Are the Gospels accurate accounts?

Exploring the details of Christianity

Moderator: Moderators

Post Reply
polonius
Prodigy
Posts: 3904
Joined: Mon Oct 12, 2015 3:03 pm
Location: Oregon
Been thanked: 1 time

Are the Gospels accurate accounts?

Post #1

Post by polonius »

Let's see if there is interest in exploring this question.

I'll lead of with a simple statement and see what response we receive.

The four gospels were written about 35 to 60 years after the events they describe by people who were not witnesses to what they wrote.

polonius
Prodigy
Posts: 3904
Joined: Mon Oct 12, 2015 3:03 pm
Location: Oregon
Been thanked: 1 time

Who wrote Matthew's Gospel?

Post #2

Post by polonius »

“The ancient tradition that the author was the disciple and apostle of Jesus named Matthew (see Mt 10:3) is untenable because the gospel is based, in large part, on the Gospel according to Mark (almost all the verses of that gospel have been utilized in this), and it is hardly likely that a companion of Jesus would have followed so extensively an account that came from one who admittedly never had such an association rather than rely on his own memories.� New American Bible, Introduction to Matthew.

The Gospel of Matthew was written anonymously. It dates from approximately 80 A.D. The tradition that the author was Matthew the Apostle begins with Papias of Hierapolis (c. AD 100–140), an early bishop and Apostolic Father.

polonius
Prodigy
Posts: 3904
Joined: Mon Oct 12, 2015 3:03 pm
Location: Oregon
Been thanked: 1 time

Did Matthew change prophecies?

Post #3

Post by polonius »

There are two aspects of Matthew's gospels that stand out.

First of all, he alters prophecies so he can report the Jesus fulfilled them And secrondly, he tries to favorably compare Jesus with Moses. Lets take a look at some of these writings by the unknown author we a calling Matthew.

polonius
Prodigy
Posts: 3904
Joined: Mon Oct 12, 2015 3:03 pm
Location: Oregon
Been thanked: 1 time

Matthew's virgin birth blunder?

Post #4

Post by polonius »

In fairness to the writer of Matthew, he was probably using the Septuagint, the Jewish translation of the Old Testament into Greek. The translator used the Greek word for virgin "parthanos."

If Matthew had used the Jewish Hebrew translation, he probably wouldn't have made this mistake since the term used is "almah" (a young woman of marriageable age, married or not. But, so much for divine inspiration

But, Matthew 1:23 “Behold, the virgin shall be with child and bear a son,
and they shall name him Emmanuel,�

The Hebrew scripture reads,

Isaiah 7:14 Therefore the Lord himself will give you a sign;* the young woman, pregnant and about to bear a son, shall name him Emmanuel. (NAB)

User avatar
onewithhim
Savant
Posts: 8904
Joined: Sat Oct 31, 2015 7:56 pm
Location: Norwich, CT
Has thanked: 1217 times
Been thanked: 305 times

Re: Are the Gospels accurate accounts?

Post #5

Post by onewithhim »

polonius.advice wrote: Let's see if there is interest in exploring this question.

I'll lead of with a simple statement and see what response we receive.

The four gospels were written about 35 to 60 years after the events they describe by people who were not witnesses to what they wrote.
I understand anyone's objection to finding discrepancies in the four accounts. But they are trivial when we consider the focus of the Bible and the main points that God wants us to understand.

What do we expect when humans---imperfect men---are involved in ANYTHING? There will be discrepancies. It's human nature. One person will have a different slant on things than the guy next to him. But what is the important point that we should be getting? God's Spirit has made sure that the men who wrote the Bible got down all of the important information.

We are told that the first humans chose to turn away from their Creator, and that action brought death on to formerly perfect humans. That is the main point we are to get from the first three chapters of Genesis. It is pointless to debate over all the details there or those details that are not addressed.

