Contradiction? 1-1

[other one]

 

Luke 22 states that when the chief priests were looking for a way to get rid of Jesus, Satan entered Judas......

 

My dad always asked when this subject came up, "did Judas have anything to do with Satan's entering him, or was it just God ordained that it happen to someone...    so in the end come judgement day will Judas be the person responsible or just Satan.

 

Personally I would not attempt to answer that.

 

Just outta curiosity Other One, what do you make of John 6:70 then?

 

That word translated devil there actually means [to speak maliciously and falsely of; slander; defame:

to traduce someone's character.]  we know that satan entered him before he actually did this, and he did pay a serious price for it in this physical world, but i have no idea what was in Judas's heart when he died....   I'm not even sure how long he lived after Jesus was crucified and paid the price for our sins....   I guess that's where I differ from a lot of people....    I've been where Judas was and know how helpless I was without the help of the Holy Spirit and since Judas was supposed to do what he did, and didn't have the help of the Spirit, all I can say is but for the Grace of God, there go I....      

So just as with you and I, I think it matters what is in our heart at the end of our lives that matters concerning eternity and none of us know what was in his heart when he died....    he did pay a terrible price in this world for his actions and I'm perfectly fine with letting Jesus deal with his eternity......    I'd shake Hitlers hand if Jesus said he'd turned to him in the end.....    

 

We are simply not to judge people that we don't consider part of the church...   and even then only their actions and not the person themselves...

[other one]

and just for the sake of pondering there is this little diddy:::

 

1 Cor 5:1-6
5:1 It is actually reported that there is immorality among you, and immorality of such a kind as does not exist even among the Gentiles, that someone has his father's wife. 2 And you have become arrogant, and have not mourned instead, in order that the one who had done this deed might be removed from your midst. 3 For I, on my part, though absent in body but present in spirit, have already judged him who has so committed this, as though I were present. 4 In the name of our Lord Jesus, when you are assembled, and I with you in spirit, with the power of our Lord Jesus, 5 I have decided to deliver such a one to Satan for the destruction of his flesh , that his spirit may be saved in the day of the Lord Jesus.
NASB

 

I still don't know exactly what to make of this.....   so I am really reluctant to judge anyone at all......   but we can judge actions.

[kwikphilly]

Blessings dre...

     Welcome to Worthy,,,,,,,,,,,,,Where do you find a discrepancy,may I ask? I have yet ,in over half a century,found one contadiction in Gods Word.............only mis-interpretations by fallible men looking to refute an infallible God,,,,,,,,,,,,With love-in Christ,Kwik

[ebaltrace]

This is the first part of my notes on the crucifixion and how the stories from matthew, mark, luke and john are not contradictory. There are a few other "contradictions" that are not listed here I was just hoping to get some advice on my apologetic notes. I'm a little nervous go easy on me

 

Who carried the cross

    This is a very temporally sensitive topic here so let’s observe and see how the timeline in John 19:17 goes. It says in John 19:17-28

“So the soldiers took charge of Jesus. 17 Carrying his own cross, he went out to the place of the Skull (which in Aramaic is called Golgotha). 18 There they crucified him, and with him two others—one on each side and Jesus in the middle.”

Seems pretty basic jesus carried his carried his cross all the way. PAUSE* This is false scripture doesn’t mention that jesus carried it the entire way rather it is a general summary of where he was heading not what happened on the way there. For example when you get pulled over by a cop you testify about where you’re from and where you’re going. The officer testifies about what transpired in between. So it’s not necessarily contradictory but rather details left out. So it is possible that this isn’t a record of the entire trip in John. Another piece of evidence for this is the actual wording. We need to look at the word “OUT” this word in itself implies leaving a place. The original greek word used which is Exerchomai.(G1831) According to the Greek Lexicon (G1831) the word means

1. to go or come forth of

A. with mention of the place out of which one goes, or the point from which he departs

1. 1. 1. of those who leave a place of their own accord

      2. of those who are expelled or cast out

Now there are two places mentioned which makes this the correct phrasing which are in John 19:17 and john 19:13.  Lastly we must consider if mark, luke, and matthew say if Simon met them on the way “OUT” or on the way there.  Simon of Cyrene is the one who carried the cross and described as “passing by” (mark 15:21),  “having met” (Having met AS THEY WERE GOING OUT matthew 27:32) and “who was on his way” (luke 23:26)

Conclusion

    I have presented ample evidence to show that this is not a contradiction and that John, matthew, mark, and luke are in agreement. John was simply describing how the trip was planned. Thank you for reading this and please notify me of any errors or additional evidence.

