Differing Stories in the Bible

  • Thread starter Thread starter ICXCNIKA
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
I

ICXCNIKA

Guest
In her book Reading the New Testament Pheme Perkins writes “Scholars think that some of the individual stories may have been gathered into collections. The parables which form the basis for Jesus’ teaching in Mark 4:1-34 might be taken from such a collection. The doubling of several miracle stories (calming the storm: Mk 4:35-41; 6:45-52; feeding the multitude 6:34-44; 8:1-9; healing the blind: 8:22-26; 10:46-52) suggest that there may have even been different collections that contained different version of the same story” (204).

I don’t have a problem with the idea of different versions of the same story, but I compared Mark 4:35-41 to Mark 6:45-52 and they seem like different stories rather than different versions.

Here is what I came up with. What do you think?

Mark 4:35-41

Before: Jesus is teaching by the sea (v. 1). Later Jesus is alone with the twelve (v. 10) and he explains the parables to them (v. 10-34).

Verse 35 is the evening of the same day.

There are other boats with them when they cross over and Jesus is with them in the boat (v. 35-36).

Verses 37-41: Jesus is in the stern asleep. A storm arises, waves beat the boat and begin to fill it. The Disciples wake Jesus, he rebukes the wind and waves. The winds cease and Jesus ask them why they are afraid, have they no faith.

Mark 6: 45-52

Before: The disciples have returned from being sent out (v. 7-13).

Verses 31-32 Jesus decides to take the disciples to a lonely place to rest.

Verses 33-44 Crowds follow them and Jesus teaches and feeds them.

Verse 45 Jesus sends the disciples away in a boat to cross over to Bethsaida while he stays behind to dismiss the crowds.

Verse 46. Jesus goes up to a mountain to pray.

Verse 48. Disciples battling the wind that is against them.

Verses 48-52: Jesus walks to them on the water, disciples are afraid but he calms them and gets into the boat and the wind ceases.
 
Between the stories there are different locations and situations. In one story Jesus is in the boat in another he isn’t, in fact the point is made several times that he is not with them (dismisses crowds, goes to mountain) and in the other story the details are that Jesus is with them, even asleep. In one story the disciples are about to be swamped in the other they are battling a strong wind. In one story, Jesus calms the storm from the boat, in the other he walks on water. Walking on water seems to be a detail that any oral retelling would not leave out.
 
These aren’t the same incident, but different ones that took place at different times. Jesus spent a lot of time around Lake Galilee. It only stands to reason there’d have been more than one miracle related to his being in a boat or near a boat. Mark’s whole thrust is to tell us that Jesus was truly the Messiah by emphasizing his death and resurrection.

Honestly, I wouldn’t take some person’s ideas about lumping all the parables and miracle stories together. Besides, the writers of the Gospels were more concerned about telling us about this remarkable Person with whom they’d had or sat at the feet of those who had such extraordinary experiences.
 
I’m currently reading some terrific Biblical scholarship in the Oxford Bible Companion. Had it for years. Just digging into it now. Great, great insights. The issues you’re discussing here, for example, have been worked over in detail by generations of some of the brightest scholars ever.👍
 
Icxcnika

Is the English for your name Jesus Christ Conquers? The use of c for sigma rather than *s *is misleading.

I have no problem with minor differences, since the gospels were written years after the events (after 60 AD), The slight inconsistencies do not alter the wonderful Good News, Jesus loves us, died for us and rose again.

Does it matter if the sermon was on a mount or in a plain, whether Jesus stood up or sat down when he gave it?

Incidentally KingAlfred recommends the Oxford Bible Comapnion. Is this the same as The Oxford Companion to the Bible (Ed B M Metzger and M D Coogan, OUP, 1993)? If so I should read it with greater respect.

Pheme Perkins is one of the best Catholic Bible scholars, thus her opinions are very valuable.
 
NoelFitz said:
Icxcnika

Is the English for your name Jesus Christ Conquers? The use of c for sigma rather than *s *is misleading.

I have no problem with minor differences, since the gospels were written years after the events (after 60 AD), The slight inconsistencies do not alter the wonderful Good News, Jesus loves us, died for us and rose again.

Does it matter if the sermon was on a mount or in a plain, whether Jesus stood up or sat down when he gave it?

Incidentally KingAlfred recommends the Oxford Bible Comapnion. Is this the same as The Oxford Comp[anion to the Bible (Ed B M Metzger and M D Coogan, OUP, 1993)? If so I should read it with greater respect.

Pheme Perkins is one of the best Catholic Bible scholars, thus her opinions are very valuable.
Click to expand...
Don’t get me wrong, I am really enjoying her book.

The ICXC NIKA is, indeed, Greek for Jesus Christ Conquers. As far as I know (I don’t know Greek) it is the same set of letters imprinted on the blessed loaf in the Orthodox church before it is consecrated. I’ve never seen it with an S, I’ve always seen it as IC XC NI KA.

I even once had a small bumper sticker on my car that had a Greek cross and around it IC XC NI KA
[/quote]
 
I have a friend. Fr Bob.

I have heard him speak of happiness and how it is achieved.

One time in a classroom at Seattle U.
One time in a lecture hall at Gonzaga U.
One time on a retreat in another lecture hall.
He has also expanded greatly the ideas presented in these speachs in a book (“healing the culture”). People are always asking for a repeat because it is a really good sermon/lecture/talk/speech.

If one person were to write it down and call it the sermon in the classroom and another write it down and call it the retreat reflexion, who would be wrong?

Jesus probably gave instruction on how to live many times throughout the years of his ministry.
Sometimes on a hill,
sometime in a hall,
sometimes on a plain
but never on a plane.

