Why do the Gospel accounts vary so much? They seem to disagree!

[oldbadger]

The gospel accounts don't agree with each other, or so it seems to me.

For example: Why did the Gospel of Mark tell of the 'Temple clearance' happening in the last week of his mission when the Gospel of John tells us that it happened in the first weeks? ........most strange.

...............and more to come.

[LittleNipper]

Very good.......
The real story, smothered later by church dogma and hogwash.

Thank you.I apologise for the terrible typos. I must have been slovenly in checking through for misstypes.

People are not saved through made up stories. People do not give up their lives to prove made up stories. None of the Apostles became monetarily wealthy through spreading the GOSPEL throughout the world. As an example: Even Jews didn't go to gas chambers for pretending to be Jews. I would suggest that you are trying to disprove something that you do not wish to accept through contriving distortion and confusion. Satan was/is the mater of that, as are those he manipulates. My honest guess is that you wouldn't allow yourself to be thrown to the lions for your "views".

People are not 'saved' in the Christian sense at all in my view, though you are of course entitled to have your own (or the Church dogma) view on this.

People do give up their lives for 'made up stories' or false religious claims. You will be aware of Muslim Martyrs or various other Glorious Death mindsets.

The faith did not spread to make the 12 wealthy, it spread because Paul reinvented it to suit Gentile (Greco - Roman) preference and they took it up and it became as popular as Isis, Mithras, Serapis, Attis and Cybele. It so happened that Constantine's mum was a Christian, so he legitimised Christianity (though I doubt he was ever a Christian himself) and after his death Christianity began suppressing all the rival religions.

I reject your accusation of Bias, (in fact I maintain the Crucifixion was real, as that is how I see the evidence). Christian Faith is equally biased, and just wants to explain away or dismiss the evidence.

You may be right that I might pretend to be Christian if threatened by being tossed on the bonfire along with Non KJV Bibles, but then atheism does not punish people with hellthreat for not dying for it. However I am more than willing to accept mass dislike and rejection for my lack of Faith, as are atheists in the US. Fortunately, through the efforts of people like me or more effective, they are being given a few more rights and credits.

Oh no, atheist have merely been known to murder people and burn churches filled with people --- in this world. They ignore the next. Atheists have been given more rights in the US --- while they have had scripture reading stripped from the educational system and make it nearly impossible for believers to have any influence in select fields of scientific research.

And a good job too. Nobody is stopping people doing their religions at home or in places of worship .It does not belong in schools and has no business interfering in science. You may have heard that Creationists tried to get the definition of science changed to be whatever church leaders said it was. It got nowhere in court but they tried.

As to atheists murdering people, I won't say it doesn't happen, but I reckon people is people and people of any religion or none can do murder.

And I don't know of any account of atheists burning churches filled with people. Citation perhaps?

As to persecution of Christians, they were regarded as subversive because they refused to sacrifice to the Emperors. The matter of persecution, while it real, is complex and this article set it out quite well.

https://theconversation.com/mythbusting ... ions-67365

While it may suit Christianity to play the persecuted victim, once they got power, it was the non -Christians who were persecuted, and as you mention the Holocaust, that is traceable to the anti - semitism that was a direct result of Christian dislike of Jews.

And why doesn't philosophy belong in school? And why is it that contrary theories are not regarded as part of the investigative learning process anymore? It once was. It's hard to imagine now, that Latin and Greek were once prerequisites to enter many colleges. What is the excuse for anti-Semitism today at various colleges and in the Middle East. Please don't blame all Christians for the cult practices of select state controlled groups. And it was not a "Christian" group that murdered Jews during World War I. It was an Anti-Christ group who murdered anyone whom they did like or who they wanted to steal property and money from...

Philosophy may be ok, but teaching ONE religion and none of the others is a different thing is it not? That is indoctrination.

You say yourself "why is it that contrary theories are not regarded as part of the investigative learning process anymore?" So why not the debate about (and against) the validity of religion in schools, just as we have it here? No. Bible in school is about teaching Christianity, not debating it. And the same with that other scam 'teach the controversy'. The debate is always to be had but schools are where the curriculum is taught, not discussion of rival theories and far less teaching creationism and telling lies about evolution, which is what 'teach the controversy' actually means.

