Did Jesus Eat Fish? (Luke 24:41-43)
Archive of Comments and Discussions - Questions and Answers From All-Creatures.org

Our subjects cover: animals, religion (Christian, Jewish and others); diet and lifestyle (vegan and vegetarian); and other miscellaneous subjects.

By John Vujicic

See our readers' comments at the end

There is only one passage in the whole of the New Testament where it is explicitly and specifically said that Jesus actually ate meat. If this text is true and genuine and in fact inspired by the Holy Spirit, then it would follow that Jesus was not and could not have been a vegetarian. But if on the other hand it can be satisfactorily demonstrated that this passage in Luke 24 is actually a forgery, then it follows that Jesus must have been a vegetarian, since a lying hand felt a need to insert a lying passage in order to portray Jesus as a carnivorous being. Let us therefore take a close look at this passage of Luke and see whether you can really believe it. Here is the text of Luke 24:41-43 which explicitly says that Jesus asked for food and that he actually ate FISH and HONEY which the disciples gave him:

“He [Jesus] said to them: Do you have any food? And they gave him a piece of BROILED FISH and some HONEY. And HE TOOK IT AND ATE IT in front of them.”

This is the only passage in the entire New Testament where we are told that Jesus in fact ATE MEAT. Those who believe in every word of the Bible but who also practice vegetarianism [like the Reformed Adventists for example] explain that Jesus only ate of the HONEY but not of the FISH. They argue that FISH and HONEY should not be combined and that if Jesus ate both together he would have been sick. The problem with this theory is that only a handful of Greek manuscripts actually include the HONEY. Vast majority of the Greek manuscripts have the FISH only. This fact is also reflected in the English translations - where most translators mention FISH only and exclude the honey. [See for example: The Bible for Today, The Moffat Bible, The New American Bible for Catholics, The Jerusalem Bible, The New English Bible, The Living Bible, The New American Standard Bible, New International Version, Good News Bible, Jewish New Testament, Rotherham Emphasized Bible, The Interlinear Greek English New Testament by Marshall, etc.]. All these translators omit HONEY since this is the case with most Greek manuscripts. Therefore it follows that according to most of the Greek manuscripts of Luke and the English versions, the disciples handed FISH to Jesus and he ATE IT while they watched. If this passage is authentic and inspired then no words could justify vegetarianism - unless of course we reject the authority of Jesus and say that he was an impostor. I however, firmly believe that Jesus was not an impostor but rather a promised Prophet and the Messiah - the very Son of God. How then do I explain the passage in question where it is said that the Son of God - as a resurrected and immortal being - actually ATE MEAT? The passage is very simple to explain. It is a FORGERY.

Luke says that Jesus appeared to two disciples who were on their way to Emmaus. One of them was named Clopas. He was invited to their place late on Sunday afternoon. When he broke bread before meal, the two disciples realised that it was Jesus. As soon as they realised this they immediately returned to Jerusalem which was about 10 kilometres from Emmaus.

Please note:

“And they rose that very hour and returned to Jerusalem; and they found the ELEVEN gathered together, and those who were with them, Saying, Truly our Lord has risen and has appeared to Simon. And they [two disciples] also reported those things that happened on the road, and how they knew him as he broke bread. And while they were discussing these things, Jesus stood among them, and said to them, Peace be with you...and as they still did not believe because of their joy, and they were bewildered, he said to them, Have you anything here to eat? They gave him a portion of BROILED FISH and of a honeycomb. And HE TOOK IT AND ATE BEFORE THEIR EYES” [Luke 24:33-43 KJV].

Luke therefore clearly places Jesus’ first appearance to his disciples on Sunday evening AT JERUSALEM. He says that ALL ELEVEN WERE PRESENT - even though John, who also says that Jesus appeared to his disciples at evening on the “first day of the week” actually says that Thomas was missing.

Matthew and Mark however clearly show that Jesus was not in Jerusalem on Sunday evening but was rather in Galilee and therefore he could not have appeared to his disciples in Jerusalem that Sunday evening and he could not have been eating fish that evening. On the night of his arrest, Jesus is quoted by Mark as saying:

“But after I’m raised to life, I’ll go ahead of you to GALILEE” [Mark 14:28].

The angel said to the women at the tomb on Sunday morning:

“Now go and tell his disciples, and especially Peter, that he will go ahead of you to GALILEE. YOU WILL SEE HIM THERE, JUST AS HE TOLD YOU” [Mark 16:7].

According to the testimony of Mark, Jesus clearly told his disciples that after he is risen from the dead he would go to GALILEE and that is where the disciples were going to see him. Matthew 26:32 also quotes Jesus as telling his disciples that after he is risen from the dead he would go ahead of them to GALILEE:

“But after I am risen again, I will go before you into Galilee.”

