Did you know that Easter has only fallen on April Fools Day something like six times in the modern era, including today? Pretty crazy.
Even though I'm no longer a believer, during this time of the year I think a lot about the Holy Week leading up to Easter. Perhaps part of it is because for many years, the week leading up to Easter was the busiest week for me. (On a side note, one thing that is rather ironic is that my daughter's Spring Break week always fell on the week before Easter, which meant I was so busy that I didn't really get to spend much time with her while she was off, but the last three years since I've been out of ministry, the school district has changed it to the week after Easter. Go figure.)
However, one of the main reasons I'm usually in a pensive mood during this time every year is because of how inconsistent the biblical accounts of the events leading up to the crucifixion, the crucifixion itself, and the resurrection are, and how some of it makes no sense whatsoever.
I don't remember when I started getting wind of the differences in the gospels concerning these events. I was trying to recall my years in bible college and if I was taught these inconsistencies or if they were explained away and since we were being taught, I just assumed that what they were saying was true.
Here is one of the reasons why this gets me these days: if you think about it, the most important event in Christianity is the resurrection, and to a little lesser extent, the death of Jesus. Paul, in 1 Corinthians, talks about this importance, because he even said that if the resurrection didn't happen, "our preaching is useless and so is your faith." So if this is the most important concept, the most important theological construct, the most important event in human history, why is it that none of the gospels actually agree with what actually happened? (a lot of this reasoning is from Bart Ehrman's book Jesus, Interrupted.)
For example, when did the cleansing of the temple happen? In Mark, it happened during the last week of Jesus. In John, it happened at the beginning of his ministry. What about Palm Sunday? Did Jesus ride one animal, or did he ride two as he did in the book of Matthew? (This is attributed to Matthew making sure that Jesus fulfilled every prophecy he could think of and rather than understanding that when it said that the Messiah would ride in on a donkey and a colt that it was poetic language, Matthew took it literally.) What happened during the trial before Pilate? In Mark, Jesus hardly talks. In John, they have a long discourse. In Luke, there is another trial before Herod. What about Judas? Why did he betray Jesus? In Mark, no reason is given. In Matthew, he did it for the money. In Luke, he did it because Satan entered into him. In John, Judas is actually called a devil, which meant he had an evil streak. Also, how did Judas die? In Matthew, it says that he hanged himself. In Acts, it says that he fell headlong and burst open in the middle and that his bowels gushed out.
And what about the actual crucifixion? What did Jesus say on the cross? In Mark, he's practically silent. In John, he's saying all kinds of things. When did the curtain that separated the Holy Place from the Most Holy place tear in half? According to Mark, after Jesus breathes his last, the curtain is torn in half. In Luke it happens while Jesus is still alive and hanging on the cross. And let's not even get started about how in Matthew, zombies came up from the graves when Jesus died.
There have been a lot of theological and mental gymnastics by biblical scholars to reconcile these differences in the death of Jesus. They will say that all of these things happened, it's just that different gospel writers wrote different parts of the story. Or that they were writing to different audiences and emphasized different things. I don't believe any of that is correct, but even if I was to cede that argument, here's the discrepancy about Jesus' death that is so significant and so irreconcilable that to me it destroys any credibility of these stories.
It's about the day when the crucifixion happened.
In Matthew, Mark and Luke, the crucifixion happens the day of Passover. In those gospels, the Last Supper (which is the meal for the preparation for the passover) happens and Jesus and the disciples eat the meal. Jesus is then arrested that night, the trial happens through the night into the morning, and Jesus dies the next day.
In John, the crucifixion happens a day earlier, on the Day of Preparation for the Passover. There is a final meal but there is no Last Supper where Jesus talks about the bread being his body or the wine his blood. Instead he washes his disciples' feet (which is not found in the other gospels).
Let me reiterate this: in Mark, Jesus eats the Passover meal and is crucified the following morning. In John, Jesus does not eat the Passover meal but is crucified on the day before the Passover meal was to be eaten.
This cannot be reconciled. Believe me people have tried. Why is John different? Here's the main theory why. "John" (who was not the author) wrote his gospel twenty-five years later than Mark, and one of his main emphases is that Jesus is the Lamb of God who takes away the sin of the world. In order for that theme to align all the way through, he has to change the day and the time of when Jesus is crucified to the day and time when the Passover lambs were being slaughtered all over Israel, to show that Jesus was the ultimate Passover Lamb sacrificed for the sins of the world.
If a gospel writer is willing to change a super important fact, one that is very pivotal to the story of Christ, then what else are they willing to change in order to suit their needs? And how much has been changed throughout history? I know we have some pieces of the Bible that go back a long ways, but not all the way to when it was written. So all of this could have changed from the time it happened to the time it was written down, as well as from the time it was written down to the oldest pieces we have.
Do you see how this undermines the Bible? Do you see how it should be hard to believe that the Bible is the inspired word of God?
And don't even get me started with the resurrection. The pivotal event. Well, don't get me started yet. That's part two. :)
No comments:
Post a Comment