Introduction 1

The Synoptic Gospels is a term used by modern New Testament scholars for the Gospels according to Matthew, Mark, and Luke of the New Testament in the Bible. They often recount the same stories about Jesus of Nazareth, though not always with all the same details and at the same length, but mostly following the same sequence and to a large extent using the same words.

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.

Already the early Church historian Eusebius of Caesarea (4th century) had devised a scheme that enabled scholars to find parallel texts; but a synopsis in the modern understanding did not come into existence until the 18th century through the labours of Johann Jakob Griesbach.

Griesbach used it to study and demonstrate a dependence of Mark and Luke on Matthew, a hypothesis that, while going back on the earliest traditions of the Church which held to the Augustinian hypothesis, in refined forms has been gaining supporters among scholars since the beginning of the 20th century. The majority of their colleagues, however, on internal evidence are proponents of the modern hypothesis of the priority of Mark. Furthermore, one source hypothesis argues that all three Synoptic gospels used a common source referred to as the Q Manuscript, although as yet this hypothetical document has not been found or mentioned in early christian texts.

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 it.

Views about the dating of all four Gospels vary greatly, from about 60–70 AD until the end of the first century.

At the heart of Christianity is the person and work of Jesus Christ. So we would expect the Christian Scriptures to include an account of Jesus' life. But why do we have four - the Gospels according to Matthew, Mark, Luke and John? Isn't this redundant? Surely one would be enough?

On the contrary, our knowledge of Jesus Christ would be incomplete if we had only one Gospel. Or even if we had three Gospels but were missing one.

Matthew, Mark, Luke and John each told the story from a different perspective, because each had a different audience in mind. We tend to blur these four distinctive portraits of Jesus together. But knowing how an act or saying of Jesus fits in with each author's perspective can greatly enhance our understanding of its meaning.

Here is a brief introduction to the particular message and theme of each of the four Gospels. Because of space limitations, we will usually cite locations rather than quote verses in full. But if you look up some of these verses in the New Testament, you will begin to see how each Gospel has a unique message. You will also see how all four work together to build a complete picture of the life and work of Jesus Christ.

Matthew - the bridge

MATTHEW'S readers were mainly Jewish Christians, and he emphasized Christianity's continuity with the Hebrew Scriptures (what we call the Old Testament) and traditions. Through Matthew we are told the relationship of Jesus to the law and the Old Testament prophets. This Gospel, placed first in the New Testament, is like a bridge from Old to New. Matthew quotes from the Old Testament more frequently than any other New Testament writer.

The most sacred part of the Hebrew Bible was the Torah, the five books containing the law of Moses. Matthew likewise concentrates most of Jesus' teaching in five long discourses as the new covenant counterpart to Mosaic law.

Matthew encouraged Jewish converts to see their heritage in the context of a greater law, and their history in the light of the spiritual kingdom of God.

For Matthew, Jesus' fulfillment of the Scriptures did not mean that those Scriptures had lost their significance and could therefore be discarded. Rather, for Matthew the Hebrew Scriptures gained significance through Jesus and continue to be part of the "treasure" of the scribe trained for the kingdom of heaven (see Matthew 13:52) (Daniel J. Harrington, The Gospel of Matthew, Sacra Pagina Series, page 22).

Mark - 'This is what happened'

MARK'S Gospel is fast-moving and dramatic. It reads like a series of eye-witness accounts. Because of this action-packed style, Mark's Gospel is an ideal starting point for discovering who Jesus Christ is and what he is all about.

Mark is more concerned about telling us what happened, rather than when it happened. He writes more like a journalist than a historian. He cuts to the quick, introducing Jesus to people who have perhaps heard of him but don't know him very well yet.

Verbs like 'run', 'shout' and 'amaze' abound in this book. Mark's favorite adverb is euthus, meaning 'immediately' or 'at once' (it occurs ten times in chapter 1 alone).

Mark does not delay the action by telling us about Jesus' genealogy, or even his birth. Rather, Mark begins with the briefest survey of the ministry of John the Baptist, the baptism of Jesus and his testing in the wilderness by Satan (1:1-13). Then the action begins, and continues nonstop for 16 chapters. Event quickly follows event. On occasion, one story is interrupted to begin another, and the first story finished later.

Mark's account of the events leading up to Jesus' trial and crucifixion is especially detailed and vivid. Mark's purpose is to show that Jesus is the Son of God (1:1). When Jesus is baptized, a heavenly voice proclaims, '...You are my Son' (1:11).

Jesus has the authority to forgive sin, a prerogative of God alone (2:5-12). Evil spirits recognize Jesus as the Holy One of God (1:24), the Son of God (3:11) and Son of the Most High God (5:7-8).

{In Mark's Gospel, the authority of Jesus is stressed by the manner of his teaching (1:22) and by the numerous miracles. But Mark also warns his audience that miracles could be ambiguous. After all, they lead Pharisees and Herodians to oppose Jesus (3:6); cause scribes to think of Jesus as possessed (3:22); leave people from his home-town unimpressed (6:1-3); cause Herod to imagine that Jesus is John the Baptist redivivus [resurrected] (6:14-16); and do not eliminate the disciples' misunderstanding (6:52; 8:17-21) (Ben Witherington III, The Christology of Jesus, page 163).

The point was, nobody in the human realm fully understands this truth. Even Peter, who rightly professes Jesus as the Christ, fails to realize Jesus' purpose: to die and after three days rise again (8:31; cf. 9:12, 31; 10:33, 45). The only human acknowledgment that Jesus is the Son of God, comes from a centurion looking at Jesus on the cross.

This, then, is the message of the Gospel of Mark - that we can fully understand who Jesus is only through his suffering, death and resurrection.

Luke - for people like us

Luke, like all the evangelists, acknowledges that Jesus was God, but he also stresses his humanity. Luke shows us that, in Jesus, God became a part of his own story, just as some producers will give themselves a small role in their own films. Except that there was nothing small about Jesus' role when he stepped into history!

Luke shows us that Jesus was a real-life person who lived in Galilee and Judea during the reigns of the Roman Emperors Augustus and Tiberius.

Like Matthew, he gives us Jesus' genealogy and an account of his birth. But only Luke records Jesus' circumcision (2:21), his presentation at the temple (2:22-38), his growth as a child (2:40), his meeting at age 12 with the religious teachers in the temple (2:41-51) and his continued development '...in wisdom and stature, and in favor with God and men' (2:52). These details establish Jesus as a historical personality.

At the beginning of his ministry, Jesus proclaimed what his mission was all about: to bring good news to the poor, release to the captives, sight to the blind and freedom to the oppressed (4:18).

Luke shows Jesus as extremely concerned about the welfare of all people, but having special empathy for those who were despised or undervalued by society: the tax collectors, Samaritans, the poor, Gentiles. No class or group was excluded; Christ's message of salvation was for everyone. Luke seems to make a special point of highlighting Jesus' concern for women.

Luke features the responsiveness of women (7:36-50; 8:1-3; 8:48; 10:38-42; 13:10-17; 24:1-12). Often it is not just a woman but a widow who is cited, since she represented the most vulnerable status within society (2:37; 4:25-26; 7:12; 18:3, 5; 20:47; 21:2-3). Whether in parable or by example, these women show that they are sensitive to the message of Jesus. Though on the fringes of first-century society, they are in the middle of Luke's story. Often they are paired with men (2:25-28; 4:25-27; 8:40-56; 11:31-32; 13:18-21; 15:4-10; 17:34-35; Acts 21:9-10), a feature suggesting that the Gospel is for both genders (Daniel Bock, in the Dictionary of Jesus and the Gospels, page 506).

Many of the most poignant parables that show repentance and forgiveness of sin being offered to everyone are found only in Luke. For example, the good Samaritan (10:30-37), the great feast (14:15- 24), the prodigal son (15:11-31) and the Pharisee and the tax collector (18:9-14).

Luke shows us that God's concern extends to everyone, not just those who are 'good' or naturally inclined to religion. In Jesus Christ, God became one of us, so that he could save all of us.

John - 'And now for something completely different'

JOHN'S was the last Gospel to be written, perhaps 60 or more years after the crucifixion. Rather than tell the whole story, he selects incidents from only about three weeks of Jesus' life. But these he explores in great detail.

John wants to let us know in profound detail who Jesus Christ was, where he came from and what he came to do (8:14). He summed it up in what is perhaps the most often quoted of all Bible verses: "For God so loved the world that he gave his one and only Son, that whoever believes in him shall not perish but have eternal life" (John 3:16).

This Gospel explains God's love and his gift of eternal life, in simple, everyday language that can be understood by anyone. But don't be misled by the apparent simplicity. John's message of Jesus Christ is a deep mine, with many levels of understanding. It will repay a lifetime of study.

For example, John devotes several chapters to Jesus' last talk with his disciples (John 14-17). He explores the relationship between the Father, Son and Holy Spirit. John dwells at length on what may at first seem to be a minor incident. For example, the healing of a blind man (chapter 9), or the chance meeting of Jesus and a Samaritan woman at a well (4:1-26).

But these vignettes were chosen because they illustrated vital lessons for all who would become disciples, not only in his time, but through the ages. John helps the non-believer to believe and the believer to come to a deeper level of understanding.

Whereas Matthew, Mark and Luke show us how Jesus taught in parables, there are no parables in John. Instead, he focuses on the symbols that Jesus used to describe and explain his role as our Savior, each beginning with "I am":

Like the other evangelists, John tells us of Jesus' miracles: he transforms water into wine (2:1-11), heals a nobleman's son (4:43-54), and a cripple (5:1-16), feeds the five thousand (6:1-14), walks on water (6:15-21), restores a blind man (9:1-41) and raises Lazarus from the dead (11:1-46).

But he doesn't call them miracles. To John, they are signs, and he shows they have a purpose that goes beyond the wonder of the act itself. Each sign tells us more about the overall reason why Jesus Christ came to earth. He came not so that a few could be healed, but so that all could have life (John 10:10).

So, while the other Gospels present Jesus' message in terms of 'the kingdom of God', John prefers the term 'eternal life'. Eternal life, although having magnificent future implications, also becomes a present reality for the believer: 'Whoever hears my word and believes in him who sent me has eternal life' (5:24).

The word gospel means good news. The good news is that Jesus Christ has made a perfect atonement for mankind that will redeem all mankind from the grave and reward each individual according to his/her works. This atonement was begun by his appointment in the premortal world but was worked out by Jesus during his mortal sojourn. Therefore, the records of his mortal life and the events pertaining to his ministry are called the Gospels; the four that are contained in our Bible are presented under the names of Matthew, Mark, Luke, and John.

The four Gospels are not so much biographies as they are testimonies. They do not reveal a day-by-day story of the life of Jesus; rather, they tell who Jesus was, what he said, what he did, and why it was important. The records of Matthew, Mark, and Luke present a somewhat similar collection of materials and have considerable phraseology in common, as well as similar main points, and thus are sometimes labeled as the “Synoptic Gospels” (Meaning “see-alike”). Even so, each is unique and has much detail that is not shared by the others. John’s record is quite different from the other three in vocabulary, phraseology, and presentation of events.

