Which Bible Book?

  • Thread starter Thread starter MadParrotWoman
  • Start date Start date
  • Christian Chat is a moderated online Christian community allowing Christians around the world to fellowship with each other in real time chat via webcam, voice, and text, with the Christian Chat app. You can also start or participate in a Bible-based discussion here in the Christian Chat Forums, where members can also share with each other their own videos, pictures, or favorite Christian music.

    If you are a Christian and need encouragement and fellowship, we're here for you! If you are not a Christian but interested in knowing more about Jesus our Lord, you're also welcome! Want to know what the Bible says, and how you can apply it to your life? Join us!

    To make new Christian friends now around the world, click here to join Christian Chat.
Tintin said:
It's okay, bro. They have their groupies too. And sure, Matthew is the most well-known, but do people really like him? :P
Click to expand...

They are all awesome in their own way.
...but some days, it's just a Gospel of Mark kind of day.

Live each day "According-ly" :D
 
Reborn said:
They are all awesome in their own way.
...but some days, it's just a Gospel of Mark kind of day.

Live each day "According-ly" :D
Click to expand...

True, true. But for me at least, the gospel of Matthew is The Lion, the Witch and the Wardrobe of the Bible. It's very good but it just doesn't have the same impact as the others, because I've heard/read it so much and am overly familiar with it.
 
Tintin said:
True, true. But for me at least, the gospel of Matthew is The Lion, the Witch and the Wardrobe of the Bible. It's very good but it just doesn't have the same impact as the others, because I've heard/read it so much and am overly familiar with it.
Click to expand...

Yeah...this is true...... I could recite it....in my sleep.
 
Tintin said:
It's okay, bro. They have their groupies too. And sure, Matthew is the most well-known, but do people really like him? :P
Click to expand...

I do like him, and also his account. :)
He used to be a tax collector. Just imagine how the "righteous" religious Jews wouldnt even eat or associate with him just because of his past. So he must have suffered a lot. But I'm sure he was a wonderful transformed person. And he served God to provide us with a beautiful Gospel.
His account is the longest and most comprehensive of the Gospels, so if you want a basis, that would be the gospel of Matthew, all these nice beatitudes and sermons of Jesus are given in full exactly in Matthew. God knew why He sent that one to me, because it probably has Jesus talking Himself the most. Yeah I know everybody is thrilled with John "that's the best" yadada yadada :p but I like the simplicity in Matthew.

When I was a teenager, my dad went to a baptism of a cousin's child and the priest sent me a pocket book, the gospel of Matthew. That book has stayed for years with me and I read it sometimes. God was working through it and kept drawing me although I did not instantaneously become a believer. With all these sermons there, it was like Jesus was talking to and preaching to me. It did make an impact. Every time.
 
Last edited:
Nothing wrong with that, my sister. The reason we have four gospels is to show different perspectives and understandings of the Son of God. That said, some gospels are suited to certain audiences more than others. I remember learning this at the Christian university I attended, back in the day.

Matthew is best for people who come from an organised church background, those with a more traditional perspective.

Mark is great for young people, busy people and new Christians.

Luke is really good in its universal appeal. It speaks best to intelligent, educated and sensitive people.

John is excellent for those who are spiritual but don't know God eg. people who are believers in the New Age and Eastern Mysticism.
 
This graph would explain why Mark seems to be the least popular. Never thought of looking this up before but yeah, I've just never seen his gospel stand out so much and now I see why - it has only 3% content which is not found in the other gospels. Forgive me if all this is already well known to you, but I never actually studied the Bible with "scholarship" angle and this kind of stuff so I find it interesting. What are your thoughts on why this is so and why was the gospel content not more equally distributed?

Relationship_between_synoptic_gospels.jpg

Though the three Synoptic Gospels share a considerable amount of text, over 90% of John's Gospel is unique to it.[SUP][/SUP] The synoptics describe much more of Jesus' life, miracles, parables, and exorcisms. However, the material unique to John is notable, especially in its effect on later Christianity.
Click to expand...
 
Last edited:
Tintin said:
Nothing wrong with that, my sister. The reason we have four gospels is to show different perspectives and understandings of the Son of God. That said, some gospels are suited to certain audiences more than others. I remember learning this at the Christian university I attended, back in the day.

Matthew is best for people who come from an organised church background, those with a more traditional perspective.

Mark is great for young people, busy people and new Christians.

Luke is really good in its universal appeal. It speaks best to intelligent, educated and sensitive people.

John is excellent for those who are spiritual but don't know God eg. people who are believers in the New Age and Eastern Mysticism.
Click to expand...

This is interesting.

I've always liked the flow of Matthew.
If you are into Revelation or prophecy study, Matthew is the best cross ref book, IMO?

This is very interesting to me though?
 
Tintin said:
Matthew is best for people who come from an organised church background, those with a more traditional perspective.

Mark is great for young people, busy people and new Christians.

Luke is really good in its universal appeal. It speaks best to intelligent, educated and sensitive people.

John is excellent for those who are spiritual but don't know God eg. people who are believers in the New Age and Eastern Mysticism.
Click to expand...

I'd like to hear more expounding on this, especially about Mark.
I've noticed people who favor Gospel of John are people who consider Love of God key (like my husband, and I have to admit, John and Matthew are equal to me now where Matthew was my top favorite).
 
SoulWeaver said:
This graph would explain why Mark seems to be the least popular. Never thought of looking this up before but yeah, I've just never seen his gospel stand out so much and now I see why - it has only 3% content which is not found in the other gospels. Forgive me if all this is already well known to you, but I never actually studied the Bible with "scholarship" angle and this kind of stuff so I find it interesting. What are your thoughts on why this is so and why was the gospel content not more equally distributed?

