These three Gospels have been called “Synoptic,” a word which means “seeing together,” because they share in common a large amount of material, follow the same basic order, and stand apart from John, whose Gospel is unique among the four.

Long ago people realized you could display the text of the three Synoptic Gospels side by side in columns to form a synopsis or parallel Gospel or a harmony. When you do this you find that a large percentage of Matthew, Mark, and Luke are parallel. They share a large amount of verbatim agreement, though each of the three has unique ways of diverging from each other in small and large matters. Much is the same and some is different.

For a long time, people who have studied the Gospels in synopsis (parallel columns) have referred to “the Synoptic Problem.” That problem is: how do we account for the agreements and differences in the parallel accounts and in the other material in the Gospels? Many of the observations I will share here come from a book that I think is the simplest and best-explained handbook on the topic, by Mark Goodacre, The Synoptic Problem: A Way Through the Maze.

In this article I am focusing only on the way comparing the Gospels in synopsis helps us see that Mark was the first to be written. Many other fascinating topics arise from a comparison of the Gospels in this manner.

Here is one of the things you find when you put the Gospels in parallel columns and study the agreements and differences: Mark is the middle term between Matthew and Luke. What I mean is this: again and again in material that occurs in all three Gospels (material called Triple Tradition) Matthew and Mark have agreements in common and Mark and Luke have agreements in common far outweighing the fewer agreements Matthew and Luke have against Mark. In the differences of detail, both Matthew and Luke agree with Mark more than they agree with each other.

Goodacre proposes a way for students to see this for themselves. You can take a synopsis (or harmony or parallel) of the Gospels and work it out for yourself. Find all the Triple Tradition material (it occurs in all three Synoptic Gospels) and use colored pencils to do a survey of agreements and differences. Here is a list of some, not all, of the Triple Tradition material (from Goodacre, pgs 35-36):

• Matt 8:1-4 … Mark 1:40-45 … Luke 5:12-16 . . . . . . . . . . . Leper
• Matt 9:1-8 … Mark 2:1-12 … Luke 5:12-16 . . . . . . . . . . . . Paralytic
• Matt 9:9-13 … Mark 2:13-17… Luke 5:12-16 . . . . . . . . . . Call of Levi/Matthew
• Matt 9:14-17 … Mark 2:18-22 … Luke 5:12-16 . . . . . . . . Fasting, New Wine, Patches
• Matt 12:1-8 … Mark 2:23-28 … Luke 5:12-16 . . . . . . . . . . Grain on Sabbath
• Matt 12:9-14 … Mark 3:1-6 … Luke 5:12-16 . . . . . . . . . . . Man with Withered Hand
• Matt 10:1-4 … Mark 3:13-19 … Luke 5:12-16 . . . . . . . . . . The Twelve
• Matt 12:46-50 … Mark 3:31-35 … Luke 5:12-16 . . . . . . . . Mother and brothers
• Matt 13:1-23 … Mark 4:1-20… Luke 5:12-16 . . . . . . . . . . Sower Parable
• Matt 8:23-27 … Mark 4:35-41 … Luke 5:12-16 . . . . . . . . Calming Storm
• Matt 8:28-34 … Mark 5:1-20 … Luke 5:12-16 . . . . . . . . . Gerasene Demoniac
• Matt 9:18-26 … Mark 5:21-43 … Luke 5:12-16 . . . . . . . . Jairus, Bleeding Woman
• Matt 14:13-21 … Mark 6:30-44 … Luke 5:12-16 . . . . . . Feeding Five Thousand
• Matt 16:13-20 … Mark 8:27-30… Luke 5:12-16 . . . . . . . Peter’s Confession
• Matt 17:1-8 … Mark 9:2-8 … Luke 5:12-16 . . . . . . . . . . . Transfiguration
• Matt 17:14-20 … Mark 9:14-29 … Luke 5:12-16 . . . . . . . Epilectic Boy
• Matt 19:13-15 … Mark 10:13-16 … Luke 18:15-17 . . . . . . . Little Children
• Matt 19:16-30 … Mark 10:17-31… Luke 18:18-30 . . . . . . Rich Young Ruler
• Matt 20:29-34 … Mark 10:46-52 … Luke 18:35-43 . . . .Blind Bartimaeus
• Matt 21:1-9 … Mark 11:1-10… Luke 19:28-38 . . . . . . . . . Triumphal Entry
• Matt chs. 21-28 … Mark chs. 11-16 … Luke chs. 20-24 Passion Narratives

So here is Goodacre’s coloring project and here are the results you will get. Color words found only in Matthew blue. Words found only in Mark color red. Words unique to Luke should be yellow. Words shared only by Matthew and Mark would be purple. Words shared only by Matthew and Luke would be green. Words shared only by Mark and Luke would be orange. Finally, words found in all three will be brown.

Here is what you will find. There will be a lot of brown, some purple, some orange, but very little green. In other words, agreements between Matthew and Luke against Mark are rare. This shows that Mark is the middle term between the three. What does Goodacre mean by “middle term”? This can be illustrated as below:

TRIPLE TRADITION MATERIAL AGREEMENTS

. . . MATTHEW . . . MARK . . . LUKE . . .

. . . MATTHEW . . . MARK

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .MARK . . . LUKE

He means that Matthew used Mark as a source and also Luke used Mark as a source. If we propose that Mark was first and that both Matthew and Luke read Mark, it explains the fact that Matthew agrees more with Mark against Luke than with Luke against Mark. It explains how Luke agrees more with Mark against Matthew than with Matthew against Mark.