It appears from the internal evidence of each record that Matthew was written to persuade the Jews that Jesus is the promised Messiah. To do so he cites several O.T. prophecies and speaks repeatedly of Jesus as the Son of David, thus emphasizing his royal lineage. Mark appeals to a gentile audience and is fast moving, emphasizing the doings more than the sayings of the Lord. He occasionally gives geographical and cultural explanations - necessary procedure for non-Jewish readers (see Mark 2: 26; Mark 5: 41; Mark 7: 2-13, 34). Luke offers his readers a polished literary account of the ministry of Jesus, presenting Jesus as the universal Savior of both Jews and gentiles. He dwells extensively on Jesus’ teachings and his doings. Luke is favorable toward the gentiles and also gives more stories involving women than do the other records. John’s account does not contain much of the fundamental information that the other records contain, and it is evident that he was writing to members of the Church who already had basic information about the Lord. His primary purpose was to emphasize the divine nature of Jesus as the Only Begotten Son of God in the flesh.

Though there are many similarities in each of the Gospels, there are also many items that are found in one record only, making a study of all the records necessary. Some of the more significant items that appear in but one record are the following

Matthew only

visits of Gabriel to Zacharias and Mary (Luke 1).
visit of the shepherds (Luke 2: 8-18).
Jesus at the temple at age 12 (Luke 2: 41-52).
the seventy (Luke 10: 1-24).
Jesus sweating blood (Luke 22: 44).
Jesus’ discussion with the thief on the cross (Luke 23: 39-43).
Jesus eating fish and honey after his resurrection (Luke 24: 42-43).

John’s record is notable for what it does not contain. For example, it has no mention of Jesus’ 40-day experience in the wilderness; of the Mount of Transfiguration; of true parables; and of casting out evil spirits.
In summation, Mark has the least amount of unique material, being only about 7 percent exclusive; John has the greatest amount, being about 92 percent exclusive. With the knowledge now available, it is not possible to create a perfect harmony of the four Gospels, because the Gospel authors themselves do not always agree on chronological matters. A possible harmony of the four Gospels that is useful for study is given in the following tables, arranged, so far as information permits, in chronological order

www.jpdawson.com/synopt/synopgos.html -

Introduction

There is considerable historical evidence external to the Gospels for the traditional authors. (168) Papias, bishop of the church at Hierapolis in Asia Minor and an old man by A.D. 130, name Matthew and Mark as Gospel writers, indicating that Matthew wrote in Hebrew or Aramaic and describing Mark as one who recorded Peter's reminiscences. Papias was himself a student of the Apostle John. (169)

Justin Martyr, after studying many contemporary Greek philosophies, converted to Christianity sometime before AD 130. He speaks of the Gospels as "memoirs of the apostles. (170) He says they were written "by apostles and those who followed them, (171) which matches the traditional ascription to two apostles (Matthew and John) and two followers (Mark of Peter, Luke of Paul). He quotes from or mentions matters found in each of the four Gospels, and apparently alludes to Mark's Gospel as Peter's memoirs. (172) It is generally agreed that the Gospels were written between 60 and 90 AD. Most scholars place the writing of John around 85 AD. They also believe that Mark was written before the other two gospels, Matthew and Luke, and the latter had access to Mark's writing before they wrote their own gospels in the early 60's A.D. This Triple Tradition was based on the material that was common between these three gospels.

It would appear from the "harmony of the Gospels" that the gospel authors had access to the same document or oral teaching. We know from Scripture that Jesus taught the disciples "in all things." In John 14:26 Jesus informs us:

"the Comforter, which is the Holy Ghost, whom the Father will send in my name, He shall teach you all things, and bring all things to your remembrance, whatsoever I have said unto you."

Through this promise of Jesus, each disciple had access to all that he was taught. It has been postulated that they may have had a common input, a "Q" source. The "Q" terminology being derived from the German word "Quelle" meaning source. The initial or common input information could have come from either a spiritual, an unknown written or an oral source, or more likely, a combination of all three.

K. Lachmann in 1835 observed that Matthew and Luke never agree in order against Mark, but sometimes Mark and Luke agree in order against Matthew, and at times Matthew and Mark agree in order against Luke. Lachmann stated that this lack of agreements in order between Luke and Matthew against Mark proved that Mark was the source document for the three documents. According to Lachmann, the argument from order proved Mark was written first. B. C. Butler in 1951, (173) pointed out there are other possibilities of source material for the gospels and that based on order alone Lachmann's reason for his conclusion was in error.

1) The Proto-Luke - that the gospel of Luke contained information from an earlier source and this information was not available to Mark.

2) The Proto-Matthew - the gospel of Matthew contained information from an earlier source and this information was not available to Mark.

3) Q hypothesis - the theory that an earlier source of information was available to Matthew and Luke, but not Mark, and this accounted for the material common to Matthew and Luke.

4) Two-Source Hypothesis - the hypothesis that Mark was the first gospel and that Matthew and Luke used another source and Mark in writing their gospels.

5) Four-Source Hypothesis - the hypothesis that Matthew and Luke used four specific sources in writing their gospels.

There are many other arguments for this conclusion and we will examine most of these arguments.

Agreement in Wording

What significance can be drawn from the "Agreement in Wording" contained within the Gospels? The remarkable agreement in wording between the Gospels can be related to one or more of the following reasons:

1) Each author had access to one or more documents containing the verses where agreement occurs in the Gospels and used these or a rewrite of these verses in their own writings.

2) They were guided by the Holy Spirit in the actual wording in their writings and not just in thought or principle.

Jesus promised the apostles that the Holy Spirit would bring to their minds all that He had taught them, so we know that the Holy Spirit guided the writers of the Gospels. That He gave them exact wording is not very probable, because each would interpret these teachings in his own words. We see this in the difference in grammar between Mark and the others. The agreement tends to validate reason number one, and since all of the topics in Mark are covered by at least one other Gospel one would conclude that Mark was available to the other writers. Peter and Mark had a close relationship and possibly Peter had Mark give the other writers a "working paper" that was the start of a "Single Gospel." The "disharmony" of the Gospels also gives reason number three credence. Each, except Mark, contained a genealogy of Jesus, but each from a different perspective, the lineage of Mary, the lineage of Joseph and direct linkage to God. In many other areas of "disharmony" the writers filled other gaps in the life and times of Jesus not contained in Mark and not overlapping the other Gospels.

Agreement in Order

What does the Agreement in Order suggest with respect to timing of authorship of the Gospels? Since all of the topics in Mark's gospel, some seventy-seven topics, are found in at least one other Gospel and the other Gospels cover the same material and topics in essentially the same order as Mark, one concludes that Mark's Gospel was available to the other writers. The odds against four authors writing independently would arrive at an order without prior consultation or guiding documents is astronomical. For example, the odds against the first 11 topics in Mark to appear in the same order in Luke are 285 trillion to one. In fact, the first 17 topics are covered in order in Luke, but I don't know what the name would be for 8.27 times 10 to the 20th power. Then based on the probabilities, the Gospel of Mark was available and used as a point of departure for the other Gospels. This would dictate that the Gospel of Mark was written first, but it does not require that there necessarily be a gap in time between the Gospels.

The parenthetical agreement between the gospels always contains the Gospel of Mark as one of the Gospels being compared. This would indicate that Mark was probably available to the other writers and they in turn copied or used the special emphasis that Mark had shown for the topic. The probability that different authors would isolate or make a special emphasis on the same phrase or material in their writings without prior review of the other document is extremely low. There may have been other common sources of material for the Gospels that have been lost, but based on the written evidence available we assume that because of the agreement in order, in wording and in the parenthetical agreement dictate the conclusion that Mark or Matthew was written first. The agreement is shown in the following table.

Matthew 24:15-18	Mark 13:14-16
Matthew 9:1-8	Mark 2:1-12	Luke 5:17-26
Matthew 8:28-29	Mark 5:1-8	Luke 8:26-29
Matthew 27:15-18	Mark 15:6-10
Matthew 26:5	Mark 14:2	Luke 22:2
Matthew 26:14	Mark 14:10	Luke 22:3
Matthew 26:47	Mark 14:43	Luke 22:47
Matthew 9:21	Mark 5:28

Luke said in his Gospel, Luke 1:1-4, that many others had written about activities of Jesus. He implied that he had access to these documents or at least knew of their existence. There undoubtedly was oral communication between the apostles and their followers and we know from scripture that they orally transmitted the Gospel to the believers and unbelievers. The general belief that a "Q" document existed is based on the agreement between the gospels and this reference in Luke would confirm the existence of a prior document. The "Q" document is undefined as to content, origin and may be the name for "many" documents, as Luke suggested.

Since Peter is considered as the titular head of the apostles, it is strange that he did not write a gospel of his own, or maybe one the documents referred to by Luke were Peter's writings. We will know for sure when the horn blows, but until then it is only speculation. I believe that Peter did have an input to the gospels and that it was through Mark's Gospel. Some phrasing and wording in Mark are similar to those attributed to Peter, maybe Peter was the instigator of the writing of "the Gospel" to depict the life and teachings of Jesus. Mark could have been instructed to prepare a "working document" and the other gospel writers filled the holes to make a complete picture. In areas where they agreed in full with Mark, they made no changes, in other areas they expanded on Mark's writings. Based on the disharmony of the gospels, they apparently "agreed" to cover the remaining topics and/or relates the same topic from a different point of view, i.e., the genealogy of Jesus.

Given that there are four different (and differing) Gospels, how should they be interpreted? By using only one of the Gospels? By combining the four into one (as Tatian did with the Diatessaron in the 2nd century)?

Mark was the first written Gospel. Matthew and Luke used Mark and a second document, called Q (for the german "Quelle"), as sources for their Gospels.

attempts to find the setting in which the Gospel traditions arose; the goal is to interpret the tradition as it would have been interpreted in its original setting

attempts to discover evidence of the Gospel editor's activity; the goal is twofold: to discern the theological perspective of the editor; and to discern the community for which the editor prepared the Gospel

treats the Gospel narrative as a purposeful unity with the goal of discovering the meaning of the author's story. (Note: "Story" does not imply that the author's narrative is fictional, only that it is told in a narrative format.)

The story is the whole realm of what happens to characters (e.g., the story of Jesus), whereas the narrative is that portion of the story that is told by a narrator (or written by an author; e.g., the Gospel According to Luke). Thus, in the four Gospels we have four different narratives that tell, in different ways, the one story of Jesus.

Gospel of John

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gospel_of_John

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

The Gospel according to John is the fourth gospel document in the sequence of the canon of the New Testament, and scholars agree it was the fourth to be written down. Like the other three synoptic gospels, it contains an account of some of the actions and sayings of Jesus, but is quite different from them in ethos and theology.

