Harmony of the Gospels

Questions about areas of controversy or conflict between the Christian faith and the academic discipline can (and sometimes do) assume an easy dichotomy between the two. One's dual commitments to "the Faith" and the guild are often seen as competing allegiances, each vying for possession of the Christian soul. The guild may even be perceived as intolerant or antagonistic toward the Christian faith. Would-be Ph.D. students of evangelical backgrounds, for example, are often warned not to be naïve, but to be suspicious of secular institutions of higher learning. Such was my experience, as I left Gordon-Conwell Theological Seminary (M.Div.; Th.M.) for doctoral work in NT at Emory University. The problem with the aforementioned formulation, however, is the a priori "us versus them" mentality it fosters-a mentality that can foreclose genuine learning opportunities and undermine the very faith it seeks to defend. It also assumes a broad consensus among Christians on the identity and definition of those items of the faith in need of safeguarding vis-à-vis "the guild." Little did I know that upon returning to my alma mater, I would be the one suspected of having wavered from "the Faith."

Mark's account of the Transfiguration was written to be a veiled allegory of St. Paul's teaching and ministry: a connection between St. Paul's preaching and the teaching of Christ.
Luke reworked some of Mark's Trasnfiguration narrative to heighten the correspondence between Christ's transfiguration and the wilderness theophanies recorded in Exodus 19-20; 24; 34; 40:34-35 and Deuteronomy 18:15. Luke implies the presence of the Holy Spirit, and Christ’s return at the eschaton, which were two of his major themes.  This was in keeping with his plan to write a New Gospel law and book of prophecy that would parallel the Torah and Jewish Prophets.
Matthew reworked Mark's version of the Transfiguration story to integrate with many Old Testament prophecies and show convincingly how Jesus was the fulfillment of all that had been prophesied and hoped for. "

The events recorded by the gospel writers from the crucifixion to the resurrection, come with their own time frames.  The Friday afternoon to a Sunday morning scenario is an impossibility if these events are allowed to remain as they are given by the gospels.  If we allow the events to stand as they are recorded, we will see that Jesus meant what He said, and we will not have to use the trickery of Talmudic math to make it work.

...a consideration of the historicity and significance of Jesus’ life from a chronological perspective.  Jesus is most commonly thought to have ministered either from c. 27 to 30 AD or from 29 to 33 AD.  Both suggestions are broadly compatible with the relevant Biblical data, but require us to discard a large amount of extra-Biblical data.  They also (in some of their forms) necessitate a less-than-straightforward interpretation of: a] the flow of events in the Gospels, and b] the time-indicators implicit in John 2.20 and Gal. 1.15-20.  In the present paper, I propose an alternative:  a Jan. 26 to Apr. 28 AD ministry.  Those who believe Jesus to have been crucified on Friday 15th Nisan (as I do) are commonly attracted to a 30 or 33 AD crucifixion date on the basis of astronomical considerations.  But, despite many assertions to the contrary, it is possible for the Passover to have fallen on a Friday in 28 AD (once intercalation is correctly handled), which enables the relevant Biblical data to be treated more soundly and the relevant extra-Biblical data to be given its full weight.  As for the apparent conflict between the Synoptic and Johannine accounts of the Passion week, I here proffer a version of Jaubert’s 364-day-year hypothesis, which turns out to be particularly amenable to a 28 AD crucifixion.  If my claims are correct--i.e., if Jesus ate his last supper within a community where the 364-day-year calendar was observed--, then Jesus’ last supper should be seen not as a fulfilment of the Mosaic law’s requirements, but as a prophetic enactment of the events to come (akin to Jesus’ coronation at Bethany and the ‘signs’ acted out by Israel’s prophets).  A community where the 364-day-year calendar was observed merely provided a convenient and appropriate environment.  As such, the present paper undercuts two frequently-made claims about the Gospels:  a] that they cannot fruitfully be treated as credible historical documents;  and b] that their account of Jesus’ last days contains an irreconciable (in Ehrman’s words, “impossible”) contradiction.  It also sheds light on the significance of Jesus’ ministry.  As Rabbi Jonathan Sacks says, “Some of Judaism’s most profound truths are to be found not in texts, but in time--in the Jewish calendar itself”.