At one time Latin and Greek were indeed considered the requirement of learning and later French was taught. Not so much now. It's hard enough to get them to master English it seems. And in my young days Christianity (no other religion) was taught in school.I can remember when it was stopped and I was glad to see the back of the lying tyke who called himself a teacher leave and take his fairy tales with him.

I don't think politics is what I want to get into here, but religion is at the heart of it. As to the protests, I can see both sides, the Palestinians started this, but maybe the Jewish response is open to criticism. That is not really relevant to a discussion about the truth or validity of Christianity.

As to the role of Christianity in anti semitism, It has for a long time been Christian - driven, and you mean WWII In WWI Jews fought for the Kaiser as much as any other German. But Anti -Semitism was deep rooted in Europe, thanks to Christianity and atheism hardly had any influence. You are flogging a long dead horse in trying to throw the blame for all the worlds' ills on atheists. It has long been my experience that Christian apologists like to claim that there is little support for a tiny group of atheists and yet they like to cast them as a powerful influence to blame for everything wrong.

Do you actually believe that Christian schools do not inform students of the various theories fabricated by men; that they are not told about Mohamed, Buddha, Joseph Smith, Karl Marx, Darwin, Charles Hutton, Charles Lyell, etc... Christian students generally receive a very wide education that is both informative and enlightening ------- NOT ONESIDED! They are also told concerning the good the bad and the ugly regarding "CHURCH" history. When the JW's and Mormons show up at the door --- they know the Bible hold the key.

If that ios the case, then ok. It is not one re;ligion being preached. Of course this assumes that one religion isn't presented positively and the others not so much (and atheism either not at all or as utter evil).

Cue !Well why not teach the controversy?"

Because controversy in any science subject - biology, history, cosmology or geology - is a matter for science discussion, not schools. They should teach what is validated, not religious speculations. We teach chemistry, not alchemy, astronomy, not astrology, history, not atlantis and ancient sea kingdoms. And we teach biology and geology, not Genesis -based creationism. That had its' care to validate itself as science at Kitzmiller vs Dover and it failed. It does not belong in schools.

Just so we don't get that argument brought up

Controversy is what makes education of any value. Students learn how to think for themselves and weigh evidence for themselves. To teach science theory as absolute is to indoctrinate where there is no possibility of duplication. And no religion nor science evaluation which cannot stand up to scrutiny should be protected from polite tempered ridicule. That means that Darwin can be faulted, Charles Russell trial can be discussed, and Joseph Smith bigamy and destruction of the newspaper press belonging to the Nauvoo Expositor are areas for discussion ---- at least among junior and senior high school students. But again, this open the can of worms in all areas of debate, including science, history, literature, social studies, and even art & music.

Of course. Question everything.But in the expertise is the place to do it, not the schools. Let them learn the subject before they start arguing about it. Christianity is not going to be debated in school - not openly. Questions will be responded to by the teacher with the usual apologetics. Further questioning will be blocked: "The bible experts are smarter than you. Don't question what you don't understand yet".or something of the kind. What is taught in schools is to be learned, not debated as 'controversy'.

So you are saying that anything that is not absolute shouldn't be taught nor discussed in public schools? No wonder Christian school students are so far ahead of public schools students by about 1 academic year: https://nwef.org/2022/02/26/why-do-so-m ... s-schools/

[The Nice Centurion]

[Replying to oldbadger in post #1]
[Replying to TRANSPONDER in post #281]
[Replying to LittleNipper in post #291]

Dudes, Dudes, Dudes . . .

Is it really necessary to quote up to 10 ( T E N ) different posts when you answer ? ? ?

I presume you do what you do because being just lazy.
Meaning you really are the way it is (falsely) acclaimed to King Noah who used to rule a part of the Nephites, milenniums back.

But I tell ya that in doing that, you are unnecessarily rude and ruthless toward your fellow debaters.
From what you do, posts get harder to read. And it is endlessly scrolling. Especially when using a Cell.

