Wait a second!
More handpicked essays just for you.
More handpicked essays just for you.
Solutions to the synoptic gospels
Research on the Synoptic gospels
Research on the Synoptic gospels
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
Recommended: Solutions to the synoptic gospels
The synoptic problem, the problem of the literary relationship between the first three “synoptic Gospels” Mark, Matthew, and Luke. Some examples of the Synoptic Problem will be given. Historical Context. Also, the many different theories of the of the synoptic problem.
First, are a few examples of the synoptic problem. “Matt. 9.9 And having passed on from there, Jesus saw a man seated in the tax-office, named Matthew, and he says to him, ‘Follow me.’ And having arisen, he followed him.” (Goodarce). “Mark 2.14And having passed on he saw Levi son of Alphaeus seated in the tax-office, and he says to him, ‘Follow me.’ And having arisen, he followed him.” (Goodarce). “Luke 5.27 And he saw a tax-collector named Levi seated in the tax-office, and
…show more content…
Since the first three gospels were so similar it was printed side by side each other as columns which is where is” synopsis” comes from. Once the Gospels were examined thoroughly, notable differences were made. The questions, “how does one account for this mixture of similar and dissimilar material in these three Gospels? (Kugler & Hartin, 351). Similarities within the are very noticeable when one notes the words and deeds of Jesus Christ are basically the same. “Mark has 661 verses, while Matthew has 1,068 and Luke 1,149” (Kugler & Hartin, 352). Matthew has 606 of mark’s verses, while Luke has 320 of Mark’s verses. That means 31 of Mark’s verses don’t occur during Luke’s and Matthew’s Gospels. The way its arranged is also similar in the outline of Jesus, ministry presented in each gospel. The dissimilarities in Matthew’s groups the saying of Jesus into five great discourses. Luke’s has a long travel narrative to Jesus’ journey to Jerusalem. Finally, the details in vocabulary or style are both similar and …show more content…
There are four well known theories of the synoptic problem: the traditional theory, the Griesbach theory, the Farrer/Goulder theory, and the Four – Source theory. “For most of Christian history, people thought that Matthew was the first and oldest gospel, and Mark was a later, shorter version of the same basic message” (Just). Mark’s Gospels contains several grammatical, historical, and geographical difficulties; as well as episodes that makes Jesus looks crazy, magical, or weak. If Matthew was the first, it would be harder to understand how mark had all the errors or how he added strange episodes of Jesus within his gospel. Mark’s gospel is the same throughout , but Matthew and Luke’s gospels have different material. Later on the third theory (the Farrer/Goulder theory) saw Mark as the first source, Matthew as the second and Luke as the third. Having Matthew taking information from mark, while Luke takes information from mark and Matthew. Finally, the Four – source Theory is what is mainly accepted by scholars today. It consists of mark, Matthew, Luke, Q (Quelle), M, and L. Q or the Quelle Source is a hypnotical source of some of Jesus teachings. M is either oral or written sources found by Matthew, while L is oral or written sources found by Luke. The Quelle source is information that consists in both Matthew’s and Luke’s Gospel. Now give that mark’s Gospel is rather short and has difficulties, it is interesting to
This work is also said to be anonymous, and believed to have been produced in Syria within a large Jewish and Jewish-Christian community. It is apparent from a number of shared accounts, and overlapping stories of Jesus that the author of Matthew’s Gospel used Mark as a source. Although many of the stories are expanded upon, and carry different connotations, the same basic stories are found in all of the synoptic gospels, and because Mark was the first written, scholars assume it was a source used by both Matthew and Luke. It should also be noted that many of Jesus’ teachings in Matthew were not found in Mark. This led scholars to search for a second