Mark contains 666 verses (excluding 16:9-20, which many scholars consider later additions to the text). A total of 606 of these verses reappear in shortened form in Matthew's Gospel of 1,071 verses; 350 of Mark's verses reappear in Luke's Gospel of 1,151 verses. This means that more than one-half of Matthew and one-third of Luke are composed of material from Mark. Only 31 verses in Mark have no parallel in Matthew or Luke.

The Synoptic Problem

1.1 What is the synoptic problem?
The synoptic problem is an investigation into the existence and nature of the literary interrelationship among the first three "synoptic" gospels. Matthew, Mark, and Luke are called the synoptic gospels, in contrast with John, because they can readily be arranged in a three-column harmony called a "synopsis." Unlike John, the synoptic gospels share a great number of parallel accounts and parables, arranged in mostly the same order, and told with many of the same words. Any proposed solution to the synoptic problem, therefore, must account for these literary similarities among the synoptics, not so much in terms of their factual content, but in the selection of that content, the arrangement of the material, and wording of the parallels.

1.5 So, is there a documentary interrelationship among the synoptic gospels?
Although a few scholars at various times have supported a largely oral solution (e.g., Westcott 1888; Reicke 1986; Linnemann 1992), a strong consensus among scholars has developed that there is indeed a documentary interrelationship between and among each of the synoptic gospels. There are five main, cumulative reasons for this conclusion:

  • Verbatim agreement. It is rare for two independent reporters of the same event to share more than a few words in common, but the synoptic gospels often feature a substantial number of agreements in their exact words. For example, in one passage about John the Baptist, Matthew and Luke agree for 61 out of 63 Greek words of a presumably Aramaic speech. Generally, the verbatim agreement between Matthew, Mark, and Luke runs about 50% of the words, but, by contrast, their agreement with John in parallel episodes falls to about 10%.
  • Extensive agreement in order, especially in which the arrangement of material is not strictly chronological but topical or exhibiting some other creativity in presentation. In these cases, it is difficult to attribute the non-chronological but topical narration to independent reporting. For example, Matthew and Mark relate the death of John the Baptist as a non-chronological flashback in the same place in their narrative. As another example, the synoptics agree in the order in which certain parables and miracles are related in an arrangement that is probably intended to be topical.
  • Substantially similar selection of material, when that selection features some amount of creative, editorial choice. Jesus did and said many things, so any account of his ministry must involve some editorial judgment in what to include and what to leave out. The synoptic gospels, for instance, relate many of the same miracles, but these miracles hardly overlap with the ones related by John.
  • Presence of editorial comments and other redactional material in the synoptics that are not necessitated by a mere telling of historical fact. For example, both Matthew and Mark feature an identical aside to the reader ("let the reader understand") in the synoptic apocalypse.
  • A consistent literary pattern between the three documents that establishes Mark as the "middle term" connecting Matthew and Luke. Specifically, agreements between Matthew and Luke against Mark are consistently much less prevalent than agreements against Matthew or Luke in arrangement and wording. We would expect for independently composed documents to exhibit no such pattern. (Carlson, 1999/2000)

The Cambridge Companion to the Bible also notes at another place:

The most plausible explanation for the relationship among the synoptic gospels is that Mark is the original, with Matthew and Luke drawing on Mark and a second common source (Q) but developing the details of structure and content independently.[7]

 

The Synoptic Problem

The Synoptic Gospels are the Gospels of Matthew, Mark and Luke. They are called "synoptic" because they so closely resemble each other. (Synoptic means "with the same eye").

The "Synoptic Problem" is a term used to describe the dilemna faced by scholars when trying to determine how these three Gospels are related to each other. Matthew, Mark and Luke:

  1. Verbatim agreement. It is rare for two independent reporters of the same event to share more than a few words in common, but the synoptic gospels often feature a substantial number of agreements in their exact words. For example, in one passage about John the Baptist, Matthew and Luke agree for 61 out of 63 Greek words of a presumably Aramaic speech. Generally, the verbatim agreement between Matthew, Mark, and Luke runs about 50% of the words, but, by contrast, their agreement with John in parallel episodes falls to about 10%.
  2. Extensive agreement in order, especially in which the arrangement of material is not strictly chronological but topical or exhibiting some other creativity in presentation. In these cases, it is difficult to attribute the non-chronological but topical narration to independent reporting. For example, Matthew and Mark relate the death of John the Baptist as a non-chronological flashback in the same place in their narrative. As another example, the synoptics agree in the order in which certain parables and miracles are related in an arrangement that is probably intended to be topical.
  3. Substantially similar selection of material, when that selection features some amount of creative, editorial choice. Jesus did and said many things, so any account of his ministry must involve some editorial judgment in what to include and what to leave out. The synoptic gospels, for instance, relate many of the same miracles, but these miracles hardly overlap with the ones related by John.
  4. Presence of editorial comments and other redactional material in the synoptics that are not necessitated by a mere telling of historical fact. For example, both Matthew and Mark feature an identical aside to the reader ("let the reader understand") in the synoptic apocalypse.
  5. A consistent literary pattern between the three documents that establishes Mark as the "middle term" connecting Matthew and Luke. Specifically, agreements between Matthew and Luke against Mark are consistently much less prevalent than agreements against Matthew or Luke in arrangement and wording. We would expect for independently composed documents to exhibit no such pattern.

Yet they also have material shared by only two of the Gospels but not the third. The material that is shared by only two authors is not presented in the same order. The dilemna therefore is which came first and who copied from whom?

An example of duplicate verses:

Matthew 16:28
"I tell you the truth, some who are standing here will not taste death before they see the Son of Man coming in his kingdom."
Mark 9:1
And he said to them, "I tell you the truth, some who are standing here will not taste death before they see the kingdom of God come with power."
Luke 9:27
I tell you the truth, some who are standing here will not taste death before they see the kingdom of God."

 

 

 

 

 

Books

cover
cover
cover

For more books
on atheism
please visit
Atheist Books