Dear Kathy,
Since you graciously agreed (in our recent conversation) to let me present you with some examples of the Bible’s problems, I decided to do it in this way so it would have its own comment thread. As I’ve said, when I was a Christian, one strike against the Bible was not enough to shake my faith — maybe it only seemed problematic, maybe there was an explanation we hadn’t uncovered yet, maybe the historical accounts were wrong, etc. But as the problems began to mount up, I reached a point where I could no longer deny the fact that the Bible had actual errors.
A couple of suggestions before we begin. Try to be as open-minded about this as possible. As you go through these examples, ask yourself if God would allow such problems to exist in a message that he wanted all people to accept and believe? According to the Bible, whenever God sent someone a message, whether it was Pharaoh or Gideon or Nebuchadnezzar or Paul, they had no question whom it was from. They didn’t always follow it, as we see with people like Pharaoh and Solomon, but they didn’t question the source of the message or what it stated. So why would God operate differently today? Why would he want us to be so confused about his message that we’re able to question whether or not it’s really from him?
Another thing to keep in mind is that even if you come to the conclusion that the Bible has actual problems, that doesn’t mean you have to stop believing in God. There are a number of Christians who don’t believe in inerrancy. And even if you lose faith in the Christian god, that still doesn’t mean you have to stop believing in God. A number of people, including several of our founding fathers, were deists. I have a lot of sympathy for that view and plan to do a post on it soon.
Some of the items listed here will have links that provide additional information, especially when the issue is too detailed to list here. I hope that you’ll check out those links, since some of them are quite significant points. And regardless of how this article strikes you, I hope it will help serve as a great springboard to launch you into your own research.
Some of the Problems
Creation
The creation accounts in Genesis do not match what we’ve learned through science. This isn’t shocking news, but it bears looking into. Evolution and the Big Bang Theory had nothing to do with my deconversion, but I’ve learned more about both since leaving Christianity. It’s shocking how much misinformation I had been operating under. Not to say that all Christians are that way — that was simply my experience. But the evidence for both evolution and the Big Bang are far more substantial than I had ever realized. Two good resources for learning more about these issues are the following (though I’d also recommend checking out the recent Cosmos series, as well as some of the PBS NOVA specials):
Another problem with the creation accounts is that Genesis 1 says that plants and trees were made on the 3rd day, while man was made on the 6th. But Genesis 2:5-9 says that man was created before there were any plants or trees in the land. Also, the 1st chapter says that man was created after all the animals, but the 2nd chapter implies that it was the other way around. It seems strange that such discrepancies would exist only a chapter apart, but there are a number of textual clues that suggest the first 5 books of the Bible were assembled over a long period of time from various writings written by a number of different people. Many scholars believe that Genesis 1 and 2 represent two separate versions of the creation story that were both included because the compilers didn’t know which was more accurate. Whatever the reason, there’s no question that the differences exist and are hard to explain.
10 Plagues
During the 10 plagues, God afflicts all of Egypt’s livestock with a disease (Ex 9:1-7), and it specifies that it would affect the “horses, the donkeys, the camels, the herds, and the flocks.” We’re told that all of Egypt’s livestock died. But the later plague of boils was said to affect both man and beast (verse 10 of chapter 9). Maybe it meant non-livestock animals. But Ex 11:5 says that the death of the firstborn would also affect Egypt’s cattle, and in Exodus 14, Pharaoh pursues the Israelites with horses.
Hares Chew the Cud
Leviticus 11:6 tells us that hares chew the cud. They do not. Animals that chew the cud are called ruminants. When they eat plant matter, it goes to their first stomach to soften, and then it’s regurgitated to their mouth. They spend time re-chewing it, and then it is swallowed and fully digested. Ruminants (cows, sheep, goats, etc.) are recognizable because their chewing of the cud is very obvious. Hares (rabbits) don’t chew the cud; however, their mouths do move frequently, so it’s possible to see why some people may have assumed that they do chew the cud. Of course, God would know they didn’t, and this is why the passage is problematic. You can read more about this here.
