Christ in the Synoptic Gospels

Taught by Mark Huber (As a course requirement for Global)

Wednesday, February 7, 2024

1. Identify the meaning of the term “Synoptic” Gospels and tell why we refer to them as such.

Christ in the Synoptic Gospels: Like many words we use in connection with religious studies, synoptic comes from the Greek language. In this case synoptic comes from a Greek word that means “seeing with or seeing together,” while gospel comes from a Greek word that means “good news.” Thus, the two terms together give us the thought of “seeing the good news alike or in the same way.”

Tyndale Bible dictionary:

The similarities among these three Gospels include their use of a common outline:

introduction;

ministry of John the Baptist and the baptism and temptation of Jesus;

Jesus’ greater Galilean ministry;

his journey and ministry through Samaria, Perea, and rural Judea;

and the Passion week, death, and resurrection of Jesus in Jerusalem.

The books also record the same emphasis in the teaching of Jesus—the presence, nature, and implementation of the kingdom of God. Furthermore, these three Gospels relate much of the same material, usually in the same order, and often with similar or identical words.

Each Gospel also contains accounts and teachings that are unique. The result is a rich diversity within the synoptic unity, each of which provides portrayals of Jesus from a variety of viewpoints.

Matthew emphasizes Jesus’ Jewishness and the continuity of his person and work with the message of the OT.

Mark’s fast-moving account presents Jesus as a man of action, the Son of Man who was a servant among men.

Luke, in exquisite Greek literary style, seems to address cultured Gentiles and shows Jesus as a friend of disadvantaged groups.

The Eerdmans Bible dictionary

A term (from Gk. synoptikós “seeing together”) referring to the Gospels of Matthew, Mark, and Luke, employed because of their common structure, perspective, and contents as distinguished from the gospel of John.

The similarity of these three Gospels may be seen in their general outline of Jesus’ life and activity, details of style and language, and at times exact or nearly exact verbal equivalency. A tabulation of material substantially peculiar to each of the Gospels or shared between two or more is provided by B. F. Westcott (An Introduction to the Study of the Gospels, 5th ed. [New York: 1875], p. 191):

Peculiar Shared

Mark 7% 93%

Matthew 42 58

Luke 59 41

John 92 8

Scholars have concluded that the Synoptics are in some way related to one another. The nature of this relationship, complicated by their sharp divergences in form and content, constitutes what is known as the “Synoptic problem.”

2. There are many theories about sources for the synoptic Gospels. What is the true source of all of the Gospel accounts, indeed all of the Bible?

The Holy Spirit:

2 Timothy 3:16–17 (LSB) All Scripture is God-breathed and profitable for teaching, for reproof, for correction, for training in righteousness, 17 so that the man of God may be equipped, having been thoroughly equipped for every good work.

2 Peter 1:20–21 (NLT)Above all, you must realize that no prophecy in Scripture ever came from the prophet’s own understanding, 21 or from human initiative. No, those prophets were moved by the Holy Spirit, and they spoke from God.

3. To whom were each of the synoptic the Gospels written, why and what style is used?

Matthew

To whom written:

Matthew wrote his Gospel primarily for Jews. They were his target audience, and we must keep this principle in mind if we are to glean the most from his record. While anyone can benefit from the study of this Gospel account, we can see quite readily that Matthew focused on the Jewish reader. He stresses the relationship of Jesus to the Jewish faith, and he organizes evidence to show that Jesus fulfilled many Old Testament prophecies. In so doing, he challenges Jews to see Jesus as the long-awaited Messiah, the Son of David. In summary, then, Matthew addresses his fellow countrymen to convince them that Jesus is their promised Messiah.

Why written:

1. More than any other Synoptic writer, Matthew quotes from the Old Testament prophets.

2. Matthew frequently uses such phrases as the holy city, the holy place, and Son of David. These terms would appeal to the Jewish mind.

3. Matthew refers often to the fulfillment of Old Testament prophecy.

4. Matthew does not explain comments he makes in reference to Jewish religious acts and practices. This implies that his recipients had prior knowledge of these things.

5. Matthew emphasizes that Jesus did not come to destroy but to fulfill the Law. This too would appeal to the Jewish mind.

6. Matthew repeatedly condemns Jewish religious leaders for their evil ways. Gentiles would not be interested in such an emphasis.

