Best of the Four Gospels?

[SomeGuyCalledWolf]

Mark, Matthew, Luke, or John?

This one was likely written first, is the shortest of the four, and according to tradition (a.t.t.), was written by John Mark, who wrote down Simon Peter's accounts of Jesus's ministry and passion. It focuses mostly on things Jesus did and portrays Him as a teacher who is constantly misunderstood, even by His own disciples. However, this Gospel lacks information on Jesus's early life and lacks in details regarding the resurrection.

Matthew is essentially Mark Deluxe Edition. Longest of the four gospels, written by Matthew the Apostle (an eyewitness) a.t.t., and intended for a Jewish audience, or at least one familiar with the Old Testament. This Gospel quotes the OT more than any other Gospel and has the goal of showing its reader that Jesus is the promised Messiah.

Luke is the most biography-like of the Gospels, listing events from Jesus's birth and youth, to His public ministry, to His death and resurrection and even His ascension. I feel it's also the best to read before reading Acts. One nitpick I have with this one though is that the passion narrative of this gospel isn't as dark as the one in Mark/Matthew, in my opinion.

John is the most unique on the four, and focuses on who Jesus is. Also written by an eyewitness, from it's very start it tells us the Jesus is God, and existed with God since the very beginning. Jesus talks about Himself in this gospel more than any of the others.

Thoughts?

 

[Sanoy]

Historically I go with Luke, Spiritually I go with John.

 

[TuxAme]

I don't have "favorites", but John's is the most memorable to me since it's not synoptic.

 

[JustRachel]

They have all given me knowledge of some kind and I'm glad they are all available. I've read of folks coming to salvation just by reading John

 

[St_Worm2]

Is there a best if it's not all four together? Each Gospel gives us a slightly different account/tells us about Jesus from different perspectives. In Matthew, we see Him principally as the King. In Mark, as the Servant. In Luke, as the Man. And in John, as God. The four also both support and expand the knowledge and understanding that we have about the other three. I probably spend more time in John, especially around here (because so many soteriological issues are addressed there), but I don't believe one Gospel should be considered better than the others.

--David
p.s. - John is the Book that I point new Christians toward as the best place to start reading the Bible. And it's the only Book that I regularly recommend to non-Christians.

 

[Basil the Great]

I prefer the Gospel of Mark myself.

 

[Dirk1540]

I always thought it would be cool to do a deep study of Matthew alongside of Isaiah. Luke might be my top choice because it has a sequel, and that sequel ties into Paul.

 

[Call me Nic]

. *duplicate post*

 

[Call me Nic]

My preference is John, which is an amazing read for the newly converted (or soon will be) unto even the most mature of Christians. My particular favorite chapters of John are 14-16.

However, my favorite section of the Bible has got to be Matthew 5 through Matthew 7: unparalleled in the rest of the New Testament in my opinion.

 

[Doug Melven]

I favor all 4 Gospels. Each presents a different side of Jesus Christ.

 

[dqhall]

I favor all 4 Gospels. Each presents a different side of Jesus Christ.

This is a link to a site that compares all four gospels side by side. It shows the Gospels are alike and unalike:

http://www.para-gospel.com/full

 

[Pilgrim]

Mark, Matthew, Luke, or John?

This one was likely written first, is the shortest of the four, and according to tradition (a.t.t.), was written by John Mark, who wrote down Simon Peter's accounts of Jesus's ministry and passion. It focuses mostly on things Jesus did and portrays Him as a teacher who is constantly misunderstood, even by His own disciples. However, this Gospel lacks information on Jesus's early life and lacks in details regarding the resurrection.

Matthew is essentially Mark Deluxe Edition. Longest of the four gospels, written by Matthew the Apostle (an eyewitness) a.t.t., and intended for a Jewish audience, or at least one familiar with the Old Testament. This Gospel quotes the OT more than any other Gospel and has the goal of showing its reader that Jesus is the promised Messiah.

Luke is the most biography-like of the Gospels, listing events from Jesus's birth and youth, to His public ministry, to His death and resurrection and even His ascension. I feel it's also the best to read before reading Acts. One nitpick I have with this one though is that the passion narrative of this gospel isn't as dark as the one in Mark/Matthew, in my opinion.

John is the most unique on the four, and focuses on who Jesus is. Also written by an eyewitness, from it's very start it tells us the Jesus is God, and existed with God since the very beginning. Jesus talks about Himself in this gospel more than any of the others.

Thoughts?

