The Four Gospels
Matthew, Mark, and Luke are called the "synoptic gospels" because they tell the story of Jesus in a similar way as opposed to the gospel of John.
Synoptic (Greek, "syn-" + "optos", eye): The gospels of Matthew, Mark, and Luke are written "with the same view"--the same optic, same eye, same perspective, same viewpoint, same standpoint.
Points of comparison
| Synoptics (Mt, Mk, Lk) | Gospel of John |
|---|---|
| Indirect assertions of the divinity of Jesus. | Explicitly says that Jesus is GOD, the Son (1:1, 20:28, etc.) |
| Jesus baptized by John the Baptist | No baptism of Jesus John the Baptist |
| Jesus fasts for 40 days and is tempted by the devil | No fast, no temptations |
| Jesus is not called "The Lamb of God." | Jesus is called "The Lamb of God." |
| Synoptics list John among the 12 apostles | No "John" the Apostle at all; "Beloved Disciple"; no list of 12 apostles. |
| Rejected by the people in Nazareth | No mention of visiting Nazareth and being rejected there |
| One-year ministry | Two- or three-year ministry |
| One visit to Jerusalem | Many visits: 2:13, 5:1, 7:10, 10:22, 11:55 |
| One Passover | At least three Passovers |
| Cleansing of Temple after triumphal entry and shortly before death | Cleansing of Temple on first visit to Jerusalem; the triumphal entry is on THIRD visit two years later. |
| Nothing comparable. | Story of woman caught in adultery (7:53-8:10) |
| Indirect mission statements: "The Son of Man ... " | Direct statements: "I am . . . " |
| "Messianic Secret" | Nothing comparable. |
| Mt & Lk: Beatitudes and Lord's Prayer | Mk & Jn: neither Beatitudes nor Lord's Prayer |
| Transfiguration (Mk 9:2, Mt 17:1, Lk 9:28) | No story of the Transfiguration (Jn 1:18 may refer to it obliquely)--but Mt, Mk, Lk say John was there! |
| Agony in the Garden | No agony in the garden -- just one part of a verse (12:27) that raises questions about the synoptic accounts. |
| Jesus uses parables to teach | No parables as such--lots of metaphors instead |
| Many exorcisms | No exorcisms |
| "Amen, I say to you ..." (total of 50 times in synoptics) | "Amen, amen, I say to you ..." (25 times) |
| "Little Apocalypse" foretelling woes to come to Jerusalem and the world (Mt 24, Mk 13, Lk 21). | Few apocalyptic prophecies. The long discourse after the Last Supper does foretell the coming of the Holy Spirit. There are also sayings about Judgment Day. |
| Last Supper: Passover meal == the first Eucharist. No footwashing ritual. | Last Supper: NOT Passover, no story of the Eucharist. Tells about washing of feet instead. Jn 6: Theology of the Eucharist without an "institution narrative." |
| Simon of Cyrene carries the cross for Jesus. | Jesus carries the cross Himself. |
| Jesus killed the day after Passover | Jesus killed the day before Passover--"Preparation Day" |
| The synoptics use Mary's name when referring to her. | Never uses Mary's name. Jesus calls her "woman", not "Mother." |
| Lk: 40 days from Res to Ascension, 10 more to Pentecost (Jewish festival of the Law). | Res, Ascension & Gift of Holy Spirit (Christian Pentecost) on same day. |
Date of composition
Estimated time of composition of the gospels (Two Source theory / Q-Hypothesis--one solution of the synoptic problem):
| Mark | Before 66-70 (destruction of Jerusalem), probably during Roman persecution. |
| Matthew & Luke | after 66-70. |
| John | 80's to 110? |
It is hard to say with any certainty whether John had read the other gospels or how familiar he may have been with them through conversations with other Christians.
Synoptic Problem
The synoptic problem arises from the differences between Matthew, Mark, and Luke when they are compared to each other. How can three gospels that are so much alike be so different from each other?
The similarities almost certainly have to have come from copying.
90% of the gospel of Mark is in Matthew and in basically the same order as it is in Mark.
80% of the gospel of Mark is found in Luke, but not in the same order as in Mark.
It is easier for me to imagine Mark being copied, revised, and augmented by Matthew and Luke (thus producing the notable similarities between the three gospels) rather than imagining Mark throwing so much material out of Matthew or Luke. How could Mark have gotten rid of the Infancy Narrative in Matthew? The Lord's Prayer? The Beatitudes? All of the special material in Matthew not found anywhere else? It is far easier for me to imagine Matthew discarding 10% of Mark while adding 8000 words of new material than to imagine Mark discarding 8000 words from Matthew and adding 1000 words not found in Matthew.
| Gospel | Verses | Words |
|---|---|---|
| Matt | 1071 | 18345 |
| Mark | 678 | 11304 |
| Luke | 1151 | 19482 |
| John | 879 | 15635 |
The Q source
Matthew and Luke seem to have used "two sources" in common:
- Mark
- A collection of sayings of Jesus.
The German word for "source" is "Quelle." The source (Quelle) of the sayings of Jesus that Matthew and Luke have in common is called "the Q source" or just "Q".
Q = Sayings of Jesus common to both Matthew and Luke but not found in Mark. M = Material unique to Matthew. L = Material unique to Luke.
If the two-source theory is true, then it accounts for the similarities between Matthew and Luke by attributing them to Mark and Q; the differences between Matthew and Luke come from their unique material (M vs. L).
Matthew = Mark (edited) + M + Q (edited)
Luke = Mark (edited) + L + Q (edited)
We don't know whether the Q Source was written or oral.
We don't have any copies of the Q source; the Q material is found only in Matthew and Luke. If it was a written manuscript, it ceased to be copied after Matthew and Luke used it in their gospels. If it was preserved orally, the oral tradition apparently broke down and disappeared without a trace sometime in the first century. So, for all practical purposes at the present time, it is just a scholarly hypothesis (guess, theory) that such an independent source existed because it helps to explain the similarities in Matthew and Luke that cannot be explained by copying from Mark.
The primacy of Matthew
A competing hypothesis to explain the similarities between Matthew and Luke is that Matthew came first and that Luke edited Matthew to produce his gospel. There is a legend in the fathers of an Aramaic version of Matthew. If there was an early version of Matthew in Aramaic, used in both the Greek version of Matthew and in Luke's gospel, which is found only in Greek, then that would also account for the Q material (the sayings of Jesus common to Matthew and Luke but not found in Mark).
Freedom of opinion
There is no dogma in the teaching of the Magisterium on this point. Catholics are free to investigate the questions raised by the different theories and disagree with each other, charitably, about how best to answer those questions.
Which John is which?
Distinguish the various Johns. John the Apostle is NOT John the Baptist. John the Apostle may be the Evangelist and the author of Revelation; it is possible that tradition has conflated (run together) the stories of two or three different people:
- John the Apostle
- John the Evangelist
- John of Patmos / John the Divine (author of Book of Revelation)