How we can tell that neither Matthew nor Luke was first: If Matthew was the first Gospel and if Mark and Luke both knew Matthew, then Matthew would be the middle term. If Luke was first, it would be the middle term. Mark is what Matthew and Luke have most in common. Therefore Mark was first.

More evidence: Another phenomenon in the Gospels is that there is a good body of material found in Matthew and Mark, but not Luke, and a good amount found in Mark and Luke, but not Matthew. And the Matthew-Mark material and Mark-Luke material follows the order of guess which Gospel? Mark. Again we see Mark as the middle term. Another line of evidence is the tendency of Mark to make statements in raw, unfiltered, almost scandalous terms. Whenever Mark describes Yeshua in a manner than might be controversial, we sometimes find that Matthew and Luke soften the description. If Mark makes the disciples look bad, we find that Matthew and Luke make them look less bad. Then there is the matter of material Mark does not include, things like the Lord’s Prayer and the various teachings that make up Matthew’s Sermon on the Mount and Luke’s Sermon on the Plain. Does it make sense, if Mark came later, that he would omit this material? In choosing what to include and what to leave out of a written Gospel (the community knew many more sayings and deeds of Yeshua than the Gospels record) why would Mark leave out the Lord’s Prayer once it was part of the Synoptic Gospel tradition? He would not be likely to. More likely, Mark was written before Matthew.

In short, the evidence stacks up that Mark is what Matthew and Luke have most in common and that Mark was the earliest to be written and circulated.

Discipleship reading might look like the following:

Replacement at the level of ideas (truths to replace falsehood and subtle errors).
Example: Yeshua sought to replace his disciples’ notion that “Messiah’s coming is to bring retribution on Israel’s enemies and to glorify us nationally” with a different notion that “Messiah’s coming is about healing Israel and the nations and the path begins with suffering.” In our time, a notion that needs replacing is “Yeshua came to reward me with an opulent afterlife experience.”

Replacement at the level of desires (the proper desires which replace envy, lust, and pride).
Example: Yeshua sought to replace national pride (Mark 12:1-9) with a desire to see broken people redeemed (Luke 14:15-24).

Replacing wicked and unhealthy habits with good ones. 
Example: Yeshua taught that a tree can only have either good or bad fruit and right after followed this up with a charge to build life on his teachings in order to survive storms. Thus, the many things Yeshua taught by example and by admonition are active ways to bear fruit for God and keep out bad fruit.

More…
Replace fear with faith. Add knowledge to root out ignorance. Abandon unhelpful goals and reorder misplaced priorities. Repent of unforgiveness. I will add more over time to this article, but this seemed like a good start.

Here is the growing Table of Contents (more to come):

• What is in the gospels? (Genre).
• Study Methods and Tips: Beginner to Intermediate.
• Reading as a disciple.
• Parables, Gospel by Gospel.
• List: Teachings of Yeshua.
• List: Teachings Unique to Luke.
• List: Healing Miracles of Yeshua.
• List: Exorcisms by Yeshua.
• List: Nature Miracles of Yeshua.
• Symbolic Actions and Kingdom Enactments.
• Midrash in the Gospels, the Example of Matthew 2:15.
• Yeshua’s Exalted Identity (Synoptic Gospels).

READING IMMERSION METHOD: Read Mark first. Then Matthew. Then Luke. Then John. This is the very likely order in which the gospels were written. Notice that Mark ends at 16:8. Anything after 16:8 printed in whatever translation of the Bible you are reading is based on late manuscripts and was added by scribes. Did Mark ever have an ending beyond 16:8? No one is sure. Notice what Mark does not have that Matthew and then Luke add: infancy narratives and resurrection narratives (Mark ends with the empty tomb). Notice that Luke’s infancy and resurrection narratives are quite different from Matthew’s. Notice how John’s gospel is largely stories near Jerusalem, how the sayings of Yeshua are long discourses, and how his is the only gospel which does not follow Mark’s basic outline.

READING HABITUAL METHOD: Make it your habit to read a bit of the gospels daily, in order either Mk-Mt-Lk-Jn or Mt-Mk-Lk-Jn. You might read one chapter a day. Or you might get a good commentary and read one section or subsection from its outline every day. If you are a Torah reader, following the parashot of Torah, you might read Matthew with Genesis, Mark with Exodus, Luke with Leviticus, John with Numbers, and Acts with Deuteronomy (I have an email list called the Daily D’var that provides these readings daily with my commentary — to request it email me at yeshuaincontext at gmail).

CHECK VARYING TRANSLATIONS: It is good to give preference to translations such as RSV (Revised Standard Version) and NRSV (New Revised Standard Version) and ESV (English Standard Version) and NASB (New American Standard Bible). The DHE (Delitzsch Hebrew English Version) is a good supplement (based on Franz Delitzsch’s Hebrew translation of the gospels and recently translated into English by Vine of David). Loose translations such as NIV, NLT, CEV, and TNIV may give you some false impressions of certain sayings and narratives.

