Biblidolators are people who worship the bible. They claim that the bible has absolutely no errors or contradictions despite the fact that one can easily spot errors. Once these errors are pointed out the biblidolator will claim the person who points them out is taking the verse out of context or doesn't REALLY understand it. They will often come up with some terribly convoluted interpretations that make the bible mean what it explicitly doesn't say.
Most people who critically study the bible agree that the gospels are irreconcilable. Since we are approaching Easter, I thought it would be a good time to look at what the Gospels (Matthew, Mark, Luke, and John) along with a few pertinent references from other New Testament books have to say about Jesus' resurrection.
I have included the appropriate verse numbers so the reader can determine for himself if there are errors or contradictions.
When did Jesus’ followers come to check his tomb?
MATTHEW
The first day of the week at dawn (28:1)
MARK
The first day of the week early after the sunrise. (16:2)
LUKE
The first day of the week at dawn. (24:1)
JOHN
The first day of the week when it was still dark. (20:1)
Who came to Jesus’ tomb?
MATTHEW
Mary Magdalene and the other Mary (28:1)
MARK
Mary Magdalene, and Mary the mother of James, and Salome (16:1)
LUKE
Mary Magdalene, Joanna, Mary the mother of James, and the other women (24:10)
JOHN
Mary Magdalene (20:1)
What did they bring with them?
MATTHEW
Did they bring anything?
MARK
Spices so that they might go and anoint him. (16:1)
LUKE
Spices (24:1)
JOHN
What spices?
How did the stone covering the tomb get moved?
MATTHEW
There was a great earthquake, an angel comes from heaven, rolls back the stone and sits on it (28:2)
MARK
The women saw that the stone had already been rolled back. (16:3-4)
LUKE
The women found the stone rolled away from the tomb. (24:2)
JOHN
Mary Magdalene saw that the stone had been removed from the tomb. (20:1)
Once they noticed the stone didn’t cover the tomb what happened?
MATTHEW
The guards, afraid of the angel sitting on the stone, shook and became like dead men. (28:3-4)
MARK
As the women entered the tomb, they saw a young man, dressed in a white robe. (16:5)
LUKE
The women entered the tomb, didn’t find a body, were confused, then suddenly two men in dazzling clothes stood beside them. (24:3-4)
JOHN
Mary Magdalene ran away (24:2). She comes back with Smon Peter and the disciple that Jesus loves. They go home. She stays and notices 2 angels dressed in white. (24:4-12)
What did the Angel/young man/two men tell the women?
MATTHEW
Do not be afraid; I know that you are looking for Jesus who was crucified. He is not here; for he has been raised, as he said. Come, see the place where he lay. Then go quickly and tell his disciples, “He has been raised from the dead, and indeed he is going ahead of you to Galilee; there you will see him.” This is my message for you. (28:5-7)
MARK
Do not be alarmed; you are looking for Jesus of Nazareth, who was crucified. He has been raised; he is not here. Look, there is the place they laid him. 7But go, tell his disciples and Peter that he is going ahead of you to Galilee; there you will see him, just as he told you. (16:6-7)
LUKE
Why do you look for the living among the dead? He is not here, but has risen. Remember how he told you, while he was still in Galilee, that the Son of Man must be handed over to sinners, and be crucified, and on the third day rise again. (24:5-7)
JOHN
The two angels in white sitting where the body of Jesus had been lying ask Mary Magdalene why she is weeping. Mary tells them it is because they have taken Jesus away and she doesn’t know where they have laid him. (20:11-13)
Between the time the women left the tomb and met the disciples did anything interesting happen?
MATTHEW 28:8-10
The women run out of the tomb and meet Jesus. Jesus greets the women, and tells them to tell the disciples to meet him in Galilee
MARK
What?
LUKE
What?
JOHN
What?
Anything else happen during this time?
MATTHEW 28:11-15
Some of the guards of the tomb go back to the city and tell the chief priests. The priests assemble the elders. After conferring with each other they bribe the guards into saying that Jesus’ disciples came in the middle of the night and stole his body while the guards slept.
