FRDB Archives

Freethought & Rationalism Archive

The archives are read only.


Go Back   FRDB Archives > Archives > Religion (Closed) > Biblical Criticism & History
Welcome, Peter Kirby.
You last visited: Today at 03:12 PM

 
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old 04-12-2004, 02:59 AM   #1
Regular Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: New York City
Posts: 358
Question What are the gospels and what are the differences between them?

I was not a studious christian before I deconverted, so I don't really know the Bible that well. It never held my interest beyond the creation and exodus stories.

Basically, which books in the bible are the gospels, and what are the differences between them?
SecretAsianMan is offline  
Old 04-12-2004, 03:11 AM   #2
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: Singapore
Posts: 2,875
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by SecretAsianMan
Basically, which books in the bible are the gospels,
Matthew, Mark, Luke, and John.
Quote:
and what are the differences between them?
You should read them and find out.

Joel
Celsus is offline  
Old 04-13-2004, 05:21 PM   #3
Regular Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: The Big State in the South
Posts: 448
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by SecretAsianMan
Basically, which books in the bible are the gospels, and what are the differences between them?
Mark is the oldest gospel. (He = the author or authors of the book) He didn't write about a virgin birth, nor did he give a lineage to Jesus. Many would argue that he didn't write about a resurrection, as well. There was an interpolation at the end of this book that describes sightings after the resurrection. The orinal text didn't have it.
He still made fantastical claims about Jesus.

Matthew and Luke were written next...I can't remember if Matthew was before or after Luke.
Both Matthew and Luke talk of a virgin birth, as well as have a lineage to Jesus. Jesus supposedly descended from David on his father's side, although he was also supposedly born of a virgin. Their lineages contradict each other. Matthew makes claims of dead people rising from the graves and Jesus riding on two donkeys. He tends to add things that weren't mentioned in the other gospels, so that somehow Jesus fulfilled scripture.
Both Matthew and Luke basicially took Mark and expanded it. Sightings after the resurrection are also depicted here.

John is not part of the three synoptic gospels. It has a feel to it's own. John adds more Christian doctrine in it. John is a little more clear about whom he believes Jesus to be. Jesus talks a lot more in the book of John. If you have a bible, in which Jesus' words are in red lettering, then in John you will see a lot of red. A lot...pages and pages of Jesus talking without a break. The sightings after the resurrection is also depicted here. Matthew, Mark (later copies), Luke, and John seem to contradict the details of Jesus' appearances after he resurrected.

Over all, there is a lot of overlap in all four gospels. Many of the stories of Jesus are in all four books.



Boomeister
Boomeister is offline  
Old 04-13-2004, 05:37 PM   #4
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: the reliquary of Ockham's razor
Posts: 4,035
Cool shameless plug

Matthew, Mark, Luke & John

best,
Peter Kirby
Peter Kirby is online now   Edit/Delete Message
Old 04-13-2004, 06:39 PM   #5
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2001
Location: Waterbury, Ct, Usa
Posts: 6,523
Default

To see how the first Gospel (Mark) developed go here:

http://www.after-hourz.net/ri/mark.html

Boomeister, most scholars would tend to place Luke a little later than Matthew but under the two source theory there is no immediate reason why Luke cannot be earlier. Those scholars who accept Mark without Q obviously place Luke later.

Vinnie
Vinnie is offline  
 

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -8. The time now is 07:17 PM.

Top

This custom BB emulates vBulletin® Version 3.8.2
Copyright ©2000 - 2015, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.