The Church Fathers believed only The Gospel of John and The Gospel of Matthew to be written by apostles of Jesus. While the "beloved disciple," who is traditionally identified with John the Apostle, had traditionally been regarded as the author, this is now disputed by scholars of Biblical Criticism based on historical context and close textual analysis.

Structure http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gospel_of_John

After the prologue (1:1-5), the narrative of this gospel begins with verse 6, and consists of two parts. The first part, called "the Book of Signs" (1:6-ch. 12) contains the story of Jesus' public ministry from the time of his baptismal initiation by John the Baptist to its close. In this first part, John chooses seven of Jesus's miracles, always calling them "signs." The second part, called "the Book of Glory" (ch. 13-21) presents Jesus in the retirement of private life and in his dialog with his immediate followers (13-17), and gives an account of his sufferings and crucifixion and of his appearances to the disciples after his resurrection (18-20). Chapter 21 the "appendix" recounting the death of the "beloved disciple," follows.

The Gospel of John is easily distinguished from the three Synoptic Gospels, which share a more considerable amount of text and describe much more of Jesus' life. By contrast, the specific peculiarities of John are notable, especially in their effect on modern Christianity.

John gives far more focus in his work to the mystical relation of the Son to the Father. As a Gospel writer, many believe he essentially developed the concept of the Trinity while the Synoptic Gospels had focused less directly on Jesus as the Son of God. John includes far more direct claims of Jesus being the only Son of God in favour of Jesus as the Son of Man. The gospel also focuses on the relation of the Redeemer to believers, the announcement of the Holy Spirit as the Comforter (Greek Paraclete), and the prominence of love as an element in the Christian character.

Popular Passages in the Gospel

John 3:16 is one of the most widely known passages in the New Testament: For God so loved the world, that he gave his only begotten Son, that whosoever believeth in him should not perish, but have everlasting life. According to the professional men's and Bible distribution society Gideons International, John 3:16 has been translated into more than 1,100 languages.

Another popular passage from John is John 4:13-14. "Jesus answered, "Everyone who drinks this water will be thirsty again, but whoever drinks the water I give him will never thirst. Indeed, the water I give him will become in him a spring of water welling up to eternal life." Jesus had said this to a Samaritan woman whom he met at a well, and he told her about the living water that he offered. This saying was based partially on Isaiah 55:1-2.

Differences from the Synoptic Gospels

John is significantly different from the three preceding Synoptic Gospels of Matthew, Mark, and Luke in man different ways. Some of the differences are:

The Kingdom of God is only mentioned twice in John. In contrast, the other gospels repeatedly use the Kingdom of God and the Kingdom of Heaven as important concepts.The Gospel of John does not contain any parables, although metaphoric stories, like John 15, are still found in the gospel.The saying "He who has ears, let him hear" is totally absent from John.The healings of demon-possessed people are never mentioned as in the Synoptics.The Synoptics contain a wealth of stories about Jesus's miracles and healings, but John does not have as much of those stories. John tends to elaborate more heavily on the stories than the Synoptics.Various speeches of Jesus are absent, including all of the Sermon on the Mount and the instructions that Jesus gave to his disciples when he sent them out throughout the country to heal and preach (as in Matthew 10).Overall, the sayings of Jesus in the Synoptic Gospels have many close parallels to sayings in the Gospel of Thomas. However, Jesus's sayings in the Gospel of John almost never closely parallel the sayings found in the Gospel of Thomas.

Characteristics of the Gospel of John

The Greek of this gospel is elegant, and its theology subtle and sophisticated, with many parallels in Hellenistic thought.

Some of the passages in this book are alleged to be anti-Semitic, mainly due to the emphasis placed on the responsibility of the Jews (especially the Jewish leaders in Judea) for the Crucifixion. The Gospel uses the term "the Jews" to categorize some of Jesus' detractors. Most likely the author was Jewish himself, speaking to a largely Jewish community, and therefore we must be careful applying a 21st century language lens on a 1st century expression. Nonetheless, these passages were appropriated and used in negative ways by some Christian groups in certain periods of history to persecute Jewish people, being quoted to justify odium theologicum. Other critics read this shift of emphasis to the Jewish public enemies of the Roman imperium and away from the Roman authorities, who actually carried out the execution, as a technique of rendering a developing Christianity more palatable in official circles. It is because of this that some politically-correct English translations (like the controversial Today's New International Version) remove the term "Jews" and replace them with non-offensive terms so as to remove alleged anti-Semitism. Critics of these translations state that when John uses "Jews," he is not referring to all Jews (as John, Jesus and his disciples were all Jews) but to the Jewish leaders (the Sanhedrin) in Judea who openly oppose Jesus. These same critics argued that those people who believe that the Gospel of John is "anti-Semitic" failed to understand how the term "Jews" is actually used.

Unlike the synoptic Gospels, elements of Gnosticism have been recognized by some readers in the Gospel of John though it is not generally regarded as a "Gnostic gospel". In order to find passages that refute Gnosticism—by stating that Christ is approachable even as Spirit—readers must turn instead to the First Epistle of John, in passages such as 1 Jn 2:1-2; 3:8, 3:16 and 4:2-3. The earliest copies of the Gospel of John are also from Gnostic sources that include overtly Gnostic writings, implying that John was read by Gnostic groups. One school of interpretation distinguishes between "Johannine Christianity" and "Pauline Christianity". The gnosis in Gnosticism is secret information that is available only to initiates. In the Gnostic view, salvation comes through "knowledge" that Jesus is the Christ -- those who understand his true nature are saved, those who don't "stand condemned already."

Though John is not a "secret" gospel—as other surviving apocryphal ("secret") gospels and fragments claim to be—the narrative is interrupted at an important turn of events just before the Crucifixion, for nearly five chapters (John 13, 18) of private discourse and teachings that Jesus shares only with the disciples, the "farewell discourses", which are without parallel in the synoptic gospels, in their present version (but compare the Secret Gospel of Mark).

Other characteristics unique to John

The Apostle Thomas is given a personality beyond a mere name, as "Doubting Thomas" (20:27 etc).

Jesus refers to himself with metaphoric "I am" saying seven times (6:35) (8:12) (10:9) (10:11) (11:25) (14:6) (15:1)Two "signs" are numbered (2:11) (4:54) There are no stories about Satan, demons or exorcisms, no predictions of end times, no Sermon on the Mount, and no ethical or apocalyptic teachings.The hourly time is given: Greek text: about the tenth hour, translated as "four o'clock in the afternoon" [first hour is 6 AM, sundial time] (1:39)When the water at the pool of Bethsaida is moved by an angel it heals (5:3-4)Jesus says he is not going to the festival. However, after his brothers had gone, he too goes, but in secret for not all to see (7:8-10)According to the New American Bible, Catholic Book Publishing Co., New York, 1970, the story of the adultress (8:1-11) is missing from the best early Greek manuscripts. When it does appear it is at different places: here, after (7:36) or at the end of this gospel. It can also be found at Luke 21:38.Jesus washes the disciples' feet (13:3-16)No other women are mentioned going to the tomb with Mary Magdalene. She seems to be alone. (John 20:1)Mary Magdalene visits the empty tomb twice. She believes Jesus' body has been stolen. The second time she sees two angels. They do not tell her Jesus is risen. They only ask why she is crying. Mary mistakes Jesus for the gardener. He tells Mary not to cling to him. (John 20: 1-18). That very evening, in the same chapter (20:28), Jesus asks Thomas to touch him and to place his fingers and hand in Jesus' still open wounds. At the sight of Jesus, Thomas gives an exclamation of faith but if he follows Jesus' direction, it is not in the text.Some of the brethren thought the "disciple whom Jesus loved" would not die, and an explanation is given for his death. (21:23)The "disciple whom Jesus loved" wrote down things he had witnessed, and his testimony is asserted by a third party to be true (21:24)The beloved disciple (traditionally believed to be the Apostle John) is never named.

Introduction: The Relationship of John's Gospel to the Synoptics.

Two basic positions on the relationship of John’s Gospel to the Synoptics are possible:

Major Differences:

1. Omission by John of material found in the synoptics.

John’s Gospel omits a large amount of material found in the synoptic Gospels, including some surprisingly important episodes: the temptation of Jesus, Jesus’ transfiguration, and the institution of the Lord’s supper are not mentioned by John. John mentions no examples of Jesus casting out demons. The sermon on the mount and the Lord’s prayer are not found in the Fourth Gospel. There are no narrative parables in John’s Gospel (most scholars do not regard John 15:1-8 [“the Vine and the Branches”] as a parable in the strict sense).

2. Inclusion by John of material not found in the synoptics.

John also includes a considerable amount of material not found in the synoptics. All the material in John 2—4, Jesus’ early Galilean ministry, is not found in the synoptics. Prior visits of Jesus to Jerusalem before the passion week are mentioned in John but not found in the synoptics. The seventh sign-miracle, the resurrection of Lazarus (John 11) is not mentioned in the synoptics. The extended Farewell Discourse (John 13—17) is not found in the synoptic Gospels.

3. Different length of Jesus' public ministry.

According to John, Jesus’ public ministry extended over a period of at least three and possibly four years. During this time Jesus goes sevreal times from Galilee to Jerusalem. The synoptics appear to describe only one journey of Jesus to Jerusalem (the final one), with most of Jesus’ ministry taking place within one year.

4. 'High' Christology as opposed to the synoptics.

The Prologue to John’s Gospel (1:1-18) presents Jesus as the Lovgo" become flesh (1:14). John begins his Gospel with an affirmation of Jesus’ preexistence and full deity, which climaxes in John 20:28 with Thomas’ confession “My Lord and my God!” The non-predicated ejgw eijmi sayings in the Fourth Gospel as allusions to Exod 3:14 also point to Jesus’ deity (John 8:24, 28, 58). Compare Mark who begins his Gospel with Jesus’ baptism and Matthew and Luke who begin theirs with Jesus’ birth. John begins with eternity past (“In the beginning the Word already was…”).

5. Literary Point of View: John versus the synoptics.

The synoptics are written from a third person point of view, describing the events as if the authors had personally observed all of them and were reporting what they saw at the time. Thus they are basically descriptive in their approach. John’s Gospel, on the other hand, although also written from a third person point of view, is more reflective, clearly later than the events he describes. The author of the Fourth Gospel very carefully separates himself from the events he describes (cf. the role of the Beloved Disciple in the Fourth Gospel). However clear it is that he was an eyewitness of the life of Jesus, it is no less clear that he looks back upon it from a temporal distance. While we see the events through his eyes, we are carefully guided to see the events of Jesus’ life not as John saw them when they happened but as he now sees them. We understand more of the significance of the events described from the position the writer now holds than an eyewitness could have understood at the time the events took place. In this sense John’s Gospel is much more reflective.

There are numerous passages in John’s Gospel which could serve as an example of this later perspective. Four will serve as examples:

In each of these passages it may be easily seen that John has adopted the “post-resurrection” point of view. He looks back on the events and emphasizes the inability of the apostles to understand the things that were happening in their true perspective at the time they occurred. It is only possible for us to understand these things when we consider the resurrection of Jesus and its significance in God’s plan.

