Skip to content
Back to the question

Evidence record

Why do the Gospels tell it differently?

Every sentence on the exploration belongs to at least one claim below. Each says what kind of statement it is, what it rests on, what the evidence does not establish, and how far it was checked. Nothing here is a score, and none of it is a verdict on a belief or a theory.

Last checked 23 September 2026.

  • Source checked: 44
  • A judgement, not a fact: 14
  • Partly checked: 2

If something here is wrong, misquoted, out of date or unfair, write to support@unknownoceans.com and give the claim number, which does not change.

What the question takes for granted

A question about texts before it is a question about events. What the four Gospels say, and where they agree and differ, can be checked on the page; why they differ is argued by scholars; what happened underneath them is mostly out of reach.

  • The Gospels really do differ

    Established

    Established by reading them: the genealogies and the four accounts of the tomb differ in names, numbers and words, in any translation. How deep the differences go is what harmonisers and critics dispute.

  • Three of them are related on paper

    Established

    Among scholars the literary relationship of Matthew, Mark and Luke is the starting point, not the conclusion. Which way the copying ran is the open part.

  • The differences need explaining rather than just noting

    Contested

    Harmonisers from Augustine on hold that the differences resolve; critical scholarship reads many of them as the work of writers with different aims. Both treat them as something to account for.

  • There is a recoverable event underneath the accounts

    Open

    The page says plainly that where the accounts diverge there is usually nothing outside them to check against, and that the tools for choosing are themselves disputed.

How the question is labelled

Claim: The four accounts

Kind
Framing. Signposting. It asserts nothing a source could check.

Claim: Four accounts

Kind
Framing. Signposting. It asserts nothing a source could check.

The question

Claim: The differences are not a modern discovery. They were noticed early.

Kind
Historical claim. A statement about the past that historical evidence can test.
Review
Source checked. The cited passage was read, and it says this.

  • Supports · NPNF (McGiffert)

    Church History, Book 3, Chapter 39: The Writings of Papias3.39.15, and McGiffert’s note on the date of Papias’ work

    Cited · Link answered, 19 October 2026 · The cited passage was read, 23 September 2026

    The source reads: wrote down accurately, though not in order, whatsoever he remembered of the things said or done by Christ. ... The date of the composition of Papias’ work is now commonly fixed at about the middle of the second century, probably nearer 130 than 150 a.d.

  • Supports

    The Harmony of the Gospels: translator’s introductory noticep. 71

    Cited · Link answered, 19 October 2026 · The cited passage was read, 23 September 2026

    The source reads: And it was a favorite method of argumentation, adopted both by heathen and by Manichæan adversaries, to urge that the evangelical historians contradicted each other.

What this does not establish

Papias remarks on the order of Mark, not on differences between Gospels as such; the pagan critics Augustine answered are the first clear case of the differences being used as an argument.

Claim 1 · checked 23 September 2026 · AI-assisted audit

Claim: Three of the Gospels share passages that sometimes agree word for word, and the fourth shares few of them.

Kind
What scholars argue. A report of what specialists argue, or where they disagree.
Review
Source checked. The cited passage was read, and it says this.

  • Supports

    Synopticsopening definition, and “Differences and resemblances”

    Cited · Link answered, 19 October 2026 · Read in full, 23 September 2026

    The source reads: these Gospels admit ... differently from the evangelical narrative of St. John, of being arranged and harmonized section by section ... Together with all these resemblances, there is throughout the Synoptics a remarkable agreement in words and phrases, which can be more particularly realized by means of a Greek harmony or a close translation of the original text.

  • Qualifies

    Synoptics“Differences and resemblances”

    Cited · Link answered, 19 October 2026 · Read in full, 23 September 2026

    The source reads: the identity of expression never extending through passages of any length, and unless in reported discourses of Christ rarely beyond a few words at a time.

    Why "whole passages" was too strong.

  • Supports · Greek (SBLGNT)

    Matthew 3, SBL Greek New TestamentMatthew 3:9

    Cited · Link answered, 19 October 2026 · The cited passage was read, 23 September 2026

    The source reads: καὶ μὴ δόξητε λέγειν ἐν ἑαυτοῖς· Πατέρα ἔχομεν τὸν Ἀβραάμ, λέγω γὰρ ὑμῖν ὅτι δύναται ὁ θεὸς ἐκ τῶν λίθων τούτων ἐγεῖραι τέκνα τῷ Ἀβραάμ.