Then we are told what the solution to the problem of imperfection and death will be. "By means of your [Abraham's] offspring all the nations of the earth will obtain a blessing for themselves because you have listened to my voice." (Genesis 22:18) This refers to the Messiah, and is in line with the prophecy at Gen.3:15, that "the woman," that is, God's heavenly organization, will provide a savior that will crush Satan and his works.

Then when that Savior came, he pointed to God's own government, with himself at its head, to solve all problems on the earth, just as there are no problems in heaven.

"Thy Kingdom come, thy will be done, on earth as it is in heaven." (Matt.6:10)


This is the message of the Bible in a nutshell. Any small inconsistency is meaningless on the face of eternity.

polonius
Prodigy
Posts: 3904
Joined: Mon Oct 12, 2015 3:03 pm
Location: Oregon
Been thanked: 1 time

Is inerrantcy in scripture a fiction?

Post #6

Post by polonius »

Onewithin him states:
I understand anyone's objection to finding discrepancies in the four accounts. But they are trivial when we consider the focus of the Bible and the main points that God wants us to understand.

What do we expect when humans---imperfect men---are involved in ANYTHING? There will be discrepancies. It's human nature. One person will have a different slant on things than the guy next to him. But what is the important point that we should be getting? God's Spirit has made sure that the men who wrote the Bible got down all of the important information. ]

RESPONSE: Perhaps you are not familiar with the Catholic infallible teaching regarding inerrantcy in scripture.

"For all the books which the Church receives as sacred and canonical, are written wholly and entirely, with all their parts, at the dictation of the Holy Ghost; and so far is it from being possible that any error can co-exist with inspiration, that inspiration not only is essentially incompatible with error, but excludes and rejects it as absolutely and necessarily as it is impossible that God Himself, the supreme Truth, can utter that which is not true. This is the ancient and unchanging faith of the Church, solemnly defined in the Councils of Florence and of Trent, and finally confirmed and more expressly formulated by the Council of the Vatican. ....nor only because they contain revelation without error; but because, having been written under the inspiration of the Holy Ghost, they have God for their author.""

So you are admitting that God makes errors???? :-s

Elijah John
Savant
Posts: 12235
Joined: Mon Oct 28, 2013 8:23 pm
Location: New England
Has thanked: 11 times
Been thanked: 16 times

Re: Is inerrantcy in scripture a fiction?

Post #7

Post by Elijah John »

[Replying to post 6 by polonius.advice]

If God dictates, I would ask, then why did it take centuries and councils to determine the exact content and canon of the Bible?

Seems instead the Bible was compiled by commitee, and as inspired as the particants may have been, they were still humans, imperfect receptacles of Divine inspiration.

As such the probability of error here and there seems obvious.

Also, what is the origin of the document you cite? (time and author) Papal encyclical?
I'm curious if infallibility is still the Church teaching regarding the Bible.
My theological positions:

-God created us in His image, not the other way around.
-The Bible is redeemed by it's good parts.
-Pure monotheism, simple repentance.
-YHVH is LORD
-The real Jesus is not God, the real YHVH is not a monster.
-Eternal life is a gift from the Living God.
-Keep the Commandments, keep your salvation.
-I have accepted YHVH as my Heavenly Father, LORD and Savior.

I am inspired by Jesus to worship none but YHVH, and to serve only Him.

polonius
Prodigy
Posts: 3904
Joined: Mon Oct 12, 2015 3:03 pm
Location: Oregon
Been thanked: 1 time

Post #8

Post by polonius »

https://www.catholic.com/magazine/print ... e-inerrant

Historical teaching on Scripture’s inerrancy

“For all the books which the Church receives as sacred and canonical are written wholly and entirely, with all their parts, at the dictation of the Holy Ghost; and so far is it from being possible that any error can co-exist with inspiration, that inspiration not only is essentially incompatible with error but excludes and rejects it as absolutely and necessarily, as it is impossible that God Himself, the supreme Truth, can utter that which is not true. . . . It follows that those who maintain that an error is possible in any genuine passage of the sacred writings either pervert the Catholic notion of inspiration or make God the author of such error (Providentissimus Deus, 20-21).�

See: http://w2.vatican.va/content/leo-xiii/e ... -deus.html


This statement seems to meet the requirements for an infallible papal ex cathedra teaching.

