Honest question - why aren't they the same? Which one do we take literally and which is the metaphor?
2007-08-07 11:27:01 · 18 answers · asked by Anonymous in Society & Culture ➔ Religion & Spirituality
If it's a different perspective, why do the facts differ - time on cross before dying, last words, who found the tomb empty, etc.? How, exactly, can those differ based on "perspective?"
2007-08-07 11:36:05 · update #1
Well, you've heard of the game "telephone," right? Well, it's kind of like that, except that some of the apostles -- possibly all of them -- just made stuff up instead of repeating what they heard.
I hope this helps!
2007-08-07 11:29:26 · answer #1 · answered by Anonymous · 3⤊ 4⤋
Get four people to witness a car crash and see if those eye witnesses come up with an exact account. Four individuals that have different priorities report what is most important to them. They all say Jesus died on the cross and was put in a tomb, sealed and guarded. They also say when the tomb was visited the tomb was empty.
2007-08-07 11:41:39 · answer #2 · answered by ? 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋
For the same reason that when several people witness any incident, they all have different versions of what they witnessed. It's called differing perspectives. People include and exclude what they believe are important or not as important when telling others what they saw/heard. Also, they may include additional/different details depending on the audience as well. Same with the New Testament.
2007-08-07 11:31:06 · answer #3 · answered by Be me 5 · 1⤊ 0⤋
they differ slightly becaues they were written by 4 different authors with different purposes. Mark was written for the Romans, Matthew for the Jews, John for everyone, and Luke for the gentiles. The 4 gospels are like 4 different news stations each showing the same story each in their own way. They are all interpreted literally and truthfully. God bless.
2007-08-07 11:30:41 · answer #4 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 0⤋
I didn't know there were different accounts, I know there are various accounts by different apostles, but was not aware there was any significant difference. The fact that there is more than one account gives the legal requirement of two or more witnesses to prove an issue.
2007-08-07 11:39:05 · answer #5 · answered by ? 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
You must remember none of this was written until 3 or 4 hundred years after the death of Jesus, and it is because of that, it makes the bible vary controversial, it's credibility is falling apart daily by intelligent people that can separate reality from mythical fantasies.
2007-08-07 11:46:47 · answer #6 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
If you put 10 people in a room and have a person come in and rob someone you will get 10 different versions. All can be right, just seen in a different way.
2007-08-07 11:35:18 · answer #7 · answered by Fish <>< 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋
The accounts are not different its the same account "The
crucifixion" just told from a different perspective.
God Bless
2007-08-07 11:32:55 · answer #8 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 1⤋
They are all made up by different folks who never even met any witnesses firsthand.
Truth is so far from the story that we wouldn't recognize it anymore.
Best example is that George Washington never even had a cherry tree let alone chopped one down but a couple hundred years made a myth out of that one.
2007-08-07 11:30:13 · answer #9 · answered by Anonymous · 2⤊ 2⤋
It's just like if you asked two WW2 vets to give their account of WW2. You expect the same story?
2007-08-07 11:40:55 · answer #10 · answered by Steve Amato 6 · 0⤊ 0⤋
All accounts were written decades after the event--stories tend to grow with time.
2007-08-07 11:30:21 · answer #11 · answered by huffyb 6 · 2⤊ 1⤋