HARMONY: Some narratives and/or sayings in the gospels are parallel passages. In many cases, the section in Mark will be repeated in Matthew and Luke. Some material in Matthew is shared by Luke and not in Mark. Only a few parallels exist between John and the other gospels. It is often helpful to check a Harmony of the Gospels or Synopsis of the Gospels. There is a free online Harmony of the Gospels available a BlueLetterBible (click here). A very helpful printed Harmony is A Harmony of the Gospels: New American Standard Edition by Thomas and Gundry (available at amazon). The advantage of a printed harmony is that the passages are laid out in parallel columns for easy comparison and contrast. A Greek synopsis is also available: Synopsis Quattuor Evangeliorum: Locis Parallelis Evangeliorum Apocryphorum Et Patrum Adhibitis Edidit by Kurt Aland. Notice the ways Matthew and Luke change Mark. Notice also similarities. And in the double tradition (Mt-Lk) material, compare and contrast Matthew and Luke.

HEBREW BIBLE: A.K.A., Old Testament. You need to understand the first five books of the Bible to get past a basic level of understanding in the gospels. If you are somewhat Pentateuch illiterate, habitual daily reading is a great idea. The Jewish readings (called parashot — singular is parashah) bring you through the Pentateuch in a year (see HebCal.com for the readings of the day). If you need a Torah course (recommended), First Fruits of Zion’s Torah Club is a great one (start with Year One). My book, A New Look at the Old Testament may be helpful also (available at amazon or at my site here: MountOlivePress.com).

ALLUSIONS AND REFERENCES TO THE HEBREW BIBLE: Look them up. You will often find that Yeshua’s way of using the Hebrew Bible (or the way the gospel author uses the Hebrew Bible) is unusual, perhaps different than the ways you have seen people use the scriptures. Yeshua’s methods are very Jewish. Also, see the category here: “Hebrew Bible as Testimony.” Certain themes from the Bible are very important: Creation, Covenant, Temple, Wisdom, Messianic Age, Messiah (Son of David), Son of Man.

ASSUME A POSITIVE VIEW OF TORAH AND JUDAISM: You will find it more illuminating to read Yeshua as positive about the Mosaic Torah, Temple, Law, and customs of Judaism than negative. Keep in mind that the Pharisees were a small sect and did not at this time dominate Jewish practice. Keep in mind that various Jews differed on the best way to keep Torah and that Yeshua is teaching how to do it, not arguing whether it should be done. And, Yeshua is Galilean, while Sadducees and Pharisees are Judean (and Galileans mistrust Judeans).

COMMENTARIES: If you want commentaries that combine readability and scholarship, the Sacra Pagina Series (Catholic) is hard to beat (so, for example, if you search “mark sacra pagina” at amazon, you will find the commentaries I am talking about).

This principle is not evident to everyone. Recently I posted something positive on Facebook about the Pharisees. I met with fierce resistance from a well-meaning Christian (actually, I’m not so sure he was well-meaning). He started posting comments with exclamation points and some words capitalized. Didn’t I know Pharisee means hypocrite and they are of their father the devil? And he had a Bible verse to back up each point.

I told him that from knowing a little history we could see that the Pharisees were not what many people think. They were a smaller and far less influential group than many think. They were not all hypocrites and neither were their teachings all opposed to Yeshua’s way. I pointed out a few positive things said about Pharisees, such as Matthew 23:1-2.

The commenter fired back, “All we need to know is in scripture. No need to bring up history to understand the Pharisees. The Bible only is our source.”

It sounds good. It’s not true. The Bible assumes knowledge of some history, trends, facts, and personalities that is not talked about in the text itself. People in Israel in Yeshua’s time knew plenty about Herod Antipas, Essenes, Sadducees, the differences between Galileans and Judeans, the way oil lamps worked, and a thousand other things that are not common knowledge.

So, the first basic principle for gospel study is that you will need some information that is not in the gospels themselves, and sometimes not anywhere in the Bible. You’ll have to consult parts of the Bible outside of the gospels (it is best to have a good knowledge of the Pentateuch and at least some of Isaiah and Psalms before getting too far). You’ll have to consult some resources outside of the Bible too.

How is your Bible study library? Want to know the very first tool you should get?

A Bible dictionary. Which one do I recommend? First, do NOT (please) use one of the free ones to be found online. For most readers, I would recommend either The New Bible Dictionary (eds. Marshall, Millard, Wiseman) or The Eerdman’s Dictionary of the Bible (ed. Freedman).

Anyway, First Fruits of Zion is publishing a booklet based on a presentation I gave with Boaz Michael at the “Jewish Gospels Seminar” here in Atlanta in September. This video goes over point #1. The booklet could be available in December 2011. And thank you to two of my kids, Josiah (13) and Hannah (15), who edited and posted my video!

#5 Read habitually in a recurring cycle, which imitates discipleship.

Disciples were with Yeshua often. The call to a disciple was, “Follow me.” They heard Yeshua’s words again and again in different contexts. The way we can imitate this repeated exposure to his words now is to read daily, habitually, and cyclically. Mark 4:10 shows that nearness to Yeshua was key, “When he was alone, the men that were with him approached with the twelve and asked him about the parable.” Peter’s saying in John 6:68 further this theme, “My master, to whom will we go? The words of eternal life are with you.” My practice is to read the gospels with the Torah cycle (Matthew during Genesis, Mark during Exodus, Luke during Leviticus, John during Numbers, and Acts during Deuteronomy).

I appreciate those who order books and resources. I think this practical presentation will help you dig deeper in your reading the life and message of Yeshua. And your support is a blessing to this writer. Order by clicking here to go to the Mount Olive Press store.

And another of my pointers, which forms the basis for this post: “Understand the genre of parables in rabbinic literature.” And the golden text for learning about this subject: David Stern, Parables in Midrash (note: this is not the David Stern who is famous in the Messianic Jewish community, but the Professor of Classical Hebrew Literature at the University of Pennsylvania).