Matthew quotes the angel as saying to the women:

“...Now hurry! Tell his disciples that he has been raised to life and is on his way to GALILEE. Go there, and you will see him” [Matthew 28:7].

Jesus himself appeared to the women and said:

“Don’t be afraid! Tell my followers to go to GALILEE. They’ll see me there” [Matthew 28:10].

Then in Matthew 28:16 we read the following:

“Jesus’ ELEVEN DISCIPLES went to a mountain in GALILEE, where Jesus had told them to meet him.”

According to Matthew, the ELEVEN APOSTLES went to GALILEE to a mountain Jesus specified. There, IN GALILEE, the disciples saw Jesus for the first time after his resurrection. The account of Luke therefore cannot be reconciled with the text of Mark and especially that of Matthew. Digressing here just for a moment, I would like to point out that Luke 24:41-43 is the only text where it is explicitly stated that Jesus actually ATE MEAT. But now you know that this text is simply not true if you believe Mark and Matthew. Jesus was not in Jerusalem that Sunday evening but was on his way to Galilee. Jesus’ first appearance did not take place in Jerusalem but rather in GALILEE - as Mark and Matthew clearly point out. Therefore the text of Luke so often cited as proof that Jesus was a meat eater and therefore not a vegetarian - as many sources prove - is a forgery.

The principle of the synoptic gospels forces you to choose between the accounts of Matthew and Luke not only on the issue whether Jesus ate fish but virtually on every other issue. Matthew and Luke simply don’t agree even on the most basic issues in the gospels. In order to conclusively prove that Matthew is correct as far as Jesus’ first appearance to his disciples in Galilee is correct while Luke’s version false, I need to give a detailed explanation of the synoptic principle. I will first present a sample of synoptic passages where Matthew always deviates from Mark in order to disagree with Luke. Then I will refer to the synoptic passages where Luke always deviates from Mark in order to disagree with Matthew. Afterwards I will quote the material common to Matthew and Luke alone where either Matthew or Luke deliberately and purposefully cause his account to disagree with the other gospel.

Matthean Deviation From Mark

Mark says that when Jesus and his disciples crossed the Sea of Galilee they arrived at the region called Gadarenes. As soon as they arrived, a demoniac met them whom Jesus eventually healed [Mark 5:1-8]. Luke agrees with Mark in his version of this story. He likewise says that the region was called Gadarenes and that only one demoniac was involved [Luke 8:26-29]. But the Gospel of Matthew must not agree with that of Luke, so the Matthean account now deviates from that of Mark. Matthew calls the region not Gadarenes - as Mark and Luke do - but actually Gergesenes. He also states that there was not one but two demoniacs [Matthew 8:28-29]. The Matthean account even changes the singular pronouns of Mark and Luke to plural.

Mark writes that Jesus sent two of his disciples to bring him a colt and that he eventually entered Jerusalem riding on this colt [Mark 11:1-2,7]. Luke agrees with Mark. He also states that only a colt was involved and that Jesus was riding only a colt [Luke 19:29-30,35]. But Matthew again deviates from Mark in order not to agree with Luke. Matthew emphasises that the disciples brought an ass and her colt and that Jesus actually rode them both as he entered Jerusalem [Matthew 21:1-2,6]. It is hard to imagine Jesus riding the two animals at the same time. But Matthean account maintains this in order to disagree with Luke - even if in doing so means to be stupid and tell a lie.

Several days after entering Jerusalem, Jesus sent two of his disciples to prepare a room where Jesus and the Twelve could eat the Passover meal. Mark places these words on the lips of the two disciples when they approached the owner of the house:

“The Master saith, Where is the guestchamber, where I shall eat the passover with my disciples? [Mark 14:14].

Luke agrees with Mark:

“The Master saith unto thee, Where is the guestchamber, where I shall eat the passover with my disciples? [Luke 22:11].

But Matthew deviates from Mark and so accomplishes his purpose - to disagree with Luke:

“The Master saith, My time is at hand; I will keep the passover at thy house with my disciples” [Matthew 26:18].

Here again we have two against one and Matthew disagreeing with Luke. One particular Sabbath Jesus went to Simon’s house and found that his mother in law was sick. He healed her of her fever. Now when Mark referred to Peter he uses the name Simon [Mark 1:29-31]. Luke agrees with him. Referring to the same incident, Luke also uses the name Simon [Luke 4:38-39]. But Matthew now must deviate from Mark in order to disagree with Luke. So what does he do? He uses the name Peter instead [Matthew 8:14-15]. John the Baptist spoke of Jesus. He told the people that Jesus was greater than he. He said something about the shoes of Jesus:

“the latchet of whose shoes I am not worthy to stoop down and unloose” [Mark 1:17].

