Contradictions

  • Welcome to Christian Forums, a Christian Forum that recognizes that all Christians are a work in progress.

    You will need to register to be able to join in fellowship with Christians all over the world.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon and God Bless!

Apr 25, 2023
126
11
18
75
North Bend
Faith
Atheist
Country
United States
Welcome to the first of a series of threads that I intend to begin on various topics related to the Bible. My intended audience is the Non-Christian subscribers to this Non-Christian forum. Christians, of course, are welcome to respond to any or all postings on this thread, but Non-Christians are under no obligation to respond. I would hope that anyone responding to this thread would assume that everyone is earnest in their beliefs and that the purpose of the thread is to engage in an open and respectful exchange of ideas.

The subject of this thread is contradictions in the Bible. Here’s what the Catholic Catechism has to say about the veracity of the Bible:

The inspired books teach the truth. “Since therefore all that the inspired authors or sacred writers affirm should be regarded as affirmed by the Holy Spirit, we must acknowledge that the books of Scripture firmly, faithfully, and without error teach that truth which God, for the sake of our salvation, wished to see confided to the Sacred Scriptures.”

(Catholic Catechism, 107)

The key phrase in the above is “without error.” This belief in the inerrancy of the Bible is a common assumption in all major Christian sects.

If the Bible is without error, then it can contain no contradictions of any kind. But the fact is that the Bible contains a great many contradictions from start to finish, and those contradictions range in significance from trivial to fundamental. A full inventory of all contradictions considered in context would consume at least one very large volume. So I shall only highlight one very special subset of contradictions that are specific to the story of the Passion.

If you compare all four narrations of the Passion story side-by-side you will find that they differ on virtually every significant detail. I will not bore you with a full itemization of these discrepancies, but will instead concentrate on that part of the narrative concerning the arrival of women at the tomb of Jesus. You can verify my summary of these events by following in your copy of the Bible-- I have cited the relevant passages. I have checked these summaries for consistency across the KJV, NKJV, RSV, NSRVue, and NIV translations, but I certainly welcome your comments on any errors or omissions in my readings.

Matthew 28:1 – 10
Two
women went to the tomb: Mary Magdalene and the “other” Mary
No mention of any spices
After they arrived there was an earthquake and one angel appeared outside the tomb
The guards that were stationed at the tomb shook with fear and “became like dead men”
The angel rolled back the stone and sat on it, meaning that the angel was outside the tomb

Mark 16:1 – 8
Three
women went to the tomb: Mary Magdalene, Mary the mother of James, and Salome
They bought spices with which to anoint the body of Jesus
On their way to the tomb they wondered who would roll away the stone
When they arrived the stone had already been rolled back
The women went into the tomb and saw one angel who was already inside the tomb
No mention of guards, or of an earthquake

Luke 23:55-56, 24:1 – 12
All
of the women who had come with Jesus from Galilee went to the tomb along with “certain others”
They had prepared spices the night before and they brought the spices with them
The stone was already rolled away when they arrived
The women went into the tomb and saw that the body of Jesus was gone
Then two angels appeared inside the tomb
No mention of guards or of an earthquake
The women returned from the tomb and told the eleven disciples and others
Mary Magdalene is named as one of the women who told the disciples
Peter then ran to the tomb, looked in, saw the linen clothes with no body, and returned amazed
No mention that Peter saw any angels inside the tomb nor any guards

NOTE: The RSV does not include the statement that Peter ran to the tomb in the main body of the narrative, and the RSV numbering skips from verse 11 to verse 13. But in a footnote the RSV says the following:
Other ancient authorities add verse 12, But Peter rose and ran to the tomb; stooping and looking in, he saw the linen cloths by themselves; and he went home wondering at what had happened
However, the NSRVue does include verse 12 in the main body of the text.

John 20:1 – 13
Mary Magdalene went alone to the tomb
No mention of any spices
When she arrived she saw that the stone had been removed from the tomb (not just rolled back)
No mention of any guards, or of an earthquake, or of any angels
She ran back and told Simon Peter and the disciple “whom Jesus loved”
Peter and the other disciple ran to the tomb
The disciple whom Jesus loved arrived first, saw the empty linen wrappings, but did not go in
Simon Peter arrived, went into the tomb, and saw the empty linen wrappings
The other disciple also went in and also saw the empty linen wrappings
The two disciples returned to their homes
No mention that either of the disciples saw any angels or guards, and no mention of an earthquake
Then Mary Magdalene looked into the tomb after the disciples had left and saw two angels sitting where the body of Jesus had been laid

Questions:

How many women went to the tomb?
Matthew says two, Mark says three, Luke says all of the women who had accompanied Jesus from Galilee and “certain others,” and John says only one. Note that Mary Magdalene is specifically named in all four stories, so these aren’t accounts of several separate visitations but are instead variations on one single narrative.

Why did the women go to the tomb? Matthew and John provide no explicit reason; but both Mark and Luke say that the women brought spices with which to anoint the body of Jesus. To anoint the body they would need to get inside the tomb. That would require rolling back the stone. According to Mark the women wondered who would roll back the stone for them as they were on their way to the tomb. Apparently they didn’t think about the need to get past the stone before they set out.

Was the stone rolled back when the women arrived at the tomb? Matthew says no, the stone was rolled back by an angel after the women arrived. Mark and Luke say yes. And John says that the stone had been completely removed before Mary Magdalene arrived.

How many angels did the women see? Matthew says one angel appeared outside the tomb after they arrived. Mark says there was already one angel inside the tomb. Luke says two angels appeared inside the tomb after the women entered the tomb. John says that Mary Magdalene did not see any angels after she arrived the first time, that neither Simon Peter nor the disciple whom Jesus loved saw any angels, but that Mary Magdalene did see two angels inside the tomb after the disciples left.

Were there guards at the tomb? Only Matthew says anything about guards and an earthquake.

These are supposed to be the absolutely reliable eyewitness accounts that prove conclusively that Jesus was resurrected from the dead. But these various stories don’t align on any significant detail. So modern readers are entitled to question the reliability of these separate narratives.

These examples of contradictions in the Bible show conclusively that the Bible is not inerrant. And by the reasoning of the Catholic Catechism, cited above, the source of the writings in the Bible could not possibly have been the Holy Spirit.
 

Waiting on him

Well-Known Member
Dec 21, 2018
11,674
6,096
113
56
North America
Faith
Christian
Country
United States
Welcome to the first of a series of threads that I intend to begin on various topics related to the Bible. My intended audience is the Non-Christian subscribers to this Non-Christian forum. Christians, of course, are welcome to respond to any or all postings on this thread, but Non-Christians are under no obligation to respond. I would hope that anyone responding to this thread would assume that everyone is earnest in their beliefs and that the purpose of the thread is to engage in an open and respectful exchange of ideas.

