Your comments......
A solution in search of a problem?
I have never see it as a problem. Just different styles and emphasis.
A certain amount of curiosity attends to how these accounts were constructed. We must reply upon additional testimony from the early Fathers for any clues. The picture best derived from that is fairly well expressed in “4.” above, so, as some have noted, it is more like a solution in search of a problem. It certainly should come as no surprise that in some points the synoptic Gospels agree to the letter in many points, because they are ultimately written by the Holy Spirit.
St. Basil: “Every word of the Gospels is deemed more eminent than all the other precepts of the Holy Spirit because in other writings the Lord addressed us through the prophets as His servants, while in the Gospels He does this through Himself.” There is a reason an Alleluia Verse precedes the reading of these Gospels in those contexts where the body and blood of Christ are to be distributed to poor sinners for their comfort and strength, as well as a reason we stand up (to the extent we are able), to hear these words.
The Gospels, synoptic as well as John’s, are not merely information or stories to be heard with curiosity, but are the Word of the Lord who is risen from the dead, through which He has ordained to lift us out of death and misery both truly and really.
Thank you for posting it.
This is a beautiful thread, an intelligent discussion of the Gospels without acrimony.
Is there really a problem?
None of the gospels tell about the destruction of Jerusalem but only that it would happen which does not prove anything as it could easily be argued that the Gospels were about Jesus and not about Jerusalem which could make sense.
But the destruction of Jerusalem? wouldn’t they be compelled to show evidence that the things Jesus said would happen did actually happen if it was all written after the fact?
It is widely agreed that the gospel of Luke was written after Mathew and Mark and this shows in Luke 1:1 to 3.
And acts 1:1 that it is the same writer to the same person.
Luke 1 1:1 to 3
1 Forasmuch as many have taken in hand to set forth in order a declaration of those things which are most surely believed among us,
2 Even as they delivered them unto us, which from the beginning were eyewitnesses, and ministers of the word;
3 It seemed good to me also, having had perfect understanding of all things from the very first, to write unto thee in order, most excellent Theophilus,
Acts 1:1 The former treatise have I made, O Theophilus, of all that Jesus began both to do and teach,
Luke verses 1 and 2 shows that this was not the first gospel written and acts one show that the writer of Luke is referring to the gospel he had written.
It also shows that acts was written after at least three gospels, and that the writer who wrote Luke was familiar with every thing which happened from the very first.
So I personally believe that all of the Gospels except for John were written before the destruction of Jerusalem and possibly even John.
If the destruction had of happened before acts was written I believe it would surly been talked about.
St Peter is the Hero in acts up until Chapter 12 then never heard from again until later in life through his epistles, and the same with John.
It seems that the writer of acts took up with Paul for some reason we don`t know, so he could have no way of knowing what was happening on the part of the other apostles but he would have known about the destruction of Jerusalem.
We have traditions which make the apostles great men but have no details, did many of them die before the fall of Jerusalem? what happened to them?
It is of great interest to me to know what happened to the men who walked, talked, lived with our Lord and was taught by him for over three years.
Beautiful history! Thanks.