Luke agrees with Mark. His text reads:

“the latchet of whose shoes I am not worthy to unloose” [Luke 3:16].

Matthew must disagree with Luke. So he alters Mark’s version and makes his own text say:

“whose shoes I am not worthy to bear” [Matthew 3:11].

The synoptic gospels portray Judas Iscariot as a traitor. He went to the chief priests and offered to deliver Jesus into their hands. Mark says that they promised Judas money [Mark 14:11]. Luke agrees with him. He also uses the word money [Luke 22:5]. But Matthew cannot use the same word since by doing so he would agree with Luke so he changes his text to read thirty pieces of silver [Matthew 26:15].

Mark says that one day Jesus led his disciples through cornfields [Mark 2:23]. Luke agrees with him. He also uses the word cornfields [Luke 6:1]. Matthew of course must deviate from Mark so that he can disagree with Luke. He chooses the word corn instead [Matthew 12:1]. Would the Holy Spirit opt to play word games? Would She inspire the original authors to distort the truth in order to uphold the synoptic principle? Jesus spoke concerning the important subject of divorce. Mark places this statement on the lips of Jesus:

“Whosoever shall put away his wife, and marry another, committeth adultery” [Mark 10:11].

Luke agrees with him:

“Whoever putteth away his wife, and marrieth another, committeth adultery” [Luke 16:18].

Mark and Luke agree: marriage is unconditional. No divorce - full stop. But Matthew cannot agree. Even though we are faced with an important and very significant doctrine, Matthew must resort to his word play in order to disagree with Luke. So he adds a clause in the mouth of Jesus:

“Whosoever shall put away his wife, except it be for fornication, and marry another, committeth adultery” [Matthew 19:9].

Shortly before his death Jesus made a remark concerning the temple after some of his disciples pointed out its massive stones and beauty. As they were sitting on the Mount of Olives his disciples asked him to clarify his remark. Mark places these words in the mouth of the disciples:

“Tell us, when will these things be? And what sign will there be when these things are about to take place?” [Mark 13:4].

Luke agrees with Mark. His text reads:

“Teacher, but when will these things be? And what sign will there be when these things are about to take place?” [Luke 21:7].

Mark and Luke agree that the question had to do only and exclusively with the destruction of the temple - when there was not going to be one stone left upon another - as Jesus pointed out. But Matthew must deviate from Mark so that he may disagree with Luke. So he places the following words in the mouth of the disciples:

“Tell us, when will these things be? And what will be the sign of your coming, and of the end of the age?” [Matthew 24:3].

Jesus began explaining that there would first of all come deceivers in his name saying I am Christ [Mark 13:6]. Luke agrees with Mark. He also uses the expression I am Christ [Luke 21:8]. You will note that in the King James Bible the word Christ is in italics. This means that it was supplied by the translators and that it does not appear in the Greek text. The Greek text simply uses Ego eimi [I am]. Virtually all New English Versions omit the italicised word Christ. So Mark and Luke simply use the phrase I am. But Matthew deviates from Mark and uses the phrase Ego eimi o christos - that is, I am the Christ. You will note that the word “Christ” in Matthew is not in italics in the King James Bible. So again we have two against one and Matthew disagreeing with Luke. When Jesus was crucified, Pilate wrote an inscription as to why he was crucified. Mark says that this inscription read:

"The King of the Jews” [Mark 15:26].

Luke agrees with Mark:

“This is the King of the Jews” [Luke 23:38].

But Matthew deviates from Mark and makes the inscription read:

“This is Jesus the King of the Jews” [Matthew 27:37].

The sample of the synoptic passages presented indisputably prove that in every single instance Matthew deviates from Mark and therefore disagrees with Luke. We thus have two gospels at odds against one. Either Matthew or Mark and Luke in these cases twisted, distorted, and perverted the true account of Jesus’ life and teachings. Now I will present the synoptic passages in which Luke deviates from Mark and therefore causes his gospel to disagree with Matthew.

Lukan Deviation From Mark

Mark reports that Peter and his brother Andrew were chosen by Jesus at the Sea of Galilee while they were throwing their fishing nets into the sea [Mark 1:16-18]. Then shortly afterwards, but independently of this incident, Jesus chose James and John at the same sea while they were mending the fishing nets with their father. He called them and they became his disciples [Mark 1:19-20]. Matthew agrees with Mark. He says the same thing [Matthew 4:18-20 and 4:21-22]. But Luke deviates from Mark in order to disagree with Matthew. He reports that Peter, Andrew, James, and John were chosen all together and at the same time at a different place, at a different chronological date and under different circumstances than reported by Mark and Matthew [Luke 5:1-11].

