• Starting today August 7th, 2024, in order to post in the Married Couples, Courting Couples, or Singles forums, you will not be allowed to post if you have your Marital status designated as private. Announcements will be made in the respective forums as well but please note that if yours is currently listed as Private, you will need to submit a ticket in the Support Area to have yours changed.

Timeline of Gospels

Gozreht

Well-Known Member
Jun 25, 2011
723
25
USA
Visit site
✟1,114.00
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Republican
I am sure this has been discussed before but please humor me.

I would love to get a chronological Bible. But the only ones they have are KJV only. Not that the KJV is bad or anything but I would rather have an easier read. So, I was copying and posting my own and I realize there are a lot of timeline problems. It is hard to really put these in actual order. Some have "immediately they went here or there" and some only have "after a time they did this". And some of them are not congruent. Which ones do you all think are more reliable in terms of order of events? Matthew, Mark, Luke, or John?
 

Eloy

Light
Sep 16, 2012
330
11
✟656.00
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Single
I am sure this has been discussed before but please humor me.

I would love to get a chronological Bible. But the only ones they have are KJV only. Not that the KJV is bad or anything but I would rather have an easier read. So, I was copying and posting my own and I realize there are a lot of timeline problems. It is hard to really put these in actual order. Some have "immediately they went here or there" and some only have "after a time they did this". And some of them are not congruent. Which ones do you all think are more reliable in terms of order of events? Matthew, Mark, Luke, or John?

I am not sure what you are asking. Are you asking whether Matthew or Mark or Luke or John was written first in the order that they are given in the New Testament? Matthew was written first because Matthew witnessed the birth of Christ and recorded it after he listed Christ's genealogy. Or are you asking if there is a Bible on the market that is published in a different order than the common received text? Please clarify what you are asking.
 
Upvote 0

ptomwebster

Senior Member
Jul 10, 2011
1,484
45
MN
Visit site
✟1,922.00
Faith
Protestant
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Others
I am not sure what you are asking. Are you asking whether Matthew or Mark or Luke or John was written first in the order that they are given in the New Testament? Matthew was written first because Matthew witnessed the birth of Christ and recorded it after he listed Christ's genealogy. Or are you asking if there is a Bible on the market that is published in a different order than the common received text? Please clarify what you are asking.


"Matthew witnessed the birth of Christ" How do you figure Matthew witnessed the birth of Christ.

Gozreht, I have never heard of a "KJV only" version of Scripture. I have heard of KJV and NKJV.
 
Upvote 0

Eloy

Light
Sep 16, 2012
330
11
✟656.00
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Single
"Matthew witnessed the birth of Christ" How do you figure Matthew witnessed the birth of Christ.

Gozreht, I have never heard of a "KJV only" version of Scripture. I have heard of KJV and NKJV.

Because Matthew recorded the details of his birth. From the lit.Gk:
“Now the birth of Iesous Christos being this: engaged, to be that mother of him, Maria to Ioseph, before the coupling of them she was found in womb carrying by Holy Spirit. Ioseph thereupon the husband of her, righteous being and not willing her to example, advises secretly a dismissal of her. These things when he thought, here angel of Lord in dream appeared to him, saying, Ioseph son of David, fear not receiving Mariam that wife yours, for that in her born of Spirit is Holy: thereupon bear a son, and call the name of him Iesous: for Save he the people of him from the sins of them. Now this all facts that be fulfilled which spoken from the Lord by the prophet, saying, Here a virgin in womb will have and bear a son, and they will call the name of him Emmanuel, which being interpreted, With us the God. Excited thereupon he Ioseph from his sleep, did as commanded him the angel of Lord, and received that wife his, and not coited her until she bore the Son, and called the name of him Iesous.” Matthew 1:18-25.
 
