By Keith Thompson
Introduction
Muslims claim there are irreconcilable contradictions in the
New Testament documents which
allegedly prove the Bible to be false.
However, such Muslims are inconsistent since they use
arguments on this issue from unbelieving naturalist, materialist scholars who
do not believe in the supernatural or for the possibility of harmonization.
Yet, these same Muslims nevertheless believe in trying to harmonize Koranic texts non-Muslims allege to be
contradictory. This is hypocritical. Also, the Koran, Sunnah and Sira
literature claim the Bible is uncorrupted and in pristine form, so Muslims are
running a fool’s errand on this issue (e.g. Koran 4:136; 5:46-47; 5:68; Sunan Abu Dawud,
Book 38, Number 4434; Ibn Isaq, The Life
of Muhammad, [Oxford University Press, 2014], pp. 102-104, 268).
Moreover, rarely do Muslims study the bulk of scholarly
Christian works which address the so-called contradictions unbelievers bring
up. For example Gleason Archer’s Encyclopedia
of Bible Difficulties, Geisler’s and Howe’s Big Book of Bible Difficulties, Haley’s Alleged Discrepancies of the Bible, Arndt’s, Hoerber’s and Roehrs’s
Bible Difficulties and Seeming Contradictions,
etc. In depth, conservative exegetical commentary sets also do a good job at
addressing alleged contradictions (e.g. PNTC, NICNT, BECNT, EBC, etc.)
The Alleged
Passion Contradictions Examined
One of the lists of alleged contradictions Muslims like to
parrot comes from Bart Ehrman. He often offers the following bunch:
“Did he die on the day before the Passover meal was eaten, as John explicitly says, or did he die after it was eaten, as Mark explicitly says? Did he die at noon, as in John, or at 9 a.m., as in Mark? Did Jesus carry his cross the entire way himself or did Simon of Cyrene carry his cross? It depends which Gospel you read. Did both robbers mock Jesus on the cross or did only one of them mock him and the other come to his defense? It depends which Gospel you read. Did the curtain in the temple rip in half before Jesus died or after he died? It depends which Gospel you read. Or take the accounts of the resurrection. Who went to the tomb on the third day? Was it Mary alone or was it Mary with other women? If it was Mary with other women, how many other women were there, which ones were they, and what were their names? Was the stone rolled away before they got there or not? What did they see in the tomb? Did they see a man, did they see two men, or did they see an angel? It depends which account you read. What were they told to tell the disciples? Were the disciples supposed to stay in Jerusalem and see Jesus there or were they to go to Galilee and see Jesus there? Did the women tell anyone or not? It depends which Gospel you read. Did the disciples never leave Jerusalem or did they immediately leave Jerusalem and go to Galilee? All of these depend on which account you read” (Bart Ehrman vs. William Lane Craig Debate, Is there Historical Evidence for the Resurrection of Jesus?, debate transcript http://www.reasonablefaith.org/is-there-historical-evidence-for-the-resurrection-of-jesus-the-craig-ehrman).
Quickly listing these off with slight anger and lots of
authority in your voice can sound convincing. But examining each one carefully
yields different results. We will cover each one.
Did Jesus
die the day before the Passover meal was eaten, as John explicitly says, or did
he die after it was eaten, as Mark explicitly says?
Well, John does not explicitly say Jesus died the day before
Passover meal was eaten. He says Jesus died on the “day of preparation of the
Passover” (John 19:14) which refers not to the day of preparation for the
Passover meal which was one Thursday.
The phrase is paraskeue tou pascha
and it instead refers to the “day of preparation of Passover week” which
was indeed on Friday (D.A. Carson, The
Gospel According to John, [Wm. B. Eerdmans, 1991], pp. 603-604). Carson
proves this with the following ancient references (Josephus, Ant. xvi. 163; xiv. 21; xvii. 213; Bel. Ii. 10; Lk. 22:1; Didache, viii.
1; Martyrdom of Polycarp, vii. 1).
So, when Mark says Jesus died the day after
Passover meal (Mark 14:21; 15:1), which was
Friday, there is no contradiction because John is saying he died on the day of
preparation of Passover week which
was also Friday. Both agree.
Did Jesus
die at noon, as in John, or at 9 a.m., as in Mark?
Well, Mark does not say Jesus died at 9 a.m. Mark 15:25 says
Jesus was crucified at 9 a.m., big
difference. However, Mark goes on to say in Mark 15:34-37 that at the ninth
hour (or 3 p.m.) Jesus “uttered a loud cry and breathed his last.” So Jesus
died at 3 p.m. according to Mark. Ehrman must not have read this text. John
19:14 says Jesus was carried away to be crucified at “about the sixth hour.”
