12:1 parables. Parables such as this are also given in Matthew, Luke, or both. See notes on Matthew 21:33,42. This frequent semi-duplication could raise questions, but there is always at least a possible explanation consistent with Biblical inerrancy. The parables and other discourses of Jesus were actually spoken in Aramaic, so the gospel writer(s) would have to translate them into Greek, and this could certainly account for minor differences in the wording of their accounts. Furthermore, Mark and Luke at least in most cases, were not present at the time, so would have to get their accounts from Peter or some other eye-witness. The doctrine of inspiration does not in any way negate the use of the writer’s own research, vocabulary and style in reporting the event, as long as there are no errors or irrelevancies in the final result. Usually other reasons can also be discerned for the differences, in line with the particular emphases of the writer. For example, Matthew’s account of this parable puts more emphasis on the willful culpability of the Jewish leaders (compare Mark 12:9 with Matthew 21:41), in effect showing that they condemn themselves by their own words. Matthew’s gospel was written especially for the Jews, seeking to bring them to accept their true Messiah despite the bitter opposition of their religious leaders.