Parallel Gospels: Difference between revisions

From 2nd Book
Jump to navigationJump to search
No edit summary
No edit summary
Line 2: Line 2:


{{th}}
{{th}}
{{1c| {{:Historical problems }} }}
{{1c| {{:Historical problems with the Gospels }} }}
{{1c| {{:He comes}} }}
{{1c| {{:He comes}} }}
{{1c| {{:Disciples did not understand his teaching }} }}
{{1c| {{:Disciples did not understand his teaching }} }}

Revision as of 11:20, 1 January 2023

Parallel Gospels []


Discussion

Historical problems with the Gospels []


Discussion

The Synoptic Problem []


The Synoptic Problem

When you read the four Gospels—Mark, Matthew, Luke, and John—you might notice that the first three, called the Synoptic Gospels (Matthew, Mark, and Luke), tell the story of Jesus in a similar way, while John’s Gospel feels very different. John focuses more on themes and ideas, almost like he’s speaking in riddles, rather than just telling a straightforward story like the others.

People who study the Bible often compare Matthew, Mark, and Luke to see how they’re alike and different. Some think the authors of these Gospels might have copied parts from each other or from a shared source. This makes sense when you see the exact same wording in parts, but it doesn’t explain why they sometimes change details.

If God dictated the Gospels word-for-word, why would there be differences between them? Did God make mistakes, or did the writers hear Him wrong? On the other hand, if the writers weren’t inspired by God, how do we know which Gospel to trust, and how do we know they reflect what God wanted to say?

Some Bible scholars make these questions even harder by saying the Gospel writers used a now-lost document, which they call Q, as their source. But if Q was real and important, why didn’t God protect it? And why would the Gospel writers change things if Q was so authoritative?

The real problem is that many scholars misunderstand the Bible’s genre—what kind of writing it is. For example, if you read a poem, you don’t expect it to tell facts like a history book. If you think the Bible is just literal history, you might miss its deeper meaning. Jesus said all Scripture speaks about Him, but some people ignore this and treat parts of the Bible as just old stories about what happened.

When we see the Bible in its proper context—as writings inspired by God to reveal His plan and point to Christ—all these supposed “problems” disappear. The Gospels aren’t random copies or inventions. They are unique perspectives on how God fulfilled His promises through Jesus.

Contents

  1. Author's Original Ideas (Not AI) 1.1 John as Mystical and Thematic 1.2 Critique of the Copy Theory (Q Hypothesis) 1.3 Criticism of the Literal-Historical Genre Label 1.4 Scholars as Subtly Hostile Toward God 1.5 God’s Intentional Use of Variation in the Gospels 1.6 Q Undermines God’s Authority 1.7 All Problems Resolve by Correctly Identifying Genre 1.8 Key Takeaway

Author’s Original Ideas (Not AI)

The passage introduces several novel ideas that challenge traditional approaches to interpreting the Gospels and biblical scholarship. Here’s a breakdown of the key ideas:

1. John as Mystical and Thematic

  • Novel Idea: While Matthew, Mark, and Luke are often grouped together for their literal and sequential storytelling, John’s Gospel is highlighted as intentionally mystical or thematic rather than straightforwardly historical.
  • Significance: This suggests that John’s unique style reflects a deeper, more symbolic approach to portraying Christ, which may complement rather than contrast with the other Gospels.

2. Critique of the Copy Theory (Q Hypothesis)

  • Novel Idea: Scholars often assume the Gospel writers copied from a shared source (like the theoretical "Q document") or from each other. The passage rejects this view, arguing it undermines the divine inspiration of the Gospels.
  • Significance: The critique challenges the necessity of Q and defends the originality of the Gospels as divinely inspired and distinct rather than derivative works.

