I would first like to note that I am not a PhD in New Testament Studies. Much of my opinion concerning the synoptic problem is influenced by Dr. Jon Weatherly; I am very much drawn to his point of view on this issue. Thus, a decent amount of the information in this post comes from him. My goal in writing is to present a case for non-literary dependence of the gospels and to do so in a manner that is coherent and understandable to the amateur student of the Bible. Whether or not that goal will be achieved at this point remains to be seen.

The so-called synoptic gospels, consisting of Matthew, Mark and Luke, are very similar to one another—hence the name synoptic. However, there are also a number of differences between these three accounts that, under the scrutiny of modern scholarship, must be accounted for. The issue at hand is commonly referred to the synoptic problem; post-Enlightenment thinkers have sought to unearth the sources of the gospels by determining which gospel writer actually wrote first. I will present the most prevalent views and offer a radically different alternative that, in my opinion, is actually the most probable.

(continue reading…)