The RESEMBLANCES between the SynopticGospels may be observed in the following points:-
2
The DIFFERENCES between the SynopticGospels may be observed in the following facts:-
3
It will be more convenient, therefore, to speak first of the SynopticGospels, Matthew, Mark, and Luke.
4
The difference between John's account of the entry into Jerusalem and those of the SynopticGospels is very characteristic.
5
The omission of events which are of importance in the SynopticGospels is a striking feature in St. John's Gospel.
6
We find in the SynopticGospels that it arose at the close of a long day of teaching and of healing.
7
The story has been preserved in all three of the SynopticGospels and would be very important to later generations of Christians.
8
Now what is the bearing of the Epistle of Clement upon the question of the currency and authority of the SynopticGospels?
9
It remains to ask whether any words used by St. John seem to show that he borrowed expressions from the SynopticGospels.
10
The agreement between the Greek words of the SynopticGospels is too close to be explained by the use of an Aramaic original.
11
It is remarkable that the SynopticGospels, the fourth Gospel, Acts, and Galatians, all show St. John in close connection with St. Peter.
12
More often, the SynopticGospels promise salvation on the basis of good works, especially righteousness and helping the poor (for example, Matt.
13
A strong argument in favour of the genuineness of the Epistle is furnished by the numerous parallels which it presents to the SynopticGospels.
14
The Synoptic problem consists in the difficulties raised by the fact that the SynopticGospels show both a remarkable similarity and a remarkable dissimilarity.
15
It is difficult to see how any one, recognizing the statements of the SynopticGospels, could pass over the mention of the Virgin more lightly.
16
That Mark's Gospel is the oldest of the SynopticGospels, and that Mark's Gospel does not contain, nor even mention, the Sermon on the Mount.