An Analysis of a Story in Three Versions: Jesus Drives Out a Demon and Heals a Person Matthew 12:22-32//Mark 3:20-30//Luke 11:14-23

When looking in the Gospel of Matthew 15:21-28 and the Gospel of Mark 7:24-30 one can find that each of these pieces of their respective gospels have both some similarities and differences. There is evidence of overlap between these two which are quite easy to find whilst one is reading the sections of each. There also are points in which these two accounts diverge from one another by either telling a certain part of the other gospel in a different way, removing content from one of the other gospels, or adding something that may not have been referenced or described in the other. Either way these accounts from Matthew and Mark both have connections to each other even if not visible on the surface.

Throughout the four Gospels of Matthew, Mark, Luke and John, it is apparent that there are similarities as well as differences when it comes to portraying the life and times of Jesus the Christ, the general descriptions of who Jesus was, and the sayings and deeds of Jesus during his short stay on this earth. Scripture scholars highlight that each Gospel writer viewed Jesus from a different perspective.

     A theme repeatedly used in the gospels is Jesus' was of challenging us through change. He wants us to directly access what keeps us from being closer to him and change so that we can live fully through him. The gospel is "good news" and it has three real stages: 1) Who Jesus is and what His message to us is, 2) Jesus' teachings-his challenges and our salvation, 3)the four officially approved written records-gospels of Matthew, Mark, Luke and John. All of these are made to help us better understand what exactly went on when Jesus was alive and what the point of his coming to save us was. (New Testament Studies)

In the Bible there are 4 different so called eye witness accounts of the life of Jesus Christ which are supposedly written by Matthew and John, two of Jesus’ disciples, Luke, a journalist and historian while Jesus was alive and Mark was a teenage Jew during the time that Jesus visited Jerusalem. Although many scholars do not agree with some of the specific episodes described in these texts, it is still believed that these documents present a fairly accurate portrayal of the life of Jesus Christ. One of the reasons that have to believe this was the time when these texts were written and how close this was to the death of Jesus Christ. It is generally believed that the gospel of Luke was written in the year 60 AD, the gospel of Mark in the year 70 AD and the gospels of Matthew and John within the years 70-100 AD. This is so significant because these books were all written within one generation of the life and death of Jesus Christ and it shows that the people writing these texts were really around to witness the events that they quoted in their texts. Another reason that historians have to believe that these texts are accurate accounts of the life of Jesus is the amount of copies of original manuscripts that still exist today. These images on the screen are just some of the ancient original texts of the bible, all of which were written before 300 AD and all of which still exist today. Although there are no original documents of any of the books of the Bible, there are several original copies by monks whose profession was to accurately copy texts so that they copies of these texts could be distributed amongst many

These books show both similarities and differences in the books of the Bible. The Gospels include Matthew, Mark, Luke, and John. Each book contains the crucifixion of Jesus, but from different people and different perspectives (Cartwright & Hulshof, p. 18). Take for instance the part of the story where Jesus is hanging on the cross. Matthew tells how there was an earthquake happening and how the dead rose from the earth. “The tombs were opened, and many bodies of the saints who had fallen asleep were raised; and coming out of the tombs after His resurrection they entered the holy city and appeared to many. Now the centurion, and those who were with him keeping guard over Jesus, when they saw the earthquake and the things that were happening, became very frightened and said, ‘Truly this was the Son of God’” (Matthew 27:52-54, NASB)! Mark tells how the veil was torn when Jesus took His final breath. “And Jesus uttered a loud cry, and breathed His last. And the veil of the temple was torn in two from top to bottom. When the centurion, who was standing right in front of Him, saw the way He breathed His last, he said ‘Truly this man was the Son of God’” (Mark 15:37-39, NASB)! The two accounts describe some of the same events but differ on some other key events that took place during the crucifixion of

The only differences within the stories are some words within some sentences. For example, in the first sentence in Matthew’s version of the Last Supper it says,“ While they were eating, Jesus took bread, said the blessing, broke it, and giving it to his

It can be argued that the similarities and differences of the Gospels of Matthew and Luke can cause the reader to either see both of these accounts to complement one another with their different perspectives or that they contradict one another by certain events being mentioned in one birth narrative but not the other. Different aspects of both of these birth narratives such as the way Matthew and Luke treat Mary, the extent to which they use the Old Testament and the audience to whom they are writing to reveals the authors’ agenda as they allow their culture and own personal beliefs to influence what they write. These factors could be argued to have an effect on the historical authenticity of these texts as it could be possible that they could have caused the authors to twist the truth to fit in with their own beliefs.

