31 thoughts on “How to Read the Bible For All Its Worth – The Gospels”
On pg 132-134 I did not understand the sections about the historical context of the evangelist and the historical context of Jesus in particular. What is the author trying to say?
This chapter has really helped me to understand why there are four gospels and the differences between them. Now when I hear people ask about the gospels and whether they are reliable, I will have an answer ready for them just like we talked about in class a couple of weeks ago.
Why didn’t Jesus write any of the gospels? pg. 128
My question comes from page 128. What makes the author believe that if Jesus would have written a book it would’ve been more similar to the Old Testament than the four gospels that we have?
Is there any possibility that Jesus wrote a letter or letters like in the NT during his time on earth?
On pages 135-140 the author talks about thinking horizontally and vertically. I don’t understand what it means to think vertically or horizontally could you please explain them?
page 132 I didn’t understand the book’s definition of pericopes -the narrative itself exists only for the sake of the saying that concudes it- It’s goin right over my head
mine is pretty much the same as megans, i didn’t understand the horizonal and vertical thinking
Mr. Cashen has talked about thinking horizontally and vertically. Most of the time horizontally with the people around us and vertically with God. I’ve never really understood it. Is that the same thing the author is talking about or am i way off base?
Could you explain the last paragraph on page 146?
Same as Megan and Mitchell!
Same as Amanda’s question…pg. 128, what makes the author think that if Jesus would have written a book it would’ve been similar to the Old Testament prophetic books?
Horizontal and Vertical thinking?
I’m with the others .. didn’t fully grasp the concept of horizontal.vertical thinking.
Vertical and horizontal thinking has me slightly puzzled as well!
I have heard Mr. Cashen talk about horizontal and vertical like Mitchell said. Are they they same thing?
I have the same question as Amanda, why would he have written more like the OT? wouldn’t he have been focused on the same things as the gospel writers like the fulfillment of prophecies and chronicling his time here on earth since that is such an important part?
Just a comment about how you were talking about how it makes sense that Luke wrote Luke and Acts. Whether it was together or not, I found that very interesting how he addressed Theophilus in both and stuff, and how Acts is important as the bridge between Luke and the letters.
I liked this chapter a lot, but i actually have a question from the Gospels themselves. In Matthew 27:52-53 it talks about holy people who had died being raised to life and walking into Jerusalem and appearing to many people. What on earth is that all about, i have NEVER heard that story before!
I have the same question as Jana.. Why would a letter from Jesus look more like the OT than like that gospels we have now? Or why does the author suggest that?
On pg. 142 it says that in Mark and Matthew the cursing of the fig tree was used for different reasons. What reason did Jesus intend and how can they use it for different meanings?
How come Jesus never wrote anything directly?
OK confused a little bit on pg 133. It says that you need to ask what Jesus’ audience was to help understand the point of what he’s saying. It also says that we don’t always know what the audience is. How can it be such a big deal but then we don’t know it most of the time?
I just have a comment that comes from page 128. It talks about how what the gospels would be like if Jesus wrote them and how they would be similar to Amos’ writings. But i just thought it would have been awesome to have a book written by Jesus!
My question comes from page 136. Why is the Gospel of John so different from Matthew, Mark, and Luke?
On pages 131 and 132 the author’s talk about pericopes and seem to suggest that the writers of the gospels simply made up stories to provide a context for Jesus’ sayings. Am I misunderstanding them? It seems a bit too arbitrary.
Why are the gospels just the first 4 books and not another book like… Acts or somethin? O and another thing… what is the whole horizontal and vertical thinking? evidently everyone wants to know too.
Oops, authors*. Please excuse that unnecessary apostrophe.
im confused about what is says about the gospels on pg. 129..it says each different christian community had a need for a book about Jesus. Weren’t there more than 4 communities or am i just confused? and also it says one was written (mark)and then rewritten (matthew and luke), so does that mean matthew and luke are just revisions of mark? i thought they were all different?
It seems logical to me that Jesus wouldn’t write a gospel about himself. when i read in the book that it is unknown, my mind went to John 5:31-32 which Jesus seems to give his own reason for not doing so.
