Those contradicting Gospels!

[TransmutingSoul]

Let's get real.

It is as real as it gets OB.

I always wish you well in working it all out.

In the end I see there is a source to understanding what it is all about.

Regards Tony

 

[oldbadger]

It is as real as it gets OB.

I always wish you well in working it all out.

Regards Tony

Oh..... I think I'm well on my journey of working it all out, TB.

 

[Muffled]

Of course you do.

It doesn't take a genius to recognize that people who witnessed the same events tend to tell the same story. The fact that they do lends to the credence of the accounts. On the other hand each has his own perspective and memories. How could one say that the copy is longer than the original?

 

[CG Didymus]

religious convictions that become locked into absolute truths can easily lead people to see themselves as God’s agents.

Does Baha'u'llah teach absolute truths?

Truth is relative and restricted to the capacity of each mind that is pursuing any Truth.

Or just relative truths?

When zealous and devout adherents elevate the teachings and beliefs of their traditions to the level of absolute truth claims, they open a door to the possibility that their religion will become evil.

So Baha'is teach that their teachings are not absolute truths?

The Bible to me is not a record of history, but stories of spiritual truths based on events of that time.

So when the Bible says he sent plagues or drowned the Egyptian army or flooded the world... those things didn't happen, but the spiritual truth is that God wants us to believe he can do those things, but he really didn't?

It is as real as it gets

No, it can get more real. Instead of relative truths, God could tell us absolute truths and give real examples in history on what he has really done. Rather than giving us fictional stories of what he did, but actually, he really didn't do those things.

In the end I see there is a source to understanding what it is all about.

So yes, there is a reliable source now, the Baha'i teachings.... so they are absolute truth? But the Bible is relative truth? And one can find spiritual truths in it... but do Baha'is believe it is without errors and contradictions? Why would you? People wrote it, right. So there must be errors, plus errors in interpretation. So there was no absolute truths until Baha'u'llah came?

 

[Brian2]

DAY 7
Contradiction number 7

The gospels differ over the dates of the last supper and hence the crucifixion. This is clear evidence that the gospels were not guided by the Divine Hand of God.

The Synoptics clearly describe the last supper as having been prepared and help on the first day of Passover, the first day of the Feast of Unleavened Bread.

However John's Gospel explains that the trial and Crucifixion of Jesus took place on this same date. Only The Synoptics or John can be right.

Exhibits:

Mark {14:12} And the first day of unleavened bread, when they killed the passover, his disciples said unto him, Where wilt thou that we go and prepare that thou mayest eat the
passover? {14:13} And he sendeth forth two of his disciples, and saith unto them, Go ye into the city, and there shall meet you a man bearing a pitcher of water: follow him.

Matthew {26:17} Now the first [day] of the [feast of] unleavened bread the disciples came to Jesus, saying unto him, Where wilt thou that we prepare for thee to eat the passover? {26:18} And he said, Go into the city to such a man, and
say unto him, The Master saith, My time is at hand; I will keep the passover at thy house with my disciples. {26:19} And the disciples did as Jesus had appointed them; and they made ready the passover.

Luke {22:7} Then came the day of unleavened bread, when the passover must be killed. {22:8} And he sent Peter and John, saying, Go and prepare us the passover, that we may eat.

John {18:28} Then led they Jesus from Caiaphas unto the hall of judgment: and it was early; and they themselves went not into the judgment hall, lest they should be defiled; but that they might eat the passover. {18:29} Pilate then went out
unto them, and said, What accusation bring ye against this man?

John {19:14} And it was the preparation of the
passover, and about the sixth hour: and he saith unto the Jews, Behold your King! {19:15} But they cried out, Away with [him,] away with [him,] crucify him

There are answers to this which involve different dating methods for the start of the Passover Festival.
But the following site tells us a way of seeing what was being referred to in each gospel without going to the different dating methods. It shows that John does not disagree with the synoptic gospels also. I will post the 2 sites that are about the same subject.
Is Passover on the First Day of Unleavened Bread? (Part One)
Is Passover on the First Day of Unleavened Bread? (Part Two)

 

[Brian2]

DAY 9

Contradiction 8

While G-John insists that Jesus was so close to Mother and family, the Synoptics clearly show that this was not so.

