A very interesting observation is that the majority of those who condemn Oscar Pistorius are actually Christians. To judge someone is human but not biblical so one is probably obligated to forgive those that judge before the defense has rested their case. On the other hand forgiveness should come from God so the author has no obligation.
This however, is not the point I really want to make. The point I want to make is that the four gospels probably have more contradictions than Oscar Pistorius’ testimony and yet the authors of the gospels are viewed in quite a different light than Oscar. How is that possible?
Can you imagine poor Matthew, Luke, John and Mark testifying in court about their testimonies of the “life and times of Jesus Christ” in a court of law? Can the most knowledgeable theologian or most dedicated Christian defend the contradictions in the gospels under the tough cross-examining of someone like Gerrie Nel?
It is certain that under this type of scrutinization the court would declare the four gospels fictional, at least in part and that the four authors of the gospels are less than reliable witnesses.
So how do some of the faithful conclude that Oscar’s testimony is unreliable yet the authors of the four gospels are not? Both sets of testimonies are flawed and contradictory yet a different set of rules is applied to them!