Waarom verskillende opstandingsverhale?

Udo,

Waarom verskil die opstandingsverhale so in Mattheus, Markus, Lukas en Johannes nie? Watter een is die aanvaarbaarste?

Groete

Winkelsmidt

 

Hallo Winkelsmidt

Dit gaan nie hier daaroor dat een verhaal meer aanvaarbaar is as ʼn ander nie; dit is dat mense vanuit verskillende perspektiewe oor dieselfde gebeurtenis verslag doen. Daar is allerlei redes vir waarom die evangelie-skrywers se weergawes sou verskil. Soos die skrywer in die artikel, Why the discrepancies among the resurrection accounts?, aandui:

“Why are they different?  The answer is in part that each author has a different purpose for writing and a different immediate audience, but that recognition in no way means that the authors were making the historical facts fit their particular biases.  The more accurate answer is that the gospel authors experienced the events from different angles (John, Matthew, and perhaps Mark) or received their information from careful research utilizing different eyewitness sources (Luke).  Because they saw what happened from different places, literally and metaphorically, they wrote with different perspectives.”

In terme van beide die juridiese sowel as joernalistieke oogpunt, selfs vandag, is dit byna aksiomaties dat waar die besonderhede in verskillende weergawes van ʼn spesifieke gebeurtenis verskil, dit nie noodwendig op teenstrydigheid of valsheid dui nie (sien Is die Evangelies histories betroubaar? Die kwessie van ‘teenstrydighede’). ʼn Verdere implikasie is dat al is daar verskille in spesifieke details, dit nog steeds moontlik is om die kern van gebeure in breë trekke bo redelike twyfel te bepaal. Om hierdie punt verder te ondersoek, kan jy gerus na die volgende kyk (in volgorde van lengte):

Groete

Udo

Be the first to comment

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.


*


This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.