Contrast Mark 6:4 and Luke 4:24. Why is the lack of honor by the family eliminated by Luke?

The luke and Mark are the different writers that describe the story of Jesus and the view that was seen at the time of the crucifixion of Jesus.

The story is about some of the bad men who crucified Jesus in front of lakhs of people and no one even uttered a word and also Jesus said toGod to forgive them all as they don't know what they are doing.  

Mark 6:4 uses lack of honor to describe the same thing that Luke does when he writes about Jesus and mentioned the sayings of him that no one is accepted in their home country.

They both are inherited with different writing styles and neither were first hand witnesses to Jesus' ministry so they relied on what they heard from others. It is therefore logical to assume that the reason the words are different is that these are different writers who described things differently.

To know more about the lack of honor, refer to the link below:

link

Different writers

Explanation:

Mark 6:4 uses lack of honor to describe the same thing that Luke does when he writes that Jesus said no one is accepted in their home country.

They both used different writing styles and neither were first hand witnesses to Jesus' ministry so they relied on what they heard from others. It is therefore logical to assume that the reason the words are different is that these are different writers who described things differently.

question - in 1827, john walker, a druggist in a small english town, tipped a splint with sulphur, chlorate of potash, and sulphid of antimony, and rubbed it on sandpaper, and it burst into flame. the druggist had discovered the first friction-chemical match, the kind we use to-day. it is called friction-chemical because it is made by mixing certain chemicals together and rubbing them. although walker's match did not require the bottle of acid, nevertheless it was not a good one. it could be lighted only by hard rubbing, and it sputtered and threw fire in all directions. in a few years, however, phosphorus was substituted on the tip for antimony, and the change worked wonders. the match could now be lighted with very little rubbing, and it was no longer necessary to have sandpaper upon which to rub it. it would ignite when rubbed on any dry surface, and there was no longer any sputtering. this was the phosphorus match, the match with which we are so familiar. according the paragraph what was the benefit of the new phosphorus match? it burst into flame when rubbed on sandpaper. it was made by mixing chemicals. it could be ignited on any dry surface. it threw fire in all directions.

answer - matches required natural chemicals