gospel - ReligionFacts ReligionFacts gospel Introduction to the Gospels The Christian New Testament is unique among the world's sacred texts in that it provides several accounts of the life of the religion's founder. These accounts are referred to as "Gospels," from the Old English word godspel, "good news." In Greek the books were called the evangelion, and their authors are correspondingly referred to as the "four evangelists." Gospels are not biographies of Jesus Christ in the modern sense of a detached, academic account of a person's life. In fact, this genre of literature was unknown to the ancient world. Narratives were written to inspire, teach a lesson, warn, or persuade, not to simply inform. The purpose of the Gospel narratives seems to be twofold: to recount the events in the extraordinary life of Jesus, and do so in such a way that its hearers will respond in faith. The author of Gospel of John affirms the latter motivation explicitly: "Jesus did many other miraculous signs...

But these are written that you may believe and that by believing you may have life in his name." {1} Although there are only four gospels in the canonical New Testament, a number of gospels were circulated in the early church - perhaps as many as 50. {2} We do not know for certain how or when Matthew, Mark, Luke and John came to be the only "orthodox" gospels, but early Christians writings provide us with some insight into the process and scholars have suggested a number of possibilities. This issue is discussed further below. The Synoptic Gospels The first three gospels, Matthew, Mark, and Luke, are known as the Synoptic Gospels, because they "see together" the events of Jesus' life and death. The three narratives use similar language, material, and ordering of events, and sometimes even repeat one another verbatim (see for example Mt 9:2-8; Mk 2:3-12; and Lk 5:18-26). Mark's Gospel, the shortest of the three, appears almost in its entirety in the Gospel of Matthew, and 53 percent of Mark is found in Luke.

The striking similarities and obvious sharing of material between the Synoptic Gospels has led biblical scholars to venture several possible solutions to this so-called "Synoptic Problem." The most common theory is that Matthew and Luke used the Gospel of Mark and an additional document (now lost) called Quelle (German for "source"), or Q for short. But others have suggested that Matthew was the common source, or that each Gospel borrowed from the others and from well-established oral tradition, or some combination of these. {3} Why These Four? The choice of early Christians to label these four gospels "canonical" and "orthodox," and others "heretical" has been of increasing concern to scholars and the public alike in recent years. Much of the hubub was sparked by Dan Brown's popular novel The Da Vinci Code, which questions the traditional distinction between "orthodoxy" and "heresy." On page , learned scholar Leigh Teabing explains to cryptologist Sophie Neveu: "Because Constantine upgraded Jesus' status almost four centuries after Jesus' death, thousands of documents already existed chronicling His life as a mortal man. To rewrite the history books, Constantine knew he would need a bold stroke.

Constantine commissioned and financed a new Bible, which omitted those gospels that spoke of Christ's human traits and embellished those gospels that made Him godlike. The earlier gospels were outlawed, gathered up, and burned." This and many other claims made in the book have been discredited by scholars, but the above passage illustrates the growing skepticism that the four canonical gospels are in any way superior to noncanonical gospels. Much more reputable sources, including works by Elaine Pagels of Princeton, Karen King of Harvard, and Bart Ehrman of the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, challenge the traditional notion that noncanonical gospels such as the Gospel of Truth, the Gospel of Thomas, and the Gospel of Mary Magdalene are little more than nonsense and heresy. Scholars have postulated a variety of reasons why only Matthew, Mark, Luke and John were ultimately accepted as canonical. Some suggest that this decision was largely due to the need for church structure and organization and the corresponding attempts by early bishops to solidify their authority against those who would practice Christianity in their own way. Another major reason early church leaders seemed to have had for rejecting all but the four gospels is apostolic authority.

Matthew and John were presumed to be written by Jesus' disciples of the same name. Although Mark and Luke were not apostles, they were believed to have had direct contact with the apostles Peter and Paul, respectively. The notion of apostolic succession and authority was very important to early church leaders, for it was seen as a way of ensuring the integrity of the gospel message was preserved after the deaths of eyewitnesses. In fact, the Gospel of John was questioned for a time before being accepted because its authorship by the Apostle John was in some doubt. This emphasis on apostolic authority and authorship meant that only early writings were accepted. According to one scholar, "not a single document written after about 120 was ever considered for inclusion in the canon, not least because such documents were not written by people in direct touch with the apostolic tradition, much less with the apostles themselves." {4} The following excerpts from early "orthodox" writings illustrate the importance assigned to authorship of canonical texts: There is current also an epistle to the Laodiceans, and another to the Alexandrians, both forged in Paul's name to further the heresy of Marcion, and several others which cannot be received into the catholic Church.