MARK
Huh?
LUKE
Huh?
JOHN
Huh?
Which disciples did the women tell and what did they tell them?
MATTHEW
Don’t know, but the disciples did leave for Galilee. (28:16)
MARK
The women fled from the tomb and didn’t say anything. (16:8)
Ok, the women did mention something to those around Peter (16:8b, Shorter ending).
Jesus appears to Mary Magdalene, she tells the other who were with been with him. (16:10-11, Longer ending)
LUKE
The women told everything to the eleven disciples and to all the rest. (24:8-9)
JOHN
Mary Magdalene told Simon Peter and the other disciple, the one whom Jesus loved,. She said, ‘They have taken the Lord out of the tomb, and we do not know where they have laid him.’ (20:2)
How well were the women believed?
MATTHEW
I guess OK since the disciples did set off for Galilee immediately (Matthew 28:16)
MARK
Not sure about Simon Peter (16:8b, Shorter ending), but the others didn’t believe Mary Magdalene (16:11, Longer ending).
LUKE
The women were not believed. (24:11)
JOHN
After Mary Magdalene tells Simon Peter and the other disciple who Jesus loved that they had taken away his body, the two disciples run to the tomb to verify it. (20:3)
After the women tell of the empty tomb who goes to see it?
MATTHEW
What?
MARK
Huh?
LUKE
Peter (24:12)
JOHN
Peter and the other disciple set out and went towards the tomb. (20:3-10)
To whom and when did Jesus appear after his resurrection?
MATTHEW
(1) Mary Magdalene and the other Mary immediately outside the empty tomb (28:9-10)
(2) The eleven disciples in Galilee. (28:16)
MARK
(1) Mary Magdalene, from whom he had cast out seven demons. (16:9 Longer ending)
(2) Jesus appears in “another form” to two of his followers, as they were walking into the country. (16:12 Longer ending)
(3) To the eleven disciples as they were sitting at the table. (16:14 Longer ending)
LUKE
(1) To Cleopas and another of his followers as they were going to a village called Emmaus. (24:13-18)
(2) Possibly to Simon. (24:34)
(3) To the eleven disciples and their companions back in Jerusalem. (24:33-36)
JOHN
(1) Mary Magdalene inside the tomb after coming back with Peter and the disciple Jesus loved. (20:14).
(2) In the evening on the first day of the week in the house where the disciples had met, Jesus meets with all the disciples except Thomas (20:19-24)
(3) A week later his disciples were again in the house, with Thomas present. (20:24)
(4) At the Sea of Tiberias to Simon Peter, Thomas called the Twin, Nathanael of Cana in Galilee, the sons of Zebedee, and two others of his disciples.
ACTS
In a vision, to Saul/Paul on the road to Damascus. (9:3-5)
1 CORINTHIANS
(1) Cephas then to
(2) “the twelve” then to
(3) 500+ “brothers and sisters” then to
(4) James then to
(5) the apostles, then finally to
(6) Paul (15:5-8)
Where did Jesus instruct the disciples to go?
MATTHEW
Go to Galilee (28:7 and 28:10)
MARK
Go to Galilee (16:7)
LUKE
Stay in Jerusalem until they have been clothed with power from on high
JOHN
Huh?
ACTS
Stay in Jerusalem (1:3-5)
What did Jesus commission his disciples to do?
MATTHEW
Go and make disciples of all the nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit, and teach them to obey everything I have commanded you. (28:16-20)
MARK
Go into the world and proclaim the good news to the whole of creation. The one who believes and is baptized will be saved; but the one who does not believe will be condemned. And these signs will accompany those who believe: by using my name they will cast out demons; they will speak in tongues; they will pick up snakes in their hands, and if they drink any deadly thing it will not hurt them; they will lay their hands on the sick, and they will recover. (16:15-18 Longer ending)
LUKE
What commissioning?