The subject of this thread is contradictions in the Bible. Here’s what the Catholic Catechism has to say about the veracity of the Bible:



The key phrase in the above is “without error.” This belief in the inerrancy of the Bible is a common assumption in all major Christian sects.

If the Bible is without error, then it can contain no contradictions of any kind. But the fact is that the Bible contains a great many contradictions from start to finish, and those contradictions range in significance from trivial to fundamental. A full inventory of all contradictions considered in context would consume at least one very large volume. So I shall only highlight one very special subset of contradictions that are specific to the story of the Passion.

If you compare all four narrations of the Passion story side-by-side you will find that they differ on virtually every significant detail. I will not bore you with a full itemization of these discrepancies, but will instead concentrate on that part of the narrative concerning the arrival of women at the tomb of Jesus. You can verify my summary of these events by following in your copy of the Bible-- I have cited the relevant passages. I have checked these summaries for consistency across the KJV, NKJV, RSV, NSRVue, and NIV translations, but I certainly welcome your comments on any errors or omissions in my readings.

Matthew 28:1 – 10
Two
women went to the tomb: Mary Magdalene and the “other” Mary
No mention of any spices
After they arrived there was an earthquake and one angel appeared outside the tomb
The guards that were stationed at the tomb shook with fear and “became like dead men”
The angel rolled back the stone and sat on it, meaning that the angel was outside the tomb

Mark 16:1 – 8
Three
women went to the tomb: Mary Magdalene, Mary the mother of James, and Salome
They bought spices with which to anoint the body of Jesus
On their way to the tomb they wondered who would roll away the stone
When they arrived the stone had already been rolled back
The women went into the tomb and saw one angel who was already inside the tomb
No mention of guards, or of an earthquake

Luke 23:55-56, 24:1 – 12
All
of the women who had come with Jesus from Galilee went to the tomb along with “certain others”
They had prepared spices the night before and they brought the spices with them
The stone was already rolled away when they arrived
The women went into the tomb and saw that the body of Jesus was gone
Then two angels appeared inside the tomb
No mention of guards or of an earthquake
The women returned from the tomb and told the eleven disciples and others
Mary Magdalene is named as one of the women who told the disciples
Peter then ran to the tomb, looked in, saw the linen clothes with no body, and returned amazed
No mention that Peter saw any angels inside the tomb nor any guards

NOTE: The RSV does not include the statement that Peter ran to the tomb in the main body of the narrative, and the RSV numbering skips from verse 11 to verse 13. But in a footnote the RSV says the following:

However, the NSRVue does include verse 12 in the main body of the text.

John 20:1 – 13
Mary Magdalene went alone to the tomb
No mention of any spices
When she arrived she saw that the stone had been removed from the tomb (not just rolled back)
No mention of any guards, or of an earthquake, or of any angels
She ran back and told Simon Peter and the disciple “whom Jesus loved”
Peter and the other disciple ran to the tomb
The disciple whom Jesus loved arrived first, saw the empty linen wrappings, but did not go in
Simon Peter arrived, went into the tomb, and saw the empty linen wrappings
The other disciple also went in and also saw the empty linen wrappings
The two disciples returned to their homes
No mention that either of the disciples saw any angels or guards, and no mention of an earthquake
Then Mary Magdalene looked into the tomb after the disciples had left and saw two angels sitting where the body of Jesus had been laid

Questions:

How many women went to the tomb?
Matthew says two, Mark says three, Luke says all of the women who had accompanied Jesus from Galilee and “certain others,” and John says only one. Note that Mary Magdalene is specifically named in all four stories, so these aren’t accounts of several separate visitations but are instead variations on one single narrative.

Why did the women go to the tomb? Matthew and John provide no explicit reason; but both Mark and Luke say that the women brought spices with which to anoint the body of Jesus. To anoint the body they would need to get inside the tomb. That would require rolling back the stone. According to Mark the women wondered who would roll back the stone for them as they were on their way to the tomb. Apparently they didn’t think about the need to get past the stone before they set out.

Was the stone rolled back when the women arrived at the tomb? Matthew says no, the stone was rolled back by an angel after the women arrived. Mark and Luke say yes. And John says that the stone had been completely removed before Mary Magdalene arrived.

How many angels did the women see? Matthew says one angel appeared outside the tomb after they arrived. Mark says there was already one angel inside the tomb. Luke says two angels appeared inside the tomb after the women entered the tomb. John says that Mary Magdalene did not see any angels after she arrived the first time, that neither Simon Peter nor the disciple whom Jesus loved saw any angels, but that Mary Magdalene did see two angels inside the tomb after the disciples left.

Were there guards at the tomb? Only Matthew says anything about guards and an earthquake.

These are supposed to be the absolutely reliable eyewitness accounts that prove conclusively that Jesus was resurrected from the dead. But these various stories don’t align on any significant detail. So modern readers are entitled to question the reliability of these separate narratives.

These examples of contradictions in the Bible show conclusively that the Bible is not inerrant. And by the reasoning of the Catholic Catechism, cited above, the source of the writings in the Bible could not possibly have been the Holy Spirit.
What do you believe an Angel is?
 

Behold

Well-Known Member
Apr 11, 2020
15,224
6,250
113
Netanya or Pensacola
Faith
Christian
Country
Israel
If you compare all four narrations of the Passion story side-by-side you will find that they differ on virtually every significant detail. I

The reason that the Gospel's are slightly different, is because they are the account of different people.

This means they are not written by one person, pretending to be 4 people.
Understand?

So, when 4 people give an account of a situation that happened, each has their own eyewitness account.
They HAVE to be different, and in this, you can know that its true.

The Gospels are 4 different accounts of the same thing.

So, the OP does not seem to be able think clearly, as common sense should have instructed this Bible Denier, that when 4 people describe the same event, it HAS to be different, because its based on 4 accounts.

Let me now simply explain this to people who have a brain and can think.. and who are not enemies of the word of God.

If 4 people are standing on a curb, in the night time, waiting for a RED LIGHT to stop traffic so that they can walk across the intersection, and the light changes and a car runs the red light and another car crashes into the car that ran the red light......

So, now, the Police show up, and these 4 pedestrians who all saw the same car wreck will give their individual TESTIMONY....their "Account".... their "Gospel".
And they will all be slightly different accounts of the same car wreck, because its 4 different versions....but its the same event.

The OP of the Thread, who is cutting and pasting other people's material, because he's not able to actually write a Thread, does not comprehend that 4 versions, 4 eyewitnesses, = of the same event, will never be exactly the same.
And THAT is why the 4 Gospels, have to be slightly different, as that is how it would be, when 4 who saw the same, or received the history, .... would relate it.

