What's new
By:
Filters
Christian Forums

This is a sample guest message. Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!

Harmony of the Gospels

Cyberseeker

Cyberseeker

Member
It has been exceedingly difficult to harmonise the gospel of John with Matthew, Mark and Luke during the time of Jesus' early ministry. This is because the synoptic gospels miss out the time from his temptation unto his Galilean ministry. They jump straight from in the wilderness in Judea to Galilee. John, on the other hand, details several months between in Judea and Samaria.

Here is a diagram that is easy to follow. (man I looove the new svg format) I hope it helps anyone who might have problems with so-called contradictions in the New Testament.


jesusearlyministry.svg

​
 
Cyberseeker,

Why don't you state one alleged contradiction that we can work on?

From your across the Tasman mate,
Oz
 
The "Harmony" of the synoptic gospels is a good subject to study.

I like the disharmony better.
Because at each and every point that the synoptic gospels seem to contradict there is a very wonderful and positive and pointed lesson to be had.

In the story of "The sending of the 12" we have particular instructions given by Jesus to the 12.
Basically that the Apostles were to take nothing with them. Until the Book of Mark.
In Mark's Gospel account they were to take a staff.
It's not a misprint or a mistake.

I'll be back with the reason why after I fry up some bacon and drink some coffee.
 
OzSpen said:
Cyberseeker,

Why don't you state one alleged contradiction that we can work on?

From your across the Tasman mate,
Oz
Click to expand...

Hi Oz. Most of the criticisms of St. John relate to order of events. Here is an example: The gospel of John tells the story of the calling of several disciples at the place where John was baptising. (John 1:37-42) This place was in the Jordan valley well away from Galilee.

However, the synoptic gospels describe the calling of these disciples on the shore of Galilee. (Matthew 4:18-22) I think there might be a reasonable explanation for this 'discrepancy', but I would like to hear what others say about it. What say ye? :chin
 
Cyberseeker said:
It has been exceedingly difficult to harmonise the gospel of John with Matthew, Mark and Luke during the time of Jesus' early ministry.
Click to expand...
That's because they are NOT meant to be harmonizes.
Each of the three evangelists related the story according to his ability and the audience to who it was being presented.
The idea that they must "match up" (harmonize) requires that the individuality of the writers and their work be destroyed.
Just leave them alone. Don't mess with them.
Let each writer tell you what he wants you to read.
They are not "History"; they are Gospel.
Those are two different things.
 
Cyberseeker said:
It has been exceedingly difficult to harmonise the gospel of John with Matthew, Mark and Luke during the time of Jesus' early ministry. This is because the synoptic gospels miss out the time from his temptation unto his Galilean ministry. They jump straight from in the wilderness in Judea to Galilee. John, on the other hand, details several months between in Judea and Samaria.

Here is a diagram that is easy to follow. (man I looove the new svg format) I hope it helps anyone who might have problems with so-called contradictions in the New Testament.
<SNIP>
Click to expand...

Correct me if I have the wrong idea, but it seems as if you are attempting to harmonize the Gospels using a map as your sole resource.

At best, any harmony is an educated guess, and is not definitive about the chronology of the life of Jesus. there are many harmonies available. Here is a portion of one on BlueLetterBible.org.

The Harmony of the Gospels offers a comparative study chart for Matthew, Mark, Luke and John's Gospel accounts. Categorized by subjects, this study resource allows quick, side-by-side viewing of what each apostle recorded in each of the four Gospels.


Subjects Matthew Mark Luke John
Pre-Christ Narratives
St. Luke’s preface 1:1-4
“God the Word” 1:1-14
The Birth and Early Childhood of Christ
Birth of John Baptist foretold 1:5-25
Annunciation of the birth of Jesus 1:26-38
Mary visits Elizabeth 1:39-56
Birth of John the Baptist 1:57-80
The two genealogies 1:1-17 3:23-38
Birth of Jesus Christ 1:18-25 2:1-7
The watching shepherds 2:8-20
The circumcision 2:21
Presentation in the temple 2:22-38
The wise men from the East 2:1-12
Flight into Egypt, and return to Nazareth 2:13-23 2:39
Christ in the temple with the doctors 2:40-52
The Baptism of Christ
Ministry of John the Baptist 3:1-12 1:1-8 3:1-18 1:15-31
Baptism of Jesus Christ 3:13-17 1:9-11 3:21-22 1:32-34
The Temptation of Christ
The temptation 4:1-11 1:12-13 4:1-13
The Early Ministry of Christ
Andrew and another disciple and Simon Peter 1:35-42
Philip and Nathanael 1:43-51
The marriage in Cana of Galilee 2:1-11
Passover and cleansing the temple 2:12-25
Nicodemus comes to Jesus by night 3:1-21
Christ and John baptizing 3:22; 4:2
Christ at the well of Sychar 4:3-42
John the Baptist in prison 4:12; 14:3 1:14; 6:17 3:19-20 3:24
Christ returns to Galilee 4:12 1:14-15 4:14-15 4:43-45
The synagogue at Nazareth 4:16-30
Andrew and Simon, James and John called 4:13-22 1:16-20 5:1-11

<SNIP>

You will not find any two that agree 100%, but respectfully I state to you, their agreement of chronology is quite irrelevant. What happened and what is recorded on the New Testament is what is what is relevant.