JOHN
To Peter, Jesus asks him to:
(1) Feed my lambs (21:15)
(2) Tend my sheep (21:16)
(3) Feed my sheep (21:17)
What happened at Jesus’ ascension to Heaven?
MATTHEW
What ascension?
MARK
After commissioning his disciples, Jesus was taken up to heaven and sat down at the right hand of God. (16:19)
LUKE
While blessing his disciples Jesus withdraws and then is taken up to heaven. (24:51)
JOHN
What ascension?
ACTS
After telling his disciples that they would receive power, Jesus is lifted up and a cloud takes him to heaven, two men in white robes appear next to the disciples and tell them that Jesus will return the same way he left. (1:6-11)
Cheers,
Darwin's Beagle
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
I understand the desire to rant, I am wondering though are you wanting to point out contradictions for the sake of pointing out contradictions? or do you have a motive that is unclear to me?
I think that dogma of any type is one of the major problems and threats to the world. In this country the biggest promoters of dogma are the religious fundamentalists. These are the very people who are biblidolators.
I want to present evidence that the bible is not as reliable as these people claim it is. The idea is that if the bible is not reliable then what is? The best answer to that is reason. Reason is the only weapon anyone has against dogma.
Cheers,
Darwin's Beagle
thank you so much for the clarification! and so speedy too...
No problems, thanks for the question.
Cheers,
Darwin's Beagle
I enjoyed reading this...i entered the entry thinking it would be a bible study, but then by the end i found it quite humourous!!!!
Hug a musician, they never get to dance.
WHAT? HUH?
To begin with, one has to take into account the fact that the different Gospels were written to different people groups for different reasons- hence four not one.
Matthew was written to Jews to prove that Jesus had fullfilled prophecy thousands of years old. It has more Old Testament references and is geared toward that association.
Mark was written to Roman converts. It is the shortest Gospel not even breaking 20 chapters and omits more things than the others. The Romans wanted the important stuff and hang the rest. Hence the abundant use of words such as "immediately" to keep the story moving.
Luke was written to the Greeks to prove that Jesus was human. Luke was a doctor and was able to cater to the Greek's love of learning. He tells the most about the birth and includes more physical details that Greeks would appreciate.
John was written to- everybody in general to prove that Jesus is God (yes, He is both God and man). He includes more miracles and connections to His God-hood.
The target purposes mean not all of the information will be in all the Gospels- hence four not one. Example 1: the Romans did not care that much that Jesus was legally descendant from King David- not all of them may even have known he existed. It was essential the Jews know this as they knew the prophecy. Example 2: so some soldiers in some backwards country gave the locals an excuse to say the resurrection was false- why would a Roman care? But a Jew would.
3) So you think the women would tell someone and not tell anyone else? Do you know any women?
It is plausable that the "didn't tell anyone" was on the way back. Maybe they were running to hard, maybe they were temporarily lost for words.
4) Your leader just got killed, you had nothing else to do seeing as the last three years of your life had been spent following Him around- why not take the dumb trip? What else would you do. They did not have to believe the women to do what they were told, or even double check the tomb.
5) Luke got most of His information from Peter, it was not relavent for him to mention the other one.
6) Unless you find timeline differences is irrelevant.
7) Luke 24:52 says, "and returned to Jerusalem with great joy" they RETURNED to Jerusalem. Not the Bible says they were in two different places.
The last few, Jesus repeats Himself alot. The wording being different is different times He said something with the same meaning in different ways. As you will find in all of Scripture- even the entire book of Psalms which is poetry that rhyms ideas not sounds.
P.S. you know Luke wrote Acts, right?
Thank you for making me go back and read what I wrote. When I did I found that I had left out a rather large part of it. I use a laptop and have a bad habit of unintentionally highlighting text and erasing it on occasion. I must have done this in this blog. Fortunately I have the original text saved in Microsoft word so I have updated it to include everything that should have been in the original post.
As to your critique, you do write a lot, but you don’t explain away the problems.