WHAT IS THE RELATION BETWEEN RABBINIC PARABLES AND YESHUA’S?
This is a tricky question that needs to be addressed. Rabbinic parables started being written down in the fourth century in the land of Israel. That’s quite a long time after Yeshua. Some books and studies have unwisely blurred the lines between the first and fourth century.

Stern sums it up simply: “They were both part of a single genre” (188). This conclusion is based on the work of David Flusser (a scholar whose work, in my opinion, has flaws, but on this specific issue he must have made his point well) who demonstrated that literary characteristics of rabbinic parables have much in common with parables in the gospels.

People were telling parables already before Yeshua’s time and the genre continued with much similarity for hundreds of years.

WHAT IS THE PURPOSE OF PARABLES IN RABBINIC WRITINGS?
Rabbinical parables in most cases originated “in public contexts (sermons or preaching), and as an instrument for praise or blame, often directed at persons in the audience” (200). They “tend to be phrased in terms of praise or blame, or as a variation upon these opposites: approbation or disapproval, appreciation or disappointment, pleasure or pain” (52).

Among the purposes mentioned by Stern for parables are apologetics (defending the idea of faith against ideas that undermine it) and polemics (urging a point of view in opposition to others).

WHAT PARABLES ARE NOT
They are not primarily about doctrine. They may reflect on doctrinal themes. But they are primarily about praise or blame.

They are not riddles intended to confuse outsiders. Stern argues this in spite of Yeshua’s sayings about “to you has been given the secret of the kingdom” and “in order that they might not see” in Mark 4:11-12 (and parallels in Matthew 13:11-13 and Luke 8:10).

Stern thinks Yeshua (or Mark) has been misunderstood. The point is not that the parables were too hard to understand rationally. The point is that outsiders, those who do not remain near to Yeshua and ask questions and learn from him, will not be able to apply them. They will not penetrate the deeper message of the parables, which are mysteries, truths of a complex nature, involving more than interpretation: “To understand correctly, one must be a member of the community” (204).

TIPS FOR READING PARABLES
Who is Yeshua praising and why?

Who is he blaming and why?

How does the praise and blame from the parable receive added information from Yeshua’s teaching and actions with the disciples?

In other words, the parables are persuasive pieces of rhetoric designed to encourage action or belief in a certain direction. They are not primarily about information or revealing doctrine. The rabbinic parables may be later, but they provide a wealth of additional contexts in which we can see the same patterns as in Yeshua’s parables. They confirm for us the way parables were used in public speaking to persuade hearers to a new course of action or to stand firm in a good course of action or belief. We should look for Yeshua’s parables to function the same way.

This will largely keep us from reading too much later Christian theology into the parables, to imagine that they are about a timeline for the last days or a foretelling of Christendom or anything of the kind. They are persuasive sermons delivered to Jews in Galilee and Judea about Jewish life and faith.

Here is how the RSV (Revised Standard Version) translates this saying of Yeshua:

The eye is the lamp of the body. So, if your eye is sound, your whole body will be full of light; but if your eye is not sound, your whole body will be full of darkness. If then the light in you is darkness, how great is the darkness!

For reasons I will argue below, this translation is definitely substandard.

In my opinion, the worst translation of the verse is the NET version (New English), though I do like a lot of things about the NET. But their books are all translated by different scholars with little consistency in translation philosophy. I think they did harm on this verse:

The eye is the lamp of the body. If then your eye is healthy, your whole body will be full of light. But if your eye is diseased, your whole body will be full of darkness. If then the light in you is darkness, how great is the darkness!

The CJB (Complete Jewish Bible and also the Jewish New Testament) does much better, but loses any illusion of close translation by paraphrasing:

‘The eye is the lamp of the body.’ So if you have a ‘good eye’ [that is, if you are generous] your whole body will be full of light; but if you have an ‘evil eye’ [if you are stingy] your whole body will be full of darkness. If, then, the light in you is darkness, how great is that darkness!

The nice thing about the CJB here is that the reader gets help understanding the idiom (the good eye = generosity) and this interpretation is, in my opinion as argued below, correct.

The strangest is the King James, but then perhaps in Elizabethan English “single” had some denotation I am not familiar with:

The light of the body is the eye: if therefore thine eye be single, thy whole body shall be full of light. But if thine eye be evil, thy whole body shall be full of darkness. If therefore the light that is in thee be darkness, how great is that darkness!

Here are some comments I have written about Matthew 6:22-23 and then I will talk about Delitzsch’s choice of Hebrew words in his translation and how the DHE helps readers see a meaning within the orbit of Jewish discussion and terminology (as it should be):

The saying about the eye as the lamp of the body is hard for moderns to grasp. It is evident that Yeshua, and the ancients, are thinking of the eye as giving light and not just receiving it. Yeshua combines the idea of bright eyes (a sign of goodness) with the opposing idea of an evil eye, one that curses and does not bless others (the evil eye is an idiom for a curse). Yeshua teaches his disciples that their eyes should be filled with generosity and devotion to good deeds. A person with shining eyes has an interior light, their whole being is good. So with the eyes we see the needs of others and bless, but with bad eyes, darkness issues from the body and continues the world’s curse.

Now, on the Delitzsch’s translation via the English rendering in the DHE:

The lamp of the body is the eye, and if your eye is whole, your entire body will be illuminated. But if your eye is evil, your entire body will be darkened — and if the light within you is darkened, how great is the darkness!

