AI-generated connections. Each carries a verification badge with a recorded basis; contested links are flagged.
The same saying in Luke 17: Noah, the pair in the field, the pair at the mill verbal / quotation: confirmed
Luke reports the flood comparison and the two pairs in a different discourse, and the overlap is lexical as well as thematic: the rare name Νῶε at Luke 17:27, and at Luke 17:35 the same two verbs of taking and leaving that Matthew uses, with the same “one and one.” Cambridge cross-refers to Luke 17:27 to 29 and notes that Luke adds the destruction of Sodom to the flood; Ellicott observes that Luke's version of the Olivet discourse omits the Noah material and substitutes a call to watchfulness, which is why the parallel sits in Luke 17 rather than Luke 21. Poole declines to treat Luke 17:26 to 27 here at all, judging it spoken at another time and on another occasion, and reserves it for his comment on that chapter. ⚙ We therefore record a verbal link between two reports of one saying, not a claim that either evangelist copies the other.
Luke 17:27 · Luke 17:35
basis: Verifier: shared Greek lexemes at Luke 17:27 include G3575 Νῶε (in 8 vv, rare) with G2250 ἡμέρα (in 368 vv); at Luke 17:35, G3880 παραλαμβάνω (in 49 vv), G863 ἀφίημι (in 131 vv) and G1520 εἷς (in 288 vv). Greek to Greek, so shared Strong's numbers are computable, and the rare name Νῶε carries the link. Verbal in vocabulary only: no quotation of one Gospel by the other is claimed.
The flood itself: Genesis named, and still not a verbal link typological
Verses 37 to 39 do not allude to Genesis, they retell it: Noah by name, the days before the flood, the entering of the chest, the water that lifted all of them away. Pulpit notes that in using the episode this way Christ confirms the historical accuracy of the Genesis narrative, and cites Genesis 6:3 for the warning and Genesis 9:20 to 21 for the drinking; Gill cites Genesis 6:2 for the unlawful unions and counts the eight persons saved; Poole sends the reader to Genesis 6:3 to 5 for the security and debauchery of that time. ⚙ The appeal is explicit and the tier is still not verbal, for a mechanical reason that we would rather state than hide: Matthew's words carry Greek Strong's numbers and Genesis carries Hebrew ones, so no shared lexeme can be computed for this pair and the Verifier records no basis for it. What can be said is that Genesis supplies the figure (a warned generation, one man who enters, a flood that takes all) and Matthew reads the parousia by it. That is typology, and we tier it so.
Genesis 6:5 · Genesis 7:7 · Genesis 7:23
basis: Cross-Testament (Greek to Hebrew): no shared Strong's lexeme is computable and the Verifier supplies no basis for this pair, so a verbal tier is unavailable however explicit the appeal. The recorded basis is figural and named: Matthew 24:37-39 uses G3575 Νῶε (in 8 vv), G2627 κατακλυσμός (in 4 vv) and G2787 κιβωτός to retell Genesis 6:5-7:23 by name. Ancient and widely held as a reading, since the Lord makes it himself.
Noah in the apostolic letters: the same two rare words verbal / quotation: confirmed
2 Peter 2:5 is the one other place in the New Testament that puts Νῶε and κατακλυσμός together, and both are rare. Ellicott builds on exactly this, noting that Peter's two letters teem with the history to which his Master's teaching had directed him, and citing 1 Peter 3:20, 2 Peter 2:5 and 2 Peter 3:6; he reads the over eager expectation and the answering scorn of 2 Peter 3:3 to 8 as the pastoral setting in which the Lord's own refusal to fix a date mattered most. Pulpit cites 1 Peter 3:20 for the length of the warning, and Cambridge lists Hebrews 11:7 among the places that spell the name Noah rather than Noe. ⚙ The link is a shared stock of rare vocabulary about one event, which is a real verbal tie; it is not evidence that Peter or Hebrews is quoting Matthew, and we do not claim that.
