Owing to the fact that Matthew, Mark and Luke confine themselves to the Galilean ministry of our Lord, and do

not speak a word of any visit to Jerusalem until His last solemn journey, there to die, these three Gospels have been

called "The Synoptic Gospels", i.e. Gospels having a common point of view, and differing very materially from

John's Gospel which gives detailed accounts of our Lord's several visits to Jerusalem and His ministry there. While

this subdivision therefore sets forth a truth, it is not the whole truth, for upon examination Matthew manifests a

different approach to his theme than either that of Mark or Luke, even as these two differ materially from each other.

Even more striking and important than the geographical setting of these Gospels, is the character of their writing.

Matthew, Mark and Luke give little comment, adding nothing by way of personal observation or doctrinal inference

from their record of parable, miracle, discourse, death and resurrection. John however not only provides a prologue

(John 1:1-18) and a stated purpose (John 20:30,31), but "delivers his historical testimony as from the chair of an

apostle" (Alford). Again, neither Matthew, Mark nor Luke claim in so many words, to have been eye-witnesses of

the facts they record, although the record of Matthew's calling, necessitates this feature in his case. John however

insists in a number of places that he wrote as an eye-witness.

We shall therefore be wise to recognise that God has given us four inspired accounts of the earthly life and

ministry of Christ, and that each writer was guided in the selection of his material so that in each case one special

aspect of that wondrous life should be thrown into prominence.

We are indebted to men of God from earliest times for the construction of a "Harmony of the four Gospels",

but any reader who has either diligently studied these attempts or, better still, has endeavoured to construct a

harmony from his own findings, will have discovered that such "harmony" is often spoilt either by the author doing

violence to the arrangement found in the Gospels, or by arbitrarily adopting one aspect or order to the exclusion or

distortion of the rest. The truth is, that there is so much material omitted that it is beyond the ingenuity of man to

supply the missing links and, moreover, it is evident that had God wished the church to have one harmonious record,

He and He alone could have supplied it. We must therefore not only thankfully accept the four gospels as they

stand, but recognise that four facets or aspects of truth are intended, and instead of wasting precious time in

attempting the impossible, spend our time and strength in discovering "the things that differ", so learning the

Divinely intended lesson.

Before we study each Gospel in turn, let us enquire into the question of authorship, for we speak of the Gospel

according to Matthew, Mark, Luke or John.

Matthew. From the earliest days, the authorship of the first of the four Gospels has been ascribed to Matthew

the son of Alphaeus and called by Mark and Luke by the name of Levi (Mark 2:14, Luke 3:24). The name

"Matthew" and not Levi is used when speaking of him as one of the apostles (Mark 3:18, Luke 6:15). There are, as

we well know, other examples of a change of name; Simon was called Peter, Saul was called Paul, and just as we do

not read of "Levi" as one of the apostles, but "Matthew", so we never read of the "apostle Simon" or the "apostle

Saul". These names "Levi" and "Matthew" need cause no trouble to us, they were evidently accepted without

comment at the beginning. The testimony of antiquity moreover is unanimous in placing Matthew's gospel first

among the evangelists. The actual date has been put at "eight years after the ascension" (Theophyl), "fifteen years

after the ascension" (Niceph. Hist.) and "at the stoning of Stephen" (Cosmos Indic:). A.D. 38 is the date adopted by

Webster and Wilkinson.

Mark. The writer of the second Gospel has been universally believed to be Marcus, the same person who is

called "John Mark" in Acts 12:12, and Mark in Colossians 4:10 and 2 Timothy 4:11. We learn from Acts 12:12 that

his mother's name was Mary, and that she was a sister of Barnabas (Col. 4:10). We gather that Mark owed his

conversion to Peter (1 Pet. 5:13); that he joined in the first missionary journey undertaken by his Uncle Barnabas

and Paul (Acts 12:25), and owing to this blood relationship partly caused the disruption recorded in Acts 15:37-40.