Replies

There aren't really "differences". Note that the author concludes that since Matthew didn't write about the taxation trip, that he must have believed that Joseph and Mary already lived in Bethlehem. However, the TRUTH is that the conjecture is on the part of the modern author. It's really hard to conclude that Matthew is ASSERTING that Mary and Joseph already lived in Bethlehem.

The Gospels do not purport to be complete in every detail. They were written with different perspectives for different audiences.

There have been various attempts to "harmonize" the Gospels so that the common truths can be extracted. Most have been academic endeavors which are really not much fun to read. [Who wants to read Robertson's book in four disjoint columns of discontiguous text?]

I found one of the best "harmonies of the Gospels" was written by the Baptist, Johnston Cheney. Unfortunately, the book seems to be out of print. Cheney was a student of Greek and decided to take some stories of the Gospels and blend them together using Greek texts. He found that he could combine all the Gospels together into one continuous story.

He developed a terminal illness and made the completion of the book his life work. He died shortly after completing it.

The chronology of the birth of Christ is actually child's play if one is looking for harmony, rather than imagining discord, like the author of this article. An interesting fact to be gleaned from careful reading is that the wise men did NOT arrive the night that Christ was born. Therefore, all the nativity scenes are historically flawed. Now some feel the Joseph and Mary had moved back to Nazareth by that time while others feel that Joseph and Mary had stayed in Bethlehem after the birth. But, does it really matter? Is there error in the Bible, or simply incompleteness?

A rather interesting part of Cheney's harmony is the story of the crucifixion. Cheney says it all flowed together and he didn't have to leave anything out.

Another interesting point is that Cheney's harmony indicates a four year ministry of Christ. Johnston claims to have found four Passover celebrations in the course of the four Gospels.

"Can you explain the difference in the Gospels"

There are no differences. Most of the so-called discrepencies come from some scholar's attempt to disprove Scripture. Matthew 2:1 simply says that Jesus was born in Bethlehem of Judea. Matthew does not get into why they were in Bethlehem, but he does go on to indicate that their proper home was in Nazareth. Luke explains that they were in Bethlehem to be counted and taxed in accordance with Caesar's proclaimation. Now Matthew says that after the visit of the Magi, the Holy Family fled to Egypt for two years until Herod died. Luke simply says that after they had done everything the Lord required of them, they returned to Nazareth. Again, there is no discrepency. Luke (who was writing to a Roman audience) simply doesn't bother mentioning the trip to Egypt because it's not important to Roman Christians. It is important to Jewish Christians, which is why Matthew talks about it.
Now the date of all of this is in dispute. We know Herod the Great died in 4 BC. We know that there were several censi and taxations taken under Caesar Augustus. I'm not sure when Quirinus was Governor of Syria. We know that there was a gathering a planets in a certain constellation that would indicate to eastern astrologers the birth of a king in Israel- possibly the star of Bethlehem- in 5-6 BC. Basically, the Nativity ocurred in 5-6 BC.

The gospels are told from different viewpoints and show different aspects of Christ's character. Different details are included win each (with a great deal of overlap.)

Joseph and Mary were living in Nazareth, went to Bethlehem for the census intending to stay, possibly to avoid the embarrasment aof what would have been considered by neighbors a scanalous birth.

The baby was born shortly after they arrived and was placed in a manger because there was no room in the inn. The shepherds came immediately; the wise men arrived much later and found them living in a house in Bethlehem (Matt. 2:11). (No wise men were by the manger - sorry, the nativity scenes are definitely NOT infallible.)

Shortly after that, Joseph, Mary, and Jesus fled to Egypt to escape Herod, who was having all boys under the age of 2 killed - that age was selected based on the age Jesus would have been at the time. They stayed in Egypt for about two years, until after Herod's death. (Note - our calendars aren't infallible either. It is likely that Jesus was born a little more than 2003 years ago. There have been sveral revisions along the way that make it difficult to detemine exactly when He was born (and when Herod died.)

They intended to return to Bethlehem, but when they heard that Herod's brother was ruling there, the went back to Nazareth instead.

This narrative comes from a combining of the two accounts of the birth of Jesus. (Mark and John make no mention of his birth.) It wasn't very difficult.

The Globe reporter is a clueless hack.

