On the Harmony of the Gospels

Anyone serious about the study of the New Testament is aware, after a bit of reading, that three of the Gospels are similar, but not identical, while the fourth gospel is quite different.  The three similar gospels, Matthew, Mark and Luke, are called the synoptic gospels (meaning "similar".)  The fourth gospel, that of the young disciple John, is written later than the other three and is quite different.  The gospel of John has a different philosophy from the other three and was probably written to fill in details not covered by the other gospels and to expand on the view of Jesus preached by the early church.

Given the four-fold lenses of these descriptions of the life of Christ, it is natural to create a "harmony" of the gospels, that is, an outline of the life of Christ which is consistent with the material provided by all four.  One example is provided here by Blue Letter Bible.  I have several books on this topic in my personal library including a standard text by A. T. Robertson.

There are a number of interesting problems that arise for those serious about a "gospel harmony" of the life of Christ.  The three synoptic gospels are each just a little bit different and the details of events and sermon vary.  At times they even appear to conflict. For example, Matthew (in Matthew 5-7) describes a sermon on the mountainside; Luke records a very similar sermon on a plain, after Jesus has descended from a mountain.  Are these two accounts recording the same event, but with slightly different descriptions by different observers? (Maybe Jesus stopped on a flat area to speak as he descended from the mountain?) Or are they different events, with very similar topics. Certainly Jesus told the same parables and teaching in different times, repeating many of the teachings, so the "Sermon on the Mount" was probably taught in a variety of locations.  These types of questions permeate the harmony attempts.

In addition to accounts which different, it is not always clear whether the episodes described in the gospels are intended to be in sequence.  Although Luke says that he put the events of Jesus "in order", he probably meant that he organized his history according to ideas and themes, not that he put the events in chronological  sequence.  (There is considerable evidence that some of the events in the gospel of Luke are out of chronological order.  At the end of Luke 9 Jesus turns towards Jerusalem but then in Luke 10-18 there are a variety of teaching or events that probably occurred prior to his final trip from Galilee to Judea.)

I'll say more about gospel harmony later, especially as we get to the gospel of John

I'm traveling this weekend, without steady internet... so I'll stop here. Tomorrow we return to the study of Luke.