Can We Trust the Gospels?: Investigating the Reliability of Matthew, Mark, Luke, and John by Roberts Mark D

Author:Roberts, Mark D. [Roberts, Mark D.]
Language: eng
Format: mobi
Tags: ebook
Publisher: Good News Publishers
Published: 2007-06-30T00:00:00+00:00

Examples of Differences among the Gospels

Most of the differences among the Gospels are inconsequential matters of word choice or literary emphasis. But there are some differences that cannot be dismissed as trivial. For example, in Matthew Jesus faces three temptations from the devil: 1) “turn stones into bread”; 2) “throw yourself off the temple”; and 3) “worship me” (see Matt. 4:1–11). Luke’s narrative also includes three temptations, but in a different order: 1) “stones to bread”; 2) “worship me”; and 3) “throw yourself off the temple” (see Luke 4:1–13). Of course many skeptical scholars would deny the historicity of this whole scene because it involves supernatural elements. But those who accept the possibility that this really happened face the peculiar variation in the order of temptations 2 and 3.

Is this a contradiction? I suppose it is if both Matthew and Luke were intending to present the three temptations in the exact order in which they actually occurred. In this case, either Matthew or Luke would be wrong, and it would be fair to refer to the variation between them as a genuine disagreement. But if Matthew and Luke were seeking to present what really happened but in more of a thematic way rather than in chronological order, then it would be unfair to say they contradict each other.

The Gospel writers did, at times, order events by theme rather than chronology. Consider another example. In Mark 6, well into Jesus’ Galilean ministry in this Gospel, there are two crucial events: Jesus’ rejection in his hometown of Nazareth (6:1–6) and the arrest and murder of John the Baptist (6:17– 29). Yet in the Gospel of Luke, the arrest of John is described in chapter 3, before Jesus begins his ministry (3:20), and the rejection of Jesus in Nazareth is placed at the very beginning of his ministry (4:16–30). If Luke was using Mark, as is likely, then he purposely moved these events for some reason or another. I think the move has to do primarily with dramatic reasons, though it may also reflect theological emphasis. Luke, it seems, didn’t believe it was a problem to diverge from Mark’s apparent chronology. Nor did the Christians who accepted both Mark and Luke as authoritative.

Seeing such chronological differences between the Gospels, a naysayer might be quick to say, “Aha! So there are contradictions. The Gospels aren’t reliable.” But as I explained in chapter 7, this would be another case of anachronistic judgment. It’s taking our contemporary value of chronology and forcing it upon writers who did not necessarily share it. In fact, historians and biographers in the Hellenistic world often preferred thematic to chronological orderings of events. So the New Testament evangelists were simply doing what came naturally, and what would have been expected by their readers.

We do this sort of thing quite commonly today, though not in the writing of history or biography. Suppose, for example, I was going to tell you what I did on last summer’s vacation alongside Swan Lake, Montana. I would be sure to relate much of what I did.

Download

Copyright Disclaimer:
This site does not store any files on its server. We only index and link to content provided by other sites. Please contact the content providers to delete copyright contents if any and email us, we'll remove relevant links or contents immediately.