This is going by Roman time since John wrote in Ephesus, the Roman province of
Asia (Irenaeus, Against Heresies,
3.1.1.; Eusebius, Church History,
3.1.1.; and note Montanists in Phrygia close to Ephesus used John’s Gospel).
This means Jesus was carried away to be crucified at about 6 a.m. according to John, and was actually crucified at 9
a.m. according to Mark. And again he died later that day at 3:00 p.m. according
to Mark 15:34-37. Hence, the times of crucifixion in the two accounts are tight
together and there is no contradiction.
Did Jesus
carry his cross the entire way himself or did Simon of Cyrene carry his cross?
Well, John 19:17 does say Jesus bore his own cross to
Golgotha. And the synoptics say Simon of Cyrene helped part of the way (Mark
15:21; Matthew 27:32; Luke 23:26). This is because of Jesus’ weakened state
from being flogged. However, John does not say only Jesus carried the cross the whole way, or that Simon of Cyrene
did not help him. That is read into the text. John just chose to omit this part
of the journey to Golgotha because it was distracting from the themes of his
gospel, such as God’s sovereign plan, the Son’s voluntarism, etc. (J. Ramsey
Michaels, The Gospel of John, [Wm. B. Eerdmans, 2010], p. 498; D.A.
Carson, The Gospel According to John,
[Wm. B. Eerdmans, 1991], p. 609). But, as we have said, John does not deny
Jesus had help. He just chose not to mention the part of the journey where he
received the help. That’s not a contradiction.
Did both
robbers mock Jesus on the cross or did only one of them mock him and the other
come to his defense?
Well, Matthew 27:44 does say the robbers mocked Jesus. And
Luke 23:39-43 says one of the robbers rebuked the other and defended Christ.
However, the answer is obviously one of the robbers on his increasingly hard
cross repented after reviling Jesus and then defended Him due to fearing God (Luke
23:40) and being impressed by the way Jesus bore the situation (Leon Morris, The Gospel According to Matthew, [Wm B.
Eerdmans, 1992], p. 719; Leon Morris, Luke,
[InterVarsity Press, 1988], p. 346). Matthew records the reviling and Luke records the repentance. Luke’s early “L” material or
eyewitness sources (Luke 1:1-3) he possessed likely provided him with this part
of the story Matthew did not include. That is not a contradiction.
Did
the curtain in the temple rip in half before Jesus died or after he died?
Well, Mark 15:37-38 and Matthew 27:50-51 affirm
the veil of the temple tore at the same time Jesus died. Luke 23:45-46 appears
to say the veil ripped before he died in some translations since they will say,
“45. . . And the curtain of the temple was torn in two. 46Then Jesus, calling out with a loud voice, said, ‘Father, into your
hands I commit my spirit!’ And having said this he breathed his last” (Luke
23:45-46). However, when in certain
translations v. 46 starts with the word “then” and proceeds to mentions Jesus’
death, although it appears to mean Jesus’ death happened after the ripping of
the veil, this is false. The word for “then” here is kai in the original Greek and it’s a particle that can also mean
“and” which allows for the veil ripping at the same time as Jesus’ death.
Instead of “then” connecting the sentences, “and” would be. Luke would simply
be mentioning different events here, not giving a chronological order to them.
Such translations which use “and” here instead of “then” include the NASB, KJV,
HCSB, ABPE, DRB, DBT, ERV, WBT, and YLT. Moreover, Matthew, Mark and Luke all
affirm the temple was torn on the ninth hour (i.e., 3 p.m.) – (see Mark 15:34,
37-39; Matthew 27:46, 51; Luke 23:44-46). Thus, they all agree on the time the
veil tore.
Who went to
the tomb on the third day? Was it Mary alone or was it Mary with other women?
If it was Mary with other women, how many other women were there, which ones
were they, and what were their names?
The answer is Mark 16:1 shows three women went there (the
two Mary’s and Salome). Luke 23:55-56 and 24:1 just say it was a group of women
who entered it without naming them. No contradiction there. And Matthew chose
to mention only the two Mary’s (Matthew 28:1) because it was inconvenient to mention
Salome who was not essential to the story (Craig Blomberg, The Historical Reliability of the Gospels, [InterVarsity Press,
2007], p. 194). Matthew does not say Salome was not present, he just emphasises
the two Mary’s for his own purpose. So, there is no contradiction here. Also,
none of the gospels say Mary was alone, contra Ehrman. However, because John
20:1 says Mary Magdalene went to the tomb, this is why Ehrman claims John has
her going alone. But, the text does not say only
Mary went to it, just that she did in fact go to it. Moreover, the very next
verse, John 20:2, shows Mary was not
alone according to John. It says, “So she
[Mary Magdalene] ran and went to Simon Peter and the other disciple, the
one whom Jesus loved, and said to them, ‘They have taken the Lord out of the
tomb, and we do not know where they have
laid him” (John 20:2). Who is the “we” here? They are Mary and the other
women whom Mark and Matthew mention, of course. So, John does not teach Mary
went alone and there is no contradiction.
