contradictions in the bible???

[rocka21]

Wow, when uss said he needed some time, he really meant it. Maybe he's away having a crisis of faith?

Its because there is no answer. One of the stories is not true. What then was the false account?

See my post above. What is the False account at the cross, at the tomb, at the centurion's house? One had to be FALSE, right?

 

[sojourner]

Wow, when uss said he needed some time, he really meant it. Maybe he's away having a crisis of faith?

One can hope. A little desolation is sometimes necessary in order to hear what God is saying...

 

[McBell]

Because the events inform us of truth. The events are not truth, in and of themselves.

Then how do you decide which is and which isn't important to the 'truth' as opposed to your 'truth'?

 

[rocka21]

Then how do you decide which is and which isn't important to your 'truth'?

right.

How can we Just pick and choose what truth is important? John was right when he said this, but wrong when he said that?

John was wrong when he said who was at the tomb. Luke was wrong when he told the story of the centurion, but they both were right when they said things that are " cornerstones" of our faith.

 

[sojourner]

Then how do you decide which is and which isn't important to the 'truth' as opposed to your 'truth'?

Truth is truth. It's not "the" or "my." We decide what speaks to us by weighing scripture, just as Jesus weighed scripture, knowing (hopefully) that what we understand is not absolute, since our picture is incomplete. we have to remain open.

In the grand scheme of things, it really is unimportant to deeper spiritual truth just who was or was not at the tomb. We have to broaden our vision.

 

[McBell]

We have to broaden our vision.

Yes, because generalities work out so well.



And yes, this is sarcasm

 

[rocka21]

Truth is truth. It's not "the" or "my." We decide what speaks to us by weighing scripture, just as Jesus weighed scripture, knowing (hopefully) that what we understand is not absolute, since our picture is incomplete. we have to remain open.

In the grand scheme of things, it really is unimportant to deeper spiritual truth just who was or was not at the tomb. We have to broaden our vision.

Yes, but if Christ did not say " it is finished" on the cross, who is to say he said " I am the way, the truth , and the life"?

could he have not said both? Do we believe 50% of what was said or 70, or 90? We can prove that 100% is not true, now we have to make up a number that makes us " feel " better.

 

[sojourner]

Yes, but if Christ did not say " it is finished" on the cross, who is to say he said " I am the way, the truth , and the life"?

could he have not said both? Do we believe 50% of what was said or 70, or 90? We can prove that 100% is not true, now we have to make up a number that makes us " feel " better.

That has been the quest of exegetes since the gospels were written and distributed.

He could have said both. We can believe 100% of what is said, because it speaks truth to us, whether or not "Jesus really said it," (or, for that matter, even if the event didn't relly happen in history the way it's presented.) Truth and fact are two different things.

 

[Autodidact]

Its because there is no answer. One of the stories is not true. What then was the false account?

See my post above. What is the False account at the cross, at the tomb, at the centurion's house? One had to be FALSE, right?

rocka:
1. You mean at least one of the stories is not true. We don't know whether either of them is, only that they are not both true.
2. You may have forgotten that I am not Christian. I don't think there's any way to know if any of them are true, nor do I much care.

 

[Autodidact]

Yes, but if Christ did not say " it is finished" on the cross, who is to say he said " I am the way, the truth , and the life"?

could he have not said both? Do we believe 50% of what was said or 70, or 90? We can prove that 100% is not true, now we have to make up a number that makes us " feel " better.

Only if you're Christian.

 

[McBell]

He could have said both. We can believe 100% of what is said, because it speaks truth to us, whether or not "Jesus really said it," (or, for that matter, even if the event didn't relly happen in history the way it's presented.) Truth and fact are two different things.

Seems to me that this is nothing more than a cop out.

Would you be able to better explain it since I have to be missing something.

 

[sojourner]

Seems to me that this is nothing more than a cop out.

Would you be able to better explain it since I have to be missing something.

it doesn't matter who said it. it can still speak truth, even if the contributing elements are not factual. For example, if one witness said, "I saw Professor Pouncekat do it in the library with a candlestick," and another said, "I saw Mrs. Heffleflekker do it in the kitchen with a rope," the truth of the matter is that the victim is still dead. both accounts speak to the truth of that death.

 

[Autodidact]

it doesn't matter who said it. it can still speak truth, even if the contributing elements are not factual. For example, if one witness said, "I saw Professor Pouncekat do it in the library with a candlestick," and another said, "I saw Mrs. Heffleflekker do it in the kitchen with a rope," the truth of the matter is that the victim is still dead. both accounts speak to the truth of that death.

It probably makes a significant difference to Mrs. Heffleflekker, however.

 

[pray4me]

and professer pouncecat

 

[McBell]

it doesn't matter who said it. it can still speak truth, even if the contributing elements are not factual. For example, if one witness said, "I saw Professor Pouncekat do it in the library with a candlestick," and another said, "I saw Mrs. Heffleflekker do it in the kitchen with a rope," the truth of the matter is that the victim is still dead. both accounts speak to the truth of that death.

If that is good enough for you, by all means close your eyes and run with it.

 

[rocka21]

The bottom line is that there are different accounts in the bible. Thats hard to deal with when we quote scripture to try to justify a position. If we are willing to admint that there are " false statements" in the bible, then do we have the right to tell others what is " truth"?

or are we saying , " as long as it is a minor detail, it does not matter".

What if it matters to some, who was at the tomb, what was written above the cross, how did Judas die, and did Jesus go to the centurions house? How can we say to the world with so much " conviction" some points , but dismmiss others?

 

[logician]

The fact that ther are so many contradictions between the gospels only lends weight to the idea that they are works of fiction(among many other reasons), certainly not eyewitness accounts of the life of some real god-man

 

[Scuba Pete]

The fact that ther are so many contradictions between the gospels only lends weight to the idea that they are works of fiction(among many other reasons), certainly not eyewitness accounts of the life of some real god-man

Again, your logic is flawed. The parallels are incredibly significant and the differences are common with any event. Look at the sinking of the Lusitania. They had reports of up to three torpedoes and as many subs from the surviving passengers. In the end, there was ONE sub and ONE torpedo. In spite of all these differences in the story, the Lusitania lies at the bottom of the sea and took 1200 victims with her.

 

[gnostic]

More over, in the case of the NT, we are reading where Jesus' words are translated from Aramaic into Greek. There are BOUND to be a variance on the translations. Does that make them inferior or in error? It's a wonder that they match as closely as they do! They corroborate each other way more than they contradict each other.

I think that you are forgetting that they lived in a society where they are bilingual. Greek (or Koine Greek) was widely spoken in the Near East, just like Aramaic. The Hellenistic period may have ended before Jesus time and Rome may taken over the provinces, but Latin wasn't as widely spoken as Greek in the East. Even in Rome, many of the aristocrats and middle-class families could speak both Latin and Greek.

Also Paul and Luke were writing to specific audience, namely the Greeks. Why else would Paul write letters to Christians in Greek cities? And if I am not mistaken, the gospel of Luke for the Greek Christians. Letters of Paul were written before any of the gospels, and Mark was the earliest of the gospels.

Just how sure are we that Jesus didn't speak Greek instead of Aramaic? Jesus never wrote anything down.

 

[logician]

? Jesus never wrote anything down.

God missed a golden opportunity here, just think of the things it could have told us, if it had only thought to record them for history.