non-fiction and is the personal story of newsman who sets out to disprove the resurrection of Jesus Christ. Their story is not recorded in Scripture, but they could have made an abrupt and perhaps noisy departure.

Who Moved the Stone by Frank Morison - Tim Chaffey Who Moved the Stone by Frank Morison - Tim Chaffey

Who Moved the Stone is a classic attempt to get behind the scenes of the Crucifixion story, beginning with evidence of what must have been happening among the people who decided late Thursday evening that Jesus would have to be arrested and executed before sundown the next day, and continuing in the same manner through all the subsequent events, with special emphasis on the arrival at the tomb of the women on Sunday morning. Ans: What Jesus is telling Mary in so many different words is that ‘HE IS NOT RESURRECTED FROM THE DEAD’, for in the colloquial language and idiom of the Jew, the expression, “For I am not yet ASCENDED unto my Father” means “I AM NOT DEAD YET’.It was not the mere sound of the name, but the way he must have deliberately intoned it that made Mary to respond –“Master! In Chesterton's review, he remarked that he picked the book up "under the impression that it was a detective story" and found that the case for the resurrection was "treated in such a logical and even legal manner. For starters, he would concede things like the idea that the last twelve verse of Mark were not written by Mark (debunked by Dean John W. Starting with the night Christ was arrested, this book mainly looks at those events surrounding the arrest and the events following the resurrection.

Who moved the stone? Ministry Magazine | Who moved the stone?

Morison says his original purpose in scrutinizing the details was to show that part at least did not occur, but the cumulative effect of all those details convinced him otherwise. After his suffering, he showed himself to these men and gave many convincing proofs that he was alive. The disciples could neither have taken on the temple guard nor a unit of Roman soldiers, nor could they have removed the stone. After the release of Who Moved the Stone, the editor of the London newspaper The Sphere invited Ross to contribute articles to a religious column that were published from 1930 to 1934. In Mark's version of the story, when the women arrived shortly thereafter, they found a young man, who told them, "He goeth before you into Galilee.Unfortunately, having a biased view towards these events I cannot honestly say that I have been convinced, but rather I can say that his argument and his exploration of the evidence that we have is excellent. Dodoma, Tanganyika [now Tanzania]: Central Tanganyika Press, 1930); Den Tomme Grav (Copenhagen: Hasselbach, 1931); Le Tombeau Vide (Paris: Editions Contemporaines, 1932); Wer Wältze den Stein? For that reason, the sermons that mean most to me are those that dig into a passage, bring it to life, and expand on its significance.

Who Moved the Stone? by Frank Morison | Waterstones

I also have an issue with Morison's questioning, it seems, of the reliance of the gospel accounts of Matthew, Luke, and John. He argued in favour of the historical authenticity of the portrait concerning Pilate's role in the trial of Jesus as presented in the four gospels collected in the New Testament. It seems like Caiaphas was fast maneuvering his second move of the night: to convince the Romans that Jesus had committed an offense warranting capital punishment.They should have acquitted Him, and if the testimony given was demonstrably false, the witnesses should have been sentenced to death by stoning” (16).

By Ahmed Deedat - Archive.org

Dispite how extrodanary this claim is, it is the only one that can account for the change of the apostles from cowards who ran away and denighed Christ; to boldly proclaiming the Word even when it lead to their own grizzly deaths. The information contained within this book is potentially exciting and revealing, however, sadly the author's style of writing does little to help the reader and has served to make the facts unclear and confused. I have never read anything quite like this book which still holds up even though it is over 70 years old. Matthew 27:64-65 states that on Saturday the Jewish leaders asked Pilate to set a guard at the tomb to prevent anyone from taking the body, and that Pilate (being thoroughly disgusted with the whole affair) told them to post their own guards.The claim that he was a lawyer was investigated by Ross Clifford, the Australian theologian and former barrister, and he established that Morison/Ross was never licensed in England to be either a solicitor or a barrister. Instead, he has enshrined for us the clearest statement in the Bible regarding the resurrected soul. This is when it took a drastic turn: the illegal extraction of a “confession” from the prisoner himself through the direct questioning by the court. The only reason I gave the book one star short from a perfect score, is that it could be a little difficult to read at times (the author lived almost 100 years ago and uses some pretty BIG words) and I never could figure out conclusively who the author thought "moved the stone. I tried to picture to myself what would happen if some two thousand years hence a great controversy should arise about one who was the center of a criminal trial, say in 1922.