So, the moral of this story is that, when a deceived Bible denier wants to ruin your faith in the bible, such as this OP.... then recognize the Devil's work, and mark this person, and do not listen to them.

That's how you do it, when you are able to "know them by their FRUIT".
 
  • Like
Reactions: Brakelite

marks

Well-Known Member
Oct 10, 2018
33,156
21,420
113
SoCal USA
Faith
Christian
Country
United States
These examples of contradictions in the Bible show conclusively that the Bible is not inerrant. And by the reasoning of the Catholic Catechism, cited above, the source of the writings in the Bible could not possibly have been the Holy Spirit.
Hi, Just some quick thoughts on this . . . I don't follow the Catholic Catechism, so I can't answer for them, however, I've studied the Bible for several decades, and I'm fairly familiar with this topic.

A couple of things, simply stated, one is, that one writer doesn't mention what another writer does is not a contradiction, unless one writer negates what another asserts. For instance, I can say, When I heard the knocking I opened a door, and there was a man there asking me questions. We talked for a few minutes, and he left.

Later, my wife is talking to her friend, "Yes, they came by, both men." Was one of us wrong? No, there were two men on my porch, but I only talked to one, so that's what I referenced. Now, if I said, there was one man standing there, and we talked for a few minutes, that would be a contradiction.

Another thing, eyewitness accounts are known for their variations in what the observers are paying attention to, and if they are too similar, that's when people become suspicious.

I can understand how someone reading these accounts can think that they sound too dissimilar to be the same thing. Angels on the stone, angels in the tomb, Just where were these angels anyways??

But there can be angels in a tomb when this person comes, and sitting on the stone when that person comes, and is that actually a contradiction?

Much love!
 

Illuminator

Well-Known Member
Jan 11, 2020
3,389
1,194
113
72
Hamilton
Faith
Christian
Country
Canada
I will be resolving all of the alleged “contradictions” from the web page entitled “194 CONTRADICTIONS, New Testament.” It’s perpetually striking to observe how many of these are obviously not logical contradictions, and how very easy they are to refute (many being patently and evidently absurd). A few here and there do seem to be genuinely perplexing (at first glance) and require at least some thought and study and serious examination (they save my patience). But all are ultimately able to be (in my humble opinion) decisively resolved. Readers can decide whether I succeed in my task or not, in any given case. My biblical citations are from RSV. The words from the web page above will be in blue.
95) A guard was placed at the tomb the day after the burial. Mt.27:65,66.
No guard is mentioned. Mk.15:44-47; Lk.23:52-56; Jn.19:38-42.

The argument from silence doesn’t prove anything, and saying nothing about a particular event can’t possibly be contradictory to statements about said event because it has no content. Mark, Luke, and John would have to state something like “no guard was ever placed at the tomb” for this to be a real contradiction. And of course, they do no such thing. So it’s yet another pseudo-, bogus “contradiction.”

Where there is overlap of mentioned women (present near the cross and at a “distance”), it’s still not undeniably contradictory, since that would require variant assertions of a person being in two different places at a given particular time or the entire time. For example, Mary Magdalene was mentioned as being close to the cross with Mary the mother of Jesus, and further off (in Matthew and Mark). She would simply have moved (possibly being forced to move by the Roman soldiers) from one place to the other: perhaps earlier by the cross and later (up to the time of Jesus’ death) at a distance.

An actual logical contradiction regarding our topic would be if some verses describing the crucifixion stated that all of the female onlookers (whether Mary, the mother of Jesus is mentioned by name or not) were without exception, always standing at a distance, the entire time of the crucifixion, while John 19:25 taught that Mary, Jesus’ mother stood near the cross. That’s an actual contradiction. There are a number of scenarios that can be imagined that would be undeniably contradictory.

My explanation is not in the least inconsistent with all the relevant texts considered together. Nothing in those texts would preclude such a theory, which is not implausible at all. Two different things were being recorded: observance from afar, and observance much closer to the cross. And even overlap of the women mentioned is not a contradiction unless the claims contradict and are incoherent and confused with regard to the specific times and locations involved.

97) Upon their arrival, the stone was still in place. Mt.28:1 2.
Upon their arrival, the stone had been removed. Mk.16:4; Lk.24:2; Jn.20:1.

It is readily observed also that the women saw the stone already rolled away when they arrived, as reported in Mark 16:4, Luke 24:2, and John 20:1. So how does the believer in biblical inspiration explain away what seems at first glance to be a glaring contradiction in Matthew’s account? Well, as is often the case and necessity, one has to examine the Greek word(s) involved and also the tense. Christian apologist Erik Manning presented these texts and then explained:
[L]et’s reconsider what Matthew says. We’re introduced to the passage about the angel by the Greek participle γὰρ (gar). Strong’s Greek Concordance defines it as: “For. A primary participle; properly, assigning a reason.” In other words, it exists to explain the earthquake and set of circumstances as the women found them.
As philosopher Tim McGrew points out, “Matthew uses an aorist participle, which could be (and in some versions is) translated with the English past perfect: “… for an angel of the Lord had descended …” (“Do The Resurrection Narratives Contradict?”, 4-6-20)

 

Wrangler

Well-Known Member
Feb 14, 2021
13,001
4,801
113
55
Shining City on a Hill
Faith
Christian
Country
United States
Welcome to the first of a series of threads that I intend to begin on various topics related to the Bible. My intended audience is the Non-Christian subscribers to this Non-Christian forum. Christians, of course, are welcome to respond to any or all postings on this thread, but Non-Christians are under no obligation to respond. I would hope that anyone responding to this thread would assume that everyone is earnest in their beliefs and that the purpose of the thread is to engage in an open and respectful exchange of ideas.

The subject of this thread is contradictions in the Bible. Here’s what the Catholic Catechism has to say about the veracity of the Bible:

The inspired books teach the truth. “Since therefore all that the inspired authors or sacred writers affirm should be regarded as affirmed by the Holy Spirit, we must acknowledge that the books of Scripture firmly, faithfully, and without error teach that truth which God, for the sake of our salvation, wished to see confided to the Sacred Scriptures.”

(Catholic Catechism, 107)

The key phrase in the above is “without error.”

Wrong again. <sigh> The key phrase is teach that truth which God, for the sake of our salvation. You start with a Strawman to reinforce your flawed concepts.