(1) With respect to the Easter problems, why should we remember that the gospels were written for different audiences? Are you implying that it is a good thing to change the story for different people? What happened to the idea of “only one truth”?
What purpose does it serve for Matthew to tell the Jews that Jesus first appeared to Mary Magdalene outside the empty tomb and then the eleven disciples later when they were in Galilee; Mark tell the Romans it was much later to Mary Magdalene, then to two of his followers walking the country, and finally to the 11 disciples sitting at a table; Luke to tell the Greeks it was first to Cleopas and a companion, possibly to Simon, and then to the 11 back in Jerusalem; John to tell … who? You didn’t say … it was first to Mary Magdalene inside the tomb after she had come back with Peter and the disciple who Jesus loved (presumably John), then to all the disciples except Thomas, then to all the disciples including Thomas, then to Simon Peter, Thomas, Nathaniel of Cana, the sons of Zebedee, and two other disciples at the Sea of Tiberias; have the author of Acts (presumably the same author of Luke) add that Jesus appeared before Paul; and Paul in 1 Corinthians say that it was first to Cephas (another name for Peter), then to “the twelve”, then to the 500+ brothers and sisters, then to James, then to the rest of the apostles, then finally to himself?
(2) You are wrong in following the traditional attributes of the Gospels. Matthew was not written by Matthew/Levi the tax collector/disciple of Jesus. Mark was not written by Mark, the secretary of Peter. Luke was not written by Luke, the physician and traveling companion of Paul, and John was not written by John, the disciple that Jesus loved.
None of the Gospels claim such an attribution. The attribution comes solely from assertions by some of the Ante-Nicene church fathers. These assertions have not withstood critical scholarship. In actuality Mark is the smallest because it is the first Gospel and Christian doctrine was not well developed at the time. Matthew and Luke came along next. Both used Mark as source, as can be seen the chronology and the wording of the pericopes. Matthew and Luke share some sayings of Jesus that is not included in Mark. Interestingly Matthew and Luke do not agree as to the periscope that these sayings belong. This has led scholars to postulate they shared a second source, Q (from the German word “quelle” meaning “source”), which contained just sayings of Jesus. The non-canonical Gospel of Thomas shows that such “sayings” gospels did exist.
John came along last when Christian doctrine had become much more sophisticated. However, its author seems to be unaware of Mark, Matthew, or Luke. This Gospel is not very similar to the other three. This has caused scholars to group Mark, Matthew, and Luke together as the Synoptic gospels … meaning they share the same view.
(3) You are a bit unclear on your attempted harmonization of who the women informed. Are you saying that Matthew didn’t see the need to tell the Jews anything on the subject, but as Mark indicates they didn’t tell anyone until they got to the disciples and then told it to them all who just happened to be gathered around Peter, and then John decides that since the others failed to go check out the empty tomb only Peter and the disciple whom Jesus loved (presumably John) are only worth mentioning. Perhaps the synoptics didn’t think that Peter and John were worth mentioning as having gone back to check out the empty tomb since all the disciples didn’t go?
The harmonization swiftly becomes very convoluted.
Your points 4, 5, and 6 are incomprehensible with respect to the subject at hand. Furthermore, your point 5 is wrong. The author of Luke never got anything from Peter. Even traditional authorship does not associate Luke with Peter.
Point 7, I assume refers to the discrepancy about where Jesus had instructed his disciples to go. Matthew and Mark say Galilee, Luke says to stay in Jerusalem. You appear to be trying to harmonize this by saying that Luke just neglects to mention that they had gone to Galilee and that in Luke 24:52 when it says they “returned to Jerusalem with great joy” they returned from Galilee. Perhaps that would be a good harmonization were it not for the fact that Luke 24:50 (a mere two verses before the one you have taken out of context) says exactly where they are returning from:
Then he [Jesus] led them [the disciples] out as far as Bethany, …
Er … constance, Bethany is just outside of Jerusalem. Galilee is a hundred miles away.