Arphaxad
In the genealogy given in Genesis 11:10-12, we see that Noah fathered Shem and Shem fathered Arphaxad. At the age of 35, Arphaxad fathered Shelah. This information is confirmed in 1 Chron 1:18. But Luke 3:35-36 tells us that Arphaxad’s son was Cainan, and he was the father of Shelah.
Where does Luke get this information? It disagrees with the Old Testament, so who should we believe? Some have suggested that Genesis and 1 Chronicles simply left out Cainan for some reason. But why would they do that? To further complicate it, how could Cainan have fit in there? Genesis tells us that Arphaxad was 35 when he fathered Shelah. Does it really seem likely that Arphaxad became a grandfather by 35, especially when you consider the extreme old ages that people lived to at that time?
Another explanation is that some copyist messed up when copying Luke and Cainan is just a mistake. But this is not much better. First of all, the error would have needed to occur early for it to be in all our copies of Luke. Secondly, are we really comfortable saying that we have the inspired word of our creator, but it got messed up by some guy who wasn’t paying close attention? To me, that doesn’t lend a lot of credence to the idea of inspiration or inerrancy.
Instead, the most likely explanation is that Luke made a mistake. This, of course, would indicate that he was not inspired.
Problems in the Book of Daniel
In Daniel 5, the writer refers to Belshazzar as the son of Nebuchadnezzar 7 different times. Yet we know from multiple contemporary sources that Belshazzar’s father was Nabonidus, who was not related to Nebuchadnezzar. The same chapter says that Darius the Mede took over Babylon, but this person does not seem to have ever existed. Daniel says that he was the son of Ahaseurus, and in mentioning this, the author of Daniel indicates that he was thinking of a later ruler — the persian emperor Darius the Great, whose son was Ahaseurus. This post in particular goes into the problems surrounding the 5th chapter, but if you’d like to learn about the problems in the rest of the book, you can access each article in the series here.
Jairus’s Daughter
In Mark 5:23, Jairus finds Jesus and says that his daughter is at the point of death. While they’re on their way to the house, some of his servants find them on the way and say that she has died and there’s no point in troubling Jesus further.
However, in Matthew 9:18, Jairus already knows that his daughter has died, but tells Jesus that if he’ll lay his hands on her, she’ll live. This may seem like a minor difference, but honestly, there’s only one scenario that could be true. Either the girl was already dead, or she wasn’t. And if Jairus already knew she was dead, then there was no point in his servants coming to tell him that (so of course, they don’t appear in Matthew’s account).
The Centurion
This is similar to the previous issue. Matthew and Luke both record a centurion who asks Jesus to heal his sick servant. Matthew 8:5-13 says that the centurion himself comes before Jesus to ask for help. Luke 7:1-10 says that the Jewish elders went on his behalf, and then he sent servants to follow up. In Luke, Jesus never speaks to, or even sees, the centurion at all.
Hight Priest
In Mark 2:23-28, Jesus talks about the occasion from the Old Testament when David ate the showbread, which Jesus said was in the days of Abiathar the high priest. However, in 1 Samuel 21:1-6, it appears that Ahimelech was the high priest. Some have tried to answer this problem by saying that Abiathar was alive during that particular episode, so Jesus’ statement is still true. But that’s obviously not the intent of the passage. After all, we would correct anyone who said that the tragedy of 9/11 occurred during the days of President Barack Obama. He may have been alive at the time, but that event did not happen while he was President.
430 Years
Galatians 3:16-17 says this:
The promises were spoken to Abraham and to his seed. The Scripture does not say “and to seeds,” meaning many people, but “and to your seed,” meaning one person, who is Christ. What I mean is this: The law, introduced 430 years later, does not set aside the covenant previously established by God and thus do away with the promise.
