Why do the Gospels have different stories from each other?

Answer 1

The traditional Christian explanation for the many differences among the gospels is that each evangelist was reporting what he knew and also that he was writing to a different audience. On this view, what to one evangelist seemed not significant enough to report was to another evangelist very important.

In fact, the Gospels of Matthew and Luke are moderately similar to the original gospel that their authors relied on as a source - Mark's Gospel. Most of what is contained in Mark is to be found in both Matthew and Luke, although often with embellishments. The major exception is the "Missing Block" in Luke, clearly the result of this author working from an incomplete copy of Mark. It has been shown that whenever Matthew and Luke agree with Mark, the wording in the Greek language is almost identical. Matthew and Luke also contain additional, identical sayings from the hypothetical 'Q' document but, because Q does not explain when or to whom Jesus would have spoken these sayings, each of the two authors had to write his own context for those sayings.

Matthew was written before Luke, but the author of Luke was unaware of that Gospel. Each of them wanted to write about the birth of Jesus and provide a genealogy that showed Jesus to be descended from King David, as required by Jewish tradition for the hoped-for Messiah. The author of Matthewdescribed Bethlehem as the home town of Joseph and Mary, and had them flee to Egypt so that he could show parallels between Jesus and Moses. He said that the father of Joseph was called Jacob, just as the father of the Old Testament Joseph was called Jacob. The author of Luke described Nazareth as the home town of Joseph and Mary, and had them travel to Bethlehem for an otherwise unknown census, then return peacefully to Nazareth. He said that the father of Joseph was called Heli.

Similarly, because Mark's Gospel provided no guidance on the resurrection appearances of Jesus, the authors of Matthewand Luke had to improvise, creating two quite different and incompatible accounts. A "Long Ending" (verses 16:9-25) was added to Mark much later, to more or less harmonise that Gospel with those of Matthew and Luke.

John's Gospel is the most different of the four New Testament gospels. It is believed by some scholars that it was written in a moderately Gnostic Christian community and subsequently modified to make it more acceptable for a centrist Christian tradition. This Gospel was inspired by Luke's Gospel, but has some material taken direct from Mark. The author felt much freer than the authors of Matthew and Luke in changing his source material, but was usually careful not to directly contradict Luke.

Answer 2

Scholars now know that Mark's Gospel was the earliest gospel and that the Gospels of Matthew and Luke were substantially based on copying Mark's Gospel. John was loosely based on Luke, with some material taken direct from Mark. Whenever Mark describes an event, the other synoptic gospels, Matthew and Luke, follow that description closely, often using exactly the same words in the Greek language.

However, Mark's Gospel did not originally contain a resurrection story. It originally ended at verse 16:8, with the young man telling the women that Jesus was risen and they fled in terror, telling no one. The "Long Ending" (verses 16:9-20) was added to Mark long afterwards to provide the necessary resurrection appearances.

The authors of Matthew and Luke realised they needed resurrection stories, but at this stage they had no lead from Mark. Matthew was written first after Mark, during the 80s of the first century. Luke was written around the end of the century, but its author knew nothing of Matthew's Gospel. Each author wrote an account that he felt was plausible, given that Mark's Gospel had stated that Jesus was risen. But, written in isolation from each other, the two accounts were always going to be very different. When the "Long Ending" was subsequently added to Mark, it was refined to harmonise as much as possible with both Matthew and Luke to mask the differences - for example, Matthew had Jesus meet the two women as they returned from the tomb, while Luke had Jesus meet two men on the road to Emmaus, so the additions to Mark just have Jesus meet "two of them as they walked."

The author of John's Gospel did have a lead from Luke, but wished to elaborate. There may be an element of sexism in this gospel: Luke says that the women were the very first persons to enter the tomb and see it empty, but John indicates that Mary only saw the stone had been removed, giving the disciples the honour of being first. It also appears that the apostle Peter was becoming excessively venerated, and the author of John wished to moderate this. Whereas Luke had Peter go alone to the tomb and become the first disciple to see it empty, John has the 'disciple whom Jesus loved' accompany Peter to the tomb and, outrunning Peter, arrive first and look inside to see it empty. However, John usually does not directly contradict Luke, so when Peter arrived, he was the first to actually enter the tomb. Chapter 21 also demonstrates that Jesus loved the unknown disciple more than Peter, further bringing Peter back to parity with the other disciples. Another issue that Elaine Pagels has pointed out is that John wished to create the image of the 'doubting Thomas' and minimise the influence of those Christians who believed they were followers of Thomas. The author split Luke'ssingle meeting between the risen Jesus and the disciples at a meal in the upper room into two such meetings, having Thomas absent on the first occasion and then express strong doubts about the resurrection. This also provided the opportunity for the other disciples to receive the Holy Spirit on the first occasion, and for Thomas to miss out (John 20:22-24) and presumably forever be a lesser disciple than the others.

Answer 3

A:There are at least three reasons for the inconsistencies and occasional contradictions in the New Testament gospels - the use of more than one multiple primary source, 'filling in the gaps' where the sources do not provide enough information, and the agenda or context of each author. SourcesIt is traditionally assumed that the four New Testament gospels were written by the apostles whose names they now bear. However, the gospels were originally anonymous and were only attributed by the Church fathers to these apostles later in the second century. Ian Wilson (Jesus: The Evidence) says it can come as quite a shock to discover that no-one can even be sure who wrote the gospels. He says that despite the versions printed in our Bibles long having borne the names Matthew, Mark, Luke and John, these names are mere attributions. The consensus of scholars is that the gospel accounts could not have been written by eyewitnesses to the events they portray.