Oh, and before one of you complains here why I am mentioning technicalitys instead of contributing to the OP, here is my contribution:

Perhaps it should be taught in schools (both christian and public) how to behave appropiately in an online forum.

Thank you for reading.


Sincerely yours

The Nice Centurion, detective of divine misterys

[oldbadger]

Is it really necessary to quote up to 10 ( T E N ) different posts when you answer ? ? ?

I don't.
I tend to just leave key sentences from others which I want to reply to........Dude !

[ChaplainFootz]

[Replying to The Tanager in post #2]

Greetings all. I'm new here, so bear with me as I get my feet wet.
In regards to why the gospels vary so much, I believe I have a different take on the Bible specifically; one which may be surprising, but that I can back up with many scriptures.

The reason there is such variation among the Bible scriptures and gospels is that the entire Abrahamic tree of faiths is a skillfully crafted ruse that tricks/seduces the adherent into becoming the very liar that the tradition says all men and women are.

In debating this topic, I often try to remind my counterpart, that according to tradition, our dialogue is being watched at this very minute by god/Jesus. This is important, as I have found that many adherents will respond to certain questions affirmatively; without actually considering the reality of their response being presently observed by the so-thought-of creator of all things.

That said, I have three questions that I feel illustrate this ruse/trick that I am pointing to, and they are these:
1. Have you read your Bible completely?
The most common response to this question is no, but...
This is a big problem for anyone claiming their love, admiration, or adherence to the god of the Bible. In reality, if one has not thoroughly familiarized oneself with a text—in particular a text that is asserted as the most important thing on Earth; then one can not speak with even an ounce of authority on it. This makes that adherent a liar; A liar in the name of receiving the magical rewards that they've only heard (not read) about.

The next question is for that reduced number of people who have spent the time to read the book thoroughly.

2. Do you feel that you understood the seven-hundred and fifty thousand plus words document?
As we know, there are monks who seclude themselves away from everyday society to try and understand what the supposed word of God is saying. Yet, most of us who read the book, read it without applying reason or raising questions (of which there are many) about things that are outright immoral (rape, murder, theft, etc...). We are blinded by the shiny glare of the magical rewards and forget that it is our morality that is being called into question. For one to say that they understood the Bible after having read it is a tall order. One that when pressed, always reveals a person not comprehending in the way that they originally indicated; again making them an unrepentant liar. You can not repent for missteps that you do not know you are making.

3. Do you abide by the Bible's story? Do you support and agree with these stories as the true origins of human beings? Do you believe that donkeys and snakes talked in sentences? That a lone, omniscient being created its own mortal enemy? And most relevant, Do you agree with the sort of judging and punishing asserted by the Bibles God?

This is to say that if we look at one of two stories where God gives this exact command:

"Kill everybody, seek out all the old women and little children, have no mercy, show no pity"

That we could and would abide by such goings-on were we in a situation where this was taking place.
The last question I think sums up the ruse; for no sane person could sit by having no mercy or pity (emotion, which is central to being human) for the old woman next door who happens to be an atheist; as she is brutally beaten to death by soldiers. Soldiers, who mind you, are then going to turn their clubs to this woman's two grandchildren (let's say four and six years old) and also beat them to death; maybe laughing and making fun out of it all. Again, it says to show no mercy and have no pity; which is to be an inhuman monster.

So back to the question of "why do the gospels vary so much"? As I alluded to, the entire tradition is one of misdirection, fooling adherents into being the very liars that it says they are. This is why there are so many contradictions found within. It is a complete ruse, meant to work against human progression.

The being looked at, within the context of the Bible's story, as the hero, is actually the villain. Jesus is Lucifer, and believe it or not, he even admits this in Revelations.

[TRANSPONDER]

[Replying to oldbadger in post #1]
[Replying to TRANSPONDER in post #281]
[Replying to LittleNipper in post #291]

Dudes, Dudes, Dudes . . .

Is it really necessary to quote up to 10 ( T E N ) different posts when you answer ? ? ?

