Contradictions in the NT - and does it matter?

Argue for and against Christianity

Moderator: Moderators

TRANSPONDER
Savant
Posts: 7960
Joined: Thu Apr 29, 2021 8:05 am
Has thanked: 932 times
Been thanked: 3486 times

Contradictions in the NT - and does it matter?

Post #1

Post by TRANSPONDER »

Well, I seem to have run out of correspondents, so let's start a thread - and on my Pet Subject:- the Contradictions.

I already set out some major contradictions in the Resurrection -accounts, hinted at them in the Nativity accounts (and those are the two touchstone cases). I referred to Luke's version of the 'Rejection at Nazareth' and I think I mentioned the 'death of Judas' as a contradiction as well as being a fudged 'prophecy'.

But I think the point is made: minor contradictions aren't too important. Who said what and in what order isn't too serious. But really bad ones discredit the reliability of the gospels. It is serious when John has no angel at the tomb explaining where Jesus had gone, and Mary running back and gasping that she doesn't know where 'they' have taken him is a total refutation of the claim of a message given at the empty tomb. I also argued that Cleophas, having heard the Marys' account of this while relating that they had seen angels, specifically says that they did not see Jesus. Somebody is telling whoppers and John sides with Luke - there is no appearance of Jesus before the Marys report back to the disciples. Matthew made that one up.

But one I really like is the transfiguration. We can disentangle the added material, such as the Other feeding of 4,000 ir that improbable trip to Caesarea Philippi; it pretty much occurred over 2 days:-

Jesus and the disciples sail across lake Galilee to Bethsaida.
He feeds the crowd (of men sitting on the grass in groups of 50) with bread and fish.
He is recognised as the messiah, by his own followers at least.
He sends the disciples back to Capernaum in the boat and catches up with them, walking on the water.

And we know where the transfiguration should occur - after the recognition by Peter that Jesus is the Messiah and before the disciples return to Capernaum by boat.

So, why isn't it in John? There's no question of where it should be, but we get Jesus apparently escaping the crowd, who want to make him a king 'By force', going into the hills. Is anyone going to argue that John didn't know about the Transfiguration, or thought it not worth mentioning? He is describing what happened; why does he tell a totally different story?

User avatar
William
Savant
Posts: 14003
Joined: Tue Jul 31, 2012 8:11 pm
Location: Te Waipounamu
Has thanked: 906 times
Been thanked: 1629 times
Contact:

Re: Contradictions in the NT - and does it matter?

Post #11

Post by William »

Difflugia wrote: Wed May 12, 2021 4:30 pm
William wrote: Wed May 12, 2021 3:54 pmNow - Just because John didn't mention the Transfiguration...does not mean he was not there at the time or that it did not happen.
This isn't TD&D, so just because the Synoptics mentioned it doesn't mean that it did happen.
It doesn't matter what forum things are stated. Such type alternate experiences have been had throughout history and pre as well. Where do we think theism comes from? The imaginative pens/tongues of script-writers/fireside story-tellers?
If you want to critique theism - in this case Christianity - then you have to embrace that into your reasoning and explain it as more than simply brain-farts, if you wish to be taken seriously.
The main reason the Beloved Disciple is traditionally considered to be John in the first place is because of the disciples otherwise not mentioned (he only names Peter, Andrew, Philip, Nathaniel, and Thomas), John is the only one that, again by tradition, wasn't dead yet when the Gospel was likely written. Modern consensus is that it was written by an unknown member of a later "Johannine school" of Jewish Christians.
So what?

How does that information critique what I wrote? Are you suggesting that the author was not in love with the central figure of the story as he made out to be?

User avatar
Miles
Savant
Posts: 5179
Joined: Fri Aug 28, 2009 4:19 pm
Has thanked: 434 times
Been thanked: 1614 times

Re: Contradictions in the NT - and does it matter?

Post #12

Post by Miles »

.


