Can one disprove Jesus' resurrection?

[pgwenthold]

The Devil wrote the bible to confuse mankind.

Back in the days of alt.atheism, Wen-King Su used to ask the question, "How do you know that the one you call God is not a "powerful deceiver" trying to fool you?"

I liked that. Clearly the demon (Satan or other) is sufficiently powerful to do things like possess mortals, so it's obviously a lot more powerful than us.

And I have always said, if I were Satan and wanted to rule the world, the first thing I'd try to do is to convince everyone that I was God. So how can you rule it out?

I've never heard a satisfactory answer for it.

 

[Leumas]

Back in the days of alt.atheism, Wen-King Su used to ask the question, "How do you know that the one you call God is not a "powerful deceiver" trying to fool you?"

I liked that. Clearly the demon (Satan or other) is sufficiently powerful to do things like possess mortals, so it's obviously a lot more powerful than us.

And I have always said, if I were Satan and wanted to rule the world, the first thing I'd try to do is to convince everyone that I was God. So how can you rule it out?

I've never heard a satisfactory answer for it.

Exactly!

Well said....exactly right.

If god had anything to do with the bible - whether authoring it directly or inspiring it to the writers who just jotted down what he was inspiring them with or even general inspirational outlines after which he left the writers to fill in the blanks - s/he/it should have at the very least ensured its correctness and comprehensibility if not also its continued validity along the ages.

Never mind the consideration that the Bible being in any way "divinely related" is automatic interference with free-will.

But if there is any divine spark in the Bible then either this divinity is the most incompetent fool or the most heinous devil.

And all this talk about metaphor and mistranslation and interpolation or missing bits or scribal slips should not pass muster with anyone who is not trying to alleviate a most severe cognitive dissonance.

If an omnipotent omniscient omnibenevolent being is involved in giving humanity a book that is supposed to convey his wishes and commandments and moral edicts as the path to ETERNAL SALVATION then the book should be utterly and totally comprehensible to anyone who reads it even if the pages were in fact BLANK PAGES let alone in the right language or correctly transcribed.

Even if the pages were EMPTY this divine book should convey the correct message to its onlookers.

And the message conveyed should be RELEVANT to the reader's culture and epoch as well as current knowledge of reality.

Even if some scribe slipped or mistranslated or deliberately forged it, the MIRACULOUS words should be self-correcting.... in fact there should not be a need for words in the first place.... the DIVINE book should miraculously show the words in the correct language and so forth to its reader.

Of course that is assuming that the Divinity is in fact omnipotent and omniscient but above all omnibenevolent.

If a divinity wanted to cause strife and mayhem and schisms and atrocities between humans throughout the ages I doubt he could have done any better than the Bible/Quran.

So if this divinity is in fact A DEVIL then yes the Bible is his book.

Consider this funny story of what may have occurred on a sleepy afternoon eons ago:

The scene: God and Satan are discussing the design of humans on a dull afternoon.

G: I am going to create humans and give them wisdom and goodness and they will love me.

S: So you are going to make them worship you?

G: No...that defeats the purpose... They will do it out of reverence to me.

S: Ah....but that is no good either. They can't help but revere you if they know you and see you.

G: Yeah....isn't that the point?

S: Not really.... that doesn't prove anything if they love you just because you do things for them and they can see you as a guardian and protector. They would be morons if they don't and YOU cannot create morons can you?

G: No... I cannot create morons...you are right. But Hmmmmm....you are right. How can I test that they would love me for me and not for the things I do for them?

S: If I may suggest something?

G: Well....go ahead!

S: I think that you should NEVER EVER show yourself to them. If before they go extinct they have come to conclude that you are THE GOD then that shows they were sufficiently clever and a testament to your creative wisdom.

G: OK…. I will just help them ANONYMOUSLY.

S: Oh no....that won't do. If you help them that would be a dead give away...no?