6. Extended dialogues or discourses rather than proverbial sayings.

John presents his material in the form of extended dialogues or discourses rather than the ‘proverbial’ or ‘pithy’ sayings found often in the synoptics: John 3 (with Nicodemus); John 4 (with the Samaritan woman); John 6 (the Bread of Life Discourse); John 13—17 (the Farewell Discourse with the disciples). As L. Goppelt observed:

The Gospel of John passed on the words of Jesus predominantly in another genre than the synoptics; it did not do so in sayings, parables, and controversy dialogues, but in connected or dialogical discourses.²⁵

7. Use of symbolism and double meaning.

John makes more frequent use of these literary techniques than the synoptics. Examples: John 2:25 (temple/body); John 7:37-38 (water/Spirit); John 12:32 (lifted up/exalted).

Much of this symbolism takes the form of dualistic antitheses: light/darkness (1:4; 3:19; 8:12; 11:9; 12:35, 46); truth/falsehood (8:44); life/death (5:24; 11:25); above/below (8:23); freedom/slavery (8:33, 36). Much of this antithetical dualism is also found in the Qumran (Dead Sea Scrolls) texts. See J. H. Charlesworth, “A Critical Comparison of the Dualism in 1QS 3:13-4:26 and the ‘Dualism’ Contained in the Gospel of John”, in John and the Dead Sea Scrolls, ed. J. H. Charlesworth (New York: Crossroad, 1990).

8. Use of the “misunderstood statement.”

John makes frequent use of the “misunderstood statement” as a literary technique. Jesus says something to someone which is misunderstood, thus giving Jesus a further opportunity to clarify what he really meant. Examples: John 3 (Nicodemus’ misunderstanding of the new birth as a second physical birth; John 4 (the Samaritan woman’s misunderstanding of the living water as drinkable water).

9. “Kingdom of God” versus “eternal life.”

The emphasis on the Kingdom of God found in the synoptics is largely missing in John (the phrase basileiva tou' qeou' occurs only twice in John’s Gospel (3:3, 5) and the noun basileiva only three times (all in 18:36). Instead we find John’s emphasis on ‘eternal life’ as a present reality (John 5:24 etc.). The emphasis on ‘eternal life’ in John’s Gospel is closer to the letters of Paul than to the synoptic gospels, as the following chart shows:

http://www.google.co.in/search?hl=en&q=Synoptic+gospels+in+the+Bible&btnG=Search&meta=

The Gospel of Mark:

http://www.religioustolerance.org/chr_ntb1.htm#mark

Author: Many Christian writers of the 2nd century CE identified the author as the John-Marcus who was mentioned in Acts 12:12. Mark was a helper who went with Paul and Barnabas on Paul's first missionary journey. Liberal theologians generally believe that the identity of the author is unknown. _6,7,10,19 Conservatives follow the church tradition that the author was Mark. _11,12,13,16 Fundamentalists within the Southern Baptist Convention felt quite strongly about this. When they obtained control of the denomination, they required their employees to subscribe to a loyalty oath in which they swore that they believe in Mark's authorship of this Gospel.

Date: Various sources estimate that this gospel was written sometime from 57 to 75 CE. Conservative theologians tend to estimate a much earlier date than do liberals:

Content: It is surprising that the gospel survived long enough to be included in the official canon. It is somewhat superfluous, as over 90% of its contents appear elsewhere in the New Testament. Only about 30 of its verses are not paralleled in Matthew or Luke. Also, it was recognized in the 2nd century that the author was not a disciple of Jesus. That weakened its importance.

The gospel lacks the polished literary style of other New Testament authors; it was written in the language of the common people. The gospel was apparently written during a time of great tension between the conservative Jewish Christians, centered in Jerusalem and the more liberal Gentile Christians, spread throughout the Roman Empire. "Since the 12 disciples of Jesus became the leaders of the conservatives, Mark shared Paul's coolness and reserve towards their authority, He makes it plain to the reader that the 12 never understood Jesus properly and therefore are not the best guides...[The author of] Mark is helping the reader to understand why the view of Jesus among the conservative Jewish Christian is so unsatisfactory to the gentile Christian church." ₁₅

Mark appears to have been quickly accepted by the Christian communities. Within a few years of its completion, the authors of both Matthew and Luke are generally believed to have used this gospel as a source of quotations for their own gospels.

The gospel "reflects the early Christian view that God was about to bring history to an end in an apocalyptic conflagration." ₁₈ This was in response to Jesus' statements that the Kingdom of God would arrive circa 30 CE, and Paul's writings during the 50's or 60's, that Jesus' return was imminent. As the decades passed and Jesus did not return, the Christian movements gave progressively less importance to the second coming.

Ending of Mark: The most ancient manuscripts of Mark all end suddenly at Mark 16:8. They appear to end in mid-sentence with some of Jesus' female followers in a state of confusion and fear. A young man in a white robe has told the women to "...tell [Jesus] disciples and Peter. 'He is going ahead of you into Galilee. There you will see him.' " Missing are the descriptions, after Jesus' resurrection, of his:

Various forged endings were added them to the original text, by unknown authors pretending that they were Mark.

The Gospel of Matthew:

http://www.religioustolerance.org/chr_ntb1.htm#mark

An early church father, Papias (circa 130 CE), named Matthew as the author of this gospel. He is identified as a tax collector in a list of the twelve disciples in Matthew 10:3. He is probably the Levi, son of Alphaeus, referred to in Mark 2:14 and Luke 5:27. Papias also believed that the gospel was originally written in Hebrew. This belief has little support today.

The Easton Illustrated Dictionary comments that: "The Gospel is full of allusions to those passages of the Old Testament in which Christ is predicted and foreshadowed. The one aim pervading the whole book is to show that Jesus is he 'of whom Moses in the law and the prophets did write.' This Gospel contains no fewer than sixty-five references to the Old Testament, forty-three of these being direct verbal citations, thus greatly outnumbering those found in the other Gospels."

In early Christianity, most theologians believed that this gospel was originally written in the Hebrew, or perhaps Aramaic, language. It was later believed to have been translated into Greek, either by the original author or by some anonymous person. A near consensus of modern theologians disagree. They believe that the gospel was written in Greek, as were the remaining gospels, epistles and other writings in the Christian Scriptures.

The Easton Illustrated Dictionary also notes that "Matthew uses the expression 'kingdom of heaven' (thirty-two times), while Luke uses the expression 'kingdom of God' (thirty-three times)." The author of Matthew was apparently writing to a Jewish audience; he seems to have avoided referring directly to God, in order to avoid offending his audience.

Some theologians believe that Matthew did not originally include a nativity story. They suggest that the first two chapters of Matthew were written later by a forger, and joined as a prefix to the autograph copy of Matthew, or an early copy, which contained only chapters 3 to 28. ₂₁

Matthew, along with the other synoptic gospels, stresses the humanity of Jesus. It the only gospel that contains the word "church" (Matthew 16:18 and 18:17). Judgment, Hell are major themes. The author wrote from a Jewish perspective, with about 50 quotations and over 75 references to Old Testament passages. It incorporates many passages from the gospel of Mark and the gospel of Q.

The Gospel of Luke:

http://www.religioustolerance.org/chr_ntb1.htm#mark

"Luke" was motivated to write the gospel and its sequel, the book of Acts, because he felt that previous gospels written by eyewitnesses to Jesus' ministry lacked accuracy. Most of the gospel was copied from Mark and Q; about one third of the passages came from another source unique to Luke, often called "L". This special material includes some of the most important passages: the parables of the Good Samaritan, of the Prodigal Son, and of Lazarus, as well as the story of Martha and Mary. Luke is also the only synoptic gospel to present Jesus as a savior (Luke 2:11). The gospel is aimed at an international audience of Greco-Roman readers. Luke is commonly believed to have been a physician. But recent analysis of his writings indicates that his knowledge of medicine was no greater than that of a typical educated person at the time. One interesting feature of the gospel is the use of duplicate parables: one involving a man and another a woman. This, the emphasis on Mary in the first two chapters of the gospel, and other internal evidence, has led one theologian to suggest that the author of Luke was a woman.

Estimates of the date of writing range from the late 50's to the 90's. A date closer to 90 CE is likely, because the author comments on the destruction of Jerusalem in 70 CE, and because of its dependence on Mark. Most conservative Christians believe that Luke was a doctor who accompanied Paul on his missionary journeys. _11,12,13,16 Most liberal Christians believe that Luke was an educated person whose identity is unknown. _6,7,10,19

The purpose of Luke appears to be the promotion of Pauline Christianity among the Gentiles.

The Gospel of John:

http://www.religioustolerance.org/chr_ntb1.htm#mark

The early church father, Irenaeus, recorded the church tradition that this gospel was written by John, son of Zebedee. Others claimed that the author was an Elder John from Ephesus. Still others, attributed it to John, the "beloved disciple." Throughout most of the history of the church, the Gospel of John was believed to have been written by Jesus' disciple. Most liberal scholars today believe that it was written by a group of authors. _6,7,10,19 There is speculation that much of the gospel was written by a single, unknown writer, and that a second, later individual reworked the text in order to make it conform to contemporary church teaching. "John" contains a great deal of anti-Jewish sentiment. It holds the Jews and their descendants responsible for the execution of Jesus. It has largely responsible for inspiring Christians to violent anti-Semitic acts in the centuries since it was written.

Because of its theological principles and the emphasis on Jesus as the Son of God, it rapidly became the favorite gospel. It has remained the favorite today, particularly among conservative Christians. It was probably written between 85 and 100 CE, after believers in Jesus were expelled from Jewish synagogues. Chapter 20 appears to be the original ending of the gospel. Chapter 21 describes the miraculous catch of fish, and the reinstatement of Peter, appears to be a later addition.

Conservative Christians typically believe that the entire gospel, including the addition, was made by John, the disciple. 11,12,13,16

Liberal Christians typically believe that it was written by a group of authors, and that Chapter 21 was added by a later editor of the gospel. 6,7,10,19

2. What specific stories are told in Matthew, Luke and Mark and how are they similar and how are they different?

A: The word "synoptic" means to give an account from the same point of view. The Synoptic Gospels (Matthew, Mark, and Luke) are similar in the miracles, parables, and teaching of Christ included in the books. This does not mean that they are identical. Often that which is found in one is not found in the other. Also, even the same events are told with slightly different viewpoints that help us see the entire story. However, the similarity is more than is usually found in three independently written biographies of the same person.

Some scholars spend great amounts of energy and ink to explain how Matthew and Luke copied from Mark or how all three took much of their information from a source that no longer exists. All of this fails to get to the spiritual meaning of the gospels and wastes a lot of time. God sometimes allowed the Bible writers to refer to extra biblical sources. However, if we believe that the Holy Ghost controlled the writing of the text, it does not matter what tools He used to get it written.

