Gospel differences in Catholic thought

Status
Not open for further replies.

kern

Miserere Nobis
Apr 14, 2002
2,171
7
43
Florida, USA
Visit site
✟3,249.00
Faith
Catholic
How do you tend to look at supposed contradictions between the Gospel accounts?

Just as an example, take Judas' death -- the account in Acts and the account in the Gospels do not match up. One common explanation is to force them to match up by claiming that Judas hung himself over the edge of a cliff and then fell down. Is this something that you accept, or do you just allow for the two variant stories?

-Chris
 

nyj

Goodbye, my puppy
Feb 5, 2002
20,966
1,303
USA
Visit site
✟39,228.00
Country
United States
Faith
Catholic
Marital Status
Private
As you've said, I don't notice a blatant contradiction. It's not as if one states that Judas hung himself and another says he slit his wrists. If Judas did hang himself, he would have hung there for quite a long time. His body would have begun to decompose. Eventually, he would have rotted to the point that his neck would have torn in town and the bloated, gas-filled body would have plummeted to the earth, the impact of which would have strewn what was left all over the place. Ghastly but effective at painting a picture for the early Christians as to what betrayal will get you.
 
Upvote 0

isshinwhat

Pro Deo et Patria
Apr 12, 2002
8,338
624
Visit site
✟13,555.00
Faith
Eastern Orthodox
I believe it is Papias that states that Mark's intention was not to write everything in chronological order. I figure most contradictions are my not understanding things correctly, whether trying to force something like Mark to fit chronologically when it was never intended to (if that is the case), or like nyj said our not having all of the facts.

Neal
 
Upvote 0

kern

Miserere Nobis
Apr 14, 2002
2,171
7
43
Florida, USA
Visit site
✟3,249.00
Faith
Catholic
Originally posted by nyj
As you've said, I don't notice a blatant contradiction.

Perhaps you misinterpreted -- to me the two stories of Judas' death are fundamentally incompatible. There are more differences than similarities between them -- Matthew says that Judas threw the silver at the priest's feet and the priests bought a field with in, while Acts says that Judas bought the field himself; Matthew says that Judas hung himself while Acts doesn't even say he committed suicide; Matthew says that the field is called "the field of blood" because it was bought with blood money, while Acts says it was because Judas' guts fell out on it. Matthew's account also attributes some prophecy to Jeremiah when no such prophecy is found in the book of Jeremiah.


If Judas did hang himself, he would have hung there for quite a long time. His body would have begun to decompose. Eventually, he would have rotted to the point that his neck would have torn in town and the bloated, gas-filled body would have plummeted to the earth, the impact of which would have strewn what was left all over the place. .

It says that he "fell headlong" in Acts, which doesn't say suicide by hanging to me.

-Chris
 
Upvote 0

kern

Miserere Nobis
Apr 14, 2002
2,171
7
43
Florida, USA
Visit site
✟3,249.00
Faith
Catholic
Yes, I've read explanations like that one. But they always seem forced to me. I just don't buy that "[Judas] bought a parcel of land with the wages of his iniquity" means that the priests bought the land with his money in his name. Whoever wrote the St. Joseph NAB annotations agrees with me so at least I'm not alone. :)

That's just my opinion though, and I don't consider Judas' death very important in the grand scheme of Christian faith or the innerancy of the Bible.

-Chris
 
Upvote 0

kern

Miserere Nobis
Apr 14, 2002
2,171
7
43
Florida, USA
Visit site
✟3,249.00
Faith
Catholic
The death of Judas especially seems like one of those things that would not have been carefully preserved in transmission like the main Jesus stories and speeches -- that would be the kind of thing that would spread more in common folklore and such. It's not so surprising to me that there are multiple versions of that particular story.

-Chris
 
Upvote 0

Wolseley

Beaucoup-Diên-Cai-Dāu
Feb 5, 2002
21,074
5,546
63
By the shores of Gitchee-Goomee
✟272,889.00
Country
United States
Faith
Catholic
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Others
I tend to agree with fragments on this one.

The Jews have the Talmud to "fill in the gaps" or clarify the muddled passages or contradictions and inconsistencies in the Scriptures; we Catholics have Apostolic Tradition to do the same thing for us. Protestants have a bit more problem with them, and if they can't come up with a plausible speculation, they seem to just simply live with the inconsistency.
 
Upvote 0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums

Talmid HaYarok

Well-Known Member
Feb 3, 2003
475
10
Semi-Nomad
Visit site
✟702.00
Faith
Messianic
Others of us use historical documents, historical method, archaelogy, or have traditional teachings that have been handed down through the generations.

I would also point out that either way Judas' money bought the field. My Maternal Grandmother is still buying stuff in name even though she's been dead for half a dozen years. Her estate continues on....

The Bible does contain many contradictions (if you disagree read Proverbs 26:4-5), but I do not believe to contain any errors. The parables of Yeshua (Jesus) are not "historically" true either, but they are theologically true.

I find that assuming there are story differences in the Bible because of accidents will only lead to you being eternally puzzled and hurting, because nothing in the Bible is there by accident. Now assuming they're the way they are on purpose, why are they there?

My inclination is to say that the Gospels have a more historical account, while Acts is quoting what Peter actually said and Peter might have been wrong (while the quote is true because its what he said) in a minor fact (Judas death having recently occurred at the time and Peter wasn't there).

Making one a true event and the other a true quote.

Its could (I don't know, I'm only conjecturing) be like this:
The world is round
Talmid said "The world is flat"

They're a contradiction, but neither is a false statement.

P.S. - I'm not Catholic, so if you're looking for a Catholic response in this forum I can't help you. But I hope I added something useful.
 
Upvote 0
Status
Not open for further replies.