LIBERTY UNIVERSITY BAPTIST THEOLOGICAL SEMINARY

The Synoptic Problem

Submitted to Dr. Paul Greer, in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the completion of the course

SEMI 500-D15 LUO Introduction to Seminary Studies

by Shamyra Kennedy Jones April 13, 2014

Table of Contents Introduction.. . Defining the Synoptic Gospels Belief . Studying the Synoptic Problem ... Periscopes Examples of Narratives . Solutions for the Synoptic Problem . Dependence Theory and Interdependence Theory ... Two-Source Theory. Four-Source Theory. Markan Priority Hypothesis . Augustinian Hypothesis.. Farrer Hypothesis.. .. Conclusion. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Bibliography. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. .. . . . . . . . . .

1 2 2 2 2 3 3 3 4 5 6 6 6 7 9

Introduction The life of Jesus in the Bible has four separate accounts of the same events that happened in His life. Each of these accounts tell His life story in ways that are different but these four separate accounts still have similarities which have been noted since the earliest possible time. In the second century a writer by the name of Tatian used the four accounts and wrote a comprehensive account of these four stories.1 Even though the Synoptic Gospels have lot of similarities they are still significantly different. Based on the gospel writers revelation and divine inspiration is how these similarities and differences are explained ultimately influences how that person interprets the scripture. Thomas believes that, there is a great deal of importance on inerrancy and divine inspiration of scripture by todays Christians.3 This importance has minimized the importance of the Synoptic Problem, which has taken away from the Christians main focus, which is coming to an agreement about the life of Christ. 4 There is a belief by some people that these three Gospels, Matthew, Mark, and Luke, were written in this manner because of the Holy Spirit. The belief is that the Holy Spirit had moved upon these men and to write about the same accounts in a like manner. The purpose of this paper is to help us to better understand these beliefs of why these accounts of these different writers are similar, but yet different when it comes to the life of Jesus.

1 2 3

D.A. Carson and Douglas J. Moo, An Introduction to the New Testament, (Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 1992), 28. Ibid.,27. Robert L. Thomas, Three Views on the Origins of the Synoptic Gospels (Grand Rapids: Kregel Publications, 2002), 12. Ibid.

Meaning of the Synoptic Problem

For use to have a better understanding of what the Synoptic Gospels is, we must first, understand what the word synoptic means. These Gospels are the three separate accounts of an event that are compared for their .J. Griesbach, in the eighteenth century started using the term Synoptic Gospels for the many similarities of the Gospels of ;Matthew, Mark, and Luke. Synoptic Problem Definition There is a belief of some people that these three Gospel were written in this manner because of the Holy Spirit. The belief is that the Holy Spirit had moved upon these men and to write about the same accounts in a like manner. Mark Goodacre in his book, The Synoptic Problem: A Way Through the Maze, states that the Synoptic Problem is, the study of the similarities and differences of the Synoptic Gospels in an attempt to explain their literary relationship.5 Mr. Goodacre was stating that there was a possibility that one or more of the writers could have used the writing of the others. If you look at the order of occurrences some of the passages are almost worded alike, which makes his conclusion somewhat logical.6 Studying of the Synoptic Problem Periscopes The self contained sections of the bible texts can be divided into what is called pericopes. Pericopes are unique to a single account of a gospel.7 The pericopes found in Matthew, are also found in Luke but not in Mark. _____________
5

Mark Goodacre, The Synoptic Problem: A Way Through the Maze/. (New York: T&T Clark International, 2001), 15. 6 Ibid., 187 7 Thomas D. Lea and David Black, The New Testament: Its Background and Message (Nashville,B&H Academic, 2003), 116.

3 The periscopes of Luke are in the first two chapters, the birth and childhood accounts of Jesus and in Matthew, the visit of the Magi.8 The Gospel of Mark does have a single account about the birth or the early childhood of Jesus. The wording used in these two gospels has some differences but, they have some similarities as well. In the book of Matthew pericopes are only found in a single block but in the Gospel of Luke they are found throughout.9 It is complicated to relate the associations between the Gospels because of the pattern of the wordings found. The wording makes its very difficult for the reader to understand how or what these gospel writers used in writing these accounts. Very little is known history about when these synoptic gospels were written.10 The hypotheses on the subject of these gospels are formed based on what is written in the texts.11 Examples of Narratives Examples of each of the common narratives are: an account of the life of John the Baptist, the Apostles being called, the ministry of Jesus in Galilee, the Sermon on the Mount, the leper healing and the last week of Jesus life. The similarities are greatest in some cases, between two of the three accounts. This is mostly seen in Matthew and Luke being similar and Mark different in wording or omitting some of the events. The similarities in Matthew and Luke extend to usage of some of the same terms. 13 While the three accounts are in agreement with some events, there are cases where two of the three are in opposition of the third. Most often Matthew and Mark are in agreement and are in opposition to Luke.

