IS THERE A SYNOPTIC PROBLEM OR A
SCHOLARSHIP PROBLEM ?
“The eyes of the LORD preserve knowledge, and He overthrows the words of the
transgressor. (Pro.22:12)
SCHOLARSHIP PROBLEM ?
“The eyes of the LORD preserve knowledge, and He overthrows the words of the
transgressor. (Pro.22:12)
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
FOUR BOOKS ONE GOSPEL
Website update 3:3:10
 |
 |
 |
PERSECUTED CHURCH LINKS
http://www.persecutionblog.com/
THE SYNOPTIC PROBLEM SOLUTION
HARMONISED TEXTS
TAITAN'S HARMONY
Another man: the author of the first harmony, had a similar reputation. Taitan 160- AD compiled a harmony, which had
a great influence on the Church and its interpretation of Scripture. Yet Taitan was a Gnostic, a heretic, a liar, yet perversely the Church acts as though his compilation of a Gospel harmony was correct. Yet Taitan’s harmony, as have all subsequent harmonies, has thousands of errors because of the way it is complied. It is forced and similar incidences are mistaken for identical incidences, so that the Gospels appear to have errors. Taitan is the second foundation stone of Liberalism.
1. Lightfoot J.B. The Apostolic Fathers. pg.269.
2. ibid pg.269
3. ibid pg.269
Another man: the author of the first harmony, had a similar reputation. Taitan 160- AD compiled a harmony, which had
a great influence on the Church and its interpretation of Scripture. Yet Taitan was a Gnostic, a heretic, a liar, yet perversely the Church acts as though his compilation of a Gospel harmony was correct. Yet Taitan’s harmony, as have all subsequent harmonies, has thousands of errors because of the way it is complied. It is forced and similar incidences are mistaken for identical incidences, so that the Gospels appear to have errors. Taitan is the second foundation stone of Liberalism.
1. Lightfoot J.B. The Apostolic Fathers. pg.269.
2. ibid pg.269
3. ibid pg.269
IT IS NOT GOOD TO BE WITHOUT KNOWLEDGE.
The Synoptic Problem stems from ignorance
of the Scriptures and history.
The Synoptic Problem begins with two
ancient historical figures:
PAPIAS and TAITAN.
PAPIAS was the first to say that there was an oral collection of sayings of Jesus before the Gospels were written. This implies that the Gospels could not be chronologically written, nor accurately transmitted. This collection of sayings whether in written or oral form is the basis for the assumption that there is a "Q" source. (German quelle -source)
The Synoptic Problem stems from ignorance
of the Scriptures and history.
The Synoptic Problem begins with two
ancient historical figures:
PAPIAS and TAITAN.
PAPIAS was the first to say that there was an oral collection of sayings of Jesus before the Gospels were written. This implies that the Gospels could not be chronologically written, nor accurately transmitted. This collection of sayings whether in written or oral form is the basis for the assumption that there is a "Q" source. (German quelle -source)
THERE IS NO ORAL TRADITION.
FIRST REASON
The Israelites were a literate race from their beginning. The Pentateuch has many references to reading and writing. All Israelites were commanded
to write the commandments on their hand, as frontlets between their eyes,
gates doorposts. (Deut. 6:8-9) There are many references to reading in the Gospels. Jesus only had a carpenter's education but He read in the
synogogues as did all the men.
SECOND REASON.
In order to memorize a story or even a statement, it must first be written down. No one can memorize a dialogue with just one hearing of it and without being commanded to do so. Once you can read and write there is no point in memorizing except to allow for circumstances where you do not have access to the written record.
THIRD REASON.
Humanly speaking it is impossible to have an oral record of historical dialogue, for no one understands the importance of an event until well afterwards.Then it is too late to remember dialogue accurately. That is why historical records do
not record dialogue; except the Bible and that because it is divinely inspired.
FOURTH REASON.
The Gospels indicate that they were committed virtually immediately to paper
Jesus says
“...let him that reads understand.” (Mk.13:14)
Jesus is sayimg in effect that the next person to know of these words
would know of them by reading them.
FIFTH REASON.
If it were possible that the sayings of Jesus were committed to memory, because say Jesus repeated them so many times that they stuck in the mind, there are many other sayings by other minor characters that are still integral with the story yet would never had been committed to memory.
The proposition that there first existed an oral record from which later books were written is simply stupidity or an outright lie.
FIRST REASON
The Israelites were a literate race from their beginning. The Pentateuch has many references to reading and writing. All Israelites were commanded
to write the commandments on their hand, as frontlets between their eyes,
gates doorposts. (Deut. 6:8-9) There are many references to reading in the Gospels. Jesus only had a carpenter's education but He read in the
synogogues as did all the men.
