Jesus And The Hidden Contradictions Of The Gospels

[irosie91]

You are aware that Catholic school kids, unlike Peter Pan, do grow up and do more in depth Bible studies? No need to be stuck back in the day of children's plays.

Nice try----the plays were created by priests and nuns. The "kids" were not toddlers

 

[Clyde 154]

Jesus And The Hidden Contradictions Of The Gospels
March 12, 2010

Jesus And The Hidden Contradictions Of The Gospels

The New Testament contains multiple versions of the life and teachings of Jesus. Bart Ehrman, the author of Jesus, Interrupted,, says they are at odds with each other on important points regarding the life, death and divinity of Jesus.

www.npr.org

​

Bible scholar Bart Ehrman began his studies at the Moody Bible Institute in Chicago. Originally an evangelical Christian, Ehrman believed that the Bible was the inerrant word of God. But later, as a student at Princeton Theological Seminary, Ehrman started reading the Bible with a more historical approach and analyzing contradictions in the Gospels.​

​

Ehrman, the author of Jesus, Interrupted: Revealing the Hidden Contradictions in the Bible (and Why We Don't Know About Them), tells Terry Gross that he discourages readers from "smash[ing] the four Gospels into one big Gospel and think[ing] that [they] get the true understanding."​

​

"When Matthew was writing, he didn't intend for somebody ... to interpret his Gospel in light of what some other author said. He had his own message," Ehrman says.​

​

To illustrate the differences between the Gospels, Ehrman offers opposing depictions of Jesus talking about himself. In the book of John, Jesus talks about himself and proclaims who he is, saying "I am the bread of life." Whereas in Mark, Jesus teaches principally about the coming kingdom and hardly ever mentions himself directly. These differences offer clues into the perspectives of the authors, and the eras in which they wrote their respective Gospels, according to Ehrman.​

​

"In Mark's Gospel, Jesus is not interested in teaching about himself. But when you read John's Gospel, that's virtually the only thing Jesus talks about is who he is, what his identity is, where he came from," Ehrman says. "This is completely unlike anything that you find in Mark or in Matthew and Luke. And historically it creates all sorts of problems, because if the historical Jesus actually went around saying that he was God, it's very hard to believe that Matthew, Mark and Luke left out that part — you know, as if that part wasn't important to mention. But in fact, they don't mention it. And so this view of the divinity of Jesus on his own lips is found only in our latest Gospel, the Gospel of John."​

​

Ehrman teaches religious studies at the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill. His book, Jesus, Interrupted: Revealing the Hidden Contradictions in the Bible, is now out in paperback.​

​

​

Of course.......the Gospels are different. They are each recorded by 4 different eyewitness accounts. A what if question? What would happen if all 4 gospels were verbatim in nature? The critic would declare..........look, they must have copied each other.

Its a common practice to parrot a "shopping list" of supposed contradictions, in the hope that they will overwhelm the honest truth found in scripture. I always pick one and prove that its not contradictory in the least........if you can disprove one, you can disprove them all. There is no wasted time. I leave the critic with gums a flapping demanding more of my time. I laugh and move on.

Of course it is not possible to deal with each supposed "discrepancy" in just a few paragraphs. So.......let's pick one and deal with the supposed discrepancies on the subject of the resurrection of Jesus. If you can logically prove that no contradiction exists with one supposed huge discrepancy...then the rest fall like dominos.

Addition does not make a contradiction. Example: Suppose one man is telling the story of how he and his wife were shopping at a local mall. The man mentions all the great spots to find hunting material and related tools. Then we have his wife telling of the same shopping trip. She mentions all the great places to purchase clothing, purses, shoes.....etc. Each told the truth.......each told the story from a personal point of view. Is there a contradiction? No, of course not.....just 2 separate accountings of the same trip.

For example the gospel of Matthew names "Mary Magalene" and the other "Mary" as women who visited the tomb EARLY ON THE FIRST DAY (Matt. 28:1). Mark sites "Mary Magalene", "Marry the mother of James" and adds Salome as the callers (Mark 16:1). Luke mentions "Mary Magalene", Jonna and Mary the mother of James and "the other women" (Luke 24:10). Lastly we have John's account who mentions "Mary Magalene" visiting the tomb early on Sunday (John 20:1).

Some use this as an example of the supposed Gospel contradictions. But, in reality do these different accounts actually contradict one another? Of course not. Some may supplement more information than another, one might omit information recorded by another....but they in no way contradict one another. Adding more information than a previous account does not contradict the other gospel who simply did not mention all that the first account supplied.

To contradict one another John would have had to declare, "Only Mary Magalene visited the tomb.......", but that is not what John recorded at all.