The Church Fathers soon realised that there was a literary dependency among, at least, the synoptic gospels, such that two of them must have been copied from a third. They decided that Matthew's Gospel came first and that Mark and Lukewere copied from it. Modern scholars agree in principle with the Church Fathers, but say that Mark's Gospel was actually first, and that Matthew and Luke were copied from it. John's Gospel was inspired by Luke, with some material taken direct from Mark. So, Mark's Gospel is one of the sources used by the other three gospels.

Another source has been identified for the Gospels of Matthew and Luke. This now-lost document is known by scholars as the hypothetical 'Q' document. Matthew and Luke are reasonably consistent when they use material from Q. However, Q does not generally provide context for the sayings attributed to Jesus, so the two gospels often place the same sayings in a different time or place when describing Jesus teaching those sayings. The Q document seems to have been unknown to the author of Mark, and its absence creates another minor inconsistency.

Filling in the gapsMark's Gospel is the shortest New Testament gospel, and omitted details that the evangelists who followed felt were needed by Christians and potential converts.

Both Matthew and Luke believed that the gospels should tell of the birth of Jesus, but neither had any guidance from Mark, except that Jesus came from Nazareth and that his mother was Mary. The burial story suggested the name Joseph for his father, as perhaps did the Old Testament. Both authors knew that the birth must take place in Bethlehem and that a virgin birth would be appropriate in the context of their times. Neither knew what the other would write, so they produced two very different nativity stories. In Matthew's Gospel, Bethlehem was the home town of Joseph and Mary, after the birth of Jesus they fled to Egypt, later beginning to return to Bethlehem, but turned aside to travel to Nazareth instead. In Luke's Gospel, Nazareth was the home town of Joseph and Mary, and they were required to travel to Bethlehem for a census, returning peacefully to Nazareth shortly after the birth of Jesus. Both Matthew and Luke have genealogies linking Jesus back through Joseph to King David, Matthewthrough Joseph's father Jacob and Luke through Joseph's father Heli.

Mark's Gospel originally ended at verse 16:8, with the young man telling the women that Jesus was risen and they told no one. The "Long Ending" (verses 16:9-20) was added to Mark's Gospel long afterwards, but the version known to the authors of Matthewand Luke would certainly have ended at 16:8, with no mention of any resurrection appearances. Each of them had to devise his own story of the resurrection and the subsequent appearances of the risen Jesus. And each of them wrote a different story. The Long Ending added to Mark does straddle the middle ground between the two, creating some appearance of harmony.

AgendasMore than any of the other gospels, that of Luke is concerned with the poor, reflected in some of the stories unique to Luke, as well as to some of the differences.

In Matthew (chapter 5) the first beatitude is, "Blessed are the poor in spirit: for theirs is the kingdom of heaven." In Luke chapter 6 the first beatitude is, "Blessed be the poor: for theirs is the kingdom of God." A subtle difference, but a telling one. Matthew's is believed to more closely reflect the original in the Q document, and is spiritual in nature. By omitting 'in spirit', Luke has dramatically changed its meaning in line with its concern for the poor.

John's Gospel, is loosely based on Luke's Gospel, but its author felt less constrained to remain faithful to his source than had Matthew and Luke. The synoptic gospels had given the 'Cleansing of the Temple' as the final trigger for the arrest of Jesus, but for theological reasons the author of John wanted to make the resurrection of Lazarus the final trigger. He therefore moved the Cleansing of the Temple out of the way, to the beginning of his story. Luke mentions Mary and Martha as friends of Jesus, but deals with Lazarus separately in a parable about death and resurrection. John treats Lazarus as a real person, brother of Mary and Martha, and really has Jesus resurrect him.

The author of John seems to have been concerned about the excessive veneration of Peter in the early second-century Church. He went about correcting this by comparing him unfavourably several times with another disciple, the 'disciple whom Jesus loved'. Whereas Luke has Peter run alone to the sepulchre and find it empty, John has the two disciples run to the tomb, with the other disciple outrunning Peter and arriving there first.

Luke has the risen Jesus meet all eleven remaining disciples at a meal in the upper room, but John splits this into two separate meetings in order to introduce the episode of 'doubting Thomas'. Luke also has a minor episode before the death of Jesus, in which he tells the fishermen to cast their nets on the other side, and they caught a huge load of fish; Johntransfers this story to the period after the resurrection and makes it an important final meeting between Jesus and the disciples. In this final scene, Jesus asks Peter what is it to him if Jesus tarry with the disciple whom he loves.

Answer 4

A:If the gospels were written by eyewitnesses to the life and mission of Jesus, they ought to be very similar, with only differences of recollection or emphasis, yet the two gospels normally attributed to eyewitnesses, Matthew and John, are the most different of all the New Testament gospels. All the New Testament gospels were actually written anonymously and only attributed to the apostles whose names they now bear later in the second century. This, and the later date of authorship, points to the reasons for the different accounts.

The Gospels of Matthew and Luke are moderately similar to the Gospel of Mark. In fact, they are known as the synoptic ('seen with the same eye') gospels because when laid side by side and thus read 'seeing with the same eye' in the original Greek language, it can be seen that much of the content of Matthew and Lukewas copied from Mark. However, Matthew and Luke also contain material copied from the hypothetical 'Q' document, making these two gospels similar again, but different to Mark. There is also material unique to Matthew for which no source is known, and similarly material unique to Luke for which no source is known.

John's Gospel was inspired by Luke's Gospel and also had some material taken direct from Mark. but its author clearly did not know Matthew's Gospel and therefore was not influenced by this book. The author of John felt more at liberty to alter his sources, although he was always careful not to directly contradict them.

Answer 5

Because every Gospel is written from a different point of view and from a different Religion.