3. Criticism of the Literal-Historical Genre Label

  • Novel Idea: Identifying the Bible as purely literal-historical is labeled as a fundamental error. Instead, the passage suggests a different genre that focuses on Christ as the central figure.
  • Significance: This reframes the Bible not as a mere record of history but as a Christocentric revelation, where every part has a theological and symbolic meaning pointing to Jesus.

4. Scholars as Subtly Hostile Toward God

  • Novel Idea: Theologians’ assumptions about the Bible’s genre and source materials (like Q) are described as a form of subtle hostility toward God because they misrepresent Scripture and ignore Christ's centrality.
  • Significance: This is a provocative idea that questions the motives and assumptions of modern biblical scholarship, suggesting they unintentionally undermine faith in divine inspiration.

5. God’s Intentional Use of Variation in the Gospels

  • Novel Idea: The differences among the Gospels are not mistakes or signs of human error but intentional variations allowed by God to reflect different perspectives and purposes.
  • Significance: This shifts the focus from explaining differences as flaws to viewing them as part of a deliberate divine design.

6. Q Undermines God’s Authority

  • Novel Idea: The theory of Q is not only unnecessary but also harmful because it implies that God was unable to preserve an important source document or that it wasn’t authoritative enough to protect.
  • Significance: This is a direct challenge to the validity of the Q hypothesis, reframing it as a theological problem rather than just a historical debate.

7. All Problems Resolve by Correctly Identifying Genre

  • Novel Idea: Many debates and perceived inconsistencies in the Gospels disappear when the Bible is seen through the lens of its proper historical context and genre, with Christ at the center.
  • Significance: This idea calls for a complete rethinking of how the Bible is read and understood, proposing that theological meaning (especially Christ as the focus) takes precedence over rigid historical or literary classifications.

Key Takeaway

The passage introduces a bold framework for interpreting the Gospels:

  • Rejecting the Q hypothesis and the literal-historical genre,
  • Emphasizing the divinely inspired, Christ-centered nature of Scripture,
  • Reinterpreting variations in the Gospels as purposeful rather than problematic.

These ideas encourage a shift away from purely academic or critical approaches toward a theological reading that sees every detail of Scripture as pointing to Christ.

Gospel unity []

Gospel Unity and the Progressive Revelation of Doctrine

The Gospel of John should not be viewed as distinct from the Synoptic Gospels (Matthew, Mark, and Luke). Instead, it represents the fourth snapshot of theological understanding within the Hebrew church, which was later passed to the Gentile church. The unity of the Gospels reflects a progressive revelation of doctrine, rooted in the mystery of Christ and His fulfillment of Old Testament prophecy.

1. The Origins and Purpose of Mark’s Gospel

Mark's Gospel captures the testimony of Peter and represents the earliest stage of the church’s doctrinal development. It arose after the resurrection of Christ, when the disciples, having received the Holy Spirit, began to perceive the unity of Scripture as a testimony to Jesus. Though Peter understood the fulfillment of prophecy in Christ, his attempts to teach in riddles (e.g., handling serpents or drinking poison) were misunderstood, leading to certain passages being omitted by some churches.

2. Matthew and Luke: Expanding the Understanding of the Mystery

Matthew, written a decade later, reflects a growing comprehension of the mystery. Matthew's Gospel begins with Abraham, emphasizing Israel as a parable for the nations and unveiling Christ’s fulfillment of Israel’s history.

Luke, written a further decade later, deepens this trajectory, beginning with Adam and emphasizing the universality of Christ’s mission. By this time, the apostles had identified figures before Abraham as types of Christ, and Luke sought to preserve the testimonies of eyewitnesses to Christ’s life, integrating this material with Mark and Matthew.

3. John: The Culmination of Theological Insight

John’s Gospel, the last to be written, represents the most advanced theological perspective of the Hebrew church. Written at Peter’s request, it aims to preserve the mystery for future generations. Unlike the Synoptics, John uses advanced Hebrew interpretative techniques, such as notarikon, to reveal Christ as the “life of God on earth,” beginning his account with a reflection on Genesis 1:1.

