Rethinking the Synoptic Problem

by David Alan Black (Editor), David R. Beck (Editor)

The problematic literary relationship among the Synoptic Gospels has given rise to numerous theories of authorship and priority. The primary objective of Rethinking the Synoptic Problem is to familiarize students with the main positions held by New Testament scholars in this much-debated area of research.

The contributors to this volume, all leading biblical scholars, highlight current academic trends within New Testament scholarship and updates evangelical understandings of the Synoptic Problem.

Genres: Biblical Studies, New Testament, Theology, History

160 pages, Paperback

First published October 1, 2001

Reviews

[Carter Yancey · Rating 3 out of 5]

A decent overview of recent (as of 2001 💀) scholarship on the synoptic problem. Similar to a "four views" type book, this is a collection of short essays each arguing that the summation of scholarship from the enlightenment to today supports their view. The authors are in agreement that:

1) there is a synoptic problem. Matthew, Mark, and Luke display literary dependence either on one another or on shared sources, but the order of this dependence is not obvious.

2) the synoptic problem is important. It has implications for apologetics and evangelism, particularly concerning the number of independent sources for the life of Jesus and the historical development of Christian theology.

3) the synoptic problem is not *that* important. Scholars go too deep down the speculation rabbit hole when they posit that the earliest Jesus communities viewed him as merely a good moral teacher, with high christological views developing later and intense theological contradictions existing between the various evangelical communities of the first century. Although each author strongly believes that their position is correct, they agree that neither Matthean nor Markan priority should be a litmus test for orthodoxy as neither truly stands as conclusive evidence for more progressive views, despite what critical scholars say.

Like most collections like it, it suffers from a lack of systematic organization. Each author is free to build their case however they want. This means that each author presents the strongest arguments for their view and knocks down the weakest for opposing views. The chapter on Markan priority had me convinced that it really is the only view that makes sense. Then came Farmer's essay on Matthean priority, and I was sure that it was true. Ultimately, it seems there are good reasons to take either view (Lukan priority and Gospel independence views are virtually non-existent), and a more thorough book would be needed to settle the matter, if that's even possible. Thankfully, each of the authors does a good job of offering source recommendations, so it does provide an opportunity to grow your reading wish list :)

[Daniel · Rating 3 out of 5]

Pretty short and a brief overview. With Farmer standing alone, his chapter was the most interesting, since the other authors mostly agreed. I appreciated that each side presented a positive case for their position, but wish they would have spent more time defending their weak points (as McKnight mentioned, Farmer didn't seem to have much to say about the linguistic arguments for Markan priority. On the other side, I would have liked to see once of the two source proponents address Farmers argument about order and wording agreeing when Mark follows Matthew or Luke.)

As the authors mention in the prologue, only the two source and Griesbach hypotheses are discussed. It would have been additionally nice to see some tackling of other perspectives.

[Lisa · Rating 2 out of 5]

If you are really interested in the Synoptic Problem, this is an okay book. I don't really understand why it matters so much to the understanding of what God is trying to say in the Gospels, and I think it would be a better use of time to study the Gospels themselves instead of spending time trying to determine the order in which they were written.

[G. A. Dietrich · Rating 4 out of 5]

I haven't read enough about the synoptic problem to know if this volume is helpful on the whole. It was, however, helpful for me though to gain an understanding of some terminology and argument as a whole. I was disappointed to see Black edit this but not contribute to it.