The DHE’s whole translates תמים or “without blemish.” In the preface to the DHE, the editors thought perhaps Delitzsch should have chosen a term more familiar from rabbinic writings (“beautiful eye” instead of “whole eye”). On the other hand, Delitzsch’s choice of “whole eye” relates the saying of Yeshua to the sacrificial terminology, the offerings of animals that are “whole” or “without blemish.”

As for “evil eye,” you are probably familiar with the idea of a person with an evil eye, one who has the ability to curse and looks at people in order to curse them. It does not matter whether the curse has any valid power behind it. The motive of an evil eye is enough to suggest a great darkness within us when we choose to wish others ill.

So, following the DHE, I think we see a great contrast, a moving lesson.

The generous person is “whole,” even “without blemish” before God. The one who denounces, speaks rudely, and wishes ill of others is filled with darkness.

Generosity erases many sins. Having an evil eye toward others erases many good deeds.

And the DHE helps us, in the limited way a translation can, as opposed to a commentary. Matthew 6:22-23 is another reason I use the DHE and value it.

Mark 4:21-34 is an important sequence of sayings whose meaning in the context of Mark is often obscured by readers who are more familiar with the sayings from Matthew. That is to say, the order in which we read the gospels sometimes affects our interpretation. How does this happen?

The different synoptic evangelists (Mark, Matthew, Luke) often include the same sayings in different contexts. The context of the saying often influences interpretation. The modern reader might wonder if: (a) the sayings are all given in arbitrary contexts with the evangelists rarely if ever knowing what context they may have been uttered in, (b) if the sayings were often repeated again and again so that they occurred in multiple contexts, (c) if each evangelist had his own literary reasons for including the sayings in the contexts where they show up. I choose (c), which does not mean there are no cases where the context and the saying are matched to “what actually happened.” It is quite possible that sometimes the evangelists give us a saying in the actual context of events in which Yeshua uttered the words. But the gospels as we have them are literary compositions and we can get far more out of them by regarding them as such without inserting historical questions into the details.

Remember that Mark’s gospel is the first to be written down and that Matthew and Luke used Mark as a source. Therefore, it is useful to view the lamp, measure, seed, and mustard weed sayings first as Mark used them. And it turns out the context and the sequence of these sayings in Mark is very meaningful.

How Matthew Influences a Reader’s View of These Sayings

The “lamp under a bushel” saying in Matthew is in the Sermon on the Mount (5:15) and its meaning there is about the disciples shining their “lamp” to reveal God’s glory to the world. As I will argue in Part 2, Mark puts this saying in a different context and the one shining his “lamp” is Yeshua, lifted up on the cross.

The “measure” saying in Matthew is in the Sermon on the Mount (7:2). There it refers to the measure or standard of judgment a person uses for another. God will judge us with the same measure we judge others. In Mark (as also in Luke), the measure saying is about giving (giving love, giving money, giving service).

The “to him who has more will be given” saying in Matthew 13:12 is about having the mystery of revelation of the kingdom. Those who learn the kingdom’s mysteries will be given more. In Mark, it seems that what the disciple has is reward, not revelation (God’s reward for the deeds of service).

The “scatter seed” saying from Mark 4:26 is unique, not found in Matthew or Luke. It is a rare case of material unique to Mark.

The “mustard seed” parable is used in Matthew in a very similar context to Mark’s use of it, but in a different sequence of sayings about the kingdom. Probably both Matthew’s use and Mark’s use of the saying is about the remarkable growth. Still, I will argue in Part 2 that Mark’s context for the “mustard seed,” and also Mark’s unique “scattered seed” parable, is about Yeshua sowing the seed more so than the disciples sowing it.

Readers who are used to the traditional order of the gospels (Matthew first) tend to give priority to Matthew’s setting for the sayings. Thus, when reading Mark 4, many readers have a pre-formed opinion about the “lamp” and the “measure” and the “seed.” It is easy to miss how Mark uses them.

Preview: Multi-Use Sayings

If a saying like the lamp and bushel could possibly, as I will try to demonstrate in Part 2, have two meanings as diverse as “disciples shine your light” and “Yeshua’s light will shine from the cross,” should we conclude that the evangelists had no understanding of the meaning of Yeshua’s words?

Not at all. First, it is more than likely that Yeshua himself used the same or similar sayings not only in different contexts, but with different meanings at times for the key terms. Second, many of Yeshua’s sayings are images with multiple layers of meaning. It is possible that multiple traditions of interpretation of a saying like the “lamp under a bushel” developed by the time the gospels were written. Is Matthew right and Mark wrong? They truly could both be right.

Next part: Interpreting Mark 4:21-34 in context.

But here is an even simpler test and if you don’t know the answer, then you have the common disease of Gospel Attention Deficit Disorder. This disease often occurs in religious communities where favorite passages are read and sermonized irregularly and without attention to context, comparisons with parallel passages, and so on. It results from a lack of two things: (1) consistent, habitual reading of the Bible and especially the gospels and (2) taking the time to check the parallels when you read a gospel story.

Here is the test:

How did Peter first meet Yeshua?

I will give the wrong answer in the comments and the right answer in the comments, so see below.

Chapter 1.1 – ORDER AND RELATIONSHIPS IN THE GOSPELS

Before you get too far in reading and thinking about the gospels — their history, the way they present Yeshua, their literary themes, their theology, the practical aspects of discipleship, and so on — it is a good idea to consider where they came from and something about how they came to us. I’ll present a more detailed theory in “Part 4: Eyewitness Theory and the Gospels.”