Finally, I am well aware that the author of Luke and the author of Acts both have a salutation to a “Theophilus”; the author of Acts refers to a previous writing which could be the Gospel of Luke; and scholars generally consider the Greek phraseology used in Acts to be very similar to that used in Luke. This evidence has led to a consensus among scholars that the author of Luke and the author of Acts is the same person, a consensus I suspect is correct. But I am also aware that neither book was written by Luke, the physician/traveling companion of Paul.
Cheers,
Darwin's Beagle
I am implying that different people are interested in different information. For example, if you were to teach a course detailing how national events effected a region's history, would you talk about the state of New York, where your students would be from, or Virginia? Such influential things as presidential elections, wars, and amendments would have different meanings. Does that mean that the same man was not elected over both states? Or that different people are- different, and need to be told different angles of the same thing?
2) In order to avoid "did to/did not/did snot" I will answer that later when I can give specific dates and quotations.
Not that I am surprised that they exist, but I had never heard of the "Antis." I have heard of the Nicene Creed, developed at the Council of Nicea (to refute Gnostics?- not sure if you take that as a talking point, double check) which declares belief in the Trinity (all three Persons Father, Son, and Spirit being one God).
3) Could you convolute your explanation more? Matthew not mentioning them has nothing to do with whether or not they broke the news to the disciples. Why would the two running not being mentioned in Mark (famous as he is for leaving out details unnecessary to the big picture) be an issue? For Matthew, maybe. Neither of them were there. The fact that the other Gospels did not mention this is indicative (boy-howdy I hope that is a word) that the one who was there- John wrote it. Matthew and Mark were not there and it would mean less to Peter who reached the tomb first because seconds before he got there he could see John reacting to the empty tomb. John would remember being the one to verify the women.
4) Was in reference to whether or not the women were believed. The way you had the verses set up it appeared that you were using the disciples action on the one hand to contradict with not believing the women on the other.
5) I must plead for your forgiveness- I got Luke and Mark mixed up. Mark was with Peter, Luke, although POSSIBLY spending time with Peter (I do not feel like doing the work it would take to check on that at the moment) he traveled with Paul. Thank you for catching.
6) Was short, and I do so few short things I will wait for further comment before elaborating.
7) Matthew ends with the Great Commission (v. 20), not with Christ's departure. It is not even mentioned. John skips it as well. Mark, unless I am skimming to lightly, does not say where they were at all. Luke is the only place that specifically attaches a location to it. The confusion is my fault for not looking carefully enough.
Finally) Just checking...
God Bless.
(1) Your critique makes no sense. You have claimed that the reason for the differences is because the authors were writing for different audiences. But when we look at the differences actually are, there is no apparent reason that any of them would be more pertinent for your claimed target audiences.
(2) The case against the traditional attribution of the authorship of the four canonical gospels is quite strong. Here is the evidence as I remember it off the top of my head.
(A) None of the Gospels identify the authorship.
(B) Traditional authorship come from Iranaeus about 80 years or so after they were most likely written.
(C) The Gospel of Mark is the simplest theologically. It is possible that it refers to an impending destruction of the temple (circa 70 CE) while the Gospels of Matthew and Luke refer to it as already having happened. The agreement in wording and pericope order is very high between Mark and Matthew and between Mark and Luke but less high between Matthew and Luke. There are many places of word-for-word agreement between all three gospels including Jesus' words. Jesus spoke in Aramaic, the Gospels were written in Greek. There is no way that 3 different authors would translate Jesus' words from one language into another language word-for-word.
Thus, Mark was the first gospel written and Matthew and Luke used Mark as a source.
(D) Mark was supposed to be the secretary of Peter. Peter was his confidant and protector. However, the Gospel of Mark is quite critical of Peter. This would be very surprising if Mark was the author.
(E) If Mark wrote Mark, then presumably he got his information from Peter. But the book is not written from Peter's point of view.