{5} Another possible reason for the rejection of Gnostic and other gospels is they rarely referred to the Old Testament or its teachings. As New Testament scholar Pheme Perkins explains: "Gnostic exegetes were only interested in elaborating their mythic and theological speculations concerning the origins of the universe, not in appropriating a received canonical tradition. . [By contrast] the Christian Bible originates in a hermeneutical framing of Jewish scriptures, so that they retain their canonical authority. {6} References - John 20:31, NIV. Francis E. Gigot, "Gospel and Gospels." Catholic Encyclopedia, 1910. "The Synoptic Gospels," NIV Study Bible (Zondervan, 1995), p. 1437. Ben Witherington III, "Why the 'Lost Gospels' Lost Out." Christianity Today, June 2004. Muratorian Canon (late 2nd cent. AD). As quoted in Witherington, op. cit. More Online Resources on the Gospels - Ben Witherington III, "Why the 'Lost Gospels' Lost Out." Christianity Today, June 2004.

Francis E. Gigot, "Gospel and Gospels." Catholic Encyclopedia, 1910. Stephen C. Carlson, "The Synoptic Problem Home Page." Robert M. Grant, "The Gospels." A Historical Introduction to the New Testament. Harper & Row, 1963. Online at Religion-Online.org. Article Info What are the Synoptic Gospels? What are the Synoptic Gospels? Subscribe to our Question of the Week : Question: "What are the Synoptic Gospels?" Answer: The Synoptic Gospels are the first three books of the New Testament , Matthew, Mark, and Luke. These three books plus John are called the “Gospels” because they chronicle the good news of Jesus’ life, death, and resurrection—the basis of our salvation. The Gospel of Matthew was written by Matthew the apostle, one of the twelve commissioned by Jesus. The Gospel of Mark was written by John Mark, a close associate of the apostle Peter. The Gospel of Luke was written by Luke the physician, a friend and traveling companion of the apostle Paul.

The first three Gospels are called “synoptic” because they “see together with a common view” (the word synoptic literally means “together sight”). Matthew, Mark, and Luke cover many of the same events in Jesus’ life—most of them from Jesus’ ministry in Galilee—in much the same order. Nearly 90 percent of Mark’s content is found in Matthew, and about 50 percent of Mark appears in Luke. All of the parables of Christ are found in the Synoptics (the Gospel of John contains no parables). There are differences, too. Matthew and Luke are both considerably longer than Mark. Matthew was written for a Jewish audience, Mark for a Roman audience, and Luke for a broader Gentile audience. Matthew quotes extensively from the Old Testament, and his oft use (32 times) of the phrase “the kingdom of heaven” is unique—it’s not found anywhere else in the Bible. Luke places a definite emphasis on Jesus’ acts of compassion toward Gentiles and Samaritans. Much of Luke 10—20 is unique to that Gospel. The difficulty in explaining the similarities and differences among the Synoptic Gospels is referred to as the Synoptic Problem in the world of biblical scholarship.

In the final analysis, the Synoptic “Problem” is not much of a problem at all—God inspired three Gospel writers to record the events surrounding the same Person during the same part of His life in the same locations, yet with slightly different emphases aimed at different readers. The Story Of The Storytellers - An Introduction To The Gospels | From Jesus To Christ | FRONTLINE | PBS WATCH SCHEDULE TOPICS ABOUT FRONTLINE SHOP TEACHER CENTER An Introduction to the Gospels Written over the course of almost a century after Jesus' death, the four gospels of the New Testament, though they tell the same story, reflect very different ideas and concerns. by Marilyn Mellowes A period of forty years separates the death of Jesus from the writing of the first gospel. History offers us little direct evidence about the events of this period, but it does suggest that the early Christians were engaged in one of the most basic of human activities: story-telling. In the words of Mike White, "It appears that between the death of Jesus and the writing of the first gospel, Mark , that they clearly are telling stories.

They're passing on the tradition of what happened to Jesus, what he stood for and what he did, orally, by telling it and retelling it. And in the process they are defining Jesus for themselves." These shared memories, passed along by word of mouth, are known as "oral tradition." They included stories of Jesus' miracles and healings, his parables and teachings, and his death. Eventually some stories were written down. The first written documents probably included an account of the death of Jesus and a collection of sayings attributed to him. Then, in about the year 70, the evangelist known as Mark wrote the first "gospel" -- the words mean "good news" about Jesus. We will never know the writer's real identity, or even if his name was Mark, since it was common practice in the ancient world to attribute written works to famous people. But we do know that it was Mark's genius to first to commit the story of Jesus to writing, and thereby inaugurated the gospel tradition. "The gospels are very peculiar types of literature. They're not biographies," says Prof. Paula Fredriksen, "they are a kind of religious advertisement.