Mark identifies the twelve disciples of Jesus by the following names: Simon Peter, Andrew, James, John, Philip, Bartholomew, Thomas, Matthew, James, Thaddaeus, Simon the Canaanite, and Judas Iscariot [Mark 3:16-19]. Matthew agrees with Mark but he slightly rearranges the order of the names [Matthew 10:2-4]. Luke however deviates from Mark so that his list of names would not agree with that of Matthew. Simon the Canaanite becomes Simon Zelotes, and Thaddaeus is replaced with Judas. Luke ends up with two disciples named Judas [Luke 6:14-16]. Thus again we have two against one and Matthew and Luke not agreeing.

Jesus promised that some of his disciples would live to see his glory. It was six days after this promise that Jesus fulfilled it. Matthew agrees with him. He also says six days. But Luke disagrees and uses eight days. Mark and Matthew say that he took Peter, James, and John to a high mountain and was transfigured. But Luke disagrees by reversing the names, deleting ‘high’ and using the word altered rather than transfigured. [Compare Mark 9:1-2, Matthew 16:28; 17:1-2 with Luke 9:27-28].

When Jesus spoke of the destruction of the temple he used the term the abomination of desolation [Mark 13:14]. Matthew agrees with him. He uses the identical term[24:15-16]. But Luke disagrees and alters Mark’s account to Jerusalem compassed with armies - so that he may disagree with Matthew [Luke 21:20-21]. Jesus told the disciples that they should learn the lesson from the fig tree according to Mark 13:28 and Matthew 24:32. But Luke changes this to fig tree and all the trees [Luke 21:29]. Jesus said that when all was about to be fulfilled they should know that the destruction is at the doors [Mark 13:29 and Matthew 24:33]. But Luke again disagrees and changes his version to at hand [Luke 21:30]. The synoptic principle or pattern continues unabated and we always have two against one and Matthew and Luke disagreeing. During the night of his arrest - while serving the supper - Jesus pointed out that the betrayer’s hand dippeth in the dish [Mark 14:20 and Matthew 26:23]. But according to Luke it was on the table [Luke 22:21]. Jesus took bread and broke it and then gave it to his disciples and said to them:

“Take, eat: this is my body” [Mark 14:22].

Matthew agrees with Mark:

“Take, eat: this is my body” [Matthew 26:26].

But Luke distorts the text of Mark so that he may disagree with Matthew and makes his text read:

“This is my body which is given for you: this do in remembrance of me” [Luke 22:19].

According to Mark 14:23-24 and Matthew 26:27-28 the wine represented the blood of Jesus which was shed for many. But Luke has it for you [Luke 22:20]. A little later Jesus told his disciples that the Son of Man will be indeed killed as it was written [Mark 14:21 and Matthew 26:24]. But Luke changes this to determined [Luke 22:22]. When Jesus was arrested he told the chief priests and the mob that they are arresting him in order to fulfill the scripture [Mark 14:49 and Matthew 26:56]. But Luke disagrees and points out that the arrest took place because it was their hour and power of darkness [Luke 22:53]. Mark reports that Jesus died with a loud cry and that his last words were Eloi, Eloi, lama sabachtani [Mark 15:34]. Matthew agrees with Mark. He says the same thing [Matthew 27: 46]. But Luke deviates from Mark in order to make his text read differently from that of Matthew. He reports that the last words spoken were Father, into thine hands I commend my spirit [Luke 23:46].

After Jesus died, the centurion was amazed at the events he saw. Mark and Matthew have him say the following words:

“Truly this man was the Son of God” [Mark 15:39].

“Truly this was the Son of God” [Matthew 27:54].

But Luke disagrees. He makes the centurion say the following words:

“Certainly this was a righteous man” [Luke 23:47].

Mark and Matthew agree that Jesus was crucified and died on GOLGOTHA:

“And they bring him unto the place GOLGOTHA, which is, being interpreted, The place of a skull” [Mark 15:22].

“And when they were come unto a place called GOLGOTHA, that is to say, a place of a skull” [Matthew 27:33].

But Luke deviates from Mark and does not use the name GOLGOTHA but rather CALVARY:

“And when they were come to the place, which is called CALVARY, there they crucified him” [Luke 23:33].

Mark and Matthew agree that there was ONLY ONE ANGEL at the tomb of Jesus:

“And entering into the sepulchre, they saw a young man sitting on the right side, clothed in a long white garment; and they were affrighted. And he said unto them, Be not affrighted: Ye seek Jesus of Nazareth, which was crucified: he is risen; he is not here: behold the place where they laid him. But go your way, tell his disciples and Peter that he goeth before you into Galilee: there shall ye see him, as he said unto you” [Mark 16:5-7].

