The Synoptic Problem refers to the question of the literary relationships between the first three gospels of the New Testament – Matthew, Mark, and Luke. These three gospels are called the “Synoptic Gospels” because they share a similar outline and content in many places. The Synoptic Problem seeks to understand the origins of these similarities and differences between the Synoptic Gospels.
There are several main theories that attempt to explain the Synoptic Problem:
The Augustinian Theory
This theory, proposed by Augustine of Hippo in the 5th century, argues that Matthew was written first, followed by Mark using Matthew as a source, and then Luke using both Matthew and Mark as sources. This theory explains the similarities by having Matthew as the earliest account that the later gospels built upon.
The Griesbach Hypothesis
Named after 18th century Biblical scholar Johann Jakob Griesbach, this theory flips the order and argues that Matthew relied on Mark, which in turn relied on Luke as the earliest gospel. This order accounts for Matthew’s similarities to Mark, and Mark’s abridgements of Luke.
The Farrer Hypothesis
Proposed by Austin Farrer in the mid-20th century, this theory has Mark written first, then Matthew using Mark, and finally Luke using both Mark and Matthew. This order accounts for the shared material between Mark and Matthew and the triple tradition between all three Synoptics.
The Two-Source Hypothesis
The most widely accepted theory amongst scholars today is the Two-Source Hypothesis. This proposes that Mark was written first, and then Matthew and Luke independently used Mark as one source. The material common to Matthew and Luke but not found in Mark is explained by a hypothetical second source called “Q” (from German “Quelle” meaning source). Thus the Two-Source Hypothesis has two sources underlying the Synoptics: Mark and Q.
There are variations within the Two-Source Hypothesis, such as theories about the nature and extent of Q and the possibility of additional sources besides Mark and Q. But in general, the Two-Source Hypothesis with Markan priority and a lost Q source is the standard explanation for the Synoptic Problem today.
Major Evidence for the Synoptic Theories
There are several main pieces of evidence scholars use to evaluate the various Synoptic theories:
- Mark has the shortest, most basic narrative. Matthew and Luke are longer and more complete.
- Matthew and Luke often agree verbatim against Mark in triple tradition passages.
- Matthew and Luke sometimes present pericopes in different narrative contexts than Mark.
- Mark does not have any infancy material or Sermon on the Mount type teachings as found in Matthew and Luke.
- Matthew and Luke share large amounts of material not found in Mark (the hypothesized Q source).
- Matthew and Luke sometimes differ in their wording of shared material both with and without parallels in Mark.
Evaluating this evidence has led to the Two-Source Hypothesis as the most cogent solution to explaining the origins and literary relationships of the Synoptic Gospels. The agreements and disagreements between the Synoptics are overall best accounted for by the theory that Matthew and Luke independently used Mark and Q as sources.
The Nature of Q
The Q source hypothesized in the Two-Source theory is thought to have been a collection of Jesus’ sayings and teachings. Q material common to Luke and Matthew includes:
- The Beatitudes (Matthew 5:3-12, Luke 6:20-23)
- Love your enemies (Matthew 5:44, Luke 6:27-28)
- The Lord’s Prayer (Matthew 6:9-13, Luke 11:2-4)
- The birds of the air and the lilies (Matthew 6:26-28, Luke 12:24-28)
- The Test of a Good Tree (Matthew 7:15-20, Luke 6:43-45)
Q source material gives insight into the earliest Christian teachings on Jesus’ ethical sayings and parables. While we no longer have a copy of Q, scholars theorize about its contents based on Matthew and Luke’s shared non-Markan material.
Implications of the Synoptic Theories
The Synoptic Problem theories have implications for our understanding of the origins, purposes, and historicity of the Synoptic Gospels. For example:
- Markan priority supports Mark being based on eyewitness testimony from Peter.
- Q material reveals Jesus as a teacher and the earliest Christian ethical beliefs.
- Differences between Matthew and Luke hint at the evangelists’ unique perspectives.
- Agreements between Synoptics boost historical reliability of many episodes from Jesus’ ministry.
While absolute certainty on the interrelationships between the Synoptics may remain elusive, continued analysis of the Synoptic Problem sheds light on the foundations of the four Gospels and helps construct a historical framework for Jesus’ life and teachings.
Analysis of Key Passages
Looking at a few key Synoptic passages helps illustrate the theories about literary relationships and possible Q material.
The Baptism of Jesus
The account of Jesus’ baptism by John is found in all four Gospels. When comparing the Synoptic versions, Mark is briefest while Matthew and Luke add details and dialogue:
Mark 1:9-11
In those days Jesus came from Nazareth of Galilee and was baptized by John in the Jordan. And when he came up out of the water, immediately he saw the heavens being torn open and the Spirit descending on him like a dove. And a voice came from heaven, “You are my beloved Son; with you I am well pleased.”
Matthew 3:13-17 expands Mark’s account by describing John’s initial refusal to baptize Jesus until Jesus insists it is necessary “to fulfill all righteousness.” Matthew also specifies the Spirit of God and voice from heaven addressing Jesus directly (“This is my beloved Son…”).
Luke 3:21-22 follows Mark but has the Spirit descend in “bodily form, like a dove” and the voice address the crowd (“You are my beloved Son…”).
This passage illustrates Markan priority, with Matthew and Luke expanding yet differing slightly from Mark’s basic account.
The Beatitudes
The Beatitudes are Jesus’ famous blessings/statements of eschatological reversal. They are one of the most extensive blocks of material found in both Matthew and Luke but not Mark – thus hypothesized Q material:
Matthew 5:3-12:
Blessed are the poor in spirit, for theirs is the kingdom of heaven. Blessed are those who mourn, for they shall be comforted. Blessed are the meek, for they shall inherit the earth…
Luke 6:20-23:
Blessed are you who are poor, for yours is the kingdom of God. Blessed are you who are hungry now, for you shall be satisfied. Blessed are you who weep now, for you shall laugh…
The Beatitudes demonstrate a shared non-Markan tradition, but Matthew and Luke differ in wording, order, and length, suggesting Q rather than direct literary dependence.
The Road to Emmaus
This resurrection appearance story is only found in Luke 24:13-35. There is no Markan or Matthean parallel. This supports theories of unique, independent traditions behind each Synoptic.
The Post-Resurrection Commission
All four Gospels conclude with Jesus commissioning his disciples after the resurrection, but with markedly different wording and settings:
Matthew 28:16-20 – On a mountain in Galilee. Disciples worship Jesus. Commissioned to baptize and teach all nations.
Mark 16:14-18 – As Jesus sits at table. Commissioned to proclaim the gospel to all creation.
Luke 24:44-49 – In Jerusalem. Opened their minds to the Scriptures. Commissioned to preach repentance and forgiveness.
John 20:19-23 – Appears to disciples in locked room. Breathes Holy Spirit on them.
The discrepancies in the commissioning accounts further support independent traditions and authorial intent behind each Gospel.
Conclusion
In summary, the Synoptic Problem remains a complex literary puzzle, but thorough analysis of the texts points to Markan priority and the Two-Source Hypothesis as the most plausible solution. Examining the similarities and differences between the Synoptics provides insight into the development of the four Gospel traditions and aids a historical understanding of Jesus’ life and teachings. While questions linger, study of the Synoptic Problem equips Christians to appreciate the distinct perspectives and purposes captured in Matthew, Mark, Luke and John’s Good News of Jesus Christ.