16

There were two thieves reviling Jesus; one then repented. John Chrysostom, who was fluent in, and therefore familiar with, the Koine Greek of the New Testament, made no mention of the use of the grammar with regard to the apparent confusion and contradiction between the gospel accounts. Instead, he noted the following - Now that you may understand what is ...


15

This answer draws on Michael J. Cahill, "Drinking Blood at a Kosher Eucharist? The Sound of Scholarly Silence", Biblical Theology Bulletin 32/4 (2002): 168-181. It should be consulted directly for full discussion and copious further references. OP: Wouldn't Jews be taken aback by the suggestion that they should drink blood? Yes, they would. OP: How ...


12

The other two answers do a good job of answering the question, but I thought it was worth pointing out the actual ban and its explanation: Leviticus 17:10 Explicitly makes your point for you; those who consume the blood of animals are cut off from the Jews, but then verse 11 explains the reason for the ban on blood of animals; drinking blood takes upon ...


10

A Generation is 40 years in Bible. Here are some examples. Numbers 32:13 (ESV) - And the Lord's anger was kindled against Israel, and he made them wander in the wilderness forty years, until all the generation that had done evil in the sight of the Lord was gone. Deuteronomy 1:34-36 (ESV) - And the Lord heard your words and was angered, and he swore, ‘Not ...


9

Jesus had aleady shocked his followers with references to drinking blood in John Chapter 6. "For My flesh is true food, and My blood is true drink" When leads to.. As a result of this many of His disciples withdrew and were not walking with Him anymore. I think we can infer that by the time of the Last Supper, any disciples who had a problem with ...


8

Mark is without doubt the most straightforward of the gospels. The book is short and engaging. It is more critical of the disciples than the other gospel, often in a humorous way. Often Mark includes details that Matthew and Luke choose to leave out, i.e. that the grass was green when the 5000 sat down to eat. Mark often chooses a few stories and tells ...


8

In my understanding, the key arguments put forward for the order Mark > Luke > Matthew (i.e., for "Matthean posteriority") are: the literary observation that Matthew appears to collect, collate, and develop traditions found in Luke (e.g., what appears in Matt 5-7 in the "Sermon on the Mount" is found at various points, and in a more "primitive" form at ...


7

Clearly No Distinction of Being Your core question is "Did the Synoptic writers intend to convey any distinction between διάβολος and σατανᾶς?" If by "distinction," you mean differing personalities (i.e. persons or beings), then I believe you have already answered your own question by noting the fact that Matthew and/or Luke uses διάβολος in places where ...


6

Let's consider for a moment what the Farrer (Mt used Mk, Lk used Mk and Mt) and Wilke (Lk used Mk, Mt used Mk and Lk) theories suggest that the third evangelist in each case did. (For what it's worth, I would regard Kloppenborg's layered Q as a nuanced form of Wilke: he puts the sayings material in the Lucan order, then adds in some para-Marcan material.) ...


5

Prelims. Just for comparison, the three synoptic texts from UBS4: Mt 22:37 ὁ δὲ ἔφη αὐτῷ, Ἀγαπήσεις κύριον τὸν θεόν σου ἐν ὅλῃ τῇ καρδίᾳ σου καὶ ἐν ὅλῃ τῇ ψυχῇ σου καὶ ἐν ὅλῃ τῇ διανοίᾳ σου· Mk 12:30 καὶ ἀγαπήσεις κύριον τὸν θεόν σου ἐξ ὅλης τῆς καρδίας σου καὶ ἐξ ὅλης τῆς ψυχῆς σου καὶ ἐξ ὅλης τῆς διανοίας σου καὶ ἐξ ὅλης τῆς ἰσχύος σου. Lk 10:27 ... ...


5

This is a messianic vision, and David is primarily concerned here with Christ and his place with God, and his Priesthood Authority. I see the first part of your question as having two elements. Element 1, "The Lord says to My Lord" is a conversation between God The Father (Elohim) and Christ The Son (Jesus Christ). Element 2, it was necessary to ...


5

Psalm 110:1 New International Version Of David. A psalm. The LORD says to my lord: "Sit at my right hand until I make your enemies a footstool for your feet." The LORD יְהוָ֨ה ׀ (Yah·weh) Noun - proper - masculine singular Strong's Hebrew 3068: LORD -- the proper name of the God of Israel to my Lord: לַֽאדֹנִ֗י (adoni) Preposition-l | Noun - ...


5

Uta Ranke-Heinemann says, in Putting Away Childish Things, page 7, that the nativity accounts in the Gospels of Matthew and Luke are, with respect to time, place, and circumstances, a collection of legends. She says (page 11) Luke wants to make the birth of Jesus in Bethlehem plausible by fabricating the story of the census. But since he handles the facts ...


4

It is generally accepted that John was the last gospel to be written, in which case it would have been possible, even likely, that the author1 knew one of more of the earlier gospels, whether or not he was influenced by anything in the other gospels. What, then, is important is whether John borrowed from any of the synoptic gospels or whether, in writing his ...


