Biblical Source Criticism as a Tool for Deeper Learning of Texts

Source criticism, also known as literary criticism, is an analysis technique used to identify the sources used to compose a biblical text. It is the oldest known method of biblical study and allows us to understand the origin of particular text within the Bible. It also allows us to gain a deeper understanding of biblical texts such as the Synoptic Gospels. In my Biblical source criticism essay, I examined the various textual and historical sources to gain a deeper understanding of the origins and development of the biblical texts.

The Use and Advantages of Biblical Source Criticism

Source criticism helps to explore the issues of the Synoptic Problem and helps to resolve the issue of copying between the apostles. Source criticism also allows us to identify and address any inconsistencies or conflicts which occur within the text. This helps us to piece together a clear understanding of the underlying value and fundamentals of the text, and to understand the true message the author is trying to convey. Finally, source criticism also helps us with dating the sacred texts and identifying their origin and influences, as a clear origin of the source helps in determining the time period in which it was written, the accuracy and bias of the source as well as the possible influences on the author.

As a preliminary point, when source “criticism” is referred to, this is not intended to imply a negative connotation in the sense that the sacred texts are being analysed for errors or being criticised for their content. Rather, use of the word “criticism” in the expression “source criticism” is intended to convey an effort to use objective criteria to try to better comprehend and explain the purpose and meaning intended by the authors of biblical text.

The Gospels of Mathew, Mark and Luke are extremely similar. They often use the same chronology and style and even the same words when describing particular events. So similar are the descriptions and words used that it is almost impossible that the three gospels were completely independent from each other. For this reason, they are known as the Synoptic Gospels. That is, they see Jesus and the events surrounding Jesus “with the same eye”. As a result, this has led historians to wonder if the authors of the Gospels shared the same source. For example, did the authors use each other’s writings or some other fourth source that described Jesus and his life and death? This fourth source is generally called “Q”, for the German word quelle.

However, no fragment of the Q document has ever been discovered and has never been mentioned in any early church documents. It is a relatively recent invention to try to explain the composition of the Gospels. Perhaps a better explanation of the similarities of the three Gospels is that the authors copied from each other. But not only are there similarities between the three Gospels, there are also significant differences; events are sometimes described in a different order; and some material is only found in two out of the three Gospels. This leads to the question about who wrote the first Gospel and which of the other authors copied from whom.

Mathew, Mark and Luke: Gospel Comparison

Luke suggests that he used some source for his Gospel as he states in Luke 1:1-4:

Inasmuch as many have undertaken to compile a narrative of the things that have been accomplished among us…it seemed good to me also… to write an orderly account for you, most excellent Theophilus, that you may have certainty concerning the things you have been taught.

This suggests that Luke was not only aware of other sources, but that he may also have used some of those sources for his own Gospel. The generally held view is that Mark was the first Gospel written and was written after the death of St Peter and before the fall of Jerusalem in 70AD. As about 50% of Mark appears in Luke many consider that Mark was the source for Luke. Given that Luke’s Gospel also has material that suggests that he was aware of the destruction of Jerusalem, his Gospel is considered by many to have been written after Mark. In Luke 19:41-44, Jesus refers to the destruction of Jerusalem as follows:

41 As he approached Jerusalem and saw the city, he wept over it 42 and said…The days will come upon you when your enemies will build an embankment against you and encircle you and hem you in on every side. 44 They will dash you to the ground, you and the children within your walls. They will not leave one stone on another…”

In the article “The Synoptic Problem and the Non-existence of Q” the author suggests,

“..when comparing Matthew and Luke, many have noted that Matthew presents more liturgically refined forms of key traditions such as The Lord’s Prayer, the Beatitudes, and the Great Commission, than the versions found in Luke. This pattern suggests that some time had elapsed between the composition of Luke and Matthew, during which these traditions evolved as the Church coalesced into a more institutionalized structure”.

Mark’s Gospel also contains several errors that are corrected in the later Gospels. This again is a good indication that Mark was the first Gospel written, otherwise why would Mark introduce errors into a source that was correct? An example of this is in Mark 1:2 where he includes a quote from Isaiah, when the quote is actually from Malachi 3:1: Mark writes:

As it is written in Isaiah the prophet, “Behold I send my messenger before thy face, who shall prepare thy way; the voice of one crying in the wilderness: Prepare the way of the Lord, make his paths straight.”  

