Monday, May 17, 2010

How Many Donkeys Did Jesus Ride

In Shane's latest lame attempt to point out a contradiction in the Bible he offers the following:

Marcus.

I guess its time to move on.

Here is another biblical issue.

There is a huge mistake regarding Jesus triumphal entry.

According to Mark, Luke, and John, Jesus entered the city riding on A donkey.

According to Matthew, Jesus is said to be riding on two donkey's? (Matthew 21:1-7).

Matthew mentions two animals in three of the verses so it cannot be explained away as a translation error. Matthew even has Jesus riding both animals at the same time.

This is because Matthew obviously must have misunderstood (Zechariah 9:9) which says "mounted on a donkey, and on a colt, the foal of a donkey".
Anyone who is familiar with OT Hebrew would know that the word translated "and" in this passage does not mean another animal, but instead its used in the sense of "even" a colt!

"Even" is given for emphasis here!
Matthew was evidently not aware of this.

This is but one example I am prepared to offer here that shows Matthew's gospel is full of fulfilled prophecies working the way Matthew wanted them to. And that Matthew in his zeal to prove Jesus was the Messiah, searched the OT for passages that could be construed as prophecy and modified events Jesus life to fulfill them!!!!

 Here is the most succinct answer I have seen.

(Category: misread the text & misunderstood the historical context)
The accusation is that the Gospels contradict about how many donkeys Jesus rode into Jerusalem on. This accusation is based on not reading the text of Matthew properly and ignoring his full point about this event.
It first should be noted that all four Gospel writers refer to this event, the missing reference above being John 12:14-15. Mark, Luke and John are all in agreement that Jesus sat on the colt. Logic shows that there is no "contradiction" as Jesus cannot ride on two animals at once! So, why does Matthew mention two animals? The reason is clear.
Even by looking at Matthew in isolation, we can see from the text that Jesus did not ride on two animals, but only on the colt. For in the two verses preceding the quote in point (b) above by Shabbir, we read Matthew quoting two prophecies from the Old Testament (Isaiah 62:11 and Zechariah 9:9) together. Matthew says:
"Say to the Daughter of Zion, 'See, your king comes to you, gently and riding on a donkey, on a colt, the foal of a donkey'."
Matthew 21:5
By saying "a donkey" and then "on a colt, the foal of a donkey" Zechariah is using classic Hebrew sentence structure and poetic language known as "parallelism", simply repeating the same thing again in another way, as a parallel statement. This is very common in the Bible (i.e. Psalm 119:105 mentions, "Your word is a lamp to my feet and a light to my path," yet says the same thing twice in succession). It is clear that there is only one animal referred to. Therefore Matthew clearly says Jesus rode only on a colt, in agreement with the other three Gospel writers.
So why does Matthew say that the colt and its mother were brought along in verse seven? The reason is simple. Matthew, who was an eyewitness (where as Mark and Luke were quite possibly not) emphasizes the immaturity of the colt, too young to be separated from its mother. As the colt had never been ridden the probability was that it was still dependent on its mother. It would have made the entry to Jerusalem easier if the mother donkey were led along down the road, as the foal would naturally follow her, even though he had never before carried a rider and had not yet been trained to follow a roadway.
Here again we see that there is no contradiction between the synoptic accounts, but only added detail on the part of Matthew as one who viewed the event while it was happening.
This is just one of many of the prophecies that Jesus fulfilled. He fulfilled ones that were in his control as well as ones which he could not manipulate, such as the time and place of his birth (Daniel 9:24-26, Micah 5:1-2, Matthew 2:1-6), and his resurrection (Psalm 16:10, Acts 2:24-32) to name but two.
Some Muslims believe that in the Taurat there is reference to the prophecy which the Qur'an speaks of in Sura 7:157 and 61:6 concerning Muhammad. However, these Muslims yet have to come up with one, while Jesus is predicted time and time again.
 This is from 101 Cleared-up contradictions in the Bible see number 36.  If you have a problem with me using someone else' answer, what about how you quoted directly from http://www.infidels.org/library/modern/paul_carlson/nt_contradictions.html (Section F). That is fine, but next time could you give a link. Next!

