Griesbach's Hypothesis

They play off of each other to get their individual points across by researching each other’s material. Matthew did it to Mark’s and Luke did it to Matthew. The timeline of their stories are similar but they have many differences. They have all put their own twist on the subject to get their individual points across and show others what they found out about the life of Jesus. The problem with the Synoptic Gospel is that Matthew

The juxtaposition of any two writings is a formidable task. The content of each, even if they seem alike, is a small part in determining similarities and differences. One must also look at the styles, authors, themes, supposed audiences and authorial intent. This front becomes even more difficult while exegeting and deciphering ancient texts because of how far removed the writings are from modern understanding and scholarship. It is also further complicated when one lacks the factual knowledge of which piece was written first and/or if both texts were using a third source at the time of their creation. These difficulties find their apex at the study of Christian history and all of its subsequent writings. In particular, the gospels according to Thomas and Luke, while they have similarities and at times identical phraseology are vastly different when one considers their theological understandings, themes, format and style.

The first three Gospels, Matthew, Mark, Luke is called “synoptic”, because they have a mutual interpretation (the word synoptic means “together in sight”). Matthew, Mark, and Luke cover several of the equivalent happenings of Jesus’ life. A greater part of them from Jesus’ ministry in Galilee. Approximately 90 percent of Mark’s evens of Christ are found in Matthew, and about 50 percent of Mark is noted in Luke’s gospel. All of the parables of Christ are established in the Synoptics.

The articles assigned this week address the resistance and protest of indigenous people against the colonizer. The articles tackled the actions taken by a series of protest ands resistant movement named, “Idle No more.” Upon the foundation of the movement by the Aboriginal peoples in Canada, it was devoted to organizing political actions worldwide. For example, Attawapiskat Chief Theresa Spence played a key role by entering long weeks of hunger, which resulted in many sympathizers and people protesting in different cities around the world such as Los Angeles, London, Minneapolis, Ontario, and New York.

Should one fully read the opening four Gospels of the New Testament, he or she can find many similar patterns of literature and themes affording much attention to detail and study. This is what someone such as Merriam Webster would define as the ?Synoptic Gospels?. So, what are and how can we explain the differences and similarities among synoptic authors Matthew, Mark, Luke, and the gospel, John? Which Book was written first? To what extent did the Evangelists depend on oral tradition, written sources, or each other? The phenomenon and mystery of these similar but unique Synoptic Gospels has for centuries challenged some of the best minds of academia and the church, stirring up much scholarly

Now that we have uncovered some of the significance of the location of the text both in relation to the surrounding narratives, and geographically it is time to look at each of the accounts, and how they compare to one another. The account of the miracle in Mark is the longest, and most detailed of the three, and I will be exploring it first. Luke’s account is very similar to Mark’s, and in fact it is believed that Luke used Mark as the sole source for his account of the story, and simply changed the language possibly changing the meaning, and focus of the text for his Gospel , so I will look at his narrative second. Finally Matthew is the shortest, and least detailed account of this narrative containing some

All stories explained in the gospels have similar results and main ideas, like Mark, Matthew and Luke as to the Gospel of John is a little more different. The stories of Mark, Matthew and Luke are known as synoptic because

The common belief among source critics is that, the Gospel of Mark is the oldest and Matthew and Luke used his gospel along with an unknown source to write their Gospels. Evidence supporting this view make the makes four points. First, the Luke’s Gospel is contains approximately half of Mark’s information and Matthew’s Gospel encompasses almost all of Mark’s views. Second, Mark’s words are used verbatium Matthew and Luke. Third, Matthew and Luke follow the same sequence of events as Mark. Finally, Matthew and Luke sometimes reword Mark’s uncomfortable passages of scripture to allow smooth transitions and ease of understanding.[5]

The Gospel of John differs in many key areas to the Synoptics,and I will address some differing lines of thought.

The word "gospel" is a translation of the Greek word "euangelion" which means "good news. The first three books in the New Testament (Mark, Matthew, and Luke) are often referred to as the Synoptic Gospels (from Greek synoptikos, "seen together") They bear greater similarity to each other than any of the other gospels in the New Testament. Along with these similarities come some differences among the gospels, suggesting that each gospel was written for a specific audience and for a specific purpose. This paper will examine the resurrection of Jesus, while identifying the significant differences between Mark, Matthew and Luke. This paper will also analyze the differences to suggest the prominent theological perspective each gospel author

The Synoptic Gospels are composed of the gospels of Mark, Matthew, and Luke. These three gospels covered many of the same stories; yet, they disagree with each other on various details within certain stories. Also, numerous events that are in Mark, is not in Matthew or Luke and vice versa. Many historians have concluded that Mark was the first of the three gospels written and that Matthew and Luke used Mark as a source to their own gospels. The Synoptic Gospels were first written in Greek, which would suggest to some ambiguity within Mark, Matthew, and Luke due to certain perceptions and translations within the Greek language. One ambiguity that is shown within the Synoptic Gospels dealt with Jesus’s view on marriage and divorce. Using

The gospel of John does not have the birth story of Jesus as it is documented in the Synoptic gospels instead refers Christ as eternal word which became flesh. Gospel of John lacks records of Jesus’ Baptism by John the Baptist but instead records his baptism activities hence contradicting role of John the Baptist in Jesus’ Baptism. Another difference of gospel of John from the synoptic gospels is that there is no indication of temptation of Jesus by Satan but records that Jesus could not be tempted because of his unity with the Father. John indicates that Jesus taught without parables something contradicts synoptic gospels. There is no accounts of apocalypse in the gospel of John but instead indicates that Jesus completed his messianic role (Harris, 2014).

The first three gospels are sometimes called the 'synoptic' (same view) gospels. This is because they each cover teaching and miracles by Jesus that are also covered in another account. John, writing later, recounts Jesus' other words and miracles that have a particular spiritual meaning.

The Gospel According to Matthew is the first book of the New Testament in the Bible, and is a Gospel narrative. The narratives provided by the Gospels in the New Testament are here to provide us with descriptions of the life, death, and resurrection of our savior Jesus Christ, as well as to share His teachings. Like any other narrative, it is important to understand the historical and literary contexts surrounding the Gospel of Matthew, as well as the importance and significance of Matthew itself. As a Gospel, Matthew is here to present us with the narrative of Jesus Christ as our Messiah, as promised in the Old Testament Prophesy. While it is important to evaluate the extensive context surrounding the narrative of Matthew, the meaning behind the narrative can be found through relating it to the various events that are described in the other Gospels. By comparing the Gospels, it is easy to evaluate the underlying meaning and significance, within the context of the Gospels. Because the Gospels were written as narratives to provide us with information on the life and death of Jesus Christ, and all that happened in between, it is important to compare the different accounts described in the Gospels whenever possible. In doing so, it is possible to examine the Gospels within the appropriate context. With 4 Gospels (Matthew, Mark, Luke, John), it is important to compare them with one another in order to further evaluate the importance of Jesus Christ, as he is the

The widely accepted theoretical solution for the synoptic problem is a second source, usually called the ‘Q’ scroll. The ‘Q’ scroll is thought to contain 235 verses, while leaving out any narrative referring to Jesus’ birth, early life, or death. The scroll has been reconstructed from shared knowledge between the gospels. This is commonly called the “two-source hypothesis”, where the Gospel of Mark and the ’Q’ scroll were accessible by the authors of the Gospels of Matthew and Luke. This is brought around by the fact that Matthew and Luke share commonalities with Mark that they do not share with each other. The “two-source hypothesis” gains further support from the timeline, which puts Mark as the first gospel around 70 CE and Matthew and Luke following suit around 85 CE.