  • Supports · Greek (SBLGNT)

    Luke 3, SBL Greek New TestamentLuke 3:8

    Cited · Link answered, 19 October 2026 · The cited passage was read, 23 September 2026

    The source reads: καὶ μὴ ἄρξησθε λέγειν ἐν ἑαυτοῖς· Πατέρα ἔχομεν τὸν Ἀβραάμ, λέγω γὰρ ὑμῖν ὅτι δύναται ὁ θεὸς ἐκ τῶν λίθων τούτων ἐγεῖραι τέκνα τῷ Ἀβραάμ.

    The same words in the same order, bar one verb.

  • Supports · WEB

    John 12, World English BibleJohn 12:8, against Matthew 26:11

    Cited · Link answered, 19 October 2026 · The cited passage was read, 23 September 2026

    The source reads: For you always have the poor with you, but you don’t always have me.

    Word for word the same as Matthew 26:11 in the WEB: John does share a little, which is why "almost none" was too strong.

  • Supports · WEB

    Matthew 26, World English Bible: the Passover and the supperMatthew 26:11

    Cited · Link answered, 19 October 2026 · The cited passage was read, 23 September 2026

    The source reads: For you always have the poor with you, but you don’t always have me.

What this does not establish

How much John shares is a matter of degree: it has the feeding, the temple, the anointing and the passion, but rarely in the same words.

Corrected

23 September 2026. Previously: “Three of the Gospels share whole passages word for word, and the fourth shares almost none of them.” Exact agreement is real but usually runs for phrases rather than whole passages (Catholic Encyclopedia, “Synoptics”), and John is not empty of it: John 12:8 and Matthew 26:11 are identical in the WEB.

Claim 2 · checked 23 September 2026 · AI-assisted audit

Claim: What the divergences mean has been argued since the second century; who came first and who copied whom was asked by Augustine, and has been argued in earnest since the eighteenth century.

Kind
Historical claim. A statement about the past that historical evidence can test.
Review
Source checked. The cited passage was read, and it says this.

  • Supports · NPNF (McGiffert)

    Church History, Book 3, Chapter 39: The Writings of Papias3.39.15, and McGiffert’s note on the date

    Cited · Link answered, 19 October 2026 · The cited passage was read, 23 September 2026

    The source reads: Mark, having become the interpreter of Peter, wrote down accurately, though not in order ... The date of the composition of Papias’ work is now commonly fixed at about the middle of the second century, probably nearer 130 than 150 a.d.

  • Supports · NPNF (Salmond)

    The Harmony of the GospelsBook I, chapter 2, §§ 3 and 4

    Cited · Link answered, 19 October 2026 · The cited passage was read, 23 September 2026

    The source reads: are believed to have written in the order which follows: first Matthew, then Mark, thirdly Luke, lastly John. ... Mark follows him closely, and looks like his attendant and epitomizer.

  • Supports

    Synoptics“The synoptic problem”

    Cited · Link answered, 19 October 2026 · Read in full, 23 September 2026

    The source reads: In point of fact, St. Chrysostom and St. Augustine are the only Fathers who have formulated views concerning the mutual relation of the Synoptic Gospels ... it is only in the course of the eighteenth century that the scientific examination of the question was actually started.

What this does not establish

The second-century evidence is Papias on Mark’s order and Tatian’s harmony, not a theory of dependence. The Catholic Encyclopedia’s survey is of 1912.

Corrected

23 September 2026. Previously: “Who came first, who copied whom, and what the divergences mean have been argued since the second century.” Nothing in the second-century sources says who copied whom. Augustine (c. 400) is the first cited source to make Mark follow Matthew, and systematic work on the question began in the eighteenth century (Catholic Encyclopedia, “Synoptics”).

Claim 3 · checked 23 September 2026 · AI-assisted audit

Claim: Read Matthew, Mark and Luke side by side and the first thing you notice is not that they disagree.

Kind
This page’s reading. A judgement the page makes from the evidence. Others read it differently.
Review
A judgement, not a fact. Reviewed for whether it is fairly put and follows from the checked claims. No source can confirm it.

A reader’s first impression, said the same way by the 1912 encyclopedia.