I presume you do what you do because being just lazy.
Meaning you really are the way it is (falsely) acclaimed to King Noah who used to rule a part of the Nephites, milenniums back.

But I tell ya that in doing that, you are unnecessarily rude and ruthless toward your fellow debaters.
From what you do, posts get harder to read. And it is endlessly scrolling. Especially when using a Cell.

Oh, and before one of you complains here why I am mentioning technicalitys instead of contributing to the OP, here is my contribution:

Perhaps it should be taught in schools (both christian and public) how to behave appropiately in an online forum.

Thank you for reading.


Sincerely yours

The Nice Centurion, detective of divine misterys

It's always good to be reminded to try to play nice. Yet it is what it is and if one can't take knocks best to stay out of the ring.

But It shouldn't be taken personally. Even accusations of being without morals just amuses me because of course it isn't true and i more of a polemic accusation than a personal one.

[TRANSPONDER]

[Replying to The Tanager in post #2]

Greetings all. I'm new here, so bear with me as I get my feet wet.
In regards to why the gospels vary so much, I believe I have a different take on the Bible specifically; one which may be surprising, but that I can back up with many scriptures.

The reason there is such variation among the Bible scriptures and gospels is that the entire Abrahamic tree of faiths is a skillfully crafted ruse that tricks/seduces the adherent into becoming the very liar that the tradition says all men and women are.

In debating this topic, I often try to remind my counterpart, that according to tradition, our dialogue is being watched at this very minute by god/Jesus. This is important, as I have found that many adherents will respond to certain questions affirmatively; without actually considering the reality of their response being presently observed by the so-thought-of creator of all things.

That said, I have three questions that I feel illustrate this ruse/trick that I am pointing to, and they are these:
1. Have you read your Bible completely?
The most common response to this question is no, but...
This is a big problem for anyone claiming their love, admiration, or adherence to the god of the Bible. In reality, if one has not thoroughly familiarized oneself with a text—in particular a text that is asserted as the most important thing on Earth; then one can not speak with even an ounce of authority on it. This makes that adherent a liar; A liar in the name of receiving the magical rewards that they've only heard (not read) about.

The next question is for that reduced number of people who have spent the time to read the book thoroughly.

2. Do you feel that you understood the seven-hundred and fifty thousand plus words document?
As we know, there are monks who seclude themselves away from everyday society to try and understand what the supposed word of God is saying. Yet, most of us who read the book, read it without applying reason or raising questions (of which there are many) about things that are outright immoral (rape, murder, theft, etc...). We are blinded by the shiny glare of the magical rewards and forget that it is our morality that is being called into question. For one to say that they understood the Bible after having read it is a tall order. One that when pressed, always reveals a person not comprehending in the way that they originally indicated; again making them an unrepentant liar. You can not repent for missteps that you do not know you are making.

3. Do you abide by the Bible's story? Do you support and agree with these stories as the true origins of human beings? Do you believe that donkeys and snakes talked in sentences? That a lone, omniscient being created its own mortal enemy? And most relevant, Do you agree with the sort of judging and punishing asserted by the Bibles God?

This is to say that if we look at one of two stories where God gives this exact command:

"Kill everybody, seek out all the old women and little children, have no mercy, show no pity"

That we could and would abide by such goings-on were we in a situation where this was taking place.
The last question I think sums up the ruse; for no sane person could sit by having no mercy or pity (emotion, which is central to being human) for the old woman next door who happens to be an atheist; as she is brutally beaten to death by soldiers. Soldiers, who mind you, are then going to turn their clubs to this woman's two grandchildren (let's say four and six years old) and also beat them to death; maybe laughing and making fun out of it all. Again, it says to show no mercy and have no pity; which is to be an inhuman monster.

So back to the question of "why do the gospels vary so much"? As I alluded to, the entire tradition is one of misdirection, fooling adherents into being the very liars that it says they are. This is why there are so many contradictions found within. It is a complete ruse, meant to work against human progression.

The being looked at, within the context of the Bible's story, as the hero, is actually the villain. Jesus is Lucifer, and believe it or not, he even admits this in Revelations.

