Search results
Results from the WOW.Com Content Network
It holds that Matthew, Mark, and Luke are each original compositions formed independently of each other, with no documentary relationship. Scholars have long noted that the three synoptic gospels have a great deal in common, not just in content but also in order and precise Greek wording. Most scholars have assumed that this must be due to some ...
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. Additionally, Matthew (24%) and Luke (23%) have material in common that is not found in Mark. [1] The calming of the storm is recounted in each of the three synoptic gospels, but not in John.
Gottlob Christian Storr, in his 1786 argument for Marcan priority, [1] asked, if Mark was a source for Matthew and Luke, how the latter two were then related. Storr proposed, among other possibilities, that the canonical Matthew (written in Greek) was translated from the original, which was written in either Hebrew or Aramaic (the logia spoken of by Papias) by following Mark primarily but also ...
A modern tweak of this view that maintains Matthaean priority is the two-gospel (Griesbach) hypothesis which holds that Mark used both Matthew and Luke as a source (thus, in order, Matthew—Luke—Mark). [23] This view envisions a Mark who mostly collected the common material shared between Matthew and Luke.
For example, according to Luke 2:11 Jesus was the Christ at his birth, but in Acts 2:36 he becomes Christ at the resurrection, while in Acts 3:20 it seems his messiahship is active only at the parousia, the "second coming"; similarly, in Luke 2:11 he is the Saviour from birth, but in Acts 5:31 [44] he is made Saviour at the resurrection; and he ...
Mark – a follower of Peter and so an "apostolic man" Luke – a doctor who wrote what is now the book of Luke to Theophilus. Also known to have written the book of Acts (or Acts of the Apostles) and to have been a close friend of Paul of Tarsus; John – a disciple of Jesus and the youngest of his Twelve Apostles
The hypothetical L source fits a contemporary solution in which Mark was the first gospel and Q was a written source for both Matthew and Luke. According to the four-document hypothesis, the author combined Mark, the Q source, and L to produce his gospel. [1] The material in L, like that in M, probably comes from the oral tradition. [1] I.
Griesbach's main support for his thesis lies in passages where Matthew and Luke agree over and against Mark (e.g. Matthew 26:68; Luke 22:64; Mark 14:65), the so-called Minor Agreements. A related theory has Luke drawing not directly from Matthew, but from a common source, seen as a proto-Matthew.