Depends on what a person is seeking to learn at any present time. Ultimately, to gain a comprehensive understanding of Jesus, read all of the Gospels. Read God's word daily, and pray without ceasing. Glory to God.

By the way 'Wolf, Welcome to Christian Forums. I'm hopeful you'll enjoy your time here. There are many 'rooms' to visit at CF... Glad you joined us.

 

[dreadnought]

Mark, Matthew, Luke, or John?

This one was likely written first, is the shortest of the four, and according to tradition (a.t.t.), was written by John Mark, who wrote down Simon Peter's accounts of Jesus's ministry and passion. It focuses mostly on things Jesus did and portrays Him as a teacher who is constantly misunderstood, even by His own disciples. However, this Gospel lacks information on Jesus's early life and lacks in details regarding the resurrection.

Matthew is essentially Mark Deluxe Edition. Longest of the four gospels, written by Matthew the Apostle (an eyewitness) a.t.t., and intended for a Jewish audience, or at least one familiar with the Old Testament. This Gospel quotes the OT more than any other Gospel and has the goal of showing its reader that Jesus is the promised Messiah.

Luke is the most biography-like of the Gospels, listing events from Jesus's birth and youth, to His public ministry, to His death and resurrection and even His ascension. I feel it's also the best to read before reading Acts. One nitpick I have with this one though is that the passion narrative of this gospel isn't as dark as the one in Mark/Matthew, in my opinion.

John is the most unique on the four, and focuses on who Jesus is. Also written by an eyewitness, from it's very start it tells us the Jesus is God, and existed with God since the very beginning. Jesus talks about Himself in this gospel more than any of the others.

Thoughts?

Each gospel would seem to have its advantages, it seems to me. I fine myself most frequently quoting Matthew. Mark was supposed to be the first written. Luke might have been the one that took the longest to write (just guessing), because the author himself apparently did not witness the events he was writing about. John seems to tell the the story from the Lord's point of view.

 

[Heavenhome]

All 4 gospels for me.
Together they complete one another.

 

[ewq1938]

The poll needs a 5th option, "No Gospel is the best."

 

[timtams]

Mark, Matthew, Luke, or John?

This one was likely written first, is the shortest of the four, and according to tradition (a.t.t.), was written by John Mark, who wrote down Simon Peter's accounts of Jesus's ministry and passion. It focuses mostly on things Jesus did and portrays Him as a teacher who is constantly misunderstood, even by His own disciples. However, this Gospel lacks information on Jesus's early life and lacks in details regarding the resurrection.

Matthew is essentially Mark Deluxe Edition. Longest of the four gospels, written by Matthew the Apostle (an eyewitness) a.t.t., and intended for a Jewish audience, or at least one familiar with the Old Testament. This Gospel quotes the OT more than any other Gospel and has the goal of showing its reader that Jesus is the promised Messiah.

Luke is the most biography-like of the Gospels, listing events from Jesus's birth and youth, to His public ministry, to His death and resurrection and even His ascension. I feel it's also the best to read before reading Acts. One nitpick I have with this one though is that the passion narrative of this gospel isn't as dark as the one in Mark/Matthew, in my opinion.

John is the most unique on the four, and focuses on who Jesus is. Also written by an eyewitness, from it's very start it tells us the Jesus is God, and existed with God since the very beginning. Jesus talks about Himself in this gospel more than any of the others.

Thoughts?

Tradition says that Matthew wrote first.

 

[joshua 1 9]

written by John Mark

Mark was the son of Mary who owned the upper room where the disciples stayed when they were in Jerusalem. He did not travel with the disciples like Matthew did. Even Paul still considered Mark to be young and not mature enough. They want on a mission trip together and Paul was upset that Mark wanted to go home early. Luke was able to get them to reconcile their differences. Later on Mark brought Paul some books and he was very happy with that. So they were able to work things out between them.

 

[timtams]

Mark's gospel

 

[FenderTL5]

My preference is John, which is an amazing read for the newly converted (or soon will be) unto even the most mature of Christians. My particular favorite chapters of John are 14-16.

However, my favorite section of the Bible has got to be Matthew 5 through Matthew 7: unparalleled in the rest of the New Testament in my opinion.

Did you know that the Gospel of John is read (daily readings) right after Pascha in the Orthodox Churches?
Customarily, Lent was a 'crash course' catechism culminating with baptisms/charismations on Pascha, followed by reading John by the new converts.

 

[danbuter]

I picked Matthew because of the Sermon on the Mount and the Lord's Prayer, but I also really like the others.