KING OF THE JEWS

KING OF THE JEWS? WHICH SIGN?

Hugh Fogelman

A sign is something that describes something, right or wrong. A sign painted on wood cannot be the same as someone telling you something, because verbal tales can be exaggerated or minimized over time. But a sign stays put; it is tangible public display.

This leads us to yet another so-called multiple witness report in the four gospels―of who saw what at the crucifixion. Let’s look at the simple sign that cannot be agreed upon!

Mark 15
²⁶ And the superscription of his accusation was written over, THE KING OF THE JEWS.

But Matthew says no, Mark was wrong because Matthew says he saw:

Matthew 27
³⁷ And set up over his head his accusation written, THIS IS JESUS THE KING OF THE JEWS.

Then Luke writes that both Mark and Matthew are wrong, because he saw:

Luke 23
³⁸ And a superscription also was written over him in letters of Greek, and Latin, and Hebrew, THIS IS THE KING OF THE JEWS.

However, John said all the others are wrong because what he saw is 100% true:

John 19
¹⁹ And Pilate wrote a title, and put it on the cross. And the writing was JESUS OF NAZARETH THE KING OF THE JEWS.

It has just been proven that these self-claiming witnesses cannot agree on a simple small sign. And just comparing the four gospels to each other of the larger sign of the crucifixion and resurrection, we clearly see they again cannot agree to the exact facts. So here is a recap,; you decide which one sign was there, four with one being a three line sign, or perhaps six―tacked up and down the cross.

KING OF THE JEWS

THIS IS JESUS THE KING OF THE JEWS

THIS IS THE KING OF THE JEWS in Greek

THIS IS THE KING OF THE JEWS in Latin

THIS IS THE KING OF THE JEWS in Hebrew

JESUS OF NAZARETH THE KING OF THE JEWS.

Christian apologists will claim that it makes no difference because the story is the same even though the details are different, and Christian layman (sheeple) will all agree without giving it any thought at all. However, this brings up more questions.

1. Which gospel can Christians feel is the right or accurate gospel―the one that was inspired by God himself? All the authors of those gospels could not possibly have been guided by God for God does not make mistakes. God would not tell one writer one story and then tell another writer a different story.

2. Were these writers truly witnesses to all the events they wrote about? Or were they given second and third hand information? You know the answer already! NO!

For example, If Matthew was one of Jesus’ disciples, why did he have to copy Mark who was not there and never met Jesus and was never one of his original disciples?

The Abingdon Bible Commentary (ABC, pg. 953) agrees with Christian scholars that Mark was the first gospel, saying; “One of the assured results of devout criticism is that almost the whole of Mark is incorporated in “Matthew.” ABC continues;

“This conclusion can be verified by any student who cares to examine in a synopsis a parable or incident which is found in both Matthew and Mark. This discovery indicates that the author was not one of the twelve, for one who had been an eyewitness himself would not report to the work of a secondary witness.

The incorporation of the material by the compiler of Matthew has not been done in a slavish, mechanical way but in a manner which reveals distinctly the compiler’s own individual prepossessions and ideas; he does not hesitate to change, omit, tone down, and otherwise adapt the material in his sources for his purpose, showing clearly that he did not consider that Mark’s account was complete.”

Another question arises. Was Luke ever there? Did he actually witness anything, or did he receive most of his information from Paul? If you answer “yes,” then you have to answer the question “where in the Christian bible, the New Testament, does it say that? This question comes up because, just like Mark, Luke never met Jesus, and was never one of the original disciples. So how can anyone take what he says as truthful? Think!!! If Luke got his information from someone who got it wrong, then what Luke would have written would also have been wrong.

So, direct questions just keep coming up! And keep in mind, Christians are betting their very souls on these gospel writers―could all the authors of those gospels have been Godly written? As I said above, God does not make mistakes. God would not tell one writer one story and then tell another writer a different story. Christians, THINK! Think before you continue to play, as Groucho Marx used to say, “You Bet Your Life!”

FOOTNOTE:

The Abingdon Bible Commentary is used for practical and evangelical purposes,[ copyright in 1929 by the Abingdon Press, Inc.] says that it “reaches out to the “thoughtful pastors, intelligent laymen, and teachers in Sunday and Week-Day schools of religious education.”

RETURN