Solving the Synoptic Problem: Investigating Gospel Harmony Theories

 

         The three Gospels Matthew, Mark, and Luke are referred to as the synoptic Gospels because they share many of the same stories in a similar sequence and even sometimes identical wording. They stand in contrast to John, whose content is largely distinct who often different in these details. For simplicity’s sake, despite the Gospel authors being unknown, they will be referred to by their traditional names.

As shown in the diagram above, the three synoptic Gospels share similar information about the life of Jesus. Statistically. over three-quarters of Mark’s content is found in both Matthew and Luke, and 97% of Mark is found in at least one of the other two synoptic gospels. Furthermore, 23% of Matthew and 23% of Luke have material in common that is not found in Mark. The question of how these 3 Gospels share the same information so closely while being written at different times is known in the literature as the “Synoptic Problem”. While no conclusive solution has been found yet, the vast majority of New Testament view favors Marcan priority which states that both Matthew and Luke have made direct use of the Gospel of Mark as a source, and further holds that Matthew and Luke also drew from an additional hypothetical document, called Q to explain what Matthew and Luke share that is not found in Mark. There is material found that is unique to Matthew and Luke which is called “Special Matthew” or M and “Special Luke” or L. Special Matthew includes mostly parables such as the Parables of the Tares or the Parable of the Two Sons, while Special Luke includes both parables and healings such as the Parable of the Good Samaritan and the Parable of the Prodigal Son. Another example of M and L are their unique infancy narratives. There are various different stories that are shared between the three synoptics such as:

1. Baptism and temptation of Jesus

2. Hometown rejection of Jesus

3. New Wine into Old Wineskins

4. Man with withered hand

5. The Beelzebul controversy

6. Calming the storm

7. Feeding the 5000

8. Confession of Peter

9. Render unto Caesar

and many others.

For example, the healing of the leper story found in Matthew 8:2-3, Mark 1:40-42, and Luke 5:12-13

Mark (NRSV): “A leper came to him begging him, and kneeling he said to him, “If you choose, you can make me clean.” Moved with pity, Jesus stretched out his hand and touched him, and said to him, “I do choose. Be made clean!” Immediately the leprosy left him, and he was made clean.”

Matthew (NRSV): “and there was a leper who came to him and knelt before him, saying, “Lord, if you choose, you can make me clean.” He stretched out his hand and touched him, saying, “I do choose. Be made clean!” Immediately his leprosy was cleansed.”

Luke (NRSV): “Once, when he was in one of the cities, there was a man covered with leprosy. When he saw Jesus, he bowed with his face to the ground and begged him, “Lord, if you choose, you can make me clean.” Then Jesus stretched out his hand, touched him, and said, “I do choose. Be made clean.” Immediately the leprosy left him.”

There is also material that is shared between Matthew and Luke but not found in Mark and scholars hypothesize that this information comes from a possible early source known as the Q which is short for Quelle which means “source” in German. The alternative hypothesis is that Luke had Matthew as a source rather than having a common source that may have been oral tradition or a Greek written source that is now lost. Examples of the Q source are:

1. The BeatitudesHealing the mother of Peter's wife

2. The Beatitudes

3. Love your enemies

4. Golden Rule

6. The Parable of the Lost Sheep

7. The Lord's Prayer

8. Parable of the blind leading the blind

And many others. The verses shared in Matthew and Luke are so close or identical in some parts of the double tradition that the most reasonable explanation for this agreement is common dependence on a written source. A date for the Q document is often placed in the 40s or 50s of the 1st century AD.

         The vast majority of scholars have Mark as the earliest Gospel and written around 70 AD with Matthew written next followed by Luke between the years 75-85 AD and then John written around 90-100 AD. The authors of the Gospels are unknown and the names of the apostles were ascribed to them around 150-180 AD since Justin Martyr quotes them without name but Irenaeus does. Matthew and Luke follow the basic narrative structure of Mark and often edit the verses from Mark to fit their theology. Examples of this are Mark missing the virgin birth or the resurrected Jesus. Another famous example is comparing Mark 10:18 and Matthew 19:17

Mark (NRSV): “Jesus said to him, “Why do you call me good? No one is good but God alone.”

Matthew (NRSV): “And he said to him, “Why do you ask me about what is good? There is only one who is good. If you wish to enter into life, keep the commandments.”

Another example is the Pharisee in Mark 12 who was commended for being removed in Matthew. The story of the widow at the end of Mark is removed as well. Similarly, Luke removes Mark 6:45-8:26 in his Gospel. Why does he do so, the answer is because this is the two chapters where Jesus strongly rebukes his disciples. Luke also edits the final works of Jesus on the cross from Mark. Mark is also the shortest and has the simplest Greek which Matthew and Luke refine. There is also editorial fatigue when Matthew and Luke were altering Mark. For example, Mark refers to Herod Antipas by the title of King while Matthew corrects Mark by calling Herod Antipas by “tetrarch”. However, eight verses later in Matthew, Herod is also called king. Mark has a less developed Christology as well as shown with Mark 10 earlier. It is more likely that Matthew and Luke developed Mark’s work than Mark “dumbed down” the latter.

Now this blog post will provide a brief overview of the various solutions to the Synoptic Problem.