A more logical example for the slow witted: Suppose you had 10 one dollar bills in your pocket. Someone asked do you have a buck on you? You answer "YES". The next persona asks, "Do you have a sawbuck (5 dollars) on you, you answer Yes. The next asks, do you have 10 bucks on you.......you answer Yes. 3 different questions, 3 different answers......all logically and reasonably true.

All the supposed contradictions can be explained via a simple application of honest logic and reasoning. For a contradition to actually exist......all the possibilities must be eliminated from the equation. And this not the case. There are always logical and reasonable explanations when one considers the fact that some 40 different authors are responsible for writing the Holy Scriptures.....with 40 different memories of each event recorded. There may be some that add more to an account, some that mention only that which he/she finds important.....thus they might omit something mentioned by another author......but just like the man with the 10 dollars.........they are all telling the truth as they witnessed it.

 

[Leviticus]

In what way did the pharisees profit from the
Temple? I am GREATLY intrigued. Jesus was an
OBVIOUS pharisee. In what way did the teachings
of Jesus "contradict" those of the Pharisees?

The pharasees were the sect tha set up the money changes and establish the rule that people had to pay for temple services and had to paywith special coins produced by the temple. The coins were far less vauable than other currency but were done on a one to one rate. So a person "donating" to the temple to have an anImal sacrficed or sother other service would give the money changers oncoin to get a much less valuable coin to pay the temple with. Its like the religious equivilent of Chuck E. Cheese tokens. The Pharasees often controlled the money changers and took a portion of the profits.

 

[irosie91]

The pharasees were the sect tha set up the money changes and establish the rule that people had to pay for temple services and had to paywith special coins produced by the temple. The coins were far less vauable than other currency but were done on a one to one rate. So a person "donating" to the temple to have an anImal sacrficed or sother other service would give the money changers oncoin to get a much less valuable coin to pay the temple with. Its like the religious equivilent of Chuck E. Cheese tokens. The Pharasees often controlled the money changers and took a portion of the profits.

Leviticus----both you and your dopperganger
suradue are victims of sunday school islamo nazi shit

 

[surada]

Leviticus----both you and your dopperganger
suradue are victims of sunday school islamo nazi shit

Are you thinking there were no moneychangers? It seems to me that the Jews didn't like using Roman coin with the engraved head of Caesar so they would have converted the shekels in the Temple. But, have it your way.. There were no "Islamo Nazis" back then.

 

[irosie91]

Are you thinking there were no moneychangers? It seems to me that the Jews didn't like using Roman coin with the engraved head of Caesar so they would have converted the shekels in the Temple. But, have it your way.. There were no "Islamo Nazis" back then.

there was lots of shit------like you. The Pharisees (like JESUS)---hated the money changers-----they were shills of the ROMANS----YOUR ALLIES who had orgasms as they watched lions eat people-----the actual foreunners of the islamo nazi heroes-----the
Heroes of the UMMAH. Jesus opposed the shit you
continue to lick and his opposition led to his crucifixion. The crucifixions were like the scene in
Khaybar when the LADIES OF THE RAPIST PIG---giggled and sucked cock as the adolescent boys
were beheaded for the sexual pleasure of muhummad and his sluts--------read the koran. The Koran is the
islamo nazi handbook

 

[hobelim]

Jesus And The Hidden Contradictions Of The Gospels

In the NT, just like in the OT, every fantastical story or assertion that offends rational thinking or outright contradicts reality is like a giant red X on a treasure map marking the exact place where something of great value, the treasures of the kingdom of God, are buried by figurative language, the subjects hidden - and not directly connected to the literal meaning of the words used.

"The kingdom of Heaven is like hidden treasure lying buried in a field. The man who found it, buried it again."

 

[surada]

The person playing the INN-KEEPER was typically,
in the MANY NATIVITY stories I saw (always done
by the kids from the catholic school)-----NASTY

You must have had a horrible childhood. Weren't there any Jewish people in your town?

 

[surada]

there was lots of shit------like you. The Pharisees (like JESUS)---hated the money changers-----they were shills of the ROMANS----YOUR ALLIES who had orgasms as they watched lions eat people-----the actual foreunners of the islamo nazi heroes-----the
Heroes of the UMMAH. Jesus opposed the shit you
continue to lick and his opposition led to his crucifixion. The crucifixions were like the scene in
Khaybar when the LADIES OF THE RAPIST PIG---giggled and sucked cock as the adolescent boys
were beheaded for the sexual pleasure of muhummad and his sluts--------read the koran. The Koran is the
islamo nazi handbook

Wow.. You just get viler and more profane. No children or grandchilden?

 

[norwegen]

In what way did the pharisees profit from the
Temple? I am GREATLY intrigued. Jesus was an
OBVIOUS pharisee. In what way did the teachings
of Jesus "contradict" those of the Pharisees?

