New Testament Contradictions and the "Ancient Biography" Argument

[Gorgias]

It’s been in the footnotes of many Bibles as an alternative.

Would you mind citing and quoting some, please?

 

[goout]

Interesting, thanks for the answer! I want to find more Christian literature written around that time, maybe some of the earliest commentaries on the Gospels. I’d be interested to see what they say about NT contradictions, or if they even mention them at all. I’m pretty ignorant on the subject, but I think that could be pretty revealing.

Are you making the assumption that Inspired literature, (which the bible is,) should be free of contradictions?
Or, that contradictions detract from Inspiration if not properly explained?

 

[Julius_Caesar]

Since you insist on me doing your homework…
(Please Note: This uploaded content is no longer available.) (Please Note: This uploaded content is no longer available.)
(Please Note: This uploaded content is no longer available.)

 

[Julius_Caesar]

Or, that contradictions detract from Inspiration if not properly explained?

Innerrancy has always been held to.

 

[goout]

goout:

Or, that contradictions detract from Inspiration if not properly explained?

Innerrancy has always been held to.

Are you replying to my post?

 

[Julius_Caesar]

I quoted it, did I not?

 

[goout]

I quoted it, did I not?

Yes was it an accident? I said nothing about the scriptures not being inerrant.

 

[Julius_Caesar]

Not an accident. And innerrancy has always been held to.

 

[goout]

Not an accident. And innerrancy has always been held to.

If you want to have a conversation, address the post. I said nothing about the scriptures lacking inerrancy.

 

[Julius_Caesar]

If you want to have a conversation, address the post.

Except that’s what I’m doing. If you want to feel some type of way, that’s on you, not on me.

 

[goout]

If you want to have a conversation, address the post. I said nothing about the scriptures lacking inerrancy. You are being unnecessarily combative.
And to start with, I was not addressing you. So if you feel the need for a long argument, pick someone else please.

 

[Julius_Caesar]

You are being unnecessarily combative

It’s been a consistent pattern with you to paint someone as “combative” when you don’t want to answer a point

If you want to have a conversation, address the post.

Again, I’ve done that. But it seems you’d like to play accuser than provide apologetics.

So if you feel the need for a long argument, pick someone else please.

Maybe actually provide a better post than just resorting to the “combativeness” card.

 

[goout]

You didn’t make a point.
You threw out a one liner that was a non sequitur.
and I was not replying to you.

 

[Julius_Caesar]

You didn’t make a point.

Oh but I did.

You said:

Or, that contradictions detract from Inspiration if not properly explained?

To which I replied:

Innerrancy has always been held to.

Don’t blame me for analyzing your point.

 

[sy1997se]

Are you making the assumption that Inspired literature, (which the bible is,) should be free of contradictions?

Yes, I guess I am.

Or, that contradictions detract from Inspiration if not properly explained?

Yes, this seems to be the commonly held view. Of course what I am trying to establish is what really is a contradiction, as opposed to an accepted literary device of the time.

 

[Julius_Caesar]

Of course what I am trying to establish is what really is a contradiction,

Which have been dealt with by many authors.

 

[goout]

goout:

Are you making the assumption that Inspired literature, (which the bible is,) should be free of contradictions?

Yes, I guess I am.

Or, that contradictions detract from Inspiration if not properly explained?

Yes, this seems to be the commonly held view. Of course what I am trying to establish is what really is a contradiction, as opposed to an accepted literary device of the time.

see the messages

 

[sy1997se]

Which have been dealt with by many authors.

You can and ought to critically examine any author’s assertions to confirm that they are valid, especially when presented with possibly contradictory evidence.

 

[Julius_Caesar]

especially when presented with possibly contradictory evidence.

Except that there are not “contradictions.”

 

[sy1997se]

Except that there are not “contradictions.”

You didn’t understand what I was saying. I wasn’t talking about “contradictions” in the Bible. I was talking about the way that differences in Gospel accounts are explained by scholars, and how I thought a certain insertion in an ancient apocryphal gospel seemed to call that explanation into question. That apocryphal gospel is the possible “contradictory evidence” to the scholars’ claims that I was referencing.