In the Synoptics Jesus is shown to have become distanced and even estranged from his Mother and family. None of his family were reported to have followed him in his mission, and certainly none were reported to be at his crucifixion. Only a sample of the many exhibits is shown.

But G-John tells us that Jesus's Mother followed him earnestly, even to the foot of the cross, which Roman soldiers would have forbidden for sure.

Mark {3:31} There came then his brethren and his mother, and, standing without, sent unto him, calling him. ...............
............ 3:33}
And he answered them, saying, Who is my mother, or my brethren? {3:34} And he looked round about on them which sat about him, and said, Behold my mother and my brethren! (Also in Matthew 12:48 - 50)

Mark {6:4} But Jesus said unto them, A prophet is not without honour, but in his own country, and among his own kin, and in his own house.

Mark {15:40} There were also women looking on afar off: among whom was Mary Magdalene, and Mary the mother of James the less and of Joses, and Salome; {15:41} (Who also, when he was
in Galilee, followed him, and ministered unto him and many other women which came up with him unto Jerusalem.
(And Matthew 27-56..... and Luke 24-10)

Matthew {10:36} And a man’s foes [shall be] they of his own household. {10:37} He that loveth father or mother more than me is not worthy of me: and he that loveth son or daughter more than me is not worthy of me.

Matthew {19:29} And every one that hath
forsaken houses, or brethren, or sisters, or father, or mother, or wife, or children, or lands, for my name’s sake, shall receive an hundredfold, and shall inherit everlasting life.

Luke {14:26} If any [man] come to me, and hate not his father, and mother, and wife, and
children, and brethren, and sisters, yea, and his own life also, he cannot be my disciple.
-----------------------------------------------------------------

John {2:1} And the third day there was a marriage in Cana of Galilee; and the mother of Jesus was there: {2:2} And both Jesus was called, and his disciples, to the marriage.

John {2:12} After this he went down to Capernaum, he, and his mother, and his brethren, and his disciples: and they
continued there not many days.

John {19:25} Now there stood by the cross of Jesus his mother, and his mother’s sister, Mary the [wife] of Cleophas, and Mary Magdalene.

Mark 3: 31-33 and Mark 6:4 are the only quotes about Jesus family and neither of them indicate estrangement or a bad relationship.

 

[Brian2]

Day 12
Contradiction 10

I can understand how the places differ in the gospel accounts about Jesus feeding multitudes since only one might have been a witness, but some Christians insist that every word in the bible is Divinely guided and true, which then makes these differences more of an issue. The venues for each feeding are shown under the verses.

Exhibits:-
John {6:11} And Jesus took the loaves; and when he had given thanks, he distributed to the disciples, and the disciples to them that were set down; and likewise of the fishes as much as they would. {6:12} When they were filled, he said unto
his disciples, Gather up the fragments that remain, that nothing be lost. {6:13} Therefore they gathered [them] together, and filled twelve baskets with the fragments of the five barley loaves, which remained over and above unto
them that had eaten.
( up into a mountain)


Mark {6:38}
{6:41} And when he had taken the five loaves and the two fishes, he looked up to heaven, and blessed, and brake the loaves, and gave [them]
to his disciples to set before them; and the two fishes divided he among them all. {6:42} And they did all eat, and were filled. {6:43} And they took up twelve baskets full of the fragments, and of the fishes.
(a desert place,)


Mark {8:6} And he commanded the people to sit down on the ground: and he took the seven loaves, and gave thanks, and brake, and gave to his disciples to set before [them;] and they did set [them] before the people. {8:7} And they had a few small fishes: and he blessed, and commanded to set them also before [them. ]
(in the wilderness)

Matthew {14:17}
{14:19} And he commanded the multitude to sit down on the grass, and took the five loaves, and the two fishes, and looking up to heaven, he blessed, and brake, and gave the loaves to [his] disciples, and the disciples to the multitude.
{14:20} And they did all eat, and were filled: and they took up of the fragments that remained twelve baskets full.
(a desert place apart)

Matthew {15:36} And he took the seven loaves and the fishes, and gave thanks, and brake [them,] and gave to his disciples, and the disciples to the multitude.{15:37} And they did all eat, and were filled: and they took up of the broken [meat] that was left seven baskets full.
(up into a mountain )

Luke {9:16} Then he took the five loaves and the two fishes, and looking up to heaven, he blessed them, and brake, and gave to the disciples to set before the multitude. {9:17} And they did eat, and were all filled: and there was taken up of fragments that remained to them twelve baskets.
(Bethsaida. )

There was more than one time when Jesus did a multiplying of the loaves and fish miracle. If we assume that the quotes with the same number of loaves and fish and baskets left over are the same event then there is no contradiction in the stories, especially when we realise that a desert is a wilderness or and these can be on a hill or mountain.