First, there is some terminology that is important. The first three gospels (Matthew, Mark, and Luke) are known as the synoptic gospels. “Synoptic” means “seeing together” and these gospels are in many ways similar in outline. They present Yeshua from the time of John the Baptist or earlier, his career in Galilee, his final journey to Jerusalem, his trials, death, and empty tomb. The fourth gospel (John) has a different sort of outline in several ways, presenting Yeshua as going to Jerusalem multiple times at various festivals.

There are other terms that can be important to know. Infancy narratives: in Matthew 1-2 and Luke 1-2, the story of Yeshua’s birth and childhood. Passion narratives: all four gospels relate the story of Yeshua’s presentation, trials, and death in Jerusalem. Resurrection narratives: all four gospels relate the empty tomb and three of the four relate appearances after the empty tomb.

For now, I will present two basic theories about the order and relationships of the gospels. The first we might call the standard scholarly paradigm and the second a modified paradigm:

Standard Scholarly Paradigm
MARK is written first (most agree on this point).
MARK is a source for MATTHEW and LUKE.
MATTHEW and LUKE are independent of one another.
MATTHEW and LUKE share material in common not found in MARK.
A non-existent document called Q is considered a possible source for the common material in MATTHEW and LUKE that is not in MARK.
Q is thought to be a document of sayings of Yeshua (no narratives).
JOHN is often thought to be independent or maybe even unaware of the others.
This is also called the TWO-SOURCE theory, which means the synoptic gospels are based on two sources: MARK and Q.

Modified Paradigm
MARK is written first.
MARK is a source for MATTHEW.
MARK and MATTHEW are sources for LUKE.
There is no such thing as Q.
JOHN may present a different approach, but does use MARK as a source (and perhaps all the synoptics).

The modified paradigm is my own preferred way of looking at the evidence and combines ideas from several scholars. To read more about why Q probably does not exist, consider the arguments of Mark Goodacre in The Case Against Q. To consider the case for John using Mark as a source, consider Richard Bauckham’s “John for Readers of Mark” in The Gospels for All Christians.

Thanks for posting the quiz, it was challenging and enlightening. It’s unfortunate that I probably only scored as well as I did because I read skeptic websites from time to time and have discussed the difficulties of inerrancy with my brother, who is a NT scholar. My church background (or devotional reading) alone wouldn’t have prepared me for it.

Take the test as a closed book exam. No open Bibles. This is a test of your retention of gospel stories and sayings (not a test of your ability to look things up!!).

The test has fifty questions. I recommend either printing it out or pasting it into a text document. To get the answers, email me at yeshuaincontext at gmail. And I’d love a follow up email with your score (take off 2 points for every wrong answer and deduct from 100). Hope you all make at least an 80! Here is the test…

1. Which gospel has a birth story that starts in Nazareth, moves to Bethlehem, then to Jerusalem, and back to Nazareth?

2. Which gospel has a birth story that begins in Bethlehem, moves to Egypt, and then to Nazareth?

3. Which two gospels begin with the story of John the Baptist (after a brief prologue)?

4. Which gospel tells the only childhood story about Yeshua we know of (post-infancy)?

5. Which gospel says Yeshua’s first miracle was at a wedding in Cana?

6. At what city in Galilee did Yeshua stay in Simon and Andrew’s home (and this city became his base of operation)?

7. Which of the four gospels is least like the others?

8. How do people get the idea that Yeshua’s career was about three years?

9. If we had only Matthew, Mark, and Luke to go on, how long would we guess Yeshua’s career was?

10. T or F: Yeshua healed only Israelites.

11. T or F: Yeshua always touched people that he healed.

12. What is the name of the blind man Yeshua healed (there were several, but we know the name of only one)?

13. T or F: Mary Magdalene was a prostitute.

14. T or F: Mary Magdalene was demon-possessed.

15. T or F: Yeshua’s work was supported financially by wealthy women.

16. Which female disciple was married to a steward in Herod’s house?

17. T or F: Yeshua expected his disciples to give alms to the poor.

18. T or F: In casting out demons, Yeshua was following the example of the Israelite prophets.

19. What two figures from the Hebrew Bible appeared with Yeshua at the Transfiguration?

20. T or F: We know which mountains were the places of the Sermon on the Mount and the Transfiguration.

21. T or F: The gospels always agree on details such as the number of people or the place names.

22. T or F: The gospels give us one relatively clear order and outline of events in Yeshua’s life.

23. Which gospel says the least about the kingdom?

24. Which gospel says the most about eternal life?

25. Which story about Yeshua is the most famous example of a scene that was not in the original manuscripts but was added later?

26. How is the story of the first disciples different in John?

27. What are some ways the Beatitudes are different in Luke than in Matthew?

28. How is Yeshua’s big “sermon” different in Luke than in Matthew?

29. What is the biggest difference in Johns version of the Temple cleansing (protest) story?

30. T or F: Yeshua said the law made accommodations to human weakness but that his disciples should follow the highest laws in Torah always.

31. T or F: Yeshua said ritual purity and tithes did not matter.

32. What was the major thing Yeshua agreed with the Pharisees about over against the Sadducees (in a public debate)?

33. Which gospel makes the most out of Jewish holiday themes?

34. Which gospel makes the most of Yeshua’s love for the poor and sinners?

35. When asked by the high priest during the trial if he was the Messiah, do all the gospels agree that Yeshua said, “I am”?

