If there is one thing many a Christian apologist is adept at it is performing the kind of mental gymnastics required to reconcile the more egregious examples of contradictions in the Bible. This video from the Non-Alchemist explains. (Oh, and go subscribe to his channel!)
10 thoughts on “The Non-Alchemist: Anything Can Be Reconciled!”
Comments are closed.
The Amateur Exegete 
Excellent video.
It’s one thing to argue that certain biblical errors, contradictions, inconsistencies, etc. aren’t material to one’s faith or interpretation of the text. That’s a subjective weighing of the relative impact or consequences of a discrepancy, about which reasonable people can disagree.
It’s another thing entirely to go through ad hoc rhetorical contortions to defend the position the Bible is without any error, contradiction, etc. As the Non-Alchemist notes, this is motivated reasoning, arguing towards a preferred conclusion of strict and literal inerrancy. Employing that manner of thinking is no more intellectually rigorous than if one of us heathens were to engage in biblical exegesis guided by a preconceived assumption the Bible contains not a single true statement whatsoever.
-Lex Lata
LikeLiked by 1 person
The death of Judas apparent discrepancy seems like one of the easier ones to reconcile. Did you check Keener or Strouse on this? Longer works (4459 and 1948 pages respectively). Can you link to your paper?
LikeLike
My post on Judas’s deaths can be found here: https://amateurexegete.com/2019/05/21/the-deaths-of-judas/
LikeLike
Thank you. I read it once and look forward to reading it again.
Do you think Judas hanged himself or do you think he fell?
LikeLike
I am unsure how Judas died (if he existed at all). I think that both Matthew and Luke, though they disagree on the manner of Judas’s demise, they nevertheless agree that he met a quick and unfortunate end which they attributed in one way or another to his treachery.
LikeLike
Thank you for your clarification, your original post was not clear to me. Your clarification opens up a couple more questions. First, you said your post was a response to a post entitled, “Did Judas Hang Himself or Fall?” Your answer to that question is, “I am unsure how Judas died,” and that answer ultimately is your contribution to this topic and your response to the other post. Am I reading you right?
Second, you say in your post on Judas’ death (in the main after footnote 3), “I take the biblical texts seriously” and in your conclusion you say, “the biblical texts do not need to be reconciled; they simply need to be read.” Then you write here in the comments, “I am unsure how Judas died (if he existed at all).” Are you saying the biblical texts (which you take seriously) are unclear as to the existence of Judas, and that that has led you to your own uncertainty? Is it fair to say 1) the unclarity of the biblical text as to how Judas died led you to be unsure of how he died, and that 2) the unclarity of the biblical text as to whether Judas existed led you to be unsure as to “if he existed at all” (your words)?
I appreciate your time in discussing what you have spent much of your time writing. Thanks for your patience in walking me through how your taking the biblical text seriously leads you to be open to doubting Judas’ existence.
LikeLike
The Gospels all speak of Judas Iscariot and they all agree he betrayed Jesus of Nazareth to the Jewish authorities. I have no doubt that the Gospel writers believed that what they wrote was true and that a man named Judas committed that treachery. But it isn’t clear to me why I should think Judas actually existed on the Evangelists’ say-so. What historical grounds do we have for thinking Judas existed?
As for his death, if he never existed then he never died. But if he did exist then we have uncertainty regarding the manner of his death since two of our sources that discuss his death do not agree with one another on it. That being said, my main interest is in the narratives themselves, not necessarily their historical import. I am open to Judas being a real historical person and I am perhaps even inclined to think that he was. But I hold it quite loosely.
LikeLike
I have to thank you for putting a smile on my face. If this is a parody website and I missed it the joke’s on me. You’re open to Judas having never existed, but you’re not open to the accounts of his death being reconcilable. I love it. Maybe that historical missing link you’re looking for will show up someday. Are you open whatsoever to Jesus having never existed?
LikeLike
I am open to the accounts being reconciled, but I do not think there is a way to do it that doesn’t either ignore specific details that hinder harmonization or that erases the role the pericopes play in their respective narratives. As I stated earlier, I’m open to Judas having never existed but am inclined to believe that he did. With Jesus of Nazareth, I’m also open to him never having existed but I think there is far too much evidence for his existence to consider non-existence credible or likely.
This will be my last response to you as it is clear by the tone of your message you are not interested in a good faith discussion.
LikeLike
I apologize, was just trying to match the tone of your original blog post. I’m sorry if you’re not feeling it.
When looking for an example of irreconcilable differences in the christian bible, the death of Judas is not a good one. Even pastor Ehrman has backed off this one. Keener cites historical example of a single individual being hanged in multiple locations something more unusual than what happened to Judas. If you wanted to revise your original post not to attribute the word “dies” to Luke in Acts 1, that would be more accurate, because he doesn’t use that word there (Peter speaking, and Matthew is there).
Thanks for giving this amateur exegete the last word
LikeLike