"Why are the gospels of Matthew and John Different?"

A straightforward reading of the Gospels presents numerous differences in perspective and detail that supplement each other but do not contradict.

https://answersingenesis.org/contradictions-in-the-bible/feedback-why-are-the-gospels-of-matthew-and-john-different/

I'm coming

We, human beings, are not created the same way, so don't expect us to report the same event in the same way.

All birds fly, but all the birds that fly are not the same...some are eagles, some are hawks, some are sparrow and so on and so forth.

In other words, God loves variety.
..that is why the same biblical accounts are written by different authors to different people.

Mathew, Mark and Luke are called synoptic because they are similar Gospel accounts... They were written around the same period. John was written far later in time as an account correcting and justifying the knowledge of Christ people knew

Because they we're written by two different people.

olayiwola4u:
We, human beings, are not created the same way, so don't expect us to report the same event in the same way.

All birds fly, but all the birds that fly are not the same...some are eagles, some are hawks, some are sparrow and so on and so forth.

In other words, God loves variety.
..that is why the same biblical accounts are written by different authors to different people.

But according to you guys, Bible was written under the direction of holy spirit. So, does that means holy spirit made a mistake or he tried to confuse them just like he did confused the prophets in old testament?

You folks are confusing I swear, always twisting and whining the Bible to suit whatever argument that Springs up

To explain logically, any historical fact will have different perspectives and areas of emphasis. Check out the writings concerning the lives of Pythagoras, Socrates, Plato, etc. There will always be slight differences... However certain important facts in the story will not be tampered with. This is the character of historical documentation.

If an ancient historical story appears to be thoroughly same from different recorders, it follows that they all are probably eyewitnesses or its a myth. Thus us because stories will have their areas of emphasis and perspectives...

This is the same with the gospels... However, the important facts are even: the fact that Christ is said to be born by a virgin, he is said to have wroth miracles, raised the dead, was crucified (even Jewish and secular sources agree with this)......


Let's stop searching for a fault where it isn't.

Matthew, Mark., and Luke recorded historical facts and his earthly ministry. Luke was. not among the Apostles but a believer, who like Paul may have been converted after Ithe accession of Jesus.

1 Forasmuch as many have taken in hand to set forth in order a declaration of those things which are most surely believed among us, 2 Even as they delivered them unto us, which from the beginning were eyewitnesses, and ministers of the word; 3 It seemed good to me also, having had perfect understanding of all things from the very first, to write unto thee in order, most excellent Theophilus, 4 That thou mightest know the certainty of those things, wherein thou hast been instructed. Luke 1: 1-5.
John was closer to Jesus than any of the Apostles and hence wrote more about His divinity than others John 1, 16,17. Reactions also testify to this in the were - up about happenings in heaven and the earth.

hackwi:
Mathew, Mark and Luke are called synoptic because they are similar Gospel accounts... They were written around the same period. John was written far later in time as an account correcting and justifying the knowledge of Christ people knew

There is no truth to this claim as all 4 Gospels were written within the period before the destruction of Jerusalem in 70AD, same as the book of Revelation which was not written in 90AD but at least 20 years prior.