 

You brought up a good topic concerning Jesus' cross

Background information……

The Passover Lamb was slaughtered on the 14th day of Abib [Nisan]

Leviticus 23:5 New American Standard Bible (NASB)

5 In the first month, on the fourteenth day of the month at twilight is the Lord’s Passover.

Exodus 12:6 New American Standard Bible (NASB)

6 You shall keep it [the lamb]until the fourteenth day of the same month, then the whole assembly of the congregation of Israel is to kill it at twilight.

You must realize that the Jewish day begins at sundown.

After sundown, on the next day, the Passover lamb is eaten on the first day of the Feast of unleavened bread.

Leviticus 23:6 New American Standard Bible (NASB)

6 Then on the fifteenth day of the same month there is the Feast of Unleavened Bread to the Lord; for seven days you shall eat unleavened bread.

Exodus 12:8 New American Standard Bible (NASB)

8 They shall eat the flesh that same night, [that night which is after sundown is the next day, the 15th of Abib]roasted with fire, and they shall eat it with unleavened bread and bitter herbs.

On the first day of unleavened bread no laborious work is to be done.

Leviticus 23:7 New American Standard Bible (NASB)

7 On the first day you shall have a holy convocation; you shall not do any laborious work.

Because, the Passover is followed immediately by the Feast of Unleavened Bread, the 14th of Abib is often called the first day of the Feast. But the 15th of Abib is the first day of the feast of unleavened bread when no laborious work is to be done.

Jesus’ disciples prepared for the Passover on the 14th of Abib.

Mark 14:12 New American Standard Bible (NASB)

12 On the first day of Unleavened Bread, when the Passover lamb was being sacrificed, His disciples *said to Him, “Where do You want us to go and prepare for You to eat the Passover?”

That evening, after sundown, on the first day of unleavened bread, when no laborious work was to be done, Jesus reclined with his disciples to eat the Passover.

Mark 14:17-18 New American Standard Bible (NASB)

17 When it was evening He *came with the twelve. 18 As they were reclining at the table and eating, Jesus said, “Truly I say to you that one of you will betray Me—one who is eating with Me.”

Now we all know the rest of the story. Before the next sundown, Jesus was betrayed, tried, convicted, executed, and placed in a tomb.

The question is….Did Jesus carry his cross on a day when no laborious work is to be done?

In Matthew, Mark, and Luke’s gospels the Bible never says that Jesus carried the cross. These gospels, perhaps because they were aware of the prohibition against laborious work, have Simon of Cyrene carrying the cross.

Matthew 27:32 New American Standard Bible (NASB)

32 As they were coming out, they found a man of Cyrene named Simon, whom they pressed into service to bear His cross.

But John’s Gospel clearly has Jesus carrying his cross.

John 19:17 New American Standard Bible (NASB)

17 They took Jesus, therefore, and He went out, bearing His own cross, to the place called the Place of a Skull, which is called in Hebrew, Golgotha.

So you tell me….Did Jesus carry his cross?

 

　

　

　

[enoob57]

John's Gospel is the last of Biblical writings... after all else John wanted to give

witness "I was with God- The Lord Jesus" and here's my witness! His distinctive purpose

delivers the most profundity of all truth and yet writes it in the most simplest language...

In this we see God in His Word for our hands have handled and eyes beheld His Word-> it

has become life to our minds, the activity of our hands and the hope of that which has not

come to be as though it already has... Love, Steven

[ebaltrace]

John's Gospel is the last of Biblical writings... after all else John wanted to give

witness "I was with God- The Lord Jesus" and here's my witness! His distinctive purpose

delivers the most profundity of all truth and yet writes it in the most simplest language...

In this we see God in His Word for our hands have handled and eyes beheld His Word-> it

has become life to our minds, the activity of our hands and the hope of that which has not

come to be as though it already has... Love, Steven

Do you think that the Apostle John wrote the Gospel according to John?

