A simple---but serious---question

Argue for and against Christianity

Moderator: Moderators

Post Reply
Athetotheist
Prodigy
Posts: 2690
Joined: Sat Nov 02, 2019 5:24 pm
Has thanked: 14 times
Been thanked: 484 times

A simple---but serious---question

Post #1

Post by Athetotheist »

There are numerous god-men who died and rose from death in stories predating the time of Jesus. Considering the notable differences between the gospel accounts, and particularly the differences between the accounts of Jesus's supposed resurrection, here's a question for gospel apologists to think seriously about:

There are four resurrection accounts about Jesus in the Christian gospels. If the exact same accounts, with the exact same differences, were written about Osiris, Tammuz, Attis or any such god-man other than Jesus, would Christian apologists find all of those accounts believable?

And if they wouldn't find all of them believable, would they find any of them believable?

benchwarmer
Guru
Posts: 2283
Joined: Mon Jun 06, 2016 8:40 am
Has thanked: 1956 times
Been thanked: 735 times

Re: A simple---but serious---question

Post #11

Post by benchwarmer »

JehovahsWitness wrote: Fri Dec 03, 2021 10:23 am It would be foolish IMO to believe that four independent accounts of the same event should be absolutely identical in content.
I'm pretty sure no one is expecting the 4 accounts to be identical. We are, however, expecting them to be non-contradictory, especially when it's clear that some parts of the accounts have literally been cut and pasted from previous ones.

In fact, having parts of supposedly independent accounts contain word for word sections of other accounts just adds to the problem, not the solution.

I expect independent accounts to be consistent and perhaps randomly fill in some missing details from other accounts. I expect a few minor discrepancies, but not complete contradictions.

Example of independent accounts:

1) We saw a white horse emerge, radiant in the sunshine, carrying a lone rider whose name is Bob.
2) I saw Bob come galloping along atop a grey horse.
3) I'd never seen Bob ride a horse before, but he rode by singing about love.

Sure, we have one minor color issue, but all 3 agree that the main character Bob was seen on a horse. Maybe he was signing, maybe he wasn't.

Example of dependent accounts with contradictions:

1) We saw a white horse emerge, radiant in the sunshine, carrying a lone rider whose name is Bob.
2) We saw a black horse emerge, radiant in the sunshine, carrying a lone rider whose name is Bob.
3) We saw a white horse emerge, carrying a lone rider whose name is Barb.

Clearly we have copying among the accounts and obvious changing of details to fit the authors preferred narrative.

I contend the gospels are more like the second example than the first.

User avatar
brunumb
Savant
Posts: 5993
Joined: Thu Nov 02, 2017 4:20 am
Location: Melbourne
Has thanked: 6607 times
Been thanked: 3209 times

Re: A simple---but serious---question

Post #12

Post by brunumb »

JehovahsWitness wrote: Fri Dec 03, 2021 10:23 am It would be foolish IMO to believe that four independent accounts of the same event should be absolutely identical in content.
Four allegedly independent accounts would be rather crucial if one was trying to establish the truth concerning a remarkable and significant event. What would one be looking for and what important questions might result in the accounts not being considered as reliable?

No glaringly obvious contradictions between the accounts.
Consistency in the accounts of major and significant details relating to the event.
Inconsistencies only occurring in minor details that are easily overlooked or which might possibly achieve unnecessary focus of attention.
Can identical sections in different accounts be relied on to be independent and not the result of collusion or copying on the part of the authors?
Were the accounts written by direct eye witnesses?
How close to the event were the accounts recorded?

So, the accounts do not need to be identical, but they do need to meet some demanding criteria to be regarded as reliable evidence for the occurrence of the event. In my opinion, the Bible fails in that regard.
George Orwell:: “The further a society drifts from the truth, the more it will hate those who speak it.”
Voltaire: "Those who can make you believe absurdities can make you commit atrocities."
Gender ideology is anti-science, anti truth.

Online
TRANSPONDER
Savant
Posts: 7959
Joined: Thu Apr 29, 2021 8:05 am
Has thanked: 932 times
Been thanked: 3486 times

Re: A simple---but serious---question

Post #13

Post by TRANSPONDER »

JehovahsWitness wrote: Fri Dec 03, 2021 8:17 am
Athetotheist wrote: Fri Dec 03, 2021 7:55 am [Replying to JehovahsWitness in post #3I'm asking if Christian apologists would give the same benefit of the doubt to non-Christian accounts for not being "identical" that they give to the Christian ones. If they wouldn't, then they have no room to expect anyone to cut the Christian accounts that much slack.
I understand what you are askjng; did I not anwser the question?
No. You answered a different question. The argument has been made before in theist apologetics that, if the gospels agreed minutely we might be as suspicious as if a four witnesses recited the same story word perfect. And indeed apparent similarities in wording, links and text -placing has suggested that a common text is being used by the synoptics, rather than relating eyewitness accounts.