G: Ok...then I will just make sure no calamities would ever befall them.

S: Oh...no that won't do either…. What kind of test is that? If nothing bad happens despite which they loved you then what kind of character test is that?

G: Hmmm....ok... I will just let them be on their own and if they grow to love me then we know they loved me for me and not just because I helped them out.

S: But that is not enough.

G: What now....what else do you want me to do.

S: Well....One has a choice only if one has things to choose from. If there are no other temptations how can we know that they chose at all? We need to tempt them away from you and if they resist then we know how clever they are.

G: I don't like this. After all I love them and you now have me rain hell on them and not help them and then you want me to also DECEIVE them too?

S: Well....it is up to you....but if you really want to be sure!

G: What do you propose then?

S: Here are my rules for the bet:

• You leave them all alone. You never show yourself or manifest any sign or indication of your existence.
• They are to be left to fend for themselves against all natural disasters and diseases and so forth.
• Every now and then, I will make sure to pretend to be some God and try to convince man to worship me as if I am the real god. I will also make sure that I do that many times in various places at the same time.
• Let’s say I do that for 10 million years.
• At the end of that time, if there are any humans who are not fooled by the myriad of godly disguises and are in fact not worshiping any of these disguises then YOU win.
• I get to keep the souls of the ones that fall for my shams. YOU get the ATHEISTS.

G: Even the atheists that are killers and rapists? What about the theists that are good and their only fault is that they fell for the ruses?

S: Well….what do you want?

G: Any people who harm other people and have made any others miserable you get whether they fell for your ruses or not. Any ones that have been kind and never intentionally or directly harmed anyone I get whether they fell for your ruses or not.

S: That is not fair. I should get all the ones that worshiped me in any guise regardless. After all I can make a case that by worshiping my hoaxes they wasted valuable time that they could have better devoted to other tasks that could have benefited humanity more.

G: Look…. I don’t like you taking ANY souls. What are you going to do with them anyway… No…. my decision is final. I agree to all your proposals EXCEPT let’s just have it so that all people who die just stay that way….except for the ones that do bad stuff….them… you get to torture for a million year and then extinguish.

S: So even the good ones just die?

G: Yes…all just die but for the bad ones whom you get for a million years and then you extinguish them and we are done.

S: So….let’s be clear about the terms:

• You never ever interfere or show your face.
• I get to do what I want.
• If by the end of 10 million years there are good atheists….you win….otherwise you lose.

G: OK….you are on……

S: How many matches do you want to play?​

 

[pgwenthold]

Another good remnant from the days of a.a: Wayne Delia's "bible contradiction"

(I'll dispense with the looking up the specific passages, but I've done it many times before)

God is jealous (all over the old testament, you can find it in probably dozens of places)
God is love (that's in a letter of John)
Love is not jealous (that is in one of Paul's letters)

A logical contradiction. The attempts to rationalize I've seen include
1) claiming that the "love" used in John is not the same as that in Paul. However, as far as I can tell, they are the same in the original language, and it's not just a difference in translation. It's obvious that the people who make this claim haven't actually looked at the original language or anything, and are just making it up as an attempt to dismiss it.
2) claiming that God is outside logic. Of course, once you admit this, then there is no discussion left to be had. The bible is not internally consistent nor inconsistent. There is no such thing as proof of anything because, hey, with God, you can just say anything you want. So if there is no such thing as logic, there is no rational discourse of any sort.

 

[SezMe]

<Merciful snip>

Christianity
<Blessed snip>

Judaism/Christianity/Islam
<Holy snip> {Make sure you read that carefully}

And? Other than those minor bagatelles, what's the problem?

 

[SezMe]

...but supported by not one single skerrick more evidence, even if one accepts your interpretation as correct.

See. I knew there was a reason to follow this thread. I learned a new word even my on-line dictionary didn't know. All hail the meandering vehicle.