Reblog this post [with Zemanta]

13 comments:

  1. Marcus.

    Lol....come on, where did you find this desperate apologetic non-sense.

    The reason there is two donkeys mentioned (a mother and a colt) is showing how the colt must be lead by its mother....?....you cant be serious....neither can the source where that came from.

    For starters Marcus, Matthew 21:1-7 says literally "on them He sat"!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

    Some translations try to omit this by saying, "on the colt He sat", like the NLT im reading from right now......yet....at the bottom of my page it says-Matthew 21:7 (Greek, over them, and He sat on them).

    Nice try Marcus



    I

    ReplyDelete
  2. Marcus.

    BTW, your source there says Matthew was an eyewitness to these events and that is why he knew exactly what happened?

    Really, is that why Matthew contians 92 percent of the gospel of Mark?
    Is that why Mark's gospel is older and it is almost universally accepted that Matthew copied from Marks gospel?
    Is that why it is almost universally accepted that no one knows who really wrote Matthew, Mark, and John?

    ReplyDelete
  3. Marcus.

    The information I have quoted from, is from notes I took a few years ago, that is why I have not shared links.
    Also, they are not all from the same source, like the scriptures about (Jesus return) that I spoke of first was of my own accord!

    ReplyDelete
  4. Shane, The site I linked to is exactly the same as your comments. Same words. Same structure. Do you really expect me to believe that you didn't get it from that infidel website?

    For the sake of argument, let's say you are right and I'm misjudging you. It's the same thing you do when you say that the Gospels were not written by those who are traditionally said wrote them. No one has ever seen the supposed "Q" source from which people think that author of Mark got his information. And if Mark, Matthew, and Luke all contain information that none other other two have, how do we know that they were copied from Mark? Not all textual critics agree with the assertions you have made here. Bruce Metsger and Dan Wallace wouldn't agree. Not everyone dates the Gospels as late as you do either.

    Second, it's not nonsense to recognize that in those days a mother donkey would lead a colt the first time it is ridden. None of the Gospels say the mother was not there. So there is no contradiction. Matthew just give a tad more information concerning this point. What we also have is proof that the author of Matthew was not writing that long after the event because he knew how things were done then.

    ReplyDelete
  5. Marcus.

    I never said I didn't use the format from that site, I said I had taken notes a long time ago and I have pages upon pages of information, you might be right in where you found it, but I have visited more then one website in the past and dont know exactly where everthing comes from.

    Whats your point anyway?.....you hardly have given a thought of your own since we began talking, you have answered me with other peoples links every time!
    Not that I care, if you feel they answer it best then thats fine.

    No one knows if the synoptics copied Mark for sure, it is just widely accepted by most.

    Nowhere in Matthew does it say that the mother donkey lead the colt, it does not say that..........what it does though, is "on them He sat", and you cant change what it says no matter how much you want to assert your response!

    ReplyDelete
  6. Shane, the point isn't that I think that you shouldn't send links but that you should reference them...which I do.

    Do you really think that Matthew was saying that Jesus was sitting on two donkeys at the same time?! IT could not be because one of them was an adult donkey and her baby! Big difference in size!

    Why didn't Matthew give more explanation? He didn't have to when writing to the audience he was writing - first century Jews. They would have known what he meant! 21st Century Americans have to dig a little more to understand what is meant if you think there is a contradiction.

    ReplyDelete
  7. Marcus.

    No, I dont think Jesus rode two donkey's, I think Matthew thought Jesus rode two because He misinterpreted (Zechariah 9:9). this is even if Matthew wrote the gospel that bears his name!

    You and I both know that the Mtthew 21:7 does in fact say Jesus rode two donkey's, and the NLT version which changes it by saying "He sat on the colt" even states at the bottom of the page, the Greek says "He sat on them".