But that wasn't the question; which was (effectively) when the stories contradict in very serious ways, is that not cause to doubt their reliability?

I mentioned (re the Resurrection) that the common agreement on the element of the crucifixion suggests it has a valid claim to be treated seriously, but the resurrection account contradict so totally that it raises the question of whether they are credible. That, and not whether atheists require the gospels to agree word for word, is the question, and we still await your answer.

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

Re: A simple---but serious---question

Post #14

Post by JehovahsWitness »

TRANSPONDER wrote: Sat Dec 04, 2021 2:50 am
JehovahsWitness wrote: Fri Dec 03, 2021 8:17 am
Athetotheist wrote: Fri Dec 03, 2021 7:55 am [Replying to JehovahsWitness in post #3I'm asking if Christian apologists would give the same benefit of the doubt to non-Christian accounts for not being "identical" that they give to the Christian ones. If they wouldn't, then they have no room to expect anyone to cut the Christian accounts that much slack.
I understand what you are askjng; did I not anwser the question?
No. You answered a different question.
Oh well, never mind. Feel free to ignore the post in that case.

Have a great day,



JW
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

Athetotheist
Prodigy
Posts: 2690
Joined: Sat Nov 02, 2019 5:24 pm
Has thanked: 14 times
Been thanked: 484 times

Re: A simple---but serious---question

Post #15

Post by Athetotheist »

1213 wrote: Fri Dec 03, 2021 4:24 pm
Athetotheist wrote: Thu Dec 02, 2021 9:04 pm ...
There are four resurrection accounts about Jesus in the Christian gospels. If the exact same accounts, with the exact same differences, were written about Osiris, Tammuz, Attis or any such god-man other than Jesus, would Christian apologists find all of those accounts believable?

And if they wouldn't find all of them believable, would they find any of them believable?
For me Jesus is believable because of what he taught. If we would have just the resurrection story, it would be quite meaningless to me. For me the greatness of Jesus comes from what he said.
If that were all there was to the Christian narrative, it might have more persuasive power (still, the questions over some of Jesus's teaching can spark other discussions).

There's enough spiritual wisdom in, say, the Tao Te Ching without having to accept inconsistent accounts of extraordinary events as historical.

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

Re: A simple---but serious---question

Post #16

Post by JehovahsWitness »

benchwarmer wrote: Fri Dec 03, 2021 4:41 pm
JehovahsWitness wrote: Fri Dec 03, 2021 10:23 am It would be foolish IMO to believe that four independent accounts of the same event should be absolutely identical in content.
I'm pretty sure no one is expecting the 4 accounts to be identical. We are, however, expecting them to be non-contradictory...
And that is the case with the gospels.

To learn more please go to other posts related to...

CONTRADICTIONS , SEQUENCING and ...EASTER CHALLENGES*
* harmonizing the resurrection narratives
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

Athetotheist
Prodigy
Posts: 2690
Joined: Sat Nov 02, 2019 5:24 pm
Has thanked: 14 times
Been thanked: 484 times

Re: A simple---but serious---question

Post #17

Post by Athetotheist »

JehovahsWitness wrote: Sat Dec 04, 2021 10:39 am
benchwarmer wrote: Fri Dec 03, 2021 4:41 pm
JehovahsWitness wrote: Fri Dec 03, 2021 10:23 am It would be foolish IMO to believe that four independent accounts of the same event should be absolutely identical in content.
I'm pretty sure no one is expecting the 4 accounts to be identical. We are, however, expecting them to be non-contradictory...
And that is the case with the gospels.

To learn more please go to other posts related to...

CONTRADICTIONS , SEQUENCING and ...EASTER CHALLENGES*
* harmonizing the resurrection narratives
So you don't concede that Mary Magdalene's behavior is inconsistent in the resurrection narratives, as I asked about in another thread?

Specifically, in that Luke has her with the other women when they encounter angels at the tomb and when they tell the disciples of this, then John has her follow two of them back to the tomb and still believe that Jesus is dead? You suggest elsewhere that Mary left the other women as soon as they found the tomb empty, but how could she miss seeing the angel who opens the tomb in Matthew and merely report to Peter that the body is missing?