Upvote 0

Gozreht

Well-Known Member
Jun 25, 2011
723
25
USA
Visit site
✟1,114.00
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Republican
I am not sure what you are asking. Are you asking whether Matthew or Mark or Luke or John was written first in the order that they are given in the New Testament? Matthew was written first because Matthew witnessed the birth of Christ and recorded it after he listed Christ's genealogy. Or are you asking if there is a Bible on the market that is published in a different order than the common received text? Please clarify what you are asking.
EX) One puts the telling of the parable of the sower at a certain point and then another puts it somewhere else in the timeline. I am not saying there are any contradictions. I just see a distorted timeline of when these things happened.

I hope that clarifies it a little more.
 
Upvote 0

Gozreht

Well-Known Member
Jun 25, 2011
723
25
USA
Visit site
✟1,114.00
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Republican
"Matthew witnessed the birth of Christ" How do you figure Matthew witnessed the birth of Christ.

Gozreht, I have never heard of a "KJV only" version of Scripture. I have heard of KJV and NKJV.
I meant are only available in KJV. I do not see any written in any other translation.
 
Upvote 0

Eloy

Light
Sep 16, 2012
330
11
✟656.00
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Single
EX) One puts the telling of the parable of the sower at a certain point and then another puts it somewhere else in the timeline. I am not saying there are any contradictions. I just see a distorted timeline of when these things happened.

I hope that clarifies it a little more.

Can you give a specific example. Because some parables may contain similar details, but in fact they are two separate and different parables. For example, a car accident witnessed by Matthew, and he gives the details of what he witnessed, and then a totally different car accident happens at another time which is witnessed by Mark and he records what he witnessed, but even though they are two different accidents they each might contain similar details, ie: both having cars, both might have similar named people, both happening at the same place, but each at a different time because they are not the same one occurrence, but two separate occurrences. Amen? Amen.
 
Upvote 0

Gozreht

Well-Known Member
Jun 25, 2011
723
25
USA
Visit site
✟1,114.00
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Republican
I already gave the example of the sower. In Matthew it happens in chapter 13 before the calming of the storm and Jairus' daughter being healed whaich are in chapter 8. But in Mark the sower has them in order; the sower in chapter 4 and then the storm and then Jarius daughter. Matthew has all the parables happening before the storm. Same with Luke but not Mark. I think the problem is mostly with Mark. Not saying it isn't Biblical since aqll the stories are accurate and true but jusy not in sync with Matthew and Luke. And those two aren't perfectly lined up either.
 
Upvote 0

ebia

Senior Contributor
Jul 6, 2004
41,711
2,142
A very long way away. Sometimes even further.
✟54,775.00
Faith
Anglican
Marital Status
Married
Politics
AU-Greens
I am sure this has been discussed before but please humor me.

I would love to get a chronological Bible. But the only ones they have are KJV only. Not that the KJV is bad or anything but I would rather have an easier read. So, I was copying and posting my own and I realize there are a lot of timeline problems. It is hard to really put these in actual order. Some have "immediately they went here or there" and some only have "after a time they did this". And some of them are not congruent. Which ones do you all think are more reliable in terms of order of events? Matthew, Mark, Luke, or John?

Why do you want to construct such a timeline?

The gospels are each a cohesive, God breathed, literary work. Not things to be cut-n-pasted into "what God should have given us - the straight facts in order".
 
Upvote 0

Eloy

Light
Sep 16, 2012
330
11
✟656.00
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Single
I already gave the example of the sower. In Matthew it happens in chapter 13 before the calming of the storm and Jairus' daughter being healed whaich are in chapter 8. But in Mark the sower has them in order; the sower in chapter 4 and then the storm and then Jarius daughter. Matthew has all the parables happening before the storm. Same with Luke but not Mark. I think the problem is mostly with Mark. Not saying it isn't Biblical since aqll the stories are accurate and true but jusy not in sync with Matthew and Luke. And those two aren't perfectly lined up either.

