Christians - even the Bible says that Jesus was not God so why do you say he was ?

[GrandizerII]

If you need a number, make it around 80%.

Can you support that? It sounds like a guess.

But forget numbers

No, I'm not going to forget numbers. If Luke omitted a significant portion of Matthew, then your position that the omission of parts of Matthew's nativity account is unusual and requires explanation is

But I sense you're not open to seeing that right now. Maybe  in the future you might.

I'm open to seeing it, if you'd just give me the numbers to back it up. You've likely done some googling and found that you were wrong, but are still trying to cling to the position. Since you're unwilling to produce the analysis, I'll do it.

From what I've read, about 70% of Matthew has a parallel in Luke (45% of Matt shared with Mark & Luke, 25% shared just with Luke).
https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:...ospels.png

Since Matt has 1071 verses, that means it has ~321 verses without a parallel in Luke. So, no, it's not an odd thing for Luke to omit parts of Matt's nativity account.

You could say, maybe most of those 330 are in the nativity account. So, let's look at that. The nativity verses in Matt 1 are fairly consistent with information in Luke. The Matt verses omitted by Luke are Matt 2:1-22.

So, Luke omits 22 verses of Matt's nativity account, which means he omits ~300 verses of Matt's other content. Put in percentages, the omitted nativity verses are only ~7% of the total omitted verses.

Conclusion: Luke's omission of parts of Matt's nativity account is not unusual.

So I was close. 70% is good enough an estimate.

Ok, you included Matthew 2, but what about Matthew 1 as well? Make that 25 extra verses, and you now have 47. That's a relatively large number of verses omitted in two chapters only.

But I disagree with that simplistic approach to measuring similarity. I'd rather we go by account similarity rather than word or verse similarity. The nativity account in Matthew is not in any way similar to the one in Luke. The genealogy as well. So Matthew 1 and 2 are entirely not in Luke.

Let's go to Matthew 3 now.

Introduction to John the Baptist (similar account found in Luke)
Baptism of Jesus (similar account found in Luke)

So overall, Matthew 3 is pretty much found in Luke.

Let's go to Matthew 4 next.

Temptation of Jesus (similar account in Luke)
Return to Galilee - Nazareth then Capernaum (similar account found in Luke)
Calling His First Disciples (similar account found in Luke)

So overall, most of Matthew 4 is also found in Luke.

Matthew 5?

Beatitudes (found in Luke)
Salt (found in Luke 14)
Light of the World (not found in Luke but it's a small passage)
Heaven and earth verse (similar verse found in Luke 16)
Love your enemies and turn the other cheek parts (in Luke as well).
Divorce (in Luke)

So Chapter 5, despite some sayings not found in any similar way, is still mostly found in Luke.

I'm getting lazy now so I'm stopping here at this point until I see a warrant for going further.

Looking at the pattern, why is it then that nothing regarding the nativity and the genealogy in Matthew is found in any similar way in Luke that would indicate Luke was aware of Matthew?

I don't want to keep going as it's a lot of work, but there is big support for what I'm saying.