I'm pretty sure that violating the laws of physics constitutes disproof, doesn't it? If not, it's a pretty heavy weight of evidence against it. From a scientific perspective, it's quite a bit more than enough to discredit the notion, even if you don't use the word "proof" per se.

I think the enlightened(?) Christian view is that the resurrection was a spiritual one...which makes its verification even more difficult and avoids the physics problems entirely.

 

[Slowvehicle]

See. I knew there was a reason to follow this thread. I learned a new word even my on-line dictionary didn't know. All hail the meandering vehicle.

Ta ever so!

 

[Butter!]

Ta ever so!

Hail! Hail!

 

[tsig]

I don't remember you being at my last party...

If you can remember the party then you weren't there.

 

[Slowvehicle]

If you can remember the party then you weren't there.

...good point!

 

[Craig B]

I have read books where it is claimed Jesus transfigured, resurrected and ascended in a cloud.

Who thinks that those events are historical accounts and can be proven?

Not the same people who think Jesus was a normal human being who was buried in a family tomb with his father, mother and brother.

 

[dejudge]

I have read books where it is claimed Jesus transfigured, resurrected and ascended in a cloud.

Who thinks that those events are historical accounts and can be proven?

Not the same people who think Jesus was a normal human being who was buried in a family tomb with his father, mother and brother.

Which story book are you reading? Identify the manuscripts with the fables of a "family" tomb with the dead FATHER of Jesus?

In the NT fables, Jesus was God but people thought he was a normal man UNTIL they found the EMPTY Tomb.

The father of the resurrected Jesus was a Ghost or God in the fables of the NT Canon.

In addition, the body of the supposed dead Jesus was MISSING when the visitors went to the burial site.

In the fables called gMark, the Jesus who was raised from the dead was a TRANSFIGURING WATER walking, Son of a God.

In the fables called gMatthew, the Resurrected Jesus was Born of a Ghost and a Virgin.

In the fables called gLuke, the same Resurrected Jesus was the product of an overshadowing Ghost and a Virgin.

In the fables called gJohn, the Jesus was God who was raised from the dead.

In the pack of lies and forgeries called the Pauline Corpus, the Resurrected Jesus was the Lord from heaven, God Creator and God's own Son.


Did Jesus resurrect or Transfigure in gMark?

Can the son of a Ghost die and then resurrect as stated in gMatthew and gLuke?

Can God Creator be buried and then resurrect as stated in gJohn and the Pauline Corpus?

The stories of Jesus are fables NOT history.

If Jesus did live and was crucified and then was SEEN ALIVE three days later it means he did NOT die on the day he was supposedly crucified.

We really have NO account of the actual death of Jesus if he was supposedly SEEN ALIVE after the crucifixion.

 

[rakovsky]

Intentionally lying and using any ploys and subterfuge for the sake of Jesus is an OLD custom.

Jesus (a.k.a. YHWH) started it

• 2 Chronicles 18:22: Now therefore, behold, the LORD hath put a lying spirit in the mouth of these thy prophets
• Ezekiel 14:9: And if the prophet be deceived when he hath spoken a thing, I the LORD have deceived that prophet
• Ezekiel 20:25-26: Wherefore I gave them also statutes that were not good, and judgments whereby they should not live; And I polluted them in their own gifts, in that they caused to pass through [the fire] all that openeth the womb, that I might make them desolate, to the end that they might know that I [am] the LORD.

Paul continued with it

• 1 Corinthians 9:20-23:To the Jews I became like a Jew, to win the Jews. To those under the law I became like one under the law (though I myself am not under the law), so as to win those under the law. To those not having the law I became like one not having the law (though I am not free from God's law but am under Christ's law), so as to win those not having the law. To the weak I became weak, to win the weak. I have become all things to all people so that by all possible means I might save some. I do all this for the sake of the gospel, that I may share in its blessings."

