0
Does John's Gospel have a different ascension scene than the synoptic Gospels?
Wiki User
∙ 13y ago
It is central tenet of Christian belief that Jesus rose to heaven after his resurrection. After all, it would be difficult to understand the value of his resurrection if he was to die again soon afterwards. However, it is only the author of Luke's Gospel and Acts of the Apostles who actually gives us an ascension scene, in fact giving two quite incompatible versions.
John's Gospel does not actually say whether Jesus ascended into heaven, but if he did it would have been after his final meeting with the disciples, at the Sea of Galilee.
In Paul's epistles, Jesus' ascent to heaven was synonymous with his resurrection. Paul seems to have believed that all of the appearances to Cephas, the twelve, the 500, then James and the apostles were as spiritual as the appearance he experienced.
In Mark's Gospel, originally the ascent of Jesus must have also been synonymous with his resurrection. This Gospel originally ended at verse 16:8, without the appearances of the risen Jesus that we now see in the "Long Ending".
Matthew's Gospel does not actually say whether Jesus ascended into heaven.
Luke's Gospel gives a graphic account of Jesus ascending bodily into heaven near Bethany, not far from Jerusalem. This occurred on the evening following the resurrection.
Acts of the Apostles, although written by the same author as Luke's Gospel, records that Jesus remained on earth for forty days and was then taken up. Presumably the author received further information between the time of writing the Gospel and writing Acts.
Wiki User
∙ 13y ago
Add your answer:
Earn +20 pts
Encountering Jesus in the New Testament chapter review answer?
List three ways johns gospel Differs from the synoptic gospels
Is the difference between the synoptic Gospels true or false?
The differences are true, because each gospel concentrates on a certain value in the Life of Jesus Christ. But differences does not mean conflicts.
What makes John's Gospel different from the other gospels?
A:The Gospel According to St John differs to such an extent from the synoptic gospels (Matthew, Mark and Luke) that Origen (Commentary on John) felt obliged to defend the Gospel, saying, "Although he does not always tell the truth literally, he always tells it spiritually." To understand both the similarities and the differences among the four New Testament gospels, it needs to be understood that all the New Testament gospels were originally anonymous and were only attributed to the apostles whose names they now bear later in the second century. Biblical scholars say there is no good reason to accept those attributions, so we do not really know who wrote the four New Testament gospels.The reason for the relatively close similarities in the synoptic gospels (Matthew, Mark and Luke) has also been established. By lying these gospels in parallel and reading them synoptically ('with the same eye') in the original Greek language, it can readily be seen that there is a literary dependency among these gospels. Scholars have established that Mark's Gospel was written first, around 70 CE, and that the other two synoptic gospels were, to a large extent, copied from it.Until early in the twentieth century, most scholars accepted that John's Gospel was independent of the synoptic gospels. However, further study has shown that it was inspired by Luke's Gospel, although many of the passages in Luke, or their chronological sequence, have been changed almost beyond recognition. Some material was actually taken direct from Mark, but the author of John usually preferred to be guided by Luke. Thus, John was further removed from the original gospel, Mark, which in itself would result in more differences. It was also written somewhat later than the others and was intended for a different theological environment.
Sreview of the Synopic gospel of Acts Chapters 13-28?
Acts is not one of the Synoptic Gospels - they are Matthew, Mark, and Luke. Acts can be considered a follow-on or sequel to Luke, since they were written to the same person and evidently by the same author. But Acts is not a Gospel.
What is the difference between the synoptic gospels and John's Gospel?
Another answer from our community:John differs from the synoptic Gospels because it is not just listing events in the life of Jesus and reporting His teachings. John is more thematic in nature and provides more theological discourse on the person and work of Christ. John also focus' on events in Judea rather than the Galilean ministry. The synoptic Gospels of Matthew, Mark and Luke are called such because they contain a brief review, summary or synopsis of Jesus' life and teachings. John is recognized as somewhat different with a lot less detail in terms of coverage of events but a much greater degree of theological detail focused around people's reactions to Jesus work and teachings and ensuing discussions. Thus John's different structure which is more theological and not a summary of all Jesus said and did is classified as non-synoptic.Another answerThere are four gospels in the New Testament: Matthew, Mark, Luke and John. Three gospels, Matthew, Mark and Luke, are called the synoptic gospels because they agree moderately well on the life and teachings of Jesus, although each is a little different from the other two.John's Gospel is quite a good deal different from the other gospels. Some scholars believe that John was originally written in a Gnostic community and was subsequently edited to remove some of the more clearly Gnostic material, although the gospel still has a Gnostic flavour. John is the only gospel that states Jesus to be God and to have been pre-existing. John also contains a good deal of material that is not in the other gospels, including a much longer account of the appearances of the risen Jesus. Although some say that this gospel is concerned with themes rather than the chronological order of events, it is nevertheless true that events are certainly placed in a different sequence compared to the other gospels.Scholars have noted that the events in the mission of Jesus, as described by the synoptic gospels, could have taken place in as little as one year, but the events described in John's Gospel would require four years. John appears to differ from the other three gospels in several ways. For example, in John the ministry of Jesus seems to last several years, whereas in the other gospels it appears to be limited to about one year. Also, John give an important role to the un-named "disciple whom Jesus loved", but the other gospels don't even mention such a person. Also, in John, Jesus performs several major miracles that aren't recorded in the other gospels, such as the resurrection of Lazarus and the changing of water into wine at the wedding in Cana. John depicts Jesus somewhat differently than the other gospels do. Some people have said that this is because John tries to show the spiritual side of Jesus, whereas the other gospels mainly try to show his human side.