What they do is proclaim their individual author's interpretation of the Christian message through the device of using Jesus of Nazareth as a spokesperson for the evangelists' position." About 15 years after Mark, in about the year 85 CE, the author known as Matthew composed his work, drawing on a variety of sources, including Mark and from a collection of sayings that scholars later called "Q", for Quelle , meaning source. The Gospel of Luke was written about fifteen years later, between 85 and 95. Scholars refer to these three gospels as the "synoptic gospels", because they "see" things in the same way. The Gospel of John , sometimes called "the spiritual gospel," was probably composed between 90 and 100 CE. Its style and presentation clearly set it apart from the other three. Each of the four gospels depicts Jesus in a different way. These characterizations reflect the past experiences and the particular circumstances of their authors' communities. The historical evidence suggests that Mark wrote for a community deeply affected by the failure of the First Jewish Revolt against Rome. Matthew wrote for a Jewish community in conflict with the Pharisaic Judaism that dominated Jewish life in the postwar period.

Luke wrote for a predominately Gentile audience eager to demonstrate that Christian beliefs in no way conflicted with their ability to serve as a good citizen of the Empire. Despite these differences, all four gospels contain the "passion narrative," the central story of Jesus' suffering and death. That story is directly connected to the Christian ritual of the Eucharist. As Helmut Koester has observed, the ritual cannot "live" without the story. While the gospels tell a story about Jesus, they also reflect the growing tensions between Christians and Jews. By the time Luke composed his work, tension was breaking into open hostility. By the time John was written, the conflict had become an open rift, reflected in the vituperative invective of the evangelist's language. In the words of Prof. Eric Meyers, "Most of the gospels reflect a period of disagreement, of theological disagreement.

And the New Testament tells a story of a broken relationship, and that's part of the sad story that evolves between Jews and Christians, because it is a story that has such awful repercussions in later times." Synoptic Gospel Parallels - Synoptic Gospels Comparison Synoptic Gospel Parallels Words of Wisdom Knowing God's Word will keep you from sin, or sin will keep you from knowing His Word. Christians are supposed to be the light of the world, but you can't be a light if you're not plugged in. Scripture Verses 2 Timothy 3:16 All Scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness. Acts 17:11 They were more fair minded than those in Thessalonica, in that they received the word with all readiness, and searched the Scriptures daily to find out whether these things were so. The Synoptic Gospel Parallels with John's Gospel The synoptic Gospels are the first three Gospels of the New Testament, Matthew, Mark and Luke and are considered as one unit. The Gospel parallels provided here also include the Gospel of John for comparison.

The term synoptic is derived from a combination of the Greek words συν (syn = together) and οψις (opsis = seeing) to indicate that the contents of these three Gospels can be viewed side-by-side, whether in a vertical parallel column synopsis, or a horizontal synoptic alignment. These first three books have been called the synoptic Gospels since the 18th century and are so called because they give similar accounts of the ministry of Jesus. The term is also applied to apocryphal works of the 2nd century (e.g., The Gospel of Thomas). The Gospel according to John has a number of points of contact with the three synoptic Gospels but differs considerably from them in content and therefore not all Gospel synopses display the book of John. The fourth canonical gospel of John differs significantly from the synoptics in terms of Christology, which is the field of study within Christian theology which is concerned with the nature of Jesus the Christ, in particular, how the divine and human are related in his person. Christology is generally less concerned with the details of Jesus' life than it is with how the human and divine co-exist in one person.

The synoptic gospels often recount the same stories about Jesus, though sometimes with different and more or less detail, but mostly following the same sequence and to a large extent using the same words. The question of the relationship between the three is called the synoptic problem. This problem concerns the literary relationships between and among the first three canonical gospels of Mark, Matthew, and Luke collectively known as the synoptic Gospels. Similarity in word choices and event placement shows an interrelationship. The synoptic problem concerns how this interrelation came to pass and what the nature of this interrelationship is. Any solution must account for the similarities and differences in content, order, and wording. Possible answers speculate either a direct relationship (one Evangelist possessed one of the gospels) or indirect (two Evangelists having access to a shared source). Most Protestant and some Roman Catholic scholars agree that Matthew and Luke were written later than Mark, which they followed closely. Matthew then divided Mark into five portions and used them in order, separating them by other material. Luke divided the book only in two, nine chapters being inserted between. Mark however, only accounts for half of the other two Gospels.

