Quote:
Originally Posted by omega2xx
You would if you could but you can't.
I will make it easy for you---list one contradiction.
|
I'll give you three
(1) Luke says that Joseph's family went from Nazareth in Galilee to Bethlehem in Judea for the census (which on all evidence was the 6 A.D. census) and then after the birth and the circumcision rites carried out in Jerusalem (around a couple of weeks) they went back there. Matthew says that they went to Egypt until Herod had died (and that was in the years 4-3 B.C.) and his son was ruling, and that was the reason the went to Galilee at all, and that pretty clearly stated they were Judeans living in Bethlehem to start off with. What's more it looks like they were living there for near on two years before Herod was supposed to have tried to eliminate Jesus (Luke of course says nothing of this) because Herod asks the cue question about
when the star appeared and then targets 2 year olds and under.
What we have are two different and utterly conflicting stories.
(2) the synoptic gospels have Jesus going to the lonely place across the sea of Galilee, which is Bethsaida, to feed the 5,000 and he returns to 'Genessaret' to his own city of Capernaum, by boat with the disciples, after catching them up by walking on the water (except Luke doesn't have that walking on the water, which is quite odd). And after the feeding of the 5,000, he is recognized as messiah and takes three disciples up a mountain where they see him transfigures and Moses and Elijah beside him.
John also has the trip to Bethsaida, the feeding of 5,000 and the return by boat and walking on the water, but where the recognition as messiah and the transfiguration should be, there is no such thing. Only Jesus scampering off into the hills because he saw that the people wanted to make him a king. (6.15) (1)
(3) here a triple contradiction. In John, Jesus arrive from Jericho, stays overnight in Bethany and then the next morning, collects his donkey to ride to the temple - but the temple cleaning - up is missing (it was shifted to 2.13). Luke has the procession and Temple bust -up on the same day, but on the same day he arrives from Jericho.
Mark also has the procession on the same day as the arrival from Jericho, but
he has the temple kerfuffle on the
next day.
Matthew also has the procession and Fracas on the same day - which it ought to be - though notoriously misreading scripture (2) he makes it Two donkeys. This isn't understandable slips - it is fiddling the text and it certainly clobbers the claim that they were eyewitness.
And here are three makeweights
Judas used his silver to buy a field in Acts. in Matthew he threw the silver to the priests who used it to buy a field. Add to that two quite different methods of suicide.
John has a spear thrust on the cross and indeed shows the wound in his side to the ten disciples (minus Thomas who is absent and Judas of course) but the spear thrust is absent in the synoptics and Luke indeed has Jesus shows feet and hands, but not the wound in his side, and Thomas is there, since Luke refers to the eleven disciples.
the 2 Marys find Jesus missing at the Tomb but after being given the message of resurrection by the angel, they run into Jesus who greets them. But Luke has Cleophas tell Jesus on the way to Emmaus that 'some women' found the tomb empty and reported a vision of angels, but no mention is made of their seeing Jesus, and in fact in Luke there is no mention of the seeing Jesus at all. And John has the empty tomb, but no angels there announcing Jesus risen.
I'd say that is something to get your teeth into. Let's have one credible explanation. 'witness error' simply will not do for contradictions like these, so you can save that one. Neither will evasions about "!t makes no difference to Jesus' message". It makes the greatest difference: it makes it worthless. I do not approve of rewriting to the stories to make them work, but you can try that, if you like
.
(1) I actually think this is a highly significant passage. I think it describes the same event but fiddled to disguise it - in contradictory ways.
(2) because he read it it in Greek in the Septuagint.