Errancy of Mark 1:2?

[Ambrosian]

And you think your response is not sarcastic and condescending??

How so? There was absolutely no sarcasm in that whole thing! I mean what I ask and say with my whole heart!

I think I’m asking a crucially important question about the truth of Christianity, looking for “Catholic Answers”. When I say “hmm that doesn’t sound rigorous enough”, it is suggested that I disagree with the Church. Why don’t people just answer the question, instead of insinuate that no answer will be good enough for me? Saint Jerome had doubts, but was he a disobedient man? It doesn’t seem so…

I just want to know why this or that seems out of place, is all.

EDIT: I was referring to lines like “Maybe we should all just sleep in next Sunday, right?”, and here I am being called sarcastic and condescending.

 

[Timothysis]

The gospels and the bible itself are not literal history books in the sense that we understand history today. It is erroneous to assume that Mark is trying to write an accurate, historically correct work complete with accurate quotes from the ancient prophets instead of trying to set down in writing the wondrous events to which he was a witness. Mark, along with the other evangelists, were not writing history, theology or biographical works per se, even though there are elements of each in their books. Theirs is a spiritual work of faith. To expect it to pass scrutiny in the way that we expect a book of “facts” to be scrutinized today is to miss the point.

Remember that St. Jerome translated the word “maiden” as “virgin” in his vulgate translation of Isiah, even though the Hebrew word in Isiah is “maiden.” This doesn’t negate his work in the same way that Mark’s work is not compromised.