Eusebius, Emperor Constantine's bishop, was one of the earliest active advocates of it

• How it may be lawful and fitting to use falsehood as a medicine, and for the benefit of those who want to be deceived.

And Martin Luther the founder of Protestantism sanctified it

• What harm would it do, if a man told a good strong lie for the sake of the good and for the Christian church ... a lie out of necessity, a useful lie, a helpful lie, such lies would not be against God, he would accept them.

Martin Luther also explained why reason is not something most theists value

• Reason is the greatest enemy that faith has; it never comes to the aid of spiritual things, but - more frequently than not - struggles against the divine Word, treating with contempt all that emanates from God

And the Bible fully supports him

• 1 Corinthians 1:19: For it is written, I will destroy the wisdom of the wise, and will bring to nothing the understanding of the prudent.
• 1 Corinthians 1:21: For after that in the wisdom of God the world by wisdom knew not God, it pleased God by the foolishness of preaching to save them that believe.
• 1 Corinthians 1:27: But God hath chosen the foolish things of the world to confound the wise;

Hi Leumas.

If one could prove that the apostles and the gospel writers who narrated their story were frequently intentionally dishonest, it would impeach their credibility when they make claims about Jesus' supernatural nature and actions.

However, Martin Luther is not a very good proof that the apostles were dishonest, as he wrote 1500 years later and created his own religious ideas and views. Perhaps a similar objection could be made about Eusebius.

I also think that those particular quotes from Jesus and Paul don't actually mean that they were dishonest. For example, when Paul says that he became like the Jews to the Jews, he was not lying. He belonged to the sect of the pharisees, came from Jewish background, performed a circumcision on Timothy, etc. In a way, he had some similarity to the Jews for Jesus group today. He found this to be an asset in converting Jews, but it doesn't mean that he was dishonest in his self-identification as Jewish. Also, when he says that he was like a gentile to the gentiles, he is talking about how he was able to move in gentile circles, eat with them, etc. when it was prohibited or frown on in Judaism. I guess it would be like an American missionary to Asia saying that in Asian society he became like an Asian himself in order to convert people.

So if one were to prove that the apostles were dishonest, I think it would have to be using some different quotes.

As for the Old Testament, I don't think that if it has lots of myths that it necessarily means the apostles were making things up intentionally. That's because they were describing things in their own time, while in the Old Testament they were frequently describing things that allegedly happened many centuries earlier.

 

[turingtest]

Not the same people who think Jesus was a normal human being who was buried in a family tomb with his father, mother and brother.

Now you've done it...

 

[rakovsky]

There are hundreds of such contradictions just in the NT alone.... but for a start have a look at the 4 accounts of the arrest of Jesus below... Notice how contradictory they are:

						Matthew   Mark     Luke      John
						------------------------------------------------------
Did Judas Kiss Jesus as a signal                 Yes      Yes       No         No
Did the arresting crowd bow down to Jesus        No       No        No         Yes
Was Jesus asked for a permission to attack       No       No        Yes        No
Was it Peter who cut the servant’s ear           No       No        No         Yes
Was the servant’s name Malchus                   No       No        No         Yes
Did Jesus heal the servants ear                  No       No        Yes        No
Was Jesus with an almost naked young man         No       Yes       No         No
Where did all this occur                     Gethsemane Gethsemane  Mount Of  Unknown
                                                                    Of Olives

Here are the verses...see for your self

Matthew 26
47 While he was still speaking, Judas, one of the Twelve, arrived. With him was a large crowd armed with swords and clubs, sent from the chief priests and the elders of the people. 48 Now the betrayer had arranged a signal with them: “The one I kiss is the man; arrest him.” 49 Going at once to Jesus, Judas said, “Greetings, Rabbi!” and kissed him.
50 Jesus replied, “Do what you came for, friend.”[d]
Then the men stepped forward, seized Jesus and arrested him. 51 With that, one of Jesus’ companions reached for his sword, drew it out and struck the servant of the high priest, cutting off his ear.
52 “Put your sword back in its place,” Jesus said to him, “for all who draw the sword will die by the sword. 53 Do you think I cannot call on my Father, and he will at once put at my disposal more than twelve legions of angels? 54 But how then would the Scriptures be fulfilled that say it must happen in this way?”
55 In that hour Jesus said to the crowd, “Am I leading a rebellion, that you have come out with swords and clubs to capture me? Every day I sat in the temple courts teaching, and you did not arrest me. 56 But this has all taken place that the writings of the prophets might be fulfilled.” Then all the disciples deserted him and fled.