The particulars of how the three gospels differ is too involved to get into here except in the most general terms. Many reference Bibles will have comparisons of the parables and miracles as found in the different gospels. If you want a heavy-duty reference that goes into all the issues, I would recommend "A Guide to the Gospels" by W. Graham Scroggie. But let me give a very general rundown of the four gospels.

Matthew - This book was especially written to the Jews and it presents Christ as the King of the Jews. It gives the royal genealogy of Christ to prove Him to be in the Messianic line of David. He gives the Sermon on the Mount (Matthew 5-7) as a rule of life for the kingdom.

Mark - In Mark, Christ is the servant of man. Mark if the shortest of the gospels and has the least teaching of the four gospels. It is a book of action using words like "straightway." The birth of Christ is not mentioned. It is the ministry of Jesus that this book portrays.

Luke - Luke shows Jesus Christ to be the Son of man. It is His humanity and His understanding of man that is emphasized. The genealogy of Christ in Luke goes back to Adam. Luke is filled with teaching for the disciples. Subjects like prayer are mentioned more in Luke than in the other gospels.

John - In John, Jesus is presented as the Son of God. The book begins with His identity as God and His work in creation. John clearly states the purpose of his book: "But these are written, that ye might believe that Jesus is the Christ, the Son of God; and that believing ye might have life through his name" (John 20:31). John was written to identify Jesus Christ as the Son of God and to lead others to believe in Him in order to have eternal life.

Notes: Only the miracle of the feeding of the 5,000 is found in all four gospels. John has the fewest number of miracles but the greatest percentage of exclusive miracles (6 out of 8).

(4) John records 2; both are exclusive. Note: John does not commonly use parables as a teaching tool.

Introduction: www.religioustolerance.org/chr_john.htm

Almost all of the biblical information about the earthly ministry of Jesus is contained in the four gospels Mark, Matthew, Luke and John. The word "Gospel" is a translation into English of the Greek word "euangelion" which means "good news." Many dozens of gospels were written in the first and second century CE; each was believed to be accurate by various groups within the early Christian movement and was extensively used by them. Four of them (Mark, Matthew, Luke and John) were eventually accepted by the early Christian movement as inspired by God. They were approved for inclusion in the official canon during the 4th century CE, and are found today in every Bible.

All of the original copies of the four gospels in the Christian Scriptures have been lost. We must rely upon hand-written copies which are an unknown number of replications removed from the originals. The oldest known surviving part of a gospel dates from about 125 CE. It consists of about 50 lines from the Egerton gospel -- one of the 40 or so gospels that never made it into the official canon, and whose author is unknown. Another portion of an ancient manuscript, containing part of the Gospel of John, is also dated to about 125 CE. The remaining manuscripts date to the second half of the second century CE or later. ₁₂

Differences between John and the Synoptic Gospels:

Matthew, Mark, and Luke are often called the "synoptic" gospels. "Synoptic" is a Greek word meaning "having a common view." ₁ John differs significantly from the synoptic gospels in theme, content, time duration, order of events, and style. "Only ca. 8% of it is parallel to these other gospels, and even then, no such word-for-word parallelism occurs as we find among the synoptic gospels." ₂ John reflects a Christian tradition that is different from that of the other gospels. It was rejected as heretical by many individuals and groups within the early Christian movement. It was used extensively by the Gnostic Christians. But it was ultimately accepted into the official canon. It is now the favorite gospel of many conservative Christians, and the gospel least referred to by many liberal Christians.

The Problem of Multiple Gospels.

http://www.westminster.edu/staff/brennie/gospels.htm

Some concern was felt in the early church over the existence of multiple gospels. This concern was by no means universal and many churches simply accepted the authority of all four gospel without great debate and therefore presumably without great problem. The very fact that a gospel was used tended to ensure that it was regarded as authoritative. However, attempts were made to solve what was evidently a problem to some. Some time around 150 CE Marcion proposed the gospel of Luke (with slight alterations) as the only authoritative text. However, he was excluded from the church of Rome. Tatian (c. 170 CE) constructed a "gospel harmony" omitting the parallels and harmonizing the differences.

What were these differences? The most striking non-agreements are between the Gospel of John and the three "synoptic" gospels. These differ in the matters of:

John has Jesus visit Jerusalem three times, remaining there for more than six months on one occasion, whereas the synoptic gospels relate only one trip to Jerusalem when Jesus was arrested and crucified.

John has Jesus preaching simultaneously with John the Baptist and carrying on a ministry of about three years, whereas the synoptics suggests a time of less than one year, starting after the imprisonment of John the Baptist.

John portrays Jesus as preaching long discourses on specific topics, in the other gospels he speaks in short, rather disconnected sayings and in parables.

In John Jesus speaks frequently of his person, "I who speak to you am he," (John 4:26) or "I have come in my father's name but you do not receive me" (John 5:43) etc. In the other gospels there is no such emphasis on his person but rather on "the kingdom of God/Heaven" (Mat 21:43) (Mark 4:11) (Luke 6:20 ) See a Concordance for more examples, John's gospel mentions the kingdom a total of five times: 3:3, 3:5, 18:36 [x3])

Few of the narratives of the synoptic gospels are repeated in John who tells many episodes unknown in the other three gospels.

Although these differences are striking they should not detract from the differences between the synoptic gospels themselves. The infancy narratives and genealogies in Matthew and Luke should be compared as should the ordering of their narratives. The different descriptions of John the Baptist in Mark and the two others should be noted.

http://www.biblestudy.org/question/syngosp.html
You Have Questions . . .
Here's the Personalized Answers!

Why are Gospels organized in the order of
Matthew, Mark, Luke, and John?
What are the "synoptic" Gospels?

Q. Why are Gospels organized in the order of Matthew, Mark, Luke, and John? What are the "synoptic" Gospels?

A. Matthew, Mark and Luke are sometimes called the "synoptic" gospels. "Synoptic" means with the same eye because they cover the same basic events in the life of Jesus. In fact many passages from all three of them can be placed side by side and seen to be parallel. While some people claim that Matthew can be shown to be the oldest of the three others claim that Mark was written first but almost everyone agrees that Luke (who also wrote the book of Acts) wrote his version later than the other two.

The book of John is written from a different perspective and the events covered in it are quite different from the other three.

Their arrangement is nothing more than a tradition but the arrangement of the three similar books adjacent makes sense with the different perspective following.

The Synoptic Gospels http://www.religionfacts.com/christianity/texts/gospels.htm

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 lable 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}

Introduction to the Gospels: What is a Gospel? Who Was Jesus?

http://atheism.about.com/od/biblegospels/

The word 'gospel' stems from the Middle English godspel (god: good, spel: news) which itself comes from Greek and means the 'good news' of some important event (like a birth or a victory). The term gospel appears often in Paul’s letters in reference to the significance of the person, life, and ministry of Jesus. Justin Martyr was the first to refer to 'gospels' in the plural, around 150 CE, and today the term is limited almost entirely to the four canonical gospels that appear in the New Testament: Matthew, Mark, Luke, and John.

The Synoptic Gospels (Matthew. Mark, and Luke).

http://www.westminster.edu/staff/brennie/mark.htm

(The "Synoptic Problem" is one part of the problem of multiple gospels. It is quite independent of the relationship of John to the other gospels.)

Mark's gospel has about 660 verses, all but twenty or so of which reappear in Matthew and Luke. Matthew reproduces almost 600 of Mark's verses and Luke about 300.

Where the synoptic gospels agree on the ordering of the material all three agree. When Matthew and Luke diverge from the ordering of Mark they also disagree with each other.

The koine or common New Testament Greek of Matthew and Luke is much better written and smoother than that of Mark.

The Structure of Mark's Gospel.
The Introduction; (Mark 1:1-13)
The Ministry in and around Galilee; (Mark 1:14 to 9:50)
The Journey to Jerusalem; Mark 10.
Jesus in Jerusalem; (Mark 11:1 to 6:8)
The Resurrection; (Mark 16:9-20)

This structure is repeated in the other synoptic gospels but is not followed in John.

The four gospel books of the Bible - Matthew, Mark, Luke and John - tell the dramatic story of Jesus, the Son of God and our Savior. His birth, His parables and other teachings, His love for all God's people, His miracles, triumphs, disappointments, conflicts, prayers, arrest, trial, crucifixion, resurrection and ascension to heaven are all narrated in the gospels.

Almost everything we know about Jesus' life, ministry, teachings, death and resurrection comes from the four gospels. Both Matthew and Luke recount Jesus' birth in the city of Bethlehem, in what is now southern Israel. He spent his youth and early adulthood in the city of Nazareth, in the land of Galilee. Almost nothing is known of this period of His life, except for the incident at the Temple told in Luke 2:41-51. At about age 30, Jesus was baptized in the River Jordan by John the Baptist and began His public ministry. He selected 12 disciples who would carry on his ministry after Him. He traveled through the regions of Galilee, Samaria, and Judea in Palestine teaching in the synagogues and speaking to the crowds of people who followed wherever He went. He preached about the kingdom of God, repentance, and love for all people. The gospels tell how He healed the sick wherever He went and performed many other miracles.

Jesus was very critical of the hypocrisy of the religious leaders of His time. He said they observed the letter of the Jewish law, but defiled its spirit by living lives of greed and sin. These religious leaders plotted to kill Jesus, and eventually forced the Roman governor, Pilate, to order His crucifixion on Friday, the eve of Passover. The gospels tell that Jesus arose from the dead on the following Sunday, and He remained on Earth another 40 days before ascending into heaven. Jesus, Himself, said He was the Son of God, the Christ, the Messiah awaited by the Jews. He said His death and resurrection were all part of God's mysterious plan for our salvation.

In the year 532 A.D., a monk named Denys le Petit calculated that Jesus was born in the Roman year 753, and that year was gradually adopted as year 1 A.D. by Christian countries. However, it is now believed that Denys miscalculated and Jesus was actually born between 6 and 4 B.C. From the accounts in the gospels Jesus was probably crucified, resurrected and ascended to heaven in the year 29 or 30 A.D.

Saul, a fierce persecutor of Christians, had a dramatic conversion experience around the year 35 A.D. (Acts 9:1-19). He changed his name to Paul and became the first and most influential interpreter of the Christian message.

The gospel message was preserved in oral form for many years before being written down. Bible scholars believe the letters of Paul are the oldest books in the New Testament, written between 50 and 60 A.D. Mark was written around 70 A.D., about 40 years after Jesus was crucified. Matthew and Luke were written between 80 and 90 A.D. Finally, The Gospel of John appeared in its final form around 95 A.D. Bible Scholars believe Matthew and Luke incorporated much of the material from Mark into their gospels. They also included unique material of their own plus common material from a presumed source called "Q" (from the German, quelle, meaning "source"), which has not been preserved.

Because of their similarity, Matthew, Mark and Luke are called the synoptic gospels (from the Greek synopsis, meaning "a seeing together"). Most of the TwoPaths Bible Studies will be on a single book, but we are grouping the three synoptic gospels together because they have so much in common.

