Is it theologically legitimate to harmonize the Gospels? When I started this study, I would have easily said, “Absolutely, yes.” Now, I am not sure and have many questions.
These questions have a context. I was working with my son and grabbed a handful of nails. My son asked, “Dad, how many nails did you bring up?” I said, “A dozen.” (There were 13). Was I lying? Was I being untruthful? I do not think I was lying or being untruthful. I was generally truthful. If anything, I was not scientifically accurate. If the Gospels were scientifically and technically accurate, then the quotes from the Old Testaments would be “word-for-word” accurate and even include a solid verifiable Chicago-style footnote.
The Gospels are admittedly “Gospels.” …show more content…
Clearly, the salvation-message was clearly preserved and details were preserved; but were they preserved to a degree that would allow for complete harmonization? I do not doubt inerrancy in anyway at all; I do doubt the ability to harmonize the Gospels.
In the discussion of the Lord’s Supper, discrepancies can be seen. For instance, when did Jesus talk about Judas’s betrayal? In Matthew, it happens before the Lord’s Supper. In Luke, it happens after the Lord’s Supper. So, the radical reductionist critic would say that the Gospel writers altered history and tampered with the truth in their bias renderings. However, maybe truth to the ancients was simply the truth, without any attention to the technicalities of that truth, all in such a way that it does not affect inerrancy and infallibility.
Another question I have concerning the total harmony of the Gospels is, “Is it worth it? Harmonizing the Gospels to a greater degree than the figure above is exceedingly difficult, and probably impossible. I always knew there were differences in the Gospels. Until doing this study, I had no idea how difficult resolving those differences could be. The Gospels are not as similar as I