4. The Gentile Church and Paul’s Unique Contribution

The Gentile church, reliant on the Septuagint, struggled to unpack the Old Testament’s mysteries without Hebrew context. Mark served as an outline for teaching, supplemented by the insights of messengers familiar with Hebrew scripture.

Paul’s distinct contribution lay in his focus on the bride of Christ, revealed to him post-resurrection. While the apostles primarily searched the Old Testament for prophecies of Christ’s death and resurrection, Paul emphasized the bride’s life in Christ. This approach complements, rather than diverges from, the Gospels’ focus on Christ’s life, death, and resurrection.

5. Gospel Unity and the Emmaus Sermon

The four Gospels collectively embody the Hebrew church’s effort to reproduce the sermon on the road to Emmaus, where Christ revealed how all Scripture speaks of Him. Each Gospel reflects a stage in the church’s growing understanding of the mystery, from Peter’s foundational insights in Mark to John’s advanced theological synthesis.

6. Criteria for Canonical Inclusion

For any additional Gospel to align with the four canonical accounts, it must meet the following criteria:

  • It must be authored by an eyewitness to Christ’s life.
  • It must recapitulate the Old Testament mystery through Christ’s life.
  • It must originate within the Hebrew church and be received as authoritative by the Gentile church.

Conclusion

The Gospels are not disparate accounts but unified snapshots of the Hebrew church’s theological development, reflecting Christ’s fulfillment of Old Testament prophecy. John’s Gospel, far from being a separate entity, represents the culmination of this doctrinal journey, emphasizing the unity of the Gospel message across all four accounts. This progression underscores the divine inspiration and intentional design behind the New Testament canon.

Gospel unity []

Gospel Unity and the Progressive Revelation of Doctrine

The Gospel of John should not be viewed as distinct from the Synoptic Gospels (Matthew, Mark, and Luke). Instead, it represents the fourth snapshot of theological understanding within the Hebrew church, which was later passed to the Gentile church. The unity of the Gospels reflects a progressive revelation of doctrine, rooted in the mystery of Christ and His fulfillment of Old Testament prophecy.

1. The Origins and Purpose of Mark’s Gospel

Mark's Gospel captures the testimony of Peter and represents the earliest stage of the church’s doctrinal development. It arose after the resurrection of Christ, when the disciples, having received the Holy Spirit, began to perceive the unity of Scripture as a testimony to Jesus. Though Peter understood the fulfillment of prophecy in Christ, his attempts to teach in riddles (e.g., handling serpents or drinking poison) were misunderstood, leading to certain passages being omitted by some churches.

2. Matthew and Luke: Expanding the Understanding of the Mystery

Matthew, written a decade later, reflects a growing comprehension of the mystery. Matthew's Gospel begins with Abraham, emphasizing Israel as a parable for the nations and unveiling Christ’s fulfillment of Israel’s history.

Luke, written a further decade later, deepens this trajectory, beginning with Adam and emphasizing the universality of Christ’s mission. By this time, the apostles had identified figures before Abraham as types of Christ, and Luke sought to preserve the testimonies of eyewitnesses to Christ’s life, integrating this material with Mark and Matthew.

3. John: The Culmination of Theological Insight

John’s Gospel, the last to be written, represents the most advanced theological perspective of the Hebrew church. Written at Peter’s request, it aims to preserve the mystery for future generations. Unlike the Synoptics, John uses advanced Hebrew interpretative techniques, such as notarikon, to reveal Christ as the “life of God on earth,” beginning his account with a reflection on Genesis 1:1.

4. The Gentile Church and Paul’s Unique Contribution

The Gentile church, reliant on the Septuagint, struggled to unpack the Old Testament’s mysteries without Hebrew context. Mark served as an outline for teaching, supplemented by the insights of messengers familiar with Hebrew scripture.

