1. Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:
    • Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
    • Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
    • Access to private conversations with other members.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!

What did they give him to drink?

Discussion in 'Biblical Debates' started by criticizer, Oct 15, 2005.

  1. criticizer

    criticizer Member

    Joined:
    Oct 2, 2005
    Messages:
    17
    Ratings:
    +0
    Hi

    How are you freinds ?

    I want an answer to this contradiction in the bible :
    What did they give Jesus to drink?

    vinegar - Matthew 27:34

    wine with myrrh - Mark 15:23
     
  2. michel

    michel Administrator Emeritus
    Staff Member

    Joined:
    Sep 27, 2004
    Messages:
    28,675
    Ratings:
    +2,658
  3. criticizer

    criticizer Member

    Joined:
    Oct 2, 2005
    Messages:
    17
    Ratings:
    +0
    Hi

    How are you Michel ?
    Thanks for your notes, the contradictions in the Bible , I saw it in different sites, and what make me to put it her, is to know how the bible's believers will answer me, and i don't know other bible's believers to ask them.
     
  4. Aqualung

    Aqualung Tasty

    Joined:
    Jun 16, 2005
    Messages:
    8,762
    Ratings:
    +604
    Michel - that doesn't answer his question.

    critizicer - I think they're both essentially the exact same thing, except vinegar is past the fermented stage.
     
  5. Merlin

    Merlin Active Member

    Joined:
    Sep 10, 2005
    Messages:
    810
    Ratings:
    +49
    Vinegar is a corruption of the French vin gar, or sour (or bad) wine.

    There is one theory that there was a powerful narcotic included with this liquid. This, they claim, is what put Jesus into a deep comatose state ready for taking down off the cross.
     
  6. Aqualung

    Aqualung Tasty

    Joined:
    Jun 16, 2005
    Messages:
    8,762
    Ratings:
    +604
    Yep, Occam's razor. The simplest theory is the most likely. It's highly unlikely there was some huge conspiracy going on with Jesus that would have caused people to put some sort of powerful drug into the wine that they may or may not have even chosen to give to Jesus, just to put him into a comatose state to make him seem dead. The Romans were good at crucifying people. It's more logical to think he just died.
     
  7. Merlin

    Merlin Active Member

    Joined:
    Sep 10, 2005
    Messages:
    810
    Ratings:
    +49
    I like that answer. I also normally apply what I call 'the balance of probability' test in religious matters, because there can never be any proof. So you are saying that, on the balance of probability, it is most likely that he died. Maybe.

    For sceptics, the drug possibility explains resurrection (when the drug wore off). It would also explain why everybody was running backwards and forwards to the Romans to try to get the body down off the cross quickly. Of course, it raises other issues as well. But it is a possibility.
     
  8. Aqualung

    Aqualung Tasty

    Joined:
    Jun 16, 2005
    Messages:
    8,762
    Ratings:
    +604
    Well, skeptics always seem to make up the most far-fetched story in place of using logic.
     
  9. Linus

    Linus Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jul 2, 2004
    Messages:
    1,211
    Ratings:
    +132
    What translation are you using?

    The New American Standard Bible says the following:

    wine mixed with gall - Matthew 27:34

    wine mixed with myrrh - Mark 15:23

    I also found the following at http://vines.mike-obrien.net/ :

    Gall
    1chole

    A word probably connected with chloe, "yellow," denotes "gall," (a) literal, Mt. 27:34 (cp. Ps. . 69:21); some regard the word here as referring to myrrh, on account of Mr. 15:23;
     
    • Like Like x 1
  10. Linus

    Linus Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jul 2, 2004
    Messages:
    1,211
    Ratings:
    +132
    I'm pretty positive that the "Mr." up there at the end of that dictionary entry should be read as "Mt."

    Just thought I'd clarify.
     
  11. glasgowchick

    glasgowchick Gives Glory to God !!!

    Joined:
    Apr 14, 2005
    Messages:
    603
    Ratings:
    +78
    Gall (Matthew 27:34) - "they gave Him wine to drink mingled with gall; and after tasting it, He was unwilling to drink."
    Myrhh (Mark 15:23) - "And they tried to give Him wine mixed with myrrh; but He did not take it."
    Gall is bile secreted by the liver. Biblically, it is used to denote bitterness of spirit (Acts 8:23; Lam. 3:19). Myrrh is an aromatic gum that grows in Arabia, Abyssinia, and India. It was used to sweeten the smell and taste of various foods. It was also used in embalming (John 19:39).
    According to "Alleged Discrepancies of the Bible" by Haley, page 28, there were two times that Jesus was offered the vinegar. "The first time, the wine drugged with bitter narcotics, the effect of which would be to stupefy him, he did not receive. Afterward, some drink free from drugs was given him, which he accepted." In other words, they were of two different times and different things were offered. Though it is a hopeful explanation, it does not fit the text. Please take a look at the table where I have put the verses in order from Matthew and Mark and included the two times Jesus was offered drink.



    Matthew Mark
    At the beginning of the crucifixion . . .
    27:34 - "they gave Him wine to drink mingled with gall; and after tasting it, He was unwilling to drink."
    (Greek "wine" is "ozos" which is a mixture of sour wine or vinegar and water.) 15:23 "And they tried to give Him wine mixed with myrrh; but He did not take it."
    (Greek "wine" is "oinos" which means simply, wine.)
    . . . several hours pass . . .

    27:48, "And immediately one of them ran, and taking a sponge, he filled it with sour wine, and put it on a reed, and gave Him a drink."
    (Greek "sour wine" is "ozos", or vinegar as above). 15:36 "And someone ran and filled a sponge with sour wine, put it on a reed, and gave Him a drink."
    (Greek "sour wine" is "ozos", or vinegar).