Matthew and Luke each have about 100 verses in common, most of them sayings like the Beatitudes. Views about the dating of all four Gospels vary greatly from about 60–70 AD until the end of the first century where it is believed the Gospel of John was last written. The tables of Gospel parallels here are where necessary repeated to give a continuous series of references in canonical order for each of the four gospels. The bold type in the tables indicates the verses in order for each gospel. For example, pericopes that are identical except for the difference in bold type shows that the pericope in bold comes before the other reference for the other gospel not in bold face. This done so the person using these synoptic Gospel parallels can scan down each Gospel's column, stopping only for the bold references, to get all the references and Gospel parallels in order for each Gospel. Synoptic Gospels - Life, Hope & Truth Synoptic Gospels by Richard Thompson What are the synoptic Gospels? Of what value are they in the account of the life of Jesus Christ? How do they help us know and believe our Savior? Students of the Bible are well aware that there are four Gospels.

Those four Gospels — Matthew , Mark , Luke and John —each provide different information about the life of Jesus Christ. Interestingly, three of the accounts are similar in their presentation; and one, the Gospel of John, is quite different from the other three. Do the four Gospels contradict one another in their accounts of Jesus’ life? After all, four men wrote about Jesus , His teachings, His actions and His life on earth. It is important to know not only if they are accurate, but if they provide any help for human beings in the 21st century. What are the synoptic Gospels? The word synoptic is defined as “taking a common view: used chiefly in reference to the first three Gospels” (Random House Webster’s College Dictionary, 1991). Merrill C. Tenney wrote the following regarding the synoptic Gospels: “Between the first three Gospels, however, there is a closer interrelation in content and manner of expression. They have consequently been called the Synoptic Gospels, from the Greek, syn, together, and optanomai, to see, since they take a common view of the life of Christ” (New Testament Survey, 1961, p.

133). The three Gospels that “take a common view” of Christ’s life are Matthew, Mark and Luke. Each writer affords us a special look into the life and teachings of Christ in a different way. One may provide one detail, and another may provide a detail that adds to the account so that the Bible student is able to receive additional insights. These insights give a more complete picture of what Christ was teaching or give details of an event that help us have greater understanding of the heart and mind of Christ. The synoptic Gospels do not contradict one another, but all three together provide a more complete account of Jesus’ life. The more information a Bible student is provided about Jesus, the more one has to understand and incorporate into one’s life. Additional information regarding the synoptic Gospels According to The Interpreter’s Dictionary of the Bible, “There is overlapping between the first three and the fourth gospels, especially in the passion story, but only about nine per cent of the material in the Synoptics coincides with material in the fourth. The coincidence of material as among the Synoptics is much higher. Approximately ninety-one per cent of Mark is paralleled in one of the other two gospels or in both.

The same thing can be said of about fifty per cent of Matthew and about forty-one per cent of Luke” (1962, article “Synoptic Problem,” p. 492). The truth of God’s inspired Word Although three different men wrote the Gospels of Matthew, Mark and Luke, and there are certain differences in what they wrote, there is a very important underlying law that governs the Bible . It is the most special Book ever written, and it is essential that every serious Bible student believe in how the Bible was written. There are no “conflicts” among the accounts in the synoptic Gospels and the book of John because God inspired them all. All apparent conflicts can be explained when one carefully considers the content and purpose of each writer. We read in Paul’s second letter to Timothy: “All Scripture is inspired by God and is useful for teaching, for reproof, for correction, and for training in righteousness, so that everyone who belongs to God may be proficient, equipped for every good work” (2 Timothy 3:16-17, New Revised Standard Version).

With that statement, the apostle Paul says that all Scripture in the Bible—the synoptic Gospels included—is needed for the spiritual growth and fulfillment of life’s purpose of anyone who “belongs to God.” Therefore, for about 2,000 years the synoptic Gospels have played a very important role in adding to the understanding of Jesus Christ and the part He should play in the lives of human beings. The life of Jesus Christ and the words inspired by God to Matthew, Mark and Luke provide humans in the 21st century with eternal words from the Creator and Ruler of the universe. The part that Jesus should have in the lives of all human beings cannot be overstated. The synoptic Gospels provide instruction, inspiration, encouragement and admonition regarding the most important life to ever be flesh and blood—Jesus Christ, the Son of God. According to Scripture, “There is salvation in no one else, for there is no other name under heaven given among mortals by which we must be saved” (Acts 4:12, NRSV).

