What are the similarities between the Gospel of Mark and the other Gospels?

Answer 1

As the author of Matthew's Gospel relied on Mark's Gospel as his only source of information about the life and mission of Jesus, there are many similarities, even including the frequent use of exactly the same wording in the Greek language. However, Matthew also relies on the hypothetical 'Q' document for additional sayings attributed to Jesus. Thus Matthewcontains sayings and parables that are absent from Mark.

Matthew includes a nativity story that is entirely absent from Mark's Gospel. It is also quite different from the nativity story in Luke.

Matthew includes a genealogy of Jesus, back through Joseph and the great Zorobabel, son of Salathiel. This is entirely absent from Mark's Gospel and is quite different from the genealogy in Luke.

Mark's story of the temptation of Jesus, after his baptism, is more primitive than the elaborate story in Matthew. In Mark, Satan could be the loyal assistant of God, as in Jewish belief, tempting Jesus in order to test his worthiness for the role. In Matthew, Satan is clearly the Christian devil and tempts Jesus with evil intent.

Mark's Gospel is noted for its geographical errors, some of which the author of Matthew corrected. In Mark, Jesus went across the Sea of Galilee to the land of the Gerasenes*, a town far away from the Sea and across a river, and healed the demon-possessed man. This location was changed in Matthew to 'Gadarenes'. (* Note: the KJV Bible has changed the text in Mark to 'Gadarenes' in conformance with Matthew, but some other English translations, such as the New American Bible (NAB), have kept the original text.)

Mark's Gospel has the storm whipping up waves that threatened to sink the fishing boat. Matthew and Luke, possibly more familiar with Palestine, removed the references to the 'storm' waves that threatened to sink the fishing boat.

In the crucifixion narrative, Mark records a great darkness for three hours and the tearing of temple curtain. Matthew embellished this with an earthquake and the dead rising from their graves and walking into the city, with another earthquake to roll away the stone.

In Mark 15:23, the soldiers offered the condemned Jesus a drink of wine and myrrh, an expensive healing potion. Matthewinstead has the soldiers offer Jesus, while on the cross, vinegar on a sponge.

In Mark's Gospel, the stone was already moved when the women arrived at the tomb of Jesus, and they went inside. In Matthew's Gospel, the stone was still in place when the women arrived, but there was a great earthquake and an angel descended from heaven and rolled back the stone and sat on it. It was the angel who told the women that Jesus was risen and they left without going into the tomb.

Mark's Gospel originally ended at verse 16:8, where the young man told the women that Jesus was written and the women ran off in terror, telling no one - the "Long Ending" (verses 16:9-25) were added later to more or less harmonise Mark with Matthew and Luke. Matthew says the women ran with great joy to tell the disciples. They saw Jesus on the road back and worshipped him; Jesus appeared to the disciples in a mountain in Galilee.

Unique to Matthew is the passage in which the authorities told the guard to say that the disciples came in the night and removed Jesus' body.

Answer 2

A:We must not assume that the four New Testament gospels are independent eyewitness accounts or separately based on apostolic testament, because they were originally anonymous and were only attributed by the early Church Fathers to the disciples whose names they now bear, later in the second century. In fact, scholars say that the authors of Matthew and Luke relied on Mark's Gospel for everything they knew about the life and mission of Jesus, as well as relying on the hypothetical 'Q' document for additional sayings material.

As a result, much of what is in Mark will be found in Matthew and Luke, although sometimes with elaborations. For example, in Mark, the stories of John the Baptist and the baptism of Jesus are dealt with in ten verses, but take 17 verses in Matthew's Gospel. In Mark, the story of the temptation in the wilderness takes just one verse (Mark 1:13), but consists of ten verses in Matthew (Matthew 4:2-11) - using material from the 'Q' document.

The similarities also flow back from Matthew and Luke to Mark. Mark's Gospel 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 - thus no resurrection appearances. With no guidance from Mark, each of the later gospel authors had to create his own resurrection appearances, to prove to the readers that Jesus really had risen from the dead. In Matthew's case, Jesus first appeared to the two women as they walked back to tell the disciples; in Luke's case, Jesus appeared to the two men as they walked on the road to Emmaeus. When the 'Long Ending' was eventually added to Mark, it included a passage in which Jesus appeared to "the two of them", thus harmonising with both Matthew and Luke.

Because the Gospel of John was inspired largely by the Gospel of Luke, whenever John parallels the synoptic gospels it is usually most similar to Luke, except for a small number of passages that came direct from Mark.

Of course there are episodes that John shares with all the synoptics, such as the cleansing of the temple, in which he overturned the tables of the moneychangers. Here, the author placed this episode at the beginning of the mission of Jesus, rather than at the very end. This is evidence of our author's literary licence - John is rarely a faithful copy of its sources, so it draws attention when it is close.

One clear similarity between John and Mark, alone of the synoptic gospels is found in John 12:5: "Why was not this ointment sold for three hundred pence, and given to the poor," which can only have come from Mark 14:5: "For it might have been sold for more than three hundred pence, and have been given to the poor." This measure is not found in either Luke or Matthew. Another is John 6:7: "Philip answered him, Two hundred pennyworth of bread is not sufficient for them, that every one of them may take a little," which can only have been interpreted from Mark 6:37:" ... Shall we go and buy two hundred pennyworth of bread, and give them to eat?" Given that John's Gospel so rarely follows that of Mark, the exact measures of three hundred pence and two hundred pennyworth of bread are remarkable.

Answer 3

A:The Gospel of Peter is a second-century gospel known from two separate discoveries, while the Gospel of Matthew is one of the four New Testament gospels and is dated to the eighties of the first century. Matthew was written anonymously and only in the second century attributed to the apostle Matthew, while Peter was written pseudepigraphically for the apostle Peter. Both are derived from older gospels: Matthew partly from Mark and partly from the hypothetical 'Q' Gospel, and some further material unique to Matthew; Peter from all three synoptic gospels.

Matthew seeks to report about the life and mission of Jesus, from conception to his death and resurrection. Peter is purely a passion narrative, dealing exclusively with death and resurrection of Jesus.