The error is in our failing to interpret Scripture by
allowing it to detrmine the interpretation. Paula is wrong
her interpretation errs in facts she has not yet learned.
May be her understanding of the time or place-or audiance.
May be ethnocentric -May even be a misreaidng of historic
fact-such has happend many times before.Those who claim
the Bible is rife with error and contradiction are
simply as those described by Paul ( formerly known as Saul of Tarsus) In his letter to the believers at Rome in
what we commonly refer to as Romans Chapter 1 verses 18-32)

The difference in the gospels are the apostles themselves. Best way I can tell you is that I have two sisters. When we get together each one of us tells stories about when we were younger and living at home. Strange thought how each one of us sees the same stories in different prespectives. We saw the same incidents but each of us tell the story different. The apostles talked and walked with Jesus but each one tells it different. Remember they all came from different backgrounds and they all saw things different. People are all that way. After a time lapse we remember things different. This Christmas when you get together with your loved one, listen to how they tell the same story but in different ways. I remember going drinking with my buddy one night. The next day we talked about it and I don't remember having as much fun as my buddy claims we had. Each one of us tells the same story but in a totally different way.

Sarcasm aside, can you explain the differences of the Gospels?

It's not that hard. They were written by different, diligent, researchers attempting to honestly and accurately describe reports of an unusual event in an age before telegraphs and railroads and printing presses much less television and computers.

There is a aphorism in fields such as journalism, law, and police work that if two witnesses give the exact same story the only thing you can be sure of is that both are lying.

It's not the differences in the Gospels that are important it's the parts that stay the same.

Yes I can.

Matthew was a Jew, and his account of the life of Jesus was written for the Jewish people and has over 60 references to the Old Testament scriptures (which the Jews would know and understand).

Mark's account of the life of Jesus was based on Greek influences. Mark showed how Jesus was the epitomy of strength and might. He equated Jesus as being a "Mighty God", vastly superior to the Greek gods.

Luke's account of the Gospels was geared toward Mary's viewpoint of the events, as well Luke's view of Jesus as the Healer.

John's account was focused on the diety of Jesus.

Each Gospel was written for a specific reason and for a specific group of people. Matthew and John were the only ones who used Old Testament references, because Greeks and Romans would not have known what the references meant. It was 4 different views .. but they had a purpose to be so. As with everything GOD says and does, there is a purpose to it.

....In Matthew, Christ is presented as the Son of David, the King of the Jews, and everything in his narrative centers around this truth. This explains why the first Gospel opens with a setting forth of Christ's royal genealogy, and why in the second chapter mention is made of the journey of the wise men from the East, who came to Jerusalem inquiring "Where is He that is born King of the Jews?", and why in chapters five to seven we have what is known as "The Sermon on the Mount" but which, in reality, is the Manifesto of the King, containing an enunciation of the Laws of His Kingdom.
In Mark, Christ is depicted as the Servant of Jehovah, as the One who through equal with God made Himself of no reputation and "took upon Him the form of a servant." Everything in this second Gospel contributes to this central theme, and everything foreign to it is rigidly excluded. This explains why there is no genealogy recorded in Mark, why Christ is introduced at the beginning of His public ministry (nothing whatever being told us here of His earlier life), and why there are more miracles (deeds of service) detailed here than in any of the other Gospels.
In Luke, Christ is set forth as the Son of Man, as connected with but contrasted from the sons of men, and everything in the narrative serves to bring this out. This explains why the third Gospel traces His genealogy back to Adam, the first man, (instead of to Abraham only, as in Matthew), why as the perfect Man He is seen here so frequently in prayer, and why the angels are seen ministering to Him, instead of commanded by Him as they are in Matthew.
In John, Christ is revealed as the Son of God, and everything in this fourth Gospel is made to illustrate and demonstrate this Divine relationship. This explains why in the opening verse we are carried back to a point before time began, and we are shown Christ as the Word "in the beginning," with God, and Himself expressly declared to be God; why we get here so many of His Divine titles, as "The only begotten of the Father," the "Lamb of God," the "Light of the world" etc.; why we are told here that prayer should be made in His Name, and why the Holy Spirit is here said to be sent from the Son as well as from the Father.

http://www.ccel.org/p/pink/gospels/gospels02.htm