Here, Paul says that the law came 430 years after the promises were made to Abraham. But in Exodus 12:40-41, we see:
Now the length of time the Israelite people lived in Egypt was 430 years. At the end of the 430 years, to the very day, all the LORD’s divisions left Egypt.
If the Israelites were in Egypt 430 years, then there could not have been 430 years between Abraham’s promises and the law. God made the promises to Abraham in Genesis 12:1-3, and as we read on through Genesis, we see that Abraham had no children at this time. Later, he had a son named Isaac. When Isaac was 60 years old, he had Jacob (Gen 25:24-26), and Jacob had 12 sons that produced the 12 tribes of Israel. Already, we can see that some time has passed since Abraham received the promise. Once Jacob’s sons were all grown with families of their own, they finally settled in Egypt. Jacob was 130 years old at this time (Gen 47:9), and this marks the beginning of that 430 year period that the Israelites spent in Egypt.
That means that the time between the promise to Abraham and the giving of the law was actually over 600 years. So why did Paul say 430 years? I think it’s obvious that this was a simple mistake. He remembered the 430 year figure because that’s how much time the Israelites spent in Egypt, and so he simply misspoke. It’s not a big deal… except that he’s supposed to be inspired by God.
Jesus’ Birth
There are a number of issues surrounding Jesus’ birth. First, Matthew’s and Luke’s accounts contradict one another on virtually all the details, which you can read about here. Secondly, Matthew seems to invent an episode where Herod kills all the children in Bethlehem who are 2 and under, causing Mary, Joseph, and Jesus to flee to Egypt (instead of just returning home to Nazareth, because only Luke says that they started in Nazareth). Matthew does this in order to “fulfill” some Old Testament passages that actually have nothing to do with Jesus or killing babies. You can read about Matthew’s misuse of the Old Testament here — it’s quite blatant.
The Virgin Birth is one of the most famous aspects of Jesus’ story, and it was supposedly done in fulfillment of a prophecy from Isaiah. But it turns out that Isaiah was prophesying no such thing — he was talking about an event that was happening in his own time, and Matthew (once again) just appropriated the “prophecy” for his own devices. You can read all the details here.
Another problem concerning Jesus’ birth narratives is that Matthew and Luke both offer genealogies for Jesus, but they are completely different from one another. Worse, they don’t match the genealogies listed in the Old Testament, either. And Matthew claims that there was a pattern in the number of generations between Abraham and David, between David and the Babylonian captivity, and between the Babylonian captivity and Christ. But to get this neat division, he is forced to leave out some names. In other words, that pattern didn’t happen. You can read more about that here.
The Triumphal Entry
While not as blatant as most of these other issues, when Matthew recounts Jesus’ triumphal entry into Jerusalem, he once again borrows from the Old Testament, but seems to make a mistake in his implementation. See here for more info.
Judas’ Death
Judas is well known for being the disciple that betrayed Jesus, but what’s not as well known is there are two different accounts of his death, and it’s very hard to reconcile them. According to Matthew, Judas threw his money down at the chief priests’ feet and went out and hanged himself. We’re not told where he did this. The priests then take the money, and instead of putting it back in the treasury (since it’s blood money), they buy a field to use for burying strangers. Because they bought the field with this money, it’s called the “Field of Blood.”
According to Acts, Judas bought a field with his money (we’re not told that he was remorseful), and he somehow fell down, bursting open in the middle and bleeding to death. The field was called “Field of Blood” after that because of the manner in which Judas died.
To make things more complicated, Matthew (of course) says that this happened in accordance with Jeremiah’s prophecy, but there’s nothing in Jeremiah that matches up. The closest reference comes from Zechariah, not Jeremiah.
These issues really complicate the notion of divine inspiration, and you can read more about them here.
The Crucifixion
There are several big problems with the way the gospels record the events of Jesus’ death, including the fact that different times of day are given for it, and even different days altogether. You can read more about this here.
The Resurrection
There are also a number of problems concerning the resurrection, some minor, some major. They’re too involved to get into here, but you can read all about them here and here.