Paul’s distinct contribution lay in his focus on the bride of Christ, revealed to him post-resurrection. While the apostles primarily searched the Old Testament for prophecies of Christ’s death and resurrection, Paul emphasized the bride’s life in Christ. This approach complements, rather than diverges from, the Gospels’ focus on Christ’s life, death, and resurrection.

5. Gospel Unity and the Emmaus Sermon

The four Gospels collectively embody the Hebrew church’s effort to reproduce the sermon on the road to Emmaus, where Christ revealed how all Scripture speaks of Him. Each Gospel reflects a stage in the church’s growing understanding of the mystery, from Peter’s foundational insights in Mark to John’s advanced theological synthesis.

6. Criteria for Canonical Inclusion

For any additional Gospel to align with the four canonical accounts, it must meet the following criteria:

  • It must be authored by an eyewitness to Christ’s life.
  • It must recapitulate the Old Testament mystery through Christ’s life.
  • It must originate within the Hebrew church and be received as authoritative by the Gentile church.

Conclusion

The Gospels are not disparate accounts but unified snapshots of the Hebrew church’s theological development, reflecting Christ’s fulfillment of Old Testament prophecy. John’s Gospel, far from being a separate entity, represents the culmination of this doctrinal journey, emphasizing the unity of the Gospel message across all four accounts. This progression underscores the divine inspiration and intentional design behind the New Testament canon.

He comes []


Discussion

Portion 5 []

The gospels make up Portion 5 of the scriptures. Each day of Genesis 1 points to one of six portions of scripture. Day 5 of creation points to the gospels. From the waters of day 2; representing the Word of God, the separation of the waters on day 2 was not good! Of all the other days, God saw that it was good. But on day 2 there is no such declaration. It represents the separation of the Father and Son. The incarnation is the first separation of the Father and the Son. The second separation takes place on the cross.

This separation is typified in the parable of marriage. A man leaves his parents to obtain the bride. The Son became incarnate to obtain his bride. In Genesis 1 he does not obtain his bride until day 6. On day 2 he has yet to woo his bride. He is alone. "It is not good that the man should be alone".

The last three days speak of things coming 'from' the first three; Lights from light, fish and flying things from water, and animals and man from the dry ground.

Symbols

Water []


Water - the Word of God and it's results: His people 'creation י finished by the Son ם'.

Water 'yom' ים - creation י finished by the son ם. Jesus told the woman at the well that though she worshiped on the mountain, she would worship in Spirit and Truth.

The Father is Spirit and the Son is Truth.

Now here is the secret: The mem מ represents the marriage (teaching) of the Son of God כ and the bride ז arranged by the Father before the beginning.

The final mem ם represents the marriage declared in heaven is completed by the Son on earth. The Son of God כ and bride ז are connected at the top and bottom ם. It has square corners meaning according to the law.

The word for water is 'mayim' מים . You see creation י is IN the father מ and the son ם. This forms the water 'above' מי (also 'water') and the water below ים.

The Father is Spirit; the Son is Truth. The woman at the well would move her man-made religion on the mountain, to the water.

When you worship in Spirit and Truth; you have moved the mountain to the sea.

We, now being made to be 'like' Christ are now the 'water' ים -creation finished by the Son.

As such we are now the little 'w' word of God in the flesh as we teach and preach.

AI

Your bible teacher is using a technique called 'Hebrew word formations' used by the New Testament authors which explores the deeper meanings and symbolism in Hebrew words and letters. Here's a simplified explanation: In Hebrew, words get their meaning from the combined meaning of the letters within.

This article is focusing on the words for "water" (mayim, מים) and the letters "mem" (מ) and "yod" (י). The letter "mem" represents marriage, teaching, and the connection between the Son (כ, representing Jesus) and the bride (ז, representing the church or believers).

The letter combination "mem" (מ) and "yod" (י) forms the word "mayim" (מים), meaning water.