source, which resulted in the Q document. Although not available as a feasible document, Q designates a compilation of Jesus’ parables and sayings from about 50 to 70 CE, which are present in Matthew (Harris p.156). Throughout the gospel, Matthew uses formula quotations, meaning he quotes from the Old Testament. This strong relationship with the Hebrew Bible helps scholars determine that Matthew wanted to emphasize his Jewish position. This is important because his interpretations of Jesus throughout the gospel are not agreed upon by all Jews, in fact only a small fraction. Although it is obvious to the readers than John and Matthew carry very different stories of Jesus’ life, it is interesting to
But if the Gospels are thoroughly researched in depth, it becomes evident that the two writers were targeting different readers. Matthew writes for a Jewish audience, while John directs his book to all Christ-believers around the world. Another evident difference is the central theme that each Gospel relates to. Matthew’s major theme is Jesus fulfilling the Old Testament prophecy. While John continuously writes about belief in Jesus is required for salvation, making this his central theme. The last difference seen between both Gospels are the perspective of Jesus that is portrayed throughout the book. Matthew presents Jesus as a Messiah but John describes Jesus as the Son of God. With just knowledge from two Gospels on Jesus, they provide one clear message that Jesus is one, true Son of
The study of the Gospel of John can be viewed as distinct and separate from the study of any of the previous three synoptic gospels. The Fourth Gospel contains language and conceptions so distinct from the synoptics that scholars are often faced with the question of its historical origins. Originally, scholars believed the main source for the Gospel of John to be Jewish wisdom literature, Philo, the Hermetic books and the Mandaean writings, leading to the idea that John was the most Greek of the Gospels. However, with the discovery of the scrolls, scholars were now faced with source materials, remarkably similar to the concepts and language found in John, illuminating the literature as not only Jewish but Palestinian in origin. The discovery of the manuscripts opened up an entirely new interpretation of the gospel of John and a progressive understanding of its proper place within biblical scripture.
The authors of the Gospel According to Matthew, and the Gospel According to Luke made some considerable modifications, deletions, and additions to the Gospel of Mark. To the average reader the changes seem rather significant and one might ask why these changes were made. Well, there are several reasons why these changes were made. For example, the authors wanted to show readers that Jesus was more holy than the original author set him out to be. Also, the authors sought after to express the gospel in, what they thought, were better words to make it appear more authentic. Furthermore the authors of the Gospel According to Matthew and the Gospel According to Luke wanted simply to modify the text because they didn’t see eye to eye with what the original author said.
Contained in the Gospel of Thomas are a few parables and sayings that parallel those found in the Synoptic Gospels. This brings up the question if the Synoptic Gospels and the Gospel of Thomas were using the ...
Roberts expresses that the authors relied upon first-hand encounters, oral traditions, and earlier happenings. He profiles how the Gospels bear a resemblance to Hellenistic biographies. “Hellenistic biography and history share in common an ordered narrative of the past” (pg. 87).
One of the main characteristics of the gospel of Mark is it’s length. Mark is much shorter than Matthew and Luke, but what it lacks in quantity, it makes up for in quality. The author of Mark does not slow down the gospel story and makes sure that only important and relevant details are included. When Mark is compared with Matthew and Luke, it becomes obvious to see what Mark has eliminated. The author’s omission of Jesus’ birth, lineage, resurrection, and ascension denote careful planning and purpose in the gospel of Mark.