7. Throughout his Gospel account, Matthew answers the questions Jews were prone to ask.

The Gospel of Matthew, more than any other Gospel, emphasizes Jesus’ teaching discourses. Therefore, we would not be wrong to call Matthew’s Gospel the “Teaching Gospel,” because he gives systematic accounts of Jesus’ teaching for the church’s internal life and evangelistic mission. Accordingly, Matthew groups Jesus’ discourses together in various places throughout his Gospel account as we have indicated:

McClaflin, M. (2011). Christ in the Synoptic Gospels: An Independent-Study Textbook (1st Edition, p. 30). Global University.

Style of writing:

Mark

Christ in the Synoptic Gospels: The term priority of Mark has gained wide acceptance among Bible scholars because it may help to explain how the Gospels, in their present form, were written.

A comparative study of Matthew, Mark, and Luke reveals that Matthew and Luke included almost all of the book of Mark in their accounts

To whom written:

Mark’s Gospel is the shortest of the Synoptics, but it is the Gospel with the most action. As we begin reading the second Gospel, we see that Mark offers neither an apologetic nor states a clear purpose for writing. So we must draw our own conclusions about his purpose from the material itself and our knowledge of the historical setting of the book.

Tradition, as we have seen, indicates that Peter died in Rome. If Mark was with Peter at the time, then, it is reasonable to assume Mark wrote his Gospel account in Rome. Furthermore, if Peter and Mark were ministering to the Gentile population at Rome, then Mark could easily have written his Gospel account for the Gentiles in general and Romans in particular. As we carefully evaluate Mark’s style of writing, this probability seems to suggest itself.

Why written:

Since Mark obtained most of his material from Peter, we can assume Mark composed his Gospel during the final years of Peter’s ministry. Perhaps with Peter’s age and impending death, Mark felt constrained to record all he remembered of the apostle’s teaching. Since Peter would no longer be available for public ministry, Mark wanted to have a record of the apostle’s teaching in written form. If this was his reason for writing, he made a wise decision, because according to early tradition, Peter died around AD 64

1. The historical setting for the writing of Mark’s Gospel seems to be Rome, where people were mostly Roman Gentiles.

2. The writing style does not appeal to strong Jewish interests. This is indicated by the relative absence of material on the fulfillment of Jewish prophecy. It is also suggested by the lack of a genealogy that links Christ with the promised Messiah, such as we find in both Matthew and Luke.

3. Mark seems to be more concerned than the other Synoptic writers to emphasize what Christ did more than what He said.

4. Mark’s liberal use of the terms at once, as soon as, quickly, and immediately indicates his preference for action.

5. Mark, then, is a Gospel of action. This style would appeal to the Roman mind.

6. Against these background factors, Mark portrays Christ as the servant of God, a doer, a worker of miracles.

Style of writing:

Luke

To whom written:

Apparently, Luke was a Gentile. Paul hints at this in Colossians 4:10–14 when he makes a distinction between those of the circumcision and Luke. If this was so, then Luke may have been the only Gentile writer of the sacred Scriptures.

If we assume Luke was a Gentile, does he appear to write for the benefit of the Jew or of the Gentile? In our view he seems to give more emphasis to the Gentile reader. As time passed, the Gentile sector of the church made up an increasingly larger part of the body of Christ. So a Gentile point of view and emphasis appear more appropriate.

We can note that while Mark wrote to the Gentile in general and to the Roman in particular, Luke writes to the Gentile in general and to the Greek in particular. In addition, we see other traits that set Luke’s Gospel apart from those of Matthew and Mark. While the Gospel of Matthew is the bridge between the Old and New Testaments, the Gospel of Luke bridges the events between Christ and the establishment of the church

McClaflin, M. (2011). Christ in the Synoptic Gospels: An Independent-Study Textbook (1st Edition, pp. 33–34). Global University.

Why written:

In it Luke presents Christ as a man more completely than any other writer of the Gospels. Also, this Gospel account is the most complete or comprehensive of all the Gospels. The following examples bear this out:

1. Luke states that he has “carefully investigated everything from the beginning” (1:3).

2. Luke gives us more details on the birth and childhood of both John the Baptist and Jesus than either of the other Synoptic writers.