2 Peter 2:5 · 1 Peter 3:20 · Hebrews 11:7
basis: Verifier: rare shared Greek lexemes G3575 Νῶε (in 8 vv) and G2627 κατακλυσμός (in 4 vv) at 2 Peter 2:5; G3575 Νῶε with G2250 ἡμέρα (in 368 vv) at 1 Peter 3:20; G3575 Νῶε with G4012 περί (in 304 vv) at Hebrews 11:7. All Greek to Greek. Verbal on the strength of the two rare lexemes; no direction of quotation is asserted.
The thief who digs through: Matthew 6:19 answered at Matthew 24:43 verbal / quotation: confirmed
The rare verb διορύσσω, to dig through a wall, occurs in only four verses of the New Testament, and two of them are in Matthew: the treasure on earth where thieves break through and steal, and this householder whose house is dug into while he sleeps. Cambridge makes the cross-reference itself, sending the reader from “to be broken up” here back to Matthew 6:19 to 20; Barnes does the same at both places. ⚙ The two passages together give one teaching about the same wall: in chapter 6 what is inside the wall is not worth defending, and in chapter 24 the wall will not hold anyway. The link is in the vocabulary, and the reading of the pair is ours.
Matthew 6:19 · Matthew 6:20
basis: Verifier: shared Greek lexemes G1358 διορύσσω (in 4 vv, rare) and G2812 κλέπτης (in 16 vv) at Matthew 6:19; G2812 κλέπτης with G3772 οὐρανός (in 255 vv) and G3761 οὐδέ (in 129 vv) at Matthew 6:20. Same book, same author, same rare verb: a genuine verbal link.
The weeping and the gnashing: a fixed Matthean formula verbal / quotation: confirmed
The closing clause of verse 51 is a set phrase. κλαυθμός stands in nine verses and βρυγμός in seven, and they occur together, with the same adverb “there,” at Matthew 8:12, Matthew 13:42, Matthew 13:50, Matthew 22:13 and Luke 13:28. Barnes, Gill and Pulpit all cross-refer among these places rather than expounding the phrase afresh here (Barnes to Matthew 8:12, Gill to Matthew 13:42, Pulpit to Matthew 8:12, Matthew 22:13 and Matthew 25:30), and Ellicott notes the definite articles, “the weeping and the gnashing,” as elsewhere. ⚙ The formula is therefore not a description composed for the wicked steward but a citation of Matthew's own standing language for exclusion, which is part of why the parable's ending can be read as the Lord dropping the figure and naming the reality.
Matthew 8:12 · Matthew 13:42 · Matthew 22:13 · Luke 13:28
basis: Verifier: rare shared Greek lexemes G2805 κλαυθμός (in 9 vv) and G1030 βρυγμός (in 7 vv), with G1563 ἐκεῖ (in 94 vv) at Matthew 13:42, Matthew 13:50 and Luke 13:28, and with G5119 τότε (in 158 vv) at Matthew 22:13; G5207 υἱός (in 344 vv) at Matthew 8:12. All Greek to Greek, and the two rare nouns travel as a unit.
The wicked man gnashing his teeth in Psalm 112 structural / thematic: confirmed
Psalm 112 ends with the wicked man seeing the prosperity of the righteous, gnashing his teeth and melting away. ⚙ Matthew's formula for exclusion puts the same gesture at the same place, outside, where the reward of the faithful can be seen and not shared, and verse 51 sets it immediately after a portion is assigned with the hypocrites. We record this as motif only. No ✦ voice in this unit cites the Psalm, and the pair cannot be checked by shared Strong's numbers because one side is Greek and the other Hebrew, so nothing here is a quotation claim.
Psalm 112:10
basis: Cross-Testament (Greek to Hebrew): shared Strong's numbers are not computable and the Verifier lists no basis for this pair, so a verbal tier is excluded. Recorded basis is a shared motif: the wicked gnashing the teeth at the sight of the righteous rewarded (Psalm 112:10) behind G1030 βρυγμός τῶν ὀδόντων (G1030 in 7 vv, G3599 ὀδούς). No quotation is claimed, and no ✦ voice in this unit cites the Psalm.
