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 chose to compare Matthew 12:25-27 and Mark 3:23-30 (A house divided against itself cannot stand). I chose this one to look at because I remember that Abraham Lincoln quoted this scripture as the country was being torn apart by slavery. Looking at the comparisons between Matthew's version and Mark's version, I would say that Mark is the original author of the story. Looking at Matthew's version, he uses nearly the same words as Mark, but his main idea is to bash on the scribes and Pharisees. I believe that he cites Mark to prove the point he is making. Mark, on the other hand, writes this down as an important lesson for people to learn, not to try and bash anybody. This is why I see the "house divided against itself" story as an original story of Mark.
ReplyDeleteI also chose to compare Matthew 12:25-27 and Mark 3:23-30, and like Ian I also think that Mark was the original author. I think this for one because Mark provides a lot more detail about what the phrase itself means, "a house divided against itself cannot stand." Since Mark goes into great detail and also does a nice job explaining its meaning, i think his purpose in discussing it is to tell it the proper way. Matthew on the other hand uses only a part of it and does not attempt or want to explain its meaning. Thus, I believe that Matthew only wanted to reference the story since it truly wasn't his story to tell.
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.
ReplyDeleteI chose to focus on "The Temptation" Matthew 4:1 - 4:11 and Mark 1:12 and 1:13. In this case Matthew goes into detail about how Jesus fasted and just how satan tempted Jesus. Mark, on the other hand, gave a very brief summery of the incident, not even telling the reader anything about what satan tempted Jesus with.
ReplyDeleteBased on the above I would say that if either of the authors were referencing the other in regards to this passage it would be Mark referencing Matthew.
I do find Mark's glossing over of this incident to be quite interesting though. One would think that the tempting of the Christ by satan would be a really big deal but apparently Mark felt that the incident was of such low merit that it barely got referred to in passing.
The 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.