Prior Book | Prior Chapter | Prior Verse | Next Verse | Next Chapter | Next Book | Viewing NASB and Amplified 2015 | |
NASB | John 1:35 ¶ Again the next day John was standing with two of his disciples, |
AMPLIFIED 2015 | John 1:35 ¶ Again the next day John was standing with two of his disciples, |
Subject: Where did Jesus call Simon and Andrew? |
Bible Note: Matthew 28: describes an earthquake, one angel coming down, rolling away the stone and sitting on it, speaks to the guards and the women..." Mark 16: women come to tomb, stone is already moved, inside the tomb is the angel (note: no guards or earthquake mentioned. To you, just an omitted "detail"?) Luke 24: huge stone is already rolled aside when the women arrive...inside, no angel yet, but then TWO angels suddenly appear... John 20: describes one woman, Mary, arriving at the tomb, the stone already rolled away. No angel or angels here at this time. Instead, Mary goes to get Peter and John. Then Peter and John go home, and Mary returns to the tomb, looks in and there are now TWO angels who talk to her.... ---------------------- As someone once said: "...the devil is in the details..." Was there an earthquake? Were there two angels, or just one? Were the guards there, too, being spoken to by the angels? How many women were there? Was Peter there? Was John there? The only version that puts John and Peter there is John...and John was certainly available or known when Mark, Matthew and Luke were written...or should have been...should these "details" be dismissed? If so, why should they? At the very simplest, if you were trying to prove a case in a court, this kind of "detailing" would derail your client in a heartbeat. Shouldn't we expect a tighter narrative? Is this the way an air-tight house should be built? Or, is the risk a "house of cards"? Again, when dealing with something as important as a "belief" and "faith", sophistry and speciousness should not be allowed. |