It’s pretty obvious, for anyone that analyzed Bible or has some theological edution, who is aware of many of Bible’s contradictions and discrepancies that Bible is weakly inspired, if at all.
While most of its many mistakes can be attributed to ignorance while still giving an useful account of what was happening, sometimes it just looks like a lie.
And it’s not some Old Testament stuff that I’m talking about, but the four evangelists themselves, the ones that we trust the most in providing us the correct information about Jesus.
What contradiction I am talking about though? Not about some small nitpicks that many enjoy alluding to like Luke 9:3-5 and Mark 6:8 disagreeing whether Jesus said they can take a staff on their journey or Mark 10:20-21 and Matthew 21:18-20 disagreeing on how quickly did fig tree wither away. In the end, those don’t matter in the big picture.
Why not? Because obviously there were not historians, they didn’t cared that much about accuracy and if not strongly inspired by God, it was not possible to agree on everything if they weren’t a direct witnesses (even then, it’s understandable that their accounts would have differences).
What I want to talk are fully planned parts of the story that were created only to convince us of some greater plan when facts just weren’t there.
A very good example is Matthew’s Genealogy of Jesus, biologos article describing possible meanings, hidden in it. The way Matthew uses different spelling of some names and even omits some of the kings so he has his sets of fourteens and beautiful math we can derive from it is good and all, but it’s doesn’t mean anything. After all there are numbers of people and crazy theories using numerology to predict or see patterns in number of things, obviously it’s apparent that if you look at something trying to find some connection you will find it.
Here we have Matthew, trying his best to make numbers align so everything seemingly makes sense. But just adding one ruler that was ommited there or changing name to how it was more commonly spelt will make the whole structure fall apart.
It shows that Matthew not only tried to interpret the story he heard but also worked painstakingly so it looked like God’s hand was in play. If he used this genealogy as important part of his gospel, how can we know that he didn’t do it at other fundamental parts like Jesus teachings, trying to convince his readers Jesus story is something more than it is.
Also, returning to Jesus nativity, both Apostles wrote widely different stories of where Jesus was born, when, under what circustances or even to which parent was the Angel speaking.
The thing is, it’s quite visible that they try to make Jesus nativity fit to prophecies a lot and because they did it independently they ended up with completely different stories, now that we know that they not only write from inspiration and from testimonies but also they manipulate facts(at least some of them) so the Jesus looks more like Messiah truly shows that the authors of gospels were biased and at the very least, they fanatically wanted Jesus to be Messiah (which heavily undermines their credibility) and in the worst scenario, they may have wanted to manipulate people.
Because of that, many would probably feel justified to decide that Bible is bogus, another religion created to manipulate masses, especially hearing constantly how perfect and innerant Bible is from its followers and priests, and truth to be told, I can’t fault them for it.
I still hope though that even though Bible is far from accurate, and while many things may have been added, removed or corrupted, testimony of all four and many other parts of New Testament will enable us to derive one shared wisdom and truth in all of them, and by extension acknowledge maybe less certain lessons as valid, while reject others, always reconsidering if what we rejected and accepted was correct.
Some sources I used:
Blog which humorously describes many of contradictions I used (most of them are not contradictions but there are some worth considering).