 

[Brian2]

John had no clue what Jesus did on his first day in Jerusalem that week. Nor the second. Nor the third.
So he couldn't have been there.

His story is a total contradiction.

Do you know what Jesus did on his first day in Jerusalem? It's there in Mark.

I'll bet that you get it wrong, because many seem to completely overlook such simple reports.

Try ? There's no catch.

Why do you think that not putting some details into his gospel meant that John did not know them.

 

[oldbadger]

There are answers to this which involve different dating methods for the start of the Passover Festival.
But the following site tells us a way of seeing what was being referred to in each gospel without going to the different dating methods. It shows that John does not disagree with the synoptic gospels also. I will post the 2 sites that are about the same subject.
Is Passover on the First Day of Unleavened Bread? (Part One)
Is Passover on the First Day of Unleavened Bread? (Part Two)

Part one referred to the Israelites instructions before the first Passover, to eat the Passover on their homes. But the strange thing about Jesus's Passover is that this meal was eaten in the Great Temple refectories, which makes me wonder if the term Last-supper is more befitting.

I think that Christianity fiddled with the early gospels, even with writings like those of Josephus. The Faith adapted and reversed itself in to so many cultures and religions that much shoving and wriggling is required to straighten things out, but that is just my opinion.

 

[oldbadger]

Mark 3: 31-33 and Mark 6:4 are the only quotes about Jesus family and neither of them indicate estrangement or a bad relationship.

I cannot agree with that. Jesus showed absolutely that he considered his real family to be those who were with him on his mission.

But by the 2nd century John was thrusting Mother Mary back on to Jesus's arms. The Romans needed a female dirty to replace their own, maybe?

 

[oldbadger]

There was more than one time when Jesus did a multiplying of the loaves and fish miracle. If we assume that the quotes with the same number of loaves and fish and baskets left over are the same event then there is no contradiction in the stories, especially when we realise that a desert is a wilderness or and these can be on a hill or mountain.

Well, which do you want?
Is it that deserts can be on mountain sides, or is it that these feeding were separate events?

 

[oldbadger]

Why do you think that not putting some details into his gospel meant that John did not know them.

Because, if he had been the disciple, been there, then the events would have been uppermost on his mind for all time.

He produces key events all his own, whilst having no clue about the events described in G-Mark.

I find John's collection of stories about Jesus etc to be most valuable, I just don't believe that apostle John was ever there, ever a witness.

 

[Brian2]

I cannot agree with that. Jesus showed absolutely that he considered his real family to be those who were with him on his mission.

But by the 2nd century John was thrusting Mother Mary back on to Jesus's arms. The Romans needed a female dirty to replace their own, maybe?

(Mark 3: 31-33 and Mark 6:4) In both these instances there is no interaction between Jesus and His mother and family. You are assuming the relationships must have soured because of your imagination about these passages and your rejection of passages in John which tell us that the relationships did not sour.

 

[Brian2]

Well, which do you want?
Is it that deserts can be on mountain sides, or is it that these feeding were separate events?

I said, if the number of loaves and fish and baskets left over are the same then the event is the same event. There was more than one feeding the multitude event however. We know that.
Where were these feeding done? The only contradiction is whether it was in a desert place/wilderness or on a mountain. That is no contradiction because a wilderness can be on a mountain.
I find no mention of Bethsaida in the feeding story in Luke's gospel.

 

[Brian2]

Because, if he had been the disciple, been there, then the events would have been uppermost on his mind for all time.

He produces key events all his own, whilst having no clue about the events described in G-Mark.

I find John's collection of stories about Jesus etc to be most valuable, I just don't believe that apostle John was ever there, ever a witness.