The most important point about the synoptic Gospels The most important point to be made regarding the synoptic Gospels or any other book of the Bible is this: God , through His Holy Spirit, inspired the Bible to be written through human instruments. The Bible is God’s instruction book to humanity in answering why human beings exist and giving us hope for the future. It provides us with what only God can do for us and what we have as a personal responsibility to do with His help through the Holy Spirit . The synoptic Gospels provide humanity with a view of our Creator and Savior Jesus Christ. It is through Him that we have access to God the Father and the path to fulfilling our purpose in life. The synoptic Gospels are three books that provide valuable lessons and guides for us in our daily lives and in the way that leads to eternal life in God’s family. We encourage you to read and study them carefully and regularly. For more study on this topic, see the article “ Gospels ” and the individual articles about Matthew , Mark and Luke .

Introduction to The Synoptic Gospel | The Synoptic Gospel Menu INTRODUCTION to The Synoptic Gospel The New Testament Greek word euangelion (evangel) means "good message", which became gospel in Old English, meaning "god term" or "god-spell", and is most commonly referred to today as "good news". Since the Latin Vulgate Bible of 405 CE, the Christian New Testament has opened with the four Gospel accounts of Matthew, Mark, Luke and John, each of which records a version of the good news of the life and teachings of Jesus Christ. Each Gospel account was written by a different man, and told to a different audience, from a different point of view; and each narrative has a slightly different emphasis, focus and reason why it was written. While the four Gospel accounts are generally united in their overall theme and storyline, they each contain unique sayings and stories that when taken together provide a more complete composite picture of the personality and teachings of Jesus Christ. Within the four Gospels there are many instances where the same saying, teaching or story is recorded in two or more of the accounts, while some sayings and events from the life of Jesus are mentioned within all four.

In the many places where the Gospel stories are describing the same event, those similar verses are thought of as "parallel", in that their content is the same or similar, occasionally even using identical wording. Because there is so much material shared between them, the four Gospels are also referred to as "synoptic", which is a Greek compound word that means "seeing together", or "seeing as one". In this case, it means seeing the four Gospel narratives of the New Testament as one single record of the things that Jesus Christ said and did and taught. In the many places where the Gospel stories closely parallel each other, there are almost always also differences in the specific details of the words that they each record. While these differences are usually minor and inconsequential, they sometimes produce contradictions and conflicts. Despite their differences, because there is so much similarity and overlap shared between the four Gospels, they have long been used together, both as a harmony (also known as a synopsis) which displays them in columns side-by-side, and as a merger that eliminates the duplication among the parallel portions, and combines the remaining words to produce a single version of each saying or event.

The FIVE COLUMN four Gospel harmony database was compiled to provide a complete and ordered record of all of the details that are contained within the four Gospel accounts of the New Testament. The main consideration of this work is that every detail from each of the four Gospel accounts is included or accounted for, and that not one single word is unnecessarily omitted. Resolution of wording differences within the parallel sections was achieved on a word-for-word basis using a system of precise notation, and the unified text of the fifth column was created through a process that involved sixteen steps. By excluding the duplication between their parallel verses, at 65,386 words compared to the 83,680 of the NASB (New American Standard Bible) version of the four Gospels, the harmonized text that results in the fifth column of this work is more than 22 % shorter compared to reading each of the four individual Gospel accounts back-to-back. The second consideration of this work is to order all of the sayings and events contained within the four Gospel stories into as correct a chronological sequence as possible, given the limited details found within the four Gospel accounts themselves, and the scarce amount of supporting information related to the historical life of Jesus Christ.

So that the entire Gospel story is easy to follow, the harmonized narrative of the fifth column of this book is laid out like a play, and divided into chapters, acts, and scenes, with the words of each scene further sub-divided into concise verses. While eliminating both the confusion caused by the wording differences within their parallel sections, and their differing chronologies, the result of this work is an easy to follow Gospel story that includes the full detail of each and every word, deed, teaching and miracle of Jesus Christ, as found within the four Gospel accounts of the NASB New Testament. The complete fifth column text of this harmony is reproduced in a separate work that is titled The Synoptic Gospel - The Story of The Life of Jesus, for those who just want to read the full, unified Gospel story. May God continue to bless and inspire all who seek to know and understand the teaching life and healing ministry of Jesus Christ, the Son of God. Synoptic Gospels [ ? ]Subscribe To This Site Who wrote the Synoptic Gospels?

