What Are the Synoptic Gospels? Matthew, Mark, Luke Compared

If you've ever read Matthew, Mark, and Luke back to back, you've noticed something striking: they often tell the same stories, in the same order, sometimes in almost the same words. That's not a coincidence. These three are called the synoptic gospels (from Greek synopsis, meaning "seeing together"), and scholars have studied their remarkable overlap for over two centuries. According to Encyclopaedia Britannica, over 97% of Mark's content appears in either Matthew or Luke — a level of similarity that raises fascinating questions about how these gospels came to be.

Key Takeaways

• Matthew, Mark, and Luke are called synoptic because they share a common viewpoint, structure, and much of the same material.
• The term "synoptic" was coined by German scholar Johann Jakob Griesbach in 1776 when he published the first modern side-by-side comparison of the three gospels.
• Over 97% of Mark's gospel is reproduced in Matthew and/or Luke, while Matthew and Luke each contain large amounts of unique material.
• Scholars use the term Triple Tradition for stories found in all three gospels and Double Tradition for material shared only by Matthew and Luke.
• The two-source hypothesis — the dominant scholarly explanation — proposes that Matthew and Luke independently used Mark plus a lost sayings collection called Q (from German Quelle, "source").
• Each gospel has a distinct author, audience, and theological emphasis: Mark is action-focused and written for Roman Christians; Matthew is law-centered and aimed at Jewish Christians; Luke is compassionate and addressed to educated Gentiles.
• John's gospel stands apart — it is not synoptic and shares only about 8% of its material with the other three.

What Does "Synoptic" Actually Mean?

The word synoptic means "seen together" in Greek. Applied to Matthew, Mark, and Luke, it signals that you can lay these three gospels in parallel columns and read them at a glance — their plots, sequences, and wording often align so closely that the parallels are impossible to miss.

This visual approach was pioneered by Johann Jakob Griesbach (1745–1812), a German New Testament scholar. In 1776 he published Synopsis Evangeliorum — a literal side-by-side display of the three gospels — instead of harmonizing them into one smooth narrative as earlier scholars had done. That publication launched what scholars now call the Synoptic Problem: the question of why these three gospels are so similar, and what literary relationship connects them.

Citation capsule: Griesbach's 1776 Synopsis Evangeliorum displayed Matthew, Mark, and Luke in parallel columns for the first time. His approach replaced harmonization with direct comparison, revealing both striking verbal agreements and significant divergences — laying the groundwork for two centuries of synoptic scholarship. (Source: Cambridge University Press, J. J. Griesbach: Synoptic and Text-Critical Studies 1776–1976)

How Much Do Matthew, Mark, and Luke Overlap?

The overlap is enormous — and statistically precise. Mark's gospel contains 661 verses. Of those, over 600 appear in Matthew and about 350 appear in Luke, according to Britannica's analysis of biblical literature. Put differently:

• 97% of Mark is found in Matthew and/or Luke.
• Only about 31 verses in Mark have no parallel in the other two synoptics.
• Roughly 76% of Mark's material appears in both Matthew and Luke (the Triple Tradition).
• Matthew and Luke each share an additional ~200 verses of sayings material not found in Mark (the Double Tradition).

This level of agreement is far beyond coincidence. In many passages, the Greek wording is nearly verbatim — a strong signal of direct literary dependence.

What Are the Triple Tradition and Double Tradition?

Scholars use these two categories to map the shared content precisely.

Triple Tradition refers to material appearing in all three synoptic gospels — stories like the Baptism of Jesus, the Temptation in the Wilderness, the Feeding of the Five Thousand, and the Transfiguration. This shared narrative core comprises roughly half of Matthew and Luke and most of Mark's gospel.

Double Tradition refers to roughly 200 verses shared by Matthew and Luke but absent from Mark. This material consists almost entirely of sayings and discourses — including the Beatitudes (Matthew 5:3–12 / Luke 6:20–23, NIV), the Lord's Prayer (Matthew 6:9–13 / Luke 11:2–4, NIV), and parables like the Lost Sheep (Matthew 18:12–14 / Luke 15:4–7, NIV). This body of shared sayings is what led scholars to hypothesize the Q source. Many of these passages are also foundational to understanding the parables of Jesus.

