Prior Book | Prior Chapter | Prior Verse | Next Verse | Next Chapter | Next Book | Viewing NASB and Amplified 2015 | |
NASB | Mark 16:8 They went out and fled from the tomb, for trembling and astonishment had gripped them; and they said nothing to anyone, for they were afraid. |
AMPLIFIED 2015 | Mark 16:8 They went out and fled from the tomb, for they were seized with trembling and astonishment; and they said nothing [about it] to anyone, because they were afraid. |
Subject: Empty tomb, but witnesses didn't tell? |
Bible Note: Contradictions in the New Testament? "It is discrepancies like the different versions of the women at the tomb that make me wonder whether all of the New Testament is inspired," writes one forum user. Internal Textual Contradictions In his book, "Jesus: The Evidence", British journalist Ian 'Wilson’s text is peppered throughout with casual references to internal contradictions in the New Testament. All of these “contradictions” (and hundreds more) have been answered by many excellent Bible scholars, both contemporary and in the past. I refer the interested reader especially to the 1874 classic An Examination of the Alleged Discrepancies of the Bible by John W. Haley (reprinted by Baker), or to the recent Encyclopedia of Bible Difficulties by Gleason L. Archer (Zondervan). 'One example Wilson gives of internal contradictions concerns the nativity of our Lord. Wilson lists three important “contradictions” between Matthew’s and Luke’s accounts: 1) In Matthew, the announcement of Jesus’ birth is given to Joseph; in Luke, it is given to Mary. 2) In Matthew, Joseph and Mary live in Bethlehem and leave only when Herod begins the slaughter of the innocents; in Luke, Mary and Joseph leave their home in Nazareth and travel to Bethlehem for the census. 3) The genealogies in Matthew and Luke contain a number of different names; most difficult is the fact that in Matthew Joseph’s father is called Jacob, whereas in Luke his father is called Heli.7 Pages have been written by a variety of scholars answering the above objections, so I will comment here only briefly. '1) Luke does not state that the angel told Mary and that no one told Joseph. Matthew does not state that the angel told Joseph and that no one told Mary. In fact, Matthew assumes that Joseph already knew about Mary’s pregnancy before his dream, since he records Joseph as having already decided to divorce Mary quietly for her “indiscretion” before the angel explained to him the true nature of the conception. Far from contradicting each other, Matthew and Luke complement each other. '2) Matthew does not say that Mary and Joseph lived in Bethlehem before Jesus’ birth. He merely states that Jesus was born in Bethlehem, and that the family lived in a house there at the time the magi came. Luke begins his story earlier than does Matthew, explaining how Mary and Joseph came to be in Bethlehem for Jesus’ birth. While Luke gives more information about the time before Jesus’ birth, he does not mention the escape to Egypt after the birth. For this we have Matthew’s account. Again, far from contradicting each other, the two accounts complement each other. '3) The two genealogies of Jesus do not contradict each other. For something to be a contradiction, there cannot be any possible reconciliation. Several viable explanations are possible, such as this one suggested by Gleason L. Archer: 'Matthew 1:1-16 gives the genealogy of Jesus through Joseph, who was himself a descendant of King David. As Joseph’s adopted Son, Jesus became his legal heir, so far as his inheritance was concerned.... 'Luke 3:23-28, on the other hand, seems to record the genealogical line of Mary herself.... This seems to be implied by the wording of v. 23: “Jesus. . . being (as was supposed) the son of Joseph? Jesus was not really the biological son of Joseph,. . . Mary. . . must of necessity have been the sole human parent through whom Jesus could have descended from a line of ancestors. Her genealogy is thereupon listed, starting with Heli, who was actually Joseph’s father-in-law, in contradistinction to Joseph’s own father, Jacob (Matt. 1:16.... Therefore Jesus was descended from David naturally through Nathan and legally through Solomon.8 'We find, then, that each of the three “contradictions” raised by Wilson are not contradictions at all. The same is true of the other internal problems Wilson raises.' To read more go to: (http://www.equip.org/free/DJ025.htm) |