8 9

Ibid. Ibid. 10 Ibid., 117 11 Ibid. 12 D. Guthrie, New Testament Introduction. 4th rev. ed. The Master Reference Collection. (Downers Grove, Inter-varsity Press, 1996), 136. 13 Ibid., 137.

4 Occasionally, Luke and Mark agree in opposition to Matthew and rarely do Matthew and Luke agree in opposition to Mark. 14 An example of this is Matthew 3:7-10 relates to Luke 3:7-9 where Jesus rebukes the Pharisees and Mark makes no mention of this.While the Synoptic Gospels similarities are tormenting, it is the differences between the accounts is what makes this a truly problematic issue. Solutions for Synoptic Problem When it comes to examining the Synoptic Problem there has been several proposed solutions. Based on these solutions many of the biblical scholars came up with the first solution is the dependence theories. Dependence Theories and Interdependence Theories The dependence theories claimed that the synoptic gospels were written independently, but were based on one source.
12

In todays teachings, other than the use of oral sources the

dependence theories are no longer relevant. 13 The next proposed solution is a group of connected hypotheses called the Interdependence theories. The sources and the hypotheses are what relates the three synoptic gospels and their inspiration from a source of criticism and ideas are draws them together.14 These theories include the deviations such as the Traditional, Two Gospel Hypothesis. 15 Two-Source Theory The Griesbach or Two Gospel Hypothesis was proposed by J.J. Griesbach in his Treatise in 1789. The theory was revived by William Farmer in his book The Synoptic Problem in 1964. This theory claims priority for Matthew with Luke and Mark following.
14 15

Carson and Moo, 89-90 John M. Rist, On the Independence of Matthew and Mark (New York, NY:Cambridge University Press, 1978), 66. 16 David Black, Why Four Gospels (Grand Rapids: Kregel Publications, 2001). 17 Scot McKnight, A Generation Who Knew Not Streeter: The Case for Markan Priority, Rethinking the Synoptic Problem, ed. David Alan Black and David R. Beck (Grand Rapids: Baker Academic , 2001), 78.

5 Luke was then written using Matthew as a source and Mark followed utilizing both Matthew and Luke. 16 The Two Source Hypothesis, the Four Source Hypothesis and Markan Priority hypothesis have been the leading solutions among scholars since the Two Source Hypothesis was proposed by Lachman and Wilke in the seventeenth century.17 The belief is that the Two Source Hypothesis is not too far from the accurate. 19 The Synoptic Gospels were created independently and did use one another as a source. 20 This theory is based on the views of the church fathers and the history of the early hurch.21 This generation of students has a difficult time trying to find conclusions that are not related in the many passages of the Synoptic Gospels.22 Four Source Hypothesis The Markan Priority was first proposed by Weisse in 1856. The Four Source Hypothesis was first developed by advanced by Streeter in his book The Four Gospels: A Study of Origins in 1924. These hypotheses are not identical but are grouped together because of their similarities.18The Two Source Hypothesis proposes the priority of Mark and an unknown second source labeled Q. It was upon these two sources that Matthew and Luke were later based. Q is thought to be a lost collection of the sayings of Jesus. The Four Source Hypothesis further augments the two sources proposed earlier with an additional two sources. Streeter proposed that Matthew and Luke were dependent on Mark and Q and Matthew had an additional unknown source he called M and Luke another source labeled L. 21

19

F. David Farnell, The Case for Interdependence View of Gospel Origins, Three Views on the Origins of the Synoptic Gospels (Grand Rapids: Kregel Publications, 2002), 258. 20 Ibid. 21 Ibid. 22 Ibid. 23 Thomas and Black, 78. 24 Ibid.

Augustinian Hypothesis The connection amongst the Synoptic Gospels was determined first by the Augustinian Hypothesis. In this hypothesis Augustine believed that Matthew was written first and relying on Matthew as a source Mark was written second.23 Based on the outline of the gospels Augustine determined that the order was Matthew, Mark and then Luke, later he changed his mind to order of Matthew, Luke and then Mark.24 In 1789, J.J. Griesbach suggested in his book the Treatise the Two Gospel Hypothesis, later in 1964 William Farmer changed it in his book The Synoptic Problem.25 The order is the Gospel of Matthew followed by Luke then Mark is the order that the theory claims. Matthew was the source of Luke and Mark used both Matthew and Luke.26 Farrer Hypothesis The Farrer Hypothesis was proposed by Austin Farrer in 1955 in his article On Dispensing with Q.27 Farrer accepted much of the Two Source Hypothesis with the exclusion of the Q material. Farrer argued Markan priority and that Matthew used Mark as a source for his account and Luke used both Mark and Matthew as sources. The most important difference between the Farrer and Two Source hypotheses is then the existence of Q.

