Y
ytrewq
Guest
How do roman catholics get around the apocryphal discrepancies, particularly Judas Maccabeas dieing three different times in three different locations?
- Status
C
COPLAND_3
Guest
Instead of blanket statements, give some specific passages with chapters and verses so those who respond can easily look them up. Since you decided to word this post in a manner of disrepect by saying in a way that is accusing us of getting around obvious contradictions and not actually having legitimate positions, it already starts the thread off on a negative tone.
J
JRKH
Guest
Agree with Copeland. Particulars would be helpful to all.
That said, I think that there is no need to “get around” some of these things.
The Catholic Church is the NT Church. The OT is provided in support of the NT more for theological than historical support. The Holy Spirit, acting through the Early councils of the Church determined that Maccabees, along with the other deuterocanonicals should be included in the canon of Scripture. So I will accept the Will of the Holy Spirit as expressed in the councils of Christ’s Holy Church.
As to such details as you mention above…such things are (to me) trifles and not really of any concern to our walk in faith.
Peace
James
That said, I think that there is no need to “get around” some of these things.
The Catholic Church is the NT Church. The OT is provided in support of the NT more for theological than historical support. The Holy Spirit, acting through the Early councils of the Church determined that Maccabees, along with the other deuterocanonicals should be included in the canon of Scripture. So I will accept the Will of the Holy Spirit as expressed in the councils of Christ’s Holy Church.
As to such details as you mention above…such things are (to me) trifles and not really of any concern to our walk in faith.
Peace
James
C
COPLAND_3
Guest
I dont believe that the Bible has contradictions. I believe that translations and many versions do, which I have ran onto and discovered, but I have always found the answer to any so-called contradiction when I’ve investigated it.
T
TimothyH
Guest
R
Rainaldo
Guest
I know exactly what the OP is referring to, and he is in error as to the facts. But I for one am not going to do his homework for him.
However, like all other alleged Biblical contradictions, the one he has in mind - or rather the one he lifted from his source without investingating the matter himself like the the noble Bereans of Acts 17 - has a simple explanation, which I will not divulge until he documents the difficulty himself.
He joined this morning and this is his first - and possibly will be his only - post. This bears the marks of a troll.
However, like all other alleged Biblical contradictions, the one he has in mind - or rather the one he lifted from his source without investingating the matter himself like the the noble Bereans of Acts 17 - has a simple explanation, which I will not divulge until he documents the difficulty himself.
He joined this morning and this is his first - and possibly will be his only - post. This bears the marks of a troll.
C
Cathhsmom
Guest
Have you actually read this? I ask because I have a Catholic friend who had this problem with Maccabbees until I pointed out in the footnotes, it tells you that they are not all the same person. Some people are given the same name as their father. I will have to go back and re-read that particular book. I know that I found that one a bit of a rough go with all of the battle info in it. I liked Tobit and Judith a lot better.
E
Elizium23
Guest
The Bible is a document of faith and morals. Its purpose is to teach Christians in the spiritual disciplines and to give us sure guidance to live a moral life. The Bible is not a science document or a comprehensive historical record. Sacred Scripture was simply never intended to be intended in this overly literal way. Unrestricted Biblical inerrancy is a noveau heresy concocted by sola scriptura extremists outside the authority of the Church. The Church alone has the authority to interpret Sacred Scripture in the light of Tradition. This doctrine of inerrancy just shows how misguided it is to jettison Holy Tradition and attempt to retain the Bible, when the Bible itself is part of Tradition.
Interpret the Bible properly as a document of faith and morals and you will find absolutely no discrepancies. Those who attempt to reject the Deuterocanonicals, Holy Tradition, and the authority of the Church in favor of a free-for-all, anything-goes, personal interpretation of Sacred Scripture will be forced to face a confusing Tower of Babel that will quickly collapse under its own weight.
Interpret the Bible properly as a document of faith and morals and you will find absolutely no discrepancies. Those who attempt to reject the Deuterocanonicals, Holy Tradition, and the authority of the Church in favor of a free-for-all, anything-goes, personal interpretation of Sacred Scripture will be forced to face a confusing Tower of Babel that will quickly collapse under its own weight.
