Another Bible Error: The Disciples' Journey

JosephAlward

The story about the instructions Jesus allegedly gave to his disciples before they were to set out on their evangelizing journey illustrates the type of contradictions which are found in the gospel stories. In their two accounts of this event, the authors of Mark and Matthew disagree about whether Jesus wanted the disciples to carry a staff with them.

Mark tells us Jesus told the disciples to go forth with a staff:

Mark's Story

"And he called unto him the twelve...And commanded them that they should take nothing for their journey, save a staff only; no scrip, no bread, no money in their purse: But be shod with sandals; and not put on two coats." (Mark 6:7-10)

These words, put in Jesus' mouth by Mark, contradict those by Matthew, whose has Jesus tell the disciples that they are not to take a staff:

Matthew's Story

"These twelve Jesus sent forth, and commanded them, provide neither gold, nor silver, nor brass in your purses, Nor scrip for your journey, neither two coats, neither shoes, nor yet staves"(Matthew 10:1-11)

Joseph F. Alward
"Skeptical Views of Christianity and the Bible"

* http://members.aol.com/jalw/joseph_alward.html

Scorpion

Also in Luke 10:4 Sandals were not to be worn as with Matthew 10. For some reason, Matthew and Luke forbid the sandals and staff while Mark accepted it.

JosephAlward

Scorpion,

I agree that the Matthew author had the disciples go barefoot, while the author of Mark gave them sandals. The case has been made by others that the Matthew author wanted to paint a picture of a "Jesus" and his disciples who suffered more than the ones described by the Mark author, so he had the disciples go on their evangelizing journey barefoot and without the protection afforded by a staff. All the better to show that the disciples had faith that the Lord would provide and protect.

I left out the sandals to force the inerrantists to focus on one contradiction at a time; if they're forced to explain too many things in one post, their arguments tend to become so unfocused as to be incoherent.

Joseph F. Alward
"Skeptical Views of Christianity and the Bible"

* http://members.aol.com/jalw/joseph_alward.html

pomegranate

Matt 10:10
10 take no bag for the journey, or extra tunic, or sandals or a staff; for the worker is worth his keep.
NIV

Matt 10:9-10
9 "Don't take any money with you; 10 don't even carry a duffle bag with extra clothes and shoes, or even a walking stick;

"extra" would also be applied to sandals and staff.

Just bring one tunic, one pair sandels, one staff.

Normally, on long journeys, journeymen would bring "extra's" of these things as these are the things that get worn out/down.

Matt 10:10
"...for the worker is worth his keep."

Their clothes and shoes and walking sticks did not wear out.

SixofNine

Itinerant innerrantist always carry two walking sticks. Cuz 'ya just never know'.

JosephAlward

Pom believes that Matthew was saying that Jesus wanted his disciples not to carry two staves, as if the thought ever would have crossed their minds! TWO walking sticks?

Who ever heard of anyone carrying two walking sticks? How would they have carried two staves, even if they wanted to? One in the right hand, the other in the left? One in the right hand, the other in the “duffel bag” Pom spoke of? That’s such a preposterous image that nobody in their correct mind would give this scenario a moment’s consideration.

Pom shows once again that he's willing to accept far-fetched, how-it-could-have-been scenarios, no matter how ridiculous they seem, in order to preserve the illusion that there are no errors in the Bible, no differences in opinion among the gospel writers. At least Pom will do this without pretending he has a satisfied smile on his face and is having fun "defeating" the skeptic; for that, I will give him some credit.

Pom is just unthinkingly parroting the only argument that professional apologists have ever been able to offer to explain away the error with the staves, but in so doing he is dismissing the Old Testament antecedent Matthew wanted his readers to refer to when he had the disciples walk through Israel without a staff. Let me explain.

Forum readers who have looked at my web site will see there are many articles which deal with the tendency of Matthew to have events in Jesus' life be fulfillments of events described in the Old Testament, thus showing that Jesus was the messiah prophesied in scripture. How does walking without a staff connect to scripture? Well, having the disciples go forth fearlessly without a staff to protect them is just Matthew's way of showing the readers that the disciples had the same faith in the protection of the Lord as did the author of the 23rd Psalm:

"Even though I walk through the valley of the shadow of death, I will fear no evil, for you are with me; your rod and your staff, they comfort me. (Psalm 23)

Thus, the 23rd Psalm speaks of a man who will walk without a staff, for the Lord will be his protection. Thus, Matthew wanted readers to keep this Psalm in mind when they imagined Jesus’ disciples going forth without their staves.

Who but those who operate at the idiot-fundamentalist level of total mindless acceptance could believe that Matthew wanted readers to think that the disciples were not supposed to carry a second staff in their duffel bag?

Joseph F. Alward
"Skeptical Views of Christianity and the Bible"

* http://members.aol.com/jalw/joseph_alward.html

pomegranate

>>How would they have carried two staves, even if they wanted to?>>

Matt 10:10
10 take no bag for the journey

They didn't have four feet or two bodies, how were they supposed to take another pair of sandals and a change of clothes? Everything EXTRA would have went in the bag,

That's what the bag would have been for.

expatbrit

It obviously went like this:

Jesus: "Disciples! Off you go. Leave everything you have with me. No sandals, no coats, no staffs, and no bread. I want it all! Damnit! Where's my hairdresser?"

Disciples: "Grumble grumble murmur."

Jesus: "What's the problem, lads?"

Peter: "Well look, this is a bit much isn't it? No coats? Gets nippy in those hills you know. We don't have women keeping us warm with their hair like you, you smoothy!"

John: "Yeah, and what about getting mugged? Those hills are bloody dangerous! Didn't you listen to that story about the good Samaritan?"

Jesus: "Oh stop whining! I'm the frickin' Messiah! What do your miserable skins count against doing my will? I have to do all the dirty work spending time with prostitutes you know!"

Luke: "I say J. You wouldn't mind if we took staves would you? That seems an equitable compromise. No objection to that, surely, oh heavenly one?"

Jesus (aside to himself): "Damn! What the gehenna is that smart-arse physician talking about now? I wish I hadn't dropped out of rabbi school at grade seven!"

Jesus: "Certainly not my man!"

Disciples depart.

Jesus (calling after them): "Oh! But if anyone asks about them, make sure you tell them: "Jesus Staves!"

The End

JosephAlward

Pom,

Your short response is nearly incoherent. You've argued that Jesus (in Matthew) was asking his disciples not to take along a spare staff, but you have not addressed the absurdity of anyone carrying TWO staves. Can you picture such a thing?

Where would the second staff have been carried? If you say that the second staff--which you claim Jesus didn't want them to carry--would have been carried in the "duffel bag," then exactly how long do you imagine this duffel bag would have to be? Five feet? Don't you see how silly your apologetic really is?

You also have not addressed the central point I made in the previous post, which was that Matthew had Jesus describe a situation which would evoke the image of the fearless faithful walking without the protection of a staff through the valley of his enemies because the Lord would be his "rod and staff." Do you really fail to see Psalm 23 in Matthew's message? If so, then you've let your mindless acceptance of the literal truth of the Bible blind you to one of the more important of Matthew's teachings. Let this example be a warning to others who are thinking about becoming a fundamentalist--or already are.

Joseph F. Alward
"Skeptical Views of Christianity and the Bible"

* http://members.aol.com/jalw/joseph_alward.html

SixofNine

Expat, usually when I say I am "LOL'ing" I am really just LIQing (laughing inside quietly). This time I am really LOL.

Another Bible Error: The Disciples' Journey

Share this