The Problem of Hell
The notion of Hell is fraught with problems. It might even surprise you to learn that the Bible’s teachings on the afterlife change dramatically between the Old and New Testaments. I go into detail about Hell’s problems here, here, and here.
The Problem of Evil
Another huge problem for Christianity is the problem of evil, which I talk about here. This post also addresses the “problem of Heaven.”
The Bible’s Morality
While a number of people believe that the Christian god is the source of all morality, the Bible is actually filled with some monstrous acts that are either commanded by God, done with his consent, or carried out by him directly. I talk about some specific examples here, and I address some of the common responses to them here.
Conclusion
Kathy, there are a number of other examples that could be given, including the prophecy of Tyre that we’ve been discussing. But to me, these are some of the most significant and clear-cut problems. We could try to manufacture explanations for every one of these — some might be more believable than others. But why should we have to? If a perfect God inspired this book, why should it contain so many discrepancies? And honestly, some of these issues can’t be explained. They’re just wrong. The problems go well beyond internal contradictions and unfulfilled prophecies. There are problems of authorship, problems with the doctrines, and problems with the way the texts were written, transcribed, and compiled.
I’m sure you’ve spent your time as a Christian trying to reach those who are lost. You’ve always believed that Christianity is truth, and it’s the one thing that everyone needs. But could it be that Christianity is just as false as every other religion in the world? And if that’s the case, wouldn’t you want to leave it behind? When one is dedicated to finding truth, they have to be prepared to follow it wherever it leads. It’s not always easy or popular. It’s not even a guarantee that you’re right. All it means is that you follow the evidence where it leads to the best of your ability. If you find out that you’re wrong about something, you adjust course when the evidence dictates. If God exists, and if he’s righteous, what more could he ask for than that? I’ll close with my favorite quote:
Live a good life. If there are gods and they are just, then they will not care how devout you have been, but will welcome you based on the virtues you have lived by. If there are gods, but unjust, then you should not want to worship them. If there are no gods, then you will be gone, but will have lived a noble life that will live on in the memories of your loved ones.
— Marcus Aurelius
Finding Truth 
“Yawn the usual claim.”
stop it – you’re making me yawn.
LikeLike
“Actually it would make a huge difference, and if you are unable to see why then more fool you.”
Ark try selling that Brooklyn bridge to he next newb that comes along. I can see it now.
CNN Reports – the Original gospel of Matthew has been found dating AD 72
Nate looks at Wife : Thats it Church of Christ. I’m coming home. hallelujah
Ruth: Now I will become a Christian for sure
Ark: this does it for me. Matthew couldn’t be a fake testament now. Its got to be the real thing
Sparkie: Well i guess that Mike guy was right after all. Honey we are going to church!
yeah uh-huh……um….right. “More fool you Ark” or whatever that means 🙂 lol and you think Christians drink their kool aid
LikeLike
“Which church had these originals? Was it the RCC or the Greek Orthodox Church?”
TEC as per some church fathers
LikeLike
Sorry, ahole, if that’s your only retort you’re more dense than I thought.
That you haven’t the nouse to reason why it would make a huge difference clearly suggests you ought to be peddling this crap over on AIG.
Honestly, the thought of you being allowed in the gene pool, even in the shallow end, is quite disturbing.
LikeLike
“Sorry, ahole, if that’s your only retort you’re more dense than I thought.?”
and one thing my man ark know about is his denseness.
Sorry laddie but I dont need any other retort. I stopped taking you seriously from about your second foaming at the mouth episode. so In other words took about five minutes
LikeLike
Of, course not….laddie, simply because you haven’t got another one. Indoctrinated apologists are reliant on faith and the dogma espoused by their imbecilic christian masters.
Common sense, evidence, and critical thought are immediately put on the back burner, if not suspended altogether when one adopts Christianity.
LikeLike
Mike said:
“IN fact as a protestant I would shudder if they existed because they would probably be in the hand off the RCC.
