Featured Entering or Exiting Jericho: a contradiction?

Jesus was caught coming and going.

He just couldn't get rid of the man!



Actually, I hold that Mark's account is more accurate, because he knew the person and who the father was.

 

just shows that the translator did make some mistakes in our kjv bibles--just as they did on the words Olam and Aion--in translating them as forever and ever and so on..takes some study to those who are willing to study it--but its all there.

 

or it could mean that since jesus didn't call the beggar to him while going into the city--that the beggar went on the other side on the city and waiting for jesus to come out from the city and catch him on the way out--then finally jesus called him to be brought.

seems this is the only logical answer if there was not a translation mistake some where in there.

 

Like I said, "Caught Him coming and going."

 

Perhaps they don't indicate there were 2 encounters, but that doesn't mean it wasn't the case.

I consider Mark is more accurate than I view Luke merely because he gives the name and family name. He was also there. Luke is relying primarily upon third party information.

But it makes so little real importance.

Whether the road sign said "Entering Jericho" or "Leaving Jericho" it still took place in the area in which the city is found.

 

actually have mercy upon me thou Son of David was the promise of the sure mercies of david for the jews--so more than 1 jew cried this saying because they knew from scripture that it was their promise from God--notice how he had both of them brought to him ?

when a gentile woman tried to cry that promise to him--he answered her not a word--this promise was for the jews only not the gentiles--then she came and fell at his feet and said Lord have mercy upon me--he asked her was it meet to give the childrens bread unto the dogs?but she admitted who she was and said truth lord--but the dogs eat the crumbs that fall from the childrens table--BINGO she admitted the promise was not for her and she was only a gentile DOG--that got jesus attention and he done according to her need.

so the point is it could have been a jew on both sides of the city crying for that promise from Jesus when they knew he was close?just a thought

 

just said it was a thought there friend :thumbsup::thumbsup:

there was beggars on both sides of the city though--and they were jews saying the same promise given to them--but im just speculating here--what I have said is true--but it doesn't mean it is what happened in this text.

 

The guy was begging for mercy when He went in, and was still begging for mercy as He left.

 

I've heard that one. Also heard that perhaps the Jericho at the time of Christ was a really dispersed city so you could be both drawing near and leaving simultaneously since you would be leaving 1 'district' and and coming into a 2nd 'district' of the same city .

Personally I don't know if there is any support to that, I haven't thought about it much either way.

 

Lots and lots of arbitrary presuppositions here.

 

Neither Mark or Luke say Jesus entered Jericho, only that he came "nigh" or close to the city.

Mar 10:46 And they came to Jericho: and as he went out of Jericho with his disciples and a great number of people, blind Bartimaeus, the son of Timaeus, sat by the highway side begging.

Luk 18:35 And it came to pass, that as he was come nigh unto Jericho, a certain blind man sat by the way side begging:

Neither of these verses say Jesus actually entered Jericho, only that he "came to Jericho", and "come nigh unto Jericho". So perhaps there was a highway that ran past Jericho. As Jesus passed by Jericho and was leaving the area, this is when Bartimaeus called out to Jesus.

 

There were two "Jerico's": the old ruins destroyed by Joshua and the Israelites, and a "New Jerico" built near the ruins.
Obviously, the trail led through both cities.

 

No, of course not. The one event occurred. As Jesus is coming toward Jericho, the blind man is calling out for healing, and as Jesus is leaving the area of Jericho, the blind man is still calling out for healing. Jesus heals him as he is leaving.

Both authors accurately record the event, but from a different point of view. Luke records the man was crying for mercy as Jesus came into the area. He is accurate. Mark records the man was crying for mercy as Jesus was leaving the area, he too is accurate.

Both are accurate because the man continued to cry out for mercy for some time. This is seen in both gospels by the fact people were calling on the man to keep quite but that the man "kept crying out all the more". There is obviously a lapse in time from the first instance of the man crying out and the point where Jesus calls the man to Himself.

So, both are accurate, but present a different point of view. The man was crying out for mercy the whole time Jesus was in the area (when He came and as He was leaving) and did not stop until Jesus healed him.

No contradiction between the texts.