2006-11-17 09:16:10 · 10 answers · asked by Anonymous in Society & Culture ➔ Religion & Spirituality
What we were taught in seminary: Some scholars believe that they are the same sermon, others point out that Jesus frequently preached similar themes in different places. However, some modern scholars believe that at least one of the "two" sermons never took place but was a compilation created by the Evangelist to frame the primary teachings of Jesus recorded in the Q document.
Either way makes sense, based on how the Gospels were compiled from oral tradition.
2006-11-17 09:23:32 · answer #1 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
Luke traced the line via David’s son Nathan, quite of Solomon as did Matthew. (Lu 3:31; Mt a million:6, 7) Luke of course follows the ancestry of Mary, subsequently exhibiting Jesus’ organic descent from David, whilst Matthew shows Jesus’ criminal precise to the throne of David by potential of descent from Solomon via Joseph, who replaced into legally Jesus’ father. The lists of Matthew and Luke come collectively lower back in 2 persons, Shealtiel and Zerubbabel. this would be that Shealtiel replaced into the son of Jeconiah; perchance by potential of marriage to the daughter of Neri he grew to become Neri’s son-in-regulation, subsequently being stated as the “son of Neri.” Or probable that Neri had no sons, so as that Shealtiel replaced into counted as his “son” for that reason additionally. Zerubbabel, who replaced into in all probability the certainly son of Pedaiah, replaced into legally reckoned through fact the son of Shealtiel, as suggested in the past.—study Mt a million:12; Lu 3:27; 1Ch 3:17-19. Then the money owed point out that Zerubbabel had 2 sons, Rhesa and Abiud, the lines diverging lower back at this component. (those would have been, no longer certainly sons, yet descendants, or one, a minimum of, would have been a son-in-regulation. study 1Ch 3:19.) (Lu 3:27; Mt a million:13)
2016-12-10 10:58:31 · answer #2 · answered by ? 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Since the Word is inerrant, it was both a plain AND a mount. Obviously they were referring (compositely) to a quarter-horse. (God! I've rescued the divine word yet again from the grips of the way-too observant! Let that be a lesson to you!)
2006-11-17 09:24:46 · answer #3 · answered by JAT 6 · 0⤊ 0⤋
The sermons are not alike word for word, so they were possibly given at different times.
2006-11-17 09:20:31 · answer #4 · answered by freelancenut 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Jesus first sermon "sermon on the mount"
no confusion.
2006-11-17 09:18:42 · answer #5 · answered by cork 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Or in the ocean like Jonah or in a bus. I still won't eat green eggs and ham. These are still minor details. Look deeper friend.
2006-11-17 09:18:01 · answer #6 · answered by Love Shepherd 6 · 0⤊ 0⤋
It was probably on the mountain. I hear there are snakes on the-- ow! ow! okay, sorry! I know it's a bad joke!
2006-11-17 09:21:14 · answer #7 · answered by skepsis 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋
wow havent seen u in a while. wb.
2006-11-17 09:18:03 · answer #8 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
It doesn't matter where it was given.
2006-11-17 09:18:27 · answer #9 · answered by stpolycarp77 6 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Do you think it matters?
2006-11-17 09:19:12 · answer #10 · answered by Jay Z 6 · 0⤊ 0⤋