Mark 14
43 Just as he was speaking, Judas, one of the Twelve, appeared. With him was a crowd armed with swords and clubs, sent from the chief priests, the teachers of the law, and the elders.
44 Now the betrayer had arranged a signal with them: “The one I kiss is the man; arrest him and lead him away under guard.” 45 Going at once to Jesus, Judas said, “Rabbi!” and kissed him. 46 The men seized Jesus and arrested him. 47 Then one of those standing near drew his sword and struck the servant of the high priest, cutting off his ear.
48 “Am I leading a rebellion,” said Jesus, “that you have come out with swords and clubs to capture me? 49 Every day I was with you, teaching in the temple courts, and you did not arrest me. But the Scriptures must be fulfilled.” 50 Then everyone deserted him and fled.
51 A young man, wearing nothing but a linen garment, was following Jesus. When they seized him, 52 he fled naked, leaving his garment behind.

Luke 22
47 While he was still speaking a crowd came up, and the man who was called Judas, one of the Twelve, was leading them. He approached Jesus to kiss him, 48 but Jesus asked him, “Judas, are you betraying the Son of Man with a kiss?” 49 When Jesus’ followers saw what was going to happen, they said, “Lord, should we strike with our swords?” 50 And one of them struck the servant of the high priest, cutting off his right ear.
51 But Jesus answered, “No more of this!” And he touched the man’s ear and healed him.
52 Then Jesus said to the chief priests, the officers of the temple guard, and the elders, who had come for him, “Am I leading a rebellion, that you have come with swords and clubs? 53 Every day I was with you in the temple courts, and you did not lay a hand on me. But this is your hour—when darkness reigns.”

John 18
1 When he had finished praying, Jesus left with his disciples and crossed the Kidron Valley. On the other side there was a garden, and he and his disciples went into it.
2 Now Judas, who betrayed him, knew the place, because Jesus had often met there with his disciples. 3 So Judas came to the garden, guiding a detachment of soldiers and some officials from the chief priests and the Pharisees. They were carrying torches, lanterns and weapons.
4 Jesus, knowing all that was going to happen to him, went out and asked them, “Who is it you want?”
5 “Jesus of Nazareth,” they replied.
“I am he,” Jesus said. (And Judas the traitor was standing there with them.) 6 When Jesus said, “I am he,” they drew back and fell to the ground.7 Again he asked them, “Who is it you want?”
“Jesus of Nazareth,” they said.
8 Jesus answered, “I told you that I am he. If you are looking for me, then let these men go.” 9 This happened so that the words he had spoken would be fulfilled: “I have not lost one of those you gave me.”[a]
10 Then Simon Peter, who had a sword, drew it and struck the high priest’s servant, cutting off his right ear. (The servant’s name was Malchus.) 11 Jesus commanded Peter, “Put your sword away! Shall I not drink the cup the Father has given me?”
12 Then the detachment of soldiers with its commander and the Jewish officials arrested Jesus. They bound him 13 and brought him first to Annas, who was the father-in-law of Caiaphas, the high priest that year. 14 Caiaphas was the one who had advised the Jewish leaders that it would be good if one man died for the people.

Hi Leumas!

I assume that the gospels have contradictions because they come from different witnesses. But in the passage above, some of the contradictions are not really contradictions. For example, if Luke says Judas kissed Jesus and John is silent on that, then the two sources aren't contradictory.