What’s up with the horizontal and vertical thinking?
On pg 132-134 I did not understand the sections about the historical context of the evangelist and the historical context of Jesus in particular. What is the author trying to say?
This chapter has really helped me to understand why there are four gospels and the differences between them. Now when I hear people ask about the gospels and whether they are reliable, I will have an answer ready for them just like we talked about in class a couple of weeks ago.
Why didn’t Jesus write any of the gospels? pg. 128
My question comes from page 128. What makes the author believe that if Jesus would have written a book it would’ve been more similar to the Old Testament than the four gospels that we have?
Is there any possibility that Jesus wrote a letter or letters like in the NT during his time on earth?
On pages 135-140 the author talks about thinking horizontally and vertically. I don’t understand what it means to think vertically or horizontally could you please explain them?
page 132 I didn’t understand the book’s definition of pericopes -the narrative itself exists only for the sake of the saying that concudes it- It’s goin right over my head
mine is pretty much the same as megans, i didn’t understand the horizonal and vertical thinking
Mr. Cashen has talked about thinking horizontally and vertically. Most of the time horizontally with the people around us and vertically with God. I’ve never really understood it. Is that the same thing the author is talking about or am i way off base?
Could you explain the last paragraph on page 146?
Same as Megan and Mitchell!
Same as Amanda’s question…pg. 128, what makes the author think that if Jesus would have written a book it would’ve been similar to the Old Testament prophetic books?
Horizontal and Vertical thinking?
I’m with the others .. didn’t fully grasp the concept of horizontal.vertical thinking.
Vertical and horizontal thinking has me slightly puzzled as well!
I have heard Mr. Cashen talk about horizontal and vertical like Mitchell said. Are they they same thing?
I have the same question as Amanda, why would he have written more like the OT? wouldn’t he have been focused on the same things as the gospel writers like the fulfillment of prophecies and chronicling his time here on earth since that is such an important part?
Just a comment about how you were talking about how it makes sense that Luke wrote Luke and Acts. Whether it was together or not, I found that very interesting how he addressed Theophilus in both and stuff, and how Acts is important as the bridge between Luke and the letters.
I liked this chapter a lot, but i actually have a question from the Gospels themselves. In Matthew 27:52-53 it talks about holy people who had died being raised to life and walking into Jerusalem and appearing to many people. What on earth is that all about, i have NEVER heard that story before!
I have the same question as Jana.. Why would a letter from Jesus look more like the OT than like that gospels we have now? Or why does the author suggest that?
On pg. 142 it says that in Mark and Matthew the cursing of the fig tree was used for different reasons. What reason did Jesus intend and how can they use it for different meanings?
How come Jesus never wrote anything directly?
OK confused a little bit on pg 133. It says that you need to ask what Jesus’ audience was to help understand the point of what he’s saying. It also says that we don’t always know what the audience is. How can it be such a big deal but then we don’t know it most of the time?
I just have a comment that comes from page 128. It talks about how what the gospels would be like if Jesus wrote them and how they would be similar to Amos’ writings. But i just thought it would have been awesome to have a book written by Jesus!
My question comes from page 136. Why is the Gospel of John so different from Matthew, Mark, and Luke?
On pages 131 and 132 the author’s talk about pericopes and seem to suggest that the writers of the gospels simply made up stories to provide a context for Jesus’ sayings. Am I misunderstanding them? It seems a bit too arbitrary.
Why are the gospels just the first 4 books and not another book like… Acts or somethin? O and another thing… what is the whole horizontal and vertical thinking? evidently everyone wants to know too.
Oops, authors*. Please excuse that unnecessary apostrophe.
im confused about what is says about the gospels on pg. 129..it says each different christian community had a need for a book about Jesus. Weren’t there more than 4 communities or am i just confused? and also it says one was written (mark)and then rewritten (matthew and luke), so does that mean matthew and luke are just revisions of mark? i thought they were all different?
It seems logical to me that Jesus wouldn’t write a gospel about himself. when i read in the book that it is unknown, my mind went to John 5:31-32 which Jesus seems to give his own reason for not doing so.
What’s up with the horizontal and vertical thinking?