Three Synoptic Gospels

The contents of the Bible have dealt with controversy in regards to its inerrancy since publication, and will surely continue to. Historians progress to learn more about biblical stories in order to provide evidence for the reliability of information. Many believers today understand that not everything in the Bible has been factually proven. An outstanding topic many scholars pay attention to lies within the four gospels. The three synoptic gospels, Matthew, Mark, and Luke, replay essentially the same story with minor inconsistencies, while John portrays Jesus in an entirely different way. The differences in each gospel are due to how each gospel entertains different portrayals of the life and understanding of Jesus himself, in order to persuade

their audience that their theology is correct (Harris, p.119). Although the Gospel of John is apparently different than all three synoptic gospels, there are interesting commonalities with the Book of Matthew. From the start it is apparent how John and Matthew see Jesus as an entirely different figure from the beginning of his time on earth, the period of Jesus’ ministry, Jesus as he performs miracles, or signs, according to John, and the crucifixion of Jesus. These differences are determined by historians and scholars to be the result of different authorial influences, such as the location and timing of the composition, the message the authors were trying to get across, as well as the intended audiences for the writings (Harris, p.121).
The Gospel of John was written between 90 and 100 CE. It is certain that John was written some time after the destruction of Jerusalem in 70 CE by the Romans (Harris, p.97; p.250). Sometimes the Gospel of John is attributed to John, the son of Zebedee, however because the author never states any true identity other than being a beloved disciple of Jesus (John 21:20-24) nothing can be proven. Ultimately scholars deem this book as written anonymously (Harris p.251). Certain literary techniques, such as dualism, have led scholars to observe similarities between John’s Gospel and Essene literature. Specific parallels are found within the Dead Sea Scrolls, ancient literature produced by Essene writers at Qumran. A prominent Essene community in Qumran is most comparable to Johannine communities, which have been thought to be the location of composition for John’s Gospel. Both communities were especially spiritual and both alluded to a great teacher who, “came to illuminate humanity’s mental and spiritual darkness,” (Harris, p. 252). This involvement of a greatly spiritual Jesus is not observed in the Synoptic Gospels, and therefore it is important to understand the impact the community in which the author of John’s Gospel created the work in. If it is true that the Essene community had a large influence on the Johannine community, it makes even more sense that this Gospel includes many what are now Christian teachings, since the Essenes have been said to be the first sign of a Christian community, or at least existed during the first development of Christianity (Harris, p.53).
Like John, Matthew was also written after the destruction of Jerusalem, somewhere around 80 CE according to scholars (Harris p.155).

This work is also said to be anonymous, and believed to have been produced in Syria within a large Jewish and Jewish-Christian community. It is apparent from a number of shared accounts, and overlapping stories of Jesus that the author of Matthew’s Gospel used Mark as a source. Although many of the stories are expanded upon, and carry different connotations, the same basic stories are found in all of the synoptic gospels, and because Mark was the first written, scholars assume it was a source used by both Matthew and Luke. It should also be noted that many of Jesus’ teachings in Matthew were not found in Mark. This led scholars to search for a second source, which resulted in the Q document. Although not available as a feasible document, Q designates a compilation of Jesus’ parables and sayings from about 50 to 70 CE, which are present in Matthew (Harris p.156). Throughout the gospel, Matthew uses formula quotations, meaning he quotes from the Old Testament. This strong relationship with the Hebrew Bible helps scholars determine that Matthew wanted to emphasize his Jewish position. This is important because his interpretations of Jesus throughout the gospel are not agreed upon by all Jews, in fact only a small fraction. Although it is obvious to the readers than John and Matthew carry very different stories of Jesus’ life, it is interesting to

note that both authors were experiencing the turmoil present in the Jewish community during that time, not only between the Jews and the Romans, but also within the religion itself.
From the beginning of Matthew and John there are strong differences in how Jesus is portrayed.

