Some of the historical conflicts in the New Testament.

[polonius]

While some claim the Bible is inerrant, how do we explain the contradictions it contains?

For example:

Was Jesus crucified on the Passover (Matthew, Mark, Luke) or on the Day of Preparation before the Passover (John)?

Following Jesus' birth, did his family return to Nazareth (Luke) or did they settle for a time in Egypt (Matthew)?

Was Jesus born during the reign of King Herod (who died in 4 BC)(Matthew) or during the 6 AD census of Judea (Luke)?

Did Jesus ascend to heaven on the day he rose from the dead (Luke) or 40 days later (Acts of the Apostles?)

[JehovahsWitness]

The Magi visit was before any trip to Egypt or return to Nazareth.

So ...

• A) before the trip to Egypt.
  
  B) before the return to Nazareth.

Is there any indication from Matthew how long before the return to Nazareth the visit was?



JW

[liamconnor]

I am a Christian, but not an inerrantist.

The problem of the chronological disrepancy between Luke and Matthew is, in my opinion, insoluble. The maneuvers required by inerrantists depend on inserting gaps into passages which lack defined time. I don't think it works:

In both, Jesus is born in Bethlehem.

In Luke, forty days from his birth he is brought to Jerusalem. The text then says "And when they had performed everything...they returned to...Nazareth."
Now, some ambiguity can be read into "And WHEN they had performed...". Perhaps some can read into this that they returned to Bethlehem, where Matthew's chronology would take place, and then "they returned to Nazareth".

Luke would then run thus:

Jesus is born in Bethlehem.
Jesus is taken to Jersualem
(Jesus returns to Bethlehem)
(Jesus is taken to Egypt)
Jesus is taken to Nazareth

If so, we must schedule Matthew as such:

Jesus is born in Bethlehem.
(Jesus is taken to Jerusalem)
Jesus returns to Bethlehem
Jesus lives in Bethlehem
Jesus is taken to Egypt
Jesus is taken to Nazareth.

In my opinion, Luke's language in "when they had performed everything..." (2:39) does not allow such an enormous amount of time. If he had used an aorist participle (in Greek) then perhaps. But he uses an adverb (os) which indicates an immediate sequence.

[JehovahsWitness]

I am a Christian, but not an inerrantist.

The problem of the chronological disrepancy between Luke and Matthew is, in my opinion, insoluble. The maneuvers required by inerrantists depend on inserting gaps into passages which lack defined time.

If the passage lacks a definite time indicator "gaps" may well be implicit in the narrative.

I went to the post office.
I got married.

Why would anyone with any critical thinking skills see these two statements as contradictory or even problematic given a complete lack of time indicators?

Even..

I went to the post office on Tuesday.
I had eggs and bacon and when I I had finished all my food I got married.

While bible critics, anti-theists and graduates from higher institutes of theological studies, may be clamouring to pronounce the above "contradictory" the reality there is absolutely no "chronological disrepancy" since only one statement has a time indicator.

Much as I'd like to address the non-issue of the biblical narrative of the sejourn to Egypt, I have yet to find a critic capable of forming a coherent argument as to what exactly they see as problematic in the two complementary biblical narratives.

JW

[polonius]

The Magi visit was before any trip to Egypt or return to Nazareth.

So ...

• A) before the trip to Egypt.
  
  B) before the return to Nazareth.

Is there any indication from Matthew how long before the return to Nazareth the visit was?



JW

RESPONSE: What relavence is your question?

According to Luke, Joseph and Mary returned to Nazareth following the birth rites for Mary which were competed about 40 days after birth for a male child.

According to Matthew, the "Magi" visited the Holy family while they were still in the Bethlehem area.

One version has the Holy Family going to Egypt. The other has them returning to Nazareth.

At best only one version is fact, the other is fiction.

[JehovahsWitness]

The Magi visit was before any trip to Egypt or return to Nazareth.

So ...

• A) before the trip to Egypt.
  
  B) before the return to Nazareth.

Is there any indication from Matthew how long before the return to Nazareth the visit was?



JW

RESPONSE: What relavence is your question?

According to Luke, Joseph and Mary returned to Nazareth following the birth rites for Mary which were competed about 40 days after birth for a male child.

According to Matthew, the "Magi" visited the Holy family while they were still in the Bethlehem area.

One version has the Holy Family going to Egypt. The other has them returning to Nazareth.

At best only one version is fact, the other is fiction.

The relelevence is if they moved to Nazareth after their trip to Egypt the two accounts can be harmonized, is there anything in Luke's account that tenders this impossible?

[polonius]

JW posted:

The relevence is if they moved to Nazareth after their trip to Egypt the two accounts can be harmonized, is there anything in Luke's account that tenders this impossible?

RESPONSE:

I’m afraid not.

Luke 2:3939 When they had finished everything required by the law of the Lord (40 days after the birth of a male), they returned to Galilee, to their own town of Nazareth.

But,

Matthew 2:22 But when he heard that Archelaus was ruling over Judea in place of his father Herod, (Note: That Archelaus remained in Judea until 6 AD or later) he (Joseph) was afraid to go there. And after being warned in a dream, he went away to the district of Galilee. 23 There he made his home in a town called Nazareth,
Joseph made his home there. i.e He was not returning home.

