Did Luke have access to the complete Matthew?

hedrick

Senior Veteran
Site Supporter
Feb 8, 2009
20,250
10,567
New Jersey
✟1,148,308.00
Faith
Presbyterian
Marital Status
Single
Mark was the son of the women that owned the upper room. This is where the disciples stayed when they were in Jerusalem. Mark loved to be a part of what was going on. He loved to sit in on the teaching of Jesus. Still Mark was very young and he did not travel with Jesus the way Matthew did. It is absurd to suggest that Matthew copied from Mark. Matthew would have been the tutor and Mark the student. Just like in a college today where the lower class man learn from the upper class men. Even this upper class and lower class label permeates society as a whole.
The early tradition says that Matthew compiled the "oracles" of Jesus in "Hebrew" (probably Aramaic). Remember that in the 1st Cent authorship wasn't used quite as literally as it is now. If someone translated the teachings from Matthew into Greek but used Mark to supplement it (presumably because Mathew didn't have narrative), it could still reasonably have been attributed to Matthew. (The Logos commentary on Matthew suggests that the original Aramaic source could even be Q. I don't think this is a very popular theory, but it's not impossible.)

Personally I doubt that what we have is actually Matthew's work at all, but if you want a conservative theory, this would work.
 
Upvote 0

HardHead

Active Member
Site Supporter
Sep 8, 2019
383
178
56
GTA
✟84,378.00
Country
Canada
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
Quite likely there was a common source or tradition. I guess you could call it Q. But generally Q is a sayings source, not a narrative, and generally it appears with nearly or actually the same wording.
This is correct in my view. The common tradition is this likely Q that no one has a copy of. Someone told someone else the basic content. They all share this content. Its also clear that they discussed preaching with each other, etc.

Also, I don't really get hung up on the details of the accounts. One person was more interested in some details than the other. This is not really a problem if you ask me.
 
Upvote 0

HardHead

Active Member
Site Supporter
Sep 8, 2019
383
178
56
GTA
✟84,378.00
Country
Canada
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
I think many verses in Matthew have the same wording as Mark (or at least I've heard this is the case with Luke and Mark)

Much of Mark is repeated in other Gospels.

Some background that may be of interest is here.

As an example of the focus of each gospel, note his comments on what Matthew and Mark focused on etc.

These links also look reasonable in describing the overlaps:
Table of Gospel Parallels
Synoptic Gospel Parallels - Synoptic Gospels Comparison

This discusses the degree of overlap ...
The Synoptic Problem | Bible.org
It is quite impossible to hold that the three synoptic gospels were completely independent from each other. In the least, they had to have shared a common oral tradition. But the vast bulk of NT scholars today would argue for much more than that.
...
When one compares the synoptic parallels, some startling results are noticed. Of Mark’s 11,025 words, only 132 have no parallel in either Matthew or Luke. Percentage-wise, 97% of Mark’s Gospel is duplicated in Matthew; and 88% is found in Luke. On the other hand, less than 60% of Matthew is duplicated in Mark, and only 47% of Luke is found in Mark.
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0

timothyu

Well-Known Member
Dec 31, 2018
22,525
8,427
up there
✟306,620.00
Country
Canada
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Private
Someone told someone else the basic content. They all share this content.
Yet Thomas which was a collection of quotes of Jesus was left out of the gentile canon because it spoke of our personal relationship with God rather than the need for go between clergy and institutions.
 
Upvote 0

HardHead

Active Member
Site Supporter
Sep 8, 2019
383
178
56
GTA
✟84,378.00
Country
Canada
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
Yet Thomas which was a collection of quotes of Jesus was left out of the gentile canon because it spoke of our personal relationship with God rather than the need for go between clergy and institutions.
I'm not trying to push a particular theology on anyone.

The question here is of the gospel stories being common and how this could be the case. I am saying that this was done via speaking to each other during the times they were preaching. Nothing more.

Regarding a personal relationship vs. a priesthood vs. tradition vs. bible only, I think this is for another thread.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: redleghunter
Upvote 0

redleghunter

Thank You Jesus!
Site Supporter
Mar 18, 2014
38,116
34,054
Texas
✟176,076.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
That would be a common tradition.
Not far removed.


Against Heresies (Book III, Chapter 1)

1. We have learned from none others the plan of our salvation, than from those through whom the Gospel has come down to us, which they did at one time proclaim in public, and, at a later period, by the will of God, handed down to us in the Scriptures, to be the ground and pillar of our faith. For it is unlawful to assert that they preached before they possessed perfect knowledge, as some do even venture to say, boasting themselves as improvers of the apostles. For, after our Lord rose from the dead, [the apostles] were invested with power from on high when the Holy Spirit came down [upon them], were filled from all [His gifts], and had perfect knowledge: they departed to the ends of the earth, preaching the glad tidings of the good things [sent] from God to us, and proclaiming the peace of heaven to men, who indeed do all equally and individually possess the Gospel of God. Matthew also issued a written Gospel among the Hebrews in their own dialect, while Peter and Paul were preaching at Rome, and laying the foundations of the Church. After their departure, Mark, the discipleand interpreter of Peter, did also hand down to us in writing what had been preached by Peter. Luke also, the companion of Paul, recorded in a book the Gospel preached by him. Afterwards, John, the disciple of the Lord, who also had leaned upon His breast, did himself publish a Gospel during his residence at Ephesus in Asia.