John was quite old when his gospel was written and/or put together. John would have known all the other gospels written about Jesus and no doubt could see gaps and important emphasese which he decided to write about. To John no doubt what happened on certain days of the last week of Jesus life had already been covered enough.
The usual dating of John's gospel is late 1st century, in the 90s.
Dating Bible Books - Early English Bibles

This site gives the quoting of John in early church father's writings before 115 AD and a circulating copy of John in Egypt between 100 and 130 AD. These facts make a writing of John after 100 AD as problematic for the acceptance and circulation of the gospel in that time frame.
The gospel was accepted fast even if written in the 90s, and that is because John was known to be the apostle John by people high up in the church at that time, eg. Polycarp and Ignatius, both mentioned in the article.

 

[oldbadger]

(Mark 3: 31-33 and Mark 6:4) In both these instances there is no interaction between Jesus and His mother and family. You are assuming the relationships must have soured because of your imagination about these passages and your rejection of passages in John which tell us that the relationships did not sour.

I read about Jesus, speaking of his real values
Apostle John was never there, that is easy to show. His story of Mother Mary at the cross is wild fantasy.

 

[oldbadger]

John was quite old when his gospel was written and/or put together. John would have known all the other gospels written about Jesus and no doubt could see gaps and important emphasese which he decided to write about. To John no doubt what happened on certain days of the last week of Jesus life had already been covered enough.
The usual dating of John's gospel is late 1st century, in the 90s.
Dating Bible Books - Early English Bibles

This site gives the quoting of John in early church father's writings before 115 AD and a circulating copy of John in Egypt between 100 and 130 AD. These facts make a writing of John after 100 AD as problematic for the acceptance and circulation of the gospel in that time frame.
The gospel was accepted fast even if written in the 90s, and that is because John was known to be the apostle John by people high up in the church at that time, eg. Polycarp and Ignatius, both mentioned in the article.

Thank you for your info.
I still reckon that G-John is an early 2nd century document.
Apostle John did have a valuable collection of info, but the more lowly healings and demon castings were not good enough, back to life miracles for John, and a pre-pagan congregation would need a female figure. John was never there, or the tumbled timeline would not be there.

 

[Brian2]

I read about Jesus, speaking of his real values
Apostle John was never there, that is easy to show. His story of Mother Mary at the cross is wild fantasy.

How is that easy to show without you reading things into the gospels which are not there?

 

[Brian2]

Thank you for your info.
I still reckon that G-John is an early 2nd century document.
Apostle John did have a valuable collection of info, but the more lowly healings and demon castings were not good enough, back to life miracles for John, and a pre-pagan congregation would need a female figure. John was never there, or the tumbled timeline would not be there.

You are ignoring all the other evidence for John actually being the apostles John and you are assuming a tumbled timeline in John's gospel.
I don't know where you got the number of Temple guards you say were on duty but the gospels do tell us that the Chief Priests and teachers of the Law and leaders amongst the people wanted to kill Jesus but could not find a time or place to do it because all the people hung on the words of Jesus. At Passover time when they did not want any riots, they had to wait for the right time and place, hence Judas and arresting Jesus at night when nobody was near.
That Jesus cleansed the temple more than once at Passover time is not beyond feasibility.
Then again it is possible that the timelines in the gospels are not 100% accurate. The teachings of Jesus are grouped together in Matthew's gospel in one section and the miracles in another section for example and it probably did not happen exactly like that in real life.
But why choose Mark as the person who was there and ignore Matthew and John when there is definitely evidence for John being there and the gospel of Matthew was never doubted to be authentic?

 

[Brian2]

Of course.
But Apostle John was certainly not Disciple John.
Disciple John was probably about 20yrs (ish) when they finally went to the Temple Feast. His Mum was still pushing and pulling for him even then. And so by 100-110AD when G-John got written disciple John would have been about 90-100 years old, which doesn't really fit with the average maximum ages of Galilean peasants. That........ and the fact that John had no clue about important occasions which disciple John would definitely have remembered. That........ and his outrageous fibs.

Who were these witnesses?
Luke was not there.
Mark was certainly present for some of those occasions, and certainly at the arrest.

What do you think are lies in John's gospel?
Luke does not tell us who the witnesses were. No doubt he used Mark's gospel and I guess Matthew's and was in a position (as companion of Paul) to speak to witnesses and to hear them as they went around to visit different churches in various locations and speak to the people. Does a list of people mean that it is true and just saying that he got information from witnesses make it a lie, or hearsay? What difference would a list of names make?
Matthew gives the feast at the tax collector's house and people also see that as a place where Matthew was present as the tax collector.