When I lecture on the synoptic gospels (synoptic means "seeing together") in my Who Wrote the Bible?, class at Columbus State University students frequently ask: Why did the earliest canonical written gospel not appear until the late 60s CE? Which gospel was written first and why? Why is Matthew's Gospel the first gospel in the New Testament even though it was probably not written first? Did Matthew, John Mark, and Dr. Luke write the synoptic gospels or are they pseudopigraphal? And most importantly... why is there such remarkable literary parallelism between the synoptic gospels? On February 27, 1933 the Reichstag (German Parliament) in Berlin was set on fire. Adolf Hitler and his Nazi Party, looking around for a suitable “scapegoat”, blamed the Communists. Many of them were executed for it, even though they probably did not do it and everybody knew it. In the winter of 64 CE a similar thing happened in Rome.

A great fire devastated two thirds of the city and the mad emperor, Nero, who himself probably started the fire, found his scapegoat in the new sect of “Christians.” In the horror that followed, which even turned the stomachs of the Roman Senator Tacitus, hundreds of Christians were brutally slaughtered — including Peter and probably Paul. Left: The first page of Mark in Minuscule 544, a Greek minuscule manuscript of the New Testament, c. 337. It was shortly after this that a papyrus roll bearing the title: arche tou euayyeliou Iesou Christou (“The Gospel of Jesus Christ”) appeared... This is the book we know as the earliest written Gospel... It is what we call “The Gospel According to Mark” and it begins the synoptic gospels tradition. Why was a gospel not written until 66 CE? In graduate school my New Testament literature professor, Dr. Ron Cottle, emphasized repeatedly that “life precedes literature." He urged us to study carefully the "soil" of the first century context of the primitive church in the Ancient Near East out of which the synoptic gospels and the other books of the New Testament grew.

In my class I show students the following chart of the first century CE to demonstrate this principle. The first thirty years I call the period of Inception. This is the time of the "historical Jesus", his life, death, and resurrection (0-30 CE). The period of Expansion (30-60 CE) sees the Jesus movement grow from a small sect of Judaism in Jerusalem to a growing international religion spread throughout the Mediterranean region and increasingly centered in the imperial capital of Rome. The method of gospel transmission is oral. Scholars call this "living story of Jesus" as the Kerygma (from the Greek verb kerusso, meaning to proclaim in the manner of a herald). The term Kerygma means the consequence or outflow of what is preached... ...and according to Paul it is the foolishness of the kerygma that saves (1 Cor. 1:21)... ...and it was during this period that James and Paul write the first books of the New Testament. Students are often surprised to learn that all of Paul's letters predate the synoptic gospels.

It is during the period of Consolidation (60-100 CE) that most of the books of the New Testament, including the synoptic gospels, are written. Why was a gospel not written sooner? I suggest five reasons: * The early disciples expected Jesus to return immediately. * The main facts of Christ’s life were common knowledge among the people of Palestine. * The eye-witnesses were dying. * There were many different competing versions of the story of Jesus. * Believers were suffering for Christ under Roman persecution and needed a record of Jesus’s faithfulness in suffering for them to give them courage and strength. What is the "Synoptic Problem"? Look carefully at the parallel passages from Matthew and Luke. Identical wording is rendered in red. This illustrates the critical problem of the remarkable literary parallelism between the synoptic gospels. The task of the “synoptic problem” is to discover the very early sources on the life and teaching of Jesus that were available to the synoptic writers. When you place the contents of the Matthew, Mark, and Luke side by side and you soon become aware of the “Synoptic Problem.” We can easily explain parallel incidents, but the actual words are also parallel...

and not just very important words as would be the case if you read the same story in three different newspapers. The “Synoptic Problem” is this: The synoptic gospels, though independently written, must have drawn much of its material from a source or sources also available to one or both of the other two. The above chart shows the literary relationship between the synoptic gospels. 76% of Mark is reproduced almost word-for-word in both Matthew and Luke. An additional 18% of Mark is reproduced in Matthew but not in Luke, and an further 3% of Mark is in Luke but not in Matthew. This means that 97% of Mark is reproduced in Matthew and/or Luke. Only 3% of Mark's material is unique to Mark and not found in Matthew or Luke. Matthew contains 606 of Mark’s 661 verses. Luke contains 320 of Mark’s 661 verses. Of the 55 verses of Mark which Matthew does not reproduce, Luke reproduces 31; therefore there are only 24 verses in all of Mark not reproduced somewhere in Matthew or Luke.

