I had a conversation with several Christian friends over the weekend and shockingly, most of them did not know that the Gospels: Mathew, Mark, Luke and John were never written by disciples of Jesus.
The authors of those books were never disciplines; they did not know Jesus, did not see him or live with it.
In fact, the earliest any of the books was written is about 30 years after Jesus’ death–with the last having been written 70 to 80 years after his death.
Obviously, that explains the common phrase; the Gospel ‘ACCORDING’ to.
My question therefore is; is it not reasonable to make space for the ‘fact’ that those who wrote these gospels many years after the said Jesus was dead could have cooked many of the stories; added their own versions, deducted some or just wrote pure garbage?
Perhaps, that is the reason why they can’t even agree on many of
basic things such as Jesus’s lineage, place of birth, date of birth and what he said or did.
Matthew and Luke give two contradictory genealogies for Joseph (Matthew 1:2-17 and Luke 3:23-38). They cannot even agree on who the father of Joseph was.
Also; Of all the writers of the New Testament, only Matthew and Luke mention the virgin birth. If indeed had something as miraculous as the virgin birth actually occurred, it would be reasonable to “expect that Mark and John would have at least mentioned it in their efforts to convince the world that Jesus was who they were claiming him to be.”
Interestingly, the pillar of Christianity-The apostle Paul never mentioned the virgin birth too, “even though it would have strengthened his arguments in several places. Instead, where Paul does refer to Jesus’ birth, he says that Jesus “was born of the seed of David” (Romans 1:3) and was “born of a woman,” not a virgin (Galatians 4:4).”
Is it not also shocking that, “according to Matthew, Jesus was born during the reign of Herod the Great (Matthew 2:1). And Luke says, Jesus was born during the first census in Israel, while Quirinius was governor of Syria (Luke 2:2). This could not have been anyway possible because Herod died in March of 4 BC and the census took place in 6 and 7 AD, about 10 years after Herod’s death.”
Though there is more, let me end here with this; Matthew and Luke clearly agree that that Jesus was born in Bethlehem. However, Luke says “Mary and Joseph travelled from their home in Nazareth in Galilee to Bethlehem in Judea for the birth of Jesus (Luke 2:4). Matthew, in contradiction to Luke, says that it was only after the birth of Jesus that Mary and Joseph resided in Nazareth, and then only because they were afraid to return to Judea (Matthew 2:21-23).”
Bible scholars; W. D. Davies and E. P. Sanders claim that: “on many points, especially about Jesus’ early life, the evangelists were ignorant … they simply did not know, and, guided by rumour, hope or supposition, did the best they could,” perhaps writing whatever they considered plausible.
Where are the intelligent Christians on here? It doesn’t take much to find these things so can we get some explanations as to why the plenty contradictions and how come the the authors could not agree on certain basic important facts if they were inspired by God or knew the heck they were writing?

Read more