Matthew’s description of Jesus’ death and afterlife differs from Mark’s narrative in a number of ways: first, Matthew revises Mark’s story by adding new information, and second, Matthew adds his own story of Jesus resurrection appearances. Examine this issue by comparing the following passages: Jesus’ death: Mk 15:33-41//Mt 27:45-56 Mark and Matthew are almost word… Continue reading →
While comparing the different passages between the two Gospels, there are very few differences in the Jesus’ death stories. Matthew uses more sophisticated language than Mark which makes the story seem more credible than Marks. In verses 16:1-8 of Mark and 28:1-15 Matthew with the tomb story again Matthew uses greater langue than Mark again… Continue reading →
Matthew has revised Mark gospel so that Jesus explicitly announces that Peter will be the foundation on which his church will be built and essentially gives Peter pope status by saying that whatever you bind on earth will be bound in heaven and whatever you loose on earth will be loosed in heaven. Matthew most… Continue reading →
When looking at Matthew’s version of the crucifixion, burial, and resurrection of Jesus, as compared to Mark’s, we see that Matthew followed the normal plot line of an ancient biography. Matthew’s account of Jesus, throughout the Gospel, focuses on the divine, and how Jesus fulfills the ancient scriptures, beginning with his genealogy and decent from… Continue reading →
Matthew’s story of Jesus greatly differs from Mark’s narrative. Although Matthew uses ninety percent of Mark’s gospel, he also includes Jesus’ birth and his resurrection, which is not a part of Mark. Matthew gives new information to Jesus’ death. Matthew uses most of the same wording from Mark when telling of the death but also describes… Continue reading →
Matthew 16: 13-20 helps give a more in depth insight of the conversation between Jesus and his disciples in Mark 8: 27-30. Matthew tells the reader what was really was said in the conversation and how Jesus is thankful that his disciples refer to him in his divine name but for the sake of others… Continue reading →
Matthew revised Mark in a number of ways. When reading both passages, I first saw that Matthew’s was longer than Mark’s. Matthew’s passage was more wordy and detailed, while Mark’s was more abrupt and brief. Matthew gave examples and more reason to what Jesus was saying to his disciples. Jesus explained to his disciples… Continue reading →
The Mark and Matthew interpretations of Jesus are different in a few ways. The first way is that I believe that Mark writes about a seeing is believing type of faith. Since Jesus performed that miracle exorcism in public, everyone saw that everyone, even other-worldly, unclean spirits, had to listen to the voice of Jesus.… Continue reading →
Matthew 16:13-20 revised Mark 8:27-30 by increasing the amount of messianic imagery and overtones and inserting a few verses where Jesus instructs Peter on the founding of his church (he will be the “rock” of the church). He endows Peter with the authority (“keys”) to regulate what is allowed and prohibited in the church, in… Continue reading →
In Matthews account 16:13-20 of Jesus questioning the disciples on his nature, three lines are added from Mark’s account including a foretelling of the future, and emphasizing a) That Jesus is the Messiah son of God and b) That his disciples are not aware of this in “flesh and blood” but have acknowledged it. The… Continue reading →
