THE
TESTIMONY

Home | About | Subscriptions | Contact us | Search
New this month | Back issues | Other publications | Other sites
Back to Bible Study special issue contents

THE STUDY OF PARALLEL RECORDS

Neville Moss

WHAT ABOUT leaving all the boring bits out? We could cut out all the repetition too... There are so many different versions of the Bible that somewhere, I imagine, there must be one which does just this. It is sad that so much effort is made and yet the Bible is so little read.

No genuine seeker after truth would seriously question the place of the so-called ‘boring bits’. "All scripture is given by inspiration of God" and its study is "profitable" (2 Tim. 3:16). The purpose of this article is therefore to look at why there are parallel accounts in the Bible, and how they are helpful and profitable.

So why is the same incident recorded or referred to more than once? Some reasons are:

• repetition reinforces the message;
• it gives us the benefit of seeing with more than one pair of eyes;
• one record will emphasise one aspect more than another.

The Bible offers us these choices. The benefit is twofold. Firstly, by comparing one account with another we can build up a fuller and more rounded picture which gives us a better insight into God’s purpose. Secondly, because we are all different, and because our needs vary from time to time, there is always somewhere we can find encouragement. 

Eyewitnesses

Suppose you witness a road traffic accident. The police are quickly on the scene and take statements from you and the other witnesses. One of the motorists is charged with dangerous driving. Not surprisingly, his account plays down his speed, exaggerates the difficulty of the road conditions, and questions the care taken by the other drivers involved. His licence is at risk, so he needs to make the most of any mitigating circumstances.

More surprising are differences in the accounts of the eyewitnesses. They all saw what happened, so why the discrepancies? In fact, there could be a number of reasons. One witness was just a few yards away and saw the whole thing from beginning to end; another was on the other side of the road and further away, and only looked up when he heard the squeal of the brakes. Perhaps another account was coloured by the age or appearance of the driver charged or by the disfiguring injuries sustained by one of the passengers.

So no one was lying, but each person was telling what happened as he saw it, perhaps coloured by personal interest or prejudice. In a fair trial all the evidence will be weighed, a full picture of what actually happened will be assembled, and any mitigating circumstances will be taken into account in reaching, in human terms, a just and fair judgement.

"Now Satan stood up against Israel..."

Take an example from two Biblical ‘witnesses’. Look at 1 Chronicles 21:1: "Now Satan stood up against Israel, and moved David to number Israel". [Quotations are from the NKJV (RAV).] Who was Satan? The concordance shows that a Hebrew word, meaning ‘adversary’, has been taken from Hebrew into English without being translated. This in itself is helpful when the passage is advanced in support of the false doctrine of a personal devil. But proof positive is provided by the parallel passage in 2 Samuel 24:1: "again the anger of the LORD was aroused against Israel, and he moved David against them to say, ‘Go, number Israel and Judah’".

So the incident becomes a very good illustration of the Scriptural principle, "whom the LORD loves He chastens" (Heb. 12:6). We have the translators to thank for the misleading use of ‘Satan’ as a proper noun, where, in fact, Chronicles refers non-specifically to an adversary, and 2 Samuel specifically identifies the LORD Himself.

Why not make both passages the same, and save the trouble of searching for an explanation? First, because there is value in more than one perspective, just as our two eyes each convey a different picture to the brain, helping us to judge distance accurately. Secondly, we can be spoon-fed to the point where we no longer appreciate what is before us; in most cases we benefit in direct proportion to the amount of effort we put in.

The conversion of Saul

Take another example. There are three different accounts in Acts of the conversion of Saul on the road to Damascus. The first is Luke’s account in Acts 9:3-9. Later, in 22:6-11, Paul describes the same event to a hostile and angry crowd in Jerusalem. Then, in 26:12-18, Paul gives a further account to King Agrippa and Festus.

By careful comparison we can build up a rounded picture of what happened. The bare bones of the Acts 9 account are that when Saul was near to Damascus a great light from heaven shone around him. He fell to the ground and heard a voice, the voice of Jesus. From Acts 22 and Acts 26 we can add flesh to the bones. The time of day was around midday (22:6; 26:13), and even at the height of the day the light was brighter than the sun (26:13). This great light also enveloped the men who journeyed with Saul, and they too fell to the ground (26:13,14).