Biblical contradictions, be they large or small, all point out one thing: the fallibility of the Bible. While it may not matter one wit that 2 Samuel 24:24 says David paid 50 shekels of silver for the purchase of a property, while 1 Chronicles 21:22-25 says he paid 600 shekels of gold, the important point is that the Bible got one of them wrong, and if the Bible can get one thing wrong it can well get many things wrong, some even quite important. Take the contradictory descriptions of Jesus's ascension to heaven as pointed out by Learn Religions:


"It wasn’t enough that Jesus rises from the dead; he also had to ascend to heaven. But where, when, and how did this happen?

Mark 16:14-19 - Jesus ascends while he and his disciples are seated at a table in or near Jerusalem

Matthew 28:16-20 - Jesus’ ascension isn’t mentioned at all, but Matthew ends at a mountain in Galilee [not important enough to mention?]

Luke 24:50-51
- Jesus ascends outside, after dinner, and at Bethany and on the same day as the resurrection

John - Nothing about Jesus’ ascension is mentioned [not important enough to mention?]

Acts 1:9-12 - Jesus ascends at least 40 days after his resurrection, at Mt. Olivet"
source

Take these contradictions as you will, and no doubt most denominations have done just that, picking one as the truth and letting the others fall by the wayside, but is this really the honest thing to do? My bet is that by way of their apologetics they'll say it is. Personally, if one is going to contend, as the Bible does, "All Scripture is God-breathed and is useful for teaching, rebuking, correcting and training in righteousness," (2 Timothy 3:16 ) it seems quite un-Christian to ignore anything in the Bible.

Of course the huge terror here is that those verses that go uncontradicted could just as well be wrong as any contradicted verse. What if the verse saying David paid 50 shekels of silver for the purchase of a property was wrong? A verse extremely important to the construction of one's theology (don't ask how or why) which made it substantially different from a theology based on David paying 600 shekels of gold, a verse never mentioned, but happened to be right!! Your 50 shekel religion would turn out to be a sham.

Hence, I see Biblical contradictions as a red flag to tread very cautiously and not to believe everything you read in the Bible. . . . . . . . if anything all



.
Last edited by Miles on Wed May 12, 2021 10:17 pm, edited 1 time in total.

User avatar
Difflugia
Prodigy
Posts: 3017
Joined: Wed Jun 12, 2019 10:25 am
Location: Michigan
Has thanked: 3247 times
Been thanked: 1997 times

Re: Contradictions in the NT - and does it matter?

Post #13

Post by Difflugia »

William wrote: Wed May 12, 2021 6:20 pmIt doesn't matter what forum things are stated.
Sure it does. In TD&D, we have to pretend that the stories are all nonfiction and somehow true together. Here, John's Gospel is a different story than Mark's Gospel. If John's Gospel doesn't have a transfiguration, then you don't get to add one just because a different story has one. If you're going to claim that John is telling a story with a transfiguration despite not mentioning one, you don't get to just inherit it from Mark, but must somehow connect it to John.
William wrote: Wed May 12, 2021 6:20 pmSuch type alternate experiences have been had throughout history and pre as well.
I don't know what you mean by that.
William wrote: Wed May 12, 2021 6:20 pmWhere do we think theism comes from?
The propensity for humans to attribute random events to an intelligent agent.
William wrote: Wed May 12, 2021 6:20 pmThe imaginative pens/tongues of script-writers/fireside story-tellers?
That, too.
William wrote: Wed May 12, 2021 6:20 pmIf you want to critique theism - in this case Christianity
I'm not critiqueing theism per se; whether or not a God exists has little bearing on whether the Bible is allegory or history, reliable or unreliable.
William wrote: Wed May 12, 2021 6:20 pm- then you have to embrace that into your reasoning and explain it as more than simply brain-farts, if you wish to be taken seriously.
You mean that it's more than a story? All we have is the story. If you want to establish it as more, that's up to you to demonstrate and it's not something I'm obligated to assume.
William wrote: Wed May 12, 2021 6:20 pm
The main reason the Beloved Disciple is traditionally considered to be John in the first place is because of the disciples otherwise not mentioned (he only names Peter, Andrew, Philip, Nathaniel, and Thomas), John is the only one that, again by tradition, wasn't dead yet when the Gospel was likely written. Modern consensus is that it was written by an unknown member of a later "Johannine school" of Jewish Christians.
So what?