 

[Leumas]

I am not able rightly to apprehend the kind of confusion of ideas that could provoke such a question.

Now here are a couple of answers to your question right below!

I assume that the gospels have contradictions because they come from different witnesses. But in the passage above, some of the contradictions are not really contradictions. For example, if Luke says Judas kissed Jesus and John is silent on that, then the two sources aren't contradictory.

If one could prove that the apostles and the gospel writers who narrated their story were frequently intentionally dishonest, it would impeach their credibility when they make claims about Jesus' supernatural nature and actions.

However, Martin Luther is not a very good proof that the apostles were dishonest, as he wrote 1500 years later and created his own religious ideas and views. Perhaps a similar objection could be made about Eusebius.

I also think that those particular quotes from Jesus and Paul don't actually mean that they were dishonest. For example, when Paul says that he became like the Jews to the Jews, he was not lying. He belonged to the sect of the pharisees, came from Jewish background, performed a circumcision on Timothy, etc. In a way, he had some similarity to the Jews for Jesus group today. He found this to be an asset in converting Jews, but it doesn't mean that he was dishonest in his self-identification as Jewish. Also, when he says that he was like a gentile to the gentiles, he is talking about how he was able to move in gentile circles, eat with them, etc. when it was prohibited or frown on in Judaism. I guess it would be like an American missionary to Asia saying that in Asian society he became like an Asian himself in order to convert people.

So if one were to prove that the apostles were dishonest, I think it would have to be using some different quotes.

As for the Old Testament, I don't think that if it has lots of myths that it necessarily means the apostles were making things up intentionally. That's because they were describing things in their own time, while in the Old Testament they were frequently describing things that allegedly happened many centuries earlier.

 

[rakovsky]

A group of tombs with the names of Jesus, Mary, Joseph and Jesus brothers and sisters was discovered and excavted. If he came back from the dead why are his bones still around?

CAINEKANE,
After near physical impossibility of the transfigured resurrection / virgin birth, this would be a second disproof, were it true that the bones had been excavated. However, the Israeli Antiquities Association is very skeptical, if not rejectionist, on the question of the "Jesus tomb" discovery.

 

[Leumas]

Hi Leumas!

I assume that the gospels have contradictions because they come from different witnesses. But in the passage above, some of the contradictions are not really contradictions. For example, if Luke says Judas kissed Jesus and John is silent on that, then the two sources aren't contradictory.

You do know that none of the gospels were written by any of Jesus' disciples...no?

So none of the gospels were written by eyewitnesses!!!

 

[Leumas]

Hi Leumas!

I assume that the gospels have contradictions because they come from different witnesses. But in the passage above, some of the contradictions are not really contradictions. For example, if Luke says Judas kissed Jesus and John is silent on that, then the two sources aren't contradictory.

What if Matthew and Mark say he DID kiss him while Luke says he was about to do it but Jesus stopped him and rebuked him?

What if Matthew says Jesus said something that is not at all what Luke says he said?

Also, have you noticed how Matthew and Mark tell us what Judas said to the soldiers? How do they know that? How could anyone of Jesus' followers know what Judas said to the soldiers?

Matthew26:48-50

Now the betrayer had arranged a signal with them: “The one I kiss is the man; arrest him.” 49 Going at once to Jesus, Judas said, “Greetings, Rabbi!” and kissed him.
50 Jesus replied, “Do what you came for, friend.”​

Mark 14:44-45

Now the betrayer had arranged a signal with them: “The one I kiss is the man; arrest him and lead him away under guard.” 45 Going at once to Jesus, Judas said, “Rabbi!” and kissed him.​

Luke 22:47-48 Luke mentions nothing about what plotting Judas did with the soldiers

While he was still speaking a crowd came up, and the man who was called Judas, one of the Twelve, was leading them. He approached Jesus to kiss him, 48 but Jesus asked him, “Judas, are you betraying the Son of Man with a kiss?”​

John 18:2-9 John's story is an entirely different set of events as to what Judas and Jesus said and did prior to the ear cutting.