A slave set over the whole house: Eliezer, and Joseph typological
The parable's opening move, a master who finds one slave trustworthy and sets him over the household, then over everything he owns, is a shape Genesis knows. Pulpit names the model explicitly: the idea is that some good and true slave is raised to the stewardship of his master's household, like Eliezer whom Abram advanced to this position (Genesis 15:2). ⚙ To Pulpit's Eliezer we add Joseph, who is put over Potiphar's house and then over all Pharaoh's, and who is exactly the slave found faithful in a small charge and promoted to a total one; that extension is ours, not Pulpit's, and it is offered as figural reading rather than as a source claim. Cambridge independently shows that the immediate furniture of the parable is Roman rather than Hebrew, the villicus over the familia with his measured ration, so the Genesis pattern is a resonance, not a derivation.
Genesis 15:2 · Genesis 39:4 · Genesis 41:40
basis: Cross-Testament (Greek to Hebrew): no shared Strong's lexeme is computable and the Verifier offers no basis for these pairs, so this is never verbal. Recorded basis is the shape of the office: a slave found trustworthy is set over the house and then over all the master's goods (G2525 καθίστημι in Matthew 24:45 and 24:47, G3610 οἰκετεία, G5225 ὑπάρχοντα). Pulpit supplies the Eliezer parallel at Genesis 15:2; the Joseph pairing at Genesis 39:4 and Genesis 41:40 is this synthesis's own extension, novel here rather than widely held.
The same two stewards in Luke 12, and why this is not tiered verbal structural / thematic: confirmed
Verses 42 to 51 have no counterpart in Mark or Luke's Olivet discourse, but stand, as Ellicott puts it, almost verbatim in another discourse at Luke 12:42 and following, where Peter's question (“Lord, speakest thou this parable unto us, or even to all?”) prompts it. Ellicott weighs repetition against transfer and prefers repetition; Poole says honestly that he does not know whether it was spoken at the same time and on the same occasion. Cambridge, Pulpit and Gill all read Matthew's version in the light of Peter's question, and Cambridge notes Luke's “with the unbelievers” where Matthew has “with the hypocrites.” ⚙ Despite how close the two passages are, we decline a verbal tier: the lexemes the Verifier can actually count as shared are all common ones, and “almost verbatim” is Ellicott's judgement of the English and the sense, not a computed basis. Structural, with the reason stated.
Luke 12:39 · Luke 12:45 · Luke 12:46
basis: Verifier bases for these pairs are common lexemes only: G1492 εἴδω (in 296 vv), G5610 ὥρα (in 99 vv), G1097 γινώσκω (in 205 vv) at Luke 12:39; G1565 ἐκεῖνος (in 237 vv) and G4095 πίνω (in 64 vv) at Luke 12:45; G2250 ἡμέρα (in 368 vv), G5610 ὥρα and G1565 ἐκεῖνος at Luke 12:46. No rare shared lexeme, so no verbal tier, even though Ellicott judges the passages almost verbatim.
“Not even the Son”: a certain link to Mark, an uncertain reading in Matthew flagged: verify source
The Berean interlinear for verse 36 in this brief carries οὐδὲ ὁ Υἱός as words 14 to 16, and the ✦ voices are unanimous that the clause is at home in Mark 13:32 and contested here. Ellicott calls it “St Mark's addition” and says it is every way remarkable; Poole introduces it with “Mark addeth”; Barnes refers the reader to his note on Mark 13:32; Pulpit reports that it “has been introduced by some very good manuscripts into this place” and that the Revised Version admits the clause; Gill states that the Ethiopic version and the Cambridge copy of Beza add the words here and “seems to be transcribed from Mark 13:32.” ⚙ We flag rather than resolve. The link between the two verses is certain; what is uncertain is whether the clause belongs to Matthew's text, and every christological argument built on this verse in this Gospel inherits that uncertainty.
Mark 13:32
basis: Provenance disputed, and the dispute is textual rather than exegetical: the clause οὐδὲ ὁ Υἱός stands in this unit's interlinear at Matthew 24:36 words 14-16, but Ellicott calls it St Mark's addition, Pulpit says some very good manuscripts introduced it into this place (with the Revised Version admitting it), and Gill attributes it here to the Ethiopic version and the Cambridge copy of Beza as transcribed from Mark 13:32. Greek to Greek, so a verbal basis would be computable, but the reading itself needs verifying before any tier is earned.