3. Luke alone of the Gospel writers includes information on the parents of John the Baptist in his narrative.

4. Luke gives more historical details than any other Gospel writer.

5. Luke’s Gospel spans the longest period of time in the life of Christ. It begins about fifteen months before His birth and continues through His ascension.

6. Luke shows greater interest for the individual person than either Matthew or Mark.

7. Luke, more than any other Gospel writer, emphasizes that salvation includes all people.

8. Luke’s account has been called the Gospel of Prayer. Luke shows Christ at prayer far more than the other Gospel writers.

Style of writing:

4. What do the Synoptic Gospels tell us about the Jesus the Man?

5. What do the Synoptic Gospels tell us about the Resurrection of Jesus? How can we reconcile these accounts?

According to Matthew

Matthew 28:1–20

Matthew notes that after the Sabbath, at dawn on the first day of the week, two women, Mary Magdalene and another Mary, come to the tomb. There they meet an angel seated on the stone in front of the tomb. He tells them Christ is risen and urges them to go tell His disciples that He has gone before them into Galilee. The women then leave to tell this news to the disciples and meet Jesus on the way. He greets them, tells them not to be afraid, and instructs them to tell His brethren to leave for Galilee, where they will see Him. Matthew then records an incident relating to the guards at the tomb and the story they give to the chief priests and elders (28:11–15). After this, Matthew records only one other postresurrection appearance of Christ, when He appears to the Eleven in Galilee.

According to Mark

Mark 16:1–20

Mark says three women went to the tomb early on Sunday morning: Mary Magdalene, Mary the mother of James, and Salome. According to him, they saw an angel and received the same news Matthew records (Mark 16:1–8).

Beginning with verse 9, Mark gives further details on the appearances of Christ. First, he indicates that Jesus appeared first to Mary Magdalene. Then she went to tell His disciples the good news, but unfortunately they did not believe her. Second, Jesus appeared to two men while they were walking in the country. When these two became aware of the reality of the risen Christ, they returned to tell the disciples, but the disciples did not believe them either. Finally, Jesus appeared to the Eleven while they were eating and rebuked them for refusing to believe in His resurrection. This scene concludes Mark’s account of the resurrection appearances of Christ.

According to Luke

Luke 24:1–53

We have seen that both Matthew and Mark give fairly simple, straightforward accounts of Christ’s postresurrection appearances. As you probably noted, Luke’s account differs somewhat in the details of these events. He begins by saying, “The women took the spices they had prepared and went to the tomb” (v. 1). Later he tells us that the group included “Mary Magdalene, Joanna, Mary the mother of James, and the others with them” (v. 10), implying that many went to the tomb together. Furthermore, while they were at the tomb, he asserts that they saw not one but two angels who gave them news of the resurrection (vv. 4–8).

Now Luke writes about the disciples’ reaction to the Resurrection, adding some facts that neither of the other Synoptic writers mentions. He indicates that after the women report what they have seen to the Eleven, Peter runs to the tomb to see for himself what has happened (vv. 9–12). Luke then tells about Christ’s experience with the two on the road to Emmaus. At this point, Luke’s story differs from that of Matthew. Luke says that when the two from Emmaus recognized Jesus, they returned immediately to Jerusalem to tell the Eleven. While they were speaking to the Eleven about this matter, Christ appeared to them all (vv. 13–36). However, Matthew moves immediately from Christ’s appearance to the women running from the tomb (Matthew 28:5–11) to His appearance to the Eleven in Galilee (vv. 16–20). How do we reconcile what appear to be conflicting accounts?

In our efforts to find a solution for this problem, we need to include references from the Gospel of John, which gives the most detailed account of the events after the Resurrection.

For ease of understanding, we can list a possible sequence of events as we attempt to harmonize the various Gospel accounts in what appears to be a disagreement:

1. At dawn there is an earthquake, and the stone is rolled away. The terrified soldiers, paralyzed for a moment, return to the city to report to the religious leaders.

2. Mary Magdalene and other women coming to the tomb find it empty and see one or two angels. Mary, leaving the other women at the tomb, runs to tell the disciples. The remaining women enter the tomb, see both angels, and are informed of the Resurrection.

3. Peter and John arrive ahead of Mary, find the tomb empty, and leave.

4. Mary, possibly arriving after Peter and John leave, stays at the tomb weeping. At this time Jesus appears to her (Mark 16:9–11; John 20:11–18).