“And behold, there was a great earthquake: for the angel of the Lord descended from heaven, and came and rolled back the stone from the door, and sat upon it. His countenance was like lightening, and his raiment white as snow…And the angel answered and said unto the women, fear not ye: for I know that ye seek Jesus, which was crucified. He is not here: for he is risen, as he said. Come, see the place where the Lord lay. And go quickly, and tell his disciples that he is risen from the dead; and, behold, he goeth before you into Galilee; there shall ye see him: lo, I have told you” [Matthew 28:2-7].

Mark and Matthew agree that there was only one angel who was sitting - dressed in white. He spoke with the women and told them to go and tell the disciples that Jesus is alive and that he was on his way to Galilee. That is where the disciples were told to go in order to see him. But Luke deviates from Mark in order to disagree with Matthew. He says that there were TWO ANGELS and that they did not instruct the disciples to go to GALILEE since, according to him, the appearance actually occurred in Judaea - Jerusalem - and not Galilee. Please note how Luke changes Mark’s account and the words spoken to the women:

“And they found the stone rolled away from the sepulchre. And they entered in, and found not the body of the Lord Jesus. And it came to pass, as they were much perplexed thereabout, behold TWO MEN stood by them in shining garments: And as they were afraid, and bowed down their faces to the earth, THEY said unto them, why seek ye the living among the dead? He is not here, but is risen: remember how he spake unto you when he was yet in Galilee, saying, the Son of man must be delivered into the hands of sinful men, and be crucified, and the third day rise again. And they remembered his words” [Luke 24:2-8].

Mark’s account was changed so that Luke’s version would not agree with Matthew. He has two angels, in shining rather than white garment, poses a question to the women rather than a statement. And most significantly, Luke completely changes the context of the words concerning Galilee. He does so in order to be able to also disagree with Matthew as to where the actual first appearance of Jesus to his disciples took place. In Luke 24:9 Luke says that the women went and reported the matter to the ELEVEN APOSTLES and the REST but they did not believe their story. Verses 13-32 state how Jesus met two of the disciples [not of the Twelve] on the way to a village called Emmaus. One of them was named Clopas. He was invited to their place late that afternoon. When he broke bread before meal the two disciples realised that it was Jesus. As soon as they realised this they immediately returned to Jerusalem which was about 10 kilometres from Emmaus.

Please note:

“And they rose that very hour and returned to Jerusalem; and they found the ELEVEN gathered together, and those who were with them, Saying, Truly our Lord has risen and has appeared to Simon. And they [two disciples] also reported those things that happened on the road, and how they knew him as he broke bread. And while they were discussing these things, Jesus stood among them, and said to them, Peace be with you...and as they still did not believe because of their joy, and they were bewildered, he said to them, Have you anything here to eat? They gave him a portion of BROILED FISH and of a honeycomb. And HE TOOK IT AND ATE BEFORE THEIR EYES” [Luke 24:33-43].

There is no doubt at all that this text most plainly reveals that Jesus ate FISH and HONEY on Sunday evening in the presence of his ELEVEN APOSTLES and some others. Luke clearly portrays Jesus in Jerusalem on Sunday night and that is where his first appearance to the disciples takes place. In his claim he deviates from Mark in order to disagree with Matthew - as we shall now see. On the night of his arrest Jesus is quoted by Mark as saying:

“But after I’m raised to life, I’ll go ahead of you to GALILEE” [Mark 14:28].

The angel said to the women at the tomb on Sunday morning:

“Now go and tell his disciples, and especially Peter, that he will go ahead of you to GALILEE. YOU WILL SEE HIM THERE, JUST AS HE TOLD YOU” [Mark 16:7].

According to the testimony of Mark, Jesus clearly told his disciples that after he is risen from the dead he would go to GALILEE and that is where the disciples were going to see him. Matthew 26:32 also quotes Jesus as telling his disciples that after he is risen from the dead he would go ahead of them to GALILEE:

“But after I am risen again, I will go before you into Galilee.”

Matthew quotes the angel as saying to the women:

“...Now hurry! Tell his disciples that he has been raised to life and is on his way to GALILEE. Go there, and you will see him” [Matthew 28:7].

Jesus himself appeared to the women and said:

“Don’t be afraid! Tell my followers to go to GALILEE. They’ll see me there” [Matthew 28:10].

Then in Matthew 28:16 we read the following:

“Jesus’ ELEVEN DISCIPLES went to a mountain in GALILEE, where Jesus had told them to meet him”.

