Synoptic Gospels - Essay Example

Synoptic Gospels Table of contents Introduction……………………………………………………………………………3 2. Relationship between the synoptic……………………………………………………3 3. The Q-source Hypothesis……………………………………………………………..5 4. The journey toward Jerusalem…………………………………………………………5 5. The resurrection……………………………………………………………………….7 6. Synoptic problem………………………………………………………………………8 7. Faith seeking understanding……………………………………………………………9 8. Conclusion……………………………………………………………………………..10 9. Bibliography…………………………………………………………………………..11 Introduction The first three books in the New Testament (Mathew, Mark , and Luke) are referred to as synoptic gospels. These books talk about similar subjects and stories concerning Jesus Christ. However, these books do not cover the events about Jesus Christ in the same length and detail. The books cover the events surrounding the life of Jesus Christ in the same sequence, and in most cases, have used similar words1. Relationship between the Synoptic Gospels The book of Mathew was written about 6 years after the ascension of Jesus Christ. This is according to the chronology of gospels that are found in the crucial dates in the lives of Mary and her son, Jesus Christ. The book of Mark followed after the writing of the gospel according to St. Mathew. It was written about 16 years after the ascension of Jesus Christ. The gospel according to St. Luke was written 27 years after the ascension of Jesus Christ while John wrote about 62 years after the ascension2. The four synoptic gospel books were written in different languages. The gospel according to Mathew was the first book written in Judea using Hebrew language. The second gospel known as Luke was written in Rome using Latin language. Further, the gospel according to Luke was written in Boeotia, Greece using Greek language. It is important to note that the synoptic gospels have difference and similarities. The similarities cannot be explained just in terms of event sequences. These books differ in terms of language, grammar, and expression3. The first similarity among the synoptic is seen in their chronology. After Mathew’s gospel had been written and widely read by other Christians, the gospel according to Mark was written. It is assumed that Mark wrote the gospel after reading the work of Mathew. This is due to the fact that Mark could read Hebrew, the language that Mathew used in writing his gospel. The main difference between the three gospels is seen in respect of languages used by the two gospel writers were using. Mark was using Latin to write the gospel after reading the Hebrew version of Mathew4. After Mark and Mathew had written their gospels, Luke wrote his gospel. The writing of the gospel according to Luke is assumed to have been influenced by the writings of Mark and Mathew since their gospels had been circulated widely. However, Luke could not interpreted Hebrew language in which Mathew’s gospel was written. The difficulty in understanding Hebrew explains why Luke’s gospel is more similar to that of Mark that Mathew. John’s gospel does not fall under the synoptic gospels because the book was written several years after the synoptic gospels had been written and were in wide circulation. The synoptic had already been translated into other languages when John decided to write the gospel. The difference between the synoptic and John’s gospel is in respect of the fact that John did not want to repeat the same events that had been narrated. John knew that his gospel was directed toward the whole church unlike the synoptic that were directed to specific audiences. The Q-source Hypothesis Several ethnologists believe that Mathew and Luke relied on the work of Mark and other written sources. The particular written source that is believed to have been used by Mark and Luke is known as “Q”, which is derived from German word “Quele” meaning “source”. This hypothesis is based on the idea that the gospel according to Mark was the first to be written. In addition, it states that Mathew and Luke did not have a copy of each other’s book while writing their gospels. In the hypothesis, all agreements found in the three texts are explained. The argument is that Mathew and Luke used Mark’s as a reference material while writing their gospels. Further, agreements between Mark and Luke that cannot be found in Mark are explained as arising from the Q-source. The hypothesis continues to be supported by several New Testament scholars up to the present time5. The hypothesis experiences challenges since there is no copy of Q-source document that can be traced or that exists today. In addition, scholars claim that there is no other ancient writing that referred to the document for reference purposes. Further, the Q-source document states that Mark’s gospel was the first to be written. This is contradictory to the chronology of events in the bible and the view held by Eusebius and Jerome. Evidence from history has indicated that Mark and Luke’s books were written after Mathew. Consequently, Christians and other New Testament scholars agree that the revised chronology explaining the writing of the synoptic contain all the agreements between the synoptic gospels thereby refuting the claims of a hypothetically unknown written document. The agreements in the synoptic are as a result of Mark’s knowledge of Mathew’s gospel. In addition, Luke had Mark as a reference point while writing the gospel6. One similarity that can be found in the synoptic is on the subjects they cover. The books tell Christians about the life, death and resurrection of Christ. In the addition, stories about the teachings, miracles and other challenges experienced by Jesus Christ have been narrated. These books tell the same story. However, the way the story is told is different from one gospel to another. A close look into the organization of the synoptic gospels reveals that even though there are similarities, there is a difference in the order in which events and content is placed. For instance, a close look at the first five chapters of Mark reveals that there is no information or material that is recounted in the gospels of Mathew and Luke. In the beginning of Jesus’ ministry, the books have the stories about John the Baptist. They also talk about Jesus’ baptism and the challenges he encountered in his ministry. However, the books differ in specific content and the manner in which events are arranged. Mark has spent about seven chapters talking about John the Baptist; this can be seen in Mark (1:2-8). In