36. T or F: Yeshua said he would destroy the Temple.

37. Which gospel has the centurion at the cross say, “Surely this man was innocent!”?

38. In which gospel does Yeshua speak to his mother, Mary, from the cross?

39. Which gospel says that some people came out of the grave when Yeshua died?

40. In which gospel does Yeshua tell the thief that he will be in paradise?

41. How do the gospels disagree about what happened at the sixth hour on the day Yeshua died?

42. How do the gospels disagree about which day Yeshua died on?

43. T or F: The gospels disagree about how many angels were at the empty tomb.

44. T or F: The gospel of John has two endings.

45. Which gospel shows Yeshua ascending to heaven?

46. T or F: The gospels say that Levi is the same person as Matthew and that Levi is one of the Twelve.

47. T or F: In one gospel scene, Mary the mother of Yeshua disbelieves in her son.

48. What are the two famous “nature miracles” of Yeshua (hint: not the fig tree)?

49. T or F: The purpose of parables is to help the uneducated understand the gospel.

50. T or F: Yeshua directly called himself Messiah and Son of God.

John 14:30-31 (RSV)
I will no longer talk much with you, for the ruler of this world is coming. He has no power over me; but I do as the Father has commanded me, so that the world may know that I love the Father. Rise, let us go hence.

Did you notice anything? Most people don’t without first being tipped off that there is something unusual to notice.

What happens after John 14:31? We get three more chapters of Yeshua talking to his disciples (chapters 15-17).

Now does something seem odd?

Now look at John 18:1 (RSV):
When Jesus had spoken these words, he went forth with his disciples across the Kidron valley, where there was a garden, which he and his disciples entered.

Hmm, seems like chapters 15-17 are sort of out of place or something. Yeshua says, “Rise, let us go hence,” but then goes on for a long time with more talking and a prayer so that the rising and going hence doesn’t happen until 18:1. How do we account for this?

Many scholars think — and I know many readers are resistant to such a suggestion — that chapters 15-17 are a later addition. I don’t mean (and neither do they) that chapters 15-17 are a late addition that should not be part of John. I mean that John may have been written in layers.

There are plenty of other evidences that John is written in layers (two editions of John is one of the leading theories — the earlier short version and the later full version with the following additions: 1:1-18, chapters 6, 15-17, and 21 added — see Paul Anderson, The Fourth Gospel and the Quest for Jesus, 32-33).

I’ll give just one more example for the unconvinced. John 20:30-31 (RSV):
Now Jesus did many other signs in the presence of the disciples, which are not written in this book; but these are written that you may believe that Jesus is the Christ, the Son of God, and that believing you may have life in his name.

Sounds like the end of the book, doesn’t it? But then we have chapter 21.

The Joy of Hearing
by Brian Richie

After perusing through Rabbi Leman’s blog “The Joy of Reading” the other day I found myself once again breaking the 10th commandment. Will God be angered by my coveting of another man’s study time? Joking aside, I have found that hearing God’s word via audio can be an excellent supplement for those of us who work “9-5‘s” on a regular basis. Many employers will allow their workers to play music at a low volume as long as it’s not a distraction to others. Along with your music, why not “bump” a little Jeremiah the Prophet?

Disclaimer: I readily admit that this is not a solution for all. Some cannot work unless they have complete silence. Other’s who try this could become distracted and fall behind on there jobs. This obviously then is not the solution for you. However, for those of you who can get work done while playing audio in the background why not? Imagine being able to go through Torah and The Gospels everyday. It would be almost impossible with most of our schedules. However, via audio bible, I was able to enjoy the ENTIRE Gospel of Mark today.

I work as an accountant, so Math has always been a favorite subject of mine. If I listen to the book of Mark five times a work week, and multiply that by approximately four weeks in a month, then that gives me the opportunity to go through Mark twenty times in one month! There is no way this would be possible for me without the use of Audio Bible. If you believe this may be a great study supplement for you as well I want to recommend a couple of my favorite resources:

The first is the “Jewish Audio Bible” posted by Dr. David Rudolph. These audio postings afford the hearer the opportunity to go through the entire Jewish Bible in two years by listening only 14 minutes a day. Dr. Rudolph utilizes Dr. Stern’s “Complete Jewish Bible” for his readings. To go to the Jewish Audio Bible, click here.

The second resource is the online audio bible through bible gateway. My personal favorite at this site is the ESV version readings with Max Mclean. To check out his readings click here.

Hopefully, these resources prove as valuable a study tool for you as they have become for me.

Peace and Blessings.

Bio: Originally from Ohio, Brian now resides in Southern California with his wife Geraldine. He enjoys working out, taking his two dogs to the beach, watching Laker basketball games, and of course all things Yeshua.

I had an experience last night that gave me an idea for this podcast. I’ve been closely reading the gospels and books on the gospels and books on the historical inquiry into the life and message of Yeshua for several years now. It’s like swimming in a sea of information at times.

But sometimes a surprise breaks through. Actually, it happens more often than sometimes. Last night I got one of those surprises reading Paul Anderson’s The Fourth Gospel and the Quest for Jesus. It reminded me of the joys of reading, especially the joys of reading the life and message of Yeshua.

I’m fortunate to have the time to do all this reading. Many people might have only half an hour a day to spare. But the joys of reading can come to you in a half hour a day.