For example, John begins by introducing Jesus as the Word made flesh, who existed in heaven beside God until coming down to earth (John 1:1,14), immediately making this gospel stand aside from the synoptic gospels, which portray Jesus as a human figure who begins his life the moment he is born. The absence of the nativity scene in John supports the claim of Jesus being the divine Son of God who was sent down from heaven and transformed into the Word incarnate. Birth wouldn’t be important to someone who had previously existed (Harris, 253). The Gospel of Matthew does in fact include the nativity scene, because according to Matthew this is the very beginning of Jesus’ existence. Before the birth, Matthew maps out the genealogy of Jesus, all to support the claim that, “Jesus the Messiah, son of David, the son of Abraham,” (Matt. 1:1) is heir to the Davidic throne, and in fact the Jewish Messiah, King of the Jews. Right off the bat it is evident that John disregards the birth scene because it really isn’t relative to the divine being, and Matthew accentuates Jesus’ lineage, which would make Jesus appear to the audience very human, and rightful to the throne, something many Jews disagreed with during that time. Matthew does, however, also refer to Jesus as the Son of God multiple times similar to John. It is still true that John uses that title to express Jesus as being, “a father’s

only son,” referring to God as the father (John 1:14). In Matthew, after Jesus saves Peter from falling under water after his lack of faith nearly kills him, Peter exclaims, “‘Truly you are the Son of God,’” (Matt. 14:33). While both Matthew and John use this title, it is for two different reasons due to their early and consistent portrayals of Jesus’ humanity and divinity through their books.
Another interesting account in which John is revealed to be unlike Matthew is in the case of Jesus’ ministry. John emphasized that John the Baptist was not equal to Jesus. Whereas in Matthew only after the arrest of John the Baptist, making the end of his ministry, begins Jesus’ ministry (Harris???). During Jesus’ ministry according to John, he travels back and forth from Jerusalem and Galilee a number of times over the course of three years, but in Matthew Jesus only makes this journey once (Harris, 255- 256). Most likely because the author of Matthew was said to have been Jewish, and the location of composition having been said was in a largely Jewish community, it makes sense that this gospel emphasizes Mosaic Law and Torah observance. Matthew signifies that Jesus’ has come to fulfill Jewish law, not abolish it (Matt. 5:17). The Johannine Jesus lacks this attention to Jewish traditions (Harris, 254). Instead, Jesus says, “’I give you a new commandment, that you love one another,’” (John 13:34). While Matthew’s Jesus also says, “But I say to you, Love you enemies and pray for those who persecute you,” (Matt. 5:44). However, this is simply an extension to a previous Jewish law. In John, Jesus tends to speak completely differently to his people than in any of the synoptic gospels. While Matthew exhibits Jesus as a teacher who only uses parables (Harris??), John instead portrays Jesus to have lengthy conversations with people, (Harris, 254), often times leaving the people with unanswered questions, and no explanation. It can be observed that Jesus is almost angry at the end of most conversations, and hashes out bitter remarks such as, “…now you are trying to kill me,”, “If God were your father you would love me,”, and “You are from your father the devil,” (John 9:40, 9:42, 9:44). In Matthew Jesus is presented a few times with a harsh tone, however it is usually not with an average person. One instance is when Jesus speaks to Pharisees and Sadducees who come to be baptized and says, “You brood of vipers! Who warned you to flee from the wrath to come?” (Matt. 3:7). The Johannine Jesus doesn’t so much care to be a great teacher who brings salvation, like Matthew, but to be the Son of God on earth, who has much power.
Through miracles, Matthew shows the identity of Jesus the Messiah. In the example of Jesus healing a centurion, a gentile who was of the highest-ranking Roman officers, Matthew is trying to emphasize that one does not have to be perfect in obeying the Jewish law, but that one must have faith above all else (Harris, 174). In John the miracles are all referred to as signs, which help show people Jesus’ supernatural and divine abilities (Harris 262). This is in opposition of Matthew, which shows Jesus as denying giving signs to the scribes and Pharisees when they ask to see, which even emphasizes more the need for faith (Matt. 12:38). In John, when Jesus gives a blind man the ability to see again, and later that man denies to the Jews that he was healed by Jesus (John 9:22). This example reveals the circumstances during the time in which it was composed. If any Jew were to accept that Jesus was the Jewish Messiah they would be deterred from the synagogue (Harris 256). The causation of division among the Jewish population had effects in both Matthew and John.