|
Register | Sign In |
|
QuickSearch
EvC Forum active members: 65 (9162 total) |
| |
popoi | |
Total: 915,806 Year: 3,063/9,624 Month: 908/1,588 Week: 91/223 Day: 2/17 Hour: 0/0 |
Thread ▼ Details |
|
Thread Info
|
|
|
Author | Topic: Matthew 28 versus John 20. | |||||||||||||||||||||||
GDR Member Posts: 6202 From: Sidney, BC, Canada Joined: Member Rating: 1.9 |
rstrats writes: But what if the people testifying were being inspired by a higher power? Why would this higher power inspire them to contradict each other? Inspiring someone to write an account is not the same as telling someone exactly what to write. I see the gospels as being written by people who wrote about either what they had observed, what had been handed down to them via the oral tradition or from earlier writings.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
rstrats Member (Idle past 102 days) Posts: 138 Joined: |
jar,
re: Inspiration is not dictation. Agreed that it doesn’t have to be. Different details, ok - however, contradictions not so much. re: The big question I still have not seen addressed is in Message 3. See message #28.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
jar Member (Idle past 393 days) Posts: 34026 From: Texas!! Joined: |
I saw Message 28 but still see no explanation of why the passages need to be reconciled. Why is this any more of an issue then the added parts to Mark?
Those that believe there are no contradictions will simply not see a contradiction. Anyone so limited that they can only spell a word one way is severely handicapped!
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
rstrats Member (Idle past 102 days) Posts: 138 Joined: |
jar,
re: I saw Message 28 but still see no explanation of why the passages need to be reconciled. Because if you were a person that asserts that there are no contradictions in the Bible it would seem to behoove you to explain why a specific one presented to you wasn’t one. re: Why is this any more of an issue then the added parts to Mark? I don’t see where I’ve said that it is. re: Those that believe there are no contradictions will simply not see a contradiction. And I’m simply asking why they think that way.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
granpa Member (Idle past 2340 days) Posts: 128 Joined: |
quote: according to john she first went to the tomb then ran to get peter.then she and peter and john went to the tomb. peter and john left and it was then that mary saw the angels and Jesus. Then mary ran to the disciples again. according to luke mary saw 2 'men' not angels when she first went to the tomb. Then she went to get peter mathew skips over the part in red (mary leaving the tomb to get peter and john) Edited by granpa, : No reason given. Edited by granpa, : No reason given. Edited by granpa, : No reason given. Edited by granpa, : No reason given. Edited by granpa, : No reason given.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
rstrats Member (Idle past 102 days) Posts: 138 Joined: |
granpa,
So you’re saying that even though Matthew’s narrative singles out Mary Magdalene and the other Mary, that he is not including Mary M. in his mention of the women five verses later and the they eight verses later? Edited by rstrats, : No reason given.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
granpa Member (Idle past 2340 days) Posts: 128 Joined: |
I dont see how you get that.
Reread what I wrote.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
rstrats Member (Idle past 102 days) Posts: 138 Joined: |
granpa,
re: "I dont see how you get that. Reread what I wrote." So if Mary M. is included in verse five and verse eight, are you saying that the Matthew account is referring to a second time that she went to the tomb? Edited by rstrats, : No reason given.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
granpa Member (Idle past 2340 days) Posts: 128 Joined: |
from verse 5 on, it must be referring to the 2nd time she went to the tomb
maybe the question you should be asking yourself is 'am I asking the right question'.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
rstrats Member (Idle past 102 days) Posts: 138 Joined: |
granpa,
re: maybe the question you should be asking yourself is 'am I asking the right question'. Per your suggestion, I asked myself if I was asking the right question and concluded that it is indeed the question that I intended to ask.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
granpa Member (Idle past 2340 days) Posts: 128 Joined: |
that was my signature.
maybe the question you should be asking yourself is 'am I asking the right question'.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
Panda Member (Idle past 3712 days) Posts: 2688 From: UK Joined: |
rstrats writes:
I came to the conclusion that "Am I asking the right question?" was not the right question to ask. re: maybe the question you should be asking yourself is 'am I asking the right question'. Per your suggestion, I asked myself if I was asking the right question and concluded that it is indeed the question that I intended to ask.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
rstrats Member (Idle past 102 days) Posts: 138 Joined: |
Panda,
re: "I came to the conclusion that 'Am I asking the right question?' was not the right question to ask." What might the right question be, then?
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
granpa Member (Idle past 2340 days) Posts: 128 Joined: |
|
|
|
Do Nothing Button
Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved
Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024