Bibliology - Lesson 2

In this lesson, we’re going to focus specifically on the Gospels of Matthew, Mark, and Luke—often referred to as the “Synoptics.” The word "synoptic" means “same view,” acknowledging the significant overlap among these three Gospels. John, by contrast, is different in tone, structure, and content, and is therefore not included in this group.

The Synoptics contain passages that are strikingly similar, yet also sections where they diverge meaningfully. This brings up an important question: if these Gospel writers differ, how can we trust them? Can we still consider them reliable?

Author and detective J. Warner Wallace makes the point that in real-life investigations, when two witnesses give identical testimony, it usually signals collusion or dishonesty. Differences, therefore, are expected. But how do we explain the combination of similarity and variation in the Synoptics?

Let’s start with similarities and differences in wording. For example, in Matthew 3 and Luke 3, there’s a passage that is nearly identical—even though it doesn’t appear in Mark. How did Matthew and Luke end up telling the same story so similarly?

There are also differences. Take the account of the thieves on the cross: both Matthew and Mark say the thieves reviled Jesus, but in Luke, one thief repents. This reflects both similarity in event and difference in detail.

Story order varies too. All three Gospels generally agree that Jesus’ ministry occurred mainly in Galilee before He went to Jerusalem to die. However, the sequence of specific stories can change. In Matthew’s temptation narrative, Satan tells Jesus to turn stones to bread, jump off the temple, and worship him—in that order. Luke switches the last two: stones to bread, worship, and then jump. Matthew’s order feels climactic; Luke’s reflects theological intent.

To understand these variations, we can turn to the Gospels themselves. Luke offers a detailed explanation in the first four verses of his Gospel. He writes that many had attempted to compile accounts of what had occurred. Although not an eyewitness himself, Luke investigated thoroughly by interviewing those who were. His Gospel is, in essence, a researched historical account.

Luke states that he aims to provide an “orderly account”—not necessarily sequential, but purposeful. He writes to a Gentile named Theophilus so that he may know the certainty of what he’s been taught. Luke is concerned with both historical reliability and theological clarity.

John, on the other hand, emphasizes his own editorial purpose. In John 21:25, he notes that Jesus did many other things that aren’t recorded. And in John 20:30–31, he explains that his selected signs were written “so that you may believe that Jesus is the Messiah, the Son of God, and that by believing you may have life in his name.”

So each Gospel writer selected and arranged material according to a theological purpose. Selection, not chronology, guided them.

Now, how were the Synoptic Gospels likely composed? This becomes crucial when discussing contradictions or harmonization later.

We believe that Mark was the first Gospel written. Early church tradition says it is based on the memoirs of Peter, recorded by Mark. Remarkably, nearly every story in Mark appears in either Matthew or Luke. That’s because Matthew and Luke used Mark as a foundational source.

Another important source is what scholars call “Q,” short for the German word Quelle, meaning “source.” Q is hypothetical, but necessary to explain why Matthew and Luke sometimes share content that is absent in Mark, and yet worded very similarly. Q probably wasn’t a single document, but a collection of sayings or traditions.

So what did Matthew use? He used Mark, Q, and his own material—what scholars call “M.” Matthew wrote for a Jewish audience, so his Gospel emphasizes genealogy (to show Jesus is a descendant of David), fulfilled prophecies, and themes that would resonate with Jewish readers.

Luke used Mark and Q as well, along with his own unique material—labeled “L.” As a Gentile writing to Gentiles, Luke emphasized stories of Jesus reaching out to non-Jews, minorities, and women. He included nearly ten chapters covering Jesus’ ministry outside Israel, especially among the Gentiles. Luke also had a strong historical emphasis.

In short, Matthew tailored his material to show Jesus as the Jewish Messiah. Luke shaped his Gospel to reveal Jesus as Savior of both Jews and Gentiles. Both used shared and unique sources, making intentional choices in what to include.

This helps us when we consider harmonization—the process of comparing different Gospel accounts of the same event and asking whether both could be true. Let’s look at an example: the birth of Jesus.

Matthew and Luke are the only Gospels with birth narratives. The only details they share are that Jesus was born and eventually lived in Nazareth. Otherwise, their stories differ.

Matthew, writing to Jews, begins with a genealogy to establish Jesus as a descendant of David. He includes the visit of the Magi, noting that by then, Jesus was in a house—not a stable. Herod’s massacre of children and the family’s flight to Egypt are emphasized, aligning with prophecies about Bethlehem and Egypt.

Luke begins with angelic announcements to Zechariah and Mary, focusing on John the Baptist and Jesus’ conception. He records the shepherds visiting on the night of Jesus’ birth—an important point, since shepherds were among society’s lowest caste. Luke also includes the circumcision and Jesus’ presentation at the temple, where Simeon proclaims Jesus as salvation for “all nations,” Jew and Gentile alike.

Why the differences? Again, selection and purpose. Matthew highlights fulfilled prophecy for Jewish readers. Luke elevates the marginalized and Gentile inclusion. Both accounts are true, but they emphasize different aspects.

So how might we reconstruct a probable order of events?

• Jesus is born.
• The shepherds visit that night (Luke).
• Eight days later, Jesus is circumcised and named (Luke).
• The family goes to the temple; Simeon and Anna prophesy (Luke).
• They return to Bethlehem and settle in a house.
• Sometime later, the Magi arrive (Matthew).
• Joseph is warned in a dream; the family flees to Egypt.
• After Herod dies, they return and settle in Nazareth.

This sequence harmonizes both accounts without contradiction. Each writer selected details based on audience and purpose, not because they disagreed.

As we close this lesson, take time to reflect. Are you bothered that the Gospels aren’t modern-style biographies? That they emphasize different details and sometimes appear to conflict?

Can you explain the four-source theory—Mark, Q, M, and L—in your own words? Can you walk someone through the harmonization of Jesus’ birth narratives?

Now’s a good time to think about those questions—and discuss them with a friend. See you in the next lesson.