Once upon a time in the Gospels…

[polonius]

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Triumphal ... _Jerusalem

“According to the Gospels, Jesus was staying at Bethany and Bethphage before entering Jerusalem. John 12:1 states that he was in Bethany six days before the passover. In the synoptic gospels, Jesus sends two disciples ahead to the village over against them in order to retrieve a donkey (or, in Matthew, two animals: a donkey and a colt) that had been tied up but never ridden, and if questioned, to say that the donkey was needed by the Lord (or Master) but would be returned.[1][2][3]

Jesus then rode the donkey into Jerusalem, with the three Synoptic gospels stating that the disciples had first put their cloaks on it (presumably to make it more comfortable). Matthew 21:7 maintains that the disciples laid their cloaks on both animals: they brought the donkey and the colt, laid their clothes on them, and set Him (or he sat) on them.[5] Heinrich Meyer suggests that "they spread their outer garments upon both animals, being uncertain which of them Jesus intended to mount".[6]

QUESTIONS:

(1)Which of these accounts are “God breathed�?

(2)and why are they different?

[liamconnor]

[Replying to post 1 by polonius]

Ummm...

It is pretty well known now that the gospels were written according to the literary conventions of the day. That is, they present to modern historians no more and no less problems of chronology than do other histories of the time period.

Plutarch himself places the same anecdote in different contexts in different writings. Yet historians don't throw up their hands and say "Plutarch is 100% unreliable". No, they act like historians, and work it out.

The suggestion that the gospels cannot be written according to the standards of the day, but must be verbatim, because they are influenced by God, requires defense. The argument that "God breathed" means "Chronologically accurate without artistic or theological sculpting" needs defense.

This OP makes a mountain out of a mole hill. It is one more sign that internet skeptics are behind the times.

[otseng]

It is one more sign that internet skeptics are behind the times.

Moderator Comment

Please just present your arguments without commenting on the posters.

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.

[Elijah John]

[Replying to post 2 by liamconnor]

"Theological sculpting", as in the Gospel of John?

Or did Jesus make those long discourses verbatim, and sometimes in isolation.

Who was there except for the "omniscient observer" to record those things he said in isolation?

Those seem like perfect opportunities for the insertion of words on Jesus lips, and "theological sculpting".

Yet many believers seem to take the attitude of: "Jesus said it, I believe it, that settles it"completely ignoring the possibilities of "theological sculpting".

[polonius]

Jesus then rode the donkey into Jerusalem, with the three Synoptic gospels stating that the disciples had first put their cloaks on it (presumably to make it more comfortable). Matthew 21:7 maintains that the disciples laid their cloaks on both animals: they brought the donkey and the colt, laid their clothes on them, and set Him (or he sat) on them.

Did Jesus sent for and ride one animal (it) as Mark, Luke, and John say, or two animals (them) as Matthew claims. 1 and 2 are different numbers.

Which passages are "God breathed" and hence inerrant? And in which did God make an "inerrant" error.?

Question: Can you figure out what the blunder is?

. This OP makes a mountain out of a mole hill. It is one more sign that internet skeptics are behind the times.]This OP makes a mountain out of a mole hill. It is one more sign that internet skeptics are behind the times.

However,they are correct correct. 1 (it) and 2 (them) are different numbers.

What "behind the times" error did Matthew (or God?) make?

[polonius]

[Replying to post 1 by polonius]

Ummm...

It is pretty well known now that the gospels were written according to the literary conventions of the day. That is, they present to modern historians no more and no less problems of chronology than do other histories of the time period.

Plutarch himself places the same anecdote in different contexts in different writings. Yet historians don't throw up their hands and say "Plutarch is 100% unreliable". No, they act like historians, and work it out.

The suggestion that the gospels cannot be written according to the standards of the day, but must be verbatim, because they are influenced by God, requires defense. The argument that "God breathed" means "Chronologically accurate without artistic or theological sculpting" needs defense.

This OP makes a mountain out of a mole hill. It is one more sign that internet skeptics are behind the times.

RESPONSE: Feel free to come up with explanations, but the simple fact is that the scriptures contain errors and therefore their author was in error.

Is God in error?

Or might it be conclude that these are "man breathed"?

[polonius]

No one seems to have answered the basic question. How can Matthew have Jesus sending for and riding on two animals when the other three gospel writers say only one animal?

Matthew was a creative writer who always tried to promote prophecy fulfillment.

The prophecy he used for scriptural fulfillment in having Jesus riding two animals at the same time is as follows:


"All this was done that it might be fulfilled which was spoken by the prophet [Zechariah], saying:

“Tell the daughter of Zion,
‘Behold, your King is coming to you,
Lowly, and sitting on a donkey,
A colt, the foal of a donkey.’�

But Matthew changed the prophecy. The term "and" does not occur in the scripture he quotes. What is being described is the single animal Jesus rode on.

[brianbbs67]

[Replying to post 7 by polonius]

Yes, this is what I had said to you before. The writer of Mathew(which mny believe was derived from the "Sayings of Yeshua Christ") either wrote in error or had little understanding of Hebrew Tanakh. Most scholars believe that Mathew drew from Mark and a Yet undiscovered Q source. And some say another source, also. Mathew was not an eye witness, it appears.

[polonius]

So basically then, we are basing the Christianity belief system on the testimony of non-witnesses.

How do we separate the sometimes fantastic stories from which a whole belief system evolved and factual history?

Are a lot of preachers' jobs at stake?

[brianbbs67]

So basically then, we are basing the Christianity belief system on the testimony of non-witnesses.

How do we separate the sometimes fantastic stories from which a whole belief system evolved and factual history?

Are a lot of preachers' jobs at stake?

1. The only way is to go back to what Christ instructed and the disciples followed. This was pure Hebrew religion. Christ came to call back the lost sheep of Isreal(the northern dispersed kingdom) These were the Goyim/gentiles first reached out to by Christ and the disciples. Rome polluted the rest along with gentiles who wanted to hear Paul in a certain way.

2. I doubt preachers will ever be out of a job. People like to choose their own delusion rather than follow as instructed by God.