Gospel is an old English word meaning “good news.” When comparing the four gospels they are all unified, but each gospel can have slight differences to them. Whether is literary structure, length, how many teachings, important events, different significance, geography or chronology; they all are correlated to tell us Jesus’ story, in their own way. In like manner, God didn’t give us one explanation from an confined individual. Rather, God educates us about the broad richness of Jesus’ life through a numerous prophet-witnesses. Moreover, God works through well-documented and a valid history, not through confidential revelations to a single person. The prophetic witnesses of the Gospels endorse the truth that God himself is speaking. Each Gospel

The gospels of Matthew, Mark, Luke and John were the recounting of the teachings of Jesus and were preached in many regions that had been conquered by Rome. The gospels of Matthew, Mark, Luke and John were the recounting of the teachings of Jesus and were preached in many regions that had been conquered by Rome. The gospels of Matthew, Mark, Luke and John were the recounting of the teachings of Jesus and were preached in many regions that had been conquered by Rome. The gospels of Matthew, Mark, Luke and John which were written in Greek, were the recounting of the teachings of Jesus and were preached in many regions that had been conquered by Rome.

The authorship of the Gospel of Matthew has been investigated due to the gospel thought to be written between A.D 75-80 (Green, 528). The gospel of Matthew’s foundation is Antioch presumably (Douglas, 631).” “The record of Papias’s statement about Matthew survives only in Eusebius (Hist. Eccl. 3.39.16). It reads ‘Matthew collected (synetaxato) the oracles (ta logia) in the Hebrew language (Hebraidi dialekto), and each interpreted (hermeneusen) them as best he could. Origen affirms this tradition, adding only that the First Gospel was written for Jewish believers (Hist. Eccl. 6.25.4) (Green, 527).” The language variation of the gospel and the author brings about question to whether the Apostle Matthew was the author or someone else. In these findings it doesn’t suggest anyone else as the author and only states that he was most likely not the writer of this text. “There are several arguments that have been used to argue that the First Gospel was not penned by the apostle Matthew. Foremost, it is argued that if the First Gospel used Mark as its primary source, it is most unlikely that an apostle (Matthew) would need to

The Gospel according to Matthew is the first book in the New Testament, and also serves as a bridge between the Old Testament and the New Testament. The gospel tells us of Jesus and his teachings. It is believed that the Gospel originated with Matthew, one of Jesus' disciples, and it circulated anonymously (Harris 149). The message in this gospel was compiled to minister to a Jewish and Jewish-Christian community when tensions between early Christians and postwar Jewish leaders aggravated bitter controversy. The Gospel of Matthew was written as an encouragement to the Greek-speaking Jewish Christians and Gentiles who were, at least partly, Torah observant during the 80s C.E. probably at Antioch in Syria

This unknown source of overlapping material between Matthew and Luke was named “The Lost Gospel Q” after the German word ‘Quelle’, or source (Borg, Marcus). The Lost Gospel Q is a ‘sayings gospel’ in the sense that it is primarily a compilation of Jesus’ sayings, rather than a narrative account of his birth, baptism and crucifixion like the gospels of Matthew, Mark and Luke (Borg, Marcus). The Q can be split up into 3 different categories including wisdom teaching, conflict or judgement sayings, and teachings about Jesus himself

In the bible we have recently been looking at the gospels of Mark, Matthew and Luke. In these gospels there are a lot of similarities and also some differences. For example in each one of those gospels it tells the story of John’s Preaching About the Coming One. (Matthew 3:11-12, Mark 1:7-8, Luke 3:15-18) All three of these gospels have a share a lot of similarities. This is not the only story. Another story is The Walking on the Water. (Matthew 14:22-33, Mark 6:45-52) Although not this story is not in Luke, the other two gospels have similarities. Looking at all of the things that are the same in these stories helps supports that the bible is true. It would be hard for the authors of these gospels to make up exactly the same thing for all three or two stories. There are many other examples of similar stories in the

The Gospel According to Matthew is the first book of the New Testament in the Bible, and is a Gospel narrative. The narratives provided by the Gospels in the New Testament are here to provide us with descriptions of the life, death, and resurrection of our savior Jesus Christ, as well as to share His teachings. Like any other narrative, it is important to understand the historical and literary contexts surrounding the Gospel of Matthew, as well as the importance and significance of Matthew itself. As a Gospel, Matthew is here to present us with the narrative of Jesus Christ as our Messiah, as promised in the Old Testament Prophesy. While it is important to evaluate the extensive context surrounding the narrative of Matthew, the meaning behind the narrative can be found through relating it to the various events that are described in the other Gospels. By comparing the Gospels, it is easy to evaluate the underlying meaning and significance, within the context of the Gospels. Because the Gospels were written as narratives to provide us with information on the life and death of Jesus Christ, and all that happened in between, it is important to compare the different accounts described in the Gospels whenever possible. In doing so, it is possible to examine the Gospels within the appropriate context. With 4 Gospels (Matthew, Mark, Luke, John), it is important to compare them with one another in order to further evaluate the importance of Jesus Christ, as he is the

A key reason pointing to the Gospel being written by a scribe is that the Gospel was written in Greek and that the author is very familiar with the Hebrew Bible, connecting his five discourses with Hebrew Scriptures. Even though tax collectors, like Matthew, were known to be literate it is not necessarily true that they would be fluent in Hebrew, Aramaic