The talk would vary in details each time it was presented. Those who heard it once would want to hear it again. When you write it down, which one will you record. I would probably record the first time I heard it, that impressed me the most.

If one performs miracles often (that is what attracted the crowds), noone needs a complete list of every miracle, so when you have to write his CV, you select the ones you found most impressive. Your writting had to fit on a standard form (sheepskin or something, I forget, but there was a standard size for written material)

So when you see differences between gospel accounts, remember, no-one can record all that happened in 3 years in a book as small as the bible, let alone something as small as a single gospel. These are just highlights according to what the author felt was most appropriate to include in his telling of the Good News.
 
NoelFitz said:
Icxcnika

Does it matter if the sermon was on a mount or in a plain, whether Jesus stood up or sat down when he gave it?
Click to expand...
Yes. The fact that it’s on the Mount in Matthew links it to the giving of the law by Moses on Mt. Sinai. Sitting is the posture of a teacher (rabbi). The Pope still does this, teaches ex cathedra - from his chair.

Luke 6:17 has the Sermon on the Plain and Jesus stands to deliver it. In Matthew 5:1, Jesus “went up on the mountain, and when he sat down his disciples came to him.”

Everything in the Holy Scriptures matters and is there for a reason.
 
Mea Culpa

I wrote:
Does it matter if the sermon was on a mount or in a plain, whether Jesus stood up or sat down when he gave it?
Click to expand...
You say Yes, it does matter. So if it matters where was the sermon given, on a mound or in a plain?
 
NoelFitz said:
Mea Culpa

I wrote:

You say Yes, it does matter. So if it matters where was the sermon given, on a mound or in a plain?
Click to expand...
As Evan posted, probably both. Matthew was writing for a mostly Jewish audience, so the Holy Spirit inspired him to emphasize things that would link Jesus to the OT prophesies of a coming Messiah, like standing on a Mountain to give his new Law (9 beautitudes), and sitting like a rabbi to do it. Luke was writing for a mostly Gentile audience, so the Holy Spirit inspired him to have Jesus on a plain and standing because that is what they would have associated with teachers (like Greek philosophers, etc.)
 
Evan said:
I have a friend. Fr Bob.

I have heard him speak of happiness and how it is achieved.

One time in a classroom at Seattle U.
One time in a lecture hall at Gonzaga U.
One time on a retreat in another lecture hall.
He has also expanded greatly the ideas presented in these speachs in a book (“healing the culture”). People are always asking for a repeat because it is a really good sermon/lecture/talk/speech.

If one person were to write it down and call it the sermon in the classroom and another write it down and call it the retreat reflexion, who would be wrong?

Jesus probably gave instruction on how to live many times throughout the years of his ministry.
Sometimes on a hill,
sometime in a hall,
sometimes on a plain
but never on a plane.

The talk would vary in details each time it was presented. Those who heard it once would want to hear it again. When you write it down, which one will you record. I would probably record the first time I heard it, that impressed me the most.

If one performs miracles often (that is what attracted the crowds), noone needs a complete list of every miracle, so when you have to write his CV, you select the ones you found most impressive. Your writting had to fit on a standard form (sheepskin or something, I forget, but there was a standard size for written material)

So when you see differences between gospel accounts, remember, no-one can record all that happened in 3 years in a book as small as the bible, let alone something as small as a single gospel. These are just highlights according to what the author felt was most appropriate to include in his telling of the Good News.
Click to expand...
But it seems to me that there are enough differences between the two accounts to lead one to believe they are different events. After all, who would leave out walking on water?
 
Mea Culpa,

are you claiming that, in fact, there were two different sermons, in which Jesus said essentially the same things?
 
NoelFitz said:
Mea Culpa,

are you claiming that, in fact, there were two different sermons, in which Jesus said essentially the same things?
Click to expand...
The Sermon on the Plain in Luke is different than the Sermon on the Mount in Matthew. There are 4 “blessed are” beatitudes, and 4 “woe to” statements, not the 9 beatitudes of Matthew’s Sermon on the Mount. So either they were two different sermons, or Matthew and Luke were emphasizing different parts of the same sermon, or their sources differed on what was actually said and done.
 
A church document which addresses many of these issues is The Pontifical Biblical Commission’s *Instruction on the Historical Truth of the Gospels *(available online).

It discusses such things as:

*…was committed to writing by the sacred authors in four Gospels for the benefit of the churches, with a method suited to the peculiar purpose which each (author) set for himself. **From the many things handed down they selected some things, reduced others to a synthesis, (still) others they explicated as they kept in mind the situation of the churches. ***

And:

…the Evangelists, in passing on the words and deeds of our Saviour, explained these now in one context, now in another, depending on (their) usefulness to the readers. Consequently, let the exegete seek out the meaning intended by the Evangelist in narrating a saying or a deed in a certain way or in placing it in a certain context. For the truth of the story is not at all affected by the fact that the Evangelists relate the words and deeds of the Lord in a different order, and express his sayings not literally but differently, while preserving (their) sense.
 
ICXCNIKA said:
But it seems to me that there are enough differences between the two accounts to lead one to believe they are different events. After all, who would leave out walking on water?
Click to expand...
The point of the story of walking on water, was not that miracle, but the admonition to have a firm faith. It was Peter’s failure to walk on the water.

Mark’s gospel is attributed to Peter and, in his humility, included these ‘embarassing’ failures while he was preaching. The other apostles tended, out of respect, to not cite such actions or use Peter as the example of one who did not measure up to Jesus’ standards.

Keep in mind, the Gospels are given to teach us the faith, not to give a biography of Jesus. If he preached the same thing 100 times over 3 years, the Gospels would not need to detail each account. Remember, these are not biographies, but a preaching of the Good News brought by the Word of God.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top