All four Gospels are anonymous in the sense that none mentions the author's name. The traditional names - Matthew, Mark, Luke and John - did not become associated with these writings until the second century. Whether or not these men were the actual authors is very controversial. For convenience, however, we will refer to Matthew, Mark, Luke and John as if they are the true authors.

The synoptic gospels read like a biography of Jesus, but that was not their original purpose. Neither were they written as history books or as books of a Christian Bible. Instead, they were first used in the early Christian churches as devotional materials, much like sermons. The human authors of these books selectively picked materials to include, rearranged it, and presented it in a way to suit their devotional purposes. Therefore we have to be content with gaps in our knowledge of Jesus' life and with some inconsistencies in names, places, times and other details of the events narrated in the gospels. However, we get a very similar "big picture" of Jesus' life and work from all four gospels, and we are fortunate to have these four "windows" to see four views of the central events of Christianity.

A: The different accounts of the gospels concerning the words of Jesus is not limited to the King James Bible but is certainly a characteristic of every Greek manuscript and every translation of the New Testament in every language and time. Perhaps someone could find one example where this is not the case in some Bibles, but that would not erase the multitude of other examples throughout the gospels. This is not a problem exclusive to the King James Bible and it is not a problem limited to the last words of Jesus. The possible examples are myriad.

My reason for the above paragraph is to help you understand that, if slight differences in the wording of Jesus in the various gospels negates the value of a Bible, then all Bibles are worthless. In fact, this is one of the arguments of skeptics against the Bible. However, there is no need for us to trash our Bibles for this reason.

Every time any historical record is given, the information given is selected by the author according to the purpose of the writing. Even in a courtroom setting where every word is recorded, there are times that the recorder is told to leave some statement or comment out of the record. Yet, we do not accuse the recorder of dishonesty because of this act.

The biblical records of conversations are true and they are completely what God wanted them to report. But they are not a complete record of everything that was said at the time. This is not required or desired (people think the Bible is long now). The Holy Spirit chose the words to be recorded according to their importance to the purpose of the text at that point. Each gospel is telling the story of the life and work of Christ, but each is approaching His life from different perspectives. If two of the gospels record the same event, they are not required to tell all the same details of that event. John stated concerning the works of Christ that "if they should be written every one, I suppose that even the world itself could not contain the books that should be written" (John 21:25). The Holy Spirit chose the most appropriate details of each scene according to the purpose of that gospel at that point.

However, this does not mean that the record is in any way false. At almost any event, the words spoken would have been many times the words actually recorded in the text of the gospels. The longest recorded sermon of Jesus is the Sermon on the Mount in Matthew 5-7. Yet, it would take only about 15-20 minutes to speak. But we see Jesus speaking to the multitudes for entire days (this is why He fed the 5,000). What he said greatly exceeded what was recorded of His sayings. What is recorded in the gospels is carefully selected for its God-given purpose.

This can explain why comparisons of the sayings of Christ do not always perfectly match. One gospel may have 25 words of His speech, while another may have 39 words of the same speech. However, He may have spoken 800 or more words at the time. The authors, by the direction of the Spirit, have simply chosen the words that best tell the story from their perspective. What may seem like a contradiction is not. The authors have just chosen different words from the same speech.

One example of these so-called contradictions is found in the sign that Pilate put over the head of Jesus at His crucifixion. Consider the following accounts:

Matthew 27:37 THIS IS JESUS THE KING OF THE JEWS

Mark 15:26 THE KING OF THE JEWS

Luke 23:38 THIS IS THE KING OF THE JEWS

John 19:19 JESUS OF NAZARETH THE KING OF THE JEWS

Many have pointed to this as a certain contradiction in the Bible. But I believe the sign probably said: "THIS IS JESUS OF NAZARETH THE KING OF THE JEWS." Check it out. This includes all the elements found in all four gospels. Every account is true, but none had the complete wording. This is not error. If you were the companion of a blind man and he asked you what you saw at any given point, would you be dishonest if you did not tell him everything you could see at that point in time? Of course not. In fact, so many things come into the range of our eyes, that this would be practically impossible. Before you could get to everything in the range of your eyes, the scene would have changed.

Now consider if the blind man asked four different people at the same time and in the same place to tell him what they saw. Would they tell him the same things? No, of course not. They would all see according to their own perspective. However, what if this blind man were able to record each of the four accounts and study them over a period of time? Would he understand more or less because of four accounts of the same scene. I think we would agree that his understanding would be increased. Not only that, he would know more than the sum of adding the four accounts together, for by comparing the records, he would learn things that were not specifically stated by any of the reporters. This is the effect that the study of the four gospels can have on our understanding of the life and ministry of our Lord Jesus Christ.

F. Furman Kearley, Ph.D. http://www.apologeticspress.org/rr/reprints/Alleged-Contradictions-in-the-G.pdf

that it will not be republished in print, on-line (including reposting on any personal Web sites, corporate

Web sites, organizational Web sites, electronic bulletin boards, etc.), or on computer media,

and will not be used for any commercial purposes. Further, it must be copied with source statements

(publisher, author, title, bibliographic references, etc.), and must include this paragraph granting limited

rights for copying and reproduction, along with the name and address of the publisher and owner of

these rights, as listed below. Except for those exclusions mentioned above, and brief quotations in

articles or critical reviews, or distribution for educational purposes (including students in classes), no

part of this document may be reproduced in any form without permission from the publisher.

Contradictions Alleged on the Basis of Difference in Structure Between the Gospels

Some critics contend that there is a contradiction between the synoptic Gospels (Matthew, Mark and

Luke) and John concerning the length of the Lord’s ministry. The critics charge that the synoptic Gospels

represent the length of His ministry as being limited to a single year, but that John represents it as extending

over at least three years (McGarvey, 1886, part 1, p. 149). There is, however, certainly no basis for

such a charge. There is no indication within the first three Gospels that they intended to limit the ministry

of Jesus to one year. They simply did not attempt to deal with the length, and passing, of time and placed

no stress on it. A careful study of these Gospels clearly presents evidence of the passage of more than one

year. John, on the other hand, specifically mentions three, and perhaps four, Passover feasts so that it is an

easy matter to note the passage of time. Yet there is no contradiction in the Gospels on the length of the

Some critics contend that the spirit, form, terminology, and style of the discourses by Jesus as recorded

in the synoptic Gospels are diametrically opposed to the spirit, form, and terminology of His discourses

as recorded in John (McGarvey, 1886, part 1, p. 149). In reply, any argument based on style is a

most subjective argument. A study of such arguments indicates that critics rarely ever agree among them-

selves in evaluating style. Certainly, such an argument is too subjective a basis to support the charge of a

contradiction. Furthermore, such a charge has the effect of accusing either John or the synoptic authors of

deliberately creating speeches and putting them in the mouth of Jesus. Such an act would be grossly unethical.

Yet the general reputation of the writers, and the thrust of their material, stresses that they were

men of the highest principle. Further, even human authors can vary their style and form depending upon

the audience and situation. Certainly, the divine Son of God was not limited in any way by style and

Critics attempt to make much concerning the variation of quotations recorded in the Gospels. One

critic charged: “Mark-Matthew say the Centurion confessed that Jesus was ‘A (the) son of God.’ Luke

changes this to: ‘He was innocent.’ What did the Centurion say?” (Lewis, 1972, p. 5).

In response to the alleged contradictions based on variations in quotations, several points need to be

made. First, the quotations may be completely different statements made by the same person at the same

time or at different times. There is absolutely no reason why the Centurion could not have made two, five,

or ten different statements concerning Christ at the point of his realization of the true nature of Christ and

the significance of the events in which he was caught up. If the Centurion concluded that Jesus was the

Son of God, it indeed follows that he would conclude as Luke records him saying, “Certainly this was a

Second, it should be noted that the quotations recorded in the Gospels are translations by four different

authors from the Aramaic language, most likely, into Greek. It generally is agreed by scholars that the

language used by Jesus, His disciples, and the people with whom they conversed in Palestine was Aramaic.

Since the Gospels were written in Greek, the writers had to translate from Aramaic into Greek. This

would result in some variation within the quotations and terminology. For example, in the quotations concerning

the camel and the eye of the needle, each different synoptic writer used a slightly different word

for eye. Matthew and Mark use the same word for needle, but Luke used a different word (Matthew

Third, it must be remembered in dealing with Christ’s quotations that He may have repeated the

same concept many times in many different situations, although using slightly different wording. This

would easily explain, for example, the supposed conflicts between the phraseology of the Sermon on the

Mount recorded in Matthew 5-7 and the similar statements recorded in Luke but found scattered throughout

It does not appear, on close examination, that the sermon called that of the mount (Matthew v. vi. vii),

and that given by St. Luke in the latter half of his sixth chapter, were delivered on the same occasion. In

fact, first, St. Luke omits many of the sentences reported by St. Matthew, and he alone adds some others

(vi. 24-26); secondly, Matthew lets us know, that the sermon which he reports preceded the healing of the

leprous person (viii.3), and Luke that his followed it (Luke v. 12); thirdly, Luke puts Matthew in the

number of those whom Jesus called to the apostleship, and who came down with him from the mountain,

before he addressed to them his discourse; whereas Matthew himself tells us, that the sermon of which he

speaks, long preceded his vocation; fourthly, one of those discourses was delivered on the mountain,

while Jesus, who had sat down, had his disciples ranged around him; the other, on the contrary, was delivered

on the plain, and with other circumstances attending it. We pause at this remark, in order to reassure

such persons as may have heard adduced against the doctrine of inspiration, the alleged contradiction

of the sentence in which Matthew (v. 40) makes Jesus say, “if any man will take away thy coat let him

have thy cloak also”; and of that in which, according to Luke, he has said, “Him that taketh away thy

cloak, forbid not to take thy coat also.” One can no more, then, we say, make an objection of this diversity,

seeing these two sentences were pronounced on different days (1949, p. 245, emp. in orig.).

Fourth, one must recognize the possibility that some quotations are condensations or paraphrases of

longer and more complicated conversations. The Gospel writers were highly selective, and condensed to a

great degree the tremendous life, teaching, and ministry of Christ. They omitted many of the events in His

life, as John indicated. Further, they must have condensed many of the accounts that are recorded, moving

in the process to the important aspects. We recognize the journalistic practice of the news media attempt

to condense matters and to get to the heart of a situation quickly. Certainly, the four Gospel writers with

the guidance of the Holy Spirit, could carry out such a task. Such a condition may explain the alleged

contradictions concerning the variations recorded in the statements by Jairus, or the angels at the tomb.