Scholars often take for granted that Tatian made use, possibly fairly extensive use, of extracanonical Gospels in producing the Diatessaron. Petersen saw the appropriations of these sources as proof that for Tatian "there was little or no distinction between canonical and extracanonical traditions. " Claims have been made for Tatian's use of the Gospel of Peter , the Gospel of Thomas , the Gospel of the Hebrews , and others, including hypothesized lost Gospels. Many of these claims were made on the basis of what is now referred to as the Old Perspective on Diatessaronic studies and would be open to reinvestigation on that basis alone. This chapter offers a new review of what scholars have proposed to be the most indicative instances of Tatian's dependence on extracanonical Gospels. It concludes that in none of these instances is the hypothesis of Tatian's dependence on a noncanonical Gospel the most obvious or problem-free explanation, and in some it is demonstrably false. Even the most generous, realistic allowance for possible influence does not leave the hypothesis much basis for optimism. With little doubt, Tatian knew of other Gospels. But there are only four Gospels we know that Tatian used for his composition, and for that composition he used no other Gospel in the way in which he used each of the four.

La parola greca “Diatessaron” significa “attraverso i quattro” e fin dal II secolo fu utilizzata in relazione ai Vangeli. I quattro Vangeli (la parola “Vangelo” significa “buona notizia”) sono testimonianze complementari che si integrano piacevolmente a vicenda in modo da offrire il quadro completo della vita di Gesù Cristo. Il testo utilizzato è quello dell’edizione riveduta del 2017 della Traduzione del Nuovo Mondo delle Sacre Scritture. Nei brani paralleli non ho scelto un Vangelo anziché un altro, nemmeno nei dialoghi. Maneggiandoli con rispetto e devozione, ho utilizzato tutti i versetti canonici dei quattro Vangeli, oltre ad altri versetti biblici attinenti, posizionando ogni episodio della vita di Gesù in ordine cronologico e fondendo scrupolosamente insieme tutti i particolari di ciascuna narrazione.

Unendo i testi dei Vangeli di Matteo e Luca, ecco una fusione devota e ordinata di tutte le informazione bibliche che abbiamo sul discorso più celebre di tutti i tempi, così come poteva apparire in tutta la sua completezza a coloro che ebbero il privilegio di udirlo dal vivo.

La parola greca “Diatessaron” significa “attraverso i quattro” e fin dal II secolo fu utilizzata in relazione ai Vangeli. I quattro Vangeli (la parola “Vangelo” significa “buona notizia”) sono testimonianze complementari che si integrano piacevolmente a vicenda in modo da offrire il quadro completo della vita di Gesù Cristo. Il testo utilizzato è quello dell’edizione riveduta del 2017 della Traduzione del Nuovo Mondo delle Sacre Scritture. Nei brani paralleli non ho scelto un Vangelo anziché un altro, nemmeno nei dialoghi. Maneggiandoli con rispetto e devozione, ho utilizzato tutti i versetti canonici dei quattro Vangeli, oltre ad altri versetti biblici attinenti, posizionando ogni episodio della vita di Gesù in ordine cronologico e fondendo scrupolosamente insieme tutti i particolari di ciascuna narrazione.

This volume combines some of the leading voices on the composition and collection of early Christian gospels in order to analyze Tatian's Diatessaron. The rapid rise and sudden suppression of the Diatessaron has raised numerous questions about the nature and intent of this second-century composition. It has been claimed as both a vindication of the fourfold gospel's early canonical status and as an argument for the canon's on-going fluidity; it has been touted as both a premiere witness to the earliest recoverable gospel text and as an early corrupting influence on that text. Collectively, these essays provide the greatest advance in Diatessaronic scholarship in a quarter of a century.

The contributors explore numerous questions: did Tatian intend to supplement or supplant the fourfold gospel? How many were his sources and how free was he with their text? How do we identify a Diatessaronic witness? Is it legitimate to use Tatian's Diatessaron as a source in New Testament textual criticism? Is a reconstruction of the Diatessaron still possible? These queries in turn contribute to the question of what the Diatessaron signifies with respect to the broader context of gospel writing, and what this can tell us about how the writing, rewriting and reception of gospel material functioned in the first and second centuries and beyond.

A review of A Gospel Synopsis of the Greek Text of Matthew, Mark and Luke: A Comparison of Codex Bezae and Codex Vaticanus. Edited by Jenny Read-Heimerdinger and Josep Rius-Camp, in collaboration with Enric Muñarch. Leiden: Brill, 2014. Pp. xxi + 315. Cloth, $240.00.