So believe it or not can;t understand the point or not. I’d rather there be copies all over the world that no one can control or limit access to because for all of the clap trap you and others have put up no major doctrine has been affected by their being copies ad the church has done very well without original relics to fawn over.”
So true about the RCC, Mike!
And I agree..there couldn’t be a better scenario for preserving the truth and credentials of the Bible. They are all just frustrated that the originals aren’t around to be tampered with.. it would just give them more “ammo” for fighting against the truth that they deliberately choose to ignore.
LikeLike
“Nate, you said:
““Even if it is the best (and I don’t think it is), it still has too many problems to be the work of an all-good, all-powerful being.”
Then I said:
What is the best if not Christianity? I really want to know what it is.. ”
Nate, I STILL really want to know your answer to this..
And also this:
“you: “The people assembling the Bible were afraid of throwing out anything that was legit. And like Christians today, they were willing to assume that there was some way to resolve the issues, even if they didn’t know how right then.”
me: How do you know they were “afraid” to throw out anything? Is there any evidence to support this? Because they rejected numerous books/ writings… “afraid”? And for the rest also.. how do you know they 1) assumed there were any contradictions and 2) that they believed it would get “resolved”? What are you basing this answer on Nate??
“But, I guess I’m not wording the question right.. in the context of what we were discussing.. you asked why God would put “barriers” aka contradictions in the Bible.. my question is, why would God have 4 different Gospels in the Bible in the first place?
You view the “contradictions” as barriers.. but again, if you apply objectivity, you reason that no one who is falsifying the story is going to include 4 different accounts by different people.. especially if they contained wording that would make it easy to believe there were contradictions. ”
And this:
“And.. “it still has too many problems to be the work of an all-good, all-powerful being.”
The NT tells us that God is good.. Jesus sacrificed Himself for us. Why isn’t that enough?”
And this:
you: “: Would a parent purposefully mislead a child in a way that could lead to death or serious injury? And if they did, could we call that parent “loving”?”
me: “It’s not God who is misleading you.. it’s yourself, your pride. If you look at the big picture, and don’t dismiss the amazing accuracies, in light of all the challenges, (another good point that Judah made)… accuracies that OUTNUMBER the seeming contradictions, then you wouldn’t be mislead. You would be inclined to give God the benefit of the doubt on those few things. Again, just like the Tyre prophecy.. MOST was amazingly accurate.. but you choose to ignore that and instead INSERT your own qualifier (the word “all”). You mislead yourself Nate.”
And then this.. which is what I was originally looking for (to re-ask you) and found the others above too..
““you: It wasn’t made up as a hoax. There really were people who believed in Jesus. But it’s important to realize that the gospels were very likely not written by any of the first-line disciples who actually knew Jesus, like Matthew or John. They were written decades later by disciples of the disciples of the disciples. The gospel story had been circulating for years, and several Christians wrote them down. The four in our Bibles were most likely written by Greek-educated Christians who truly believed that Jesus was the Messiah, but they never actually knew him. They were no more lying about their beliefs than Mormons lie about theirs today. It was not a hoax.”
me: “So, you’re saying that the writers, who were not the disciples or other eyewitnesses, believed it, but what they believed was a hoax? Made up by others.. the disciples? Is that right?”
LikeLike
William, thanks for your sincere comment following my admission of error.. aka my “I’m stupid” rant.. which may be stupid in itself.. ok, enough self berating.. WHICH.. is partly motivated by a desire to set an example of applying objectivity to one’s self.. we’ll see how all that goes…
anyway.. you said:
I was reminded of the story of the old and young prophet – where the young prophet was told to go and send a message to this king and leave right away, and not stay and eat at anyone’s house and go back a dfferent way. But an old prophet stopped the young man and told him that god said it was alright for the young man to stay and eat. So the young man believed him and was later killed as a punishment.
“the moral was always, “trust god over man.
