Best And Most Detailed Gospel.

Silverbackman · 09-21-2005, 12:44 AM

Which do you think is the best and most detailed gospel of Jesus's life? Mathew? Mark? Luke? John?

lunamoth · 09-21-2005, 01:46 AM

Wow, pick just one? I'm not sure I can!

I love them each for their different strengths and idiosyncracies.

Matthew has a great Sermon on the Mount and is longest, so has the most detail. John is poetic and lofty and can't be beat for proclaiming Jesus as Lord. Mark is supposed to be earliest, so I often look to him for that reasonl. I probably read Luke the least, but he has many gems as well!

peace,
lunamoth

Silverbackman · 09-27-2005, 12:39 AM

Anyone else want to coment?

Quahom1 · 09-27-2005, 04:18 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Silverbackman

Which do you think is the best and most detailed gospel of Jesus's life? Mathew? Mark? Luke? John?

Depends on who the reader is (background, mindset, etc.). Each Gospel appears to be designed to target or appeal to a particular group of people.

Originally written in Aramaic, Matthew is regarded as appealing to those of the Jewish and Palestinian peoples. Mark is considered as appealing to the Romans. Luke appears to be geared towards the Greeks (helenistic), and John is found to be favored by most of the rest of the world, due to simplicity in telling the story of Jesus and expounding upon His being the Son of God.

There are other Gospels that did not get included in today's Bible, yet they exist. They tell interesting stories that tend to flesh out what the first four might or might not have missed.

my thoughts.

v/r

Q

Bandit · 09-27-2005, 06:53 AM

i think for the most detailed of his life on earth, i will go with Luke.
for the most detailed & forward of his life as a mystery i go with John.
then Matthew.
last but not least, Mark.

I might change on that order next week.

InLove · 09-27-2005, 07:15 AM

Hi--Peace--

I admit that I have not read this thread. So if my post is stupid, well, that is what it is.

The "Gospels" are a boxed set. They complement one another. Matthew tells the saga--Mark reinforces it. Luke tells the same, but with a bit more insight--and for those who cannot grasp the simplicity of Truth written in the first two. My dear John wraps it all up, guided by the Spirit.

Is there a contest among the writers of the Truth? And....are there others that have not been discussed here?

Just still thinking...

InPeace,
InLove

InLove · 09-27-2005, 07:40 AM

It has been so long since I have really been able to post much, but the following is something I think is important: (Hope I do this right)

Quote:

Originally Posted by Quahom I

Depends on who the reader is (background, mindset, etc.). Each Gospel appears to be designed to target or appeal to a particular group of people.

Originally written in Aramaic, Matthew is regarded as appealing to those of the Jewish and Palestinian peoples. Mark is considered as appealing to the Romans. Luke appears to be geared towards the Greeks (helenistic), and John is found to be favored by most of the rest of the world, due to simplicity in telling the story of Jesus and expounding upon His being the Son of God.

There are other Gospels that did not get included in today's Bible, yet they exist. They tell interesting stories that tend to flesh out what the first four might or might not have missed.

my thoughts.

v/r

Q

truthseeker · 09-30-2005, 12:20 AM

I think Matthew tells Jesus life the best.

Mark tells the death the best.

John tells the philosophy the best.

Luke tells the stories (parables?) the best.

Quahom1 · 09-30-2005, 07:20 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by truthseeker

I think Matthew tells Jesus life the best.

Mark tells the death the best.

John tells the philosophy the best.

Luke tells the stories (parables?) the best.

I think you studied your Gospels...

very cool.

v/r

Q

Awesome Possum · 10-01-2005, 08:31 AM

I always found it interesting that they were named "Gospels". They don't contradict each other and they're all part of one big and beautiful gospel, so they're not all really seperate gospels, but rather 4 testimonies told from different points of view and and written with specific goals in mind.

My favorite of the four would be John, simply because I enjoy reading it the most. It flows really well and sets forth a fact that many Christian denominations, sadly, do not seem to grasp: that Jesus is the Christ and Son of the living God.

Silverbackman · 10-10-2005, 09:45 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Awesome Possum

I always found it interesting that they were named "Gospels". They don't contradict each other and they're all part of one big and beautiful gospel, so they're not all really seperate gospels, but rather 4 testimonies told from different points of view and and written with specific goals in mind.

My favorite of the four would be John, simply because I enjoy reading it the most. It flows really well and sets forth a fact that many Christian denominations, sadly, do not seem to grasp: that Jesus is the Christ and Son of the living God.

Actually historians have found some contradiction, at least a few in the gospels. According to Mathew Jesus had his sermon on the mount while in Luke it claims that he came down from the mount onto a flat land for the sermon

.

bob x · 10-11-2005, 04:25 PM

Bandit's order would be precisely the reverse of mine. I am more concerned with authenticity: the Markan narrative is the oldest, and where Matthew and Luke depart from Mark I do not trust them; Matthew however contains early recordings of Jesus's teachings. John is worthless.

Bandit · 10-11-2005, 05:03 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Awesome Possum

I always found it interesting that they were named "Gospels". They don't contradict each other and they're all part of one big and beautiful gospel, so they're not all really seperate gospels, but rather 4 testimonies told from different points of view and and written with specific goals in mind.

My favorite of the four would be John, simply because I enjoy reading it the most. It flows really well and sets forth a fact that many Christian denominations, sadly, do not seem to grasp: that Jesus is the Christ and Son of the living God.

i agree. they are different points of view. some people simply like to find fault & i find no fault in the gospels.
Jesus is both- the Christ & the Son of the living God.

Quahom1 · 10-11-2005, 08:46 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by bob x

Bandit's order would be precisely the reverse of mine. I am more concerned with authenticity: the Markan narrative is the oldest, and where Matthew and Luke depart from Mark I do not trust them; Matthew however contains early recordings of Jesus's teachings. John is worthless.

Mark catches your attention? Then it worked. God is very wise indeed. The anylist/scientist found a nitch...very cool.

truthseeker · 10-11-2005, 11:00 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by bob x

Bandit's order would be precisely the reverse of mine. I am more concerned with authenticity: the Markan narrative is the oldest, and where Matthew and Luke depart from Mark I do not trust them; Matthew however contains early recordings of Jesus's teachings. John is worthless.

John took the time to reflect on the teachings of Jesus. He did write it in old age. What you get in John is a meditative, even philosophical approach to Jesus' walk on the earth. If you're approaching the story from John's perspective, then it would probably have more worth than the other three. Anyhow, all four together gives us a grounded perspective of the life of Jesus and his influence on those who followed him while he lived.