Comparing The Gospels Of Matthew, Mark, And Luke's Gospel

Is the “Synoptic Puzzle” really a problem? The Gospels of Matthew, Mark, and Luke have been identified as having strong similarities, are often grouped together and understood to be related to each in a special way; other than the way they are related to the Gospel of John. In effort to compare the Gospels similarities and differences a tool, synopsis is utilized (Mark Powell, 93). A synopsis (from the Greek syn, “with” + opsis, “seeing”) presents parallel texts from each of the Gospels side by side in vertical columns to contrast and compare the individual accounts. Aiding in seeing where the Gospel writers include both similar and difference in their accounts of the Gospel and their discourses, a synopsis is set up; this allows similar material
Although, Matthew and Luke's gospels are written in Greek, Mark's gospel has “poorer Greek” (CN, September 18). Luke tends to agree more with Mark than with Matthew, proposing that Luke and Matthew worked independently from the other. Nonetheless, of where one falls on the oversight of certain critical accounts and biblical stories from Matthew and Luke, it raises the concern why are the stories copied in a poor manner. A theory that suggest Mark came first is the “Two Source” theory. The “Two-Source” hypothesis states the two main sources used to create Matthew and Luke included Mark's gospel and a source called “Q”; which is suggested to be “an abbreviation for Quelle, the German word for 'source'” (Powell, 96). Q would be a collection of sayings that are common to Matthew and Luke, but not Mark. According to this theory, the authors of Matthew and Luke not only used these two sources, but also had one source that each used that the other did not. Scholars call these “M” and “L,” naming them after the gospels to which they are associated. A more accepted theory declares Mark, the shortest of the gospels, wrote his first, and Matthew and Luke utilized his as a baseline