  • Context

    Synoptics“Differences and resemblances”

    Cited · Link answered, 19 October 2026 · Read in full, 23 September 2026

    The source reads: which show in parallel columns the coincident parts of the evangelical narratives, the reader will at once notice the large amount of matter which is common to the Gospels of St. Matthew, St. Mark, and St. Luke.

Claim 4 · checked 23 September 2026 · AI-assisted audit

Claim: It is how often they agree exactly, in Greek, down to the word order,

Kind
Historical claim. A statement about the past that historical evidence can test.
Review
Source checked. The cited passage was read, and it says this.

  • Supports · Greek (SBLGNT)

    Matthew 3, SBL Greek New TestamentMatthew 3:7

    Cited · Link answered, 19 October 2026 · The cited passage was read, 23 September 2026

    The source reads: Γεννήματα ἐχιδνῶν, τίς ὑπέδειξεν ὑμῖν φυγεῖν ἀπὸ τῆς μελλούσης ὀργῆς;

  • Supports · Greek (SBLGNT)

    Luke 3, SBL Greek New TestamentLuke 3:7

    Cited · Link answered, 19 October 2026 · The cited passage was read, 23 September 2026

    The source reads: Γεννήματα ἐχιδνῶν, τίς ὑπέδειξεν ὑμῖν φυγεῖν ἀπὸ τῆς μελλούσης ὀργῆς;

    Identical to Matthew 3:7 letter for letter; 3:8 to 3:9 continue with one verb and one number different.

  • Supports

    Synoptics“Differences and resemblances”

    Cited · Link answered, 19 October 2026 · Read in full, 23 September 2026

    The source reads: This verbal agreement in the Greek Gospels is all the more surprising, as Jesus spoke in Aramaic

What this does not establish

The example is from material Matthew and Luke share without Mark. Exact runs of this length are the striking cases, not the rule.

Claim 5 · checked 23 September 2026 · AI-assisted audit

Claim: in a way that only happens when texts are related on paper.

Kind
What scholars argue. A report of what specialists argue, or where they disagree.
Review
Source checked. The cited passage was read, and it says this.

  • Supports

    Synoptics“The synoptic problem”

    Cited · Link answered, 19 October 2026 · Read in full, 23 September 2026

    The source reads: On the one hand, the resemblances are too numerous and too striking to be regarded as explicable on the hypothesis that the first three Evangelists wrote independently of one another.

  • Supports

    Is rewritten Bible/Scripture the solution to the Synoptic Problem?p. 5

    Cited · Link answered, 19 October 2026 · Read in full, 23 September 2026

    The source reads: The Two Document Hypothesis offers the most economical and plausible accounting of the form and content of the synoptic Gospels.

Other readings

An older view explained the agreement by a fixed oral tradition rather than documents; the 1912 encyclopedia lists it first among the solutions.

Claim 6 · checked 23 September 2026 · AI-assisted audit

Claim: Then read John, and little of it is there.

Kind
Describes a Bible passage. What a biblical passage says, in this page’s words. A fact about the text, separate from whether an event happened.
Review
Source checked. The cited passage was read, and it says this.

  • Supports

    Is rewritten Bible/Scripture the solution to the Synoptic Problem?p. 3

    Cited · Link answered, 19 October 2026 · Read in full, 23 September 2026

    The source reads: how is it that Matthew, Mark and Luke tell much the same story in much the same order, whereas John has a completely different procedure

  • Qualifies · WEB

    John 12, World English BibleJohn 12:8

    Cited · Link answered, 19 October 2026 · The cited passage was read, 23 September 2026

    The source reads: For you always have the poor with you, but you don’t always have me.

    Identical to Matthew 26:11. Little, not none.

Corrected

23 September 2026. Previously: “Then read John, and almost none of it is there.” John does share some of the wording: John 12:8 is word for word Matthew 26:11 in the WEB.

Claim 7 · checked 23 September 2026 · AI-assisted audit

What is on the page

Claim: What is on the page

Kind
Framing. Signposting. It asserts nothing a source could check.

Three of them are literally related

Claim: Three of them are literally related

Kind
What scholars argue. A report of what specialists argue, or where they disagree.
Review
Source checked. The cited passage was read, and it says this.

“Literally” in the sense of literary: related as written texts.

Claim 9 · checked 23 September 2026 · AI-assisted audit

Claim: Matthew, Mark and Luke overlap so closely that they are usually printed in parallel columns, which is where the name synoptic comes from.