According to Matthew the ELEVEN APOSTLES went to GALILEE to a mountain Jesus specified. There, IN GALILEE, the disciples saw Jesus for the first time after his resurrection. The account of Luke therefore cannot be reconciled with the text of Mark and especially that of Matthew. Again we have two against one. Jesus was not in Jerusalem that Sunday evening but was on his way to Galilee. Jesus’ first appearance did not take place in Jerusalem but rather in GALILEE - as Mark and Matthew clearly point out. Therefore the text of Luke so often cited as proof that Jesus was a meat eater and therefore not a vegetarian - as many sources prove - is a forgery. By now it has been demonstrated that the synoptic principle dictates that Luke and Matthew would not agree. Not only is this true of the material all three evangelists have in common but even of the material that Matthew and Luke only have in common. This fact will now be demonstrated.

Matthean And Lukan Discrepancies

Both Matthew and Luke give their own version of the birth of Jesus. But as always they simply do not agree. Matthew maintains that Joseph and Mary lived in Judaea when Mary fell pregnant and that Mary gave birth in Bethlehem. From Judaea they escaped to Egypt. After Herod died they returned to the “land of Israel” - meaning Judaea. After they learnt that Herod’s son reigned over Judaea in his father’s place, they were afraid and decided to go to Galilee instead. Matthew has them settle in Nazareth ONLY AFTER THEY RETURNED FROM EGYPT:

“And he arose, and took the young child and his mother, and came to the land of Israel. But when he heard that Archelaus did reign in Judaea in the room of his father Herod, he was afraid to go thither [Judaea]: notwithstanding, being warned of God in a dream, he turned aside into the parts of Galilee: and he came and dwelt in a city called Nazareth” [Matthew 2:13-23].

Matthew has Joseph and Mary living in Bethlehem of Judaea. That is why he says nothing about taxing and their journey to Bethlehem. They did not have to journey to Bethlehem since they lived there. They wanted to return to Bethlehem from Egypt but were afraid and so they settled in Nazareth instead. But Luke has both Joseph and Mary living in NAZARETH of GALILEE while they were still unmarried and before Mary even fell pregnant. In fact, Luke says that Gabriel was sent to the city of NAZARETH in order to tell Mary that she was going to become pregnant with the Messiah. Luke 1:26 says that Gabriel went to see Mary in NAZARETH. Luke 2:4-5 says that Joseph and Mary went from NAZARETH to Bethlehem. Matthew says that Joseph, Mary and Jesus escaped to Egypt, while Luke says that they went to Jerusalem’s temple in order to perform the rites of purification. Luke knows nothing about Herod’s wish to kill Jesus and the children of Bethlehem. For Luke there was no need to run to Egypt but rather it was perfectly safe to travel to Jerusalem and even to the very temple. After Joseph and Mary finished their rites in the temple they returned to NAZARETH - their own town [Luke 2:39]. Matthew has the Magi come from Persia and visit the child. Luke knows nothing of this. He has the shepherds visiting Bethlehem and the angelic hosts singing. Matthew has Yahweh saying at Jesus’ baptism the following words:

“This is my beloved Son, in whom I am well pleased” [Matthew 3:17].

Luke changes this to read:

“Thou art my beloved Son; in thee I am well pleased” [Luke 3:22].

Matthew traces Jesus’ lineage to David through Joseph and SOLOMON [Matthew 1:6, 16]. Luke can’t agree with Matthew so he traces Jesus’ lineage to David through Joseph and NATHAN - Solomon’s brother [Luke 3:23,31]. After his baptism Jesus went to the desert where he was tempted by the devil. Matthew says that the order of temptation was in the following manner:

1. TO TURN STONES INTO BREAD [Matthew 4:3].

2. TO JUMP FROM THE PINACLE OF THE TEMPLE [Matthew 4:5].

3. TO BOW DOWN AND WORSHIP SATAN [Matthew 4:9].

Now Luke of course can’t agree with Matthew. So what does he do? He reverses the order of temptation.

1. TO TURN STONES INTO BREAD [Luke 4:3].

2. TO BOW DOWN AND WORSHIP SATAN [Luke 4:7].

3. TO JUMP FROM THE PINACLE OF THE TEMPLE [Luke 4:9].

One of Jesus’ disciples was originally a TAX COLLECTOR. Matthew calls him MATTHEW:

“And as Jesus passed forth from thence, he saw a man, named MATTHEW, sitting at the receipt of custom: and he said unto him, follow me. And he arose, and followed him” [Matthew 9:9].

Luke can’t agree with Matthew so he names this disciple LEVI:

“And after these things he went forth, and saw a publican, named LEVI, sitting at the receipt of custom: and he said unto him, follow me. And he left all, rose up, and followed him” [Luke 5:27-28].

