The meaning of the word Gospel stands for “good news” and this idea is presented in Matthew, Mark, Luke, and John. In the Bible, John is the last Gospel, and the way he exemplifies the good news is different from the Synoptic Gospels. From the beginning of the Gospel, John introduces Jesus as someone that has high importance by referring him to “Son from the Father” (John 1:14). Thus, the Gospel John illustrates theology and Jesus’ divine nature, unlike the Synoptic Gospels.
The four Gospels are viewed as their testimonies on Jesus Christ. Matthew, Mark, and Luke demonstrate similar materials and main ideas in their books, which is why they are called the Synoptic Gospels, though each of their stories is unique. However, John’s Gospel is different from the other Gospels by the way he presents theology. For example, in the
…show more content…
Unlike John, the Synoptic Gospels do not symbolize Jesus as the “Word,” and they do not mention the “Word” at all in their stories. Also, the approach that Matthew, Mark, and Luke interpret Jesus is different from the Gospel of John. For instance, in the beginning of John 2:13-22, Jesus cleanses the temple, but the Synoptic Gospels cleanse the temple at the end (Matthew 21:12-17, Mark 11:15-19, and Luke 19:45-48). Another difference is Jesus’ death happens after Passover (Matthew 26:17-20, Mark 14:12-17, and Luke 22:7-16), but Jesus’ death happens at Passover, in the Gospel of John (John 13:1). This event is the difference in
Should one fully read the opening four Gospels of the New Testament, he or she can find many similar patterns of literature and themes affording much attention to detail and study. This is what someone such as Merriam Webster would define as the ?Synoptic Gospels?. So, what are and how can we explain the differences and similarities among synoptic authors Matthew, Mark, Luke, and the gospel, John? Which Book was written first? To what extent did the Evangelists depend on oral tradition, written sources, or each other? The phenomenon and mystery of these similar but unique Synoptic Gospels has for centuries challenged some of the best minds of academia and the church, stirring up much scholarly
All stories explained in the gospels have similar results and main ideas, like Mark, Matthew and Luke as to the Gospel of John is a little more different. The stories of Mark, Matthew and Luke are known as synoptic because
The Gospel according to Matthew is the first book of the New Testament. The story explains how the Messiah, Jesus, was refused by Israel and finally sent the disciples to preach the gospel around the whole world. As Matthew wrote for his fellow Jews, he wrote his Gospel in the language Jesus spoke, Aramaic, which led early Church Fathers to believe Matthew’s was the first Gospel. On the other hand, the Gospel of Mark teaches that Jesus is the Son of God who assumed human nature. Mark wrote the gospel in Greek for a Gentile-Christian audience, which was undergoing persecution, perhaps in Rome. A central theme is that following Jesus often means that a Christian must suffer like Jesus did. Mark’s Gospel points out that Jesus accepted this important title, but that he was reluctant to let people know his identity. (Matthew 26:26-30 and Mark 14:22-26 )
It can be argued that the similarities and differences of the Gospels of Matthew and Luke can cause the reader to either see both of these accounts to complement one another with their different perspectives or that they contradict one another by certain events being mentioned in one birth narrative but not the other. Different aspects of both of these birth narratives such as the way Matthew and Luke treat Mary, the extent to which they use the Old Testament and the audience to whom they are writing to reveals the authors’ agenda as they allow their culture and own personal beliefs to influence what they write. These factors could be argued to have an effect on the historical authenticity of these texts as it could be possible that they could have caused the authors to twist the truth to fit in with their own beliefs.
The gospel of Luke and John are gospels about Jesus and John the Baptist. They have several differences and similarities. The Gospel of Luke describes the conception and birth of John the Baptist and Jesus while the gospel of Luke describes their life after birth. Summaries, variances, and connections of these two gospels are discussed below.