T
Todd_Easton
Guest
As far as I can tell, there are three different people named Judas in the First Book of Maccabees: Judas Maccabeus, son of Mathathias, whose death is mentioned in 1 Mac 9:18; Judas Maccabeus’ nephew Judas, son of Simon, whose death is mentioned in 1 Mac 16:16; and Judas, son of Calphi, mentioned in 1 Mac 11:70 and whose death seems to be implied in 1 Mac 12:48. Perhaps you have confused these three people named Judas. The history related in the Second Book of Maccabees ends before the death of Judas Maccabeus.
J
JRKH
Guest
I agree that it is difficult to know his level of understanding etc from the OP. I hope that he comes back and provides a bit more detail so that we might have a fruitful conversation.
Possibly - but I prefer not to jump to any conclusions.
We should be charitable - even if someone turns out to be a troll (which this poster may not be).
Peace
James
P
patrick457
Guest
Let me get back to you with another question. How do you get around Matthew’s account of Judas hanging himself with the Judas who falls down and bursts his entrails in Acts, or the fact that while Matthew has Jesus dying while quoting Psalm 22 (“Jesus, crying out again with a great voice…”), Mark’s Jesus expires with a scream (“Jesus, having let out a great voice…”), Luke’s Jesus says “Father, into thy hands I commend my spirit” while John’s Jesus proclaims “It is finished,” or the fact that Matthew and Luke have two different genealogies for Jesus, or the fact that Acts have three different accounts of Paul’s vision en route to Damascus?
T
tabycat
Guest
He does not have to be a troll to post-and-dash. Hopfully he will come came back and clear up what he ment by his post. 
:tiphat:
:tiphat:
Y
ytrewq
Guest
So sorry! I forgot to cut and past the references!
1 Macc. 6:18, 16; 2 Macc. 1:16; 2 Macc 9
1 Macc. 6:18, 16; 2 Macc. 1:16; 2 Macc 9
E
edward_george
Guest
J
JRKH
Guest
Thanks…
I see in your profile you are a “bible believing protestant”…We are bible believing Catholics…:grouphug:…Good to meet ya…
Peace
James
S
steve53
Guest
Any discerning Catholic Forum member would have noticed that not only was this the thread-starters first post, but he made his moniker simply by typing horizontally across the keyboard starting with the letter “y.”
Give him due consideration.
Give him due consideration.
J
JRKH
Guest
heehee - I hadn’t noticed…interesting…
If he had done it frontwards he’d have been “qwerty”
Peace
James
C
COPLAND_3
Guest
I imagine this forum gets a lot of so-called organized teams that plan to “save” the Catholics, which create profile after profile as they get banned, posting all these weak arguements hoping something sticks.
Y
ytrewq
Guest
OK. I must have been half asleep last night when I wrote that initial post.
It is actually Antiochus Epiphenes who died in three different ways, I hope this makes slightly more sense now . . . .
It is actually Antiochus Epiphenes who died in three different ways, I hope this makes slightly more sense now . . . .
T
Todd_Easton
Guest
1 Mac 6:1-16 and 2 Mac 1:14-17 and 2 Mac 9:1-29 do seem to give us three different accounts of the death of Antiochus IV of Syria.
The circumstances given in 1 Mac 6:1-16 and 2 Mac 9:1-29 seem to be quite similar and do not seem irreconcilable.
2 Mac 1:14-17 is not the inspired author’s own inerrant account of the death of Antiochus IV but a secular account of the stoning of Antiochus IV which the author includes from a letter written by the Jews of Jerusalem to the Jews in Egypt, which account was not necessarily inerrant.
2 Mach 1:16:
When Antiochus was come in: and opening a secret entrance of the temple, they [the Naneans] cast stones and slew the leader [Antiochus], and them that were with him, and hewed them in pieces; and cutting off their heads, they threw them forth.
On 2 Mach 1:16, Haydock’s Commentary says:
Ver. 16. Slew. Literally, “struck.” Greek, “stoned.” Yet [Antiochus] Epiphanes escaped, (2 Mach. x. 9. and 1 Mach. vi.) having received some wounds. But a fall from his chariot, and vexation, hastened his death. H. — Some of his followers, who had advanced farther into the temple, perished. C.
- Status