Acts says Mary was impregnated by a man (2:30). Matthew says she was impregnated by the Holy Ghost.
What tranlation are you using for Acts 2:30???? The NAS states
30"And so, because he [David]was a prophet and knew that GOD HAD SWORN TO HIM WITH AN OATH TO SEAT one OF HIS DESCENDANTS ON HIS THRONE,
KJV:
[30] Therefore being a prophet, and knowing that God had sworn with an oath to him, that of the fruit of his loins, according to the flesh, he would raise up Christ to sit on his throne;
What you're seeing there is the difference between how the Romans (John) and the Jews (Mark) marked time in terms of days, hours.
I don't buy this. Please provide a link.
I would be glad to, GoodK. Before I do that, would you post the portions of Scripture together that you're referring to? I think that would be advisable for each contradiction. I hope you don't mind that I started numbering them. I'll be back.
Matthew says Mary Magdalene and the other Mary went to see Jesus at his tomb. Mark says Mary Magdalene, Mary the mother of James, and Salome were there. John says it was just Mary Magdalene.
That Matthew says-------Mary Magdalene and the other Mary That Mark says-----------Mary Magdalene, Mary the mother of James, Salome That John says-----------Mary Magdalene
Does not rule out all three women or more women. None of the above passages state "only" the names listed were present.
John does in no way indicate that Mary Magdalene was alone. He never states that it was "just" Mary. He simply reports on Mary.
The above are not contradictions.
You don't think they are contradictions. If all three were there, then they would have been mentioned by name.
Matthew says Mary Magdalene and the other Mary went to see Jesus at his tomb. Mark says Mary Magdalene, Mary the mother of James, and Salome were there. John says it was just Mary Magdalene.
That Matthew says-------Mary Magdalene and the other Mary That Mark says-----------Mary Magdalene, Mary the mother of James, Salome That John says-----------Mary Magdalene
Does not rule out all three women or more women. None of the above passages state "only" the names listed were present.
John does in no way indicate that Mary Magdalene was alone. He never states that it was "just" Mary. He simply reports on Mary.
The above are not contradictions.
You don't think they are contradictions. If all three were there, then they would have been mentioned by name.
Just quickly. If I recall correctly, John doesn't mention time of death. Again, would you post the scripture ref's and state which translation you're using?
But in any case, I think if you look at the contradiction lists, when it comes to time discrepancies, most of those will occur in John that are in disagreement.
Thanks
Last edited by Google Feedfetcher on Thu Apr 03, 2008 1:45 am, edited 1 time in total.
Acts says Mary was impregnated by a man (2:30). Matthew says she was impregnated by the Holy Ghost.
What translation are you using for Acts 2:30???? The NAS states
30"And so, because he [David]was a prophet and knew that GOD HAD SWORN TO HIM WITH AN OATH TO SEAT one OF HIS DESCENDANTS ON HIS THRONE,
KJV:
[30] Therefore being a prophet, and knowing that God had sworn with an oath to him, that of the fruit of his loins, according to the flesh, he would raise up Christ to sit on his throne;
Many assert that the Luke's genealogy shows that Mary was a descendant of David. Thus, Jesus is a fruit of David's loins. No impregnation by a man is needed.
Last edited by Dr Moore on Thu Apr 03, 2008 1:13 am, edited 1 time in total.
What you're seeing there is the difference between how the Romans (John) and the Jews (Mark) marked time in terms of days, hours.
I don't buy this. Please provide a link.
I would be glad to, GoodK. Before I do that, would you post the portions of Scripture together that you're referring to? I think that would be advisable for each contradiction. I hope you don't mind that I started numbering them. I'll be back.
Mark 15:25
John 19:14
Jersey Girl wrote:The Gospel of Mark doesn't say that Jesus died at "9 AM". It clearly states "ninth hour" which as nothing to do with "9AM". I'll return to fill in the "blanks" on this post.
Umm... Jersey Girl, where does Mark "clearly state" ninth hour?
No one said ninth hour meant "9 AM". If I you familiarize yourself with the meaning of "Third Hour" - which Mark does "clearly state" - you will see you have made a mistake.
Acts says Mary was impregnated by a man (2:30). Matthew says she was impregnated by the Holy Ghost.
What translation are you using for Acts 2:30???? The NAS states
30"And so, because he [David]was a prophet and knew that GOD HAD SWORN TO HIM WITH AN OATH TO SEAT one OF HIS DESCENDANTS ON HIS THRONE,
KJV:
[30] Therefore being a prophet, and knowing that God had sworn with an oath to him, that of the fruit of his loins, according to the flesh, he would raise up Christ to sit on his throne;
Many assert that the Luke's geneology shows that Mary was a descendant of David. Thus, Jesus is a fruit of David's loins. No impregnation by a man is needed.
Seems like a stretch Richard. What is the meaning of "the fruit of his loins, according to the flesh"?
Speaking of Jesus' genealogy, Matthew 1:6-16 and Luke 3:23-31 can't agree on Jesus' genealogy. Matthew starts with Abraham, Luke traces his roots all the way back to Adam.
Matthew says Mary Magdalene and the other Mary went to see Jesus at his tomb. Mark says Mary Magdalene, Mary the mother of James, and Salome were there. John says it was just Mary Magdalene.
That Matthew says-------Mary Magdalene and the other Mary That Mark says-----------Mary Magdalene, Mary the mother of James, Salome That John says-----------Mary Magdalene
Does not rule out all three women or more women. None of the above passages state "only" the names listed were present.
John does in no way indicate that Mary Magdalene was alone. He never states that it was "just" Mary. He simply reports on Mary.
The above are not contradictions.
You don't think they are contradictions. If all three were there, then they would have been mentioned by name.
Why do you think that?
Because there is no reason, that I can see/think of, to mention one person, or two, but and not mention third. Maybe you can think of a reason.