Search Results
6/26/2025, 6:10:35 AM
Contradiction 1)
Jesus gets 2 completely different geneologies, both of which contradict with the Old Testament.
Matthew tries to establish a perfect 14-14-14 pattern which he feels is meaningful, and even deletes names on his list to make it work. But he still fucks up the count.
Luke adds names almost at random to his list. He keeps repeating names too. Very bizarre.
Jesus gets 2 completely different geneologies, both of which contradict with the Old Testament.
Matthew tries to establish a perfect 14-14-14 pattern which he feels is meaningful, and even deletes names on his list to make it work. But he still fucks up the count.
Luke adds names almost at random to his list. He keeps repeating names too. Very bizarre.
6/18/2025, 2:11:31 PM
>>507848138
In which case? The genealogy speaks for itself. Just go look both of them up, they both have massive errors in them.
As for the birth story
In Luke, his parents are residents of Nazareth, and only travel to Bethlehem for the Census of Cyrenius. Then they visit Jerusalem 33 days after for the ritual purification, then go home to Nazareth. Jesus is presented kind of like a prophecied king rising to the throne, like a European story.
In Matthew, Jesus's parents are residents of Bethlehem. The "evil king herod" is introduced who isn't mentioned in Luke, he tries to kill Jesus by holocausting all of Bethlehem, and Jesus flees to Egypt with his parents. In this story the wise men show up and warn Jesus what's about to happen, in this story Jesus is actually a young toddler. Upon returning to Israel, they settle in Nazareth, and in this story it's the first time they've ever set foot there. In this story Jesus is more like a "jewish refugee" fleeing a holocaust, it's a very jewish story.
That's because Luke was attempting to sell the story to a European audience, while Matthew was trying to sell the story to a Jewish audience. So the details are very different.
This is a theme throughout Luke, he blames the jews more, downplays the Roman atrocities, and is basically super pro-roman and anti-jewish.
Another weird thing about Luke is that he places Jesus's resurrection in the city of Jerusalem, while Mark says he resurrected in Galilee. Another massive contradiction that can't be reconciled.
In which case? The genealogy speaks for itself. Just go look both of them up, they both have massive errors in them.
As for the birth story
In Luke, his parents are residents of Nazareth, and only travel to Bethlehem for the Census of Cyrenius. Then they visit Jerusalem 33 days after for the ritual purification, then go home to Nazareth. Jesus is presented kind of like a prophecied king rising to the throne, like a European story.
In Matthew, Jesus's parents are residents of Bethlehem. The "evil king herod" is introduced who isn't mentioned in Luke, he tries to kill Jesus by holocausting all of Bethlehem, and Jesus flees to Egypt with his parents. In this story the wise men show up and warn Jesus what's about to happen, in this story Jesus is actually a young toddler. Upon returning to Israel, they settle in Nazareth, and in this story it's the first time they've ever set foot there. In this story Jesus is more like a "jewish refugee" fleeing a holocaust, it's a very jewish story.
That's because Luke was attempting to sell the story to a European audience, while Matthew was trying to sell the story to a Jewish audience. So the details are very different.
This is a theme throughout Luke, he blames the jews more, downplays the Roman atrocities, and is basically super pro-roman and anti-jewish.
Another weird thing about Luke is that he places Jesus's resurrection in the city of Jerusalem, while Mark says he resurrected in Galilee. Another massive contradiction that can't be reconciled.
Page 1