In the resurrection stories, there are innumerable problems / contradictions. Here I will point out just one:

John 20:1 Now on the first day of the week Mary Magdalene *came early to the tomb, while it *was still dark, and *saw the stone already taken away from the tomb.
John 20:2 So she *ran and *came to Simon Peter and to the other disciple whom Jesus loved, and *said to them, "They have taken away the Lord out of the tomb, and we do not know where they have laid Him."
John 20:3 So Peter and the other disciple went forth, and they were going to the tomb.

In these verses above, Mary had gone to the tomb, and discovering the body of Jesus already gone, she ran to tell the disciples, and was afraid, because she did not know what had happened, and thought "they" had taken the body of Jesus out of the tomb and hidden it somewhere. At that point, the two disciples run to the tomb to see for themselves what had happened. Then later after the disciples left, two angels were inside the tomb, one sitting where the head of Jesus had been laying, and the other sitting where the feet had been. They asked her why she was weeping, to which Mary replied with the fact that she didn't know what had happened to Jesus. Then Jesus appeared to her (also in the tomb), but she did not know it was Jesus. Jesus also asks why she is weeping, and she explains to him as well (thinking he was the gardener). Then Jesus tells her to tell the other disciples.

There is a different story in each of the other gospels overall, but I'll just pick one as an example:

Matt 28:1 Now after the Sabbath, as it began to dawn toward the first day of the week, Mary Magdalene and the other Mary came to look at the grave.
Matt 28:2 And behold, a severe earthquake had occurred, for an angel of the Lord descended from heaven and came and rolled away the stone and sat upon it.
Matt 28:3 And his appearance was like lightning, and his clothing as white as snow.
Matt 28:4 The guards shook for fear of him and became like dead men.
Matt 28:5 The angel said to the women, "Do not be afraid; for I know that you are looking for Jesus who has been crucified.
Matt 28:6 "He is not here, for He has risen, just as He said. Come, see the place where He was lying.
Matt 28:7 "Go quickly and tell His disciples that He has risen from the dead; and behold, He is going ahead of you into Galilee, there you will see Him; behold, I have told you."

What we see here is that two Mary's came to the grave together, and the stone had not yet been rolled away from the tomb. A severe earthquake took place as the [single] Angel of the Lord descended from Heaven and rolled away the stone, and then sat upon it. The guards shook from fear, but the angel told the women not to be afraid and that he knows why they are there, and he proceeds to explain to the two Mary's that Jesus has risen from the dead, and commands them to go tell the other disciples, which they do excitedly.

Further, they encounter Jesus on the way to tell the disciples about this, and Jesus tells the two Mary's to tell the disciples to meet him in Galilee, which the disciples did (Matt 28:16).

What are the Contradictions between these two gospels in this short passage? In Matthew: There are two Mary's.
In John: There is only one Mary. In Matthew: There is one Angel.
In John: there are two Angels. In Matthew: The Mary's come across the tomb with the stone still in front of it, but then the angel rolls it away.
In John: Mary comes across an empty tomb, with the body of Jesus already gone. In Matthew: The angel knew exactly why the women were there.
In John: The angels appeared to not know why Mary was there or why she was crying. In Matthew: The women report to the disciples the good news that the angel explained to them at the tomb when he rolled away the stone for them. They had always known exactly what happened from the moment they first got to the tomb.
In John: Mary, having found an empty tomb when she got there, ran back and was afraid, saying she didn't know what had happened to the body of Jesus. In Matthew: The women encounter Jesus after leaving the tomb, while on the road back to tell the disciples the good news.
In John: Mary encounters Jesus while still at the tomb, at the same time the angels finally appear to her. In Matthew: The women find out what happened to Jesus from the angel who rolled the rock away from the tomb, and again from Jesus after they left the tomb.
In John: The angels did not tell Mary anything, but she heard it only from Jesus himself while she was still at the tomb.

The question comes, does the Bible have contradictions. Absolutely it does. In one instance Mary is afraid and doesn't know what happened to the body of Jesus, since she encountered an empty tomb, and in the other gospel, the Mary's watched the angel roll the stone away from the tomb and heard the angel explain exactly what had happened to Jesus, so there was no doubt or fear. (And these are just a few of the contradictions with the resurrection narrative in the Bible.)

Contradictions galore!

When I asked my father who is Catholic to explain this contradiction he said it was because there were a few different people writing the NT, and they all had seperate sources which the story came to them from and the retelling of these stories became like the game of telephone via word of mouth and it came to each of them seperately in different forms, so each had slightly different happenings in it, which he thought actually gave the story more validity not less, because the only way for each version to be slightly different was for it to come down through people who had seen it first hand and it got "scewed" strangely enough.

I asked him this after my first reading of the entire bible at 15, he explained "away" most of the contradictions this way. He also did admit that most of the stories had been added to for effect and that most of the new testiment had been embellished by the roman cannonisation of the NT.