Matthew recorded Jairus as saying, “My daughter is even now dead,” (9:18). Mark recorded him as saying,

“My little daughter is now at the point of death” (5:23). In such an abbreviated account, Jairus may

* Note also difference in text between the Nestle Greek Text and the Bible Society or Aland Greek Text.

have made both statements. He could have said she was at the point of death when he first came to Jesus,

and then upon arriving at the house with Jesus and learning more exactly concerning the situation, he

could have said that she was dead. There certainly is not enough variation in this situation (having no

more knowledge than we do) to charge that a contradiction has been made. [The same principles govern

the problem concerning the statements made by the angels at the tomb of Jesus in Matthew 28:5-8, Mark

16:5-8, and Luke 24:4-8 (John 20:12-13 was spoken by an angel at a completely separate time).]

Contradictions Alleged Due to Variation in the Use of Language and Terminology

An example of this type of contradiction might be the charge that John contradicts the synoptic Gospels

on the time of the Passover Feast. This charge is based on the fact that the synoptic Gospels represent

Jesus and His disciples as eating the Passover Feast before His arrest and crucifixion. Critics have

charged that John represents the Passover Feast as being in the future at the time of the trial of Jesus. This

charge is based on the statement in John 18:28 that members of the Sanhedrin did not enter into the Praetorium

“that they might not be defiled, but might eat the Passover.” However, John seems quite plainly to

represent Jesus and His disciples as eating the Passover Feast on the night before (John 13:1-20). Furthermore,

there was no Old Testament law making one unclean by entering the house of a Gentile, and the

general law concerning uncleanness provided that if one became unclean during the day he should ceremoniously

wash himself and be unclean until the evening (Leviticus 15:1-24; 16:23-28). Thus these Jews

could have cleansed themselves before the next day began at sunset. If these Jews were mainly priests, it

is possible that they were using the term Passover to refer to special offerings that the priests were to

make (and of which they were to eat—Numbers 28:16-25). Also, there seems to be evidence that the term

Passover was used in a general way for the entire feast of unleavened bread. Thus the term Passover possibly

In many instances, critics charge that there is a contradiction when the problem simply is a matter of

one source omitting what another source records. These occurrences fall into two categories. First, critics

assume the omission of a complete event by one Gospel author constitutes the denial that this event took

place. Examples include the miracle of Christ healing the man born blind in John 9, and the raising of

Lazarus in John 11. Critics charge that if such notable miracles really took place, then surely the other

Gospel writers would have mentioned them. This is a ridiculous charge. Jesus did many notable things

A somewhat more serious example might be involved in the case where Matthew recorded the visit

by the wise men and the flight to Egypt. Luke omitted these two events, but recorded the circumcision

and the presentation at the temple that Matthew left out. Then Luke mentioned that the family returned to

live at Nazareth (Matthew 2:1-18; Luke 2:21-39). Critics charge that the two directly conflict with each

other. However, this is not true, for all of the events recorded by both writers can be arranged in sequence

so that all of them may be true. The critic cannot prove these contradictions, and in fairness must recognize

a sequence that admits all of the accounts. According to many scholars, Luke was aware of Matthew’s

account. If there had been the slightest thought of contradiction, he would have written so as to

avoid this. Also, the earliest Christians accepted Matthew and Luke and saw absolutely no contradiction

in the accounts. Otherwise, they would have dealt with the problem in some manner. These early Christians

certainly knew more about the matter than any critics who have come along centuries later.

Another type of omission that critics assume constitutes a contradiction involves one author mentioning

two or more parties to an event while another mentions only one. One example involves the healing of

blind Bartimaeus at Jericho (Matthew 20:29-34; Mark 10:46-52; Luke 18:35-43). Matthew specifically

mentioned two blind men and their cure, but gave no personal names. Mark mentioned only one blind

man, and gave his name as Bartimaeus. However, he did not say that there was not another blind man.

Luke simply said there was “a certain blind man.” But he did not deny that there was another. There is no

contradiction. A contradiction could be established only if one author said there was only one blind man

while another said there were two blind men. An exact parallel example also is seen in the case of the

number of the angels mentioned above (Matthew 28:5-8; Mark 16:2-8; Luke 24:1-8; John 20:11-18).

Contradictions Alleged on the Basis of Misunderstanding Progression in the Narrative

Such a case is illustrated by the critics’ charge of contradictions between the narratives concerning

the behavior of the thieves crucified with Jesus (Matthew 27:35-44; Mark 15:24-32; Luke 23:33-43; John

19:18-27). All four writers agree there were two thieves. Matthew and Mark stated that state the robbers

reproached him. John said nothing of their behavior. Luke specifically mentioned that one of the malefactors

railed on Christ, but went into detail as to how the other asked to be remembered by Him. A contradiction

could be proved here only if both incidents could not be true. However, it is possible (and even

probable) that both thieves at first were insolent and reproachful. Later, one of the thieves became more

sober-minded and recognized the unique nature of Christ, even as the Centurion did while the crucifixion

Two examples may serve as illustrations. First, many critics have urged that the two genealogical accounts

in Matthew and in Luke are totally irreconcilable. However, Christian apologists from the very

earliest times have presented several plausible explanations. The word “son” was used by the Hebrews in

at least four different senses—an immediate son, a descendant several generations removed, a Levirate

son, or a son by in-law relationship. The two genealogies may be harmonized by accepting one as the legal

genealogy including Levirate relationships, and the other as the physical genealogy. On the other

hand, one account may be of Joseph’s genealogy, while the other account is the genealogy of Mary. At

any rate, since there are several possible explanations a contradiction cannot be proven.

Second, critics contend that the statements recorded by the different Gospel writers of the superscription

over the cross cannot be harmonized. Notice this exact comparison of the statements:

The accusation is the same in all four narratives—“the King of the Jews.” The only variation is in the

personal name of Jesus. This seems easily explained by acknowledging that John records the full inscription,

while the other writers assume all to understand the personal name and simply focus on the accusation

upon which the crucifixion was based. Also involved in the problem is the fact that since the superscription

was written in three different languages, translation may have been involved in some instances.

If one is sincere in his attempts to examine problems or alleged contradictions in the Gospels and also desires to be fair and just in working with the material, he should follow at least these basic steps:

2. Accept that the writers had more specific and general knowledge about the events than others living centuries later and therefore knew more about what they were writing than critics do about what they are criticizing.

3. Study the material carefully and look for a harmonious arrangement and possible agreement.

4. Recognize the possibility of repeated occurrences of similar events and statements.

5. Recognize the possibility of variation due to (translations from Aramaic to) Greek and from quotations of similar statements under different circumstances.

6. Recognize the Holy Spirit’s power to guide the writers in accurately condensing the narratives and stating the heart of the matter.

7. Recognize that our inability to solve a difficulty does not mean that it cannot be solved. We simply may not have enough information at present.

On the positive side, the alleged contradictions actually add strength to the independent testimony of

1. These surface differences clearly show that there was no collusion between the writers. If there had been any apparent problems, they would have been smoothed over. Thus, each writer’s testimony is independent
(Torrey, 1907, pp. 87-88).

2. These supposed contradictions really bring forth the strong testimony of the early church that the Gospels were in harmony. Had the earliest Christians, who had a more exact knowledge of these matters than any later critics, felt there were any contradictions in the Gospel accounts they would have done one of three things:

3. These problems cause a more careful study and examination of the Gospels and lead to a

more complete picture of the life and teachings of Christ than might be true otherwise.

4. The overall effect is a deeper faith because the testimony of the evangelists has been tried

Gaussen, L. (1949), The Inspiration of the Holy Scriptures, trans. David D. Scott (Chicago, IL: Moody).

Lewis, Warren (1972), “Every Scripture Breathed of God is Profitable,” Mission, January.

Torrey, R.A. (1907), Difficulties and Alleged Errors and Contradictions in the Bible (New York: Revell).

2. What specific stories are told in Matthew, Luke and Mark and how are they similar and how are they different?

The Genealogies in Matthew: The Gospel of Matthew begins its infancy narratives with the genealogy of Jesus. Jewish genealogies typically only listed the names of the fathers and sons. Matthew does something extremely unusual by mentioning the name of five women (the fifth, of course, being Mary in 1:16). Who are the four women that are mentioned in verses 3, 5, and 6 of Matthew chapter one?

Interestingly, each of these four women have a history in the Old Testament (see Genesis 38:1-30; Joshua 2:1-24; 6:17-25; Ruth 1:1-5; 3:1-18; 2 Samuel 11:1-27). What were the national origins of each (especially, the last three)? What was sexually scandalous about each? Why do you think Matthew might have mentioned this?

The Beatitudes in Matthew: As you read in the on-line notes, the Beatitudes in Matthew (5:3-12) spoke against the actions and attitudes of the Pharisees and the Zealots (see also the NT Backgrounds notes for details about each of these groups). According to Matthew, the Pharisees were rebuked for their self-righteous, hypocritical attitude (see also 23:1-36). The Zealots, of course, were militant Jewish nationalists that wanted to challenge the Romans. How do the statements of the Beatitudes in Matthew relate to the actions and attitudes of each of these groups?

The Six Antitheses in Matthew: In Matthew 5:17-48, Matthew records Jesus' perspective on the Torah and the Jewish interpretation of it in a series of six antitheses. In each of the six examples Jesus describes one of the Jewish laws but then he provides his interpretation of it. Jesus rejected the scribal interpretation of these laws that was passed down by the Pharisees. How does Jesus further the implications of the following Jewish laws:

Avoid Publicizing Spirituality: In the Sermon on the Mount (Matthew chaps. 5-7), Jesus denounces public displays of spirituality (Mt. 6:1-18). What does Jesus have to say about giving (Mt. 6:1-4), praying (Mt. 6:5-15), and fasting (Mt. 6:16-18)?

A Higher Righteousness: In the Sermon on the Mount (Matthew 5-7), Jesus emphasizes a higher righteousness. In other words, Jesus emphasizes doing what God wants rather than merely making an outward, public display that one is righteous or spiritual. In what ways do the following passages indicate an emphasis on doing right (as compared to merely believing or knowing or talking right):

Food for thought: With this emphasis on doing right, notice what is the only request in the Lord’s prayer (Mt 6:9-15) that is conditional based upon one’s reciprocal attitudes and actions. Also notice who is "blessed" in Matthew 5:9. Also notice the emphasis on actions in Matthew 25:31-46.

The Births of John the Baptist and Jesus according to Luke: Luke 1-2 tells the story of the birth of John the Baptist (1:5-80) before telling the story of Jesus' birth (2:1-52). There are many similarities between the births of John and Jesus. In what ways are the births of John and Jesus similar? In what ways are their births different? Food for thought: How do you think this might relate to their roles as adults?

The Good Samaritan: Read Luke 10:25-37 which records the "Parable of the Good Samaritan." Who passed by the hurting man in Luke 10:31? Who passed by the hurting man in Luke 10:32? What did the Samaritan do for the hurting man in Luke 10:33-35? What do you think was the point Jesus was making by telling the parable (Hint: 10:25-29, 36-37)?

The Prodigal Son: Read Luke 15:11-32 which records the so-called "Parable of the Prodigal Son."

