Matthew and Luke used diverging perspective when discussing Jesus' genealogy and this generated much controversy in the Christian world. While Matthew focused on discussing in regard to genealogy from Jesus to Abraham, Luke concentrated on relating to it from Jesus to Adam. Even with this, both individuals provided the same account when considering the lineage lasting from Abraham to David. One of the most intriguing concepts pointing toward the belief that the two religious individuals actually discuss different genealogies is the fact that Matthew claims that Joseph's father is Jacob while Luke says that Joseph's father is Heli. Also, even with the fact that both trace the genealogy through David, Matthew does so by using Solomon while Luke does so by relating to Nathan. Many have a tendency to consider that many divergences between Matthew's genealogy and Luke's are owed to the fact that the Bible contains a lot of errors. It is difficult to determine if this is, in fact, true, taking into account that individuals editing it through the years have been renowned for their meticulousness. One of the easiest methods of trying to understand why Matthew and Luke provide different accounts concerning the genealogy would be to take into account that the former focuses on direct lineage while the latter considers the concept of levirate marriage. This idea relates to how if a man dies without having any male children, it is customary for the respective individual's brother to
“When his mother Mary had been engaged to Joseph, but before they lived together, she was found to be with child from the Holy Spirit” (Matthew 1:18). Lastly, to complete the prophecy of Jesus’s birth, Matthew reaffirms that “. . . Jesus was born in Bethlehem of Judea . . .” (Matthew 2.1). Matthew inserts these assertions to emphasize the credulity of Jesus’ tie with traditional Judaism.
Lineage of Jesus had mentioned twice in the New Testament, Matthew 1 and Luke 3: 23-38. In Matthew, the genealogy of Jesus can traced back to Abraham and in Luke, Jesus traced back to Adam. However, we still have reason to believe that, Matthew and Luke are completely different lineages. For example, Matthew indicated that, Jacob is Joseph's father (Matthew 1:16), while Luke indicated that, Heli is Joseph's father (Luke 3:23). Therefore, Matthew’s traced clue is David's son- Solomon (Matthew 1: 6), and Luke clue is David's son- Nathan (Luke 3:31). In fact, between David and Jesus, they have two same names: Shealtiel and Zerubbabel (Matthew 1:12, Luke 3:27).
Matthew and Luke each contain short but elaborate birth narratives concerning Jesus’. Within each of their narratives,both Matthew and Luke mention the genealogies of Jesus which when compared to each other are quite different. In Matthews gospel he traces Jesus’ ancestry back to that “of Jesus the Messiah, the Son of David, the Son of Abraham” (Matt 1:1). While in Luke’s gospel, Jesus is traced back through David and Abraham to Adam and God. Now, even though both Matthew and Luke’s genealogies are not the same, what is even more concerning is that neither is overly correct. In regards to Matthews take on Jesus’ genealogy, one can see that his “genealogy suggests — indeed, it almost demonstrates— that the entire course of Israel’s history has proceed according to divine providence” (116). However, historians today know about two thirds of
In the Gospel of Matthew, the focus on the Jewish genealogy of Jesus played a significant role in the birth story. To fully understand Jesus, it was imperative to first acknowledge who Jesus was within Jewish ancestry and his subsequent position as King of the Jews.
It is possible to write on the life of Jesus from the information gathered from the bible. I will be dividing my essay into three parts. In the first part of the paper, I will talk about the nature of the gospels, John’s views vs. the Synoptic, discuss if the authors of the gospels are eyewitnesses and how they used written sources. Also I will talk about the Q source. Then I will elaborate on the topic of how Matthew and Luke were similar. Then I will continue on by discussing how the Old Testament uses Moses, Samuel and Elijah to interpret Jesus, and finally whether or not the Sermon on the Mount happened. In the second part of my paper, I will talk about Jesus’s birth and childhood, his miracles, his resurrection, and what Jesus did to cure people, spirits and how they are interpreted to the prophet, magician and the mad man compared to Saul and Elijah. The final part of the paper I will talk about what Jesus talked about as regards to the Kingdom of God vs. the Kingdom of the Romans and what he intended by speaking of the end of the world. I will also speak of the reasons behind the Romans executing him. My sources for this paper will be the New Jerusalem Bible Readers edition as my primary source and lecture notes from Professor Trumbach.