SECOND REASON.
In order to memorize a story or even a statement, it must first be written down. No one can memorize a dialogue with just one hearing of it and without being commanded to do so. Once you can read and write there is no point in memorizing except to allow for circumstances where you do not have access to the written record.
THIRD REASON.
Humanly speaking it is impossible to have an oral record of historical dialogue, for no one understands the importance of an event until well afterwards.Then it is too late to remember dialogue accurately. That is why historical records do
not record dialogue; except the Bible and that because it is divinely inspired.
FOURTH REASON.
The Gospels indicate that they were committed virtually immediately to paper
Jesus says
“...let him that reads understand.” (Mk.13:14)
Jesus is sayimg in effect that the next person to know of these words
would know of them by reading them.
FIFTH REASON.
If it were possible that the sayings of Jesus were committed to memory, because say Jesus repeated them so many times that they stuck in the mind, there are many other sayings by other minor characters that are still integral with the story yet would never had been committed to memory.
The proposition that there first existed an oral record from which later books were written is simply stupidity or an outright lie.
THERE IS NO LITERARY DEPENDENCY
Literary Dependency simply means copying from one Gospel to another.
The false witnesses accused Jesus as follows,
“This fellow said, ““I am able to destroy the temple of God, and to build it in three days.””(Matt 26:61)
"We heard him say, “I will destroy this temple that is made with hands, and within three days I
will build another made without hands.”" (Mk 14:58)
BUT
These false witnesses misquote from the book of John. (Jn.2:19) not from Matthew or Mark as one would expect, because it is not in either of these books. These statements are similar but have a different sense because the verbs are different, which definitely indicates that neither Mark nor Matthew were copied from each other. They are different statements uttered by different people. And humanly speaking John must preceed Matthew and Mark because that is the source of the quote. Except of course, if the Gospels were divinely inspired.
MOREOVER
The two statements are not the same statements but separate statements by different witnesses and occur in different books. If there was literary dependancy one would expect the statements to be the same statement and attributed to both witnesses. There are many similar instances where the dialogue in two or more Gospels are similar but have a different sense and hence definitely not the same statement, indicating that they were independently written.
See God speaking at Jesus' baptism. http://neilcadman.com/john_baptizes_jesus.htm
FURTHERMORE
The statements are only heard at the trial by John, not Matthew or Mark who record them. John does not record them. This speaks in favour of Divine inspiration and is contrary to literary dependency.
AND THEREFORE
Literary Dependency simply means copying from one Gospel to another.
The false witnesses accused Jesus as follows,
“This fellow said, ““I am able to destroy the temple of God, and to build it in three days.””(Matt 26:61)
"We heard him say, “I will destroy this temple that is made with hands, and within three days I
will build another made without hands.”" (Mk 14:58)
BUT
These false witnesses misquote from the book of John. (Jn.2:19) not from Matthew or Mark as one would expect, because it is not in either of these books. These statements are similar but have a different sense because the verbs are different, which definitely indicates that neither Mark nor Matthew were copied from each other. They are different statements uttered by different people. And humanly speaking John must preceed Matthew and Mark because that is the source of the quote. Except of course, if the Gospels were divinely inspired.
MOREOVER
The two statements are not the same statements but separate statements by different witnesses and occur in different books. If there was literary dependancy one would expect the statements to be the same statement and attributed to both witnesses. There are many similar instances where the dialogue in two or more Gospels are similar but have a different sense and hence definitely not the same statement, indicating that they were independently written.
See God speaking at Jesus' baptism. http://neilcadman.com/john_baptizes_jesus.htm
FURTHERMORE
The statements are only heard at the trial by John, not Matthew or Mark who record them. John does not record them. This speaks in favour of Divine inspiration and is contrary to literary dependency.
AND THEREFORE
THERE IS NO REDACTOR?
Because no editor would think of taking an important quotation, forming part of a story, from one book to another. He would quote from the same book. He would put the original statement and its quote in the same book, otherwise it takes away from the literary qualities.
THERE IS NO REDACTOR?
Without literary dependency there cannot be an editor, because an editor takes a portion of one document and adds it to another document, which is literary dependency.
MOREOVER
John says “there are many other signs which Jesus did in the presence of His disciples, which are not written in this book.” (Jn.20:30)
If, as some say, an editor) compiled this Gospel as much as 200 years after the event, how would he know that Jesus did many
other things, even after 20 years. A collection of sayings would never say a thing like that. But if he did have other material stating as much; a"Q" source he would never throw it away because that material would have no only equal standing but greater standing as that recorded in the Gospels i.e as the word of God. But no remains of a written "Q" source have ever been found.
