Info

You are currently browsing the archives for the Gospel of Matthew category.

September 2010
M T W T F S S
« Aug    
 12345
6789101112
13141516171819
20212223242526
27282930  
Categories
Latest Postings
Links
Archives
Meta

Archive for the Gospel of Matthew Category

The Synoptic Problem

February 6, 2010, 11:31 am by dc-agape.

Before I can start reading the NT I must cover one more topic.  Previously, I covered the “silent years”.  I must bring up the Synoptic Problem before I can begin reading the four gospels.  The Problem boils down to: the independence of the Gospels and the order the Gospels were written.

In the Zondervan NIV 9 theories are presented on this Synoptic Problem.  Many of these theories are variations on the same theme.  One common source (verbal, lost verses, lost Gospel, or Matthew, Mark, or Luke being the original) are all similar concepts.  One theory, which can be thrown out, is that all three books are completely independent.  This is hogwash…between Matthew and Mark there is a 91% correlation, and between Luke and Mark there is a 53% correlation.  Since only one of these authors that might have been an eyewitness, Matthew, it is impossible to have 3 independent accounts of the same events with these correlation numbers. 

It seems odd that the best theory accepted today does not include Matthew as the source (if he was the Apostle Levi!  He was the only one there, yet Biblical scholars do not believe that the Book of Matthew was the original source.  In fact, it is clear that the author of the Book of Matthew was not the Apostle Matthew (Levi).  So we have 3 Gospels of Jesus that were not written by his Apostles.  This concept leaves a feeling of corruption in the mouth of a gay Atheist. 

The earliest possible date of “publication” was at least 20 years after the death of Jesus.  If you are more than 25 years old, think back 20 years…could you write about the events of that period in your life with accuracy?  Now think about someone else writing about that same time period with you as the center piece…what do you think about the possibility of accuracy now?  When we push the dates of writing out further from the actual events, toward 40 years, repeat the thought process I introduced previously.  How does the accuracy of the writings look to you now?

I will use the most accepted theory of the Biblical scholars.  This one includes Mark and another document (called the Quelle) as the original source of the 3 Synoptic Gospels.  As a result, most of Matthew and Mark will be identical translations.  I should probably start with the book of Mark as a result.



Posted in Gospel of Mark, Gospel of Matthew, Biblical topics | Print | 1 Comment »

Prior to the Book of Matthew

January 23, 2009, 7:06 am by dc-agape.

The Book of Matthew ends a ~400 year period of “silence”.  The last writings of the OT were Ezra, Nehemiah, and Malachi somewhere around 440BC.  Even though these 4 centuries were considered silent three additional texts were written.  The Septuagint, the Apocrypha, and the Dead Sea Scrolls were all written during the “silent years”. 

The Septuagint was a Greek translation of the OT.  It was written around 250BC and became the “new” Torah.  In this project I will assume that the Biblical translators used this as source material for the English translation. 

The Apocrypha is a different story.  All but one book was written during the “silent years”.  The latest book was written in 90AD.  This book was heavily used by all Christendom until the Reformation.  At this point the Protestants decided not to use these books.  The fathers of the church and the Apostles of Jesus had used these books just like they used the OT.  As a result, I will have to include them in this experiment.  I wonder how difficult it will be to find a good translation.  Here the editors/translators of the NIV show their true colors:

     There is nothing of theological value in the Apocryphal books that cannot be duplicated in canonical scripture, and they contain much that runs counter to its teachings. Zondervan NIV Study Bible: Fully Revised, Zondervan Press, 2002, p1457.

This is a direct quote from the Bible.  What it tells a gay Atheist is that the Protestants covered up anything that ran counter to their beliefs.  This has since become a Tradition of Man to leave these Scriptures out of the Word of God.  When I find a good translation of these writings I will add them to the experiment.

“The third writings from the “silent years” are the “Dead Sea Scrolls.” These writing have collaborated much of the OT and the Apocryphal.  These writings have also included material central to the Essenes.  Due to the fragmented condition of the Scrolls and that the Essenes were a short lived branch of Judaism; these writings have been tightly controlled.  There is only one original copy that has taken years to translate, with much of it in tatters.  Since it was a small group of people, it is assumed, by the Traditions of Man that these books are not the Word of God.  From an Atheist interpretation, all of Judaism and Christendom may be wrong!  The reason that both religions might be wrong is specifically for ignoring this sect’s writings.  This Saturday (Jan 24, 2009) I will be writing a special post on Pascal’s wager.  On Saturday I will also tackle the Synoptic Problem.  After that I will start the reading of Matthew.



Posted in Gospel of Matthew, Introduction | Print | 1 Comment »

|