Oh, you mean chronology, chronological order. No, when retelling of historical events it is up to the teller of how they relay that to the listener. For example in Genesis chapter 1:20-25 God makes all the animals first and then in verse 26 he makes man, and in Genesis 2:19,20 it would "appear" that God made the man first and then the animals. However this is the same event. So I would explain it as God created all things first, and then made man last to take care of that what he made. And Genesis chapter two is a retelling of the the events. It would be like saying today I got up and showered and left the house. Then later retell it saying, "today I left the house when I got up and showered." It is the same event but told differently, and sometimes Matthew may be highlighting or emphasizing a particular point in the event and that is why he says it one way, and Mark may be highlighting a different aspect of the events and that is why he tells it the way he does. If you give me the exact chapters and verse in both books, I can look them up and do a comparative for you and show you the concord between them. Amen? Amen.
 
Upvote 0

Gozreht

Well-Known Member
Jun 25, 2011
723
25
USA
Visit site
✟1,114.00
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Republican
Why do you want to construct such a timeline?

The gospels are each a cohesive, God breathed, literary work. Not things to be cut-n-pasted into "what God should have given us - the straight facts in order".
Just for my own studies. I would love to read the way Jesus viewed things as they happened. I think it would put things into a better perspective of what He went through trying to talk to people. Sometimes we read He went here or there but how much time did He have to do it in? How "fast" did He have to go? I just think it would be cool to understand some of these things.
 
Upvote 0

Gozreht

Well-Known Member
Jun 25, 2011
723
25
USA
Visit site
✟1,114.00
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Republican
Oh, you mean chronology, chronological order. No, when retelling of historical events it is up to the teller of how they relay that to the listener. For example in Genesis chapter 1:20-25 God makes all the animals first and then in verse 26 he makes man, and in Genesis 2:19,20 it would "appear" that God made the man first and then the animals. However this is the same event. So I would explain it as God created all things first, and then made man last to take care of that what he made. And Genesis chapter two is a retelling of the the events. It would be like saying today I got up and showered and left the house. Then later retell it saying, "today I left the house when I got up and showered." It is the same event but told differently, and sometimes Matthew may be highlighting or emphasizing a particular point in the event and that is why he says it one way, and Mark may be highlighting a different aspect of the events and that is why he tells it the way he does. If you give me the exact chapters and verse in both books, I can look them up and do a comparative for you and show you the concord between them. Amen? Amen.
I appreciate this offer. That is what I am in the middle of doing with my own studies. This is how I came to realize the timeline of events are off. I agree that it is all about the ideas and not the order of events that is important. But I would like to have one to see if it may open up some more study ideas for me. I was just curious if any body else had the same ideas.
 
Upvote 0

Eloy

Light
Sep 16, 2012
330
11
✟656.00
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Single
I appreciate this offer. That is what I am in the middle of doing with my own studies. This is how I came to realize the timeline of events are off. I agree that it is all about the ideas and not the order of events that is important. But I would like to have one to see if it may open up some more study ideas for me. I was just curious if any body else had the same ideas.

To obtain the correct truth from scripture, we must start with the premise that the scripture is holy. That means there is "nothing off" with the scripture, but it is 100% correct, so if there "seems" to be something off when we read it, there is usually a logical explanation. The first thing we should do is read the holy scriptures from the Holy Spirit, because they are inspired, meaning God-breathed or God-spoken, so since the scriptures are inspired or in-spirited, we also must be inspired or in-spirited in order to rightly understand them. Also we must know that an English translation is a translation from one language, usually Hebrew written in old testament and Greek in the New Testament, into another language, so when you translate from one language crossing over into another different language mistranslations of words can occur. And these can usually be spotted because the English mistranslated word is out of context with the rest of the passage or else it does not make sense with the rest of the passage. So you can look up the word in the original Greek or Hebrew and find out that it was a mistranslated word. I translate the scriptures and I have found many words that have been mistranslated, not intentionally, but nonetheless it sometimes changes the meaning of a verse because of it. So first we must accept that the scriptures in their original tongues are 100% accurate, and that mistranslations into other languages, English not excluded, can occur. Then we must not isolate a word away from its proper context in the passage in order to attach a different meaning then what the passage demands, else false doctrine occur. So comparing line upon line, and word upon word, we can find the correct original meaning. Amen? Amen.
 