Here is a quotation from the Catholic Encyclopedia. See what you understand them as saying.

The first four historicalbooks of the New Testament are supplied with titles (Euangelion kata Matthaion, Euangelionkata Markon, etc.), which, however ancient, do not go back to the respective authors of those sacredwritings. The Canonof Muratori, Clement of Alexandria, and St. Irenæus bear distinct witnessto the existenceof those headings in the latter part of the second century of our era. Indeed, the manner in which Clement(Stromata I.21), and St. Irenæus(Against Heresies III.11.7) employ them implies that, at that early date, our present titles to the Gospels had been in current use for some considerable time. Hence, it may be inferred that they were prefixed to the evangelical narratives as early as the first part of that same century. That, however, they do not go back to the first century of the Christian era, or at least that they are not original, is a position generally held at the present day. It is felt that since they are similar for the four Gospels, although the same Gospels were composed at some interval from each other, those titles were not framed, and consequently not prefixed to each individualnarrative, before the collection of the four Gospels was actually made. Besides, as well pointed out by Prof. Bacon, "the {C}historical{C} books of the New Testament differ from its apocalyptic and {C}epistolary{C} {C}literature{C}, as those of the Old Testament differ from its {C}prophecy{C}, in being invariably anonymous, and for the same reason. {C}Prophecies{C} whether in the earlier or in the later sense, and letters, to have authority, must be referable to some {C}individual{C}; the greater his name, the better. But {C}history{C} was regarded as a common {C}possession{C}. Its facts spoke for themselves. Only as the springs of common {C}recollection{C} began to dwindle, and marked differences to appear between the well-informed and accurate {C}Gospels and the untrustworthy . . . did it become worth while for the Christian teacher or apologist to specify whether the given representation of the current {C}tradition{C} was 'according to' this or that special compiler, and to state his qualifications". It thus appears that the present titles of the Gospels are not traceable to the Evangelists themselves.

 

What is also interesting is that the gospel mentions "the disciple that Jesus loved."   But never mentions John by name as being the author of the Gospel.

But Lazarus is mentioned as being loved by Jesus.

John 11:5 Now Jesus loved Martha and her sister and Lazarus.

 

So the question arises ...Who wrote the Gospel according to John?

Was it John? Or was it a tradition of the Roman Catholic Church which created the title for the Gospel as being according to John?

Or was it Lazarus? Mary? or Martha? [sisters of Lazarus]

Or someone unknown?

[Bonky]

That word translated devil there actually means [to speak maliciously and falsely of; slander; defame:

to traduce someone's character.]  we know that satan entered him before he actually did this, and he did pay a serious price for it in this physical world, but i have no idea what was in Judas's heart when he died....   I'm not even sure how long he lived after Jesus was crucified and paid the price for our sins....   I guess that's where I differ from a lot of people....    I've been where Judas was and know how helpless I was without the help of the Holy Spirit and since Judas was supposed to do what he did, and didn't have the help of the Spirit, all I can say is but for the Grace of God, there go I....      

So just as with you and I, I think it matters what is in our heart at the end of our lives that matters concerning eternity and none of us know what was in his heart when he died....    he did pay a terrible price in this world for his actions and I'm perfectly fine with letting Jesus deal with his eternity......    I'd shake Hitlers hand if Jesus said he'd turned to him in the end.....    

 

We are simply not to judge people that we don't consider part of the church...   and even then only their actions and not the person themselves...

While I'm sure we disagree on many things, I like your humility and hesitation to judge people. Very refreshing.

[Guest shiloh357]

You brought up a good topic concerning Jesus' cross

Background information……

The Passover Lamb was slaughtered on the 14th day of Abib [Nisan]

Leviticus 23:5 New American Standard Bible (NASB)

5 In the first month, on the fourteenth day of the month at twilight is the Lord’s Passover.

Exodus 12:6 New American Standard Bible (NASB)

6 You shall keep it [the lamb]until the fourteenth day of the same month, then the whole assembly of the congregation of Israel is to kill it at twilight.

You must realize that the Jewish day begins at sundown.

After sundown, on the next day, the Passover lamb is eaten on the first day of the Feast of unleavened bread.

Leviticus 23:6 New American Standard Bible (NASB)

6 Then on the fifteenth day of the same month there is the Feast of Unleavened Bread to the Lord; for seven days you shall eat unleavened bread.