How does that information critique what I wrote?
You wrote:
John does give the reader a whole other perspective to bath in. Assuming he is the same "Beloved Disciple" his take on things went through particular filters associated with the relationship he had with Jesus - itself filtered through his particular attitudes, beliefs, world view and subconscious intention.
You don't think "John's not the Beloved Disciple" impacts that?
William wrote: Wed May 12, 2021 6:20 pmAre you suggesting that the author was not in love with the central figure of the story as he made out to be?
That depends on what you mean. If you're just talking about the motivations of the Beloved Disciple and Jesus as characters in the story, then it's not a settled question whether the Beloved Disciple was written as the narrator of the story or the narrator's written source. If you mean a relationship of some sort between the actual author of the work and a historical Jesus, then it's unlikely that a historical Jesus and the author of John's Gospel ever met.
My pronouns are he, him, and his.

TRANSPONDER
Savant
Posts: 7960
Joined: Thu Apr 29, 2021 8:05 am
Has thanked: 932 times
Been thanked: 3486 times

Re: Contradictions in the NT - and does it matter?

Post #14

Post by TRANSPONDER »

1213 wrote: Wed May 12, 2021 4:27 pm
TRANSPONDER wrote: Wed May 12, 2021 2:25 pm ...It's this: Mark 9 2 says: ....
John, 6.15, describing what must be the same event say this...
Sorry, I don’t see any good reason to think they are about the same thing.

As I explained above, the sequence of events shakes down clearly

Jesus and the disciples cross the ea of Galilee to Bethsaida, the 5000 are fed then the disciples return to Capernaum and Jesus catches them up by walking on the water.

In between, there is the recognition of Jesus as the Messiah and the transfiguration. That is where John ought to have that if he knew of it. Instead, he has this business of Jesus escaping into the hills because the people want to force him to be a king. I don't see any way they cannot be what was supposed to happen at the same time, but the stories are quite different.

TRANSPONDER
Savant
Posts: 7960
Joined: Thu Apr 29, 2021 8:05 am
Has thanked: 932 times
Been thanked: 3486 times

Re: Contradictions in the NT - and does it matter?

Post #15

Post by TRANSPONDER »

Difflugia wrote: Wed May 12, 2021 9:44 pm
William wrote: Wed May 12, 2021 6:20 pmIt doesn't matter what forum things are stated.
Sure it does. In TD&D, we have to pretend that the stories are all nonfiction and somehow true together. Here, John's Gospel is a different story than Mark's Gospel. If John's Gospel doesn't have a transfiguration, then you don't get to add one just because a different story has one. If you're going to claim that John is telling a story with a transfiguration despite not mentioning one, you don't get to just inherit it from Mark, but must somehow connect it to John.
William wrote: Wed May 12, 2021 6:20 pmSuch type alternate experiences have been had throughout history and pre as well.
I don't know what you mean by that.
William wrote: Wed May 12, 2021 6:20 pmWhere do we think theism comes from?
The propensity for humans to attribute random events to an intelligent agent.
William wrote: Wed May 12, 2021 6:20 pmThe imaginative pens/tongues of script-writers/fireside story-tellers?
That, too.
William wrote: Wed May 12, 2021 6:20 pmIf you want to critique theism - in this case Christianity
I'm not critiqueing theism per se; whether or not a God exists has little bearing on whether the Bible is allegory or history, reliable or unreliable.
William wrote: Wed May 12, 2021 6:20 pm- then you have to embrace that into your reasoning and explain it as more than simply brain-farts, if you wish to be taken seriously.
You mean that it's more than a story? All we have is the story. If you want to establish it as more, that's up to you to demonstrate and it's not something I'm obligated to assume.
William wrote: Wed May 12, 2021 6:20 pm
The main reason the Beloved Disciple is traditionally considered to be John in the first place is because of the disciples otherwise not mentioned (he only names Peter, Andrew, Philip, Nathaniel, and Thomas), John is the only one that, again by tradition, wasn't dead yet when the Gospel was likely written. Modern consensus is that it was written by an unknown member of a later "Johannine school" of Jewish Christians.
So what?