Upvote 0

Gozreht

Well-Known Member
Jun 25, 2011
723
25
USA
Visit site
✟1,114.00
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Republican
Found a great website that has already done the study I wanted to do. What they have put together is fantastic. It shows how the verses fit together almost in a daily basis. Very neat. Some may have a problem with what I did but I did not do this "to change scripture", but I put these verses together, took out all of the repetitive wording and put together what was left. In this order it is remarkable how scripture has come even more vibrant. I am not suggesting in any way shape or form that we should get rid of all the repetition and read the Bible this way as a church but as an individual some of these have made these stories from the past excitingly new.
 
Upvote 0

motherprayer

Elisha
Jul 12, 2012
8,470
586
Visit site
✟26,875.00
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
Found a great website that has already done the study I wanted to do. What they have put together is fantastic. It shows how the verses fit together almost in a daily basis. Very neat. Some may have a problem with what I did but I did not do this "to change scripture", but I put these verses together, took out all of the repetitive wording and put together what was left. In this order it is remarkable how scripture has come even more vibrant. I am not suggesting in any way shape or form that we should get rid of all the repetition and read the Bible this way as a church but as an individual some of these have made these stories from the past excitingly new.

What is the site? Id love to check it out!
 
Upvote 0

Gozreht

Well-Known Member
Jun 25, 2011
723
25
USA
Visit site
✟1,114.00
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Republican
CHRONOLOGICAL 4 GOSPELS

They out things side by side. They outline when they think it happened such as (33 years 2 months of age). And they have a couple other things on there. The site is not pleasing to the eye but some good information. They do not put all the words together like I did but it was a great place to start that activity. After I was done with the first part it was neat reading more of the whole story about Jesus being baptized by John. Can't wait to read more.
 
Upvote 0
May 29, 2011
745
64
New Brunswick
✟23,763.00
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Single
Politics
CA-Others
A timeline is weird for the gospels because Mark doesn't concern with chronological order, and because Luke and Matthew have a similar structure it is possible to assume that they are not chronologically accurate because it wasn't their concern. Still Papias seems to think Matthew was written in an orderly fashion of events, while Mark wasn't, and where does that leave Luke? A mystery of sorts.


Papias writes of the gospel of Mark

"The Elder used to say: Mark, in his capacity as Peter's interpreter wrote down accurately as many things a he recalled from memory though not in an ordered form of the things either said or done by the Lord. For he neither heard the Lord nor accompanied him, but later as I said, Peter, who used to give his teachings in the form of chreiai, but had no intention of providing an ordered arrangement of the logia of the Lord. Consequently Mark did nothing wrong when he wrote down some individual items just as he related them from memory. For he made it his one concern not to omit anything he had heard or to falsify anything."

and of the gospel of Matthew:

"therefore, Matthew put the logia in an ordered arrangement in the hebraidi dialecto, but each person interpreted them as best he could"

I left hebraidi dialecto because it could either mean "Hebrew language" meaning that the gospel of Mark was first written in Hebrew, or it could mean "Hebraic style" because both could be right.

but it seems that to establish a timeline that one should consider these things.
 
Upvote 0

Gozreht

Well-Known Member
Jun 25, 2011
723
25
USA
Visit site
✟1,114.00
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Republican
A timeline is weird for the gospels because Mark doesn't concern with chronological order, and because Luke and Matthew have a similar structure it is possible to assume that they are not chronologically accurate because it wasn't their concern. Still Papias seems to think Matthew was written in an orderly fashion of events, while Mark wasn't, and where does that leave Luke? A mystery of sorts.
That is why I started this study. The important thing of course is that no matter what order they are all accurate accounts of what happened in each situation.


Consequently Mark did nothing wrong when he wrote down some individual items just as he related them from memory. For he made it his one concern not to omit anything he had heard or to falsify anything."
Some have a problem with Mark 16. But as said here some of these things are his writings. The boy who ran naked in the garden when Jesus was arrested I believe is Mark. Maybe that is why later we learn he left Paul, perhaps he was scared to do a lot of the work until he grew up.

