 |
| Also, by the fire, past event |
Apologetics Press
Cited
By Eric Lyons, M.Min.
Perhaps the most famous alleged Bible contradiction
---
My church sermon this morning featured Matthew 26 (with Luke 22 and John 13) in regard to the biblical story of Peter's denial of Jesus Christ and the crowing rooster. This story reminded me of dealing with this issue while at bible school.
Here is my short, very non-exhaustive, explanation for this biblical difference...
Cited from link above
The passages in question are found in Matthew 26, Mark 14, Luke 22, and John 13. Matthew, Luke, and John all quoted Jesus as saying that Peter would deny Him three times before the rooster crowed. Jesus said to him, “Assuredly, I say to you that this night, before the rooster crows, you will deny Me three times” (Matthew 26:34). Then He said, “I tell you, Peter, the rooster shall not crow this day before you will deny three times that you know Me” (Luke 22:34). Jesus answered him… “Most assuredly, I say to you, the rooster shall not crow till you have denied Me three times” (John 13:38).
Cited
Matthew, Luke, and John all indicated that Peter denied Jesus three times before the rooster crowed.
Cited
Mark however, says otherwise. He recorded Jesus’ prophecy as follows: “Assuredly, I say to you that today, even this night, before the rooster crows twice, you will deny Me three times” (Mark 14:30, emp. added). Following Peter’s first denial of Jesus, we learn that he “went out on the porch, and a rooster crowed” (Mark 14:68). After Peter’s third denial of Jesus, the rooster crowed “a second time…. Then Peter called to mind the word that Jesus had said to him, ‘Before the rooster crows twice, you will deny Me three times’ ” (Mark 14:72). Mark differs from the other writers in that he specifies the rooster crowed once after Peter’s first denial and again after his third denial. But, do these differences represent a legitimate contradiction? Do they indicate, as some critics charge, that the Bible is not from God?
Cited
no one should assume that, because three of the gospel writers mentioned one crowing while Mark mentioned two crowings, a contradiction therefore exists. Realistically, there were two “rooster crowings.” However, it was the second one (the only one Matthew, Luke, and John mentioned) that was the “main” crowing (like the fourth buzzer is the “main” buzzer at a football game). In the first century, roosters were accustomed to crowing at least twice during the night. The first crowing (which only Mark mentioned—14:68) usually occurred between twelve and one o’clock. Relatively few people ever heard or acknowledged this crowing (Fausset’s Bible Dictionary). Likely, Peter never heard it; else surely his slumbering conscience would have awakened.
Cited
REFERENCES
“Animals” (1986), Nelson’s Illustrated Bible Dictionary (Electronic Database: Biblesoft).
“Cock” (1998), Fausset’s Bible Dictionary (Electronic Database: Biblesoft).
“Cock-crowing,” McClintock, John and James Strong (1968), Cyclopaedia of Biblical Theological and Ecclesiastical Literature (Grand Rapids, MI: Baker).
Lenski, R.C.H. (1961), The Interpretation of St. Mark’s Gospel (Minneapolis, MN: Augsburg).
McGarvey, J.W. (1875), Commentary on Matthew and Mark (Delight AR: Gospel Light).
---
While briefly considering the four versions in church, listening to the sermon, I eventually remembered my explanation from years back, which is similar, but not identical, to the answer provided by this writer from Apologetics Press.
Jesus and the disciples primarily spoke in Aramaic.
Each of the four Gospel versions requires some translation from Aramaic to New Testament, Koine Greek.
In the case of Mark, it was a Gospel heavily influenced by the Apostle's Peter relationship with John Mark. Barclay explains:
'There is clearly a very close connection between Peter and Mark.' (112).
'There is in our opinion no good reason reason for rejecting the tradition of Mark's gospel connection with Peter.' (127).
Stephen Short notes that the main source of Mark was the preaching and instruction of the Apostle Peter and this verified by certain Church Fathers such as Papias and Justin Martyr, Irenaeus and Clement of Alexandria, all of the second century. (1156).
I can accept that Mark's (with Peter's) account is likely technically accurate with two crowings.
These translations would not always be identical and would include a paraphrase of the Aramaic to Greek.
In the case of the Gospel of Mark, the author included two rooster crowings, whereas the other three Gospels just included the one crowing. Again, I would deduce that as the story took place in Aramaic, when translated to Koine Greek, four times, the versions would not be identical. They are by nature paraphrases.
Of course, it is logically possible, that Mark or Matthew, Luke, John was in error on this issue because of the difference in presentation, one side stated two crows, the other side, one crow. I can understand how some critics and scholars would assume this explanation, but it is not the most reasonable explanation. Admittedly, if one holds to Holy Spirit inspiration and infallibility of the biblical scripture (I do with the original autographs, not copies) this objection is not fatal, whatsoever.
Greek New Testament
Greek New Testament
The manuscripts evidence offers as usual, some variance, but the five versions presented all feature diV (twice). So, it is not as if there is an obvious difference where some versions of Mark are stating that the rooster crowed once. If this was obviously the case, then one would need to discuss the possibility of scribal error or scribal alteration, but that does not appear the case, at least based on the New Testament Greek sources cited.
To be blunt, if there was scribal alteration here, harmonization would seem more likely, in other words all four Gospels should indicate either one or two crowings.
To be blunt, if there was scribal alteration here, harmonization would seem more likely, in other words all four Gospels should indicate either one or two crowings.
BARCLAY, WILLIAM (1976) The Letters of James and Peter, Philadelphia, The Westminster Press.
SHORT, STEPHEN S. (1986) ‘Mark’, in F.F. Bruce (ed.), The International Bible Commentary, Grand Rapids, Zondervan.
MARSHALL, ALFRED (1975)(1996) The Interlinear KJV-NIV, Grand Rapids, Zondervan.