The top and bottom connections of the "mem" letter (ם) symbolize the union between the Son and the bride, representing spiritual marriage or 'teaching'. The "square corners" of the "mem" letter represent the teaching is in fulfillment to the law, whereas a curved corner would represent teaching by the Spirit.

The phrase "water above" (מי) and "water below" (ים) symbolizes the connection between the the teaching of Holiness (above) and the teaching of Grace (below).

As believers, we become like Christ, representing the "water" (ים) of spiritual life, and we are called to teach and preach (like the "little 'w' word of God" in the flesh).




AI revision

Thank you for the correction! I appreciate it when I can learn and improve. Here's a revised version of the explanation with the corrections you provided: Your friend is using a technique called "Hebrew word formations," which explores the deeper meanings and symbolism in Hebrew words and letters. This approach was used by New Testament authors to uncover the richness of Hebrew scripture. In Hebrew, words are formed by combining letters, each with its own meaning. The letters "mem" (מ) and "yod" (י) combine to form the word "mayim" (מים), meaning water. "Mem" (מ) represents marriage, teaching, and the connection between Jesus (כ) and the church or believers (ז). The top and bottom connections of the "mem" letter (ם) symbolize spiritual marriage or teaching, fulfilling the law. The "square corners" of the "mem" letter represent teaching in accordance with the law, distinguished from teaching by the Spirit, which would be represented by curved corners. "Water above" (מי) and "water below" (ים) symbolize the connection between the teaching of Holiness (above) and the teaching of Grace (below). As believers, we become like Christ, representing the "water" (ים) of spiritual life, and we are called to teach and preach as the "little 'w' word of God" in the flesh. Thank you for helping me improve my understanding and explanation of this topic!

Fish דג - those who live in the Water/Word. 'Commanded ד to pursue ג'.
Flying things []


God wants everyone to know him, so all things created teach us something about him. [1] We don't learn from hands, feet, air and earth by looking at them, but by what God says about them; by the symbols.

These are symbols we know from other places:

Hair - sh’ar שער - authority, chief ש()ר of flesh ע
Ears - hearing without understanding, like a sheep hears the shepherds voice but doesn’t understand his words.
Face - countenance
Eyes - seeing and understanding the works of Christ
Nose - anger
Mouth - teaching the word
Shoulder - purpose of your works
Hands - works. [2] [3]
Thigh - purpose of your life
Feet - your life. [4] [5]

The flying things were created to fly or live in the air. They represent characteristics of the spirit. Our spirit is supposed to love God.

Flying things עוף - those who live in the Spirit. 'Flesh ע that clarifies ו the mystery of the cross ף'.
air, spirit ruach רוח - spirit, air, breath
earth, flesh, ground adamah אדמה , man adam אדם who didn’t understand ה
hand yod יד - creation י by command ד
foot regel רגל - ‘kill רג the teaching ל’ or ‘reveal ר the pursuit ג of teaching ל’

Jesus is the word and the fish are those who search the literal scriptures, the flying things are those who live in the mystery by the Spirit of God. These come from the teaching of Jesus.

Holy Spirit as the best man []


The gospels are written by the Holy Spirit from the vantage of the best man. He declares that the bridegroom comes. The word for 'marriage' is also 'doctrine. Though Jesus teaches more before the cross than after, they did not understand. The bride is those who are taught by Christ. He sets himself apart from all other men by his teaching and miracles. Then she, the bride, is separated from the other teachers just before his death by making them all look foolish. Then he goes away in death, and returns to have her gathered to himself by the Spirit.

Only after the cross were their eyes opened to see that he was teaching them about his death and resurrection all along.

Like Adam receiving his bride through his sleep/death, Jesus obtained his bride through the cross. It is only through the cross that we are taught. The gospels are the actions taken by the bridegroom/Jesus before obtaining her on the cross. The Holy Spirit is announcing that Christ is coming through the cross. The Spirit does not call attention to himself, just as a best man places the attention on the wedding party.