Was the
stone rolled away before they got there or not?
Well, Mark 16:3-4, Luke 24:1-2,
and John 20:1 all clearly agree the stone was moved before they got there. It’s
just that a sloppy, liberal reading of Matthew 28:1-2 confused Ehrman to think
it teaches the stone was rolled after they got there. The text says, “1Now
after the Sabbath, toward the dawn of the first day of the week, Mary Magdalene
and the other Mary went to see the tomb. 2And behold, there was a great earthquake, for an angel of the
Lord descended from heaven and came and rolled back the stone and sat on it”
(Matthew 28:1-2). However, there’s nothing actually in the text indicating the
stone was rolled after they got there
(Gleason Archer, Encyclopedia of Bible
Difficulties, [Regency, 1982], p. 348). All we’re told is they went to see
the tomb (v. 1) and also that the stone was rolled away (v. 2). It doesn’t say
after they got there it was rolled away. Ehrman has to read that into the text.
Did they see
a man, did they see two men, or did they see an angel?
Well, Mark 16:5 says the women saw a young man with a white
robe. Matthew 28:2-3 and John 20:12 correctly interpret this to be an angelic
visitation. That Matthew and John were correct to infer Mark spoke of an
angelic visitation is evidenced by the fact that, as in Mark, angels often
appeared in human form in the Old Testament, and the white apparel and
revelatory message in Mark indicates it was angelic as well. Moreover, the
early Jewish historian Josephus shows first century Jews believed angels did appear
in beautiful human form (Josephus, Antiquities
of the Jews, 5.8.2). So there is no contradiction. The evidence proves in
all gospels this was an angelic visitation. How many angels did they see? The
answer is Mark and Matthew mention one (Mark 16:5; Matthew 28:2), and Luke and
John mention two (Luke 24:2; John 20:12). But that doesn’t mean Mark and
Matthew believed only one was there.
Where there are two angels there is at least one, and Mark and Matthew simply
chose to mention one of them. Why? Well Blomberg notes, “It is more natural to
suggest that there really were two characters present in each case, but that
one . . . dominated the scene in a way that left the other easily ignored in
narratives that so regularly omitted non-essential details (Craig Blomberg, The Historical Reliability of the Gospels,
[InterVarsity Press, 2007], p. 194). Thus, there is no contradiction.
What were
they told to tell the disciples?
Well in Mark 16:6-7 and Matthew 28:5-7 they’re told Jesus
rose and that they must go to Galilee to tell the others. In Luke 24:5-7
they’re told Jesus rose but Luke simply omits the command to go to Galilee
because he doesn’t plan on narrating any Galilean appearances in his gospel.
Luke doesn’t say they were not told to go to Galilee. Thus, there is no
contradiction.
Were the
disciples supposed to stay in Jerusalem and see Jesus there or were they to go
to Galilee and see Jesus there?
Yes, they were to go to Galilee (Mark 16:6-7; Matthew
28:5-7) as noted before. It’s just that, again, Luke
simply omits the command to go to Galilee because he doesn’t plan on narrating
any Galilean appearances in his gospel. No contradiction.
Did
the women tell anyone or not?
Yes, Mark 16:7, Matthew 28:7-8, Luke 24:9, and
John 20:18 indicate the women told the disciples. It’s just that when Mark 16:8
says “they said nothing to anyone, for they were afraid” Ehrman takes this to
mean they did not tell the disciples even though they were told to tell the
disciples in Mark 16:7. However, all v. 8 means is that as they ran back to the disciples they did not tell anyone due to
fear. As Robert Gundry aptly observes, “We wouldn’t know this episode if the
women hadn’t told about it. . . ” (Robert Gundry, Commentary on the New Testament, [Hendrickson], 2010], p. 220).
Did the
disciples never leave Jerusalem or did they immediately leave Jerusalem and go
to Galilee?
Yes, again, they went to Galilee (Mark 16:6-7; Matthew
28:5-7). Luke simply omits the command to go to Galilee because he doesn’t plan
on narrating any Galilean appearances in his gospel.
No comments:
Post a Comment