How does that information critique what I wrote?
You wrote:
John does give the reader a whole other perspective to bath in. Assuming he is the same "Beloved Disciple" his take on things went through particular filters associated with the relationship he had with Jesus - itself filtered through his particular attitudes, beliefs, world view and subconscious intention.
You don't think "John's not the Beloved Disciple" impacts that?
William wrote: Wed May 12, 2021 6:20 pmAre you suggesting that the author was not in love with the central figure of the story as he made out to be?
That depends on what you mean. If you're just talking about the motivations of the Beloved Disciple and Jesus as characters in the story, then it's not a settled question whether the Beloved Disciple was written as the narrator of the story or the narrator's written source. If you mean a relationship of some sort between the actual author of the work and a historical Jesus, then it's unlikely that a historical Jesus and the author of John's Gospel ever met.
This whole question of a supposed eyewitness that we can trust (as the writer of John says) is an interesting one. At one time, I toyed with the idea that John's gospel, apart from the writer's evident addition of debates and sermons that he puts into Jesus' mouth (there is little hint of them in any of the synoptic gospels, just as John relates no parables) was indeed based on an eyewitness account and more reliable in the related events than the synoptics were. The arrival at Bethany and the collecting of a pre-arranged donkey to ride to the Temple first thing next morning, the exhibition -resurrection of Lazarus which, if taken as an Event, has all the signs of a put -up job and the details of Jesus being quizzed by Caiphas' father in law, looked persuasively eyewitness to me. I have doubts about that now, particularly the business of handing over Jesus' mother to the 'beloved disciple', which I suspect is symbolic of the passing of Jesus' authority from the Jews to the Christians. After all, Jesus' brothers and sisters were presumably still alive.

I see the basic common story as what John calls a reliable eyewitness, and he adds to that whatever he wants - which disagrees with the synoptic story.

User avatar
William
Savant
Posts: 14003
Joined: Tue Jul 31, 2012 8:11 pm
Location: Te Waipounamu
Has thanked: 906 times
Been thanked: 1629 times
Contact:

Re: Contradictions in the NT - and does it matter?

Post #16

Post by William »

[Replying to TRANSPONDER in post #16]
Sure it does. In TD&D, we have to pretend that the stories are all nonfiction and somehow true together.
But I don't have to pretend that the stories are not true, just because we are in this forum. My position therefore is that they could be true so what makes them untrue?

I do not think so called 'contradictions' prove that they are therefore 'untrue' - which I think you are arguing that they do...
Here, John's Gospel is a different story than Mark's Gospel.


Clearly the Catholic Church is responsible for including and excluding things which are in the bible.
[link]
If John's Gospel doesn't have a transfiguration, then you don't get to add one just because a different story has one.
I wasn't trying to add anything other than the obvious details which are missing. The thing about stories and readers is that the brain projects images on the mind according to what one is reading.
If you're going to claim that John is telling a story with a transfiguration despite not mentioning one, you don't get to just inherit it from Mark, but must somehow connect it to John.
Well since Mark and John were connected anyway... Peter, James, and John were there. Mark wasn't...so we have to treat Marks account as second hand.
Such type alternate experiences have been had throughout history and pre as well.
I don't know what you mean by that.
Astral Plane stuff - where humans experience alternate realities. Jesus obviously had a good understanding and foothold in that realm. [He referred to the Astral Plane as "My Fathers Kingdom"] - as the story goes.

Before the Bible and even before religion, The Astral Realms have been experienced by human beings.

Some have even become masters within it through understanding it.

Jesus obviously was able to take others with him and the transfiguration story is evidence of that.

To the disciples at the time, it seemed to be the other way around and the Astral Realm came to them - into their world.
It doesn't really matter which is which as the reality is they superimpose upon each other.

