U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Religion and Spirituality > Christianity
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 03-15-2016, 06:30 AM
 
8,662 posts, read 11,913,348 times
Reputation: 3137

Advertisements

There seems to be only two views on how to address the discrepancies found between the differing gospel accounts.

1. They are actually different events, or they are told from different perspectives. (orthodox/fundamentalist)

2. They prove that the writers were making it all up, getting their facts confused. (skeptic)

Neither of these views really makes sense. Which is why I think the truth is something like this:

3. They are intentional, and the writers were highly educated. Their purpose is to tell the reader that the stories are not factual, in case they were unable to gather that from the clues within the text themselves. There is a deeper meaning that the writer is trying to convey. If the reader is not smart enough to catch the clues, then perhaps the differences will get his attention.

What do you think of this third view?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 03-15-2016, 07:54 AM
 
Location: Gulf Coast Texas
26,265 posts, read 14,140,123 times
Reputation: 10128
You know - if each gospel were the same - there would be accusations that they copied each other.

People who want to find fault, will find fault. People who choose to believe, will believe.

Have a news event covered by a newspaper in Alabama, and in Massachusetts, and in California. Will the story have the same details? Does that mean the event did not take place?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-15-2016, 10:04 AM
 
1,481 posts, read 796,892 times
Reputation: 569
Quote:
Originally Posted by DRob4JC View Post
You know - if each gospel were the same - there would be accusations that they copied each other.

People who want to find fault, will find fault. People who choose to believe, will believe.

Have a news event covered by a newspaper in Alabama, and in Massachusetts, and in California. Will the story have the same details? Does that mean the event did not take place?



yes. certainly even the testimony of "eye witnesses" to the same event may vary as criminal investigators have found out to their dismay and confusion. similarly, the accounts of professional journalists may vary greatly as to what was really the important thing said or done at a given current event (say a political speech by a particular presidential candidate) and what was the exact meaning thereof.


the fact that the gospels were apparently written by NON specialists, relatively uneducated persons at least several years after all the events took place AND that there is a general consensus of the events and the meanings of those events by the several writers seems to make at least a reasonable case for the integrity and good intentions of those writers to record as well and truly as they could what they saw and experienced.


the gospels (and epistles) are not biography in the sense we are used to nowadays---they are a record of those significant events important to the writers (and the reader/listener's) understanding of Jesus and His mission and each writer seems to have seen that in a slightly different (yet not conflicting according to traditional Christian understanding) viewpoint---from Matthew's desire to show the close correlation of Jesus words and actions as the fulfillment of Jewish prophecy of a Messiah to John's emphasis on Jesus as the pre-existent cosmic/divine "Logos" of God----but both writers (and the others as well) believe that Jesus came into the world as a Savior to heal the world of sin.


FWIW,even the writers say their writings do not cover every event, every word and action that Jesus may have done: "there are still many things that Jesus did. yet, if they were written about in detail, I doubt that there would be room enough in the whole world to hold the books to record them" (last verse in the gospel of John). "...these (accounts) are written that you may believe that Jesus IS the Messiah the Son of God, and by believing so you may have life in His name." (John 20:31).
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-15-2016, 10:08 AM
 
19,952 posts, read 12,998,586 times
Reputation: 1957
Quote:
Originally Posted by OzzyRules View Post
There seems to be only two views on how to address the discrepancies found between the differing gospel accounts.

1. They are actually different events, or they are told from different perspectives. (orthodox/fundamentalist)

2. They prove that the writers were making it all up, getting their facts confused. (skeptic)

Neither of these views really makes sense. Which is why I think the truth is something like this:

3. They are intentional, and the writers were highly educated. Their purpose is to tell the reader that the stories are not factual, in case they were unable to gather that from the clues within the text themselves. There is a deeper meaning that the writer is trying to convey. If the reader is not smart enough to catch the clues, then perhaps the differences will get his attention.

What do you think of this third view?
Your suggestions are not new. We've all heard these before and they've been handled by guys that are far smarter than you and me.

I think Drob has a good point -- if they were all the same they'd be accused of simply copying each other.

They were written by different authors, and they did retell the same events, with different spins on them for the reason that they wanted to emphasize certain parts. The Gospels are not simply reporting what they saw--as if they are news reporters. They are books written for a purpose of persuading their audience.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-15-2016, 10:34 AM
 
9,985 posts, read 6,401,183 times
Reputation: 5594
Examples ?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-15-2016, 10:46 AM
 
Location: GOVERNMENT of TRAITORS & NAZIS
20,600 posts, read 22,776,609 times
Reputation: 7630
Quote:
Originally Posted by Vizio View Post
Your suggestions are not new. We've all heard these before and they've been handled by guys that are far smarter than you and me.

I think Drob has a good point -- if they were all the same they'd be accused of simply copying each other.

They were written by different authors, and they did retell the same events, with different spins on them for the reason that they wanted to emphasize certain parts. The Gospels are not simply reporting what they saw--as if they are news reporters. They are books written for a purpose of persuading their audience.
I try my best.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-15-2016, 01:32 PM
 
Location: Southern Oregon
15,570 posts, read 7,026,171 times
Reputation: 1607
They ARE considered to have copied one another in any case, except for John. Apparently they didn't do it carefully.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-15-2016, 01:34 PM
 
19,952 posts, read 12,998,586 times
Reputation: 1957
Quote:
Originally Posted by nateswift View Post
They ARE considered to have copied one another in any case, except for John. Apparently they didn't do it carefully.
Matthew is an extended version of Mark. There is the idea they used a common source. But they are not word-for-word the same.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-15-2016, 06:00 PM
 
2,655 posts, read 1,387,717 times
Reputation: 305
Quote:
Originally Posted by OzzyRules View Post
There seems to be only two views on how to address the discrepancies found between the differing gospel accounts.

1. They are actually different events, or they are told from different perspectives. (orthodox/fundamentalist)

2. They prove that the writers were making it all up, getting their facts confused. (skeptic)

Neither of these views really makes sense. Which is why I think the truth is something like this:

3. They are intentional, and the writers were highly educated. Their purpose is to tell the reader that the stories are not factual, in case they were unable to gather that from the clues within the text themselves. There is a deeper meaning that the writer is trying to convey. If the reader is not smart enough to catch the clues, then perhaps the differences will get his attention.

What do you think of this third view?
Gospel harmony based on John - Religion-wiki - Wikia
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-15-2016, 06:01 PM
 
8,662 posts, read 11,913,348 times
Reputation: 3137
Quote:
Originally Posted by Vizio View Post
Your suggestions are not new. We've all heard these before and they've been handled by guys that are far smarter than you and me.

I think Drob has a good point -- if they were all the same they'd be accused of simply copying each other.

They were written by different authors, and they did retell the same events, with different spins on them for the reason that they wanted to emphasize certain parts. The Gospels are not simply reporting what they saw--as if they are news reporters. They are books written for a purpose of persuading their audience.
I think you are trying to say that the minority of orthodox scholars' opinions need to be trusted over the majority of modern religious scholars who reject the orthodox view.

MARK was the first gospel. The fact that Matthew and Luke agree with other only in those places where they agree with Mark attests to this fact. They both used Mark as a source document to tell the gospel their own way.

To even suggest that these were written by "uneducated" men is absurd. The only people who could have possible "written" anything in those days would have been the most educated *elite* type of scholar.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:

Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Religion and Spirituality > Christianity
Similar Threads
Follow City-Data.com founder on our Forum or

All times are GMT -6.

2005-2018, Advameg, Inc.

City-Data.com - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35 - Top