INSPIRATION OF SCRIPTURE.
THE “Q” SOURCE IS THE HOLY SPIRIT.
Jesus says, “The Comforter, the Holy Spirit whom the Father will send in my name, He shall teach you all things
and will bring all things, to your remembrance, everything I have spoken to you.”(Jn.14:26)
The Holy Spirit brought all things to the disciples remembrance. Who is the source of the Gospels? It is the
Holy Spirit. Jesus is addressing the apostles. Since the Holy Spirit brought Jesus' words to each apostles remembrance what need did they have to copy Jesus' words from each another?
Do you think an editor would ever include such as statement? It would deny his work.
A DISREPUTABLE WITNESS.
Papias the author of oral tradition
Papias, AD. 0- 130 approximately, Bishop of Hierapolis in Asia and alleged by Eusebius
to be the writer of five books titled “Expositions of Oracles of the Lord,” made the claim that he was
taught by the apostles Andrew, Peter, Phillip, Thomas, James, John and Matthew plus two others who
were not apostles, Aristion and the elder John. To be certain this would make him a credible witness,
if it were true and he himself was trustworthy but the content of his own writings testifies that he is a disreputable witness and casts doubt on everyone who acknowledges him, such as IRENAUS AND
EUSEBIUS. Irenaus attributes the following as HAVING BEEN SPOKEN BY THE LORD and delivered
to Papias from the apostles.1.
“The days will come, in which vines shall grow, each having ten thousand shoots, and on each shoot ten thousand branches and on each branch again ten thousand twigs and on each twig ten thousand clusters,
and on each cluster ten thousand grapes and each grape when pressed shall yield five and twenty measures
of wine. And when any of the saints shall have taken hold of one of the clusters,another shall cry, I am a better cluster; take me, bless the Lord through me…” 2.
Is that or anything like it in the Bible? What do the Scriptures say,
“God, who in sundry times and divers manners spake in times past to the fathers by the prophets, has in
these last days spoken to us by the Son...” (Heb.1:1-2)
This means that God has ceased speaking to man, since speaking by Jesus as recorded by His apostles.
If Papias claimed to record the words of Jesus then he would be claiming to be an apostle. Now Anastasius of Sinai claimed Papias' sayings were interpreted spiritually, 3. nevertheless it is stated by Iraneus, that Papius claimed that Jesus said these words. If that was the case then they would be the words of God and hence Scripture. Aside from the somewhat ludicrous and carnal nature of the words Jesus is alleged to have said, and of which no parallel can be found amongst His words, they are extra Biblical and adding to the word of God.
“Do not add to His words, lest He reprove you and you be found a liar.” (Pro.30.6)
Papias was a liar.
Further damming evidence of his character is found in his denial of the death of Judas and
hence inerrancy of the Gospels in the following;
“Judas walked about in this world a terrible exampleof impiety; his flesh swollen to such an extent that,
where a wagon can pass with ease, he was not able to pass, no, not even the mass of his head merely. They
say that his eyelids swelled to such an extent that he could not see the light at all, while as for his eyes they
were not visible even by a physician looking through an instrument, so far had they sunk from the surface...”4.
The Scriptures expressly state that Judas hung himself, fell headlong and burst open in the middle and his entrails spilled out,
therefore the field was called the field of blood. (Acts 1. 18-19) That he died is certain for he went to his own place (Acts 1.25) which, since
he was possessed by Satan was hell. Therefore Papias is directly contradicting Scripture and plainly speaking only to those who were
ignorant of the Scriptures. He claimed to be taught by the apostles but speaks contrary to them.Papias was a liar. These sayings of
Papias are among his few remaining. It is a sad indictment against him if all that can be credited to him with certainty speaks only of his falsification of the Scriptures. It therefore must be made plain that any scholar who uses Papias as a source to justify a proposition is either terribly ignorant, terribly foolish or an outright deceiver. To use one such as Papias as a supporting source, invalidates one’s argument from the beginning.
Papias is the first foundation stone of the Synoptic Problem and Liberalism. Liberalism is simply unbelief in the Word of God.
IN THE BEGINNING WAS THE WORD... Jn.1:1
EVERY WORD OF GOD IS PURE. Pro 30:5
There are six things the Lord hates, a proud look, a lying tongue, hands that shed innocent blood, a heart that devises wicked imaginations, feet that run to do mischief, a false, lying witness and he that sows discord among brethren. Pro 6:16-17
There are six things the Lord hates, a proud look, a lying tongue, hands that shed innocent blood, a heart that devises wicked imaginations, feet that run to do mischief, a false, lying witness and he that sows discord among brethren. Pro 6:16-17