Totally NOT a debate about the veracity of the gospels

[Mudhammam]

You cannot say the gospels are "completely different and then say "except"..

The except negates the completely.

Allow me to qualify my statement: completely different in major respects.

And so what if they were completely different? Different and contradictory are not the same.

Now if you have a contradiction to point out then do so. Differences in details do not necessarily equate to contradictions in details.

The Gospel of Luke says that Joseph brought them to Jerusalem after Jesus' circumcision and the days of purification prescribed in Leviticus 12:2-8. "And when the time came for their purification according to the law of Moses, they brought him up to Jerusalem to present him to the Lord." (Luke 2:22).

The Gospel of Matthew says they did not go. Joseph was afraid to go to Jerusalem because he feared Herod's son Archelaus, who was then ruling in Jerusalem. "But when he heard that Archelaus reigned over Judea in place of his father Herod, he was afraid to go there, and being warned in a dream he withdrew to the district of Galilee. And he went and dwelt in a city called Nazareth." (Matthew 2:22-23)

You want them to be contradictory so bad, but why? So you can feel justified in dismissing the gospels?

You were saying?

You do not need a reason to do that. Just dismiss them as rubbish and move on. Just say you do not care if they are true or not. Anything but these feeble attempts at making them contradictory when they are not.

What more could people care about if any specific relic of the Christian myth was true?

Haha honest to you is of course downright lie to me. But I don't mind you preaching to me

One might educate oneself about what faith actually means in the Christian context before one pontificates about it.

When all else fails, obfuscate and equivocate! You Christians are almost as good at it as the Muslims are.