You first got my opinion of why chronology is unimportant, now here is the reason from Scripture:

John 21: 25 Now there are also many other things that Jesus did. Were every one of them to be written, I suppose that the world itself could not contain the books that would be written. ESV​

I sincerely hope that this helps you
 
Jim Parker said:
That's because they are NOT meant to be harmonizes.
Each of the three evangelists related the story according to his ability and the audience to who it was being presented.
The idea that they must "match up" (harmonize) requires that the individuality of the writers and their work be destroyed.
Just leave them alone. Don't mess with them.
Let each writer tell you what he wants you to read.
They are not "History"; they are Gospel.
Those are two different things.
Click to expand...
Well they are history too. All we know about the historical Christ comes from these accounts in the Gospels.

The ancients like to tell the story by narrative with the historical guide posts as secondary. Luke is probably the exception to this as he clearly wants the reader to examine the historical markers. Which most have been confirmed by archeology.

In John's case he is obviously not concerned much with historical markers but giving as full of the account of what he saw as the key moments of the ministry of Jesus Christ.
 
By Grace said:
Correct me if I have the wrong idea, but it seems as if you are attempting to harmonize the Gospels using a map as your sole resource.
Click to expand...

No, my scripture references are on the left hand side of the map.

By Grace said:
At best, any harmony is an educated guess, and is not definitive about the chronology of the life of Jesus. there are many harmonies available. Here is a portion of one on BlueLetterBible.org.

The Baptism of Christ
Ministry of John the Baptist 3:1-12 1:1-8 3:1-18 1:15-31
Baptism of Jesus Christ 3:13-17 1:9-11 3:21-22 1:32-34
The Temptation of Christ
The temptation 4:1-11 1:12-13 4:1-13
The Early Ministry of Christ
Andrew and another disciple and Simon Peter 1:35-42
Philip and Nathanael 1:43-51
The marriage in Cana of Galilee 2:1-11
Passover and cleansing the temple 2:12-25
Nicodemus comes to Jesus by night 3:1-21
Christ and John baptizing 3:22; 4:2
Christ at the well of Sychar 4:3-42
John the Baptist in prison 4:12; 14:3 1:14; 6:17 3:19-20 3:24
Christ returns to Galilee 4:12 1:14-15 4:14-15 4:43-45
The synagogue at Nazareth 4:16-30
Andrew and Simon, James and John called 4:13-22 1:16-20 5:1-11
Click to expand...

Ive snipped this from your post because Im only dealing with Jesus early ministry period.

By Grace said:
You will not find any two that agree 100%
Click to expand...

Well, Im pleased to say that Im 100% in agreement with BlueLetterBible's summary of Jesus early ministry. Yes, it helped. :)
 
Cyberseeker said:
Hi Oz. Most of the criticisms of St. John relate to order of events. Here is an example: The gospel of John tells the story of the calling of several disciples at the place where John was baptising. (John 1:37-42) This place was in the Jordan valley well away from Galilee.

However, the synoptic gospels describe the calling of these disciples on the shore of Galilee. (Matthew 4:18-22) I think there might be a reasonable explanation for this 'discrepancy', but I would like to hear what others say about it. What say ye? :chin
Click to expand...

Cyber,

The answer is fairly simple. John 1:37-51 indicates that Jesus called Andrew, Peter, Philip, Nathanael, and one other disciple on that occasion. But, as you've indicated we find a different list in Matt 4:18-22. See also Mk 1:16-20 and Lk 5:1-11.

The solution is found in the fact that in John 1:37-51 we have an indication of 'Jesus' initial interview of the disciples, not their permanent call. As a result of this first contact they only stayed with Jesus "that day" (John 1:39), after which they returned to their homes and regular employment. The later passages indicate the time they left their former jobs and took up their full-time ministry as disciples of Christ' (Geisler & Howe 1992:405).

There are a number of books available that deal with Bible difficulties. These include the one I've referenced here. See also,
  • The older one by John W Haley, Alleged Discrepancies of the Bible (n.d. Whitaker House). Available online at: https://archive.org/details/examinationof00hale
  • Gleason L Archer, Encyclopedia of Bible Difficulties (1982 Zondervan);
  • Walter C. Kaiser Jr., et al Hard Sayings of the Bible (1996 InterVarsity Press).
Blessings,
Oz

Works consulted
Geisler, N & Howe, T 1992. When Critics Ask: A Popular Handbook on Bible Difficulties. Grand Rapids, Michigan: Baker Books.
 