5. Jesus then appears to the other women (Matthew 28:9–10).

6. At about this time, Christ also appears to Peter (Luke 24:33–35; 1 Corinthians 15:5).

7. In roughly the same time period, He appears to the two men on the road to Emmaus (Mark 16:12–13; Luke 24:13–32).

8. Next He appears to the disciples in a home (Mark 16:14; Luke 24:33–43; John 20:19–23). Whether this home was in Galilee or Jerusalem seems unclear; yet it appears to be Jerusalem, because all of these appearances seem to occur on Resurrection Sunday.

9. A week later He appears once again to the disciples (John 20:26–31).

10. From then until His ascension, Christ appeared on numerous occasions to various people and groups of people.

6. In conclusion, what do we learn from the Synoptic Gospels about … ?

The World in Jesus’ time?

Our study led next to the world into which Christ came “in the fullness of time.” Since Scripture stresses the time factor, we examined the evidence to see how the hand of God shaped events and created conditions to give the gospel message the greatest impact. In a word, preparation tells how God worked, for He prepared both the environment and a people for the coming of Christ.

Before Christ’s coming, each successive empire in that area of the world enlarged its territory and absorbed more peoples. As a result, the region was ruled by one empire rather than by many small, isolated nations. This tended to give the peoples of the empire a common worldview and a common bond of understanding. In fact, Greece and Rome did more to bring together the people under their control than all of the preceding empires. Greece, you should recall, provided the language and Rome the political security that made this unity possible. These two elements—a common language and political security that made communication easy—provided stability throughout the Roman world and created ideal conditions for the gospel to be unveiled and spread.

Some might argue that these conditions were not really necessary since Christ confined himself to Palestine during His entire ministry. However, spreading His message and establishing the church required ease of communicating and traveling to the far reaches of the empire. Thus peace, stability, and a popular, common language characterized the Roman Empire in which Christ lived. It also provided the most ideal conditions for the proclamation of the gospel. Of course, this reveals the sovereign hand of God.

Yet one more element was needed for Christ’s message to be birthed and then nurtured to maturity: a religious vehicle through which Christ could operate. The Jewish nation provided this vehicle in the form of Judaism. God, whom Jesus called Father, and the God of the Jews were the same. Jesus absorbed the religious law of the Jews and brought it to its complete and proper fulfillment.

Jesus the Man?

We learned that while Christ ministered exclusively in Palestine and directed His message to its people, He devoted the majority of His time to the people of Galilee. This indicates that Christ had a special feeling for the Galileans. For one thing, all of His disciples came from Galilee with the exception of the one who betrayed Him. In addition, He spent His boyhood and early manhood in Galilee. This no doubt increased His natural attraction to and understanding for these people. Finally, in terms of sheer physical presence, Christ accomplished the greatest portion of His public ministry in Galilee.

Although we will not speculate here, it is possible that the open, friendly attitude of Galileans, unlike that of Judeans, explains why Christ preferred to minister in Galilee. Their response to His message and claims may also have influenced His decision to operate from Galilee rather than Judea. Whatever His reasons for choosing Galilee as both His primary headquarters and focus of ministry, the Galileans were fortunate people.

The Message of Jesus?

In general terms Christ intended for His message to do the following:

1. Prove He was both the promised Messiah of Israel and the Son of God.

2. Prepare His hearers to accept the new order (the Kingdom) He was establishing that would be built on the Law.

3. Persuade Jews that God would accept Gentiles into His kingdom.

As Christ’s ministry progressed, the truth of the first two aspects of His purpose became obvious, but the third was not so pronounced.

It therefore became apparent that the Jewish nation could not be used as the vehicle for spreading the gospel. Jesus had given the Jewish people the opportunity, but they had rejected it. So He gave His few chosen and loyal disciples the task of spreading the gospel to the ends of the earth. While He knew that His mission to the Jews in a general sense had failed, He also knew that after His death the church would emerge and become the vehicle for world evangelization. It would not fail, because His followers would be filled with and empowered by the Holy Spirit. Equipping them in this way guaranteed that the gospel would be preached effectively to all nations (Matthew 24:14; Acts 1:8).

Although the disciples were committed to spreading the gospel, they did not know what means God would use to accomplish the task, for God had not revealed this truth. Not knowing about the church and its implications for the Gentiles prevented them from seeing the grafting in of the Gentiles.