Talk:Synoptic problem

message: I propose these articles be merged. I was cleaning up the gospels article, and I realized that other than the section on etymology, these two articles were covering the same material.  Counter proposals, anyone? --Otheus 14:08, 8 July 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  merge_with_synoptic_gospels 

message: The article is about the synaptic problem. Yet, it starts with the solutions, and discusses afterward of the problems. Also, we should explain much more carefully the problems that are being raised. I think that a list of quick "facts" that the solution must account would be helpful. I am not a specialist of this question, so I am hesitant to change the article, but here is what the list of "quick facts" could include (which I borrowed from diverses Wikipedia articles about the gospels):
*Matthew and Luke, but not Mark, include a sayings collection from Jesus
*92% of Mark is found in Matthew, but only 56% of Mark is included in Luke. Matthew and Luke share 53%.
*Chronologically, Matthew and Luke follow Mark most of the time. When Matthew disagrees with Mark's chronology, Luke often agrees with Mark. When Luke disagrees with Mark's chronology, Matthew will always agree with Mark. Matthew and Luke rarely ever disagree together against Mark.
*Whenever Mark and Matthew agree, Mark often has a more verbose version.
*Luke has more similarity to John than any other two synoptic gospels
*Mark's Greek is more primitive than the other Gospel writers. Often, Luke or Matthew will state a parallel Jesus quote much more eloquently than Mark. 
*There is progression in the quality of language and communication with Mark being the least polished/rendered Greek, Matthews being the most 'Jewish', with many key terms replaced with Jewish emphasis to make the Gospel more applicable to a predominately Jewish audience, and Luke being the work of a refined scholar of language, with clear rhetorical technique demonstrated -Philbool
*Luke refers in his gospel that many versions summarizing Jesus life are already available 21:15, 2 November 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Right, so first off, we merge synoptic gospels with this article, and then expand on the similarities and differences. It's hard/redundant to try to cover the same material in two different articles. My proposal so far has one supporter (Markus wilby73) who is not a "main" contributor to either article, so I'm waiting to hear from others before commencing the merge. --Otheus 21:41, 11 July 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Makes sense to me, Otheus. I'd hate to end up at this article (as I just did) and miss those useful facts (as I would have if I weren't in the habit of checking talk pages). Pschelden 09:22, 25 October 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: What this article is lacking

message: Outside input is requested at Nativity of Jesus. It concerns a section, The narratives compared, which is a table showing the differences in detail between the nativity accounts of Matthew and Luke. Questions have been raised as to whether it should be included. Concerns include original research, novel synthesis, and dependence upon primary sources. The table can be seen at this version of the page: .
Opinions concerning whether it should be included at all (given its current state, as well as the "Nativity as myth" section, which addresses discrepancies in the narratives), and if so, then in its current state, or beefed up with references, or converted to prose, are needed and would be greatly appreciated. Thanks to all who respond at the talk page. carl bunderson (talk) (contributions) 21:52, 10 February 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: Help needed at Nativity of Jesus

message: First the dating of when the gospels were written must have some influence on these theories and should be mentioned. 
Second rather than just % how about content. For example it would be good to say things like: the 11% Mark but not in Matthew was about demonic possession, Jesus rejecting family, and advising his followers to do the same.Nitpyck (talk) 05:04, 16 April 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  2 ideas that  I'm never going to add 

message: Substituted at 07:29, 30 April 2016 (UTC)
thread_title: Assessment comment