    Possible solutions

    Most probably, both gall and myrrh were added to the vinegar. The text does not explicitly state this, nor does it exclude the possibility. Nevertheless, "The ancients used to infuse myrrh into wine to give it a more agreeable fragrance and flavour."1 This means that it is quite possible that the vinegar already had myrrh in it, as would be expected among Roman soldiers, and gall was later added. Each writer focused on a different aspect.
    Furthermore, these verses do not necessitate a contradiction if we understand a contradiction to be the condition when the statement of one verse negates the possibility of the other being true. Technically, the inclusion of both gall and vinegar is very possible.
    A second explanation could be that that Matt. 27:34 and Mark 15:23 are describing different events. Textual evidence supporting this would be that different Greek words are used: "ozos" in Matthew for "wine" while Mark has the Greek "oinos" as wine. That, combined with different Greek words "chole" for "gall" in Matthew and "smurna" for "myrrh" in Mark, may be a clue that these are different events. However, this explanation, though possible, is not very likely since the context of the verses strongly suggest that each is a description of the same event.
    Third, there may be an unknown copyist error. I say unknown because I could find no record of any textual variation in Matthew and Mark regarding these verses in question. This does not mean that we might not find one in the future which could shed more light on the issue. However, the weakness with this explanation is that it is an argument of silence and is not favored.
    I conclude that the most likely explanation is the first one, that both myrrh and gall were present in the vinegar.

    __________________
    1. Enhanced Strong’s Lexicon, (Oak Harbor, WA: Logos Research Systems, Inc.) 1995.


    --------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Return to Bible Difficulties - Matthew to Mark
    Return to or Bible Difficulties - Luke to Acts



    CHRISTIAN APOLOGETICS AND RESEARCH MINISTRY
    Home | Contact | Newsletter | Publications | Donations | Copying and Linking
    © Matthew J. Slick, 1996, 1997, 1998, 1999, 2000, 2001, 2002, 2003
     
  12. Aqualung

    Aqualung Tasty

    Joined:
    Jun 16, 2005
    Messages:
    8,762
    Ratings:
    +604
    No, it's Mr. as in Mark.
     
  13. Linus

    Linus Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jul 2, 2004
    Messages:
    1,211
    Ratings:
    +132
    Ha ha. Duh. How did I mess that up?

    Thanks
     
  14. Aqualung

    Aqualung Tasty

    Joined:
    Jun 16, 2005
    Messages:
    8,762
    Ratings:
    +604
    That's fine. I thought you were right too, but then I looked at matthew and it was something random. Plus, they usually say Mk, instead of Mr.
     
  15. Linus

    Linus Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jul 2, 2004
    Messages:
    1,211
    Ratings:
    +132
    I guess I've never seen that before. For me it isn't that much more effort to write out the entire word "Mark" rather than just Mr. or Mk. Oh well. To each his own I guess.
     
  16. greatcalgarian

    greatcalgarian Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    May 12, 2005
    Messages:
    4,618
    Ratings:
    +178
    I would put it as most likely a biproduct of oral tradition of telling story. The original 'true' story could be completely different from both versions.

    On the other hand Bible inerrancy advocates would like to keep the stand that the NT is inpired and hence cannot have error, and always tried to harmonize these human errors, and come up with all explanations, which I think is entertaining to read, to argue, but definitely far from any 'scientific' truth.
     
  17. true blood

    true blood Active Member

    Joined:
    May 10, 2004
    Messages:
    848
    Ratings:
    +36
    Mark 15:22 and 23:
    And they [soldiers] bring him unto the place of Golgotha, which is, being interpreted, The place of a skull.

    And they gave [were giving] him to drink wine [Greek: oinos, wine] mingled with myrrh: but he received not.

    In verse 22 the Greek word for "bring" is phero which means "to bear" or "to carry". So that action is in present tense. The soldiers were carrying Jesus to Golgotha.

    Matthew 27:33 and 34:
    And when they were come [having come] unto a place called Golgotha, that is to say, a place of a skull,

    They gave him vinegar [Greek: oxos] to drink mingled with gall [Greek: chole] : and when he had tasted , he would not drink.

    The Greek word for "were come" is erchomai. Here it is in the aorist tense incidates they had already attained an action. They had arrived at Golgotha. The drink here was different then the one offered on the road. Here they had reached Golgotha. Both drinks contained different substances known to deaden pain, decent wine + myrrh of Mark and cheap, very sour wine + gall of Matthew. These two drinks were also offered before Jesus was on the cross. After suspended on the cross Jesus is offered his third drink of [Oxos, a cheap, sour wine] however there is no indication of any pain killer like gall or myrrh in this drink, and no indication that Jesus received this third drink offered. Then a fourth drink in Matthew 27:48 and 49, this action seems to be the same identical account in Mark 15:36. No indication that he accepted. Very near this death he does finally request a drink. I really don't see any contridiction in this whole ordeal. Jesus seems to be denying four different drinks offered by soldiers and very near the end requested a drink unto his family and close friends standing nearby who responds and utilizes hyssop which is a throwback to the first Passover. Only this fifth drink did Jesus request and accept and biblically speaking, the number five signifies grace. Hyssop tied with a scarlet cord to a cedar handle was used in purification ceremonies of the Old Testament. Hyssop has long been known for its value in healing and purifying. It was used in the cleansing of a healed leper and of a house delivered from plague and was to be used in the cleansing of anyone who had been in contact with a dead body. Psalms 51:7 "Purge me with hyssop, and I shall be clean..."
     
Loading...