View attachment 96211
Click to expand...

This is interesting also.
I have to admit, it almost bogged down my laptop the second it popped on my screen.:D
That's a big graph.:eek:
 
Tintin said:
Nothing wrong with that, my sister. The reason we have four gospels is to show different perspectives and understandings of the Son of God. That said, some gospels are suited to certain audiences more than others. I remember learning this at the Christian university I attended, back in the day.

Matthew is best for people who come from an organised church background, those with a more traditional perspective.

Mark is great for young people, busy people and new Christians.

Luke is really good in its universal appeal. It speaks best to intelligent, educated and sensitive people.

John is excellent for those who are spiritual but don't know God eg. people who are believers in the New Age and Eastern Mysticism.
Click to expand...

Okay, I did a teaching course, not a theology course, so please keep that in mind.

Matthew covers the basics in a linear fashion and in a very matter of fact way. There's Jesus birth to Jesus death and resurrection. And there's more time spent detailing the Jewish cultural context and how Jesus subverted the Old Covenant and was the fufillment of the New Covenant.

Mark is a shorter book than the other gospels. Also, it covers most of the stuff you need to know about Jesus and His ministry and what He's calling His followers to participate in.

Luke is rooted more in the emotional language of Jesus than some of the other gospels. It also explores and relates the life of the Son of God in a way that more brain-motivated seekers and followers can take hold of. There's an emphasis on the humanity of Christ and how He limited Himself for our sake.

John is very different to the other gospels. The language is more evocative and spiritually-motivated and there's a larger exploration of the divinity of Christ and what it means for Jesus to fully God/fully man. Much of the material in John can't be found in the other gospels. The spiritual realm is taken for granted as truth. Little time is spent talking about the Jewish culture of the time.
 
Tintin said:
Okay, I did a teaching course, not a theology course, so please keep that in mind.

Matthew covers the basics in a linear fashion and in a very matter of fact way. There's Jesus birth to Jesus death and resurrection. And there's more time spent detailing the Jewish cultural context and how Jesus subverted the Old Covenant and was the fufillment of the New Covenant.

Mark is a shorter book than the other gospels. Also, it covers most of the stuff you need to know about Jesus and His ministry and what He's calling His followers to participate in.

Luke is rooted more in the emotional language of Jesus than some of the other gospels. It also explores and relates the life of the Son of God in a way that more brain-motivated seekers and followers can take hold of. There's an emphasis on the humanity of Christ and how He limited Himself for our sake.

John is very different to the other gospels. The language is more evocative spiritually-motivated and there's a larger exploration of the divinity of Christ and what it means for Jesus to fully God/fully man. Much of the material in John can't be found in the other gospels. The spiritual realm is taken for granted as truth. Little time is spent talking about the Jewish culture of the time.
Click to expand...

Thank you for this, that's exactly what I wanted to know, how the differences in style and content affect different persons.
Makes me want to read the gospels again!
Before MPW confiscates the other three away, that is, so I better hurry :D

P.S.
I also see now why Matthew was sent to me, considering the abolishing of Pharisees and their ways.
The main obstacle to my salvation was that no one explained to me how to get born again, and I was trying to stop sinning on my own power... the Catholic church has never taught me how to walk, just laid burden upon burden, and tons of rituals which I've finally started to contempt. The gospel of Matthew was preparing me to finally pursue the path of a disciple!
 
Last edited:
Tintin said:
Okay, I did a teaching course, not a theology course, so please keep that in mind.

Matthew covers the basics in a linear fashion and in a very matter of fact way. There's Jesus birth to Jesus death and resurrection. And there's more time spent detailing the Jewish cultural context and how Jesus subverted the Old Covenant and was the fufillment of the New Covenant.

Mark is a shorter book than the other gospels. Also, it covers most of the stuff you need to know about Jesus and His ministry and what He's calling His followers to participate in.

Luke is rooted more in the emotional language of Jesus than some of the other gospels. It also explores and relates the life of the Son of God in a way that more brain-motivated seekers and followers can take hold of. There's an emphasis on the humanity of Christ and how He limited Himself for our sake.

John is very different to the other gospels. The language is more evocative and spiritually-motivated and there's a larger exploration of the divinity of Christ and what it means for Jesus to fully God/fully man. Much of the material in John can't be found in the other gospels. The spiritual realm is taken for granted as truth. Little time is spent talking about the Jewish culture of the time.
Click to expand...

Thanks for that brother.
 
The "honest answer" is ALL OF THEM...............but, because you are asking to state only two specific...........I must reply:

ALL OF 'EM................ (oh well, can't lie about it can I?)

:)
 
Matthew tends to present the Jewish Messiah as the fulfillment of the Old Testament hopes of Israel, Mark shows Jesus as the suffering Son of God who dies for the sins of the world, Luke emphasizes that Jesus is a Saviour for all people, while John seems to focus on the fact that Jesus is the eternal Son of God.
 
I like the example the person has made of choosing between your kids.
But if I should give an answer to that, I would say Genesis & Revelation
Genesis is the Alpha, the beginnings of God's dealings with mankind
Revelation is the Omega, the end of God's dealings with mankind.
They are like the Alphabet. Without them we cannot have what came in between them.
What follows is a new world, a new order, no Genesis-beginning, for it is man in eternity, the perfect state of life.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top Bottom
Back