Matthew has Jesus saying to the Pharisees that he casts out demons “with the Spirit of God”:

“But if I cast out devils by the SPIRIT OF GOD, then the kingdom of God is come unto you” [Matthew 12:28].

Luke must deviate from Matthew so he uses the phrase “finger of God”:

“But if I with the FINGER OF GOD cast out devils, no doubt the kingdom of God is come upon you” [Luke 11:20].

Now let us compare the “beatitudes” and the rest of this important speech of Jesus. Matthew says that Jesus ascended the mountain and then delivered his speech in a sitting position [Matt. 5:1]. Luke says that Jesus descended from the mountain to a plain and delivered his speech in a standing position [Luke 6:12,17]. In Matthew, Jesus uses the pronouns “they, theirs,” [verses 3-10] while in Luke “you, yours” [verses 20-21]. In Luke, Jesus also pronounces “woes” while Matthew knows nothing of these. In Matthew, Jesus uses the term “Kingdom of Heaven” while in Luke “Kingdom of God.” In Luke 6:20 the poor are blessed while in Matthew 5:3 the poor in spirit. In Matthew 5:4 “mourners shall be comforted” while in Luke 6:21 “mourners shall laugh.” In Matthew, Jesus says “revile you, persecute you” [verse 11] while in Luke “hate you, ex-communicate you” [verse 22]. All this was to be done “for my sake” [Matthew 5:11] but “for the Son of Man’s sake” in Luke 6:22. In Matthew 5:15 people do not put a candle “under a bushel” while in Luke 8:16 “under a bed.”

When hated and persecuted the disciples should “rejoice and be exceedingly glad” [Matthew 5:12] but according to Luke 6:23 Jesus said “Rejoice ye in that day, and leap for joy.” When Jesus spoke of doing good he said to do good even to “publicans” [Matthew 5:46] but according to Luke 6:33 “sinners.” In Matthew 5:48 the audience was to strive to be “perfect as the Father is perfect” while in Luke 6:36 they were to strive to be “merciful as the Father is merciful.” In Matthew 5:45 the righteous are “Children of the Father” while in Luke 6:35 “Children of the Highest.” In Matthew 5:45 Yahweh is kind to “just and unjust” while in Luke 6:35 to “unfaithful and evil.” In Matthew 7:16 Jesus said that people do not collect “grapes from thorns” and “figs from thistles” while in Luke 6:44 he says “grapes from bramble bush” and “figs from thorns.” In Matthew 7:26 the foolish man builds his house “upon the sand” while in Luke 6:49 “upon the earth.”

During this speech Jesus also taught his disciples and the general public how to pray. He taught them the prayer commonly called “The Lord’s Prayer” [Matthew 6:9-13]. But according to Luke, Jesus did not teach his disciples this prayer then but rather later - when the disciples asked him to do so - since John the Baptist also taught his disciples how to pray [Luke 11:1-4]. Matthew and Mark do not only disagree on their chronology but they also disagree on the content of the prayer. But then so they should. The synoptic principle dictates that they should disagree just about on any subject. Here is the comparison of the “Lord’s Prayer” according to the two versions - that of Matthew and Luke:

A close comparison reveals that either Matthew or Luke deliberately rearranged and changed the content of the prayer so that they would not agree. Now let us continue and see that there are further deliberate alterations by either Matthew or Luke so that their gospels would simply not agree. In Matthew 8:5-10 a centurion’s servant was “sick of the palsy, grievously tormented” while in Luke 7:1-9 he was “sick and ready to die.” In Matthew the centurion personally goes to Jesus for his help while in Luke he sends “elders of the Jews.” In Matthew 12:39-40 Jesus says this concerning the sign of Jonah:

“An evil and adulterous generation seeketh after a sign: and there shall no sign be given it, but the sign of the prophet Jonas: For as Jonas was three days and three nights in the whale’s belly; so shall the Son of man be three days and three nights in the heart of the earth.”

But in Luke 11:29-30 Jesus has this to say instead:

“This is an evil generation: they seek a sign; and there shall no sign be given it, but the sign of Jonas the prophet. For as Jonas was a sign unto the Ninevites, so shall also the Son of man be to this generation.”

According to Matthew 23:23 the scribes and Pharisees pay tithe “of mint and anise and cummin” while according to Luke 11:42 “mint and rue and all manner of herbs.” In Matthew 23:27 the scribes and Pharisees are like “whited sepulchres, which indeed appear beautiful outward, but are within full of dead man’s bones, and of all uncleanness.”

