Please take a look a this online Gospel synopsis here. This site allows you to easily scroll through Matthew, Mark, or Luke and find the parallel passages in the other gospels. If you clicking on the purple (Matthew), blue (Mark), or green (Luke) book icon beside the section heading, the appropriate column will automatically scroll to the parallel passage. Read a portion of the Gospel of Mark and a parallel passage in the Gospel of Matthew, e.g., the "plucking the grain" story in Matthew 12:1-8 and Mark 2:23-28 or the "house divided" story in Matthew 12:25-27 and Mark 3:23-30.
As your "comment," note which version of the passage (if either) seems to you to be most likely the original version? In this passage does it look like Matthew is dependent on Mark, the Mark is dependent on Matthew, or that the the two gospels are giving independent accounts? Explain your thinking.
I found the story of Jesus healing the leper in Matthew 8:1-4 and Mark 1:40-45 to be very interesting. Comparing the two, Mark gives us much more detail on what happened. He includes how the leper begs him to be healed, how Jesus feels such pity for the man, and how the healed leper talks freely about his experience even though Jesus told him not to. Without having any sense of knowing when the gospels were written, I think that Mark was the original author of this story. He is the one that shares all the details that we need to hear to get a real sense of what was going on. I feel like Matthew was referencing the story from Mark; making note of it because it was extremely important, but also hoping his readers would be well-read and therefore be familiar with Mark’s story. We see other examples of this when Matthew quotes Old Testament passages - he starts quoting the passage and expects his readers to know the rest of the story. Following this theme, I think Mark was the original author of this story.
ReplyDeleteI also chose to compare Matthew 12:25-27 and Mark 3:23-30, I think Matthew was the original author. Matthew is the original author because he adds more detail. Mark is summarizing Matthew. I also think Matthew makes a better case in his story. Matthew puts more meaning in division than Mark.
ReplyDeleteThe verses I chose are Matthew 10:1-16, Mark 3:13-19 and Luke 6:12-16. All three of these focus on the calling of Jesus' disciples. Matthew looks to be the most in depth version of this/the original, and I believe that Mark and Luke are dependent on Matthews accounts. Mark and Luke name the disciples while Matthew names them and goes into detail about their mission and calling.
ReplyDeleteI have been doing some research, and I hope I am reading this correctly, but the book of Matthew was written by the apostle Matthew. He was there with Jesus and experienced most of the things he is writing about first hand. I find that to be extreme credible and would explain why he went into more detail regarding the disciples and their lives.