And of course Luke has them return to their home in Nazareth about 40 days after the birth of Jesus. While Matthew has the whole slaughter of the innocents and visit of the Magi story inserted at this point.

N.B “In Matthew's Gospel, Bethlehem appears to be the home town of Jesus' parents, Joseph and Mary. After Jesus was born, magi came following a star from the east to see the new Messiah, whom they found in a house in Bethlehem. But Herod was afraid that Jesus would become king in his place. Jesus and his family fled immediately to Egypt, while Herod had all the infants killed, in order to remove a supposed rival. After Herod died, the family returned towards Bethlehem but, being warned in a dream, turned aside and migrated to Nazareth in Galilee.

There are more important time discrepancies between Matthew and Luke’s birth narratives.

Perhaps you’d like to compare Matthew’s claim that Jesus was born during the lifetime of King Herod who died in 4 BC and Luke’s claim that Jesus was born during the Judean census of 6 AD. That’s a ten year difference.

[JehovahsWitness]

[Replying to post 16 by polonius]

Which word renders the above reading impossible? The word "There or "he" or "made" maybe "his home "?

[polonius]

[Replying to post 16 by polonius]

Which word renders the above reading impossible? The word "There or "he" or "made" maybe "his home "?

RESPONSE: Apparently you've run out of rational arguments so now we are playing word games

Lets summarize:

1. The nativity narratives apparently were attached to the earlier strata of Matthew narrative. Later to Luke's (See the writings of the Edomites the first Christians).

2. It is improbably that Jesus was born both during the lifetime of King Herod (died in 4 BC) and born again during the Jewish census of 6 AD. conducted by the governor of Syria with jurisdiction over Judea (but not Galilee).

Here the story breaks off into two versions: Matthew has Jesus born while King Herod is still alive and who orders the slaughter of the newborn of Bethlehem. He has Rachael weeping for her children although she died about 600 years earlier.

We then have at least two "Magi" who follow an erratic star which settles over the where Jesus is. (Luke says nothing about this.)

After Jesus is born and the necessary purification rituals are performed (according to Luke), Joseph and Mary return to their home in Nazareth of Galilee. Matthew has them travel by why of Egypt so he can fulfill the prophecy "Out of Egypt I have called my son, Just like Moses was.

It is unclear just whyJoseph and Mary residents of Nazareth in Galilee were counted in the census, since the Judean census under Quirinius involved only those living in Judea and perhaps Syria.

But such facts of history leave the "true believers" to resort to "Which word renders the above reading impossible? The word "There or "he" or "made" maybe "his home "? attempts to prove the historicity of what is rather obviously a very badly conflicted story. Note that aside from Matthew and Luke, no other evangelist nor even Christ himself makes any reference to it.

The tale is told in Matthew and Luke and never referred to in later writings.

And then the story becomes even less credible (if that is possible) with

Though nearly identical from Abraham to David, the two accounts of Jesus parentage are entirely different from David to Jesus. After David, only the names of Shealtiel and Zerubbabel appear on both lists.

Matthew has twenty-seven 27 generations from David to Joseph, whereas Luke has forty-two,42 with almost no overlap between the names on the two lists.� Notably, the two accounts also disagree on who Joseph's father was: Matthew says he was Jacob, while Luke says he was Heli.

These problems usually result in fundamentalist apologists wanting to play word games to avoid having to admit that these stories are largely Christian fictions.

[JehovahsWitness]

[Replying to post 16 by polonius]

Which word renders the above reading impossible? The word "There or "he" or "made" maybe "his home "?

RESPONSE: Apparently you've run out of rational arguments so now we are playing word games

No, just trying to get you to go by the plain meaning of words and refer to the actual words in the text. Which words exactly restrict the move to Nazareth to within 40 days of Jesus birth? Which words exactly limit the move to Nazareth happening on the 41st day after Jesus birth?

So why dont you

• a) Point to the words ...

So we can

• b) ...just go by the plain meaning of them.

Lets summarize: ...

No let's see if you can point to the actual words that support your claim.



JW

[showme]

While some claim the Bible is inerrant, how do we explain the contradictions it contains?

For example:

Was Jesus crucified on the Passover (Matthew, Mark, Luke) or on the Day of Preparation before the Passover (John)?

Following Jesus' birth, did his family return to Nazareth (Luke) or did they settle for a time in Egypt (Matthew)?

Was Jesus born during the reign of King Herod (who died in 4 BC)(Matthew) or during the 6 AD census of Judea (Luke)?

Did Jesus ascend to heaven on the day he rose from the dead (Luke) or 40 days later (Acts of the Apostles?)

I don't want to imply that the accounting of the NT is without numerous misrepresentations and falsehoods, but the day of Preparation for the Feast of Unleavened bread is Passover. And the Passover lamb was sacrificed between the two evenings of Passover, the 14th of Nissan. The Feast of Unleavened Bread is on the 15th of Nissan, and is a high holy Sabbath. The Jewish traditions appear to not follow what is written in the law, and appear to combine Passover with the feast of Unleavened Bread into one feast. The "last supper" was not the "feast of the Passover" but occurred "before the feast of the Passover" (John 13:1-2).