What is different about the 4 Gospels of the New Testament?

Answer 1

The four canonical Gospels are recognized by Christians as being those written by Matthew, Mark, Luke and John. The Gospels take their names from their assumed authors and comprise the first part of the New Testament compilation.
The four Gospels — Matthew, Mark, Luke, and John — each present the life and/or ministry of Jesus from the author's point of view.

Answer 2

The four Gospels of the New Testament offer four distinct perspectives on the life, teachings, death, and resurrection of Jesus Christ. Each Gospel was written by a different author (Matthew, Mark, Luke, John) and tailored to a specific audience, highlighting different aspects of Jesus's ministry and message. While there is overlap in content, each Gospel provides unique insights and emphases.

Answer 3

A similarity between all four gospels is that they all point to that one, blessed person, the Lord Jesus Christ, the Savior, the Son of God. But each present him in a different way. Such as: Matthew- Jesus as a teacher Mark- Jesus as the suffering servant/ Messiah Luke- Jesus as the compasionate Savior John- Jesus--God Incarnate; Life -giving Divine Savior

Answer 4

Each gospel appeals to a different reader. For example, Matthew appeals to the Jews by citing Jewish geneology tracing Jesus back to David, and explaining how this makes Jesus king of kings. And Luke mainly caters to Gentiles.

Answer 5

A:

Matthew, Mark and Luke are often referred to as the synoptic gospels because of their similarities and particularly their frequent use of exactly the same Greek text.

All the New Testament gospels were written anonymously in the Greek language and were only attributed to the apostles whose names they now bear, later in the second century. Modern biblical scholars say that there is no good reason to accept those attributions, and that we do not really know who wrote the gospels. They say that none of the gospels could have been written by an eyewitness to the events portrayed, thus there is no personal memory of Jesus from which more consistent witness accounts would be written.

The second century Church Fathers realised that there was a literary dependency among the three synoptic gospels, as can easily be demonstrated by a parallel reading in the Greek language. By the end of the second century they had formed the opinion that Matthew was written first, and that Mark and Luke were derived by copying Matthew's Gospel. Modern scholars agree there is a clear literary dependency, but have demonstrated that Mark was first and that the authors of Matthew and Luke relied on Mark for their knowledge of the life and mission of Jesus. However, the authors of Matthew and Luke believed that their followers needed more information on Jesus, particularly on his birth and his resurrection appearances, neither of which Mark had mentioned. Without guidance from Mark, each author wrote a quite different nativity story and a quite different story of the appearances of the risen Jesus1.

Neverthelss, it appears that there were perhaps 13 pages missing from the copy of Mark that was used by the author of Luke. The consequence of this is the 'Missing Block', a total of 74.5 verses from Mark 6:47 to Mark 8:27a, a total of 74.5 verses that are omitted from Luke.

Matthew and Luke shared a further source, the hypothetical 'Q' document, for sayings material attributed to Jesus. It appears that Q was unknown to the author of Mark, so this gospel does not contain any of the material from Q.

There is additional material unique to each of Matthewand Luke, for which there is no known source, and which some scholars believe not to reflect real, historical events.

Footnote

1Mark's Gospel, in its original form, 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's Gospel long afterwards to provide the necessary resurrection appearances.

Answer 6

A:Matthew, Mark and Luke are known as the synoptic gospels, because they are moderately similar in what they say. Biblical scholars say that this results from Matthew and Luke being based on the Gospel of Mark. John's Gospel, on the other hand, was not directly based on Mark, but on Luke, and its author felt less constrained to remain close to his source.

This history made John's Gospel very different from the other New Testament gospels, no doubt raising questions in the minds of the early Church Fathers about its authenticity. Origen, in defending John's Gospel (Commentary on John), said "Although he does not always tell the truth literally, he always tells it spiritually."

Answer 7

Scholars now know that Mark's Gospel was the earliest gospel, and that it was written around 70 CE. The authors of Matthew's Gospel and Luke's Gospel copied much of their material from Mark, but each often elaborated the original in some way, without reference to the other. Matthew and Luke also derived much additional material from the hypothetical 'Q' document, which seems not to have been available to Mark. Also, since 'Q' only contained sayings material without the context in which Jesus might have uttered those sayings, Matthew and Luke each had to provide its own hypothetical context, usually as parables but in different places and at different times. A less obvious difference is that Luke's Gospel omits a large and important section of material from Mark's Gospel, now known as the "Missing Block". It has been estimated that the Missing Block probably consisted of thirteen pages of Greek text.

Both Matthew and Luke responded to a need to tell about the infancy of Jesus, but each was unaware of the other's account, so they have little in common. And because Mark (in its original form, before the addition of the "Long Ending") provided no information about the appearances of the risen Jesus, each added information about those appearances, again without any reference to the other's account.

Scholars say that John's Gospel was inspired by Luke's Gospel, and with some material taken direct from Mark, but that he took greater liberties than did his predecessors. He not only moved material around in time, he sometimes even reversed the original sense. Thus, the hypothetical resurrection of poor Lazareth, contained in a parable in Luke, became the actual resurrection of rich Lazareth in John.

Answer 8

Gospels were a new genre similar to biographies, but with one important difference. If a biography is shown to contain untrue material, it is no longer a biography. If a gospel is shown to contain untrue material, it is still a gospel.

One characteristic of the gospels is the extent to which they tell much the same story: this is because the Gospels of Matthew and Luke were actually based on Mark's Gospel, even to the extent that they often contain exactly the same words in the Greek language. John's Gospel is believed to have been loosely based on Luke.

Answer 9

There were far more than four gospels, but the four that we now see in the New Testament are the gospels that most closely correspond to the theology of the centrist Christian church of the second century. All four were originally anonymous and we now know that Mark's Gospel, written approximately 70 CE, was the first to be written. The other gospels were based directly (Matthew, Luke) or indirectly (John) on Mark's Gospel. Thus, they substantially represent a single record of the mission of Jesus, with some alterations and elaborations in the later gospels.

Answer 10

The gospels in The Bible are Matthew, Mark, Luke and John.