Jesus spoke in Hebrew (26:14); and, in apparent contradiction, according to 9:7 the men "stood speechless, hearing a voice but seeing no one", but according to 22:9 "they did not hear the voice of him who spoke to me". Must we assume that the invariably meticulous Luke got it wrong, and that Saul, the participant, was right? Not by any means; it seems that because Jesus spoke in Hebrew the men heard a voice which was unintelligible to them, whereas Saul heard, and understood, the voice of him who spoke.

Only by drawing on all three accounts is it possible to arrive at a reasonable conclusion as to what actually happened. This is not simply detective work for its own sake. As we compare verse with verse we are reminded again that God alone has the power to create light brighter than the midday sun. We can take comfort, too, that, just as Jesus personally identified with those Saul was persecuting, so he will personally identify with us in our trials and difficulties.

Elijah’s effective, fervent prayer

In some cases Jesus and the New Testament writers throw additional light on Old Testament events. Take the time of Ahab as an example. 1 Kings 17:1 introduces us to Elijah pronouncing the start of a period of drought to King Ahab. In 1 Kings 18:1 God instructs Elijah "in the third year" to go again to Ahab and announce the end of the drought; and, following the dramatic events on Mount Carmel, torrential rain begins to fall (v. 45).

Two New Testament references add to the detail of the narrative. Luke 4:25,26 records the words of Jesus. First, Jesus says the drought lasted for three years and six months. Then he refers to famine, the consequences of drought, resulting in starvation and intense suffering, causing there to be not only the widow of Zarephath but "many widows" in Israel in the days of Elijah. James 5:17,18 confirms the three-and-a-half-year time period, and adds one further very significant detail, that it was Elijah’s earnest prayer to God that caused drought to come on the land in the first place, and his further prayer that brought the drought to an end.

Why did Elijah pray thus, knowing what the consequences would be? It must be that he was appalled at the wickedness of Ahab, who "did more to provoke the LORD God of Israel to anger than all the kings of Israel who were before him" (1 Kgs. 16:33). He saw the state of idolatry that God’s people had been led into, with Ahab building a temple for the worship of Baal at Samaria. So he pleaded with God to shut up the heavens; and for more than three long furnace-like years God’s king and his people were forced to reflect on the utter futility of worshipping idols of wood and stone.

Then came the final demonstration on Mount Carmel. It is marvellous that after so long a period of drought the people were commanded to pour out twelve, or perhaps even more, waterpots of water on the altar and the surrounding trench. They must have gasped with dismay, as well as with parched tongues, to see so much water draining away into the ground. In contrast, Elijah’s rock-solid confidence that God would answer the effective, fervent prayer of a righteous man (Jas. 5:16) is there for all to see. No doubt it would delight God if our concern for the evils of this present age and our confidence in His power to answer prayer matched those of Elijah.

God’s dealings with Israel

A further fruitful source of comparison is the history of God’s dealings with the Jews. The primary sources are the books of the Law and the historical books in the Old Testament. There are, however, a number of psalms which take this theme, and also sources in the New Testament.

Take, for example, Psalm 106 about the rebellions of the children of Israel in the wilderness, and Nehemiah 9, when the Levites lead God’s people in a confession of their sins and of God’s mercy. In both instances there are new insights.

Psalm 106:20,21 tersely comments on the stupidity of Aaron and of the people in making the golden calf in the wilderness: "Thus they changed their glory into the image of an ox that eats grass. They forgot God their Saviour". Similarly, Nehemiah 9:25 says that the children of Israel found a fruitful and fertile land when they crossed over the Jordan, and they "grew fat"—a warning that peace and prosperity often lead to indolence and complacency.

In the New Testament Stephen uses the call of Abraham and the deliverance from Egypt in his defence before the high priest in Jerusalem (Acts 7). Compare the account of when Moses killed an Egyptian for beating one of his brethren (Ex. 2:11-15) with Stephen’s account in Acts 7:23-29. Stephen tells us how old Moses was (forty years; cf. Ex. 2:11: "when Moses was grown"). More important, Stephen gives an insight into Moses’ motive and his understanding of his future role: "he supposed that his brethren would have understood that God would deliver them by his hand" (v. 25). There is also food for thought in the words of Moses in verse 26: "Men, you are brethren; why do you wrong one another?". Whether under the yoke of Egyptian slavery, or in our own generation, it well behoves faithful brethren to work together and not to quarrel.