So yeah. We are talking about stories and which are 'true' and which are 'false' and how do we know which is which.
Where do we think theism comes from?
The propensity for humans to attribute random events to an intelligent agent.
You are mistaken. Theism understands there is intelligent agency involved with real-world events - and the agency can be experienced as real.
That is why theism has persisted, in various form and function. Zooming in upon one small part of it, does not show one the whole picture.
The imaginative pens/tongues of script-writers/fireside story-tellers?
That, too.
From another perspective, what has been happening upon this planet throughout its existence, is itself a story. One might say that the author is ultimately whomever created it, if indeed created it is.
Everyone is an actor even if they do not care to understand it that way. Many of us are also co-writers...

What is your story? I bet you have one. Do you think it is true? Does it matter?
Point being, stories are what we live in and for.
You don't think "John's not the Beloved Disciple" impacts that?
It doesn't matter as far as I can tell. I read love in Johns words. Even maybe infatuation.
This whole question of a supposed eyewitness that we can trust (as the writer of John says) is an interesting one.
There is a position possible where trusting stories is not really the point. Nor even trusting the teller of the story.
John appears to be pointing to Jesus as he knew him and saying "trust that guy." - go far enough in with that, and the Astral Realm presents itself as something which can be experienced.
At one time, I toyed with the idea that John's gospel, apart from the writer's evident addition of debates and sermons that he puts into Jesus' mouth (there is little hint of them in any of the synoptic gospels, just as John relates no parables) was indeed based on an eyewitness account and more reliable in the related events than the synoptics were. The arrival at Bethany and the collecting of a pre-arranged donkey to ride to the Temple first thing next morning, the exhibition -resurrection of Lazarus which, if taken as an Event, has all the signs of a put -up job and the details of Jesus being quizzed by Caiphas' father in law, looked persuasively eyewitness to me. I have doubts about that now, particularly the business of handing over Jesus' mother to the 'beloved disciple', which I suspect is symbolic of the passing of Jesus' authority from the Jews to the Christians. After all, Jesus' brothers and sisters were presumably still alive.
Maybe John was revealing that certain tricks were being played to add to the mystique in order to attract that kind of seeker...or maybe that is just the way things went down.
Essentially that is why it is hopeless to get uptight about contradictions. Life is practically full of them and that is why things are so darned interesting.

Sure - its not quite the Dungeons and Dragons of Lord of The Rings fame - where the reader can become part of the story so much easier...but nor is Robin Hood - one has to inject life into the characters and understand their dilemma...once upon a time they were minding their own business and up walked a magician...saying he came from "God" - where exactly is the funny side?

Half the problem is the way it has been presented...dry and pointed...but why should I let that get in the way of having a good time?
I see the basic common story as what John calls a reliable eyewitness, and he adds to that whatever he wants - which disagrees with the synoptic story.
It branches away from the others but that in itself does not signify that it was made up. I get what I can from them all.

Image

User avatar
JehovahsWitness
Savant
Posts: 21073
Joined: Wed Sep 29, 2010 6:03 am
Has thanked: 790 times
Been thanked: 1114 times
Contact:

Re: Contradictions in the NT - and does it matter?

Post #17

Post by JehovahsWitness »

TRANSPONDER wrote: Wed May 12, 2021 10:37 pm As I explained above, the sequence of events shakes down clearly
# EVENT : feeding of the 5000 ( Maththew 14:13-34; Mark 6:41-53 ; Luke 9:10-17; John 6:10-21 )
# TIME : Shortly before the Passover, Spring 32(?) (John 6:4)
# LOCATION : Around the sea of Galilee (Eastern shore near Bethsaida)

# EVENT : Jesus withdraws to prays on the mountain ( Mat 14:23; Mark 6:45-46 ; John 6:10-15 )
# LOCATION : around the sea of Galilee (Eastern shore near Bethsaida)

# EVENT : Jesus walks on water to meet the disciple (Mat 14:24-33; Mark 6:47-53 ; John 6:16-20)
# LOCATION : The sea of Galilee

# EVENT : Jesus and his disciples come ashore (Mat 14:34; Mark 6:53 ; John 6:21 )
# LOCATION : Gennesaret (back on the western shore South of Capernaum.)