"therefore, Matthew put the logia in an ordered arrangement in the hebraidi dialecto, but each person interpreted them as best he could"

I left hebraidi dialecto because it could either mean "Hebrew language" meaning that the gospel of Mark was first written in Hebrew, or it could mean "Hebraic style" because both could be right.

but it seems that to establish a timeline that one should consider these things.
I agree. I see Matthew as the basis and try to use those words more than the others. John is completely different case. Most of his focus on the personal feelings of Jesus. It is more emotional and you can actually feel John's emotion.
 
Upvote 0

Gozreht

Well-Known Member
Jun 25, 2011
723
25
USA
Visit site
✟1,114.00
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Republican
As an example look what happens when you put all togther the story of John's (Baptist) testimony. Some may not be get anything out of this but I see the crowd in a different light now. John is yelling at the Pharisees. Now the crowd sees how he is getting the message across and they start asking for more. I don't know why I see that more clearly now. It's the same story but it seems it is more complete now. I took out verse numbers and stuff. Now it reads like a short story.

The Testimony of John

This is the testimony of John. John the Baptist appeared in the wilderness preaching a baptism of repentance for the forgiveness of sins. Now John himself was clothed with a garment of camel’s hair and a leather belt around his waist; and his food was locusts and wild honey. Then Jerusalem was going out to him, and all Judea and all the district around the Jordan; and they were being baptized by him in the Jordan River, as they confessed their sins.

The Jews sent to him priests and Levites from Jerusalem to ask him, “Who are you?” The people were in a state of expectation and all were wondering in their hearts about John, as to whether he was the Christ. And he confessed and did not deny, but confessed, “I am not the Christ.” They asked him, “What then? Are you Elijah?” And he said, “I am not.” “Are you the Prophet?” And he answered, “No.” Then they said to him, “Who are you, so that we may give an answer to those who sent us? What do you say about yourself?” He said, “I am a voice of one crying in the wilderness, ‘Make straight the way of the Lord,’ as Isaiah the prophet said.” Now they had been sent from the Pharisees. They asked him, and said to him, “Why then are you baptizing, if you are not the Christ, nor Elijah, nor the Prophet?” So, John began saying to the crowds who were going out to be baptized by him. “As for me, I baptize you with water for repentance, but among you stands One whom you do not know. He who is coming after me is mightier than I, and I am not fit to remove His sandals; He will baptize you with the Holy Spirit and fire. His winnowing fork is in His hand, and He will thoroughly clear His threshing floor; and He will gather His wheat into the barn, but He will burn up the chaff with unquenchable fire.”

But when he saw many of the Pharisees and Sadducees coming for baptism, he said to them, “You brood of vipers, who warned you to flee from the wrath to come? Therefore bear fruit in keeping with repentance; and do not suppose that you can say to yourselves, ‘We have Abraham for our father’; for I say to you that from these stones God is able to raise up children to Abraham. Indeed the axe is already laid at the root of the trees; therefore every tree that does not bear good fruit is cut down and thrown into the fire.

And the crowds were questioning him, saying, “Then what shall we do?” And he would answer and say to them, “The man who has two tunics is to share with him who has none; and he who has food is to do likewise.” And some tax collectors also came to be baptized, and they said to him, “Teacher, what shall we do?” And he said to them, “Collect no more than what you have been ordered to.” Some soldiers were questioning him, saying, “And what about us, what shall we do?” And he said to them, “Do not take money from anyone by force, or accuse anyone falsely, and be content with your wages.”

So with many other exhortations he preached the gospel to the people. These things took place in Bethany beyond the Jordan, where John was baptizing.
 
Upvote 0

pshun2404

Newbie
Jan 26, 2012
6,027
620
✟86,400.00
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Married
EX) One puts the telling of the parable of the sower at a certain point and then another puts it somewhere else in the timeline. I am not saying there are any contradictions. I just see a distorted timeline of when these things happened.

I hope that clarifies it a little more.

He being a Rabbi as well as the LORD Messiah probably taught His lessons and parables to more than one group at different times and in some cases in different places.

Paul
 
Upvote 0