Once exiled from God’s presence, man wandered; he was dead, alone in the wilderness, a creature without a creator. And somewhere in his wandering, man’s concept of death began to take on a more mundane meaning. The holy people began to ensconce their faith less in the Father and more in territory and tabernacle, and alienation from these earthly things became a kind of death; after other nations had begun imposing exile on the Israelites, resurrection had come to mean a return not to God but to the earthly elements, to land and temple, vestments, and ritual. The concept of kingdom, then, would encompass not just fellowship with God but would make Jerusalem and the temple the center of their universe. The Israelite conception of kingdom had strayed from humanity’s holy beginnings in the Garden of Eden, and so resurrection had become less about reconnecting with God individually and spiritually and more about reconnecting with Him through their possessions and practices.

Jesus promised the kind of kingdom that Adam enjoyed before forsaking it: a kingdom without altars and sacrifices, without feast days and observances, without circumcision and Sabbath. He promised a spiritual kingdom in which the people of God simply dwelt with God out of sheer desire and without any external reminders and promptings. He promised a kingdom that the Creator had desired from the beginning. Resurrection was meant to be to new life, not to new territory.

The Pharisees, like Paul, believed in the resurrection (Acts 23:8), so why would they have charged him in this matter? Because the resurrection they preached was a biological resurrection. The Sadducees disagreed with the Pharisees on any concept of resurrection, and sought Jesus’ opinion on it, posing to him a question about bodily resurrection, or new life in which people continue to marry (Mk 12:18-23). Jesus answered that in the resurrection, people do not marry but are like the angels (Mk 12:25). Jesus preached a spiritual resurrection. Resurrection was not in the material. It was not in houses, brothers, sisters, parents, or children (Mt 19:29). The Pharisees believed that decomposed human bodies would reconstitute and rise out of the ground. Hence their disagreement with Jesus and then later with Paul.

 

[Clyde 154]

Once exiled from God’s presence, man wandered; he was dead, alone in the wilderness, a creature without a creator. And somewhere in his wandering, man’s concept of death began to take on a more mundane meaning. The holy people began to ensconce their faith less in the Father and more in territory and tabernacle, and alienation from these earthly things became a kind of death; after other nations had begun imposing exile on the Israelites, resurrection had come to mean a return not to God but to the earthly elements, to land and temple, vestments, and ritual. The concept of kingdom, then, would encompass not just fellowship with God but would make Jerusalem and the temple the center of their universe. The Israelite conception of kingdom had strayed from humanity’s holy beginnings in the Garden of Eden, and so resurrection had become less about reconnecting with God individually and spiritually and more about reconnecting with Him through their possessions and practices.

Jesus promised the kind of kingdom that Adam enjoyed before forsaking it: a kingdom without altars and sacrifices, without feast days and observances, without circumcision and Sabbath. He promised a spiritual kingdom in which the people of God simply dwelt with God out of sheer desire and without any external reminders and promptings. He promised a kingdom that the Creator had desired from the beginning. Resurrection was meant to be to new life, not to new territory.

The Pharisees, like Paul, believed in the resurrection (Acts 23:8), so why would they have charged him in this matter? Because the resurrection they preached was a biological resurrection. The Sadducees disagreed with the Pharisees on any concept of resurrection, and sought Jesus’ opinion on it, posing to him a question about bodily resurrection, or new life in which people continue to marry (Mk 12:18-23). Jesus answered that in the resurrection, people do not marry but are like the angels (Mk 12:25). Jesus preached a spiritual resurrection. Resurrection was not in the material. It was not in houses, brothers, sisters, parents, or children (Mt 19:29). The Pharisees believed that decomposed human bodies would reconstitute and rise out of the ground. Hence their disagreement with Jesus and then later with Paul.

I do not know from where you receive your doctrine.........but such a doctrine is not found IN SCRIPTURE.
Jesus was not the "First" to promise a NEW COVENANT between God and Mankind....i.e, a NEW HEAVEN AND A NEW EARTH based upon the concept of "Spiritualism" instead of the oracles written on stone, but based upon the oracles of God found within the heart of the faithful. Jesus only stated as fact, that NEW KINGDOM OF GOD was at hand in the 1st century, and some standing there hearing Jesus speak would not taste of death until they witnessed this NEW KINGDOM OF GOD come "with power". (Matt16: 16-20, Mark 9:1)

The Old Law of Moses was taught only until the life time of John the Baptist in the 1st century. (Luke 16:16) Then, in the 1st century, the Kingdom of God was being forced upon the people. The Law never failed. Jesus fulfilled the requirements of the covenant of Moses, in being the perfect, without spot nor blemish.......sacrificial Lamb of God.