I’m fortunate to have a background in biblical studies that makes it easier for me to read book after book of history and commentary. But the joys of reading can come from simply reading the gospels themselves or in combining them a little at a time with other reading.

I have a good friend in our congregation who makes more time for study than most people, but he is also a very busy person. Sometime more than a year ago, when I mentioned to people they might benefit from reading a Harmony of the Gospels, he asked me which one to buy. Then he came back time and time again, and still does occasionally, excited about parallels he has found or observations he has made that are only possible because he now reads more closely.

I have another good friend in our congregation. She is devout and loves to study. She told me just recently that taking Torah Club Volume 4 with Daniel Lancaster’s teaching on the life of Yeshua has been so rich and meaningful.

I get emails from several people who read my commentary on the gospels every day and notice the finer points of close reading and see something in the message of the gospels that inspires them, challenges them, keeps them focused on the meaning of life.

The joys of reading, and especially reading in conversation with friends, are many. There are the surprises. There are the community experiences of togetherness. There are the frequent reminders to re-order my priorities and my way of viewing people, the world, evil, righteousness, and hope.

The secret of reading is not short bursts of intense energy. The secret is regular, a little at a time, over a long period of time.

It all started for me with a reading of N.T. Wright’s The New Testament and the People of God followed by Jesus and the Victory of God. Before that, I didn’t know historical Jesus studies or gospel research could be so rewarding.

There have been many aha moments for me along the way. One was when Vine of David published Paul Philip Levertoff’s Love in the Messianic Age. I read the epilogue called “Love in the Fourth Gospel” and my outlook on many things was changed.

Levertoff opened me up to the mystical in the life and sayings of Yeshua. By mystical I mean the idea that we can experience on earth foretastes of the Age to Come, of the Presence of God, of Life from Above, of the Mystery of Union with God.

Messiah, he says, is the personification of Divine Love. The visible manifestation of this love is the death of Christ. The love of God is concentrated in Messiah. The world is perishing for want of True Light and Communion with him. He gives to them his Fullness. Jesus, by his love, expects to awaken in men love for God and each other. The mystical oneness of the believers, this perfect achdut or unity, is founded on the oneness of Jesus with the Father. As Jesus cannot work without God, so his followers cannot work without Jesus. The conception of love is not merely humanitarian, it is an Israelitish covenant love. God in his Spirit makes the heart of the believer his habitation, and thus the highest expectation of the Messianic Age is fully realized.

I followed up this reading soon after with Raymond Brown’s commentary on the Fourth Gospel. There is so much to learn.

And gospel reading, like Torah study in classical Jewish thought, is not about learning something once and moving on. It is about constant forgetting and remembering.

A rabbi and mentor taught me a midrash on the story from Exodus in which the people of Israel cannot endure the voice of God. They ask Moses to listen to God and relay the words. If Israel had not done this, if they had persisted through their fear to hear the words from God directly, then Torah learning for Jews today would not be so hard. No mitzvah or bit of Torah learning would ever be forgotten. Each generation of Israel could read Torah once and know it their whole lives. But because that generation of Israel asked Moses to relay the words, they brought upon us forgetfulness, so that Torah must be learned daily and its points forgotten and recalled over and over again through repetition.

The joy of reading the gospels regularly, daily if possible, and over and over again, is just this. There is frequently a fresh revelation or a sweet reminder of something once learned and all but forgotten.

In Paul Anderson’s book on the Fourth Gospel last night, certain impressions I had developed over the years from following the standard course of historical thought about Yeshua, were suddenly challenged. I read a remarkable list he has in his book. It is a list of parallels in memorable sayings of Yeshua between Mark and the Fourth Gospel.

In historical Jesus research the Fourth Gospel is discounted. In gospel scholarship, the Fourth Gospel is often regarded as the least historical. And it is an axiom that John did not use Mark. Anderson gives a more complex theory, one I am not taking time to fully explain here, about interdependence of the traditions in the formative or oral tradition years. And he gives a remarkable list of forty-four parallels in memorable sayings from Mark to John.

It was another surprise, another aha moment. And its full effect on me can only be explained by the fact that I have become immersed in the world of the gospels. And I have found, as you will too and as many others have, that they are a deep well. Like the Torah, the gospels are a regular source of forgetting and remembering that can occupy a lifetime.

And perhaps the most important practice of reading is simply reading the gospels themselves. There is the importance of reading each gospel individually and then there is the importance of comparing, contrasting, and finding patterns, similarities, and differences.

When you become familiar you will think about things like, were there two anointings of Yeshua by a woman or only one? Did she anoint his head or his feet? You will think about things like, why are some minor characters named and others not? It will occur to you to compare the Sermon of the Mount with the parallels in Luke. You will want to get a Harmony of the Gospels, but you will find yourself disagreeing with it in places. And you will also realize that the parallels are not always in parallel stories. Often the same sayings of Yeshua, sometimes in varied form, show up in different settings and stories.

If you haven’t started, you should. There are many ways to go about it. The first and simplest is just to use a bookmark and a Bible. Read a little every day. Write observations sometimes. Compare things. You can find a free harmony of the gospels on the Study Tools page at BlueLetterBible.com or you can buy a Harmony such as the one by Thomas Gundry.

You can start adding some commentary. Consider taking Torah Club Volume 4, the “Chronicles of Messiah,” from FFOZ. Use my YeshuaInContext website. I could gladly recommend various commentaries to you on the gospels. There is joy in the reading and an endless supply of surprises and revelations.