Cyberseeker said:
It has been exceedingly difficult to harmonise the gospel of John with Matthew, Mark and Luke during the time of Jesus' early ministry. This is because the synoptic gospels miss out the time from his temptation unto his Galilean ministry. They jump straight from in the wilderness in Judea to Galilee. John, on the other hand, details several months between in Judea and Samaria.

Here is a diagram that is easy to follow. (man I looove the new svg format) I hope it helps anyone who might have problems with so-called contradictions in the New Testament.
​
Click to expand...
Hi CS

WHY are you attempting to harmonize the gospels?
Either the 3 synoptic or the 3 to John's?

I have at least 2 lists in chronological order of Jesus' ministry.
They don't agree.

So what?

The gospels were written many years after Jesus ascended, as you know.
How great of a memory do you suppose the writer's had? There is even some question as to whether Mathew really wrote Mathew. (I believe He did).
Luke is second-hand and so is Mark.

Of course, God inspired the writings in the N.T.
But He didn't get His computer and type it out Himself.

Frankly, I'd be more worried if they DID harmonize.
It would mean they huddled around and compared notes and decided what would be good to write and what wouldn't. Like a kind of conspiracy...

As the gospels stand, I know that each person had his own experience of Jesus and presents it as such. Much more honest.

Two persons see an auto accident.
Do they see the same details?
Do they remember it the same?
Does their life experience affect what they see?
Does what they see affect their life experience?
etc etc

If you wish to discuss a specific problem, that would be one thing,
but I wouldn't question the fact that they are not in full agreement.

​
 
JohnDB said:
The "Harmony" of the synoptic gospels is a good subject to study.

I like the disharmony better.
Because at each and every point that the synoptic gospels seem to contradict there is a very wonderful and positive and pointed lesson to be had.

In the story of "The sending of the 12" we have particular instructions given by Jesus to the 12.
Basically that the Apostles were to take nothing with them. Until the Book of Mark.
In Mark's Gospel account they were to take a staff.
It's not a misprint or a mistake.

I'll be back with the reason why after I fry up some bacon and drink some coffee.
Click to expand...
Now clearly Mark's Gospel has a staff but no other does.
In Israel at that time if a Rabbi carried a staff he was signifying that he was a leader of other Rabbi.
In the case of Mark it is actually Mark, cousin of Peter, who at the direction of the Church Leadership in Jerusalem wrote down the many stories Peter used to tell about Jesus. "Peter said it; Mark wrote it.
Peter was the Apostolic Leader of the Apostles as he was always speaking what was on everyone's mind but generally too shy to say. Peter was never shy about blurting out questions or comments or concerns.
 
Pegasus said:
Well they are history too....The ancients like to tell the story by narrative with the historical guide posts as secondary.
Click to expand...
Yes.
Today, it's more like the transcript of a video tape.
Then, you could "mold" the event to the narrative.
Pegasus said:
In John's case he is obviously not concerned much with historical markers but giving as full of the account of what he saw as the key moments of the ministry of Jesus Christ.
Click to expand...
John emphasizes Jesus' deity and the Eucharist as the body and blood of the Lord.
 
Cyberseeker said:
I like your answer Oz. (What would the world do without the Ozzies?)
Click to expand...

We'd have a few less kangaroos and koalas.

pagehh.jpg


Ones like this jump around the parks of my suburb, especially in drier weather. I attended a funeral recently in a Brisbane suburb where there were at least 20 kangaroos watching funeral operations.

25-Koala_2.png

This kind of fellow lives in the trees about 100m from where I live, in a protected habitat in the valley.

Oz
 
Contrary to those who depreciate John’s value as an historical book, his gospel provides a very useful historical date. When Jesus spoke of the temple, “Destroy this temple, and in three days I will raise it up.” The Jews answered, “It has taken forty-six years to build this temple, and will you raise it up in three days?” (John 2:20)

Herod’s building projects are well documented in history, and in the case of his famed temple, it started in 20 BC. Therefore Jesus’ visit to Jerusalem in his early ministry, as shown on the map, would have been April AD 27. That’s pretty accurate.

So, if it’s good enough of John to leave a date, it must be good enough for us to use it? Finding a reliable harmony of the gospels is a good place to start. Yes?
 
wondering said:
About 20 to 60 years depending on the book.
Mark or Mathew were the first and John was the last.

Not home. But the dates are easy to find for each book.
Click to expand...
That is an early range so I would concur. Here is a listing of Christian theologians and the average dates of each NT book:

http://evidenceforjesuschrist.org/Pages/bible/dating-nt-chronological_order.htm

{The above was prepared by Dr. Gary Butner ThD, with all permissions granted for use in this discussion.}
 
Pegasus said:
How many years?
Click to expand...
Good catch!

Also missing in the BC/AD year designation is the fact that there is no "year zero" and the fact that the date of the exact time (let alone season) of the birth of Jesus has never been accurately stated, anywhere.

That is because the times and date of events are stated in relation to the rulers of nations. Isiah stated, "In the year that King Uzziah died..." and so forth
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top