Exodus 12:8 New American Standard Bible (NASB)

8 They shall eat the flesh that same night, [that night which is after sundown is the next day, the 15th of Abib]roasted with fire, and they shall eat it with unleavened bread and bitter herbs.

On the first day of unleavened bread no laborious work is to be done.

Leviticus 23:7 New American Standard Bible (NASB)

7 On the first day you shall have a holy convocation; you shall not do any laborious work.

Because, the Passover is followed immediately by the Feast of Unleavened Bread, the 14th of Abib is often called the first day of the Feast. But the 15th of Abib is the first day of the feast of unleavened bread when no laborious work is to be done.

Jesus’ disciples prepared for the Passover on the 14th of Abib.

Mark 14:12 New American Standard Bible (NASB)

12 On the first day of Unleavened Bread, when the Passover lamb was being sacrificed, His disciples *said to Him, “Where do You want us to go and prepare for You to eat the Passover?”

That evening, after sundown, on the first day of unleavened bread, when no laborious work was to be done, Jesus reclined with his disciples to eat the Passover.

Mark 14:17-18 New American Standard Bible (NASB)

17 When it was evening He *came with the twelve. 18 As they were reclining at the table and eating, Jesus said, “Truly I say to you that one of you will betray Me—one who is eating with Me.”

Now we all know the rest of the story. Before the next sundown, Jesus was betrayed, tried, convicted, executed, and placed in a tomb.

The question is….Did Jesus carry his cross on a day when no laborious work is to be done?

In Matthew, Mark, and Luke’s gospels the Bible never says that Jesus carried the cross. These gospels, perhaps because they were aware of the prohibition against laborious work, have Simon of Cyrene carrying the cross.

Matthew 27:32 New American Standard Bible (NASB)

32 As they were coming out, they found a man of Cyrene named Simon, whom they pressed into service to bear His cross.

But John’s Gospel clearly has Jesus carrying his cross.

John 19:17 New American Standard Bible (NASB)

17 They took Jesus, therefore, and He went out, bearing His own cross, to the place called the Place of a Skull, which is called in Hebrew, Golgotha.

So you tell me….Did Jesus carry his cross?

 

John said Jesus carried His cross.  The Bible is inerrant and so if the Bible says it happened, it happened.  Obviously, Jesus had already lost a lot of blood and was fatigued by the beating and flogging he had already received.  He carried His cross until he no longer had the strength to do so.  That is why Simon a Jew from Cyrene was compelled to carry it.

[enoob57]

John's Gospel is the last of Biblical writings... after all else John wanted to give

witness "I was with God- The Lord Jesus" and here's my witness! His distinctive purpose

delivers the most profundity of all truth and yet writes it in the most simplest language...

In this we see God in His Word for our hands have handled and eyes beheld His Word-> it

has become life to our minds, the activity of our hands and the hope of that which has not

come to be as though it already has... Love, Steven

Do you think that the Apostle John wrote the Gospel according to John?

Here is a quotation from the Catholic Encyclopedia. See what you understand them as saying.

The first four historicalbooks of the New Testament are supplied with titles (Euangelion kata Matthaion, Euangelionkata Markon, etc.), which, however ancient, do not go back to the respective authors of those sacredwritings. The Canonof Muratori, Clement of Alexandria, and St. Irenæus bear distinct witnessto the existenceof those headings in the latter part of the second century of our era. Indeed, the manner in which Clement(Stromata I.21), and St. Irenæus(Against Heresies III.11.7) employ them implies that, at that early date, our present titles to the Gospels had been in current use for some considerable time. Hence, it may be inferred that they were prefixed to the evangelical narratives as early as the first part of that same century. That, however, they do not go back to the first century of the Christian era, or at least that they are not original, is a position generally held at the present day. It is felt that since they are similar for the four Gospels, although the same Gospels were composed at some interval from each other, those titles were not framed, and consequently not prefixed to each individualnarrative, before the collection of the four Gospels was actually made. Besides, as well pointed out by Prof. Bacon, "the {C}historical{C} books of the New Testament differ from its apocalyptic and {C}epistolary{C} {C}literature{C}, as those of the Old Testament differ from its {C}prophecy{C}, in being invariably anonymous, and for the same reason. {C}Prophecies{C} whether in the earlier or in the later sense, and letters, to have authority, must be referable to some {C}individual{C}; the greater his name, the better. But {C}history{C} was regarded as a common {C}possession{C}. Its facts spoke for themselves. Only as the springs of common {C}recollection{C} began to dwindle, and marked differences to appear between the well-informed and accurate {C}Gospels and the untrustworthy . . . did it become worth while for the Christian teacher or apologist to specify whether the given representation of the current {C}tradition{C} was 'according to' this or that special compiler, and to state his qualifications". It thus appears that the present titles of the Gospels are not traceable to the Evangelists themselves.