4

This question is hotly debated, and there's no real consensus. There's a very recent monograph on exactly this topic, Goodacre's "Thomas and the gospels". He argues strongly that Thomas is dependent on Matthew and Luke. According to Goodacre in an interview with his publisher, scholars are divided roughly 50/50 on whether Thomas is early and independent ...


4

You have asked about the order being Mark > Luke > Matthew. My answer below addresses the order of Luke being written before even Mark. This arrangement is called Lukan Priority. It is very much a minority opinion. As you know, the prevailing theory in New Testament studies is Markan Priority. It has the most support among scholars. A minority position (...


4

The gospel is: the power of God unto salvation to every one that believeth; to the Jew first, and also to the Greek (Romans 1:16 - KJV). The gospel is the fact that God chose to forgive our ungodly behavior (for we ALL are sinners by birth) and to have us reconciled with Him when in fact we should have deserved death, and the means by which He chose ...


4

The simple answer is, of course they are different, they are describing actions that happened on two separate occasions. One narrates from His birth until 40 days later; while the other tells of events that happened around the age of two. First you have to remember that there were no chapter and verse markers in the original Greek; you can’t always assume ...


4

Relationship of the texts To determine how to reconcile the Gospels accounts, we first need to determine the relationship between the different accounts. The best way to do this is to look at the original Greek. Below are the verses in question. Since a few Biblical scholars also think Luke 10:4 is related, I went ahead and included it too. The Greek is ...


4

There are two possible explanations. One is that the individual Gospel writers did not arrange events in a chronologic order; each one organized the events in a way that made the most sense to their audience or to best fit their theological emphasis. The second is that Jesus did this on more than one occasion and John records the first which took place ...


4

I would answer with just two comments: It is almost certain that since John probably wrote his Gospel almost at the end of the first century and the synoptics were written possible 25 years earlier, John was well aware of them. [The purpose in John composing is account is quite different - it is theological rather than historical as per the synoptics. But ...


3

In the original Hebrew we find the LORD (yud-hey-vahv-hey) says to my Lord (Adonee). The second lord, being in the singular, is referring to a human king or nobleman. In historical context it becomes clear that this psalm, written by David, was meant to be sung by the kohenim during temple liturgy. The kohenim would sing "The LORD says to my lord (king ...


3

As to #1 - Different Quantity of Objects No reconciliation needed across the gospels, because if it is true that Christ said four things, he also said three things. There is no untruth in noting the lesser amount, just a shift in emphasis. Now as far as reconciling four things in the Greek with the three things of the Hebrew text, the Hebrew word לֵבָב (...


3

I would have to agree with everything stated above by Niobius about the style and aims of Mark's gospel. If I may add a little something, it's possible that, while being an accurate account, the tidbit about the naked young man in Mark 14:51 forms a loose inclusio with the fully dressed young man in Mark 16:5. Exactly what this is to emphasize is unsure, but ...


3

The conservative view is that the Gospel of Thomas dates from the second century. This is largely because it demonstrates the existence of Gnostic Christian beliefs and, to some, it is inconceivable that such variant beliefs could have existed so soon after the crucifixion of Jesus. On the other hand, the dominant view among critical scholars is that it is ...


3

Kingdom of heaven is found only in Matthew and it is normally said that Matthew used that phrase because he was writing to a Jewish audience. Two reasons are given why the nature of the audience is significant. One is linguistic as George Eldon Ladd says: The difference between the two phrases is to be explained on linguistic grounds. The Kingdom of ...


3

This is an emphatic NO! Sextus Julius Africancus, a 2nd century historian, wrote that two other non-Christian historians Thallus and Phlegon also wrote about this darkness. During the time of Jesus' death they reported darkness by solar eclipse. Here is what Julius writes in XVIII. [1102]: On the Circumstances Connected with Our Saviour's Passion and ...


3

The most authoritative Church commentators in antiquity understood Jesus here to be referring to the Transfiguration (Matthew 17:1-8; Mark 9:2-8; Luke 9:28-36). It is no coincidence that the Transfiguration is the very next event the Synoptics recount after Jesus says There may be some standing here ... (Matthew 16:28; Mark 9:1; Luke 9:2) - with Matthew and ...


3

Lots of scholars look for alternatives to the traditional Mark-Q priority, but in my view without success. Dennis R. MacDonald wrote a well-researched thesis in Two Shipwrecked Gospels that Luke knew not only Mark, but also Matthew. That would have caused an even bigger stir among critical scholars than his book, The Homeric Epics and the Gospel of Mark, but ...


3

It depends on your definition of gleaning, and what time of year they were doing it. Gleaning is supposed to be done by the poor after the harvesters have gone through the field and gathered in the harvest. From wikipedia: According to the Holiness Code and the Deuteronomic Code of the Torah, farmers should leave the corners of their fields unharvested, ...


Only top voted, non community-wiki answers of a minimum length are eligible