A recent book by Peter Enns was discussed on the latest edition of the Unbelievable? radio program. Enns was on the program with David Instone-Brewer. One of the issues that came up was the historicity of the infancy narratives. Enns, Instone-Brewer, and the host, Justin Brierley, referred to how different the accounts in Matthew and Luke are, and not much was said about agreements between the two. Brierley referred to how the narratives are "almost two completely different stories".
Here's an article I wrote last year that gives thirty examples of agreements between Matthew and Luke regarding Jesus' childhood, including some that are of an unusual nature or meet the criterion of embarrassment. I also discuss some of the reasons why it makes sense for the two sources to differ to some extent. The agreements between Matthew and Luke are often underestimated, while their differences are overestimated, and all three participants in the Unbelievable? program furthered that misconception.
No comments:
Post a Comment