28 Since they had no mind to recognize God, He turned them loose to follow the unseemly designs of their depraved minds and to do things that should not be done. 29 Their days are filled with all sorts of godless living, wicked schemes, greed, hatred, endless desire for more, murder, violence, deceit, and spitefulness. And, as if that were not enough, they are gossiping, 30 slanderous, God-hating, rude, egotistical, smug people who are always coming up with even more dreadful ways to treat one another.
Romans 1:28-30 (The Voice)
 

Wrangler

Well-Known Member
Feb 14, 2021
13,001
4,801
113
55
Shining City on a Hill
Faith
Christian
Country
United States
So I shall only highlight one very special subset of contradictions that are specific to the story of the Passion.

How many women went to the tomb?

Here you turn from Strawman to Poison The Well.

The movie The Case for Christ addresses eye witness discrepancies in talking with a detective. The detective explains that discrepancies are expected given their POV and are usually superficial and easy to explain. In fact, the detective added surprisingly that it would be suspicious if everyone as a scene all told the precise same story, for that would indicate collusion; that they conspired ahead of time of what story to tell. Let's go over an example.

A man walks into a room and reports seeing 3 men standing over a dead body, then leave with one of the men. 5 seconds later, I walk into the room and report seeingly only 2 men standing over the dead body. Your analysis is to call this an irreconciliable contradiction and basis to invoke Poisoning The Well; the testimony of eye witnesses ought to be disregarded on the basis that there are apparent contradictions in the story.

But wait, there is more!

It's truly irrelevant to the main story. The main story is not how many men were standing over the dead body. The main story is from all reports that the dead body was seen by many AND later many also testify seeing that person come back to life after 3 days.

Going back to the Catholic Catechism, 107, Key phrase, teach that truth which God, for the sake of our salvation; The 2 witnesses point to this without error. That is to say, our report does not sometimes fail to teach that truth of God, which is the sake of our salvation. You want to turn how they point to God as erring rather than WHAT, that they point to God without error. It really shows how desperate and depraved your mind is to manifest hate for God as Roman 1:30 reveals to us.

I'll pray for you.
 

Waiting on him

Well-Known Member
Dec 21, 2018
11,674
6,096
113
56
North America
Faith
Christian
Country
United States
The main story is from all reports that the dead body was seen by many AND later many also testify seeing that person come back to life after 3 days.
The thing I still struggle with is how no one recognizes Jesus, even his own mother doesn’t recognize him.
 
Apr 25, 2023
126
11
18
75
North Bend
Faith
Atheist
Country
United States
I will be resolving all of the alleged “contradictions” from the web page entitled “194 CONTRADICTIONS, New Testament.”
OR-- one could take note of the fact that the Gospels were all written several decades after the events they describe:

Mark, usually viewed as the earliest of the canonical Gospels, is dated by most biblical scholars to sometime around the First Revolt against Rome, either immediately before or just after 70 CE.
(The Oxford History of the Biblical World, ed. by Michael D. Coogan, pg. 372)

So these different stories are not eyewitness accounts. They represent different traditions that separately evolved and migrated apart over time, and the discrepancies noted are written evidence of their unreliability as records of fact.
 

Wrangler

Well-Known Member
Feb 14, 2021
13,001
4,801
113
55
Shining City on a Hill
Faith
Christian
Country
United States
the fact that the Gospels were all written several decades after the events they describe:
Yea, written. There was a well established oral tradition before they were written.

In an intellectual video on Ancient Greece, the professor asserted the works of Homer may have been put in written form 7 centuries after they were created by Homer.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Waiting on him
Apr 25, 2023
126
11
18
75
North Bend
Faith
Atheist
Country
United States
Yea, written. There was a well established oral tradition before they were written.

In an intellectual video on Ancient Greece, the professor asserted the works of Homer may have been put in written form 7 centuries after they were created by Homer.

If by "well established" you mean "without error," that's an assumption you can't prove. With an assumption like that one can "prove" most anything. Allow me to illustrate:

1. Muslim tradition says that Mohammed recited the words of the Koran while enraptured by the Holy Spirit.
2. Mohammed is known to have been unlettered, so his scribes simply wrote down what he said while under the spell of the Holy Spirit.
3. That's why the resulting book is known as the "Koran" which, in Arabic, means "The Recitation." Mohammed was simply reciting the words that were given to him by the Holy Spirit.
4. Devout Muslims are known to be God fearing and highly moral.
5. Therefore they would have no reason to lie about the origin of the Koran.
6. Hence the Koran must be the Word of God-- a Word which supersedes the Bible, as it came later and was given to the greatest Prophet of God, Mohammed.
7. So obviously the best course of action for anyone who wishes to be granted eternal life is to convert to Islam, to read the Koran every day, and to pray to God five times daily.

That's how believers of all stripes operate. They are willing to overlook discrepancies, moral dilemmas, and complications in their texts in favor of discovering something in which to believe. Here's an excerpt from the Koran to show you the kinds of teachings that Muslims have accepted:

Fight those who believe not in God and the Last Day
and do not forbid what God and His Messenger
have forbidden--such men as practise not the
religion of truth, being of those who have been given
the Book--until they pay the tribute out of hand
and have been humbled.
(Sura 9:28-29, Koran, Arberry translation)

"Those who have been given the Book" means Jews and Christians, the Book being the Bible. Mohammed is saying that Jews and Christians must be forced to pay a tribute to Muslims, and they (Jews and Christians) must be humbled. That doesn't sound very ecumenical. No wonder the believers of the world's "great" religions can't get along.
 

Illuminator

Well-Known Member
Jan 11, 2020
3,389
1,194
113
72
Hamilton
Faith
Christian
Country
Canada
If by "well established" you mean "without error," that's an assumption you can't prove. With an assumption like that one can "prove" most anything.
Call in question, radio show:
"... And so my question is, is that we have the belief that the Holy Spirit is the primary author of Scripture. And so I would like to know, how can we account for apparent factual contradictions? One story comes to mind of the demon-possessed man in the Gospel of Mark and also in the Gospel of Matthew. In the Gospel of Matthew there’s two possessed men and also the location seems to be different from the same story from the Gospel of Mark. And so how can we counter the seeming factual contradictions?

Jimmy: Ok, the incident you’re referring to is the… it’s described in one place as the Gadarene demoniac, because Jesus is in the area of Gadara; and so there are a couple of things to note here, because you’ve asked about the location and about the number of the possessed men.

One of the things that we find in Scripture is that the location terms often overlap. So you can describe– because they didn’t have, you know, geo-location coordinates back then, geocaching was not a big thing in the first century–and so you could describe locations in a variety of different ways.
  • Sometimes you could describe them based on where they were in terms of the region that they’re in;
  • sometimes you could describe them in terms of what town they were close to;
  • sometimes you could describe them in terms of how you got there;
  • sometimes you could describe them in terms of what features geographically were nearby;
and so there were a bunch of ways that you could more or less describe the same area, and because they weren’t, you know, trying to geocache these things, you could say, well this happened in this region or in this approximate area.