(F) Matthew was one of Jesus' original 12 disciples. He would have spent quality one-on-one time with Jesus. It would be surprising that he would use Mark's second-hand stories as the basis of his gospel over his presumably first-hand stories.
(G) The Gospel of Luke makes references to events that happened after 80 CE. Luke would have been very old at that time. Also Luke was a travelling companion of Paul. It is very likely the author of the Gospel of Luke is the same as the author of Acts. But Acts account of Paul travels are inconsistent with Paul's epistles.
(H) John was one of Jesus' 12 disciples but the Gospel of John shows no signs of being aware of any of the Galilean pericopes seen in Matthew, Mark, and Luke. There are significant differences in John compared to Matthew, Mark, and Luke. For instance, the events of Jesus' ministry in Matthew, Mark, and Luke can all be fit comfortably within a single year. John requires at least a 3 year ministry. Matthew, Mark, and Luke all emphasize Jesus' attempts to keep his divinity secret until he goes to Jerusalem and his crucifixion. John has Jesus claiming divinity from the very first of his ministry.
Together these evidences suggest that the traditional attribution is wrong.
(3) Finally, the rest of your post (like the first) fails to resolve any of the apparent conflicts. I would love to hear you explanation of why Matthew and John would not consider Jesus' assention into heaven as being worth mentioning.
Cheers,
Darwin's Beagle
Romans wanted to get the job done no fluffy stuff- therefore the shortest Gospel. Greeks were philosopher/science people- Luke has many physical references. Jews looked for Messiah- Matthew pointed out OT passages that Christ fullfilled.
2) get back to you on A.
B) Traditional Matt, Mk, Lk, John authorship comes from Polycarp- early church father taught by John himself, and died around 156 AD at 80 years of age(Trial and Triumph)- and other early church fathers who lived in the transition time into the second generation of Christians and quoted the NT so much that the entire thing can be reconstructed from their sermons and writings. Keep in mind that AD and BC dates are off from the actual happenings, so when traditional John dies around 100AD nothing excludes him from being Jesus's disciple or knowing these church fathers.
C) Rats! It has been so long since the course when I actually knew all the dates (ok, maybe half of them). Either way they used each other for a source, this does not take away from the accuracy or inspiration. God may have taken His people out of Egypt but Moses had to wave the staff around. So to did the Gospel writers research and work to be accurate.
D)Why is that surprising? Would it not be obvious? Would Peter flatter himself in the midst of Christ's life? Would he be more critical of others instead of himself? He knew his struggles and could speak from experience. Most artists could tell more things wrong with their picture than their friends can, and often more than the faults in their friends. Why not apply this to Peter?
E) I might get back to you with more on this. Current thoughts- Mark was not Peter and could not wholly write from his perspective.- Just because Peter was a main source does not mean that he was the only. Whose view do you think it is meant to be from?
F) Ever asked a buddy what the assignment was? Ever asked to check their assignment book? Why would he not try to be as accurate as possible? If you knew that an account was out there that came from an authoritative person, would you purposely neglect it, or check to see if you were leaving anything out or for that one sermon that's words you were having trouble remembering exactly?
G) What are the inconsistencies?
H) 'These things are written that you may believe that Jesus is the Christ' Of course John would highlight His claims of Divinity. Hence more miracles than the other books. While Jesus strove to not start confrontation with the religious leadership of the day until the appointed time, that does not mean that He was not trying to make His disciples know who He was. Also related to the miracles- the other books did not stress the Divinity as much and had no reason to talk about the extra two years or so of miracles and general workings.
3) Matthew, to my knowledge (if I'm wrong please tell me), had nothing to connect the ascension to the OT prophecies. He had just finished the case of Jesus being the Messiah and wanted to let that sink in before throwing something the Jews, or anyone, had not been told by God (that there would be two commings). The emphasis on the Asencion would have confused them. You teach kids that God can do anything and He is good before you teach them that He can only do things consistent with His nature and within the realms of logic and reason He established. One thing at a time. As for John- I have no clue.