These Gospels are what shaped not only the Old Testament, but the New Testament as well. The New Testament contains twenty-seven Gospels while the Old Testament contains thirty-nine Gospels. Gospels that were left out of the New Testament are referred to as noncanonical gospels. Some of the Gospels that were omitted from the New Testament were added into some of the Gospels that were included. The Gospels most known for this would be the Gospels of Matthew, Mark, Luke, and John. (Lowe). Some of the earlier Gospels were simply lost, and unable to be transcribed into the New Testament. Gospels that were persevered are referred to as sources for the New Testament. (Schorn). “Scholars have determined that there were at least three main sources. These three sources were believed to be some of the first Gospels in the Old Testament” (Northcott). The original names are unknown, but have received the modern names of the Lost Q Source, the Pre-Markan passion Narrative, and the Signs Gospel. Gospels could have been omitted from the New Testament due to wars, conquests, persecutions, and few copies being made. (Eherman). Also, there are accusations that leaders of the early church intentionally destroyed these Gospels to cover up facts of the origin of Christianity. (Taussig
God’s written law is something that is and should be continuously turned, to not only when Christians find themselves in need, but also throughout in one’s daily life. The four gospels tell to story of Jesus’ life and his teachings he gave while on the earth making it possible for there to be a true example of Christ-like faith. The proposition that there are differences in the story of Jesus and in his teachings seems to question the basis upon which the Christian faith is found upon. Rather than proclaiming the gospels as falsehoods because on the differences they possess, by analyzing the differences in the context of the particular gospel it can be understood that the differences are not made by mistake, rather as a literary device. While
It is stated in the New Jerusalem Bible that “the Gospels don’t reflect the biography or the life of Jesus but are the four versions of the preaching from Jesus and are full of wonders and mysteries regarding the life of Jesus.” (New J Bible 1147). All the stories in gospels share similar outcomes and main ideas. They are very similar mainly that of Gospels of Mathew, Mark and Luke while Gospel of John is a little different from the rest three. The stories from Matthew, Mark and Luke are known as the synoptic. It is because they have the same synopsis and are simil...
The first three gospels are sometimes called the 'synoptic' (same view) gospels. This is because they each cover teaching and miracles by Jesus that are also covered in another account. John, writing later, recounts Jesus' other words and miracles that have a particular spiritual meaning.
Mark’s gospel and John’s gospel contain many differences from the beginning, but both end with Jesus’ crucifixion and resurrection. The gospels of John and Mark represent Jesus as two different people. The disparity is that Mark represents Jesus as a servant while John portrays Jesus as a divine being. However, one must realize the two texts are meant to read by different audiences during different time periods. Each description presents a particular aspect of the life of Historical Jesus.
The reason that the Gospel of Matthew is in the first place among the four Gospels is due to the early church tradition that Matthew was the earliest one who recorded Lord’s word and Jesus stories. In the fifth century, Augustine of Hippo claimed that "the canonical order of the four Gospels was the chronological order." In the late-eighteenth century, J. J. Griesbach stated that The Gospel of Mark was a short version of the combination of the Gospel of Matthew and the Gospel of Luke. In the nineteenth century, German scholars concluded that the Gospel of Matthew was preceded by the Gospel of Mark and Matthew used the Gospel of Mark as his primary source. No matter which theory that most New Testament scholars accept, Matthew did not simply copy sources from other Gospels, but also included his own ideas and quoted verses from the Old Testament. So the question of readers should rise is "How strong relationship did the Gospel of Matthew have with the Old Testament?" or "How accurately did Matthew use the Old Testament?
The development of the Gospel as described by Luke referred to “eyewitnesses” an “account of the things” and “an orderly account”. These stages correlate to the Oral tradition, the period of written sources, and the period of final composition. Lea and Black, The New Testament, Its Background and Message 2003:115. • The Urevangelium Theory by G. E. Lessing, a German critic, suggests that the relationships from the Gospels derived from a single Gospel written in Hebrew or Aramaic. He believed that Matthew wrote the Aramaic Gospel of the Nazarenes, the germs of which originated in the time immediately following the death of Jesus Christ.
Most Christian scholars agree that Mark was written before Matthew and Luke. Over half the material in Matthew and Luke is common to material in Mark, suggesting that Matthew and Luke used Mark to write their gospels. Matthew and Luke each have about 100 verses in common, most of them sayings; to explain this agreement, scholars assume that they used a primitive document, which they call Q. It consisted largely of sayings of Jesus. Matthew and Luke also contain unique material not present in Mark. This apparently came from two different sources, of which each author had access to only one. These differences and similarities can be seen in the story of the resurrection of Jesus. The resurrection of Jesus can be broken down into 5 sections: the approaching of the tomb, the removal of the stone, looking in the tomb, the response and the reaction.