Does the Bible Contradict Itself?

[spockrates]

Perhaps you should approach the subject of Jesus as a blank canvass upon which differing sects project their values, ideals, or wishes. The words on the page are enough to tell a story, and that's all we're talking about. ...

But the gospels are not clean slates, are they? Don't they paint extremely detailed portraits of who Jesus was and what he said and accomplished?

The difficulty I'm having in understanding the pictures they paint for us is sumerized well by Socrates. Please consider what he had to say, and let me know what you think:

"Writing, Phaedrus, has this strange quality, and is very like painting; for the creatures of painting stand like living beings, but if one asks them a question, they preserve a solemn silence. And so it is with written words; you might think they spoke as if they had intelligence, but if you question them, wishing to know about their sayings, they always say only one and the same thing! And every word, when once it is written, is bandied about, alike among those who understand and those who have no interest in it, and it knows not to whom to speak or not to speak; when ill-treated or unjustly reviled it always needs its father to help it; for it has no power to protect or help itself."

(Phaedrus 275)

The difficulty is, as I've previously suggested, the same that Socrates describes. Now for the difficulty I'm having in accepting your advice, please consider this analogy:

Let's say you and I are admiring Leonardo da Vinci's painting of the Mona Lisa. I wonder why she is smiling. You tell me she is smiling because she has fooled me. She is not a she, but a he--it is a self portrait of Leonardo! A museum curator then corrects you, saying that Leonardo's subject is indeed female and she is smiling because she is enamored with the painter. A janitor sweeping the floor nearby then says you're both wrong--she's smiling because she just passed gas!

Now you might advise me to treat Mona Lisa as a clean canvas and paint whatever picture of her I like, but if any picture I paint is alright, then why would you suggest that your picture of Mona Lisa is better than the rest?

The truth, it seems to me is that only Mona herself and perhaps Leonardo know why she smiles so. To say that any opinion of her disposition is just as good as any other is to ignore the truth that she actually had a reason for the smile Leonardo captured on canvas. The only way to accurrately discern her reason with any degree of certainty is to ask her, or Leonardo, or someone who knew one of them and was told the reason for her expression.

The same is true with writing: Books are sometimes unclear, and when they are, the best way to accurately discern their intended meanings with any degree of certainty is to ask the one quoted in the book, or the author of the book, or someone who knew either one. Do you agree at least with this general principle?