I was perusing my favorite blogs the other day when I came upon one that I couldn’t believe. Now, I am not one to judge quickly (except if you are not a “true” believer or you are emergent or not elect), but I had to take another look at this one. The Pyro guys (awesome) had a post that talked about the two different times that Jesus turned over the moneychanger tables in the temple. Of course there were two different times! In John’s gospel it happens in chapter 2 and in Matthew’s gospel it happens in chapter 21. How can it be the same event if they happen 19 chapters apart? Not only that, but in John Jesus says, “Get these things out of here. Don’t turn my Father’s house into a marketplace.” But in Matthew it says, “The Scriptures declare, ‘My Temple will be called a place of prayer,’ but you have turned it into a den of thieves!”
So you can see there are two different accounts of a different event. Forget that most scholars believe this is the same event in two different accounts. If you look at the scriptures, really “look”, then you have to see they are two different events. As one commenter on Pyro said:
“I knew they were at chronologically different points in the Synoptics (Matthew, Mark, and Luke) and John (end and beginning of Christ’s earthly public ministry respectively), but I accepted the hypothesis that they were different versions of the same event.
That, I realize now, is making a mockery of the Holy Spirit in His inspirational working through the Evangelists; and/or accusing either the Synoptic authors or John of pious fraud.”
Well said commenter. How dare you think these are two different accounts of the same event? Now that Pyro has pointed this out to you, don’t you dare think that the Bible is Not Inerrant! This should prove it!
Now my real beef with the Pyro guys (Awesome) is that they use a commentary by D. A. Carson. Even though he gets this passage right (the John 2 passage), he is so wrong on so many other things. Just take a look at this:
“As a consulting editor of the New Bible Commentary, D.A. Carson is responsible for the following attempt to undermine the historicity of the Genesis account of creation:
“Most of these stories [in Genesis 1-11] deal with periods long before writing was invented, so they cannot be ‘history’ in the strict sense of the term or be verified by evidence from outside the Bible. … T. Jacobsen has coined the term ‘mytho-historical’ to describe such literature … ‘Myth’ has negative overtones, so ‘proto-history’ is probably a better way to describe Genesis 1-11. In the present state of knowledge it is difficult to know how to relate these chapters to modern scientific discovery. … In that these are days of God’s activity not human work, it is unlikely that they are supposed to last twenty-four hours” (New Bible Commentary, Intervarsity Press, 1994, consulting editors D.A. Carson, R.T. France, J.A. Motyer, G.J. Wenham).”
Pyro guys, Please pick you commentators for their entire works and not just for something that agrees with your point. We don’t want to start looking like those emergent guys. I know that you are great Fundamentalists (awesome) and you have TRUTH on your side, but you have to do your research a little better. The Bible is inerrant and we don’t need anyone questioning our TRUTH with facts. Stop using D.A. Carson! He is not Fundamentalist enough. Actually, I am now beginning to question whether he is really saved like me!
I believe because I have to!
Dr. Seymore Spurgeon