Howdy, Stranger!
It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!
Categories
- All Categories 13.8K
- General Category 10.9K
- General Announcements 184
- Faith Issues 3.4K
- Coptic Orthodox Church 2.5K
- Personal Issues 1.4K
- Prayer Requests 423
- Random Issues 1.8K
- Introductions 294
- Non-Orthodox Inquiries 232
- Youth Corner 606
- Hymns 2.5K
- Hymns Discussion 2.5K
- Technicial Difficulties 368
- Technical Topics 368
A Gentile Soldier's faith
Hi everybody,
I had a question maybe someone knows the answer to. Why is it in both Matt 8:5-13 and Luke 7 1-10, the story of the centurion's servant who was healed is told but the stories are somewhat different? For example, In Matt, it is the centurion himself who asks Christ to heal his servant and in Luke, it says that the centurion's servants are the ones who go to Christ and ask him to come heal the servant, then other servants come and tell our Lord that he doesn't need to make the trip, but to just say the word and the man will be healed.
I hope I'm making sense and thanks for the help! ;)
I had a question maybe someone knows the answer to. Why is it in both Matt 8:5-13 and Luke 7 1-10, the story of the centurion's servant who was healed is told but the stories are somewhat different? For example, In Matt, it is the centurion himself who asks Christ to heal his servant and in Luke, it says that the centurion's servants are the ones who go to Christ and ask him to come heal the servant, then other servants come and tell our Lord that he doesn't need to make the trip, but to just say the word and the man will be healed.
I hope I'm making sense and thanks for the help! ;)
Comments
God bless
Reading the two passages I wonder if Matthew is choosing to give the gist of the events, where the main point is the Centurion's seeking the intervention of Christ, while Luke choose to provide more detail of the event, in which there were a variety of intermediaries who were passing the messages.
If the Queen of the UK sent an ambassador to the President of France with a message, it would still be correct to say that the Queen asked the President such and such, even though it was actually the messenger who went into the presence of the President and gave the message.
That was how I have understood the difference. Matthew is concentrating in the core of the story, while Luke expands it with additional historical details that are not contradicted in Matthew's account, but are not considered important in his telling of the same incident.
Just my thoughts.
Father Peter
St. Luke is known to have been a physician, which is why you tend to find more detail in all of the stories/parables he explains. This is a perfect example of also seeing how all the gospels complete each other...