And different authors can take different approaches to how they do that, and so that’s how I would account for the difference in location descriptions that you find in Matthew and Mark, both of whom have a version of this incident. If you’d like to read more about that, I’d suggest you check out my commentary on Mark which is called “Mark: A Commentary” by Jimmy Akin, and it’s available on Verbum Bible Software. I have a–it’s actually a really thorough commentary and I go through that question, among others, in this.

Also, I go into the question of the the number of the demoniacs, and that is one that’s actually even easier to solve, because one of the things that authors have to make a decision on when they’re writing–and this is true of all authors, certainly I know it’s true of me when I’m writing–is how much detail you’re gonna go into. Because frequently you know way more about something than you have space to go into, either because you’ve gotten a word count from your editor that you have to meet, or you’re gonna run out of paper, or you simply don’t want to bore your audience so they lose interest and stop reading and you’re writing for no purpose.

So every author is conscious of “How much detail am I gonna go into here?” And therefore authors make different choices. They may choose, for example, to simplify an account in terms of how many of the details they record, like, suppose something happened with two guys, but…they’re both demoniacs, they both get exorcised by Jesus, they’re both in the same location; do I really need to mention both, or can I just make as an author the point that, okay, Jesus exorcised a demoniac here. And that’s the choice that Mark makes when Mark only mentions one. He’s using a simplified account.
Now in Mark’s case, he may not have been the one who did the simplification, because Mark is dependent in his Gospel on Peter’s preaching. And so if Peter, in his preaching, simply decided, “I’m gonna talk, for the sake of my audience, about one guy rather than confuse him with two,” then that could have been the form of the account that Mark was familiar with, and so that’s the one he wrote down.
But either way, either Peter or Mark is simplifying. Matthew, also as an eyewitness, would have known, “Well okay, there is–” assuming he was there for this incident, assuming, you know, he wasn’t taking the day off, and that he was already a follower of Jesus by this point, but as a witness of Jesus’s ministry, could well have been there and he could have said, “You know, there are actually two guys there, and I think that’ll suit my literary purposes in helping my audience in writing my Gospel, so I’m not gonna use the simplified account I found in Mark; I’m gonna give a little bit more detail than Mark did, and mention the second guy.”
So that’s the basic approach that I take in looking at those. It’s not actually a contradiction, it’s just a question of how much detail are you gonna go into, and different authors make different choices.
source

The "Bible contradictions argument" collapses in a heap.
 

Attachments

  • 1684980351468.jpeg
    1684980351468.jpeg
    45.1 KB · Views: 1
Last edited:

Zachariah

Active Member
Mar 20, 2023
405
138
43
34
Belief in government = belief in slavery.
Faith
Christian
Country
Australia
Welcome to the first of a series of threads that I intend to begin on various topics related to the Bible. My intended audience is the Non-Christian subscribers to this Non-Christian forum. Christians, of course, are welcome to respond to any or all postings on this thread, but Non-Christians are under no obligation to respond. I would hope that anyone responding to this thread would assume that everyone is earnest in their beliefs and that the purpose of the thread is to engage in an open and respectful exchange of ideas.

The subject of this thread is contradictions in the Bible. Here’s what the Catholic Catechism has to say about the veracity of the Bible:



The key phrase in the above is “without error.” This belief in the inerrancy of the Bible is a common assumption in all major Christian sects.

If the Bible is without error, then it can contain no contradictions of any kind. But the fact is that the Bible contains a great many contradictions from start to finish, and those contradictions range in significance from trivial to fundamental. A full inventory of all contradictions considered in context would consume at least one very large volume. So I shall only highlight one very special subset of contradictions that are specific to the story of the Passion.

If you compare all four narrations of the Passion story side-by-side you will find that they differ on virtually every significant detail. I will not bore you with a full itemization of these discrepancies, but will instead concentrate on that part of the narrative concerning the arrival of women at the tomb of Jesus. You can verify my summary of these events by following in your copy of the Bible-- I have cited the relevant passages. I have checked these summaries for consistency across the KJV, NKJV, RSV, NSRVue, and NIV translations, but I certainly welcome your comments on any errors or omissions in my readings.

Matthew 28:1 – 10
Two
women went to the tomb: Mary Magdalene and the “other” Mary
No mention of any spices
After they arrived there was an earthquake and one angel appeared outside the tomb
The guards that were stationed at the tomb shook with fear and “became like dead men”
The angel rolled back the stone and sat on it, meaning that the angel was outside the tomb

Mark 16:1 – 8
Three
women went to the tomb: Mary Magdalene, Mary the mother of James, and Salome
They bought spices with which to anoint the body of Jesus
On their way to the tomb they wondered who would roll away the stone
When they arrived the stone had already been rolled back
The women went into the tomb and saw one angel who was already inside the tomb
No mention of guards, or of an earthquake

Luke 23:55-56, 24:1 – 12
All
of the women who had come with Jesus from Galilee went to the tomb along with “certain others”
They had prepared spices the night before and they brought the spices with them
The stone was already rolled away when they arrived
The women went into the tomb and saw that the body of Jesus was gone
Then two angels appeared inside the tomb
No mention of guards or of an earthquake
The women returned from the tomb and told the eleven disciples and others
Mary Magdalene is named as one of the women who told the disciples
Peter then ran to the tomb, looked in, saw the linen clothes with no body, and returned amazed
No mention that Peter saw any angels inside the tomb nor any guards

NOTE: The RSV does not include the statement that Peter ran to the tomb in the main body of the narrative, and the RSV numbering skips from verse 11 to verse 13. But in a footnote the RSV says the following:

However, the NSRVue does include verse 12 in the main body of the text.

John 20:1 – 13
Mary Magdalene went alone to the tomb
No mention of any spices
When she arrived she saw that the stone had been removed from the tomb (not just rolled back)
No mention of any guards, or of an earthquake, or of any angels
She ran back and told Simon Peter and the disciple “whom Jesus loved”
Peter and the other disciple ran to the tomb
The disciple whom Jesus loved arrived first, saw the empty linen wrappings, but did not go in
Simon Peter arrived, went into the tomb, and saw the empty linen wrappings
The other disciple also went in and also saw the empty linen wrappings
The two disciples returned to their homes
No mention that either of the disciples saw any angels or guards, and no mention of an earthquake
Then Mary Magdalene looked into the tomb after the disciples had left and saw two angels sitting where the body of Jesus had been laid

Questions:

How many women went to the tomb?
Matthew says two, Mark says three, Luke says all of the women who had accompanied Jesus from Galilee and “certain others,” and John says only one. Note that Mary Magdalene is specifically named in all four stories, so these aren’t accounts of several separate visitations but are instead variations on one single narrative.