That New Kingdom of God was prophesied by Jeremiah. "Behold, the days come, saith the Lord, that I will make a new covenant with the house of Israel, and with the house Judah: Not according to that that I made with their fathers in the day I took them by the hand to bring them out of the land of Egypt; (The Law of Moses), which My covenant they brake, although I was husband unto them (married only to Israel, faith only to Israel, and to no other nation on earth) saith the Lord;

But this shall be the covenant that I will make with the house of Israel; After those days, saith the Lord, I will put My law in their inward parts, and write it on their hearts; and I will be their God, and they shall be My people.

And they will teach no more every man his neighbor; and every man his brother; saying KNOW THY LORD; for shall all know Me, from the least of them to the greatest of them, saith the Lord; for I will forgive their iniquity, and I will remember their sin no more." -- Jer. 31:31-34.

This prophecy was fulfilled during the lifetime of Jesus. Jesus told the peoples many times, "My kingdom is not from here......not a physical kingdom but a spiritual kingdom located within the hearts of those remnant who were faithful to the God of creation. (Luke 17:21)

As far as Jesus being "physically" raised from the dead, "But they were startled and frightened.....(the discipels of Jesus), AND THOUGHT THEY WERE LOOKING A SPIRIT. And He (Jesus) said to them, "Why are you frightened, and why are doubts arising in your hearts? SEE MY HANDS AND MY FEET THAT IT IS I MYSELF; TOUCH ME AND SEE, BECAUSE A SPIRIT DOES NOT HAVE FLESH AND BONES AS YOU PLANLY SEE THAT I HAVE.........." -- Luke 24:37-39. So much for Jesus teaching that His was a spiritual resurrection only. Jesus was seen in the flesh after His resurrection and ascended into heaven.

The only time Jesus addresses His spirituality is when He......IN THE SPIRIT is conveyed into Hades, (the realm of the dead in order to preach to the spirits imprisoned there. And that was in the 3 days He was still in the burial tomb. Jesus was "quickened" by the sprit of God, i.e., brought back to life, the spirit reanimated the flesh of Jesus.

1 Peter 3:18-20, "For Christ also has once suffered for sins; the just for the unjust, that He might bring us to God, being put to death in the flesh; but quickened by the Spirit.......BY WHICH (THE SPIRIT OF GOD) HE WENT AND PREACHED UNTO THE SPIRITS IN PRISON (in Hades).............."

 

[ninja007]

there are no contradictions, zero. none.

 

[surada]

there are no contradictions, zero. none.

Sure there are.. Contradictions, anachronisms, errors of geography... Its no wonder.

Scripture was redacted and amended many times by multiple authors and scribes.

 

[irosie91]

so far nobody had been able to tell me how the
PHARISEES PROFITED from the conduct of the
the Temple rites------a very fundamental teaching
transmitted by the sunday school whores to the
minds of brainwashed christian children

 

[surada]

so far nobody had been able to tell me how the
PHARISEES PROFITED from the conduct of the
the Temple rites------a very fundamental teaching
transmitted by the sunday school whores to the
minds of brainwashed christian children

What did your Sunday School teachings say about who profited?

 

[irosie91]

What did your Sunday School teachings say about who profited?

the pharisees

 

[surada]

the pharisees

I wonder if they were all Pharisees.

This is a pretty mainstream Christian discussion of the subject.

Who were the money changers in the Bible? | GotQuestions.org

Who were the money changers in the Bible? Why was Jesus so angry at the money changers near the temple?

www.gotquestions.org

 

[irosie91]

I wonder if they were all Pharisees.

This is a pretty mainstream Christian discussion of the subject.

Who were the money changers in the Bible? | GotQuestions.org

Who were the money changers in the Bible? Why was Jesus so angry at the money changers near the temple?

www.gotquestions.org

none were pharisees-----the PHARISEES despised the money changers in the temple courtyard for what they
were------Roman shills. Your islamic heroes----adolf
and josef and magda were mainstream christian as was pig LUTHER-----and his spawn

 

[surada]

none were pharisees-----the PHARISEES despised the money changers in the temple courtyard for what they
were------Roman shills. Your islamic heroes----adolf
and josef and magda were mainstream christian as was pig LUTHER-----and his spawn

There was no Islam until the 5th century so they aren't to blame for the identification of the moneychangers.

Are you saying HItler was a Christian?

 

[irosie91]

There was no Islam until the 5th century so they aren't to blame for the identification of the moneychangers.

Are you saying HItler was a Christian?

why did you bring up ISLAM? Adolf was baptized
and raised a catholic and Josef and Magda were both
CATHOLICS in good standing-----in fact, --so was adolf. The book MEIN KAMPF is second only to the
KORAN as popular reading in muslim countries----one of the few books actually translated into arabic. ----even the koran was not translated into arabic in
many muslim countries-----I gave my copy of Pickthall to a PAKAISTANI SURGEON------at that time (and maybe now) there were no translation into URDU