1. Two-Source Hypothesis:

It posits that the Gospel of Matthew and the Gospel of Luke were based on the Gospel of Mark and a hypothetical sayings collection called Q that was discussed earlier. Later, two other sources were added to this hypothesis known as M and L which were also mentioned earlier. Having Marcan priority solves the triple tradition while posting Q solves the double tradition. This is the hypothesis most widely held by New Testament scholars.

 

2. Farrer Hypothesis:

The theory is that the Gospel of Mark was written first, followed by the Gospel of Matthew and then by the Gospel of Luke without Q. The Gospel of Mark was used as source material by the author of Matthew. Lastly, Luke used both of the previous gospels as sources for his Gospel while the previous theory states what Matthew and Luke wrote independently.

 

3. Three-Source Hypothesis:

This theory attempts to synthesize the previous two theories. It states that the Gospel of Matthew and the Gospel of Luke used the Gospel of Mark and Q as primary sources, but that the Gospel of Luke also used the Gospel of Matthew as another source.

 

4. Four-Source Hypothesis:

It posits that there were at least four sources to the Gospel of Matthew and the Gospel of Luke: the Gospel of Mark and three lost sources (Q, M, and L). This theory also holds that Matthew and Luke wrote independently of each other or in other words that Luke did not rely on Matthew’s work. It further states that the M material has its origins in Jerusalem, the L material has its origins in Caesarea, and the Q source is from Antioch. This theory also posits a proto-Luke document that did not have the Marcan material or the birth narrative.

5. Multi-Source Hypothesis:

This theory posits that Matthew, Mark, and Luke are not directly interdependent but have each drawn from a distinct combination of earlier documents. According to these theories, the common material among the three Synoptic Gospels ultimately derives from a proto-gospel somewhat like Mark. This proto-gospel underwent two independent revisions, A and B. Mark was formed by recombining these two revisions. Matthew built upon A and Luke upon B. Both Matthew and Luke also drew from a common source Q, as well as other sources for their unique material.

6. Augustinian Hypothesis:

This theory by Augustine of Hippo posits that Matthew the Evangelist was written first contrary to the previous theories. It further claims that Mark the Evangelist wrote his Gospel using Matthew and the preaching of Peter. Then Luke the Evangelist wrote his Gospel while being aware of the other two. No Q source or other material is mentioned. This theory of Augustine is based on church tradition rather than historical and textual criticism. This theory also holds that Matthew was originally written in Hebrew rather than Greek.

7. Griesbach Hypothesis:

This theory posits that Matthew was written before Luke but both were written before Mark. This theory does not require a Q source similar to the previous. This theory also states that the synoptic gospels were written much earlier, 40s AD, than what modern New Testament scholars and historians say, 70-85 AD. It also holds that Mark’s Gospel is based on the public sermons of Peter and Luke consulted the Gospel of Mark and Matthew and was also approved by Peter. This theory, similar to the previous, is based on church tradition rather than textual criticism. One may ask, if Luke had the final version of Matthew, why did they differ on Jesus’ genealogy, circumstances of birth, and events following resurrection? Also why did Mark ignore the virgin birth, scenes after the resurrection, and the Sermon on the Mount if Peter was his source?

8. Matthean Posteriority Hypothesis:

This theory, like the earlier theories, posits Marcan priority. But unlike them it posits Matthean posteriority. In other words, that the Gospel of Mark was used as a source by the Gospel of Luke, then both of these were used as sources by the Gospel of Matthew.

9. Independence Hypothesis:

This theory posits that Matthew, Mark, and Luke are each original compositions formed independently of each other, with no documentary relationship. Therefore, each evangelist has independently drawn from eyewitness accounts and perhaps oral tradition. This theory undermines the historical and textual criticism of New Testament scholars as well as the massive overlap between the gospels.

10. Jerusalem School Hypothesis:

This theory posits Matthew copied from Mark but did not know Luke directly but all the synoptic authors all used two other documents for background material, unknown to scholars. These unknown documents are a Hebrew biography of Jesus and a literal Greek translation of it.

11.  Priority of the Gospel of Marcion:

This hypothesis claims that the first produced or compiled gospel was that of Marcion and that this gospel of Marcion was used as inspiration for some, or all, of the canonical gospels. Marcion of Sinope (85-160 AD) was the founder of Marcionism which was an early heretical christian movement which held that the God of the Old Testament and the New Testament were two different Gods and was heavily inspired by Paul. He was also, according to New Testament historians, the first person to create a first New Testament canon. In his canon he had his own gospel which was a revised version of the Gospel of Luke without any statements that contradicted his theology. Some argue that the gospel of Marcion precedes the gospel of Luke and that the gospel of Luke is a revision of the Gospel of Marcion. Others argue that the gospel of Marcion and the gospel of Luke are two independent versions of a common source. Others go further and consider that the Gospel of Marcion was the very first gospel ever produced, preceding all others including the gospels of Matthew, Mark, Luke, and John.

  

12.  Hebrew Gospel Hypothesis:

This theory posits that there is that a lost gospel, written in Hebrew or Aramaic, predated the four canonical gospels. This theory eventually led to the theorization of the Q source document but in Greek instead of any semitic language.

13.  Q+/Papias hypothesis:

This theory posits that both Matthew and Luke have used a Q document, that Matthew used Mark and that Luke used both Mark and Matthew, and that Mark also used the Q document.