Why did the women go to the tomb? Matthew and John provide no explicit reason; but both Mark and Luke say that the women brought spices with which to anoint the body of Jesus. To anoint the body they would need to get inside the tomb. That would require rolling back the stone. According to Mark the women wondered who would roll back the stone for them as they were on their way to the tomb. Apparently they didn’t think about the need to get past the stone before they set out.

Was the stone rolled back when the women arrived at the tomb? Matthew says no, the stone was rolled back by an angel after the women arrived. Mark and Luke say yes. And John says that the stone had been completely removed before Mary Magdalene arrived.

How many angels did the women see? Matthew says one angel appeared outside the tomb after they arrived. Mark says there was already one angel inside the tomb. Luke says two angels appeared inside the tomb after the women entered the tomb. John says that Mary Magdalene did not see any angels after she arrived the first time, that neither Simon Peter nor the disciple whom Jesus loved saw any angels, but that Mary Magdalene did see two angels inside the tomb after the disciples left.

Were there guards at the tomb? Only Matthew says anything about guards and an earthquake.

These are supposed to be the absolutely reliable eyewitness accounts that prove conclusively that Jesus was resurrected from the dead. But these various stories don’t align on any significant detail. So modern readers are entitled to question the reliability of these separate narratives.

These examples of contradictions in the Bible show conclusively that the Bible is not inerrant. And by the reasoning of the Catholic Catechism, cited above, the source of the writings in the Bible could not possibly have been the Holy Spirit.
The cannon was put together by and is still controlled by the imperial romans. They included their own books such as "Romans" that glorify mans authority and enforce "tax". There is both contridiction and deception within the Bible.
 
Last edited:

Illuminator

Well-Known Member
Jan 11, 2020
3,389
1,194
113
72
Hamilton
Faith
Christian
Country
Canada
The cannon was put together by and is still controlled by the imperial romans. They included their own books such as "Romans" that glorify mans authority and enforce "tax". There is both contridiction and deception within the Bible.
This is not a reply to the quote. So called "contradictions" relies on excessive literalism and word games and ignores a number of important factors, as previously mentioned.
Do you mean the book of Romans was written by the mythical "Catholic Roman Empire Church"??? I always thought Paul wrote to the Christian Romans in Rome, but I could be mistaken.
Romans 1:1 Paul, a servant of Jesus Christ, called to be an apostle, separated unto the gospel of God, 7 To all that be in Rome, beloved of God, called to be saints: Grace to you and peace from God our Father, and the Lord Jesus Christ. (KJV)
Romans 1:8 gets more interesting,
8 First, I thank my God through Jesus Christ for you all, that your faith is spoken of throughout the whole world.
throughout the whole world. = Greek: kataholos= Latin: Catholicus= English: Catholic. Surpise!!!

So called "contradictions" can't withstand scrutiny.
There are no contradictions in the inspired written Word of God. Just inventions from people who have scriptural myopia (nearsightedness) and are hung up trying to disprove the greatest treasure ever given to humanity, to be revered as it were Christ's own body.
 
Last edited:

Illuminator

Well-Known Member
Jan 11, 2020
3,389
1,194
113
72
Hamilton
Faith
Christian
Country
Canada
CHAPTER III
SACRED SCRIPTURE, ITS DIVINE INSPIRATION AND INTERPRETATION


11. Those divinely revealed realities which are contained and presented in Sacred Scripture have been committed to writing under the inspiration of the Holy Spirit. For holy mother Church, relying on the belief of the Apostles (see John 20:31; 2 Tim. 3:16; 2 Peter 1:19-20, 3:15-16), holds that the books of both the Old and New Testaments in their entirety, with all their parts, are sacred and canonical because written under the inspiration of the Holy Spirit, they have God as their author and have been handed on as such to the Church herself.(1) In composing the sacred books, God chose men and while employed by Him (2) they made use of their powers and abilities, so that with Him acting in them and through them, (3) they, as true authors, consigned to writing everything and only those things which He wanted. (4)

Therefore, since everything asserted by the inspired authors or sacred writers must be held to be asserted by the Holy Spirit, it follows that the books of Scripture must be acknowledged as teaching solidly, faithfully and without error that truth which God wanted put into sacred writings (5) for the sake of salvation. Therefore "all Scripture is divinely inspired and has its use for teaching the truth and refuting error, for reformation of manners and discipline in right living, so that the man who belongs to God may be efficient and equipped for good work of every kind" (2 Tim. 3:16-17, Greek text).

12. However, since God speaks in Sacred Scripture through men in human fashion, (6) the interpreter of Sacred Scripture, in order to see clearly what God wanted to communicate to us, should carefully investigate what meaning the sacred writers really intended, and what God wanted to manifest by means of their words.

To search out the intention of the sacred writers, attention should be given, among other things, to "literary forms." For truth is set forth and expressed differently in texts which are variously historical, prophetic, poetic, or of other forms of discourse. The interpreter must investigate what meaning the sacred writer intended to express and actually expressed in particular circumstances by using contemporary literary forms in accordance with the situation of his own time and culture. (7) For the correct understanding of what the sacred author wanted to assert, due attention must be paid to the customary and characteristic styles of feeling, speaking and narrating which prevailed at the time of the sacred writer, and to the patterns men normally employed at that period in their everyday dealings with one another. (8)

But, since Holy Scripture must be read and interpreted in the sacred spirit in which it was written, (9) no less serious attention must be given to the content and unity of the whole of Scripture if the meaning of the sacred texts is to be correctly worked out. The living tradition of the whole Church must be taken into account along with the harmony which exists between elements of the faith. It is the task of exegetes to work according to these rules toward a better understanding and explanation of the meaning of Sacred Scripture, so that through preparatory study the judgment of the Church may mature. For all of what has been said about the way of interpreting Scripture is subject finally to the judgment of the Church, which carries out the divine commission and ministry of guarding and interpreting the word of God. (10)

13. In Sacred Scripture, therefore, while the truth and holiness of God always remains intact, the marvelous "condescension" of eternal wisdom is clearly shown, "that we may learn the gentle kindness of God, which words cannot express, and how far He has gone in adapting His language with thoughtful concern for our weak human nature." (11) For the words of God, expressed in human language, have been made like human discourse, just as the word of the eternal Father, when He took to Himself the flesh of human weakness, was in every way made like men.