 

What is also interesting is that the gospel mentions "the disciple that Jesus loved."   But never mentions John by name as being the author of the Gospel.

But Lazarus is mentioned as being loved by Jesus.

John 11:5 Now Jesus loved Martha and her sister and Lazarus.

 

So the question arises ...Who wrote the Gospel according to John?

Was it John? Or was it a tradition of the Roman Catholic Church which created the title for the Gospel as being according to John?

Or was it Lazarus? Mary? or Martha? [sisters of Lazarus]

Or someone unknown?

Yes it was John the disciple of Jesus... and the distinction is where and when he mentions

accounts... the witness is narrowed down

John 21:20-25

20 Then Peter, turning about, seeth the disciple whom Jesus loved following;

which also leaned on his breast at supper, and said, Lord, which is he that

betrayeth thee? 21 Peter seeing him saith to Jesus, Lord, and what shall

this man do? 22 Jesus saith unto him, If I will that he tarry till I come,

what is that to thee? follow thou me. 23 Then went this saying abroad among

the brethren, that that disciple should not die: yet Jesus said not unto him,

He shall not die; but, If I will that he tarry till I come, what is that to thee?

24 This is the disciple which testifieth of these things, and wrote these things:

and we know that his testimony is true. 25 And there are also many other things

which Jesus did, the which, if they should be written every one, I suppose that

even the world itself could not contain the books that should be written. Amen.

KJV

Luke 5:10

10 And so was also James, and John, the sons of Zebedee, which were partners with

Simon. And Jesus said unto Simon, Fear not; from henceforth thou shalt catch men.

KJV

Gal 2:9

9 And when James, Cephas, and John, who seemed to be pillars, perceived the grace

that was given unto me, they gave to me and Barnabas the right hands of fellowship;

that we should go unto the heathen, and they unto the circumcision.

KJV

They were always together... I can see no apparent scholarship to not believe that

at the supper and other times 'it was John with Peter'. Plus my comfortable peace as

I receive the words as that of John's written account Love, Steven

[ebaltrace]

 

 

John's Gospel is the last of Biblical writings... after all else John wanted to give

witness "I was with God- The Lord Jesus" and here's my witness! His distinctive purpose

delivers the most profundity of all truth and yet writes it in the most simplest language...

In this we see God in His Word for our hands have handled and eyes beheld His Word-> it

has become life to our minds, the activity of our hands and the hope of that which has not

come to be as though it already has... Love, Steven

Do you think that the Apostle John wrote the Gospel according to John?

Here is a quotation from the Catholic Encyclopedia. See what you understand them as saying.

The first four historicalbooks of the New Testament are supplied with titles (Euangelion kata Matthaion, Euangelionkata Markon, etc.), which, however ancient, do not go back to the respective authors of those sacredwritings. The Canonof Muratori, Clement of Alexandria, and St. Irenæus bear distinct witnessto the existenceof those headings in the latter part of the second century of our era. Indeed, the manner in which Clement(Stromata I.21), and St. Irenæus(Against Heresies III.11.7) employ them implies that, at that early date, our present titles to the Gospels had been in current use for some considerable time. Hence, it may be inferred that they were prefixed to the evangelical narratives as early as the first part of that same century. That, however, they do not go back to the first century of the Christian era, or at least that they are not original, is a position generally held at the present day. It is felt that since they are similar for the four Gospels, although the same Gospels were composed at some interval from each other, those titles were not framed, and consequently not prefixed to each individualnarrative, before the collection of the four Gospels was actually made. Besides, as well pointed out by Prof. Bacon, "the {C}historical{C} books of the New Testament differ from its apocalyptic and {C}epistolary{C} {C}literature{C}, as those of the Old Testament differ from its {C}prophecy{C}, in being invariably anonymous, and for the same reason. {C}Prophecies{C} whether in the earlier or in the later sense, and letters, to have authority, must be referable to some {C}individual{C}; the greater his name, the better. But {C}history{C} was regarded as a common {C}possession{C}. Its facts spoke for themselves. Only as the springs of common {C}recollection{C} began to dwindle, and marked differences to appear between the well-informed and accurate {C}Gospels and the untrustworthy . . . did it become worth while for the Christian teacher or apologist to specify whether the given representation of the current {C}tradition{C} was 'according to' this or that special compiler, and to state his qualifications". It thus appears that the present titles of the Gospels are not traceable to the Evangelists themselves.