Now Judas, who betrayed him, knew the place, because Jesus had often met there with his disciples. 3 So Judas came to the garden, guiding a detachment of soldiers and some officials from the chief priests and the Pharisees. They were carrying torches, lanterns and weapons.
4 Jesus, knowing all that was going to happen to him, went out and asked them, “Who is it you want?”
5 “Jesus of Nazareth,” they replied.
“I am he,” Jesus said. (And Judas the traitor was standing there with them.) 6 When Jesus said, “I am he,” they drew back and fell to the ground.
7 Again he asked them, “Who is it you want?”
“Jesus of Nazareth,” they said.
8 Jesus answered, “I told you that I am he. If you are looking for me, then let these men go.” 9 This happened so that the words he had spoken would be fulfilled: “I have not lost one of those you gave me.”​

What about the contradiction of what Jesus says after the ear cutting? Matthew says he said one thing and John says something very different.

Matthew 26:52 -55

“Put your sword back in its place,” Jesus said to him, “for all who draw the sword will die by the sword. 53 Do you think I cannot call on my Father, and he will at once put at my disposal more than twelve legions of angels? 54 But how then would the Scriptures be fulfilled that say it must happen in this way?” 55 In that hour Jesus said to the crowd, “Am I leading a rebellion, that you have come out with swords and clubs to capture me?​

Mark 14:48 Mark does not say anything about what Jesus said to the ear cutter and goes on to report what Jesus said to the soldiers

“Am I leading a rebellion,” said Jesus, “that you have come out with swords and clubs to capture me?​

Luke 22:51-52

But Jesus answered, “No more of this!” And he touched the man’s ear and healed him. 52 Then Jesus said to the chief priests, the officers of the temple guard, and the elders, who had come for him, “Am I leading a rebellion, that you have come with swords and clubs?​

John 18:11-12

Jesus commanded Peter, “Put your sword away! Shall I not drink the cup the Father has given me?”
12 Then the detachment of soldiers with its commander and the Jewish officials arrested Jesus.​

 

[Leumas]

Hi Leumas!

I assume that the gospels have contradictions because they come from different witnesses. But in the passage above, some of the contradictions are not really contradictions. For example, if Luke says Judas kissed Jesus and John is silent on that, then the two sources aren't contradictory.

Which of the disciples was a witness to Jesus' nativity?

Which of the disciples was privy to what the devil said and did to Jesus in the desert?

Which of the disciples was witness to what Joseph dreamed?

Which of the disciples was there when God (a.k.a. Holy Phantasm) raped and committed adultery with Mary (and incest since she was also his mother )?

Which of the disciples was old enough to see and understand what transcribed between Mary and Elizabeth while they were both pregnant with god's "help"?

Was any of the disciples even born yet to watch and hear what the angel said to Zacharias?

Which of the disciples was witness to what John the Baptist did and said to Jesus let alone the Holy Spook?

Which of the disciples was there when Jesus was tried by the Sanhedrin?

Which of the disciples sat on the trial with Pilot?

Which of the disciples was invited to the birthday dinner party Herod threw for his chiefs to see and hear the dancing and conversation that led to the beheading of John the Baptist.

Which of the disciples heard Jesus beg his father to reprieve him from having to undergo the bloody human sacrifice that this nasty father ordained Jesus had to suffer?

 

[rakovsky]

What if Matthew and Mark say he DID kiss him while Luke says he was about to do it but Jesus stopped him and rebuked him?

What if Matthew says Jesus said something that is not at all what Luke says he said?

Also, have you noticed how Matthew and Mark tell us what Judas said to the soldiers? How do they know that? How could anyone of Jesus' followers know what Judas said to the soldiers?