 

Zachariah

Active Member
Mar 20, 2023
405
138
43
34
Belief in government = belief in slavery.
Faith
Christian
Country
Australia
I
This is not a reply to the quote. So called "contradictions" relies on excessive literalism and word games and ignores a number of important factors, as previously mentioned.
Do you mean the book of Romans was written by the mythical "Catholic Roman Empire Church"??? I always thought Paul wrote to the Christian Romans in Rome, but I could be mistaken.
Romans 1:1 Paul, a servant of Jesus Christ, called to be an apostle, separated unto the gospel of God, 7 To all that be in Rome, beloved of God, called to be saints: Grace to you and peace from God our Father, and the Lord Jesus Christ. (KJV)
Romans 1:8 gets more interesting,
8 First, I thank my God through Jesus Christ for you all, that your faith is spoken of throughout the whole world.
throughout the whole world. = Greek: kataholos= Latin: Catholicus= English: Catholic. Surpise!!!

So called "contradictions" can't withstand scrutiny.
There are no contradictions in the inspired written Word of God. Just inventions from people who have scriptural myopia (nearsightedness) and are hung up trying to disprove the greatest treasure ever given to humanity, to be revered as it were Christ's own body.
I dont get into heavy debates really. I love the bible i think its a beautiful book but we need understand our history around the time of the Roman empire. I'm not saying that a person called Paul didn't write the book of Romans, its more of an assumption based on its immoral text along with the name of the book aswell as with a bit of research into the institutionalisation of Christianity.

Ro 13:1-7: "Everyone must submit to governing authorities. For all authority comes from God, and those in positions of authority have been placed there by God. So anyone who rebels against authority is rebelling against what God has instituted, and they will be punished. For the authorities do not strike fear in people who are doing right, but in those who are doing wrong. Would you like to live without fear of the authorities? Do what is right, and they will honor you. The authorities are God’s servants, sent for your good. But if you are doing wrong, of course you should be afraid, for they have the power to punish you. They are God’s servants, sent for the very purpose of punishing those who do what is wrong. So you must submit to them, not only to avoid punishment, but also to keep a clear conscience. Pay your taxes, too, for these same reasons. For government workers need to be paid. They are serving God in what they do. Give to everyone what you owe them: Pay your taxes and government fees to those who collect them, and give respect and honor to those who are in authority."

This text is horrific and was used to controle the population. It enforces transgression and also uses the word "institution". This is not true Christianity. Regardless of who wrote it, it is completely immoral.

That's my contribution to the thread anyway.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: Waiting on him

Illuminator

Well-Known Member
Jan 11, 2020
3,389
1,194
113
72
Hamilton
Faith
Christian
Country
Canada
I

I dont get into heavy debates really. I love the bible i think its a beautiful book but we need understand our history around the time of the Roman empire.
First, you're way off topic. Second, if you are going to cite history, cite a reliable source like someone with a Ph.D. in church history, Protestant or Catholic. They are not going to jeopardize their credentials by publishing papers that support revisionism and falsehoods. Second, don't fall for the "Catholic Roman Empire Church" myth. It's a lie and cannot withstand scrutiny. I've been waiting for 25 years for someone to show me what emperor told the pope what to teach.
I'm not saying that a person called Paul didn't write the book of Romans, its more of an assumption based on its immoral text along with the name of the book aswell as with a bit of research into the institutionalisation of Christianity.
The Council of Jerusalem in Acts 15 was an institution that reached an infallible decision. You have to dismiss or ignore that because it doesn't fit in with the man made Protestant tradition of a non-infallible Church.
Ro 13:1-7: "Everyone must submit to governing authorities. For all authority comes from God, and those in positions of authority have been placed there by God. So anyone who rebels against authority is rebelling against what God has instituted, and they will be punished. For the authorities do not strike fear in people who are doing right, but in those who are doing wrong. Would you like to live without fear of the authorities? Do what is right, and they will honor you. The authorities are God’s servants, sent for your good. But if you are doing wrong, of course you should be afraid, for they have the power to punish you. They are God’s servants, sent for the very purpose of punishing those who do what is wrong. So you must submit to them, not only to avoid punishment, but also to keep a clear conscience. Pay your taxes, too, for these same reasons. For government workers need to be paid. They are serving God in what they do. Give to everyone what you owe them: Pay your taxes and government fees to those who collect them, and give respect and honor to those who are in authority."
The Church is a hospital for sinners, not a prison.
 

Zachariah

Active Member
Mar 20, 2023
405
138
43
34
Belief in government = belief in slavery.
Faith
Christian
Country
Australia
First, you're way off topic. Second, if you are going to cite history, cite a reliable source like someone with a Ph.D. in church history, Protestant or Catholic. They are not going to jeopardize their credentials by publishing papers that support revisionism and falsehoods. Second, don't fall for the "Catholic Roman Empire Church" myth. It's a lie and cannot withstand scrutiny. I've been waiting for 25 years for someone to show me what emperor told the pope what to teach.

The Council of Jerusalem in Acts 15 was an institution that reached an infallible decision. You have to dismiss or ignore that because it doesn't fit in with the man made Protestant tradition of a non-infallible Church.

The Church is a hospital for sinners, not a prison.
Regardless of any history and regardless of who wrote it, it is an immoral piece of text. Its right in the words for us all to see. "Punish" "institution" "tax" "mans authority". If you think this is Truth you are mistaken. I'm not here to make you believe anything just state that this is a major contridiction in my knowing and understanding.
 

Brakelite

Well-Known Member
Feb 6, 2020
8,383
6,295
113
Melbourne
brakelite.wordpress.com
Faith
Christian
Country
Australia
Welcome to the first of a series of threads that I intend to begin on various topics related to the Bible. My intended audience is the Non-Christian subscribers to this Non-Christian forum. Christians, of course, are welcome to respond to any or all postings on this thread, but Non-Christians are under no obligation to respond. I would hope that anyone responding to this thread would assume that everyone is earnest in their beliefs and that the purpose of the thread is to engage in an open and respectful exchange of ideas.

The subject of this thread is contradictions in the Bible. Here’s what the Catholic Catechism has to say about the veracity of the Bible:



The key phrase in the above is “without error.” This belief in the inerrancy of the Bible is a common assumption in all major Christian sects.

If the Bible is without error, then it can contain no contradictions of any kind. But the fact is that the Bible contains a great many contradictions from start to finish, and those contradictions range in significance from trivial to fundamental. A full inventory of all contradictions considered in context would consume at least one very large volume. So I shall only highlight one very special subset of contradictions that are specific to the story of the Passion.

If you compare all four narrations of the Passion story side-by-side you will find that they differ on virtually every significant detail. I will not bore you with a full itemization of these discrepancies, but will instead concentrate on that part of the narrative concerning the arrival of women at the tomb of Jesus. You can verify my summary of these events by following in your copy of the Bible-- I have cited the relevant passages. I have checked these summaries for consistency across the KJV, NKJV, RSV, NSRVue, and NIV translations, but I certainly welcome your comments on any errors or omissions in my readings.