I considered that and finally realized that i had always taken man’s word for it. always. God didnt write the bible. man did. and man claimed god inspired them… but what proof did they have? Miracles? no, they were claims of miracles, and we dont have those today – at least i haven’t seen any.”
Have you asked this question William: HOW else could God reveal Himself to us if not through the written word? Other than physically revealing Himself / His majesty?
THE question is why He chose not to make His presents factually known.. with “empirical” evidence.. and THEN the question would be.. HOW would he do it if not through empirical evidence.
The written word, written by His creation. Both of which are vulnerable, fallible.
Yes, God CAN control the “errors” in the Bible, but He can also prevent every single bad thing in this world from happening. It’s clear that we are not going to get the answers to some of these very difficult questions. But, again, I fail to see how these things cancels out the COMPELLING evidence for God’s existence.. which, at this time, you and Nate and others will “attack” that claim of “compelling” evidence.
Sorry but it’s abundant. You and Nate and others have been distracted by the “prophet” on the road. God warns us over and over about these stumbling blocks.. I don’t think you all have meditated on THIS portion of God’s word.. you haven’t heeded the warnings.
LikeLike
@Kathy
Perhaps you would be able to explain why the writer of Matthew used aproximately 600 verses from the gospel of ‘Mark.’ for his own gospel ?
LikeLike
He borrowed from Mark because he didn’t have independent details of his own for those things.. SO WHAT?
LikeLike
“They are all just frustrated that the originals aren’t around to be tampered with.. it would just give them more “ammo” for fighting against the truth that they deliberately choose to ignore.”
Kathy you know it., They can all talk a good game now but we know what would happen. If an original was found now it would be HOTLY contested if it were early , Great accepted if it were very late and boiling hot if it were pre AD 70. AD 50 -60 for a gospel probably out and out rejected just on the basis that it had to be too early. In fact if skeptics had one original to go after they would throw every conceivable accusation against it because they would know in so doing they could claim to have eradicated the entire book in any form from consideration.
LikeLike
“He borrowed from Mark because he didn’t have independent details of his own for those things.. SO WHAT?”
Should not have agreed with other apostles (who may even have somewhat codified certain stories in the early church – surely they had several decades of messages) BAD Matthew! BAD boy.
🙂
LikeLike
@ kathy,
you had some good questions for me. I’ll answer the best i can.
1) how else would god reveal himself? If direct revelation is out, now I’d say that there are only lesser ways… This is really hard to answer. If I never saw issue sin the bible, then i’d still be charistian, and would never have begun to question the other logical issues, so I guess with all of that in mind, perhaps a perfect book, with preserved originals would be fine… but then that’s assuming god wants us to know something.
I really think that direct revelation to each person is the best way to prevent any confusion or misunderstanding, so it’s hard for me to find a “second best” method that wold make sense to attribute to a perfect god – I’ll have to think about this some more.
2) If god chose to reveal himself through imperfect means, then he’s not fully revealing himself, number one. and number two, it gets confusing. I understand that any given christian can say that they understand the right way, but look at all the various sects of christian out there, each with their own members who think they have the right understanding… but they cant all be right. This isnt even considering the other religions in the world. If the majority of the workd is in disagreement, how can it be clear? why would it be given that way?
and kathy, i still dont see what things in the bible speak so highly for its validity. I see errors, which is a trike against. But dont get me wrong, despite the errors and problems I see, i also see great moral truths like jesus’ sermon on the mount, proverbs, etc. But there have been countless other books with great moral truths and/or with historical validity – but again, I cannot get past the errors.
why?
why allow them when it’s in you power to prevent them?
prov 3:27 says to not withold doing good when it’s in our power to do it… Is god demanding something out of us that he is unwilling to do? This doesnt seem reasonable.
I dont mind work or sweating. I dont mind reading, praying or helping others. i value self control and concentration; devoted searching for truth, knowledge and understanding.
i am sure you value these as well. Would you willingly condemn yourself by “choosing” not to believe when you value the hardest parts of being a christian? I would not. I am sincere.