La parola greca “Diatessaron” significa “attraverso i quattro” e fin dal II secolo fu utilizzata in relazione ai Vangeli. I quattro Vangeli (la parola “Vangelo” significa “buona notizia”) sono testimonianze complementari che si integrano piacevolmente a vicenda in modo da offrire il quadro completo della vita di Gesù Cristo. Il testo utilizzato è quello dell’edizione riveduta del 2017 della Traduzione del Nuovo Mondo delle Sacre Scritture. Nei brani paralleli non ho scelto un Vangelo anziché un altro, nemmeno nei dialoghi. Maneggiandoli con rispetto e devozione, ho utilizzato tutti i versetti canonici dei quattro Vangeli, oltre ad altri versetti biblici attinenti, posizionando ogni episodio della vita di Gesù in ordine cronologico e fondendo scrupolosamente insieme tutti i particolari di ciascuna narrazione.

Matthew C. Williams' "Two Gospels from One: A Comprehensive Text-Critical Analysis of the Synoptic Gospels" promises more than it can deliver, misleads readers with its subtitle, and stymies rather than advances the agendas of text-critical research and gospel criticism. Williams' study not only fails to shed new light on the synoptic problem, but also misappropriates (and misapplies) text-critical criteria to problems beyond their purview. The result is a work that amounts to little more than a cataloguing of well-known arguments for Marcan priority, encumbered by repeated attempts to tether a text-critical approach to the Synoptic Problem. Despite the appearance of copious detail, the work is selective in its treatment and founded upon a number of abstractions.

La parola greca “Diatessaron” significa “attraverso i quattro” e fin dal II secolo fu utilizzata in relazione ai Vangeli. I quattro Vangeli (la parola “Vangelo” significa “buona notizia”) sono testimonianze complementari che si integrano piacevolmente a vicenda in modo da offrire il quadro completo della vita di Gesù Cristo. Il testo utilizzato è quello dell’edizione riveduta del 2017 della Traduzione del Nuovo Mondo delle Sacre Scritture. Nei brani paralleli non ho scelto un Vangelo anziché un altro, nemmeno nei dialoghi. Maneggiandoli con rispetto e devozione, ho utilizzato tutti i versetti canonici dei quattro Vangeli, oltre ad altri versetti biblici attinenti, posizionando ogni episodio della vita di Gesù in ordine cronologico e fondendo scrupolosamente insieme tutti i particolari di ciascuna narrazione.

Bereits diese knappe Annäherung an die Oratorientrilogie Schneiders  lässt einige grundsätzliche Beobachtungen zu. Bezüglich des Schriftgebrauchs ist zunächst die abundante Verwendung des Johannesevangeliums zu konstatieren. Dieses vierte Evangelium wiederum enthält kaum Dramatik, weshalb Mayer innerhalb seiner Oratorientexte zur Dramatisierung auf die übrigen Evangelien zurückgegriffen hat. Die ergänzenden, frei gedichteten Nummern unterstützen die starke Kontrastbildung durch die Einführung der Unterweltmächte (Satan, Höllengeister) sowie die Ausgestaltung der Opposition von Dunkel und Licht sowie Gutem und Bösem. Die Oratorien dürften in ihrer theologischen Konzeption als Zeugnisse der Erweckungsbewegung des frühen 19. Jahrhunderts verstanden werden. Musikalisch weisen sie eine Reihe von Merkmalen auf, die typisch bereits für Schneiders Das Weltgericht sind. überdies ergeben sich bisweilen Verbindungen zu Händels Messiah. Die starken Kontrastbildungen sind kompositorisch deutlich ausgestaltet. Die Formenwahl insgesamt sowie die Satzweise der Chöre sind von großer Abwechslung geprägt, obschon sich teils gewisse Wiederholungen ergeben. Wie gezeigt wurde, lassen sich die einzelnen Teile der Kompositionen in Szenen untergliedern, wodurch sich eine durchaus schlüssige Binnenstruktur ergibt, welche wiederum die teils fehlende konkrete Handlung ersetzt. Die Verbindungslinien zwischen den Werken sind musikalisch dünn. Es ist der Chor der Engel, der den Bogen von der Geburts- zur Passionsgeschichte schlägt. Dass Schneider keine Werke in einem strengen kirchlichen Stil oder etwa für liturgische Kontexte geschaffen hat, dürfte aus den Bemerkungen zur Musik ebenso deutlich geworden sein.

The Hebraic Concept of Time is non-linear, made up of repeating types and patterns. As opposed to Western chronology, the Gospels are not written in chronological order, but were written to show how Jesus is the fulfillment of types revealed in the Torah. They used the various books of the Torah upon which to model their individual books. Their main structural elements were typological.