Freethought & Rationalism Archive

Toto · 09-23-2007, 12:02 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by EmpiricalGod

Can you please help me understand. Why there appears to be contradictions in the post-resurrection stories in Mark , Matthew and Luke, but alot of scholars believe that MAtthew and Luke were written with the use of the gospel of Mark.
The many exact lines in those texts would tell us that some copying had to go on, (excluding the divine origin of simularities), but how can contradictions arise, if the two writters copies from other texts.? Surely they would not make a contradiction if they copy a text.

Apologists claim that this is because Matthew and Luke had additional sources besides Mark.

But I think it is evidence that both Matthew and Luke regarded Mark as a story, not as factual history. They felt free to change details in the story to make it better, or more meaningful to them. This is what you do if you are remaking a movie, or retelling an urban legend.

EmpiricalGod · 09-23-2007, 12:07 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Minimalist

Read Misquoting Jesus (or via: amazon.co.uk) by Bart Ehrman. At the end he explains the different versions of the gospel texts and some of the reasons for the changes made by Luke and Matthew.

The "inerrant" bible is full of "errants."

I have ordered a copy last week.
Waiting for it!!

Cygnusx1 · 09-24-2007, 09:03 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by EmpiricalGod

Quote:

Originally Posted by Minimalist

Read Misquoting Jesus (or via: amazon.co.uk) by Bart Ehrman. At the end he explains the different versions of the gospel texts and some of the reasons for the changes made by Luke and Matthew.

The "inerrant" bible is full of "errants."

I have ordered a copy last week.
Waiting for it!!

One of the best books I've read this year. Bart is the man.

Thread Tools	Search this Thread
Show Printable Version	Search this Thread: Advanced Search

Freethought & Rationalism Archive

The archives are read only.