    I dont like using arguments from non-information, but you already did in your other post by telling me- "none of the other gospels say the mother donkey was not there, so it is not a contradiction",- since you did this I will too.

    Nowhere in Matthew does it give indication that the mother donkey was brought along to lead the colt!
    And nowhere does it say it was the colts first time out either.
    All we have is Matthew telling us Jesus sat on both animals.

    You tell me Matthew didn't have to give more information because he was writting to 1st century Jews?

    Considering Jesus was rejected by the majority of the Jews and even crucified by them, then it would be no surprise if Matthew embellished the truth or added to Marks gospel in his zeal to get the Jews attention and build up Jesus to them!

    ReplyDelete
  8. Marcus.

    BTW, just a quick note, you said Jesus could not have sat on the mother and the colt because the size difference would have been too much.

    Well....I dont believe He did either I believe Mtthew made an error plain and simple.....but....just a question. If Jesus was who He said He was, then why couln't He have been able to ride both the mother and the colt?

    You would tell people "oh yes....Jesus multiplied bread and fish".
    "Oh yes...Jesus brought people back from the dead".
    "Oh yes.....Jesus walked on water".
    "Oh yes....Jesus healed multitudes of people".

    Yet when faced with an issue like this latest one I have posted you say "do you really think Jesus was sitting on two donkeys? it could not be, one was an adult and the other its baby! big difference in size"!

    You see, you appeal to reason when it suits your purpose!

    ReplyDelete
  9. Shane, I believe Jesus is indeed who He claimed to be - God incarnate - God made flesh - the propitiation for the sin of all those who believe. That being the case then why would I reject Jesus feeding thousands of people with just bread and fish, bringing people back from the dead and healing multitudes of people. Duh..He's God! These are miraculous but not illogical. Amazing but not silly. How silly would Jesus look riding an adult Donkey and a baby donkey? Very silly. He'd have one butt cheek floating on air! Do you really wanna argue that?

    Look, what makes the most sense? That or the coats were spread over bother mother and baby donkey and Jesus sat on the coats on the baby donkey being led by its mother? Or that Jesus was riding both of them with one of his butt cheeks floating in the air? Be honest. If you had been on the road that day what would you have seen? I guarantee He was not floating into town because that is not what Matthew is saying.

    ReplyDelete
  10. Marcus.

    You must not read my messages very thoroughly.

    I already told you I dont believe Jesus rode both donkeys!
    I said, Matthew writes "on them He sat"? So the problem is not in what I think, the problem is in what the author of Matthew thought, or, the author made a translation error.

    If you want to deny the error, then please explain why in does in FACT say " they threw their coats over THEM, and on THEM He sat".

    Also, Matthew does not say anywhere that the mother was brought out to lead the colt, as oppossed to riding it.
    Neither do the other gospels even mention the mother donkey.

    I think it is quite possible the author of Matthew was not inspired, and mistakenly mistranslated (Zechariah 9:9) to mean two donkeys!

    ReplyDelete
  11. Here's another question, who was the twelth disciple?

    According to-Matt 10:2-4
    -Mark 3:16-19
    The twelth disciple was Thaddaeus.

    According to Luke- 6:14-16
    The twelth was Judas (son of James).

    According to-John 21:2
    The twelth was Nathanael.

    The other elevan were, Peter, Andrew, Philip, James, Bartholomew, John, Thomas, James, Matthew, Simon, Judas Iscariot.

    ReplyDelete
  12. No, i readcf you i know you were not saying he did, but you suggested that would be a literal interpretation, but I'm saying that is not what people who were reading Matthew thought when they read it. Why should you? Matthew adds the detail of the mother donkey, why would that be a problem if the other Gospels did not include it. They don't there was no mother leading the baby do they? No.

    As for your next question do you mean the twelfth disciple chosen or just the name of the twelfth disciple?

    ReplyDelete