1. Hello Guest! You are browsing the forums as a guest; you will have limited permissions as a guest so we advise registering to enjoy the forums fully. Remember: we are a Christian ONLY site - any user who is not Christian will not be approved. Blessings, Christian Forum Site Staff
    Dismiss Notice

Harmony of the Gospels

Discussion in 'Bible Study' started by Goinheix, Aug 16, 2011.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. The harmonic problems have concerned christians since the four Gospels were circulating. The first attempt of wich we have news was the Diathessaron wich not only failed to provide a solution but included several apocrifa. The Diathessaron quikly subtitued the four Gospels in popularity, but - thamks God - it was prohibited and burned.

    Agustine is the next to do an effort to fix the harmonic problems, but his work resulted insuficient.

    We have no news of any other attempt to solve the harmonic problem; not until the XX Century. Is then the last years wich produced more works pproposing different solutions, but no one claiming to be satisfactory, but recognicing the obstacles that couldent be superated.

    How important can be a final harmony, providing a satisfactory solution for all the harmonic problems?
  2. The importance of final harmony is really IMO a matter of perspective. In some ways, it really just isn't important at all. We know that Jesus preached a lot more than we have a record of, and so when two disagree about what he said, they could easily be from different times that he taught the same basic lesson, or simply from the fact that most of the Gospels were written many, many years after the event. Generally, the is another book (referred to as "Q") that is believed to have existed at one time but is lost to us now that each of the Gospels were tied to in some way.

    In other ways, it's absolutely vital! There are certainly issues that arise within Christianity that cause a great deal of misunderstandings between denominations because they appear to be conflicting in some points. It would be good to clear up some of these issues, but I think some people are so dug-in to their beliefs, that they may refuse to accept any changes. Those who are willing to re-evalutate their own beliefs would benefit greatly.
  3. I agree with Mr. "B".

    I learned a long time ago that people are comfortable with what they know even if what they know is wrong.
    We simply do not want to re-learn what we already think we are correct in knowing.

    That is not just Biblical matters but ALL matters.
  4. You are saying how people is. Are you also saying that it is good to be like that?
  5. I have seen "IMO" before; but still dont know the meaning.
  6. It means "In my opinion".
  7. If I read you btween lines you are saying: "In some way isnt important, and in all other ways it is important" Do you agree that it has some importance? Not the most, not biggest, but of some importance? Otherwise, is it your opinion that has not importance at all? This is what the thread is about, to check out different personal opinions on how important or not it is to solve the harmonic problems? The next question will be how much christians know of the harmonic probles.
  8. Theologist have studied the Gospels in deep and have identified two problems: the synoptic and the harmonic problems.

    The synoptic problem refer to the tree first Gospels and try to answer the question: wich was the first and was copied by the other two? It is problem because because it is clear that did read Mark before writing his Gospel, but aswell it is clear that Mark did read Metthew before writing his Gospel. Some theologist come with the idea of a previous writing or collection of writing that both Mark and Matthew did use a a common sourse. Were the germans who proposed a hypotetic text that they named Quelle (Q) containing - in theory - tales of Jesus. Also it was proposed another hypotetic text named Logos containing - also in theory - teachings of Jesus.

    In my personal studues of the NT, I have found some evidence of some previous writtings. In Act 20:35 we read "and to remember the words of the Lord Jesus, how he said, It is more blessed to give than to receive". We can npot foud that teaching in all the Gospels. We know that Jesus did and said more thing that those in the Gospels, but...how did the christians know of those words of Jesus? Probably because the hypotetical Quelle and Logos were in fact circulating before the Gospelds. Check also: 13:48-49; 15:35-36; 16:32; 19:10; where "the word of the Lord" seems to be "the Gospel", and it is the same "word of the Lord Jesus" in 20:35.

    The synoptic probloem is somethig else. It is the difficulty to compare all 4 Gospels in order to have a continuous and chroniologic text. Each difficult being a singular harmonic problem. For example: Mark say that after enterin Jerusalem Jesus went back to Bethany; next day he curse the fige tree and perfor the cleansing of the Temple, and one more day later the fige tree is dry. Matthew is saying that Jesus did the cleansin of the Temple the first day he entered Jerusalem, and the curse of the fige tree is after, not before the cleansing. How do we fix this harmionic problem?

    There is two ways to deal with harmionic problems. One is saying that the Gospels are not aqurate because a number or reasons. There is many reason why four eye witnesses have different memory of facts. But that is saying that the Gospels contain human errors and are not dependable. Even more; they are not inspoired by the Holy Spirit. The second way to deal with the harmonic problems is to solve them. A solution for an harmonic problem is to answer how it is possible that both - in this case - Matthew and Mark are correct. It is not an easy job.
  9. NO I didn't say that.

    I simply stated an observation that I have seen take place over the years in my life. Some will certainly will not agree with me but life goes on!
  10. Do you think that it is important to solve the harmonic problems?
  11. My opinion is that I have seen people use very minor perceived inconsistencies to make claims against the accuracy of the Bible. Those minor points often have no basis because they are so easily explained. So in that sense, a claim against the harmonics is not valid and therefore not important.

    All other areas will either fall into the same type of situation, or will actually be very important. Certainly the deity of Christ, means of Salvation, and many of the other critical areas to Christianity are important and there must be harmony.
  12. Difficult, but not unsurmountable. Usually theologians go with Markan priority and resolve any conflicts that way, but I think it is much more accurate to understand what purpose each book was written to address and resolve conflicts against the whole story.
    Major likes this.
  13. What if Jesus never did resurrect? If Jesus did never resurrect he was not the Christ. If Jesus did not resurrect we are lost in our sin. How do we know that Jesus did resurrect? Because it is in the Gospels? Because Mary, the women, the apostles did saw him? What if the four Gospels do not coincide with the most of the details? Can we trust on them? What we do with four witnesses that do not coincide?

    If we cab not present a satisfacrory harmony of four Gospels and make them coincide, then we are in problems. Do you still think that an harmony is irrelevant?
  14. Sorry but all the authors that have presented a proposed harmony did recognize the they did fail on solving several harmonic problems. Obviously it is not that easy to prepare a harmony. Over 1900 year have pass since all four Gospels were writed and still we dont can not found a good harmony in the shelves of christians bookshops. What if I tell you that it is one harmony that solves all the harmonic problems? Will you buy it?
  15. The harmony comes from understanding the spirit behind the writing and then it all fits perfectly.
  16. Do you have such understanding? If you do, then you can share with us how all fits perfetly.
  17. So, if I don't list every single possible issue of importance, you assume that I must consider it unimportant? I'm starting to think this is a language issue here. I was very clear that some things are extremely important for harmony, but that there are some very minor issues that are not. I'm still not sure why you keep trying to find fault with each of my posts.
  18. Of course there is a single harmony that resolves all of it. That goes without saying. For it to not be the case, then we would have to accept that the Bible is not true and that we have all been lied to. Whether or not I accept your version of that solution is up to debate, since the way you have responded to me so far has done little to earn my trust. No offense intended, I enjoy your discussions a lot, but you do seem to be here to teach us your version of things and reject anything we have to say about the matter.
  19. Language...Yes.

    Pre-conveived "pet" project ........maybe??
  20. You knowme well. I will fingerpoint all teaching that is IMO incorrect. And I hope all of you fingerpoit all of my wrong techings. That is the exercise as I understand it.

    You say that there is a single harmony that resolves all of it. I claim is mine. The other authors claim not to be therirs. Wich one are you refering to?
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.

Share This Page