 

What is also interesting is that the gospel mentions "the disciple that Jesus loved."   But never mentions John by name as being the author of the Gospel.

But Lazarus is mentioned as being loved by Jesus.

John 11:5 Now Jesus loved Martha and her sister and Lazarus.

 

So the question arises ...Who wrote the Gospel according to John?

Was it John? Or was it a tradition of the Roman Catholic Church which created the title for the Gospel as being according to John?

Or was it Lazarus? Mary? or Martha? [sisters of Lazarus]

Or someone unknown?

 

Yes it was John the disciple of Jesus... and the distinction is where and when he mentions

accounts... the witness is narrowed down

John 21:20-25

20 Then Peter, turning about, seeth the disciple whom Jesus loved following;

which also leaned on his breast at supper, and said, Lord, which is he that

betrayeth thee? 21 Peter seeing him saith to Jesus, Lord, and what shall

this man do? 22 Jesus saith unto him, If I will that he tarry till I come,

what is that to thee? follow thou me. 23 Then went this saying abroad among

the brethren, that that disciple should not die: yet Jesus said not unto him,

He shall not die; but, If I will that he tarry till I come, what is that to thee?

24 This is the disciple which testifieth of these things, and wrote these things:

and we know that his testimony is true. 25 And there are also many other things

which Jesus did, the which, if they should be written every one, I suppose that

even the world itself could not contain the books that should be written. Amen.

KJV

Luke 5:10

10 And so was also James, and John, the sons of Zebedee, which were partners with

Simon. And Jesus said unto Simon, Fear not; from henceforth thou shalt catch men.

KJV

Gal 2:9

9 And when James, Cephas, and John, who seemed to be pillars, perceived the grace

that was given unto me, they gave to me and Barnabas the right hands of fellowship;

that we should go unto the heathen, and they unto the circumcision.

KJV

They were always together... I can see no apparent scholarship to not believe that

at the supper and other times 'it was John with Peter'. Plus my comfortable peace as

I receive the words as that of John's written account Love, Steven

 

Dear Steven,

The references you cite do not point to John IMO

Allow me to make a point.

²⁰ Peter, turning around, *saw the disciple whom Jesus loved following them; the one who also had leaned back on His bosom at the supper and said, “Lord, who is the one who betrays You?” ²¹ So Peter seeing him *said to Jesus, “Lord, and what about this man?” ²² Jesus *said to him, “If I want him to remain until I come, what is that to you? You follow Me!” ²³ Therefore this saying went out among the brethren that that disciple would not die; yet Jesus did not say to him that he would not die, but only, “If I want him to remain until I come, what is that to you?”

 

So what made Peter point to the disciple that Jesus loved and say..."“Lord, and what about this man?”"

Why? Was there something unique that would inspire this question?

Yes...Peter was pointing to Lazarus who had died and had been resurrected.

In the verses just preceeding these verses Peter and Jesus had been speaking of Peter's death and now Peter wanted to know if Lazarus would die again.

And Jesus answered...""“If I want him to remain until I come, what is that to you? ""

And everyone present knew that they were talking about Lazarus.  ""Therefore this saying went out among the brethren that that disciple would not die;"' They thought Lazarus would not die because he had already died once.  ""And inasmuch as it is appointed for men to die once and after this comes judgment,"" Hebrews 9:27

 

Remember the Bible says Jesus loved Lazarus.[John 11:5] but never says he loved John.