enow.com Web Search

Search results

  1. Results from the WOW.Com Content Network
  2. Genealogy of Jesus - Wikipedia

    en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Genealogy_of_Jesus

    A minority view holds that while Luke gives the genealogy of Joseph, Matthew gives the genealogy of Mary. A few ancient authorities seem to offer this interpretation. [64] Although the Greek text as it stands is plainly against it, it has been proposed that in the original text Matthew had one Joseph as Mary's father and another as her husband.

  3. Two-gospel hypothesis - Wikipedia

    en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Two-gospel_hypothesis

    Since Matthew was the primary source for Luke, and Matthew's gospel (the only published gospel at the time) would have been well known to Peter, he mostly would have preached on the contents of Matthew. Knowing Matthew better than Luke, Peter was more likely to mention details found in Matthew and not Luke than vice versa. This would explain ...

  4. Genealogies in the Bible - Wikipedia

    en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Genealogies_in_the_Bible

    The New Testament provides two accounts of the genealogy of Jesus, one in the Gospel of Matthew and another in the Gospel of Luke. [6] [non-primary source needed] Matthew starts with Abraham, while Luke begins with Adam.{Luke 3:23-38} The lists are identical between Abraham and David but differ radically from that point.

  5. Four-document hypothesis - Wikipedia

    en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Four-document_hypothesis

    According to B. H. Streeter's analysis the non-Marcan matter in Luke has to be distinguished into at least two sources, Q and L.In a similar way he argued that Matthew used a peculiar source, which we may style M, as well as Q. Luke did not know M, and Matthew did not know L. Source M has the Judaistic character (see the Gospel according to the Hebrews), and it suggests a Jerusalem origin ...

  6. Matthew 1 - Wikipedia

    en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Matthew_1

    Luke's genealogy contains a more realistic number of names, given the time period, and Matthew's list also lacks the papponymic naming used in the period. Gundry believes the latter part of Matthew's list is "a large figure of speech". He argues that at the time it was perfectly acceptable to fill gaps in a historical narrative with plausible ...

  7. Marcan priority - Wikipedia

    en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Marcan_priority

    A modern tweak of this view that maintains Matthaean priority is the two-gospel (Griesbach) hypothesis which holds that Mark used both Matthew and Luke as a source (thus, in order, Matthew—Luke—Mark). [23] This view envisions a Mark who mostly collected the common material shared between Matthew and Luke.

  8. Two-source hypothesis - Wikipedia

    en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Two-source_hypothesis

    The traditional view is represented by the Augustinian hypothesis, which is that the four gospels were written in the order in which they appear in the bible (Matthew → Mark → Luke), with Mark a condensed edition of Matthew. This hypothesis was based on the claim by the 2nd century AD bishop Papias that he had heard that Matthew wrote first.

  9. Synoptic Gospels - Wikipedia

    en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Synoptic_Gospels

    Over three-quarters of Mark's content is found in both Matthew and Luke, and 97% of Mark is found in at least one of the other two synoptic gospels. Additionally, Matthew (24%) and Luke (23%) have material in common that is not found in Mark. [1] The calming of the storm is recounted in each of the three synoptic gospels, but not in John.