Citation capsule: The Double Tradition — some 200 verses of sayings shared by Matthew and Luke but absent from Mark — accounts for approximately 24–25% of Matthew's content and 22–23% of Luke's content. Most of this material consists of teachings rather than narrative events. (Source: A. M. Honoré, "A Statistical Study of the Synoptic Problem," Novum Testamentum 10, 1968; summarized in Bible Odyssey, SBL)

Each gospel also contains unique material: stories and sayings found in only one gospel. Scholars call this M material (unique to Matthew, e.g., the Magi visiting Jesus in Matthew 2) and L material (unique to Luke, e.g., the Parable of the Prodigal Son in Luke 15:11–32, NIV).

What Is the Synoptic Problem?

The Synoptic Problem is the scholarly name for the question: In what order were the three gospels written, and did the authors use each other as sources?

Three main answers have been proposed:

1. Markan Priority (Two-Source Hypothesis) — Mark was written first. Matthew and Luke each independently used Mark as a narrative source, plus a now-lost sayings document called Q. This is the dominant view among most New Testament scholars today, though it remains debated.

2. Griesbach/Two-Gospel Hypothesis — Matthew was written first, Luke used Matthew, and Mark was a condensed digest of both. This view was popular in the 18th and early 19th centuries and still has defenders.

3. Farrer Hypothesis — Mark was written first, Matthew used Mark, and Luke used both Mark and Matthew (no Q required). This view has gained traction in recent decades, especially following Mark Goodacre's The Case Against Q (2002).

No single solution has achieved universal scholarly agreement. The two-source hypothesis still holds the majority position, but the debate remains genuinely open — and that's part of what makes synoptic studies so intellectually alive.

Citation capsule: The Two-Source Hypothesis remains the dominant scholarly position, though no definitive solution to the Synoptic Problem has been found. Alternative hypotheses — including the Farrer hypothesis (Mark + Matthew, no Q) — continue to gain scholarly support. (Source: Bible Odyssey, SBL, "The Synoptic Problem")

If you're curious to read these parallels yourself, Bible Expert's side-by-side translation comparison tool lets you place Matthew, Mark, and Luke in adjacent columns and see their verbal agreements instantly — in any of 1,200+ translations.

What Is the Q Source?

Q (from German Quelle, meaning "source") is the name scholars give to a hypothetical document thought to explain the Double Tradition — the ~200 verses of shared sayings in Matthew and Luke that don't come from Mark.

The case for Q rests on a simple observation: Matthew and Luke share a large block of sayings material that is absent from Mark. If Matthew and Luke didn't know each other's gospels (a key premise of Markan Priority), they must have shared a common written source. Scholars call that source Q.

What would Q have looked like? Most scholars picture it as a sayings gospel — a collection of Jesus's teachings with little narrative framework, similar in format to the Gospel of Thomas (a non-canonical text discovered in 1945). B. H. Streeter, in his influential 1924 work The Four Gospels, argued Q was written in Koine Greek and that Luke preserves its original order better than Matthew.

Crucially, no manuscript of Q has ever been discovered, and no ancient writer mentions it by name. It remains a scholarly inference, not a physical document. Some scholars — particularly those favoring the Farrer hypothesis — argue Q is unnecessary: Luke simply knew Matthew's gospel.

How Do Matthew, Mark, and Luke Differ?

Despite their shared material, each synoptic gospel has a distinct personality. Here's a side-by-side comparison:

The differences in audience explain much. Mark writes for Roman converts unfamiliar with Jewish customs — that's why he explains Aramaic phrases and Jewish practices (Mark 7:3–4, NIV). Matthew targets Jewish Christians and quotes the Hebrew Scriptures constantly, showing Jesus as the fulfillment of prophecy. Luke's elegant Greek prose and his focus on women, the poor, and Gentiles reflect his educated, cosmopolitan audience.

You can explore these differences using the Bible study methods that scholars have developed specifically for reading gospels comparatively.

Why Isn't John a Synoptic Gospel?

John's gospel stands in a category of its own. While Matthew, Mark, and Luke share a common structure and large blocks of overlapping material, John shares only about 8% of its material with the synoptics — and even that small overlap looks very different in style and theological framing.

The differences are striking. John opens not with a birth narrative or baptism but with a cosmic prologue: "In the beginning was the Word" (John 1:1, NIV). He uses long theological discourses rather than short parables. He includes episodes found nowhere in the synoptics — the Wedding at Cana, Nicodemus, the Samaritan woman, Lazarus's resurrection — while omitting key synoptic events like the Transfiguration and the institution of the Eucharist at the Last Supper (though he gives the most extensive Last Supper discourse of all).

John's gospel is typically dated to around 90–95 CE — later than the synoptics — and reflects a more developed Christology (understanding of who Jesus is). Whether John knew the synoptic gospels and chose to complement rather than duplicate them is itself a debated question in scholarship.