CHURCH FATHERS: Against Heresies, III.1 (St. Irenaeus)
 
Upvote 0

joshua 1 9

Well-Known Member
Site Supporter
May 11, 2015
17,420
3,592
Northern Ohio
✟314,577.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
Personally I doubt that what we have is actually Matthew's work at all
The Bible is built on the foundation of the disciples. The main disciples being Peter, James and John. Luke and Mark were not disciples so this is secondary information. Or what they call eyewitness information.

"1Many have undertaken to compose an account of the things that have been fulfilled among us, 2just as they were handed down to us by the initial eyewitnesses and servants of the word. 3Therefore, having carefully investigated everything from the beginning, it seemed good also to me to write an orderly account for you, most excellent Theophilus, 4so that you may know the certainty of the things you have been taught." (Luke 1:1-4)

We know that Paul, Luke, Mark & Barnabas were close to each other and they traveled together doing missionary work to various cities. They knew the disciples but did not hang out with them. Their ministry was to the gentiles and the disciples ministry was to the "Jews" or the " lost sheep of Israel."

"For God, who was at work in Peter as an apostle to the circumcised, was also at work in me as an apostle to the Gentiles." (Galations 2:8)

The people in the Bible are real people that we will have the opportunity to meet when we go to Heaven. That is why even now we are getting to know them as real people. Even I have already had a chance to talk to Paul. When we go to the university in Heaven and attend a class there is a chance that someone that actually wrote the Bible will be asked to teach the class on a special day. I am sure that will be an exciting day and no one will want to miss the class with an honored guest doing the teaching that day.
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0

joshua 1 9

Well-Known Member
Site Supporter
May 11, 2015
17,420
3,592
Northern Ohio
✟314,577.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
I think many verses in Matthew have the same wording as Mark (or at least I've heard this is the case with Luke and Mark)
Luke did learn from Mark. He also spent a lot of time talking to Mary the mother of Jesus. That is why we have a lot more information about Jesus early life from Luke. Paul, Luke, Mark & Barnabas use to travel together and they spent a lot of time together.
 
  • Informative
Reactions: HardHead
Upvote 0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums

Presbyterian Continuist

Senior Veteran
Site Supporter
Mar 28, 2005
21,813
10,794
76
Christchurch New Zealand
Visit site
✟831,704.00
Country
New Zealand
Faith
Charismatic
Marital Status
Married
This is what @Sanoy was writing
Can the Christmas stories be reconciled?


Can the Christmas stories be reconciled?


It seems I'm unable to convince @Sanoy that he is mistaken about his beliefs so I was seeing if I can get Christians here to back me up.

My belief is that Matthew and Luke are based on Mark and maybe Q. I don't think Luke had access to the complete book of Matthew.

I thought it would be better to start a new topic about this.
As Luke points out at the beginning of his gospel, he has done meticulous research, and has spoken to eye-witnesses, many of whom were alive during the ministry, crucifixion and resurrection of Jesus. He would have spoken to all the Apostles as part of his research information gathering. As far as the genealogies go, the Temple with its genealogical records was still there, and he would have had no problem in consulting them as part of his research.

Also, Luke was writing to a different audience than Matthew. Matthew was writing to Jewish believers. Luke's audience was a Gentile, possibly an official who may have requested Luke to do the research and to present his findings.
 
Upvote 0

HardHead

Active Member
Site Supporter
Sep 8, 2019
383
178
56
GTA
✟84,378.00
Country
Canada
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
The Bible is built on the foundation of the disciples. The main disciples being Peter, James and John. Luke and Mark were not disciples so this is secondary information. Or what they call eyewitness information.

There is also a timing question here relative to when each gospel was written vs. when it was originally preached prior to being put down in book form.

To me this makes the idea of association to the disciples themselves perhaps difficult. For me, they all got the idea of what they wanted to write down together from the various teachings/preaching and then decided to put it into text form in the bible to preserve things for future generations. Because of this, what is exactly attributed to one of them is not clear to me.

I think its all correct, but I see the categorization into the book of Mark vs. Matthew vs. whomever as much a literary convenience as the exact sayings of each of them. I think they are certainly separate works done by different people but the overlap suggests they were making decisions of what to put where.
 
Upvote 0

redleghunter

Thank You Jesus!
Site Supporter
Mar 18, 2014
38,116
34,054
Texas
✟176,076.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
This is correct in my view. The common tradition is this likely Q that no one has a copy of. Someone told someone else the basic content. They all share this content. Its also clear that they discussed preaching with each other, etc.

Also, I don't really get hung up on the details of the accounts. One person was more interested in some details than the other. This is not really a problem if you ask me.
The common tradition was that the gospels were penned by people who actually witnessed the events.
 
Upvote 0

redleghunter

Thank You Jesus!
Site Supporter
Mar 18, 2014
38,116
34,054
Texas
✟176,076.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
Yet Thomas which was a collection of quotes of Jesus was left out of the gentile canon because it spoke of our personal relationship with God rather than the need for go between clergy and institutions.
There’s a lot more reasons why Thomas did not make the canon. First would be it was a second century work.
 
  • Agree
Reactions: HardHead
Upvote 0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums

HardHead

Active Member
Site Supporter
Sep 8, 2019
383
178
56
GTA
✟84,378.00
Country
Canada
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
That’s because 11 of the apostles saw and heard the same things.

Why is this so difficult to believe?
Its not hard to believe at all. How they wrote it down and for what audience is another matter entirely.
 
Upvote 0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums

redleghunter

Thank You Jesus!
Site Supporter
Mar 18, 2014
38,116
34,054
Texas
✟176,076.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
I agree. This is the traditional view.
Yes and it was the view of the church until liberal skeptic theological thought in the 19th century questioned it. And they have no evidence to question the witness of the church for centuries.
 
Upvote 0