Other examples in the New Testament are Paul’s speech in the synagogue in Antioch in Pisidia (13:16-41), where God’s commendation of David as "a man after My own heart" is recorded; and the great survey of the faithful in Hebrews 11.

The Gospel records

No review of this subject would be complete without referring to the four Gospel accounts of the life and ministry of Jesus. Each writer, under God’s inspiration, throws light on different facets of Jesus’s life. By following the Bible Companion it is our privilege to share in the life of our Master on eight separate occasions in the course of a year.

Matthew emphasises the Messiah, the King and the Kingdom; for confirmation, check how many times he uses such words as ‘kingdom’, ‘kingdom of heaven’ and ‘kingdom of God’. Mark’s Gospel, the shortest, is notable for its sense of urgency; look for the words ‘immediately’ and ‘straightway’, particularly in the early chapters. Perhaps this comes as no surprise when we reflect that Mark is traditionally held to have written about the things which Peter, a real man of action, saw and heard.

Luke gives more emphasis to the humanity of Jesus, the "friend of tax collectors and sinners" (7:34), and, more than the other Gospel writers, gives prominence to women. John concentrates on the time Jesus spent in Judea, emphasises the miracles or ‘signs’ he performed, and spends five chapters (chs. 13–17) recording the words of Jesus the night before his crucifixion.

There are also points of detailed comparison to look out for. For example, all four Gospels describe the Feeding of the Five Thousand, but only Mark comments on "the green grass" (6:39). John adds the fact that it was close to Passover time and that there was "much grass" (6:4,10). The detail is consistent, for only in the springtime, at the time of Passover, would there be much green grass in the land. John also records Jesus’s testing of Philip about how the great multitude was to be fed (vv. 5-7), reminding us that the incident took place close to the sea of Galilee and Philip’s home town of Bethsaida.

Where next?

These few examples show that there is much to be learned from the careful comparison of parallel records. How should we set about it?

• A Bible with good marginal references is essential. The choice of translation is less important. In fact, some newer translations have editorial headings which are very useful in scanning the text.
• There is no substitute for regularly reading the Bible. In this respect the Bible Companion is hard to beat. Bible reading groups, involving as they do close examination of particular texts, can also be a great help.
• As you read, be alert to the possibility of a parallel text. The four Gospels are an obvious example, as are the historical books in the Old Testament, not forgetting the historical narrative in some of the prophets. Careful use of marginal references will bring many other examples to light.
• Assume the role of a detective. Look for the differences; look for extra items of information; and look at the order of the narratives. Then lay your material out like the pieces of a jigsaw puzzle. Sometimes the puzzle will not come right. Sometimes there will be more than one possible outcome. Rarely, though, will you be disappointed.

You will find it valuable to consult commentaries and to make use of published ‘parallels’ and ‘harmonies’, for example, of the Gospels, of the life of Paul, and of the historical books in the Old Testament.

Two excellent examples of this approach to Bible study are Who Moved the Stone? by Frank Morison and The Day Christ Died by Jim Bishop. Mr Morison’s book, first published in 1930, investigates the last seven days of the life of Christ. In the preface he tells how he set out to write one kind of book and found himself compelled by sheer force of circumstances to write quite another. Despite his own preconceptions, he came to acknowledge the historical truth of the Gospel message: that on the third day God raised His Son from the dead.

Mr Bishop’s book is an hour-by-hour account of "the most dramatic day in the history of the world, the day on which Jesus of Nazareth died". He describes it as a journalistic historian’s approach, and says significantly that "The fundamental research was done a long time ago by four fine journalists: Matthew, Mark, Luke and John".

In conclusion...

"... the word of God is living and powerful, and sharper than any two-edged sword, piercing even to the division of soul and spirit, and of joints and marrow, and is a discerner of the thoughts and intents of the heart" (Heb. 4:12).

The figure of the ‘two-edged’ sword is an apt one in this context. If, with all reverence and humility, our approach to God’s Word is keen and observant, searching out every shade of meaning and message of encouragement, then His Word will indeed be a living and powerful force in our lives.