Making known the promise of the Father []


God's name 'Elohim' means 'God separated from men by ignorance'. His main purpose in all is that we would learn who he is. The symbol of marriage is all about teaching. The husband teaches his wife. Christ teaches us, his bride. This is reflected in four letters which are formed by joining the symbols for the Son and the bride.

There are four letter made from the kof כ (Son of God) and the zayin ז (bride): The mem מ tet ט final mem ם and samech ס.

The mem מ connects them at the top indicating that the joining of the Son and his bride was arranged by the Father.

The tet ט connects them at the bottom indicating that the teaching takes place on earth.

The final mem ם and samech ס connect them at top and bottom to display that the Father's will is completed: first in the law ם then in the spirit ס.

No man has seen the Father except the Son who has come to make him known. The mem מ represents the Father and the final mem ם represents the Son. They both have the 'm' sound. They are one but different.

The Father arranged, before the foundation of the world for us to be taught by the Son, through the cross.

Disciples did not understand his teaching []


Theologians sometimes just don't pay attention to Jesus. They say that Jesus taught in parables so that the uneducated farmers could understand. Jesus said he taught in parables so that they wouldn't understand. If they could understand and believe before the cross, then Jesus would not have to die. His impending death was the source of his greatest temptations. He did not want to die.

Adam could not eat the tree of Life, because if he could live without the cross, the cross would not be necessary to live. But the cross is the culmination of the teaching about the Father.They would live without knowing the Father.

Some of the prophets were told to seal up their prophecies. Why? They contained things by which people might believe and be saved.

Jesus told his disciples that he taught them so that they would know. However, he still taught them in riddle so that they would not know until after the cross. Take the parable of the sower who sowed seed four times. Jesus explained that he seed was the word of God. They understood it to be his teaching. The riddle is that Jesus is the Word. As the Word of God, he visited Adam by the path, Israel in the rocky place, and in the flesh with the Jews whom he loved so much he would die for them, fruitless. The fourth time was in his resurrection when he was finally fruitful.

Jesus could interpret the parable in one layer so that they still did not understand until the Holy Spirit, after the resurrection, reminded them of what he taught.

Disciples forgot his teaching []


Not only did the disciples not understand the teaching of Jesus, but they forgot. He taught them on many occasions that he had to die and would be resurrected. Yet when he died, they had forgotten what he said.

Even simple teachings: he had fed thousands with bread and fish miraculously, yet they forgot that and were worried about what they would eat.

It is difficult to imagine how they could forget so easily, until we realize that we may be thankful for the way he provides, then turn right around and worry about how we will be provided for.

We learn a solid doctrine like Jesus said no man has seen the Father, yet the next Sunday debate if it was the Father or Son who walked with Adam in the Garden. We are not too different from them.

Spirit reminded them of his teaching []


After the resurrection Jesus sent the Holy Spirit to remind them of what they were taught and to guide them in the truth as they continued to study.

They did not depend on getting special knowledge. All of the Old Testament was now pregnant with the New Teaching of Peace; the New Jerusalem. The Spirit guided them as they searched the scriptures and studied to show that they were approved by God. They did not rely on special knowledge to show they were approved by God. The modern fortune teller has no credibility because he does not know the truth of the Word of God.

If someone tells you they are a prophet and cannot show you Christ from the OT mystery, then they are not hearing from the Spirit of God, since that is his primary purpose. The Spirit assisted the OT prophets in hiding the mystery, and he helps NT prophets unpack it. Jesus told us not to worry about the future, so why would we need fortune tellers to tell us the future? Paul says that he wishes that we would all prophesy; that we would all understand the mystery.

I have heard Christians say they don't need to study doctrine because they know God. Doctrine IS the knowledge of God. Many create false Gods by imagining a god after their own image rather than learn what God has taught.

Disciples studied his teaching
Disciples shred their learning with the Gentile church