The Synoptic Gospel Parallels with John's Gospel

The Synoptic Gospel Parallels with John's Gospel

The synoptic Gospels are the first three Gospels of the New Testament, Matthew, Mark and Luke and are considered as one unit. The Gospel parallels provided here also include the Gospel of John for comparison. The term synoptic is derived from a combination of the Greek words συν (syn = together) and οψις (opsis = seeing) to indicate that the contents of these three Gospels can be viewed side-by-side, whether in a vertical parallel column synopsis, or a horizontal synoptic alignment. These first three books have been called the synoptic Gospels since the 18th century and are so called because they give similar accounts of the ministry of Jesus. The term is also applied to apocryphal works of the 2nd century (e.g., The Gospel of Thomas). The Gospel according to John has a number of points of contact with the three synoptic Gospels but differs considerably from them in content and therefore not all Gospel synopses display the book of John. The fourth canonical gospel of John differs significantly from the synoptics in terms of Christology, which is the field of study within Christian theology which is concerned with the nature of Jesus the Christ, in particular, how the divine and human are related in his person. Christology is generally less concerned with the details of Jesus' life than it is with how the human and divine co-exist in one person.

The synoptic gospels often recount the same stories about Jesus, though sometimes with different and more or less detail, but mostly following the same sequence and to a large extent using the same words. The question of the relationship between the three is called the synoptic problem. This problem concerns the literary relationships between and among the first three canonical gospels of Mark, Matthew, and Luke collectively known as the synoptic Gospels. Similarity in word choices and event placement shows an interrelationship. The synoptic problem concerns how this interrelation came to pass and what the nature of this interrelationship is. Any solution must account for the similarities and differences in content, order, and wording. Possible answers speculate either a direct relationship (one Evangelist possessed one of the gospels) or indirect (two Evangelists having access to a shared source).

Most Protestant and some Roman Catholic scholars agree that Matthew and Luke were written later than Mark, which they followed closely. Matthew then divided Mark into five portions and used them in order, separating them by other material. Luke divided the book only in two, nine chapters being inserted between. Mark however, only accounts for half of the other two Gospels. Matthew and Luke each have about 100 verses in common, most of them sayings like the Beatitudes. Views about the dating of all four Gospels vary greatly from about 60–70 AD until the end of the first century where it is believed the Gospel of John was last written.

The tables of Gospel parallels here are where necessary repeated to give a continuous series of references in canonical order for each of the four gospels. The bold type in the tables indicates the verses in order for each gospel. For example, pericopes that are identical except for the difference in bold type shows that the pericope in bold comes before the other reference for the other gospel not in bold face. This done so the person using these synoptic Gospel parallels can scan down each Gospel's column, stopping only for the bold references, to get all the references and Gospel parallels in order for each Gospel.

1. Preface
2. Birth and Childhood
3. Preparation
4. The Beginning of Jesus' Public Ministry (According to John)
5. Jesus' Ministry in Galilee
6. The Sermon on the Mount (According to Matthew)
7. The Sermon on the Plain (According to Luke)
8. Jesus' Ministry in Galilee Continued
9. The Way to the Cross
10. Last Journey to Jerusalem (According to Luke)
11. Jesus at the Feast of Tabernacles (According to John)
12. The Ministry in Judea
13. The Final Ministry in Jerusalem
14. The Olivet Discourse
15. Conclusion of the Account before the Passion
16. The Passion Narrative
17. The Resurrection
18. The Endings of the Gospels

1. Preface

2. Birth and Childhood

3. Preparation

4. The Beginning of Jesus' Public Ministry (According to John)

5. Jesus' Ministry in Galilee

6. The Sermon on the Mount (According to Matthew)

7. The Sermon on the Plain (According to Luke)

8. Jesus' Ministry in Galilee Continued

9. The Way to the Cross

10. Last Journey to Jerusalem (According to Luke)

11. Jesus at the Feast of Tabernacles (According to John)

12. The Ministry in Judea

13. The Final Ministry in Jerusalem

14. The Olivet Discourse

15. Conclusion of the Account before the Passion

16. The Passion Narrative

17. The Resurrection

18. The Endings of the Gospels

Note: The Gospel Parallels. Short ending of Mark: Several witnesses, including four uncial Greek manuscripts of the seventh, eighth, and ninth centuries (L Ψ 099 0112), as well as Old Latin k, the margin of the Harclean Syriac, several Sahidic and Bohairic manuscripts, and not a few Ethiopic manuscripts, continue after verse eight with small variations.

Starting in the 19th century, textual critics have commonly asserted that Mark 16:9–20, describing some of the disciples' encounters with the resurrected Jesus was added after the original autograph. Mark 16:8 stops at the empty tomb without further explanation. The last twelve verses are missing from the oldest manuscripts of Mark's Gospel. The style of these verses differs from the rest of Mark suggesting they were a later addition. In a handful of manuscripts, a “short ending” is included after 16:7, but before the “long ending”, and exists by itself in one of the earliest Old Latin codices, Codex Bobiensis. By the 5th century, at least four different endings have been attested.

Irenaeus, c. 180, quoted from the long ending, specifically as part of Mark’s Gospel. The 3rd-century theologian Origen quoted the resurrection stories in Matthew, Luke, and John but failed to quote anything after Mark 16:8, suggesting that his copy of Mark stopped there, but this is an argument from silence. Eusebius and Jerome both mention the majority of texts available to them omitted the longer ending. Critics are divided over whether the original ending at 16:8 was intentional, whether it resulted from accidental loss, or even the author’s death. Those who believe that 16:8 was not the intended ending argue that it would be very unusual syntax for the text to end with the conjunction “gar” (γαρ), as does Mark 16:8, and that thematically it would be strange for a book of good news to end with a note of fear (εφοβουντο γαρ, “for they were afraid”). Some of those who believe that the 16:8 ending was intentional suggest a connection to the theme of the “Messianic Secret”. This abrupt ending is also used to support the identification of this book as an example of closet drama.