The chart also shows that 23% of Luke is word-for-word identical to 25% of Matthew, but this is material unique to these gospels and not found in Mark. This suggests another literary source in independent of Mark used by Matthew and Luke in the evolution of the synoptic gospels tradition. Scholars have made various attempts to solve the synoptic problem... Oral tradition theory According to this theory, behind the synoptic gospels lies a common oral story of Jesus, which all three evangelists knew. This solution does not explain the minute resemblances in wording among the synoptic gospels. So it must be a “literary” problem. Two-Source Hypothesis (2SH) Originally conceived in Germany by Christian H. Weisse in 1838, the 2SH culminated in Burnett Hillman Streeter’s (1874-1937), The Four Gospels: A Study of Origins (London: Macmillan, 1924). Today the 2SH commands the support of most biblical scholars from all denominations. The first principle of the 2SH is the priotity of Mark. Mark is earliest written formal account of Christ’s life.

Luke and Matthew use Mark as one of their main sources. Scholars offer three proofs: * Common content: 97% of Mark is included in Matthew and Luke. * Common wording * Common order: Matthew and Luke almost always follow Mark’s order of events, and when one departs from it, the other always follows it. The cumulative force of these facts compels us to conclude that the earliest written Gospel is Mark. The second principle of 2SH is that Matthew and Luke both used a second written source. Scholars call it “Q” (from the German Quelle, meaning "source"). This explains the words (and verses) in Matthew and Luke, but not in Mark. Conclusion: Mark was a source for Matthew and Luke, both of whom also independently used a now lost source called Q. 2HS is the generally accepted theory of the evolution of the synoptic gospels. Click here to learn more about the lost source Q. Four Source Hypothesis (4HS) 20% of Matthew's gospel is unique to Matthew and 35% of Luke's gospel is unique to Luke.

An expanded version of Streeter's hypotheses postulated Matthew’s and Luke’s own special sources as distinct, written sources (designated by scholars M and L). Some critics have theorized that Q and L constituted a "Proto-Luke", perhaps dated as early as Mark's gospel, before being incorporated into the final version Luke at a later date. The 4SH proposes at least four principle literary sources behind the synoptic gospels: Mark, Q, M, and L. Who wrote the synoptic gospels? None of the synoptic gospels name their author or authors. In each case authorial attribution dates from the second century CE. The Gospel According to St. Mark Left: Fra Angelico's Head of St. Mark, c. 1437-46 Papias, Bishop of Hieropolis, Asia Minor (c. 112-155 CE), gives us the author’s name, though it is not attached to the gospel itself around 150 CE): “Mark, having become the interpreter of Peter, wrote down accurately all that he remembered of the things said and done by the Lord, but not, however, in order.

For neither did he hear the Lord, nor did he follow Him, but afterward, as I said, Peter, who adapted his teachings to the needs (of the hearers), but not as though he were drawing up a connected account of the Lord’s oracles. So then Mark made no mistake in thus recording of the Lord’s oracles. So then Mark made no mistake in thus recording some things just as he remembered them, for he made it his one care to omit nothing that he had heard and to make no false statement therein.” Other early statements relating to the authorship of Mark include the Anti-Marcionite Prologue (160-180), Irenaeus (c. 180), Clement of Alexandria (150-213), Origen (185-254), and Jerome (347-420). Right: Beginning of a Latin Gospel of Mark, Book of Durrow (7th Cent.) From 1 Peter 5:13 we know that Mark was with Peter in Rome (“... my son Mark”).

This agrees with the later Papias tradition, which is supported by Irenaeus, Clement of Alexandria, Origen and Eusebius that associates Mark with Rome. If this is correct we could call Mark’s Gospel “Reminiscences of Jesus as told by St. Peter to his friend John Mark.” The majority of scholars date the Gospel about 65-70 CE. Mark's sources include: Oral Traditions: The Kerygma; Peter's memories—Mark was his amanuensis (secretary) and interpreter; possibly his own personal memories of Jesus’ last week in Jerusalem and at his mother’s home. Written Sources: Document describing the conflicts between Jesus and Jewish religious leaders; collection of parables; Chapter 13 originally may have been an independent document (dated after 70 CE); the Passion story; the names of the Twelve; a account of the Work of John the Baptist. The Gospel According to St. Matthew Left: Icon of Saint Matthew, c. 1295-1317 Why is Matthew first in the New Testament canon? First, it presents Jesus as Messiah—the FULFILLMENT of Old Testament prophecies.