In the parable, which son squandered his family’s money and reputation and then remorsefully regretted it?

The "I AM" statements in the Fourth Gospel: In the Fourth Gospel, Jesus often refers to himself figuratively with emphatic "I AM" statements (Greek, ego eimi). These statements are sometimes connected to Jesus' signs in the Fourth Gospel in order to reveal Jesus' identity (which is the entire purpose of the Gospel as stated in Jn 20:30-31). How are the "I AM" statements below connected to one of Jesus' signs:

Conclusion

Perhaps the printed literature or the booklet or the gospel of St. John, is printed in larger quantities and distributed to the people around the world, to present the gospel in a simpler way for the content to be more easily understood. There is no way we can say that the gospel writer is more accurate, precise or articulate. It is not going to help anyone simply to question the reason why 4 gospel books have been compiled in the Bible, while they basically communicate the same message. Knowingly or unknowingly the leaders of the gospel will be benefited by some way.

My advice would be, rather than comparing and contrasting the 4 gospels with each other would be critically to look for discrepancies, one should accept all the 4 gospels as “Gospel Truths” to get the full benefit of the substance of all the 4 books.

TEST

2. List 6 points ,why Matthew is called the Bridge of the Bible in the New testament?

4. Mention any 5 unique Characteristics in the books of Matthew , Mark and Luke ?

5. Mention any important 6 points , why Gospel books plays a significant role in the New Testament Bible ?

	Rev. C.I. Scofield, editor of the Scofield Reference Bible gives a range of 57 to 63 CE. ₁₁
	H.H. Halley, author of Halley's Bible Handbook estimates 60 to 70 CE. ₁₂
	H.L. Wilmington, author of Wilmington's Bible Handbook estimates 57-59 CE. ₁₃
	J.D. Douglas, general editor of the New Commentary on the Whole Bible estimates the late 50's. ₁₄
	L.P. Pherigo, author of an article about the gospel in the The Interpreter's One-Volume Commentary on the Bible, estimates 64 to 75 CE. ₁₅
	P.N. Benware, author of "Survey of the New Testament" estimates 64 to 68 CE. ₁₆
	R. Shorto, author of "Gospel Truth" states that "Scholars believe that Mark was written about 70 CE." ₁₇

	appearance to his followers on the road to Emmaus (Luke 24:13)
	meeting with to the 11 disciples in Jerusalem (Luke 24:36)
	opening the minds of the disciples so they could understand the Hebrew Scriptures (Luke 24:44)
	Ascension into heaven (Luke 24:50)
	Great Commission (Matthew 28:18)

	Mark simply ended the gospel at this point, for an unknown reason.
	Mark was interrupted in mid-sentence, and was never able to return to finish the gospel. Perhaps his death intervened.
	The original scroll was damaged, and the ending was lost.
	The original ending was intentionally destroyed by unknown Christians, perhaps because it included details of later meetings between Jesus and the disciples that directly contradicted the accounts in the other gospels. The ending might have been deleted to maintain an apparent harmony among the gospels.
	The original ending was intentionally destroyed because it contained an account of the disciples' doubt that the resurrection really happened. One would expect the author of Mark to have emphasized the disciples' doubt; it would be consistent with many other negative comments that he made about them. Both Matthew and Luke appear to have incorporated this lost ending in their gospels. Matthew describes how some of the disciples doubted the resurrection at their meeting in Galilee (Matthew 28:24). Luke explains how they did not believe because of their emotional state (Luke 24:41). Most Biblical scholars believe that large portions of the text of the gospels of Matthew and Luke were copied from Mark. It would be reasonable to assume that these two instances are simply another indication of this use of material from Mark.

Item	Matthew, Mark, Luke	John
First event mentioned	Jesus' birth (baptism in Mark)	Creation of the world
Authors: according to conservative Christians	Apostle Matthew; Mark and Luke, co-workers of Paul	Apostle John
Authors: according to liberal Christians	Unknown authors	2 or more unknown authors
Virgin birth	Mentioned in Matt, Luke	Some interpret John 1:45 as denying the virgin birth
Jesus as Son of God...	From the time of birth or baptism	From the time that the universe was created
Description of Jesus	Jesus' humanity emphasized	Jesus' deity emphasized
Preaching style	Brief one-liners; parables	Essay format
True parables	Many	None
Jesus' theology	Deviated little from 1st century CE liberal Judaism. Similar to beliefs taught by Hillel.	Largely independent of Judaism
Response expected from the reader ₂₀	Respond to God's will as expressed in the Mosaic law	Respond to Jesus as the definitive expression of God's will or revelation
Kingdom of God	Main theme	Background theme
Exorcism of demons	Many	None
Poor and suffering people	Focus of his ministry	Rarely mentioned
Scribes (teachers)	26 references to scribes, who are puzzled and angered by Jesus' teachings	No references at all.
Miracles performed by Jesus	Many; "nature miracles," healings, and exorcisms	Few; all "nature miracles"
Jesus references to himself	Rare	Focus of the gospel, including the many "I am" sayings
Basis of personal salvation	Good works, helping the poor, sick, imprisoned, and needy	Belief in Jesus as the Son of God
Duration of ministry	1 year	3 years
Location of ministry	Mainly Galilee	Mainly Judea, near Jerusalem
Aggravated assault in the Temple courtyard:	Near the end of his ministry	Near the start of his ministry
Date of the Last Supper	Passover eve	Night before Passover eve
Ceremonial event at the Last Supper:	Communal meal	Foot washing
Who carried the cross?	Simon	Jesus
Visitors to the tomb on Sunday with Mary Magdalene?	One or more additional women	None; Mary Magdalene went alone
Burial shroud	A single piece of cloth	Multiple pieces of cloth, as was the Jewish practice at the time. (John 20:5-7)

	"Secret Mark", "for those who had attained a higher degree of initiation in to the church than the common crowd." It has been lost, except for two fragments which appeared in a copy of a letter from Clement, a second century CE theologian.
	An edited, smaller version of Secret Mark that has been preserved to the present time. It was the freely distributed, public version, that became part of the Bible.
	A heretical version of Secret Mark, written to justify the beliefs and practices of a small Christian sect in the second century CE. It did not survive to the present day. ₈

	Conservative Christians generally assert that the gospel was written by the disciple Matthew, perhaps 45 CE or earlier. The Scofield Bible states that the traditionally accepted date is 37 CE, only 4 to 7 years after Jesus' execution. _11,12,13,16
	Liberals believe that the name of the author is unknown. It was written after the destruction of Jerusalem and its temple in 70 CE, because it describes the event in Matthew 24. Various authorities date Matthew about 85 CE. _6,7,10,19

IICM WEBSITE COURSE compiled by Dr. John Williams & Dr. C. Raj Kumar

Introduction:

As we know, in each Gospel we find essential information about the following:

· The Announcements of the Birth of Jesus Christ

· The Birth of Jesus Christ

· Miraculous Occurences and Incidents that took place before, at the time of and immediately after the Birth of Jesus Christ.

· The Ministry of Jesus Christ from the time he attained 30 years and was baptized in river Jordan by John the Baptist

· The encounters of Jesus Christ with several persons who were sick, possessed, blind, deaf, dumb etc., and the way Jesus ministered to them and healed them or delivered them.

· The Miracles brought by Jesus Christ

· The simple and poor life of Jesus Christ

· The fact that Jesus mingled with and freely related to the orderly simple poor folks.

· The manner in which He preached with parables and stories

· The Righteous indignation that he has against the Religious leaders who gave more emphasis to the traditions than to the Truth.

· The prophecies that he gave about His Death, Resurrection, Ascension and the Second Coming

· Several powerful statements that Jesus made about the fact that He was essentially the triune God, but was present with them in the physical body as the Son of Man and that He and His Father were one and that if they had seen Him then they had seen the Father.

· His instructions to the Diciples to tarry in Jerusulam until the Holy Spirit came and they were endued with power from on high.

· A full report about the life style of Jesus Christ, various encounters He had with many people, confrontation with the devils with those who possessed devil, many miracles brought by Him, and the supernatural way in which He died, resurrected and ascended up in to heaven.

· Some information about the selected few individuals and families with whom He closely mingled, associated with or stayed.

· Several astonishing truths that He proclaimed in parables, mysteries and statements.

· The teachings of Jesus Christ, about sins of pride, riches, worldliness, jealousy, hatred, covoteousness as well as, some positive values about faith in God, contentment, joy, peace, forgiveness, love etc.

Synoptic Gospels en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Synoptic_Gospels

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Synoptic_Gospels -

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Matthew - the bridge

Mark - 'This is what happened'

Luke - for people like us

John - 'And now for something completely different'

www.jpdawson.com/synopt/synopgos.html -

Introduction

"the Comforter, which is the Holy Ghost, whom the Father will send in my name, He shall teach you all things, and bring all things to your remembrance, whatsoever I have said unto you."

Agreement in Wording

Agreement in Order

Gospel of John

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gospel_of_John

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Structure http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gospel_of_John

Popular Passages in the Gospel

Differences from the Synoptic Gospels

Characteristics of the Gospel of John

Other characteristics unique to John

The Apostle Thomas is given a personality beyond a mere name, as "Doubting Thomas" (20:27 etc).

Introduction: The Relationship of John's Gospel to the Synoptics.

Major Differences:

1. Omission by John of material found in the synoptics.

2. Inclusion by John of material not found in the synoptics.

3. Different length of Jesus' public ministry.

4. 'High' Christology as opposed to the synoptics.

5. Literary Point of View: John versus the synoptics.

6. Extended dialogues or discourses rather than proverbial sayings.

7. Use of symbolism and double meaning.

8. Use of the “misunderstood statement.”

9. “Kingdom of God” versus “eternal life.”

The Gospel of Mark:

http://www.religioustolerance.org/chr_ntb1.htm#mark

The Gospel of Matthew:

http://www.religioustolerance.org/chr_ntb1.htm#mark

The Gospel of Luke:

http://www.religioustolerance.org/chr_ntb1.htm#mark

The Gospel of John:

http://www.religioustolerance.org/chr_ntb1.htm#mark

Introduction: www.religioustolerance.org/chr_john.htm

Differences between John and the Synoptic Gospels:

The Problem of Multiple Gospels.

http://www.westminster.edu/staff/brennie/gospels.htm

http://www.biblestudy.org/question/syngosp.html You Have Questions . . . Here's the Personalized Answers!

The Synoptic Gospels http://www.religionfacts.com/christianity/texts/gospels.htm

Why These Four?

Introduction to the Gospels: What is a Gospel? Who Was Jesus?

http://atheism.about.com/od/biblegospels/

The Synoptic Gospels (Matthew. Mark, and Luke).

http://www.westminster.edu/staff/brennie/mark.htm

Conclusion

TEST

T h e E n d

IICM WEBSITE COURSE
compiled by Dr. John Williams & Dr. C. Raj Kumar

http://www.biblestudy.org/question/syngosp.html
You Have Questions . . .
Here's the Personalized Answers!