Gospel Reliability Experiment

I just read a recent entry in the Cross Examined Blog where the author decided to make a point about the reliability of the "contradictory" Gospel accounts of the resurrection of Jesus, and why they are not in fact contradictory.  Briefly, the main charge of skeptics of the Gospel accounts is the accounts contradict each other and are therefore unreliable.  For example, were there two angels or one, how many people went to the empty tomb, and who were they, etc.  These objections all have answers, but Neil Mammen used a clever illustration to make his point and hoist the skeptics by their own petard.

There had recently been an airplane accident where it had to make a crash landing, killing a young boy, wrecking a couple cars by sliding off the runway, and  breaking through multiple barriers coming to rest on a street.  Multiple news agencies reported the incident but made different observations.  A couple sources mentioned two cars, one or two others mentioned one car.  A couple reports mentioned breaking through a wall, another a barrier, and another a security fence.  One report only mentioned the boy killed.  So Neil went on a rant citing all the "contradictions" in the reporting and concluding the incident never took place, much like skeptics of the resurrection of Jesus.

Obviously most commenter's came to the defense of the differing reports actually citing reasons most Christian apologists give for the defense of the differing accounts in the Gospels, which the skeptics themselves reject for the defense of the Gospels.

In the end the point is glaring and obvious.  The accounts vary because of differences of perspective, not contradiction or deception.  The entire blog article is a bit long but well worth the read.