Question about a verse?

Question

From the New American Standard version

Matt 8:5 And when Jesus entered Capernaum a centurian came to him 8:6 and saying "Lord my servant is lying paralyzed at home fearfully tormented"

Luke 7:2 And a centurian's slave who was highly regarded was sick and about to die. 7:3 when he heard about jesus he sent some Jewish elders asking him to come and save the life of his slave.

In matthew it says the centurian asked Jesus to save his slave yet in Luke it says he asked Jewish elders to go ask jesus. If that is not a contradiction why is it not? If it is a bad translation why has it not been translated properly in the last 1700 years.

Answer 1

Most Scholars hypothosize that the Gospels relied on oral traditions about Jesus and were actually written many years after Jesus' crucifxion. Most point ot Mark as the earliest Gospel (around 70 CE/AD) and guess that Matthew and Luke were written 10-20 years after that.

Not only do they rely on oral traditions--which would explain the variance in the way the stories are told--but the Gospel writers are writing out of very different situations and are making different theological points about their communities; Luke may have had an agenda in adding the detail about the Jewish Elders. Matthew may have had an agenda that led him to cut them out of his version.

It's ultimately about making an educated guess about the contexts and purposes of the writers.

Answer 2

It was common in those days to send someone on your behalf. This is not a contradiction. Cultures differ. Besides, couldn't both the centurion and the Jewish elders have talked to Jesus? The centurion may have sent the elders out first, then gone later to seek out Jesus himself. There is no indication that Jesus didn't hear from both parties.

It's also important to remember that Matthew and Luke were two different people who naturally emphasized different parts of the same story, just as you and I would if retelling a story. If you read the whole passage, you will notice that Matthew is more concerned with the end of the event, the interaction between Jesus and the centurion, whereas Luke emphasized the actions/heart of the Jewish leaders. Hope that helps.

Answer 3

In Matthew the servant/slave is paralized and in Luke he is sick unto death. Both end the same way. Matthew was with Jesus at the time, Luke heard from eyewitness and wrote his account. You know if you have 5 people that see the exact same thing, you will get 5 different stories. I don't think either is wrong and possibly some of the witnesses saw the people going to Jesus and assumed they were elders. And since Luke was getting his report from eyewitnesses, they may have all told him different stories.

Answer 4

I believe the Bible is inerrant and God-breathed.

What appears as a contradiction on the surface, might have been easily understood in that culture of the day. The Centurian was a well-respected army officer, commanding about 100 men. For him to meet someone, or have others meet someone on his behalf, are likely irrelevant. In other words, the Jewish elders acting on behalf of the Centurian, carry the same weight as the Centurian himself. Mathew records it one way in his style; whereas, Luke - a physician (and likely more particular in writing and speech) - identified the elders.

Answer 5

Perhpas when Matthew recorded the story he had heard that Centurian asked, but perhaps the reality is that Centurain asked Jesus by sending some Jewish elders.

Answer 6

The NASB was given a great deal of effort and much prayer during it's updateing some years ago.... There are some differences in reporting by the different authors of the Gospels... The variation is not so great as to take from the intent in telling of the event... as There are no "original" texts existing, and even the NASB had to rely on translations that were made form copies of copies of copies, The desision to not alter what has been passed down was probably made because no one knows which is closest to the actual event.... but the intended lesson of the story remains in each of the accounts... that is the intended message from God.

Answer 7

It is neither a contradiction nor is it a bad translation. There are several Scriptural accounts where a servant or other representative of someone acting under their authority are spoken of as if it was actually that person himself.

In fact that very thing is one of things that cause people to believe the trinity. Jesus has come in his Father's name, with the authority given him by God, so people get them mixed up. (John 5:43; Also compare Exodus 23:20, 21 with Exodus 13:21 & 14:9.

Answer 8

The Gosepls are not pure historical accounts like history textbooks. They are about people's personal experiences of Jesus. Luke was not an apostle...he probably never even met Jesus. On the other hand, Matthew was one of Jesus' first apostles called...he was probably there.

The actual point that both parties had was the great faith they had in Jesus to heal others -- even when that sick person was not directly in front of Jesus but maybe 3-4 miles away.

The other main point is that the centurion was pagan -- but he still had faith in Jesus' ability to heal. NOTICE that Jesus did NOT ask the centurion to become born again in order to have his request/prayer answered.

Third, Jesus healed those who were not of his own Jewish faith as well as those who were.

Answer 9

Maybe Matt told Luke about it later, maybe the Jewish elder was once or still was a centurian. Maybe the bible's a bunch of stories, no one really knows, well maybe Jesus, I bet he'd know.

Answer 10

The Apostles were written by each one in accordance to how they viewed it. I you were to read all 4 there would be more than one case of this. Different views by different people. The same as if you were at a accident site and had 4 witnesses. all 4 stories would be different depending on their perception. If you were to change Luke's version to match Mathews then that would be wrong.