Now is it merciful to condemn someone who is sincere and who lives morally, but they just dont believe in the bible or that jesus was really god’s son?
How is that different from a middle east dictator executing a good and productive citizen for not proclaiming the greatness of said dictator?
I dont know – i think about every thing you asked and more. I once believed, but i truly feel like i was given my sight when i realized it was all bogus. Not trying to be a jerk about it – just letting you know.
LikeLike
“Sorry but it’s abundant. You and Nate and others have been distracted by the “prophet” on the road.”
ROFL. You go girl!
Listen this whole thing about textual criticism and documentary theory is all a load of huey trying to represent itself as real science. That atheist go gaga over it is the surest evidence you can have that they will buy into anything no matter how unscientific as long as it supports their cause.
There are by and large no hard and fast tests in textual criticism. Yes in some cases you can look at the papyri, the stylus and ink used and even to stylings of text for particular eras but the greater part of the hogwash is like trying to read tea leaves. In some passage for example someone might say our father David and then the “scholar” figures no Jew would call David their father ad bam that becomes a basis for a new theory or interpolation.
We used to do a little bit of it in seminary and it gets silly and tedious at times like why the Holy spirit is never mentioned in James and of course is esther canonical since it doesn’t mention God. IF God inspired someone to say something differently thats going to come under scrutiny as suspicious.
Its not a real science and anyone that tells you it is is a liar or a fool.
LikeLike
Personally, I’d say Buddhism. It advocates peace and contentment — and best of all, its teachings don’t have to be given by divine insight, nor do they depend upon whether or not certain historical events took place. Instead, they are precepts that can be discovered independent of one’s culture or place in time. They’re just good principles to live by.
LikeLike
Borrowed? Borrowed!
600 verses!
Do you know how many verses are in Mark, Kathy? 661.
If you or I ”borrowed” this amount of material for our doctoral thesis we would be drummed out of university, as well you know.
So, when you ask SO WHAT, well, dear, THAT’S WHAT.
Are we clear, or do you require a further explanation written in crayon?
LikeLike
“Afraid” might not have been the best term to use. I’m not sure about that point. However, it’s well known that they did throw out any gospels that didn’t meet the narrative standards they were looking for, which is why it’s no great surprise that there aren’t massive contradictions in message, like the ones you were asking about before. Just like a Beatles anthology won’t contain any Led Zeppelin songs, it’s not shocking that the NT fits together reasonably well in its large points.
However, there was some concern about some of the contradictions. The Diatesseron is a great example. It’s a 2nd century work that tries to harmonize the 4 gospel accounts into one. As such, it smoothes over the differences that can’t be reconciled.
No, that’s not really what I’m saying. The simplest way to see this is to imagine the game of telephone, where people pass around a message long enough that it begins to lose its original meaning and the details quickly change. I believe that Jesus was probably a real person. I think he was an itinerant preacher who believed that the kingdom of God would soon come. Exactly what he thought that would mean, I’m not sure. But he had some dedicated followers who either believed he was the Messiah, or the person preparing the way for the Messiah (some verses in Mark give this latter impression).
When he died, I believe most of the disciples were shocked — how could God have let him die like that? But a few of them may have had visions of him afterward, which is not all that uncommon after the loss of a loved one. In fact, I had a very real dream about my grandfather last night, and he’s been dead for 6 years now. Other disciples probably began thinking of his death as a sacrifice — and the more they thought about that, the more it fit within the Jewish sacrificial framework.
All the while that his core disciples were processing events and thinking about his life and death and what it all might mean, the stories began to grow and evolve. As more disciples were brought into the fold, and as the movement began to spread into other areas, the teachings evolved even more. You should take some time to look into all the different Christologies that were floating around in the early days of Christianity. The variation is astounding. It’s no controversy to suggest that major evolution was occurring within the Christian communities.
