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 03-17-2016, 04:38 AM
 
8,652 posts, read 11,904,465 times
Reputation: 3136

Advertisements

Mark 14 - Jesus is arrested, then he appears before the Jewish council, then Peter denies him.

Matthew 26 - Jesus is arrested, then he appears before the council, then Peter denies him.

Luke 22 - Jesus is arrested, Peter denies him and Jesus turns around and LOOKS at Peter, then Jesus appears before the council.

How do you account for this major discrepancy?

(By the way, I really love the way Luke is so obvious with his clues that it is all made up.)
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 03-17-2016, 08:03 AM
 
Location: Wisconsin
2,202 posts, read 1,322,978 times
Reputation: 1353
What is the discrepancy? I cannot see it ? Please elaborate for this "dummies for Peters" denial
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-17-2016, 08:36 AM
 
Location: Gulf Coast Texas
26,251 posts, read 14,130,021 times
Reputation: 10122
Quote:
Originally Posted by OzzyRules View Post
Mark 14 - Jesus is arrested, then he appears before the Jewish council, then Peter denies him.

Matthew 26 - Jesus is arrested, then he appears before the council, then Peter denies him.

Luke 22 - Jesus is arrested, Peter denies him and Jesus turns around and LOOKS at Peter, then Jesus appears before the council.

How do you account for this major discrepancy?

(By the way, I really love the way Luke is so obvious with his clues that it is all made up.)

Regardless of the order... all three events occurred. The importance is that the events occurred... not the exact order in which they occurred.

Side note... I would tend to believe Luke's order of events since that was his stated purpose.

Luke 1:3 - So it seemed good to me as well, because I have followed all things carefully from the beginning, to write an orderly account for you, most excellent Theophilus
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-17-2016, 09:24 AM
 
19,952 posts, read 12,991,687 times
Reputation: 1957
Quote:
Originally Posted by OzzyRules View Post
Mark 14 - Jesus is arrested, then he appears before the Jewish council, then Peter denies him.

Matthew 26 - Jesus is arrested, then he appears before the council, then Peter denies him.

Luke 22 - Jesus is arrested, Peter denies him and Jesus turns around and LOOKS at Peter, then Jesus appears before the council.

How do you account for this major discrepancy?

(By the way, I really love the way Luke is so obvious with his clues that it is all made up.)
The Gospels are not necessarily a chronological history of events. They are collections of stories about Jesus, and based on the sermons of the apostles. The fact that an event is described before one in another Gospel does not mean to suggest the Gospel presents it as happening in that time frame. Remember the purpose of the Gospels -- they were written to specific people to relate specific events and facts about Jesus.

If you and I each wrote a research paper talking about 5 major events, and I listed #5 before # 3 but didn't say it happened that way, would you accuse me of being wrong? Or would there possibly be a reason I just wanted to discuss it at that point in the paper?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-17-2016, 09:30 AM
 
20,322 posts, read 15,670,237 times
Reputation: 7436
There is no discrepancy here. Peter's three denials of Jesus took place over a period of time while Jesus was standing before the Council. Luke, in giving his account, simply chose to first mention Peter's denials before mentioning the council, while Matthew and Mark chose to first mention the counsel before talking about Peter's denials.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-17-2016, 03:15 PM
 
7,869 posts, read 6,677,880 times
Reputation: 1372
Seems that there are many threads by people who just trying to discredit God and His Word , and these people cannot understand what the scriptures mean because they cannot understand the grammar of the text , as they might not have the Spirit of God on their lives
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-17-2016, 05:04 PM
 
8,652 posts, read 11,904,465 times
Reputation: 3136
Quote:
Originally Posted by openmike View Post
What is the discrepancy? I cannot see it ? Please elaborate for this "dummies for Peters" denial
If I thought that you were sincere I probably would. I don't trust you, Openmike.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-17-2016, 05:06 PM
 
8,652 posts, read 11,904,465 times
Reputation: 3136
Quote:
Originally Posted by Vizio View Post
The Gospels are not necessarily a chronological history of events. They are collections of stories about Jesus, and based on the sermons of the apostles. The fact that an event is described before one in another Gospel does not mean to suggest the Gospel presents it as happening in that time frame. Remember the purpose of the Gospels -- they were written to specific people to relate specific events and facts about Jesus.

If you and I each wrote a research paper talking about 5 major events, and I listed #5 before # 3 but didn't say it happened that way, would you accuse me of being wrong? Or would there possibly be a reason I just wanted to discuss it at that point in the paper?
If that is what you believe, then you cannot honestly say that the gospels were divinely inspired.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-17-2016, 06:00 PM
 
Location: In a little house on the prairie - literally
10,202 posts, read 5,744,354 times
Reputation: 4508
The gospels are based on what Paul wrote. None of them appeared earlier. Paul invented it, and with each gospel, the further away they got from Paul's' writings, the more embellishment to detail.

Amazing isn't it?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-17-2016, 07:32 PM
 
20,322 posts, read 15,670,237 times
Reputation: 7436
Quote:
Originally Posted by cupper3 View Post
The gospels are based on what Paul wrote. None of them appeared earlier. Paul invented it, and with each gospel, the further away they got from Paul's' writings, the more embellishment to detail.

Amazing isn't it?
That's not true at all. There were oral traditions which were passed down from the beginning of the Church during the time of eyewitnesses who could attest to the accuracy of those oral traditions and prevent them from becoming distorted. As well, those scholars who hold to Markan priority generally believe in either the two source or four source hypothesis and posit the possible existence of sources such as 'Q,' 'M', And 'L,' from which much information was obtained for the Gospels.

Luke admits at the beginning of his Gospel that he investigated everything carefully regarding those things handed down by those who were eyewitnesses from the beginning. The apostles who walked with Jesus were certainly among those eyewitnesses that Luke interviewed.

Scholars also acknowledge the existence of pre-Pauline traditions which were handed down from the beginning of the church. One such example of a pre-Pauline tradition or creed is 1 Corinthians 15:3-7. Paul states that he received that information which he was passing on. Most scholars believe that Paul received this information from Peter and James when he went to see them some three years after his conversion. What that means is that from the very beginning of the church it was believed that Jesus was raised from the dead and that He appeared to those mentioned in the passage.

Now while many scholars maintain that we can't know who the writers of the Gospels were, there are scholars who still hold to the belief that the early church held, that the four Gospels were written by the men whose names have been attached to them. Which means then that the Gospels of Matthew and John were written by eyewitnesses to Jesus' ministry, Mark got his information from Peter, and Luke, from eyewitnesses.

Your unsupported claim carries no weight.
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
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