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

Re: A simple---but serious---question

Post #18

Post by JehovahsWitness »

Athetotheist wrote: Sat Dec 04, 2021 11:57 am
So you don't concede that Mary Magdalene's behavior is inconsistent in the resurrection narratives, as I asked about in another thread?

I concede we have various independent accounts which are not identical but which can be harmonized to one coherent narrative. I also concede that the accounts fill in some missing details from other accounts but have no complete contradictions.





JW

To learn more please go to other posts related to...

CONTRADICTIONS , SEQUENCING and ...EASTER CHALLENGES*
* harmonizing the resurrection narratives
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
Miles
Savant
Posts: 5179
Joined: Fri Aug 28, 2009 4:19 pm
Has thanked: 434 times
Been thanked: 1614 times

Re: A simple---but serious---question

Post #19

Post by Miles »

JehovahsWitness wrote: Fri Dec 03, 2021 6:47 am I believe only an idiot would expect four independent accounts of an event to be entirely identical.
Considering

2 Timothy 3:16-17 (ESV)
All Scripture is breathed out by God and profitable for teaching, for reproof, for correction, and for training in righteousness, that the man of God may be complete, equipped for every good work.


And in as much as the four accounts sometimes contradict each other, of course they're not identical, but what was god's purpose in putting such contradictions in his book? Was he an "idiot"?


CONTRADICTION: Joseph's father was Jacob VS Joseph's father was Heli.

Matthew 1:16

…and Jacob the father of Joseph the husband of Mary, of whom Jesus was born, who is called Christ.

VS

Luke 3:23

Jesus, when he began his ministry, was about thirty years of age, being the son (as was supposed) of Joseph, the son of Heli,


CONTRADICTION: Take your staff VS Don't take your staff

Mark 6:8
He charged them to take nothing for their journey except a staff–no bread, no bag, no money in their belts–

VS

Luke 9:3-5
And he said to them, “Take nothing for your journey, no staff, nor bag, nor bread, nor money; and do not have two tunics.



Did god perhaps put these contradictions in the Bible for the benefit of the cherry-pickers?



.

Athetotheist
Prodigy
Posts: 2690
Joined: Sat Nov 02, 2019 5:24 pm
Has thanked: 14 times
Been thanked: 484 times

Re: A simple---but serious---question

Post #20

Post by Athetotheist »

JehovahsWitness wrote: Sat Dec 04, 2021 12:52 pm
Athetotheist wrote: Sat Dec 04, 2021 11:57 am
So you don't concede that Mary Magdalene's behavior is inconsistent in the resurrection narratives, as I asked about in another thread?

I concede we have various independent accounts which are not identical but which can be harmonized to one coherent narrative. I also concede that the accounts fill in some missing details from other accounts but have no complete contradictions.





JW

To learn more please go to other posts related to...

CONTRADICTIONS , SEQUENCING and ...EASTER CHALLENGES*
* harmonizing the resurrection narratives
"
From your post with the subheading, When Mary returned from the tomb, did she know Jesus had been resurrected?":
Luke 24:8,9 is clearly summarizing the outcome of all the events since in verse nine he says the women reported {quote} "to the eleven and to all the rest {unquote}. At no point the intitial comings and goings were all the woment with ALL the Apostles AND all the rest of the disciples.
Look at the next verse, v. 10:

"It was Mary Magdalene, Joanna, Mary the mother of James and the other women with them who told these things to the apostles."

Luke makes Mary Magdalene a member of a group of women telling the apostles that they had seen angels at the tomb. John simply has MM tell Peter that the body is missing and that they [an unknown number of women] don't know where it is (20:2).

For the same MM to deliver these two mutually exclusive messages she would have to have done so at different times, so you have to have her saying one thing upon her first return from the tomb and the other thing upon her second return (John 20:18).

The missing body message in John would have to come first, but that message doesn't include any mention of Matthew's tomb-opening angel, who would have been hard to miss. John has Peter and another disciple run to the tomb, find only what Mary had described and then go home. If MM encounters angels at that point it would have to be the encounter she describes with the others in Luke, but that encounter is nothing like her angelic encounter in John. Also, by following the Luke narrative from that point we end up with Peter running to the tomb again (24:12), even though John has indicated that he went to his own home and presumably wasn't with the other disciples.

This doesn't seem to be adding up.

Post Reply