Which gospel was written to inspire faith in Jesus but is not a synoptic gospel?
The gospel of John is not part of the Synoptic Gospels.The gospels of Matthew, Mark, and Luke are referred to as the Synoptic Gospels.
Who are the 3 synoptics in the Catholic Church?
The gospels of Matthew, Mark, and Luke are the synoptic gospels, as theya re similar to an parallel to each other. The gospel of John is different.
Which Gospel was written independent of the Synoptic Gospels?
A:John's Gospel is certainly quite different to the synoptic gospels. It is almost completely independent of Mark's Gospel, from which scholars say that Matthew and Luke were copied. However, it is not really independent, as it was loosely based on Luke, with a small amount of material taken direct from Mark. Being further removed from Mark, and having been written with somewhat less concern compared with Matthew and Luke for following the source as closely as possible, John's Gospel is relatively independent of the Synoptic Gospels.
Which gospel records the least miracles?
John's Gospel records seven miracles, which is less than in the synoptic Gospels.
Of the four evanglists which was not part of the synoptic writers?
Saint John (he wrote the gospel of john in the bible) is the evangelist who was not part of the synoptic writers. The Gospels of Matthew, Mark, and Luke were known as the synoptic writers because they had many of the same stories in their gospels.
Which one of the four gospels is not synoptic?
A:Among the New Testament gospels, Matthew, Mark and Luke are known as synoptic ('seen with the same eye') gospels, because when laid sise by side in the original Greek language and seen with the same eye, it can be shown that two of these gospels must have been based on the third. The original of these gospels is now known to have been Mark's Gospel. On the other hand, when John's Gospel is laid alongside the others, its dependence is not immediately apparent. Because John was more loosely based on Luke and, to a lesser extent, Mark, there are few similarities in the text and even the storyline often differs. It is therefore not a synoptic gospel.The Gospel of John is not one of the "synoptic gospels"
What does the Gospels contain?
The Gospels are the books of Matthew, Mark, Luke and John. The name of the book is the name of the person who's point of view the story is told from. These four gospels (Gospel is translated as 'The good news') tell the life of Jesus, from his birth to his ascension to heaven.
Encountering Jesus in the New Testament chapter review answer?
List three ways johns gospel Differs from the synoptic gospels
What language does the word synoptic gospels come from?
The term "synoptic gospels" comes from Greek. The word "synoptic" is derived from the Greek words "syn" (together) and "opsis" (seeing), referring to the fact that the Gospels of Matthew, Mark, and Luke present a similar view of Jesus' life and teachings.
Did John assume that his readers understood the basic outline of the synoptic Gospels?
A:The author of John's Gospel certainly knew of the existence of Mark and Luke, as his own gospel was loosely based on those gospels (mainly Luke, but some material is from Mark), but like the author of Luke he seems entirely unaware of the existence of Matthew's Gospel. John was written to be the gospel of choice in the Johannine community and the synoptic gospels were probably discouraged. Nevertheless the anonymous author of Johnassumed his readers might have known the synoptic gospels, as evidenced by the fact that even when completely changing the synoptic account, he was careful not to directly contradict his sources.However, there is a difference between possibly knowing of the synoptic gospels and knowing them well enough that John need not tell everything about the life and mission of Jesus. When John omits details found in the synoptic Gospels of Mark and Luke, it was not because the author expected his readers to have found those stories elsewhere, while he focussed on important new information. For example, John omits the nativity story of Luke, but it can be seen elsewhere that the author and his community did not really believe that Jesus was born in Bethlehem.
What type of gospels are the first three gospels?
A:The first three New Testament gospels are known as the synoptic gospels. The word 'synoptic' means 'seen with the same eye' and is used to describe them because, when laid in parallel and 'seen with the same eye' in the original Greek language, it can be demonstrated that one gospel (Mark) must have been the original from which the other two were copied.
What does synoptic mean when referring to the christian gospels?
A:The word synoptic means 'seen with the same eye' and can refer to many different things such as synoptic weather charts. In a religious context, it refers to the close similarities among the Gospels of Matthew, Mark and Luke - the synoptic gospels. When the synoptic gospels are looked at in parallel - synoptically - in the original Greek language, it soon becomes apparent that there is a literary dependency among the three gospels. New Testament scholars say that Mark's Gospel was written first, approximately 70 CE, and that Matthew and Lukewere largely based on Mark's original Gospel. There are further similarities between Matthew and Luke only, which have been traced back to the hypothetical 'Q' document.