However, realizing that the Bible is frequently in error, Vatican II introduced a subtle way around this teaching.

polonius
Prodigy
Posts: 3904
Joined: Mon Oct 12, 2015 3:03 pm
Location: Oregon
Been thanked: 1 time

"For the sake of salvation???"

Post #9

Post by polonius »

The placement of the phrase “for the sake of our salvation� can change the meaning and the intent of the passage based on whether the phrase is placed in the middle of the paragraph or at the end of the sentence.

A common interpretation of the statement based upon the placement of the phrase “for the sake of our salvation� at the end of the sentence is that scripture is inerrant only in matters that pertain to salvation.

This so-called “minimalist� view of inerrancy is not only found among those scholars who might be considered liberal in their approach to scripture, but it is found even among scripture scholars who might be considered orthodox in their beliefs. Placing the phrase in the middle of the sentence can broaden the scope of inerrancy to include matters beyond faith and morals. So, the question with which we are faced concerns whether the council fathers intended to teach that scripture is inerrant only in matters that deal with salvation, faith, and morals, or whether they continued to uphold prior Church teaching that inerrancy applies to scripture on a broader scale.

Tart
Banned
Banned
Posts: 1663
Joined: Wed Dec 20, 2017 8:55 pm
Been thanked: 1 time

Re: Is inerrantcy in scripture a fiction?

Post #10

Post by Tart »

polonius.advice wrote: Onewithin him states:
I understand anyone's objection to finding discrepancies in the four accounts. But they are trivial when we consider the focus of the Bible and the main points that God wants us to understand.

What do we expect when humans---imperfect men---are involved in ANYTHING? There will be discrepancies. It's human nature. One person will have a different slant on things than the guy next to him. But what is the important point that we should be getting? God's Spirit has made sure that the men who wrote the Bible got down all of the important information. ]

RESPONSE: Perhaps you are not familiar with the Catholic infallible teaching regarding inerrantcy in scripture.

"For all the books which the Church receives as sacred and canonical, are written wholly and entirely, with all their parts, at the dictation of the Holy Ghost; and so far is it from being possible that any error can co-exist with inspiration, that inspiration not only is essentially incompatible with error, but excludes and rejects it as absolutely and necessarily as it is impossible that God Himself, the supreme Truth, can utter that which is not true. This is the ancient and unchanging faith of the Church, solemnly defined in the Councils of Florence and of Trent, and finally confirmed and more expressly formulated by the Council of the Vatican. ....nor only because they contain revelation without error; but because, having been written under the inspiration of the Holy Ghost, they have God for their author.""

So you are admitting that God makes errors???? :-s

No (to butt in line) i think you and I are the ones that make the errors in understanding... I think our best thinking can barely grasp God's foolishness.


18 For the message of the cross is foolishness to those who are perishing, but to us who are being saved it is the power of God. 19 For it is written:

“I will destroy the wisdom of the wise;
the intelligence of the intelligent I will frustrate.�[c]

20 Where is the wise person? Where is the teacher of the law? Where is the philosopher of this age? Has not God made foolish the wisdom of the world? 21 For since in the wisdom of God the world through its wisdom did not know him, God was pleased through the foolishness of what was preached to save those who believe. 22 Jews demand signs and Greeks look for wisdom, 23 but we preach Christ crucified: a stumbling block to Jews and foolishness to Gentiles, 24 but to those whom God has called, both Jews and Greeks, Christ the power of God and the wisdom of God. 25 For the foolishness of God is wiser than human wisdom, and the weakness of God is stronger than human strength.

Post Reply