Matthew26:48-50

Now the betrayer had arranged a signal with them: “The one I kiss is the man; arrest him.” 49 Going at once to Jesus, Judas said, “Greetings, Rabbi!” and kissed him.
50 Jesus replied, “Do what you came for, friend.”​

Mark 14:44-45

Now the betrayer had arranged a signal with them: “The one I kiss is the man; arrest him and lead him away under guard.” 45 Going at once to Jesus, Judas said, “Rabbi!” and kissed him.​

Luke 22:47-48 Luke mentions nothing about what plotting Judas did with the soldiers

While he was still speaking a crowd came up, and the man who was called Judas, one of the Twelve, was leading them. He approached Jesus to kiss him, 48 but Jesus asked him, “Judas, are you betraying the Son of Man with a kiss?”​

John 18:2-9 John's story is an entirely different set of events as to what Judas and Jesus said and did prior to the ear cutting.

Now Judas, who betrayed him, knew the place, because Jesus had often met there with his disciples. 3 So Judas came to the garden, guiding a detachment of soldiers and some officials from the chief priests and the Pharisees. They were carrying torches, lanterns and weapons.
4 Jesus, knowing all that was going to happen to him, went out and asked them, “Who is it you want?”
5 “Jesus of Nazareth,” they replied.
“I am he,” Jesus said. (And Judas the traitor was standing there with them.) 6 When Jesus said, “I am he,” they drew back and fell to the ground.
7 Again he asked them, “Who is it you want?”
“Jesus of Nazareth,” they said.
8 Jesus answered, “I told you that I am he. If you are looking for me, then let these men go.” 9 This happened so that the words he had spoken would be fulfilled: “I have not lost one of those you gave me.”​

What about the contradiction of what Jesus says after the ear cutting? Matthew says he said one thing and John says something very different.

Matthew 26:52 -55

“Put your sword back in its place,” Jesus said to him, “for all who draw the sword will die by the sword. 53 Do you think I cannot call on my Father, and he will at once put at my disposal more than twelve legions of angels? 54 But how then would the Scriptures be fulfilled that say it must happen in this way?” 55 In that hour Jesus said to the crowd, “Am I leading a rebellion, that you have come out with swords and clubs to capture me?​

Mark 14:48 Mark does not say anything about what Jesus said to the ear cutter and goes on to report what Jesus said to the soldiers

“Am I leading a rebellion,” said Jesus, “that you have come out with swords and clubs to capture me?​

Luke 22:51-52

But Jesus answered, “No more of this!” And he touched the man’s ear and healed him. 52 Then Jesus said to the chief priests, the officers of the temple guard, and the elders, who had come for him, “Am I leading a rebellion, that you have come with swords and clubs?​

John 18:11-12

Jesus commanded Peter, “Put your sword away! Shall I not drink the cup the Father has given me?”
12 Then the detachment of soldiers with its commander and the Jewish officials arrested Jesus.​

Hi Leumas:

The passages don't say that Jesus wasn't kissed by Judas, nor do they say that Peter didn't cut the ear.

The writer Luke says:

the man who was called Judas, one of the Twelve, was leading them. He approached Jesus to kiss him,
48 but Jesus asked him, “Judas, are you betraying the Son of Man with a kiss?”

After that, Judas could have kissed Jesus.

Anyway, if there are discrepancies in texts or contradictions, it doesn't mean they are lying. One professor had a few men come into a room and fight each other and leave. He later asked his rooms of students how many people were in the group, and students gave different answers (from 5 to 6), even though they had just seen the same thing.

If Luke, who wrote his texts and already had Mark's gospel available, wanted to make up the story, he would be more likely to copy such simple details instead of creating contradictions. So those kinds of contradictions in details can serve as contradictions.

I suppose if there was a lengthy passage totally contradicting another one, then it would be a much stronger contradiction, because people would be less likely to just confuse details years later about something major they describe at length.