addition, Mark dedicated three verses talking about Jesus’ baptism; while the tribulations encountered by Jesus have been narrated in two verses (1:12-13)7. The main difference that arises between Mathew’s gospel and Mark’s gospel comes in the way the stories have been told. Mathew has improved the content of stories concerning John the Baptist. Mathew further tells more about John including his appearance and the content of the message. Mathew 3: 1-12 is the best example of how Mathew has elaborated the story. Further, Mathew expands on the tribulations encountered by Jesus Christ. In regard to the nature of temptations as shown in Mathew 4:1-11, Luke has presented the detail concerning the ministry of Jesus Christ in a similar manner as Mathew. However, Luke has included more historical details and more information concerning the teachings of John. Mark 2: 10-14 best illustrates the teachings of John while Mark 3: 23-38 talks about the genealogy of Jesus8. The Journey toward Jerusalem The simplest version on the journey toward Jerusalem has been presented by Mark. However, most of the stories presented by Mark are also included in the other two synoptic gospels. A larger portion of Mark’s gospel talks about the themes of discipleship and how Christians ought to be disciples of Jesus Christ. Mathew uses a similar structure found in Mark’s gospel but includes questions touching on taxation (17:24-27) and other stories concerning activities that should take place in the church (18:15-20). Further, Mathew has included the parable of the unmerciful servant (18:23-35) and the parable of the laborers in the vineyard (20:1-16). These two parables are only present in Mathew but lack in the other gospels9. The journey toward Jerusalem has been well illustrated by Luke. The narrative is longer in Luke’s gospel. In addition, the journey is well structured because it has Samaria as the beginning point of the journey. The mention of Samaria cannot be found in Mark and Mathew. The uniqueness of Luke’s gospel concerning the journey toward Jerusalem includes a series of unique parables. The Resurrection There are wide differences on the way the resurrection story is recounted in the three gospel books. However, the story of the empty tomb has been recounted in all of the books but the details differ. The gospel of Mark has the shortest version on the resurrection of Jesus; about eight versus in the gospel talk about resurrection. According to the gospel by Mathew, there is the mention of an earthquake and an angel that removed the stone from the tomb. In addition, there is an angel talking to the women concerning the resurrection of Jesus Christ (28:2-7). Further, the gospel according to Luke states that Jesus met the women at the tomb and gave them instructions for the disciples. It is also important to note that the story of Jewish leaders corrupting the guards to lie is only present in Mathew’s gospel (28:11-15). The gospel according to Luke, however, mentions two men at the tomb talking to the women. This can be read in Luke 24:4-7. The story of the resurrection is told in unique manner in Luke’s gospel. The report from the women and the response of the disciples is different. In addition, there is the inclusion of the two men on a journey to Emmaus (24:13-35). There are also stories concerning the appearance of Jesus Christ to the disciples and his advice to them contained in Luke 24:36-4910. Synoptic Problem The synoptic problem is a term that has been developed by scholars to refer to the questions and possible interpretations among the synoptic gospels. If Christians want to understand the relationship among the synoptic, they will have to accept and come to terms with the questions about the literary relationship in the synoptic. Christians need to understand that they need not have all the answers concerning their logical questions before they accept the bible. The main problem is in the faith of Christians; they have to decide whether or not they want to believe in the bible. Faith seeking understanding is the best way to solve the synoptic problem11. Faith Seeking Understanding Christians have long been challenged with the synoptic problem, and have wondered whether there is a correct approach to the solution. However, Christians should understand that the issue is not an important matter to Christian faith. There should be rigorous honesty in the way the bible is studied by Christians in order to avoid the synoptic problem. The solution that can best suit the interest of Christians is to view the bible as the scripture for the church. Christians should come up with clear methodologies of how they investigate the bible. The investigation should be based on a detailed reading but not on what other people told us they should mean12. The solution to the synoptic problem should not deny the fact that the bible is and was inspired by God. The solution should affirm the authority of the bible more strongly. There is no need to have contentious issues concerning chronology of events; Christians have to understand that faith is more important in the ministry than any other issue. Conclusion Synoptic gospels have differences and similarities. The differences are shown in the chronology of events; language used and the content of gospel included. The three books are similar because they recount the stories surrounding the birth, ministry and temptations encountered by Jesus Christ. However, Christians should understand that the main focus should be on faith as opposed to the differences people hold concerning the synoptic. Christians need to understand that they need not have all the answers concerning their logical questions before they accept the bible. The main problem is in the faith of Christians; they have to decide whether they want to believe or not to believe the bible. Faith seeking understanding is the best way to solve the synoptic problem13. Bibliography Cary George. The Synoptic Gospels: Together With A Chapter on the Text Criticism of the New Testament. New York. Nabu Press. 2012. Johnson Frederick. The Synoptic Gospels: Bible Studies for the Contemporary Church. Whole Person Associates. 2006. Montefiore Charles. The Synoptic Gospels. Bibliobazaar. 2010. Nickel Keith. The Synoptic Gospels: Conflict and Consensus. John Knox Press. 1980. Perkins Pheme. Introduction to the Gynoptic Gospels. New York. McGraw-Hill. 2007. Riches John, Telford William & MacKnight Scot. The Synoptic Gospels. New York. John Wiley & Sons. 2001. Read More