The Differences in the Four Gospel Accounts

By Jeff Curtis

    When one begins to fashion the harmony of the Gospel, it soon becomes apparent that variation exist between accounts of the same event. How can the differences be explained? As was noted in an earlier writing, in the book of Acts Luke gave three accounts of the conversion of Saul (Acts 9; 22; 26). John Stott commented on this: “Our study of how a single author (Luke) tells the same story differently will help us understand how three synoptic evangelists (Matthew, Mark and Luke) could also tell their same story differently.”

     In most cases, one account simply supplements another account. Consider the story of the anointing of Jesus at Bethany. In Matthew’s account (Matt. 26:6-13), Jesus was in Bethany at the home of Simon the leper when an unnamed woman came with a container of precious perfume and anointed Jesus, which resulted in Jesus’ disciples expressing their disapproval. Mark’s account (Mark 14:3-9) is much the same, but some details are added: The perfume was pure nard, the woman broke the container, and the perfume was worth three hundred denarii. (“Denarii” is the plural form of “denarius.” Which was equivalent to one day’s wages for the common laborer.) John’s account (John 12:1-8) gives other details, including: Jesus was at a banquet held in honor; Martha was serving the meal; Lazarus was also a guest of honor; the woman who anointed Jesus was Mary, sister of Martha; and the one who started the criticism was Judas Iscariot. These details are obviously not in contradiction, but rather are supplementary.

     It has been noted that when witnesses give supplementary details this does not discredit their testimony but rather establishes their honesty. Dr. Henry Van Dyke said,

     If four witnesses should appear before a judge to give an account of a certain   

     even, and each one tell exactly the same story in the same words, the judge

     would probably conclude, not that their testimony was exceptionally valuable,

     but that the only event which was certain beyond a doubt was that they had

     agreed to tell the same story. But each man had told what he had seen, as he had

     seen it, the evidence would be credible. And when we read the four Gospels, is

     it not that exactly what we find? The four men tell the same story each in his

     own way.

     In some cases, however, the details are not simply supplemental; instead, they are different. The order of events may not be the same, different personnel may be mentioned, or numbers may vary. For instance, notice the story of Jesus healing one or more blind men near Jericho. In Matthew’s account (Matt. 20:29-34), Jesus was leaving Jericho and two men healed. In Luke’s account (Lk. 18:35-43), Jesus was approaching Jericho and one blind man is mentioned. In Mark’s account (Mk. 10:46-52), only one blind man is healed (Bartemaeus). How do we explain differences such as these? Let’s lists a few possibilities:

1. Some differences in details exist because of differences in the writers’ emphases.
2. Differences in details may exist because writers were recording similar events, but not the same event.
3. Contradictions may seem to exist when we don’t possess all the facts of the case. So, the incident could have taken place as Jesus left one and entered the other. Those who assert that contradictions exist are admitting a lack of knowledge.
4. Contradictions may seem to exist because we don’t understand something about the original text. For years, skeptics claimed that a contradiction existed in the OT regarding a payment that was made: One account referred to the payment as a certain amount while another account gave a different figure. Later, archaeologists discovered that two systems of appraising the value of precious metals existed at that time; probably one writer referred to one system of appraisal while the other referred to the second. From time to time, archaeology sheds new light on the text.

As we continue through the story of Jesus, some of the more publicized “differences” between accounts will be noted and possible ways to reconcile the differences can be discussed.

Comparing the Four Gospels

By Jeff Curtis

     All of the four accounts have the same basic purpose – to reveal Jesus – but each was written from a slightly different point of view, apparently appealing to a somewhat different audience. For an example of tailoring an account an account for different audiences, see the three accounts of the conversion of Paul in the Book of Acts: in Acts 9 the account was written for Luke’s readers; in Acts 22 it was part of Paul’s defense before the Jews in Jerusalem; in Acts 26 it was part of Paul’s sermon in Caesarea which was primarily directed to King Agrippa. Simon Kistemaker made this comment on the last two accounts: “From the same incident (his conversion), (Paul) wisely chose different words and emphasized different aspects in his effort to bring the gospel to each party…”

     Regarding the four Gospel Accounts, Matthew was apparently writing for the Jews. He quoted over one hundred Old Testament passages and used terms familiar to the Jews, such as “son of David” (Matt. 1:1). He presented Jesus as a King who came to set up His kingdom; the word “kingdom” appears fifty-five times in the book. He put special emphasis on Jesus as the Messiah and wrote of His teachings, His kingdom, and His authority.

     Unlike Matthew, Mark seems to have written for a non-Jewish audience. He eliminated matters of little interest to the Gentiles, such as genealogies. When he mentioned Jewish traditions, he usually added an explanation. Many writers think Mark was addressing a Roman audience; he sometimes used Latin phrases in stories where the other writers used Greek phrases. According to Clement of Alexandria (c. AD 150-215), Mark received a request from Christians at Rome to record the life of Christ as he had heard it from Peter. Mark seems to have been more concerned with Jesus did than what He taught. He presented Jesus as a Savior, one who helped others (Mark 10:45). He emphasized the miracles of Jesus because, in them, the Lord’s love and care for people can be seen.

     Like Mark, Luke apparently wrote for a non-Jewish audience. However, while Mark’s account seems directed to the action-oriented Roman, Luke’s account appears to have been written for the intellectual, the student. Many conclude that Luke had a Greek audience in mind. His account presents Jesus as “the Son of Man” (Luke 19:10) and outs special emphasis on His perfect humanity.

     John’s account, which was probably written near the end of the first century, has its own special emphasis. Erroneous concepts had arisen regarding the nature of Jesus, causing confusion among believers. John presented Jesus as “the Son of God” (John 20:31) and stressed His deity.

     We could say that Matthew has special appeal today for the Bible student and Mark has special appeal for the average person, including businessmen, while Luke appeals especially to scholars, thinkers, idealists, and truth-seekers. On the other hand, John has been called “the universal Gospel,” appealing to all people for all time.

     Further, we could say that Matthew’s purpose is to present Jesus as the promised Savior; Mark, the powerful Savior; Luke, the perfect Savior; and John, the personal Savior. As we make these distinctions, however, we must not lose sight of the fact that the ultimate purpose of each book is the same: to bring all men to saving knowledge of Jesus.