So, I don’t believe that anyone was purposefully perpetrating a hoax. I think most, if not all, Christians were very sincere in their beliefs. But sincerity does not equal accuracy, as can be seen by all the various denominations that exist today and all the ones that existed back then.
I think you wanted me to answer a couple of other questions too, but I had trouble understanding what they were, if you don’t mind clarifying…
LikeLike
Kathy,
This is something you asked William, but I hope you’ll be okay with me giving an answer as well.
I think you’re right on what the first question should be, but I don’t feel like it’s been answered. When I read your question to William, I thought, “why wouldn’t / couldn’t he do it physically?”
What would be wrong with that? According to the Bible, that’s exactly what he did for most of recorded history, so why stop? Mike has said that it didn’t work well when he spoke directly, but if that’s true, what rational being would think that writing it down would be better???
How many times have we all had the experience of writing something to someone only to have them misunderstand something we said? How many times have we thought, “no, that’s a better conversation to have in person so there’s no misunderstanding”?
There is nothing wrong with empirical evidence. As William said in his reply, there are plenty of people who aren’t Christians because they honestly don’t believe it’s true. They’re not being rebellious, or evil; they just truly don’t believe it. That could easily be remedied by direct communication from God.
The natural response is to say that such a thing would eliminate faith. But I have two replies to that. First of all, that means that none of the people in the Bible who directly interacted with God or Jesus had faith. And that contradicts Hebrews 11. Secondly, who cares if it eliminates faith? Why should we think that faith, over knowledge, is such a good thing? Perhaps it should make us a bit skeptical to realize that as technology and historical records improved, evidence of the supernatural declined. We’re forced to have faith in such things today because the evidence is insufficient. Is that truly by God’s design, or is it an indication that those supernatural things never actually occurred anyway?
LikeLike
“Are we clear, or do you require a further explanation written in crayon?”
given your post I thought you were already writing in crayon
“Do you know how many verses are in Mark, Kathy? 661.’
oh dear. Just a suggestion but if you are going to be all slobbering suggesting people are stupid you might want to get your count right there sparky.
and there is no verse counts in GK manuscripts.
LikeLike
“Mike has said that it didn’t work well when he spoke directly, but if that’s true, what rational being would think that writing it down would be better???’
Oh dear again. Nate take a nap or something? We rational human being write things down all the time so that they are not subjective. They are called contracts or covenants and yeah they work better.
LikeLike
And we have courts that constantly have to discuss them to decide what they really mean.
LikeLike
“Sorry but it’s abundant. You and Nate and others have been distracted by the “prophet” on the road. God warns us over and over about these stumbling blocks.. I don’t think you all have meditated on THIS portion of God’s word.. you haven’t heeded the warnings.” _ kathy
I actually, think it’s the other way around. The writers of the bible all claim to speak for god – just like the old prophet.
How do we check those claims? well, it’s already been pointed out that we cant check or measure the spiritual claims, like “what’s heaven look like,” or “what exactly happens after we die” but we can verify many of the physical claims. I think tyre is a good example, but we disagree there somehow, so how about Jesus saying that a seed must die before it will grow? We can measure that. we can verify that – and it’s false.
There are others.
But even if there were only one, it shows the bible is flawed. If we cant trust the bible on seed biology, then why should we trust them on the soul?
Also, god has never spoken to me directly. The bible is very indirect, since it supposedly went to the writers, then past through many copiests and translators, etc. Everything you know of god comes from some other dude.
LikeLike
Thanks for the responses to my questions/ points.. I’ll address them later today..
LikeLike
Lol…hey champ, you reading ‘Made for Tots’ bible or is your version a ‘Made for Tits ?’ with all the polysyllables removed?
If I say there are 661 verses in Mark then there are, and the source is verifiable.
Why don’t you spent your weekend counting them, champ?
And, in fact, the writer of Matthew actually ripped off more than 600 but rather than nit pick I used an approximate figure. You can count those too, if you’re up to it?
Maybe you aren’t able to see the significance either?
LikeLike