The Cairo Debate — Page 60
09 60 reports his praising God and then making his remarks. Matthew incorporates many others with the centurion. They 'saw the earthquake' and 'were filled with awe' and exclaimed afterwards. . Apart from this their testimonies differ widely from one other. In Matthew the centurion is reported to remark, "Truly this was a son of God. ". According to Mark the centurion says, "Truly this man was a son of God. " Luke's version makes the centurion' say, say, "Certainly this man this man was innocent. " In Matthew the centurion's utterance is "son of God" not "man. " In Mark both "man" and "son of God" are used. In Luke there is "man" and "innocent," and "son of God" is omitted. This is interesting gradual variation. Now. Christians are in a fix. If they discredit one report the rest will be dropped too. And if all of them are harping on the same then it should be admitted that "son of God" and "innocent" are only synonyms expressing the same idea. The. Gospel writers used "son of God" in the sense of "innocent"-which answers the question of sonship of Jesus. (11) Were people or the Jews aware of Jesus' death when he cried? Matthew and Mark make no contribution to this problem. In Luke we find : "And all the multitudes who assembled to see the sight, when they saw what had taken place, returned home beating their breasts. And all his acquaintances and the