Ultimately, both Matthew and Luke’s gospels have different and and even inaccurate historical information in their birth narratives of Jesus. However, as you saw from the two main examples I gave, the chances are that both authors were more focused on showing the reader just how important Jesus was going to be in relation to Gods kingdom, the Jewish people, as well as the Gentiles. In the end, the gospels were probably not written more to show deeper meaning than accurate historical information. Works Cited Coogan, Michael D., et al. The new Oxford annotated Bible : with the Apocrypha.
The Gospel of John was written between 90-100 ADE. A late book in the New Testament, it deals with different problems than the early Gospel of Mark. Although the book does not try to stray from the special traditions of Christianity (after all, The Christian Church has become strong by this time), the book the Life of Jesus, to meet the needs of the community in 100 ADE. What were the changes that the Johannine Community had to deal with; and, how does the Gospel of John differ from earlier gospels to deal with these changes? The entire new testament is apocalyptic writing, by authors who (obviously) believe in the Parousia.
The answer is unclear by the author but we must acknowledge the manipulation of information as Matthew trying to prove the Jewish heritage of Jesus, born of the spirit, adopted son of Joseph, son of David and son of Abraham. Matth... ... middle of paper ... ...nd reflection on the complex figure of this teacher with such powerful expression pondering deep theological interpretation. Matthew asserts the new community with the past tying Christianity to the traditions of the old, ensuring the Christian compilation of the bible in two testaments. As a separate study it would be interesting to compare Matthews theology and Christology to the other gospel writers, especially intriguing for me would be a direct comparison with Paul. Works Cited Matthew’s Christian-Jewish Community Anthony J.Saldarini Matthew John Riches The New Moses A Matthean Typology Dale C Allison Tyndale New Testament Commentaries Matthew R.T.France The Theology Of The Gospel Of Matthew Ulrich Luz What are they saying about Matthew?
The point is the author was likely to be of Jewish origin, but he wrote his book in Ancient Greek. The Gospel of Matthew was likely to be composed in Hebrew and then translated into Ancient Greek. Hebrew version of the gospel did not survive, and the Greek translations could contain errors and misinterpretations. One of the gospels, Q gospel, written by Matthew could be rather a collection of the Jesus ' sayings, logia. Disciple Matthew had been a taxman before becoming the Disciple of Jesus (“St.
The New Testament is a collection of different spiritual literary works, which includes the Gospels, a history of early church, the epistles of Paul, other epistles and apocalypse. Without deeply thinking or researching of the chronological order of the Gospels, a reader should not have problem to observe that the Gospels begin with the Gospel of Matthew, and to notice that there are many common areas, including content and literary characteristics, among the first three Gospels, the Gospel of Matthew, Mark, and Luke. The reason that the Gospel of Matthew is in the first place among the four Gospels is due to the early church tradition that Matthew was the earliest one who recorded Lord’s word and Jesus stories. In the fifth century, Augustine of Hippo claimed that "the canonical order of the four Gospels was the chronological order." In the late-eighteenth century, J. J. Griesbach stated that The Gospel of Mark was a short version of the combination of the Gospel of Matthew and the Gospel of Luke.
Even if we discard the fact that our earliest Septuagint manuscripts used the Tetragrammaton, we know that the Septuagint was translated from the Hebrew Scriptures. The Hebrew Scriptures used the divine name. We have evidence of this in the Dead Sea Scrolls and the Masoretic text. Therefore, at some point the translators of the Septuagint either translated the Tetragrammaton as Kurios or scribes replaced the name at a later date. Now, using our current manuscript copies of the New Testament that use only Kurios, and because the quotations and other references to the God of the Hebrew Scriptures in the NT are from the Septuagint, the intended meaning behind the word Kurios would be the divine name.
Raymond E.Brown contends that John may not have been responsible for all, or parts of the Gospel of John that are available to us today. He begins by stating that in the last two centuries the "majority of scholars shifted towards the position that John was not authored by an eyewitness" He also wrote "Accordingly the present Gospel is thought to involve the work of two hands, an evangelist who composed the body of the Gospel,and a redactor who later made additions." Brown goes on to make a number of statements, some his own thoughts, and some quoting other scholars, which give more indications of his own personal opinion and approach to the matter of authorship. For example, "...a typ... ... middle of paper ... ...ld not be exaggerated." Conclusion: I find it difficult to decide in some of these matters which way I "lean" as the matters concerned are complex and often clouded by the mists of nearly two millenia.
Until years after the resurrection Christianity did not exist, it was simply a branch of Judaism. Jesus was the founder or this sect of Judaism but Paul defines the identitly of Christianity (Dunn, 2011). Many speculate that the letter to Ephesus was pseudonymously written even though... ... middle of paper ... ... 2014). To conclude the research of the letter of Ephesians, it is only reasonable to understand that the author of the epistle may never be determined. Whether the decision is made that Paul did or did not write the letter, it is still known as a Pauline document and corresponds to Paul’s teachings.
The new testament contains four (4) accounts of the story of Jesus’ life, death and resurrection as presented by Matthew, Mark, Luke, John, The 3 accounts are similar, while Johns bible presents Jesus in a unique way. These differences exist because Matthew and Luke got their information from Mark and John got his information from another source, maybe John did not have access to the other gospels or he chose not to use them. No one really knows the source of John’s gospel and we don’t know for sure who wrote the gospels. Scholars refer to the authors as Matthew, Mark, Luke & John, this may not even be their real names. The Gospel were not first hand accounts except for Mark.
Comparative Study Final Paper It is from the differences between the Gospel of John and the Gospel of Matthew that one can understand why the Gospel of John is not included in the Synoptic gospels. While there are many similarities between them, there are also numerous differences as well. In the next few pages, I would like to share some of those differences. Right away when one looks at Chapter One of each of these gospels, it is most noticeable from the start a difference in their opening prologues. Matthew begins with Jesus’ genealogy which leads up to His birth while John begins where all things, all creation began and that is in the beginning.