Welcome indded. That said, I haven'tmuch to say other than Satan seems more the useful gofor of God's than His opponent. And I don't expect every Bible readerto read every word (I certainly haven't) but it is more imortant to understand what they do read.

[oldbadger]

1. Have you read your Bible completely?

Yes. Lunchtime reading right thru 1994.

2. Do you feel that you understood the seven-hundred and fifty thousand plus words document?

Books like Revelation were just junk, maybe written by the author whilst in frequent hallucinations.
But the stories of how people ruined good ideas, systems and legislation through greed, selfishness and corruption riddled the whole book.

3. Do you abide by the Bible's story? Do you support and agree with these stories as the true origins of human beings? Do you believe that donkeys and snakes talked? And most relevant, Do you agree with the sort of judging and punishing asserted by the Bibles God?

I thought that the laws of Moses were a brilliant guide for a very successful, healthy, strong, fast growing and secure nation......AT THAT TIME.....if they could be kept for any length of time.
The Bible showed that if humanity can mess up something good then it surely will in time.

Yes, sure, I believe that people can hear snakes and donkeys talking....sure. But that depends upon what they've been drinking, smoking or injecting in themselves.

[TRANSPONDER]

It comes down to the same thing every time, Faith, and one can have Faith in all kinds of religions, cults, conspiracy theories and (I'm going to say it) Anyone who doesn't see that that Maga is a denialist, faithbased cult that has infected a political party hath not eyes to see nor ears to hear.

They are all about 'I'm right because i know I'm right' and it's even easier to believe it if you are in a group that beleives the same things, and hold bias -confirmation rallies, so long as the dude up on the stage isn't sounding too crazy.

But isn't atheism also the same? Isn't it a religion with a Dogma (Darwinism) Holy Book (Origin of species) and a High Priest (Dawkins).

If if it (it isn't ) it in evidence a true one, and Christianity isn't. And that is because the Book is wrong. That is the point behind the two 'inerrancy' threads we have going. Like the old atheist meme has it 'If it is wrong about temporal things, how can webeleive it on spiritual things?'

So we may get the bend or break of cherry picking what's true and what's not tr...what's "metaphorical" ...and the denialism of 'no errors'or at least nothing that matters.

Which is why I do the biggies, and part of the hornswoggling of Bible - apologetics is the strawman of picking easy to explain problems ("One angel or two") and ignoring all the biggies.

I still cannot believe that I'm the only one(that I know of) to notice that John has no Transfiguration.

[otseng]

I presume you do what you do because being just lazy.
But I tell ya that in doing that, you are unnecessarily rude and ruthless toward your fellow debaters.
Perhaps it should be taught in schools (both christian and public) how to behave appropiately in an online forum.

Moderator Comment

Please avoid making comments about others.

Please review the Rules.





______________



Moderator comments do not count as a strike against any posters. They only serve as an acknowledgment that a post report has been received, but has not been judged to warrant a moderator warning against a particular poster. Any challenges or replies to moderator postings should be made via Private Message to avoid derailing topics.

[LittleNipper]

3. Do you abide by the Bible's story? Do you support and agree with these stories as the true origins of human beings? Do you believe that donkeys and snakes talked? And most relevant, Do you agree with the sort of judging and punishing asserted by the Bibles God?



Yes, sure, I believe that people can hear snakes and donkeys talking....sure. But that depends upon what they've been drinking, smoking or injecting in themselves.

I feel that you might just be kidding; however, since GOD exists and since the Bible has been inspired by GOD, and since GOD created everything --- then I see no reason under GOD's sun, why if GOD so chooses to allow an animal to communicate with a human that it cannot happen. Perhaps it was telepathic... I don't understand why people want to limit GOD's abilities. If one doesn't believe in GOD, then don't believe. However, to make light of miraculous events as silly, seems rather redundant of those who choose not to believe that the CREATOR is real. Without GOD there are no miracles, but then prove how life originated by making some biological life of your own. Until then, that's the atheist's own miraculous belief.