Why Does Matthewrsquo;s Gospel Agree with Both Mark and Luke?

In the realm of Christian theology, similarities between the gospels can often confuse and perplex scholars and laypeople alike. For instance, the Gospel of Matthew is known to contain a significant portion of its content from the Gospel of Mark and shares many similarities with the Gospel of Luke. This essay explores the reasons behind these agreements and whether the similarities are due to copying or a shared underlying source.

Historical Context and Source Analysis

Imagine you were writing a class essay on the Civil War and two of your classmates had essays with similarities to yours. You wouldn't be surprised, right? Historians always use sources, and two sources from the past can share similarities. For example, the diary of someone from the Battle of Gettysburg is likely to have similarities to another personrsquo;s diary, whether they were confederate or Union soldiers. It is essential to gather and understand as many perspectives and sources as possible.

Similarities Between Matthew, Mark, and Luke

The Gospels of Matthew, Mark, and Luke are all based on the life and actions of Jesus of Nazareth. These gospels were written for different audiences, with distinct reasons and purposes, which account for the differences and agreements in their content. However, their shared content is a fascinating subject of inquiry. Specifically, the Gospel of Matthew contains about ninety percent of the verses found in Mark, and the Gospel of Luke shares substantial similarities with Mark. These parallels have led to much discussion among scholars regarding the origins of these agreements.

The Traditional Theory and a More Likely Explanation

The traditional theory is that Matthew expanded on Mark, while the latter theory posits that Mark cut down Matthew. While the former is the more common explanation, a closer examination of the text and historical context suggests that it is more likely that Matthew expanded upon his primary source, which was his own Aramaic document.

A letter by the early Church Father Papias mentioned an Aramaic document that he attributed to Matthew. Given that the current Greek Gospel of Matthew is believed to have been written using this Aramaic document as a primary source, it is plausible that Matthew expanded upon this original source and then translated it into Greek.

Conclusion and Importance of Eyewitness Accounts

In summary, the agreements between Matthew, Mark, and Luke can be attributed to sharing a common underlying source, likely Matthewrsquo;s own Aramaic document. The early Church understood the importance of having witness to events from two or three sources. The agreements among these three gospels are critical in providing a comprehensive understanding of Jesusrsquo; life and teachings. By examining the sources and the agreements, we can better appreciate the complexity and richness of early Christian literature.

Understanding these similarities and differences between the gospels is essential for scholars and believers alike to gain a broader and more accurate view of the life of Jesus and the beliefs of early Christianity. This essay aims to shed light on the reasons behind the agreements between Matthew, Mark, and Luke, providing a clearer understanding of the source and evolution of these important religious texts.