the synoptic shuffle, part I

One of the greatest conundrums in New Testament scholarship is the matter of the relationships among the three synoptic gospels, Matthew, Mark, and Luke. Which came first? Were they independently constructed based on similar sources? Did Matthew revise Mark, or vice versa? Did Luke revise one or both? Did all draw from a "book of sayings" similar to the Gospel of Thomas, and then try to fit Jesus's sayings into a coherent narrative? Who wrote them? What cultural, historical, theological, or linguistic factors explain the differences among the three texts?

Obviously, I have neither the time nor the erudition to answer all these questions, which are great fodder for biblical scholars the globe over. Thanks to a recent discussion about Jesus's prophecies related to the "end of the age," though, we can look at a specific pericope and examine these issues.

We'll leave behind, for the moment, the question of which Gospel came first. In the words of preachers everywhere, let's turn in our Bibles to the book of Matthew, chapter 24. Done reading? Now turn to Mark 13. Then to Luke 21.

First, notice that the sermon comes at a different narrative point in each synoptic. Matthew places it after a discussion of "Seven Woes," which occurs in the temple (and is unique to that particular gospel). Mark, though, along with Luke, places it after an incident involving a widow leaving her tithe at the temple--a story found nowhere in Matthew. Clearly we're not looking at a journalistic, "as-it-happened" incident, but at an attempt to reconstruct the circumstances of a particular discourse. (A question for another day: which of the gospel authors, if any, was an eyewitness to what actually happened?)

All three agree on the following minimal account.

Jesus and his disciples leave the temple; the disciples point out the stones, and Jesus makes the startling prophesy: they will all be torn down. Later, Peter, James, John, and Andrew (in Mark) or "the disciples (Matthew) or "some of the disciples (Luke) privately ask him, "when will these things happen? And what will be the sign that they are all about to be fulfilled?"

Jesus then launches into a lecture on the "signs of the age." The highlights:

1. Watch out for false prophets claiming to be the Christ. You'll hear of wars, but don't be alarmed; the end is yet to come. There will be earthquakes and famines--the "beginning of birth pangs" (except in Luke).

2. You'll be persecuted for your faith. When you see the "abomination that causes desolation" (Matthew and Mark) or "Jerusalem surrounded by armies" (Luke), if you're in Judea, run for the hills, and don't even stop to gather your things. Pray that it doesn't happen in winter--but God will shorten these days of travail for the sake of the elect. Again, false Christs will arise and deceive people with signs and wonders; don't be fooled.

3. In the days following that distress, the "sun will be darkened and the moon will not give its light;the stars will fall from the sky and the moon will not give its light." At that time, the Son of Man will come in the clouds with power and glory, sending his angels to gather up the four winds.

4. Think about a salient analogy: when its twigs become tender and shoots appear, you know summer has just about arrived. SO, when you see these events, you'll know that the end is "right at the door."

5. "I tell you the truth: this generation will ceratinly not pass away until all these things have happened."

6. Except the Father in heaven, no one knows exactly when this will happen. Not even me. Therefore,

7. Watch!


Now, the interesting differences.

Wording: in Matthew and Mark, the end is "still to come;" in Luke, it "will not come right away." (This is in the NKJV; when I have time I'll look up the Greek texts.)

Luke adds "pestilences" and "fearful events and great signs from heaven" to the list of maladies in (1), and makes no mention of "birth pangs."

Mark and Luke mention "standing before kings and governors" in (2), and refer to "not worrying about what to say" when dragged before the authorities; in Luke, Jesus says that he will directly guide the speech of the believer, and that "not a hair of [the believer's] head will perish." Mark, along similar lines, puts it in slightly different words: "it is not [the believer] speaking, but the Holy Spirit."

Here is where we come to the greatest discrepancy between Matthew's version and the other two. Matthew has lifted this passage (or, the other two have misplaced it?) and put it into an entirely different discourse, in the tenth chapter, the instructions to the twelve disciples, which creates even more interesting problems with the phrase "this generation."

In Matthew, Jesus sends out the 12 disciples; in the Lukan passage, Jesus sends out 72(!) two-by-two to "every town and place he was about to go." Underscoring the point, Matthew lists the twelve, who disperse to unknown results; Luke's anonymous seventy-two come back marveling that "even the demons submit to us in your name."

[more to follow]