COMMENT : All 4 gospels specifically mention the feeding of the 5000 as happening in region in the vicinity of the Sea of Galilee. While Lukes narrative of the days events stops there, all three remaining accounts indicate that the subsequent dismissal of the crowd*, his praying in isolation and the miracle on the sea all happened on the same evening.



JESUS WITHDRAWS
TRANSPONDER wrote: Wed May 12, 2021 10:37 pm
In between, there is the recognition of Jesus as the Messiah and the transfiguration. That is where John ought to have that if he knew of it. Instead, he has this business of Jesus escaping into the hills because the people want to force him to be a king.
Emphasis MINE

*John reports that evidently some in said crowd wanted to make Jesus king (there is no mention or recognising Jesus Messiahship). There is no absolutely no reason to link John's observation with the miracle of the transfiguration.


TRANSPONDER wrote: Wed May 12, 2021 10:37 pm... the stories are quite different.
John account harmonizes completely with the synoptics; as is common in John it simply adds a detail the others ommitted.





JW
Last edited by JehovahsWitness on Thu May 13, 2021 6:40 am, edited 4 times in total.
INDEX: More bible based ANSWERS
http://debatingchristianity.com/forum/v ... 81#p826681


"For if we live, we live to Jehovah, and if we die, we die to Jehovah. So both if we live and if we die, we belong to Jehovah" -
Romans 14:8

User avatar
JehovahsWitness
Savant
Posts: 21073
Joined: Wed Sep 29, 2010 6:03 am
Has thanked: 790 times
Been thanked: 1114 times
Contact:

Re: Contradictions in the NT - and does it matter?

Post #18

Post by JehovahsWitness »

THE TRANSFIGURATION
TRANSPONDER wrote: Wed May 12, 2021 10:37 pmI don't see any way they cannot be what was supposed to happen at the same time...
None of the gospels allude to the transfiguration at the same time as the feeding of the 5000.

OBJECTION #1: But does Luke not say that same day Jesus was transfigured ?

No he does not. True, the next thing Luke reports is the transfiguration but the connector he uses (later) only indicates that what he is about to narrate happened chronologically after: he does not say "later that same day#" or "later that night". There is no indication of how long after the feeding of the 5000 the narrative picks up.


OBJECTION #2 But does Luke not say Jesus was praying alone ?

Yes. But this is not particularly signifiant as the gospels on many occassions speak of Jesus seeking solitude to pray. There is no reason to link Lukes observation to the earlier event.

Image






CONCLUSION : We cannot possibly know exactly when the conversation Jesus had with his disciples at Luke 9:18-21 look place. Or indeed if his warnings of the suffefings of being a disciple, were on the same occasion. All we can say for sure is that the writer stipulates 8 days after the latter exchange, Jesus was again on a mountain, this time with four of his disciples and they witnesses the transfiguration. It is the other gospels which provide the context of when and where (and on which mountain), the later" event of the transfiguration look place.





RELATED POSTS
What are we to make of the transfiguration promises?
http://debatingchristianity.com/forum/v ... 11#p832111

What is the significance of the transfiguration?
http://debatingchristianity.com/forum/v ... 04#p921204

Did Luke report the transfiguration happened on the same day as the feeding of the 5000? [This post]
viewtopic.php?p=1039401#p1039401

Did the disciple witness actual dead people talking at the transfiguration?
viewtopic.php?p=943921#p943921
Last edited by JehovahsWitness on Sun Oct 16, 2022 11:44 am, edited 1 time in total.
INDEX: More bible based ANSWERS
http://debatingchristianity.com/forum/v ... 81#p826681


"For if we live, we live to Jehovah, and if we die, we die to Jehovah. So both if we live and if we die, we belong to Jehovah" -
Romans 14:8

nobspeople
Prodigy
Posts: 3187
Joined: Wed Nov 11, 2020 11:32 am
Has thanked: 1510 times
Been thanked: 824 times

Re: Contradictions in the NT - and does it matter?