The Gospel of John, the last of the four gospels in the Bible, is a radical departure from the simple style of the synoptic gospels. It is the only one that does not use parables as a way of showing how Jesus taught, and is the only account of several events, including the raising of Lazarus and Jesus turning water into wine. While essentially the gospel is written anonymously, many scholars believe that it was written by the apostle John sometime between the years 85 and 95 CE in Ephesus. The basic story is that of a testimonial of one of the Apostles and his version of Jesus' ministry. It begins by telling of the divine origins of the birth of Jesus, then goes on to prove that He is the Son of
The two Gospels that I 've decided to compare are Luke and John. Luke is considered a Synoptic Gospel and presents the human side of Jesus. Luke takes us through the longer version of his birth and his childhood and focuses on the humanity of Jesus. There was a debate in this story whether or not Jesus was human and raised many question to potential followers. Many said that Jesus was just a spirit but by reading Luke, there was great detail of his humanity. Luke directed this book directly to Gentiles and focused more on the teachings and miracles that Jesus created rather than the law. Stated in the text, Luke’s Gospel also depicts more clearly the way in which the proclamation of the kingdom of God and the accompanying mighty works of Jesus brought the benefits of salvation to marginalized people. Luke also highlights the concern of Jesus for the materially poor, and the duty of his followers to be free from love of possession and to give generously to those in need. John was considered a different story in the Bible and in the Gospel. It was the last story of the Gospels and does not repeat any of the other stories from Matthew, Mark, or Luke. John had the opportunity to see the gospel and its affect it had and based that off the
Gospel is an old English word meaning “good news.” When comparing the four gospels they are all unified, but each gospel can have slight differences to them. Whether is literary structure, length, how many teachings, important events, different significance, geography or chronology; they all are correlated to tell us Jesus’ story, in their own way. In like manner, God didn’t give us one explanation from an confined individual. Rather, God educates us about the broad richness of Jesus’ life through a numerous prophet-witnesses. Moreover, God works through well-documented and a valid history, not through confidential revelations to a single person. The prophetic witnesses of the Gospels endorse the truth that God himself is speaking. Each Gospel
The books of the Gospels, Matthew, Mark, Luke and John; where written over 2000 years ago. These books excluding the Gospel of John are often called the synoptic Gospels. The term synoptic is derived from the Greek word meaning “seeing together.” These three books are comparable in their recording of the existence and ministry of Jesus. The wording of the synoptic Gospels is similar as well. For example, the account of the healing of the leaper occurs in all three books and the
The word 'gospel' means good news. There are four gospel accounts in the New Testament:
The new testament contains four (4) accounts of the story of Jesus’ life, death and resurrection as presented by Matthew, Mark, Luke, John, The 3 accounts are similar, while Johns bible presents Jesus in a unique way. These differences exist because Matthew and Luke got their information from Mark and John got his information from another source, maybe John did not have access to the other gospels or he chose not to use them. No one really knows the source of John’s gospel and we don’t know for sure who wrote the gospels. Scholars refer to the authors as Matthew, Mark, Luke & John, this may not even be their real names. The Gospel were not first hand accounts except for Mark. John did not seem to have known the existence of the other
The books of Matthew and John though have many similarities, also have many differences due to the goals that they are trying to achieve and the importance of points/events they are trying to get across. The reason behind the initial portrayals of Jesus helps achieve the goals of each book; whereas Matthew’s book tries to ‘convince’ the educated readers and quarrelers (Pharisees), John’s book does not care much about reputation per se. For example, Jesus turns on the Jews who believe in him to generate a readers response to him as the definitive expression of God 's will or revelation as opposed to Matthew’s intentional readers response to God 's will as expressed in the Mosaic Law. While there are many qualities I could delve into regarding the difference in characters of Jesus, my essay in particular will look at what each book views is especially important with regard to Jesus and his intentions. Specifically, my main focus will be on the presentation of Jesus and reasons for doing so; setting in context what the book is basically about.
Matthew, Mark, Luke, and John are the first books of the New Testament within the Bible, The Gospels as they are so called. The words of the Gospels tell of the teachings of Jesus and his disciples and they bring the word of God to others through the land. Now, the books of Matthew, Mark, and Luke are called synoptic gospels as they are all very similar as to the way the stories are structured, worded, and similarity in context. As for the book of John, this book differs a bit with its structure being different than the 3 before and also its perception, or depiction, of Christ.
The Gospel According to Matthew is the first book of the New Testament in the Bible, and is a Gospel narrative. The narratives provided by the Gospels in the New Testament are here to provide us with descriptions of the life, death, and resurrection of our savior Jesus Christ, as well as to share His teachings. Like any other narrative, it is important to understand the historical and literary contexts surrounding the Gospel of Matthew, as well as the importance and significance of Matthew itself. As a Gospel, Matthew is here to present us with the narrative of Jesus Christ as our Messiah, as promised in the Old Testament Prophesy. While it is important to evaluate the extensive context surrounding the narrative of Matthew, the meaning behind the narrative can be found through relating it to the various events that are described in the other Gospels. By comparing the Gospels, it is easy to evaluate the underlying meaning and significance, within the context of the Gospels. Because the Gospels were written as narratives to provide us with information on the life and death of Jesus Christ, and all that happened in between, it is important to compare the different accounts described in the Gospels whenever possible. In doing so, it is possible to examine the Gospels within the appropriate context. With 4 Gospels (Matthew, Mark, Luke, John), it is important to compare them with one another in order to further evaluate the importance of Jesus Christ, as he is the
The gospel of John does not have the birth story of Jesus as it is documented in the Synoptic gospels instead refers Christ as eternal word which became flesh. Gospel of John lacks records of Jesus’ Baptism by John the Baptist but instead records his baptism activities hence contradicting role of John the Baptist in Jesus’ Baptism. Another difference of gospel of John from the synoptic gospels is that there is no indication of temptation of Jesus by Satan but records that Jesus could not be tempted because of his unity with the Father. John indicates that Jesus taught without parables something contradicts synoptic gospels. There is no accounts of apocalypse in the gospel of John but instead indicates that Jesus completed his messianic role (Harris, 2014).