Jesus miracle of raising the centurion's son in Matthew is similar to the nobleman of John Matthew 8:5-13

the centurion

John 4:46-54 Nobleman

Could they refer to the same miracle?

-- Elpidio Gonzalez (egonzalez@srla.org), June 16, 2003

Answers

Any comments?

-- Elpidio Gonzalez (egonzalez@srla.org), June 16, 2003.

I doubt that these two accounts refer to the same incident. There are a number of significant discrepancies. The centurion approached Jesus in Cana, the "royal official" in Capernaum. The centurion was seeking healing for his servant, the official for his son. The interaction between Jesus and these two men was also quite different. In the case of the centurion, Jesus initially offered to go to his house, but the man himself, in a tremendous display of humility and faith, turned down the offer, confessing his unworthiness, and saying that the word of Jesus alone was enough. The royal official on the other hand was repeatedly imploring Jesus to come to his house. It was Jesus who declined to go there, telling the man to go home, and that his son would be healed.

One thing we should keep in mind regarding the scriptural accounts of Jesus' preaching, healing, and other activities is that the Bible provides only a tiny sampling of what He actually said and did. When we read that he gave a particular teaching at a particular town on a particular day, most likely he gave that same teaching many times, in many different places. The people of that town were not the only ones who needed to hear it! Jesus actively taught and ministered for roughly a thousand days (three years). The Bible records events from only a very few of those days. Yet , surely Jesus preached nearly every day, or at least several times a week. Likewise, the few people whose healings are specifically described are certainly representative of many hundreds, if not thousands of people whom Jesus healed. In some places we read general statements like "He healed all those who were brought to Him". Sometimes we pass over such passages, concentrating on the small number of more detailed descriptions provided. But no doubt there were days when the miraculous healings we read about were repeated many times over, perhaps even hundreds of times.

-- Paul (PaulCyp@cox.net), June 17, 2003.

Paul, I agree with what you have said in these lines: When we read that he gave a particular teaching at a particular town on a particular day, most likely he gave that same teaching many times, in many different places. The people of that town were not the only ones who needed to hear it! Jesus actively taught and ministered for roughly a thousand days (three years). The Bible records events from only a very few of those days. Yet , surely Jesus preached nearly every day, or at least several times a week. Likewise, the few people whose healings are specifically described are certainly representative of many hundreds, if not thousands of people whom Jesus healed.

There is so much that is not in the Bible, and the setting for many of his preachings was not the same.

Here is the part that makes believe this are the same : John 4:46 So Jesus came again into Cana of Galilee, where he made the water wine. And there was a certain nobleman, whose son was sick at Capernaum. The man is from cana, but the son is sick at Capernaum.

Could it be that as you were saying, once the Gospel reached the Romans, changing the official to a Roman Centurion would help in their conversion ?

-- Elpidio Gonzalez (egonzalez@srla.org), June 17, 2003.

No, Elpidio. Your theory would render one account true and the other false. But the Bible is inerrant, so your theory cannot be correct.
We reject your non-Christian idea that the Bible is loaded with errors and intentional modifications made for ulterior motives. You started this thread with an interesting question, but it proved to be nothing but a vehicle for you to try to tempt people to believe that the Bible -- even the New Testament -- is full of fictions and nonhistorical material. Your actions at this forum are just horrible, Elpidio.
John

-- J. F. Gecik (jfgecik@hotmail.com), June 17, 2003.

John G, why are Matthew, Mark, and Luke called the synoptics? Which do you think best fits your answer? a) they are the same b) they are different c) they may look the same in some parts, yet they are different d) They copied one another e)add my own explanation

Explain these: matthew 9:2727As Jesus went on from there, two blind men followed him, calling out, "Have mercy on us, Son of David!"

Matthew 20:30Two blind men were sitting by the roadside, and when they heard that Jesus was going by, they shouted, "Lord, Son of David, have mercy on us!"

Mark 8:22They came to Bethsaida, and some people brought a blind man and begged Jesus to touch him.

10:46Then they came to Jericho. As Jesus and his disciples, together with a large crowd, were leaving the city, a blind man, Bartimaeus (that is, the Son of Timaeus), was sitting by the roadside begging.

Luke 18:35As Jesus approached Jericho, a blind man was sitting by the roadside begging.

John 9:1As he went along, he saw a man blind from birth.

Last 3 gospels mention 1 blind man. Matthew doubles it.

Matthew 28:5The angel said to the women, "Do not be afraid, for I know that you are looking for Jesus, who was crucified

Mark 16:4But when they looked up, they saw that the stone, which was very large, had been rolled away. 5As they entered the tomb, they saw a young man dressed in a white robe sitting on the right side, and they were alarmed.

Luke 24: 4While they were wondering about this, suddenly two men in clothes that gleamed like lightning stood beside them. 5In their fright the women bowed down with their faces to the ground, but the men said to them, "Why do you look for the living among the dead?

John 20:10Then the disciples went back to their homes, 11but Mary stood outside the tomb crying. As she wept, she bent over to look into the tomb 12and saw two angels in white, seated where Jesus' body had been, one at the head and the other at the foot.

Was there only an angel at the tomb as Mark and Matthew say, or there were two, as Luke and John say?

-- Elpidio Gonzalez (egonzalez@srla.org), June 18, 2003.

Jmj

Elpidio, for a respectful Protestant who is a newcomer to the forum, I would patiently go through each item you have raised.
But I will not do so for you, because you don't deserve it. Why not? Because I have already explained the last item to you in the past, but you have already forgotten what I told you. Why should I put a lot of effort into explaining things again to an abuser like you, who doesn't have the courtesty to remember or to learn from what I said previously?

I will remind you of how you have repeatedly gone wrong on the last point. It is so simple that you ought to be ashamed of yourself.

You wrote: "Was there only an angel at the tomb as Mark and Matthew say, or there were two, as Luke and John say?"

From now on, Elpidio, I will call you "Luther Gonzalez." Just as the heretic Fr. Martin Luther added the word "allein" (alone) to Romans 3:28 -- yielding "For we hold that a man is justified by faith alone, apart from works of law" -- so you, Elpidio, have added the word "only" to what Sts. Mark and Matthew wrote. You claim that they specifically claim that there was ONLY one angel at the sepulchre, but your claim is false. The truth is that they mention only one of the two angels who were there, while Sts. Luke and John mention both angels.

I want to assure all "lurkers" that, for every alleged contradiction in the Bible, there is an explanation. Do not, good people, be misled, by heretics like Luther Gonzalez. The Bible contains no errors.

God bless you.
John

-- J. F. Gecik (jfgecik@hotmail.com), June 19, 2003.

Q.E.D

-- Elpidio Gonzalez (egonzalez@srla.org), June 20, 2003.