The Gospel of Luke focuses on the conception and the birth of John the Baptist and Jesus. It also provides the histories of Elizabeth and Zachariah. It also describes Angel Gabriel’s announcement to Zachariah and the Virgin Mary.
It can be seen through the first three Gospels that Nathanael’s name does not appear at all in any shape, form, or fashion. Yet it is commonly believed that Nathanel and Bartholomew are one in the same persons. The theory behind this logic derives from the fact that the Gospel of John
The Bible is composed of many different stories and narratives. Each one of these individual stories contributes to the greater story of the Bible; sometimes called the Grand Story of Scripture. Within each Story, they have elements that define the setting, characters, climax, and themes. The overall Grand Story of Scripture contains these elements in each of the five divisions: prologue, epilogue, and three acts in between.
Two thousand years ago, the birth of Jesus, arguably the most influential man the world has ever seen, altered history forever. Christians know him as the Messiah, the son of God who came to save all of mankind, and for others, he may just be a great teacher and person of history. It is the latter that Reza Aslan attempts to shed an unbiased light on by comparing the Jesus that modern Christians believe in to the Jesus that Aslan believes would have fit into first-century Palestine: a violet revolutionary, dedicated to the eradication of the Roman government in Israel and the deposition of the rich priestly class. Aslan paints a portrayal of Jesus using knowledge of the time period, Scripture that has been taken out of context and misinterpreted, and most of all, the author’s imagination and powerful rhetoric to cover up his faulty argumentation. In his book Zealot: The Life and Times of Jesus of Nazareth, Reza Aslan recreates an interesting but purely speculative image of the historical Jesus through exploring the political and social history of first-century Palestine, the life and teachings of Jesus, and the development of early Christianity.
The first three Gospels, Matthew, Mark, Luke is called “synoptic”, because they have a mutual interpretation (the word synoptic means “together in sight”). Matthew, Mark, and Luke cover several of the equivalent happenings of Jesus’ life. A greater part of them from Jesus’ ministry in Galilee. Approximately 90 percent of Mark’s evens of Christ are found in Matthew, and about 50 percent of Mark is noted in Luke’s gospel. All of the parables of Christ are established in the Synoptics.
Parallel Lives of Jesus: A Guide to the Four Gospels by Edward Adams is a book that is focused on the unity of all four narratives Jesus’s life. This book is a very good example of an introduction to the four Gospels and a method to study the Gospels.
The Historical Jesus: Five Views edited by J.K Beilby and P.R Eddy is a most interesting book to say the least. This is a great book to be introduced into the world of the historical Jesus. Along with the editors we have five contributors hence the name “Five Views”. This includes Robert M. Price, J.D Crossan, Luke Timothy Johnson, D.G Dunn and Darrel L. Bock. Each contributor presents their own views of the historical Jesus presented in the gospels and what they believe.
There are many similarities between the Gospel of Luke, Mark, and Matthew. But one difference is the way in which they are written. Luke unlike the other two begins his Gospel with a introduction called a historiographic preface. This is a Greco-Roman literary device used by authors to express the depth of the research and scholarship included in the work. Ehrman states "they commonly refer to the sources that were at his disposal, and they not infrequently suggest that the final product of the author's labors, the volume being written on the subject." (Ehrman 96). This brings up another difference which is the style in which Luke writes. The text states that the author of the Gospel of Luke was much elequate and fluent in ancient greek
Discuss the distinction between the Christ of Faith and the Jesus of History. What are the implication did it have within our social location
One great change that I would like to see in the world is the spread of Christianity. Civil rights leader Mahatma Gandhi wrote, “Be the change you want to see in the world.” I think everyone should be close to God, and accept Jesus Christ as their personal savior. To help this happen, I could donate to missionaries, get Christianity back into the public, and raise awareness in places where the people may have not previously known about God. This would help create an awesome, powerful change.