19

F. David Farnell, The Case for Interdependence View of Gospel Origins, Three Views on the Origins of the Synoptic Gospels (Grand Rapids: Kregel Publications, 2002), 258. 20 Ibid. 21 Ibid. 22 Ibid. 23 Thomas and Black, 79 24 Ibid. 25 Ibid. 26 D. E. Nineham (ed.), Studies in the Gospels: Essays in Memory of R. H. Lightfoot (Oxford: Blackwell, 1955). 27 Ibid.

7 Conclusion

Since, the time of Augustine there has studies done of the Synoptic Problem. These studies of the Synoptic Problem, over a period of time have moved slowly but they have given a lot of details to the points of the Synoptic Problem. Greek studies that are word for word, give minor agreements of Matthew and Luke against Mark, the similarities between Matthew and Luke and the time and place of the Q material.28 In Scott McKnights book the Rethinking the Synoptic Problem, he discusses in the chapter about the Markan Priority A Generation Who Knew Not Streeter. McKnight wanted highlight that even the basic synopsis of the Synoptic Problem is not easy to comprehend. 29 McKnight states that during their examination they left out the most important detail which was the basic synopsis.230 When you examine the gospels Matthew, Mark, and Luke you can identify that the accounts that are similar to each other. These similarities are the reason why Matthew, Mark, and Luke are called the synoptic gospels. Some researchers have argued that Matthew, Mark, and Luke must have had the same source because of how similar they are. Why the Synoptic Gospels are so similar, it is because the writers were inspired by Holy Spirit to write about what they witnessed or heard about. Each one of the gospel was written by someone who followed Jesus an associate of one of his followers. It is most likely that some variant of the Two Source Hypothesis is close to the correct explanation for the Synoptic Problem.

28 29

Black 2001. McKnight, S., (2001). A Generation Who Knew Not Streeter: The Case for Markan Priority, Rethinking the Synoptic Problem, ed. David Alan Black and David R. Beck (Grand Rapids: Baker Academic , 2001), 78. 30 Ibid., 78

8 It is difficult, if not impossible, to be sure about the existence of Q, but Farrers arguments against its existence have the advantage of maintaining a more simple situation. Occams razor generally applies here in that Farrer argues against the introduction of a new supposition (the existence of Q) and the burden of proof lies upon those who offer a new supposition. The existence of Q is not proven beyond doubt so it is most likely the Farrer Hypothesis (Markan priority and Lukes use of Matthew) is most correct.

9 Bibliography

Black, D. A., Why Four Gospels. Grand Rapids, MI: Kregel Publications, 2001. Black, D. A., and David R. B. Rethinking the Synoptic Problem. Grand Rapids, MI: Baker Academic , 2001. Carson, D.A., and Douglas J. Moo. An Introduction to the New Testament. Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan, 1992. Farmer, W. R. Farmer's Argument For Matthean Priority. New Testament History. Geoff Trowbridge. 1964. http://www.maplenet.net/%7Etrowbridge/farmer.htm (accessed September 24, 2009). Farnell, F. D. The Case for Interdependence View of Gospel Origins, Three Views on the Origins of the Synoptic Gospels (Grand Rapids, MI: Kregel Publicaitons, 2002), 226309. Goodacre, M. The Synoptic Problem, A Way Through the Maze. 2nd Edition. New York, NY: T&TClark International, 2001. Guthrie, D. New Testament Introduction. 4th rev. ed. The Master Reference Collection. Downers Grove, Ill.: Inter-Varsity Press, 1996. Lea, T. D. and David Black. The New Testament:Its Background and Message. 2nd Edition. Nashville, TN:B&H Academic, 2003. McKnight, S., (2001). A Generation Who Knew Not Streeter: The Case for Markan Priority, Rethinking the Synoptic Problem, ed. David Alan Black and David R. Beck (Grand Rapids, MI: Baker Academic , 2001). Nineham, D. E. (ed.), Studies in the Gospels: Essays in Memory of R. H. Lightfoot (Oxford: Blackwell, 1955) Rist, J. M. On the Independence of Matthew and Mark. New York: Cambridge University Press, 1978. Thomas, R. L. Three Views on the Origins of the Synoptic Gospels. Grand Rapids, MI: Kregel Publications, 2002.