For a fuller picture of how all four gospels fit together with the rest of Scripture, see our guide to Old Testament vs New Testament.

Does the Synoptic Problem Affect Christian Faith?

For many believers, the Synoptic Problem raises a natural concern: if the gospel writers borrowed from each other and from unknown sources, does that undermine biblical authority?

The short answer is: the existence of literary sources doesn't reduce the theological value of the gospels. Ancient historians and biographers routinely used written sources — Luke explicitly says so in his opening verses: "I too decided to write an orderly account for you...having carefully investigated everything from the beginning" (Luke 1:3, NIV). Using sources was a mark of responsible authorship, not of fabrication.

Catholic, Protestant, Orthodox, and Evangelical scholars approach inspiration differently, but all major traditions affirm that the gospels — however composed — communicate reliable testimony about Jesus. The inspiration of Scripture is understood by most Christian traditions to work through human authors, including their use of sources, research, and literary craft.

If these discussions spark deeper questions for you, Bible Expert's AI Bible Chat is a good place to explore them with direct verse references — and for doctrinal questions that touch your faith, your pastor or spiritual director is always the best guide.

How Can You Study the Synoptic Gospels Together?

The best way to grasp the synoptic relationship is to read parallel passages side by side. In our experience working through these texts, the Feeding of the Five Thousand (Mark 6, Matthew 14, Luke 9) is the ideal starting passage — the verbal agreements are immediate and striking. Here are three practical approaches:

1. Use a printed synopsis. Aland's Synopsis of the Four Gospels (United Bible Societies) arranges every pericope in four parallel columns. It's the standard tool used in seminaries worldwide.

2. Read in sequence. Start with Mark (shortest and most action-driven), then Matthew (most structured), then Luke (most narrative and compassionate). Note what each adds, omits, or changes.

3. Focus on the differences. The unique material in each gospel — the M and L sources — often reveals the most about each author's theological priorities. The Parable of the Prodigal Son (Luke 15:11–32, NIV), found only in Luke, tells you something profound about Luke's vision of divine mercy.

Our guide to how to study the Bible covers these comparative approaches in depth, including how to use a concordance and how to trace themes across books.

Frequently Asked Questions

What are the synoptic gospels?

The synoptic gospels are Matthew, Mark, and Luke — the three New Testament gospels that share a common structure, much of the same content, and similar wording. The term "synoptic" comes from Greek, meaning "seeing together." Over 97% of Mark's content appears in Matthew or Luke.

Why is John not a synoptic gospel?

John's gospel shares only about 8% of its content with Matthew, Mark, and Luke. It has a different structure, a distinct theological focus, and was written in a more symbolic and reflective style. John likely wrote to complement, not duplicate, the synoptic tradition.

Who coined the term "synoptic gospels"?

German scholar Johann Jakob Griesbach coined the term in 1776 when he published the first modern side-by-side comparison of Matthew, Mark, and Luke — called a synopsis. His work launched modern synoptic studies.

What is the Q source?

Q (from German Quelle, "source") is a hypothetical document scholars use to explain the ~200 verses of sayings material shared by Matthew and Luke but absent from Mark. No manuscript of Q has ever been found. Some scholars argue it never existed and that Luke simply used Matthew.

Which synoptic gospel was written first?

Most scholars believe Mark was written first, around 65–70 CE, making it the earliest of the synoptic gospels. Matthew and Luke are typically dated to 80–90 CE. This view — called Markan Priority — is the majority position, though alternatives exist.

What is the Synoptic Problem?

The Synoptic Problem is the scholarly question of why Matthew, Mark, and Luke are so similar, and what literary relationship connects them. The leading explanation is the Two-Source Hypothesis: Matthew and Luke each used Mark plus a lost sayings document called Q.

What is the Triple Tradition?

Triple Tradition refers to material found in all three synoptic gospels — including the Baptism, Temptation, Feeding of the Five Thousand, and Transfiguration of Jesus. This shared content forms the narrative backbone of the synoptic gospels.

How do Matthew, Mark, and Luke differ theologically?

Mark emphasizes Jesus's urgent power and action. Matthew presents Jesus as the fulfillment of Jewish Scripture and law. Luke focuses on Jesus as the universal Savior who prioritizes women, the poor, and those on the margins of society. All three present Jesus as Lord — with distinct emphases suited to their audiences.

Julien is a Bible educator and content writer at Bible Expert, passionate about making Scripture accessible across all Christian traditions.