4 ms·

"Sure, but they don't stand up to inspection." Please elaborate.

• tomohawk 7y ago
  This statement is in response to the broad claim of inconsistencies in the accounts. If anyone needs to elaborate, it is the original claimant. Is there a claimed inconsistency you would seek to have explained?
  • bediger4000 7y ago
    Nowhere did I say they were inconsistent - merely that different gospels have different stories, or different versions of the same story, and they appear in different orders. This is beyond dispute. It's also not something that christianity as a whole makes clear. The Gospel of John is radically different than the other 3 gospels. You can see that by reading maybe a page of each one. Beyond dispute.
• bediger4000 7y ago
  He can't because it's not true. Any reading of Matthew/Mark/Luke will net you a set of stories that are similar, but every story is not included in all 3 gospels, and the order is a bit different. Wikipedia maybe says it well: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Synoptic_Gospels https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Synoptic_Gospels > they include many of the same stories, often in a similar > sequence and in similar or sometimes identical wording. > They stand in contrast to John, whose content is largely distinct. This is reasonably well known among scholars, but not super common knowledge. I believe this is clearly what Cleese was complaining about, and what the Bishop tried to gloss over by claiming that knowledge is commonly imparted by religious education. There's also things like the "Johannine Comma" (https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Johannine_Comma https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Johannine_Comma), and the ending of Mark (https://uk.answers.yahoo.com/question/index?qid=20110430123606AA6O1GG https://uk.answers.yahoo.com/question/index?qid=201104301236...), if you want to dig deeper.