Matthew 28:1 – 10
Two
women went to the tomb: Mary Magdalene and the “other” Mary
No mention of any spices
After they arrived there was an earthquake and one angel appeared outside the tomb
The guards that were stationed at the tomb shook with fear and “became like dead men”
The angel rolled back the stone and sat on it, meaning that the angel was outside the tomb

Mark 16:1 – 8
Three
women went to the tomb: Mary Magdalene, Mary the mother of James, and Salome
They bought spices with which to anoint the body of Jesus
On their way to the tomb they wondered who would roll away the stone
When they arrived the stone had already been rolled back
The women went into the tomb and saw one angel who was already inside the tomb
No mention of guards, or of an earthquake

Luke 23:55-56, 24:1 – 12
All
of the women who had come with Jesus from Galilee went to the tomb along with “certain others”
They had prepared spices the night before and they brought the spices with them
The stone was already rolled away when they arrived
The women went into the tomb and saw that the body of Jesus was gone
Then two angels appeared inside the tomb
No mention of guards or of an earthquake
The women returned from the tomb and told the eleven disciples and others
Mary Magdalene is named as one of the women who told the disciples
Peter then ran to the tomb, looked in, saw the linen clothes with no body, and returned amazed
No mention that Peter saw any angels inside the tomb nor any guards

NOTE: The RSV does not include the statement that Peter ran to the tomb in the main body of the narrative, and the RSV numbering skips from verse 11 to verse 13. But in a footnote the RSV says the following:

However, the NSRVue does include verse 12 in the main body of the text.

John 20:1 – 13
Mary Magdalene went alone to the tomb
No mention of any spices
When she arrived she saw that the stone had been removed from the tomb (not just rolled back)
No mention of any guards, or of an earthquake, or of any angels
She ran back and told Simon Peter and the disciple “whom Jesus loved”
Peter and the other disciple ran to the tomb
The disciple whom Jesus loved arrived first, saw the empty linen wrappings, but did not go in
Simon Peter arrived, went into the tomb, and saw the empty linen wrappings
The other disciple also went in and also saw the empty linen wrappings
The two disciples returned to their homes
No mention that either of the disciples saw any angels or guards, and no mention of an earthquake
Then Mary Magdalene looked into the tomb after the disciples had left and saw two angels sitting where the body of Jesus had been laid

Questions:

How many women went to the tomb?
Matthew says two, Mark says three, Luke says all of the women who had accompanied Jesus from Galilee and “certain others,” and John says only one. Note that Mary Magdalene is specifically named in all four stories, so these aren’t accounts of several separate visitations but are instead variations on one single narrative.

Why did the women go to the tomb? Matthew and John provide no explicit reason; but both Mark and Luke say that the women brought spices with which to anoint the body of Jesus. To anoint the body they would need to get inside the tomb. That would require rolling back the stone. According to Mark the women wondered who would roll back the stone for them as they were on their way to the tomb. Apparently they didn’t think about the need to get past the stone before they set out.

Was the stone rolled back when the women arrived at the tomb? Matthew says no, the stone was rolled back by an angel after the women arrived. Mark and Luke say yes. And John says that the stone had been completely removed before Mary Magdalene arrived.

How many angels did the women see? Matthew says one angel appeared outside the tomb after they arrived. Mark says there was already one angel inside the tomb. Luke says two angels appeared inside the tomb after the women entered the tomb. John says that Mary Magdalene did not see any angels after she arrived the first time, that neither Simon Peter nor the disciple whom Jesus loved saw any angels, but that Mary Magdalene did see two angels inside the tomb after the disciples left.

Were there guards at the tomb? Only Matthew says anything about guards and an earthquake.

These are supposed to be the absolutely reliable eyewitness accounts that prove conclusively that Jesus was resurrected from the dead. But these various stories don’t align on any significant detail. So modern readers are entitled to question the reliability of these separate narratives.

These examples of contradictions in the Bible show conclusively that the Bible is not inerrant. And by the reasoning of the Catholic Catechism, cited above, the source of the writings in the Bible could not possibly have been the Holy Spirit.
If the story of the passion of Christ, and other events in scripture, was a cleverly devised fable as you seem to be suggesting, then you are giving the writers absolutely no credit for any intelligence whatever. If the story of Jesus was made up, would not everyone agree as to ask the details? But then, if that happened, like any judge of evidence, you would be totally suspicious and believe it was a conspiracy and the whole story contrived right? Which is why lawyers and judges and juriesexpect differences in testimony, knowing that different perspectives offer a bigger picture, and in fact confirm the veracity of each account.
But of course, you don't have to believe, and you can do whatever you like to affirm your own doubts.
 

Brakelite

Well-Known Member
Feb 6, 2020
8,383
6,295
113
Melbourne
brakelite.wordpress.com
Faith
Christian
Country
Australia
If by "well established" you mean "without error," that's an assumption you can't prove. With an assumption like that one can "prove" most anything. Allow me to illustrate:

1. Muslim tradition says that Mohammed recited the words of the Koran while enraptured by the Holy Spirit.
2. Mohammed is known to have been unlettered, so his scribes simply wrote down what he said while under the spell of the Holy Spirit.
3. That's why the resulting book is known as the "Koran" which, in Arabic, means "The Recitation." Mohammed was simply reciting the words that were given to him by the Holy Spirit.
4. Devout Muslims are known to be God fearing and highly moral.
5. Therefore they would have no reason to lie about the origin of the Koran.
6. Hence the Koran must be the Word of God-- a Word which supersedes the Bible, as it came later and was given to the greatest Prophet of God, Mohammed.
7. So obviously the best course of action for anyone who wishes to be granted eternal life is to convert to Islam, to read the Koran every day, and to pray to God five times daily.

That's how believers of all stripes operate. They are willing to overlook discrepancies, moral dilemmas, and complications in their texts in favor of discovering something in which to believe. Here's an excerpt from the Koran to show you the kinds of teachings that Muslims have accepted:

Fight those who believe not in God and the Last Day
and do not forbid what God and His Messenger
have forbidden--such men as practise not the
religion of truth, being of those who have been given
the Book--until they pay the tribute out of hand
and have been humbled.
(Sura 9:28-29, Koran, Arberry translation)

"Those who have been given the Book" means Jews and Christians, the Book being the Bible. Mohammed is saying that Jews and Christians must be forced to pay a tribute to Muslims, and they (Jews and Christians) must be humbled. That doesn't sound very ecumenical. No wonder the believers of the world's "great" religions can't get along.
One point. My personal testimony is that I met Jesus before I had ever read a word from the Bible. I bought a Bible 3 days later. My experience was therefore confirmed by what I read... Jesus had indeed risen, was very much alive and well and wanting nothing more than for you to get to know Him.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Waiting on him