But according to Luke 11:44 they are as “graves which appear not, and the men that walk over them are not aware of them.” In Matthew 23:4 the scribes and Pharisees “bind heavy burdens “ which they would not lift with even one finger.” In Luke 11:46 it is not the scribes and Pharisees who do this but actually lawyers. In Matthew 23:29 the scribes and Pharisees “build the tombs of the prophets, and garnish the sepulchres of the righteous” while in Luke 11:47 the lawyers actually do that. In Matthew 23:13 it is the scribes and Pharisees who neither entered the kingdom themselves nor allowed other to do so. But in Luke 11:52 it is not the scribes and Pharisees who did so but rather lawyers. In Luke 12:24 “ravens” are fed by “God” while in Matthew 6:26 “fowls” by “Heavenly Father.”

According to Luke 18:35-43 a blind man met Jesus in Jericho as he was on his way to Jerusalem. Jesus gave him sight. But according to Matthew 20:29-34 there was not one man but two. I can go on and on - citing other examples. But this is not necessary. The quotations provided indisputably prove that the gospels of Matthew and Luke were written in such a way so that they would simply not agree. Now the Tridentine Council has stated that every word in the Bible was dictated by the Holy Spirit. Did the Holy Spirit dictate the synoptic gospels in such a way that generally two gospels would agree against one and the gospels of Matthew and Luke to disagree? Obviously not! The gospels were tampered with and forged. The Law says that no one can be judged and condemned on the testimony of a sole witness. Everything must be established on the evidence of at least two witnesses. Luke is a sole witness that Jesus ate fish and honey on Sunday night in Jerusalem. Matthew and Mark testify that this was not the case because Jesus was not with his disciples in Jerusalem at that time and that his first appearance was in fact in Galilee. On the basis of the Law therefore we must discard the account of Luke and accept the testimonies of Matthew and Mark.

On the basis of their testimonies Jesus did not eat fish on Sunday night nor did he instruct Peter and his colleagues to cast a net into the sea after failing to catch anything the whole night. Luke’s account of this event is alone and Jesus could not have done so nor did he choose Peter and Andrew then but rather earlier as Matthew and Mark clearly testify.

Likewise, the account of John 21 cannot be correct and Peter with some of his fellow apostles could not have been fishing after Jesus’ resurrection. Jesus did not serve fish to his disciples since that appearance, according to Matthew and Mark never took place. John like Luke says that Jesus’ first appearance took place in the evening of the first day, while the door was locked where the disciples were gathered together. John says that this was the first appearance and that Thomas was not present.

A week later Jesus supposedly appeared to his disciples for the second time while Thomas was also present. This does not agree even with Luke for he states that all eleven disciples were present when Jesus appeared to them in Jerusalem. Mark and especially Matthew show that the eleven saw Jesus for the first time on a mountain in Galilee. This was the first and the last appearance. In Mark 16:9-19 we read that Jesus’ first appearance was to Mary Magdalene. His second appearance was to Clopas and his friend who were walking from Jerusalem to Emmaus. His third and final appearance was to the eleven apostles.

King James translators use the word “afterward” after the second appearance which is misleading. The Greek word is “husteron” which means “eventually, at last, finally.” The appearance to the eleven was the third indeed but actually first to them and it was also the final for Jesus ascended heaven after that appearance. John calls the appearance at the Sea of Tiberias as the “third” appearance. Since he is wrong about the first appearance he is also wrong about the third. According to Matthew and Mark Jesus simply did not and could not have eaten fish, instructed the disciples to fish while supposedly preaching from Peter’s boat or prepare fish and offer them to his disciples at the Sea of Tiberias.

See Our Readers' Comments:

• By Betsy - 28 Jan 2008
• By Frank and Mary Hoffman - 28 Jan 2008
• By Debra - 21 Apr 2009
• By Frank and Mary Hoffman - 21 Apr 2009
• By Norm - 4 May 2009
• By John Vujicic - 6 May 2009
• By Luis Santana - 16 Sep 2009
• By John Vujicic - 17 Sep 2009
• By Adriana - 24 Apr 2010
• By Frank and Mary Hoffman - 24 Apr 2010
• By Adriana - 25 Apr 2010
• By Ellie - 28 Apr 2013
• By Alafair - 8 Sep 2015
• By Yasu - 29 Nov 2015
• By John - 3 Mar 2016
• By Mary - 28 Dec 2016
• By Frank and Mary Hoffman - 29 Dec 2016
• By Mary - 29 Dec 2016
• By Frank and Mary Hoffman - 30 Dec 2016
• By Kevin - 26 Mar 2017
• By Donald - 3 Jul 2017

Go on to: Comments by Betsy - 28 Jan 2008
Return to: Discussion Table of Contents