Does the Bible Contradict Itself?

[spockrates]

Grimesy:

To me, the context shows that Jesus said all three statements during his execution. His crucifixion was not quick, as this article from the Journal of the American Medical Association points out:

http://jama.jamanetwork.com/article.aspx...eid=403315

The ancient Romans perfected the process to make the executed suffer for as long as possible, so as to deter others who were tempted to commit the same crimes. So Jesus had plenty of time to speak more than once during the excruciating torture (indeed, the word excruciating comes from the Latin for out of the cross, or something to that effect), despite that fact that he would have found it extremely difficult to catch his breath. Since none of the authors use the words, "Jesus last words were..." (or something similar) it's not at all certain that any of these statements spoken during his execution were his last statement. Earlier, I guessed that Luke recorded his last statement, for he adds the words, "and having said thus, he gave up the ghost." However, I'm not sure of this guess, either. Jesus might very well have said something else after the words Luke recorded, and before "he gave up the ghost". We simply don't have enough information from the texts to know with any degree of certainty.

That being said, I should add that for me, personally, it's not important what Christ said with his last breath. What matters is that what he said from his first breath on the cross, to his last was not contrary. For example, he did not say, "Father, forgive them. For they don't know what they are doing is wrong," and "Father, make them pay for what they've done to me! May they burn in Hell!" His words do not contradict each other--either on the cross, or at any point in his life. He was a man absent of any contradiction, which is a feat I don't think I'll ever achieve.

LUK 23:46: "And when Jesus had cried with a loud voice, he said, "Father, unto thy hands I commend my spirit:" AND HAVING SAID THUS, HE GAVE UP THE GHOST."

JOH 19:30: "When Jesus therefore had received the vinegar, he said, "It is finished:" AND HE BOWED HIS HEAD, AND GAVE UP THE GHOST."

These both look like last words to me. Don't forget that your OP challenged people to find contradictory passages. The fact that you get a certain meaning from it or Jesus may have said something that we don't know about, or distractions about how the Romans performed this type of execution are only your interpretation and speculation NOT WHAT THE PASSAGES ACTUALLY SAY.

Regards

Grimesy

Yes, I agree it is entirely possibly there is a contradiction regarding the chronological order of events, though there seems to me to be no contradiction in the words Jesus spoke during his crucifixion. It appears the these ancient authors were not as concerned with chronology as, say a modern investigative journalist would be.

---

why yes it does

Well, Jacob said this after spending a night wrestling with God in prayer and then wrestling with a man. If the man was God, he was God hidden within a man, or God is a man.

So what do you think Jacob meant by saying he did see God? What really happened? Did he see the God inside the man, or was the man he saw God, or do you see some other possibility?

---

This is something I've not heard about the NT before.

My guess would be that this is because you refuse to expose yourself to different points of view from actual scholars.

'Misquoting Jesus',by Bart Ehrman would be a good place to start. Perhaps also read up on the first Nicene council, (325 CE) at which the Christian canon was arbitrarily decided. Also have a read of 'The Gospel Of Thomas' part of the Nag Hammadi texts. Available free on line.

0000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000

The full Wiki article is worth reading,but the book is much better (a kind member sent me a pdf copy)

Misquoting Jesus: The Story Behind Who Changed the Bible and Why is a book by Bart D. Ehrman, a New Testament scholar at University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill.[1] The book introduces lay readers to the field of textual criticism of the Bible. Ehrman discusses a number of textual variants that resulted from intentional or accidental manuscript changes during the scriptorium era.

Summary

Ehrman recounts his personal experience with the study of the Bible and textual criticism. He summarizes the history of textual criticism, from the works of Desiderius Erasmus to the present. The book describes an early Christian environment in which the books that would later compose the New Testament were copied by hand, mostly by Christian amateurs. Ehrman concludes that various early scribes altered the New Testament texts in order to deemphasize the role of women in the early church, to unify and harmonize the different portrayals of Jesus in the four gospels, and to oppose certain heresies (such as Adoptionism). Ehrman contends that certain widely-held Christian beliefs, such about the divinity of Jesus, are associated not with the original words of scripture but with these later alterations.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Misquoting_Jesus

Thanks for the reading suggestions, padraic. I've heard that a great many reputable Bible scholars reject the Gospel of Thomas, saying it is Gnostic rather than Christian in origin. What do the scholars with whom you are familiar say in response?