Jesus Christ! Is this a contradiction?

by observador 26 Replies latest watchtower bible

• 

  observador

  The other day while rereading the scriptures about the last Supper, I spotted something that is very interesting.

  Mathew 26:23 reads:

  "In reply he said: "He that dips his hand with me in the bowl is the one that will betray me."

  The above doesn't make much sense to me because it implies that one would have to give himself away by doing exacly what Jesus said the betrayor would do. Now, look at how John words the same event in John 13:26:

  "Therefore Jesus answered: "It is that one to whom I shall give the morsel that I dip". And so, having dipped the morsel, he took and gave it to Judas, the son of Simon Iscariot."

  Now it makes a lot more sense, humn? What John says implies Jesus' actions to identify the betrayor, not Judas'.

  Contradiction plain and simple? Any opinions?

  Observador.
• 

  Dustin

  The Bible is full of contradictions. That's why I don't believe in it.

  Dustin
• 

  Bryan

  It may be possible that Jesus, wanting to fullfill the scriptures, was actually choosing the one who would have to betray him. Otherwise the text really doesn't make much sence. After he says who ever dips or gets my morsel will betray me, everyone's looking hard... you know it. Once Jesus gave it to Judas, no called him a betrayer or shouted at him.

  IMHO

  Bryan

  Have You Seen My Mother
• 

  Narkissos

  In the synoptics the saying doesn't function as a way to identify the betrayer. It is simply understood as "one of those who dip," i.e. one of those present. Cf. Mark 14:20: "It is one of the twelve, one who is dipping bread into the bowl with me. For the Son of Man goes as it is written of him, but woe to that one by whom the Son of Man is betrayed! It would have been better for that one not to have been born." Luke 22:21: "But see, the one who betrays me is with me, and his hand is on the table."

  Only John means it differently, and accordingly makes it an act of Jesus, the meaning of which is revealed only to the Beloved disciple.

  On one possible background behind the saying, see http://www.thecosmiccontext.de/christianity/last_passover.html
• 

  peacefulpete

  Considering the number of other Zealot militant details in the Jesus story, this might be significant. Narkissos what do you think? Is this a remnant of a zealot plot? Perhaps to storm the heavily guarded Temple? The meal could have been merged with the Passover and the Mystery cult Eucharist thu parallelism.
• 

  Forscher

  One thing to remember with thses accounts is that, although they were both written by eye witnesses to the events described, they are from different perspectives. To illustrate; two other people and I all witnesses a car wreck. When the police arrive, the other two will not be giving an accurate version of what occured, or will they?
  
  John was in the bosum position at with Jesus at that feast. That is, right beside him. We do not know exactly where Matthew was. He could easily have been the most distant one at the table from Jesus and the events described for all we know. So that maybe he didn't have that close-up persprective.
  
  It is simple little things like that which are often behind the discreptencies in the Bible that some folks make so much out of.
• 

  Will Power

  Forscher, don't take this the wrong way.....but the accident scenario sounds like the typical JW answer for any "discrepancy"...like the "do yiou trust your doctor?" LOL
  
  The original question is the straining the gnat thing.... can't see the forest for the trees, is more like it.
  
  The JW idea of the "passover" the bread & wine to the next guy with a nod & a concerned look, is the same betrayal as a Judas, don't you think? Thanks Jesus, but no thanks?
  
  The JW memorial is an offense to any Christian. (a believer in Christ as the Way, the TRUTH, and the Light - their saviour)
  
  Sincerely
  Will
• 

  googlemagoogle

  they were both written by eye witnesses
  
  now where did you get that from?
• 

  xjw_b12

  I always thought Judas got the short stick on that episode. Predestined to betray the son of god. LIfe's a bummer.
• 

  Balsam

  Remember these gospel accounts were just handed down by word of mouth till late in the 1st century. We are not sure that they are eye witness accounts because the books author is not clearly identified. But each one was seemly attributed to various Apostles. Whether they were written by eye witness accounts is simply speculation. Having said that, one must then assume by the time the writer got around to writing down the account it was necessary for Jesus to fit into the guildlines given in the Hebrew scriptures of the coming messiah. We do not not know how much is actually fact and which is given to us to prove he fulfilled the scriptures in order for him to be the messiah. In order for people to have faith in him as the messiah and savior of the world, the writers knew he had to fulfill the scriptures. There in lies the problem of the entire NT. The books were written to encourage faith not give a true historical account. Thus the many contradictions that are found in the various NT writings. Each of these books were written independent of each other too, so it wasn't like they could go and look at anothers account to see if they got their account the same. Finding out how the NT was written, really sheds light on why there are so many contradictions. Then it begs the question is the bible the written world of God or mearly the written word of men of faith.