Do contradictions in a story show that it didn’t happen? When I first responded (a few days ago) to Mark Goodacre’s five points calling into question the traditional story of the discovery of the Nag Hammadi Library, I was intrigued to receive a number of comments suggesting I sure seemed to be inconsistent in how I dealt with historical accounts.
To wit: Why would I say contradictions in the Nag Hammadi discovery story (that Mark pointed out) DON’T show that the basic account is false — that is, didn’t happen — but I DO use contradictions to call the Gospel accounts of Jesus into question. Is this an agenda-driven inconsistency?
All right — fair question. First let me remind you that