Matthew corrects this mistake by Mark by leaving out the quote that is from Malachi. He simply writes:

For this is he who was spoken of by the prophet Isaiah when he said, “The voice of one crying in the wilderness: Prepare the way of the Lord, make his paths straight'.

Matthew also corrects Mark when he quotes Jesus as incorrectly stating what the 10 commandments are. According to Mark, Jesus says that defrauding is one of the 10 commandments:

“You know the commandments; ‘Do not kill, do not commit adultery, do not steal, do not bear false witness, do not defraud, honor your father and mother'.

But defrauding is not one of the 10 Commandments. So Matthew omits this incorrect reference when he quotes Jesus:

And Jesus said, “You shall not kill, you shall not commit adultery, you shall not steal, you shall not bear false witness, honor your father and mother'.

As a result of source criticism, there are good arguments to suggest that Mark was the first Gospel written. This was then used as a source for Luke and Mathew was written after Luke and used both Mark and Luke as a source.

Source criticism also indicates that because the Gospels were written at different times, and presumably for different audiences, they present some different views about the character of Jesus. In particular, Matthew paints a picture of Jesus that has less human frailties and more divine attributes.

For example, in Mark 6:4-6, Mark writes that Jesus was unable to perform miracles in particular circumstances and He was surprised (a human trait) by the unbelief of the people:

And he could do no mighty works there, except that he laid his hands upon a few sick people and healed them. And he marvelled because of their unbelief.

Matthew revises this so that these human traits are not part of Jesus’ character. He changes Mark so that it is Jesus’ decision not to perform any miracles in the particular circumstances. He writes:

And he did not do many mighty works there because of their unbelief.

This presents a very different view of Jesus. It paints Jesus as always being in control and choosing not perform miracles rather than being unable to do so in particular circumstances. This reaffirms the divinity of Jesus rather than making him subject to human failings.

Another example is in Mark 10:13-16 where Mark writes that Jesus became “indignant” with the disciples who rebuked people for bringing children to Jesus. Mark writes:

13 And they were bringing children to him that he might touch them; and the disciples rebuked them. 14 But when Jesus saw it he was indignant, and said to them, “Let the children come to me, and do not hinder them; for to such belongs the kingdom of God.

Such a human failing is omitted for Matthew’s version of the event. He writes simply:

13 Then children were brought to him that he might lay his hands on them and pray. The disciples rebuked the people, but Jesus said, “Let the children come to me, and do not hinder them; for to such belongs the kingdom of heaven'.

Another good example of Matthew’s desire to present Jesus as not having human failings is in the story about Jesus healing the man with the shrivelled hand in the Synagogue. In Mark’s version, Jesus becomes angry at the people waiting to see if he would heal on the Sabbath.

And he said to them, “Is it lawful on the sabbath to do good or to do harm, to save life or to kill?” But they were silent. And he looked around at them in anger, grieved at their hardness of heart, and said to the man, “Stretch out your hand.” He stretched it out, and his hand was restored.

Matthew repeats this story but leaves out any suggestion that Jesus became angry or showed any other negative human emotions. He describes the event in a more objective manner:

12b “So it is lawful to do good on the sabbath.” 13 Then he said to the man, “Stretch out your hand.” And the man stretched it out, and it was restored, whole like the other.

It seems clear that Matthew is presenting Jesus as a more divine being. He may be doing this because he is writing for a later audience and wants to ensure that new converts understand the divine nature of Jesus rather than seeing him as just another prophet with human weaknesses. Given the persecutions of the Christians, converts would want to be convinced that they would have eternal life because Jesus was divine and not a mere mortal. Whatever the reason, source criticism provides a with a deeper understanding of these texts.

Matthew also revises parts of Luke’s gospel in order to refocus some of the negative sayings attributed to Jesus by Luke. It is difficult to understand, as reported by Luke, that Jesus would tell people to hate their family. But this is what Luke states in Luke 14:27-27 when he records Jesus saying:

26 “If anyone comes to me and does not hate his own father and mother and wife and children and brothers and sisters, yes, even his own life, he cannot be my disciple. 27 Whoever does not bear his own cross and come after me cannot be my disciple.