Second, it proves that the Church is the consummation and continuation of the saving purposes of God begun with Abraham in the Old Testament. Papias attributes this gospel to Matthew c. 150: “Matthew composed his sayings (logia) in the Hebrew dialect, and every one translated it as he was able.” Other ancient statements relating to the authorship of Matthew are found in the writings of Irenaeus (c. 180), Origen (185-254), Eusebius (c. 325), Cyril of Jerusalem (c. 350), Epiphanius (c. 350), and Jerome (347-420). The nature of Matthew’s witness to the gospel as well as later references to Matthew in the Letters of Ignatius, Bishop of Antioch, suggests to scholars likely provenance (place of composition) in Antioch-in-Syria. Most critics date the composition of the gospel around 85 CE. The Sources of Matthew: * Mark and Q. * Matthew’s special source M: this source emphasizes observance of the Torah and “tradition of the elders.” It describes no attempt to convert the gentiles.

It departs from other materials in the account in its interpretation of the difference between the Jewish and Christian attitudes towards the Law. It Shows a distinctive attitude toward the Church. * Other sources such as a supposed Antiochene tradition, as well as a collections of parables. The Gospel According to St. Luke and Acts Right: St. Luke by Andrea Mantegna, c. 1453-1454. In addition to contributing to the synoptic gospels, traditionally Luke is believed to be the author of Acts. Internal evidences pointing to common authorship of Luke and Acts include: * Acts is described as a continuation of gospel account. * Tote the dedicatory prefaces of both are to Theophilus (Luke 1:1-4 and Acts 1:1-2). * Luke and Acts show homogeneity of style. About 700 words in Luke-Acts are used nowhere else in the New Testament. * Medical interest shown in both Luke and Acts by correct use of medical language and descriptions of miracles of cure, sorcery, and magic. External evidence relating to the authorship of Luke and Acts include the Anti-Marcionite Prologue (c.

150-180): “Luke was a Syrian of Antioch, a physicians by profession, a disciple of the apostles and later a follower of Paul until his martyrdom, serving the Lord without distraction, without a wife, without children. At the age of eighty-four he died in Boeotia, full of the Holy Spirit. Although gospels already existed—the one according to Matthew written in Judea, the one according to Mark in Italy—he was impelled by the Holy Spirit to write this whole gospel among those dwelling about Achaea, making clear in his preface the fact that other gospels were written before his, and that it was necessary to set forth the accurate narrative of the Dispensation to gentile believers, so that they should not be distracted by Jewish fables nor, deceived by heretical and empty fancies, miss the mark of the truth... And afterward the same Luke wrote the Acts of the Apostles; later John, the apostle, one of the Twelve, wrote the Apocalypse on the Island of Patmos, and after that the gospel.” Other ancient statements affirming Lukan authorship of Luke-Acts are found in the Muratorian Canon (c.

170) and the writings of Irenaeus (c. 180), Clement of Alexandria (150- 213), Tertullian (c. 207-210), Origen (185- 254), Eusebius (c. 325), and Jerome (c. 347-420). When was Luke written? Some scholars suggest a possible Proto-Luke as early as 60-62 CE. Most agree that the final version is dated 85-90 CE. This is based on Luke's extensive used of Mark. Luke 21 indicates that the fall of Jerusalem (70 CE) had already happened and that the persecution of Christians by Domitian (81-96 CE) was underway. However, it must have been written before John’s gospel (c. 95 CE) as John seems to have had a knowledge of Luke’s gospel.

Sources used by Luke: * A source used only by Luke (L) * Oral Tradition Luke-Acts could be called The History of Christianity, Parts 1 and 2: Volume 1—The Story of How the Gospel Began with Jesus in Galilee and Jerusalem Volume 2—The Story of How His Apostles Carried the Gospel from Jerusalem to Rome New! Comments Have your say about what you just read! Leave me a comment in the box below. Copyright 2009-2016 free-online-bible-study.org This site is owned by Teach the Nations, Inc., a non-profit organization incorporated in the State of Georgia, which is exempt under section 501(c)(3) of the Internal Revenue Code from Federal income tax. Contributions are deductible under section 170.

Question: Which of the four Gospels in the Christian New Testament is not a synoptic gospel?
Answer: John