Post #19

Post by nobspeople »

[Replying to TRANSPONDER in post #1]

Contradictions in the NT - and does it matter?
I think it matters if one believes the bible to be 100% the Word of God (and thus infallible), even if it's inspired and not literally dictated.
If it is 100% the word of God, there should be no contradictions IF God is truly trying to tell humanity 'what's right and wrong'. If there are contradictions in the 100% true word of God, then we must assume God is messing with humanity purposefully OR he's incompetent.
If one believes the bible isn't infallible, then any contradictions or something that doesn't 'make sense' can simply be overlooked.
Convenient.
Have a great, potentially godless, day!

User avatar
Goose
Guru
Posts: 1707
Joined: Wed Oct 02, 2013 6:49 pm
Location: The Great White North
Has thanked: 79 times
Been thanked: 68 times

Re: Contradictions in the NT - and does it matter?

Post #20

Post by Goose »

TRANSPONDER wrote: Wed May 12, 2021 12:05 pmWell, I seem to have run out of correspondents, so let's start a thread - and on my Pet Subject:- the Contradictions.
I’m wondering, do you also take such a keen interest in the contradictions present between secular accounts or is it just contradictions between the Gospels?
I already set out some major contradictions in the Resurrection -accounts, hinted at them in the Nativity accounts (and those are the two touchstone cases). I referred to Luke's version of the 'Rejection at Nazareth' and I think I mentioned the 'death of Judas' as a contradiction as well as being a fudged 'prophecy'.
Are you referring to your post here?
But I think the point is made: minor contradictions aren't too important. Who said what and in what order isn't too serious. But really bad ones discredit the reliability of the gospels.
Does this criterion of “really bad” contradictions also discredit the reliability of secular works? It should if one is being consistent.

But more importantly, what objective criteria are you using to determine what constitutes a “really bad” contradiction? How many of these “really bad” contradictions must be present to discredit the reliability? Just one? Or five? Or fifty? You’ve given some examples of what you subjectively think is a “really bad” one but not explained why it is the case that the example(s) is actually a “really bad” one. At this point we just have your assertion it’s really bad. All I need to do to counter your argument is merely assert it’s not really that bad, but rather seems like a minor contradiction.
It is serious when John has no angel at the tomb explaining where Jesus had gone,
Why is that serious or a “really bad” one? This seems to me to be a minor contradiction and thus not too important by your reasoning.
and Mary running back and gasping that she doesn't know where 'they' have taken him is a total refutation of the claim of a message given at the empty tomb.
How is this a “total refutation”? I’m not following you here. This, again, seems like a minor contradiction to me.
I also argued that Cleophas, having heard the Marys' account of this while relating that they had seen angels, specifically says that they did not see Jesus. Somebody is telling whoppers and John sides with Luke - there is no appearance of Jesus before the Marys report back to the disciples.
But why is this a “really bad” one? Seems like another minor one to me.
Matthew made that one up.
Perhaps. But can you prove it?
But one I really like is the transfiguration. We can disentangle the added material, such as the Other feeding of 4,000 ir that improbable trip to Caesarea Philippi; it pretty much occurred over 2 days:-

Jesus and the disciples sail across lake Galilee to Bethsaida.
He feeds the crowd (of men sitting on the grass in groups of 50) with bread and fish.
He is recognised as the messiah, by his own followers at least.
He sends the disciples back to Capernaum in the boat and catches up with them, walking on the water.

And we know where the transfiguration should occur - after the recognition by Peter that Jesus is the Messiah and before the disciples return to Capernaum by boat.

So, why isn't it in John? There's no question of where it should be, but we get Jesus apparently escaping the crowd, who want to make him a king 'By force', going into the hills. Is anyone going to argue that John didn't know about the Transfiguration, or thought it not worth mentioning? He is describing what happened; why does he tell a totally different story?
But why is John’s omission of the transfiguration a “really bad” contradiction? In fact, why should we think of an omission as a contradiction at all?
Things atheists say:

"Is it the case [that torturing and killing babies for fun is immoral]? Prove it." - Bust Nak

"For the record...I think the Gospels are intentional fiction and Jesus wasn't a real guy." – Difflugia

"Julius Caesar and Jesus both didn't exist." - brunumb

"...most atheists have no arguments or evidence to disprove God." – unknown soldier (a.k.a. the banned member Jagella)

Post Reply