Matthew softens this statement in Luke. He does not refer to wives or children or brothers or sisters and the does not state that you cannot be a disciple if you don’t love Jesus more than family, only that the person is unworthy.

37 “He who loves father or mother more than me is not worthy of me; and he who loves son or daughter more than me is not worthy of me; 38 and he who does not  take his cross and follow me is not worthy of me.

This softening would make it much more palatable and less likely to offend potential new followers of Jesus.

The Synoptic Gospels also deal with the baptism of Jesus in ways that reflect differently on Jesus’ human/divine nature. For example, Mark’s Gospel suggests that perhaps Jesus was neither divine nor sinless - otherwise why would he need to be baptised by John the Baptist. Mark writes:

In those days Jesus came from Nazareth of Galilee and was baptized by John in the Jordan. And when he came up out of the water, immediately he saw the heavens opened and the Spirit descending upon him like a dove. 

If Jesus was divine and sinless, then he did not need to be baptised for the forgiveness of sins. But this dilemma is solved by Matthew who revises this event by declaring that it was not needed and was just fulfilling prophesy. Again, this suggests a more refined, and late, liturgical development that places Matthew after Mark. Matthew explains the baptism of Jesus in this way:

Then Jesus came from Galilee to the Jordan to John to be baptized by him. John would have prevented him, saying, “I need to be baptized by you, and do you come to me?” But Jesus answered him, “Let it be so for now; for thus it is fitting for us to fulfill all righteousness.” Then he consented. And when Jesus was baptized, he went up immediately from the water, and behold, the heavens were opened and he saw the Spirit of God descending like a dove.” 

Conclusion

In conclusion, source criticism of the Synoptic Gospels shows that the Gospels are really complements to each other. While there are great similarities between the three Gospels, there are also differences which provide readers with different perspectives of the life and times of Jesus. Because of source criticism, readers can understand that the different Gospels were written at different times and probably for different audiences. The latter Matthew Gospel show a more advanced liturgical perspective and corrects errors in the earlier Gospels. Source criticism helps readers to better understand the sacred texts by exposing the differences and similarities and correcting errors. In this way, readers obtain a much more holistic appreciation of the development and historical context of the Synoptic Gospels.

References

• Bible.org. (2019). The Synoptic Problem | Bible.org. [online] Available at: https://bible.org/article/synoptic-problem 
• Bibleodyssey.org. (2019). Did the Authors of the Canonical Gospels Know Each Other?. [online] Available at: http://www.bibleodyssey.org/tools/bible-basics/did-the-authors-of-the-canonical-gospels-know-each-other.aspx
• Catholic-resources.org. (2019). The Synoptic Problem & Proposed Solutions. [online] Available at: http://catholic-resources.org/Bible/Synoptic_Problem.htm 
• CompellingTruth.org. (2019). Christian Truth. [online] Available at: https://www.compellingtruth.org/ 
• CompellingTruth.org. (2019). Source criticism – What is it?. [online] Available at: https://www.compellingtruth.org/source-criticism.html 
• Crivoice.org. (2019). The Synoptic Problem: The Literary Relationship of Matthew, Mark, and Luke. [online] Available at: http://www.crivoice.org/synoptic.html 
• GotQuestions.org. (2019). What is the Synoptic Problem?. [online] Available at: https://www.gotquestions.org/synoptic-problem.html 
• maze, T. (2019). The synoptic problem: a way through the maze : Goodacre, Mark : Free Download, Borrow, and Streaming : Internet Archive. [online] Internet Archive. Available at: https://archive.org/details/synopticproblemw00good/page/n4 
• Owlcation. (2019). Comparing the Gospels: Matthew, Mark, Luke, and John. [online] Available at: https://owlcation.com/humanities/Comparing-the-Gospels-Matthew-Mark-Luke-and-John 
• Synoptic-problem.com. (2019). 1. Hidden Synoptic Patterns. [online] Available at: http://synoptic-problem.com/synoptic_patterns.html 
• The Exchange | A Blog by Ed Stetzer. (2019). Differences in the Gospels, A Closer Look. [online] Available at: https://www.christianitytoday.com/edstetzer/2012/march/differences-in-gospels-closer-look.html