I would actually agree with your father on most of these points, except obviously not the conclusion he drew from it that it made the Bible more valid.If they were subjective differences of how bright out it was outside, then that would be one thing.But when a woman didn't know what happened, or did know what happened, depending on which gospel you read, that's a contradiction.Contradiction is totally ok for a mythological storyline invented by mankind, but could not have occurred if it is the holy, inspired, inerrant, word of God. I'm impressed you understood these things at 15 years of age! I do think there were various stories handed down and recorded independent of each other, and it is beyond a shadow of a doubt that there have been alterations to these and all other Greek manuscripts as well, like your dad was saying. For instance: Dr. Bart Ehrman notes on page 92 of his book "Misquoting Jesus" (HarperCollins Publishers, 2009), that in the later manuscripts from which we derive what we use in our Bibles today, John 17:15 says the following: "I do not ask you take them from the world, but that you keep them from the evil one." Whereas in one of our best manuscripts -- the 4th century Codex Vaticanus -- it leaves out words such as "world" and "from the", and thus shows Jesus saying the complete opposite: "I do not ask that you keep them from the evil one"!
If this is the word of God, that should be startling to Christians. And why did Rome cover that up to say the opposite in our later manuscripts then? I guess this rolls back to things like how people claim that Satan used to be an angel but is now the devil because he tried to overtake God but was cast out of heaven (referencing Isaiah 14:12+), and they say that the "morning star" was Satan (a.k.a. Lucifer, or the devil). Actually, it has to do with the kings of Babylon; however, if one wants to go on the term "morning star', then the only clear definition we have for what or who the morning star is, comes from the New Testament, in Revelation 22:16. Jesus tells us he is the morning star, which would mean then he is the devil -- the one who tried to over throw God, but is now ruling over the world. I guess that would be why he "does not ask that God keeps them from the evil one", since that's what he is. But Rome covered this up with changes to the ancient manuscripts, here, and in so many other locations. The fact is, you can't truly trust anything the Bible says, but even more specifically, the New Testament of the Bible, because of all the corruption of manuscripts. Here is a brief video of Bart Ehrman speaking a little about this (10 min) http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JbQeKj0VOlY Or here he is speaking elsewhere, and about a lot more: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7cK3Ry_icJo&feature=related (Ehrman begins speaking about 4 min into video #1) )

I think I became a skeptic at 13, I had a very close friend who was a non-chirsitan and she explained to me about her family's religious beliefs, I was confounded and wanted to research and analyze my fathers, at the time my own, religion and their claims but I knew a book like the bible was not easy to understand and waited two years to read it.

Even as a child who had what one might descibe as "supernatural" expereinces, it became clear to me quite early on there are rational explainations for what we say is of a sacred or divine source, that they were invented by man and I was not blinded by faith when looking at these issues. I have amazing parents who one is religious and one is atheist and they taught me to read very young and I was an avid reader and comprehended above my age. I got the reading and analyzing skeptical bug and it shaped who I am.

Great vids, really enjoyed those Jim. I need to read and watch more on the very early texts and their sources and authors to better understand them.

I found this:http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-middle-east-12888421it's interesting, I want to see what they get out of it.

That was interesting Berbs. Im with you, looking forward to see what comes from it. Thanks for sharing.

I had seen this article on March 31st and asked Dr. Michael Wise at NWC about them. He is working on his second Doctorates, is the Dept Chair at NWC for Biblical and Theological studies, has a command of 20 languages, and is a translator of the dead sea scrolls. He also has a few books out. Here is his exact quote regarding this:

"These artifacts are probably modern forgeries. But only full publication and open scholarly examination will decide the matter (if that occurs)."

I think there are a lot of forgeries, just because people can make a pretty penny for them, even on the black market. But like he said, time will tell -- assuming the examination does take place with them. It probably will since they received media attention, but who knows.





Erhman has several books out, as do Metzger. Here are a few, from more basic to more complex, if you're interested:

He talks about it a tiny bit in his book (won't get a ton out of this):

Bart Ehrman, "Jesus, Interrupted: Revealing the Hidden Contradictions in the Bible (And Why We Don't Know About Them)", in chapter 4.



These would probably be more "happy-medium" (they're pretty good):

Bart Ehrman, "The New Testament: A Historical Introduction to the Early Christian Writings"

and

Bruce Metzger, "The Canon of the New Testament: Its Origin, Development, and Significance"



There is also the next one by Ehrman, but I haven't read it yet (though I do own it):

Bart Ehrman, "The Orthodox Corruption of Scripture: The Effect of Early Christological Controversies on the Text of the New Testament"



And more in-depth (and expensive):

Bruce M. Metzger, "The Early Versions of the New Testament: Their Origin, Transmission, and Limitations"





Other good books more about Early Christian History, if interested:

After the New Testament: A Reader in Early Christianity
Bart D. Ehrman

Christianity in Late Antiquity, 300-450 C.E.: A Reader
Bart D. Ehrman, Andrew S. Jacobs

I'm glad to see people did not try to argue that these verses were not contradictory. It's like a breath of fresh air when the truth stands firm and those that would oppose it concede. I love truth! =)

Is it so hard to believe that Jesus' body may not have been put in the tomb to begin with? (assuming that the story is partially true...which I do have my doubts about)