2007-10-04 04:30:03 · 22 answers · asked by Anonymous in Society & Culture ➔ Religion & Spirituality
i mean why is the old testement soo different than the new testement, who are these 4 guys (who have no surnames and have never met each other) that have manged to change the bible soo much. how can one today believe in such a book that has no valid source. i mean if i was to give you a cheque with just my first name would you accept it?, would the bank accept it? would you get a job with just your first name? or get a passport? can you tell me where in history sumone has just one name, does a mother/father only give one name to his child? so how can we believe the work of such a individual... discuss!
2007-10-04 04:37:49 · update #1
Luke was Greek, so he might've had any surname. Mark, Matt and John were Hebrew, so their surnames would've been "bar", which means 'son of' and then their father's first name.
2007-10-04 04:33:27 · answer #1 · answered by Acorn 7 · 1⤊ 0⤋
Only Matthew and John were one of the 12 disciples. Mark was the cousin of Peter. Mark is known as John Mark. The Bible doesn't mention a surname for John the belloved. Matthew is also known by Levi in the gospels. Luke is a Greek and is known as Lucas as well.
2007-10-04 11:48:03 · answer #2 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 0⤋
In that Society & Continuing even Today to some extent, U were "Associated" with "Something". In Judisim, it was the "Tribe" & then Ur "Family Tree". Outside of this it was often the Town / Village and then the Occupation of Ur Family. For example, John, the "Baptist", Joseph, of Arimathea, Mary, of Magdalene were some "Titles" used as "Surnames". If U are into "Geneaology" U will find the "Meaning" of Ur "Surname" such as mine. Kramer is German Jewish meaning "Grocer / Butcher" in German (I'm related to Echrich & Parrot Meat Packing today) & going back farther into the Jewish my Famliy were the "Providers of Sacrifice" for the Temple. So this is just how it was done. John
2007-10-04 11:49:59 · answer #3 · answered by moosemose 5 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Back in Bible day they referred to men by there surnames and to distinguish who they were they would say that they were the son of someone or were from the house of such and such . In the case of Jesus , he was and is , referred to as the son of God . But there is only one Jesus , and there was only one of Mark , Matthew, john and Luke . It was common in those days , but now we go by our surname , but the family name is the important and respected name .
But I like your question and one that brings to the surface some Bible truths for us to ponder as to who we really are and what our name really means .
2007-10-04 11:47:57 · answer #4 · answered by newkirkb52 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋
I'm pretty sure that Cher could pass a check with just the one name on it.
In fact, surnames are a fairly recent invention. Back then, you were known by your first name and where you came from, or where you ended up, as in Judas Iscariot, who I believe came from a village called Caria, or some such. John of Patmos is more familiar in this vein. For that matter, Jesus Christ is 'the Annointed One'. It's not like Joseph's last name was Christ!
Officially, people were known as blank, son of [bar] blank.
2007-10-04 11:43:11 · answer #5 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 1⤋
Surnaming did not come into effect until the time of Napoleon. He made people get a last names. Up until that time it was prefixes only John son of..... Bar Jona is like that. Johnson ...son of John.. O' Reilly son of Reilly... most languages have it.
Napoleon as he marched through Europe started the whole last name thing. The Dutch were smart. They choose stupid names and the French wrote them down. John Hole in the Dyke. etc.
It is funny really. Ask the Dutch what their last name means.
2007-10-04 11:37:08 · answer #6 · answered by Anonymous · 2⤊ 0⤋
For the most part there were no surnames in the bible times. People were known as son of so and so the carpenter, or the fisherman, hence the names became Carpenter and Fisher in later years.
2007-10-04 11:34:01 · answer #7 · answered by Capri 1230 3 · 1⤊ 0⤋
My understanding, is surnames at that time came from the place they were from, as Jesus of Nazareth, Saul of Antioch. etc. As the surnames of the 4 gospel authors, I'm sure they are traced somewhere, but I sure do not know where.
But, I'll bet they are somewhere in Church History! Hope you'll get a proper answer.
2007-10-04 11:36:16 · answer #8 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
The real folks--if they were real folks--most likely had surnames but they are not named in the Bible. The Gospels named "Mark," "Mathew," "Luke," and "John" after the disciples of Jesus were not written by the named disciple but probably by a person or a group of persons who belonged to an early Christian lineage that associated themselves with that particular disciple. The gospels were written decades to centuries after the supposed ministry of the Biblical Christ and actually there were a myriad of Christian cults/sects out there all with their own take on the teachings of Christ and their own gospel stories. In 300 AD, the official church chose the 4 that have become the standard scripture of Christianity
2007-10-04 11:39:09 · answer #9 · answered by philosophyangel 7 · 0⤊ 2⤋
John and James father is mentioned in one of the gospels - Zebedee I think. So in common with Jewish naming conventions of the time it would be:
John bar-Zebedee
That John is author of John can be found from several verses in John's gospel, but you have to be a careful reader to spot them.
2007-10-04 11:42:35 · answer #10 · answered by Cader and Glyder scrambler 7 · 1⤊ 0⤋