Matthews and Like are the most similar of all of the canonical gospels, they offer different messages and send differing accounts of the figure of Jesus. Matthew calls Jesus the Jewish Messiah, while Luke does the opposite. Luke calls Jesus the universal savior, and by doing so each writer sets up their gospel to try and explain who they think Christ Is by using their writing and knowledge to their advantage. Matthew depicts Jesus to be the king of the Jews by using words such as kingdom and fulfilled.
He tries to present evidence as to why Jesus is the promised Jewish messiah. Both gospels contain a genealogy of Christ and in each of them the writer agrees that Jesus is a descendant of Abraham and David. This relationship between Jesus, Abraham and David is essential to Matthews gospel. He uses these key Jewish figures to prove that their prophecy has been fulfilled. Luke on the other hand agrees that Jesus Is related to both Abraham and David, however, he argues that Jesus is the universal savior and the son of man rather than Just the Jewish messiah and he roves this by tracing Jesus’ lineage back to Adam the Orlando Son of God. how does ivermectin work cdc
The mall point that each writer raises Is that Christ Is of Importance . I believe that Matthew sets up his gospel so it cannot be proven wrong. One interesting thing that he does is he compares Jesus to Moses in the “Sermon on the Mount” And in that very moment Jesus is like a king to his subjects. ” When Jesus saw the crowds, he went up the mountain; and after he sat down, his disciples came to him” (Matthew 5:1 MRS.). In many ways this imagine is Just like that of Moses when he came down from Mat. Sinai.
Jesus starts interpreting the original Ten Commandments, the old law, and offers new law; which is recalling the revelation to Moses. If Jesus is like Moses, and Moses is a messianic figure then Jesus must also be a messianic figure himself. It is also suggested that Jesus teaches much Like that of a rabbi according to Duet. 9:9. Jesus Is set up to be above everyone else, and this Is what Luke has an Issue with. If Jesus were the Messiah, why would he stop with Just Jews? ivermectin rct Luke believes the complete opposite of Matthew.
Jesus is not the Jewish Messiah because he is the son f man; his is the universal savior. A sharp contrast to the “Sermon on the Mount” is the “Sermon on the Plain”. This idea puts Jesus on the same playing field as all other people. ” He came down with them and stood on a level place, with a great crowd of people from Judea, Jerusalem, and the coasts of Tree and Sided” (Luke 6:17) Instead of being above of all non-gentiles on a mountain he stands with them, suffers with them; he is equal.
In Lake’s words God’s love goes beyond Jews and Judea. God’s love goes beyond Judea because Christ is the universal savior. So why does this matter? It matters because It is possible that Matthew and Luke may be using the same document for their gospels. ivermectin and seizures in huskies “It Is assumed in this article that the verbal resemblances between Matthews “Sermon on the Mount” and Lake’s “Sermon on the Level Place” are so striking as to make It certain that the two evangelists are here working over the same documentary source. ” (Peg. 88 In the this is the case then it is plausible that no only did Luke expand off of Matthews gospel but he may have used the same “documentary source ” to preach a similar message. Patton goes on to talk about the similarities and differences in both Matthew and Luke like I have except he looks directly at the differing ways that Christ talks to his followers such as ” The injunction of Jesus according to Matthew, ” Be Ye there Perfect,” Luke seems to have softened into the injunction, ” Be ye therefore merciful,” as being more within the bounds of attainment. (Peg 288, Deviations) If this is the case then Matthew and Luke are both trying to make sense out of the same or argumentatively the same document. Matthew and Luke have differing motives as to why they focus on certain elements in their gospels such as their takes on Jesus’ sermons and his genealogy. Where ever Matthew emphasizes Jesus’ “Swinishness” , Luke De-emphasizes it by tracing Christ back to Adam the original son of God and by including both Abraham and David it ties both of these figures to Lake’s belief because most of Christians were Jewish at this time.
So instead of associating his reader ship wants to bring Jesus to the “world”. Matthew uses language in his gospel to describe Christ as king of the Jews. Luke twists Matthews word in his own gospel to prove that Christ is instead the universal savior. I find it interesting that Matthew argues that Chris is solely the Jewish messiah and how the prophecy was fulfilled. On the other hand, Lake’s gospel to sounds like the very first beginnings of the idea of Christianity.
It is as if Luke was saying that is Just so much more to this figure of Christ that he is more than what we thought. In essence, the concrete differences in both Matthew and Luke are only minute compared to the possibility of their source being the same, the synoptic problem loud lead us to conclude that if they both hold a different view of the sermons of Christ. Then who was he really? Is Christ the Jewish Messiah or is he the universal savior?
Luke makes Christ both divine and human while Matthew makes Christ the King of the Jews; I think that is necessary to know how they were as people or Disciples of Christ before we even compare these two gospels. Their geographic locations will allow us to the see their differing religious views more easily. Even though they have very different motives, they both agree that Christ is a savior, and although they will always promote different things the messages that they send will always resound as similar tidings.
Both gospels tell us to be a decent human being and to hold your self to a standard higher than animals. Through Patron’s article ” In the Deviances of Matthew and Luke” we can see that not much differs and not much changes the message of the lord will remain the same through out time regardless of what religion one claims he is the savior of. Bibliography: 1 . The Deviations of Matthew and Luke in the “Sermon on the Mount”, by Carl S. Patton The Biblical World 1916 The University of Chicago Press.