Kind
Historical claim. A statement about the past that historical evidence can test.
Review
Source checked. The cited passage was read, and it says this.

  • Supports

    Synopticsopening paragraph

    Cited · Link answered, 19 October 2026 · Read in full, 23 September 2026

    The source reads: The name given since Griesbach's time (about 1790) to the first three canonical Gospels . It is derived from the fact that these Gospels admit ... of being arranged and harmonized section by section, so as to allow the eye to realize at a glance ( synopsis ) the numerous passages which are common to them

Claim 10 · checked 23 September 2026 · AI-assisted audit

Claim: Nearly everything in Mark turns up in Matthew, and most of it in Luke, frequently in the same sequence and the same phrasing.

Kind
What scholars argue. A report of what specialists argue, or where they disagree.
Review
Source checked. The cited passage was read, and it says this.

  • Supports

    Synoptics“Differences and resemblances”

    Cited · Link answered, 19 October 2026 · Read in full, 23 September 2026

    The source reads: while, with the exception of a few incidents (68 verses), the whole contents of St. Mark are practically found in St. Matthew and in St. Luke.

  • Qualifies

    Synoptics“Differences and resemblances”

    Cited · Link answered, 19 October 2026 · Read in full, 23 September 2026

    The source reads: Matthew 14:22 - 16:12 and Mark 6:45 - 8:26 , record a series of Galilean incidents which are nowhere found in the third Gospel.

    Why Luke has most of Mark rather than nearly all of it.

  • Supports

    Is rewritten Bible/Scripture the solution to the Synoptic Problem?p. 5

    Cited · Link answered, 19 October 2026 · Read in full, 23 September 2026

    The source reads: Hence, they sometimes take over from Mark the same wording and sequence (resulting in the triple agreements)

Claim 11 · checked 23 September 2026 · AI-assisted audit

Claim: Coincidence does not produce that. Two writers describing the same event independently agree about the event, not about the participles.

Kind
This page’s reading. A judgement the page makes from the evidence. Others read it differently.
Review
A judgement, not a fact. Reviewed for whether it is fairly put and follows from the checked claims. No source can confirm it.

The page’s argument, and the standard one: agreement in wording, not only in content, is what points to a written relationship.

  • Context

    Synoptics“Differences and resemblances”

    Cited · Link answered, 19 October 2026 · Read in full, 23 September 2026

    The source reads: it is plain that the verbal resemblances cannot be referred to an accidental similarity, since they are due to the common use of very peculiar terms and expressions

Claim 12 · checked 23 September 2026 · AI-assisted audit

Claim: That some form of copying happened, from each other or from shared written material, is the starting point of the problem the book cited here is a way through.

Kind
What scholars argue. A report of what specialists argue, or where they disagree.
Review
Partly checked. Only part of the source could be read. What was not read is listed.

  • Supports

    Is rewritten Bible/Scripture the solution to the Synoptic Problem?p. 3

    Cited · Link answered, 19 October 2026 · Read in full, 23 September 2026

    The source reads: More simple and plausible solutions to the Synoptic Problem include the Augustine, Griesbach and Farrer-Goulder Hypotheses. They have two features in common: Firstly, each has Mark in a medial position

    Every solution Malan surveys is a theory of written dependence.

  • Supports

    The Synoptic Problem: A Way Through the MazeCrossref record: title and subtitle

    Cited · Link answered, 19 October 2026 · Catalogue record only, 23 September 2026

    The Synoptic Problem: A Way Through the Maze. The record carries the book’s subject, not its argument.

What this does not establish

The cited book itself was not read; that it is a guide through the problem rests on its title.

Claim 13 · checked 23 September 2026 · AI-assisted audit

John is a different book

Claim: John is a different book

Kind
This page’s reading. A judgement the page makes from the evidence. Others read it differently.
Review
A judgement, not a fact. Reviewed for whether it is fairly put and follows from the checked claims. No source can confirm it.

A heading for the list of checked differences that follows.

Claim 14 · checked 23 September 2026 · AI-assisted audit

Claim: John has no birth narrative, no parables of the kind the other three are full of, no exorcisms, and at the last supper no words over the bread and the cup.

Kind
Describes a Bible passage. What a biblical passage says, in this page’s words. A fact about the text, separate from whether an event happened.
Review
Source checked. The cited passage was read, and it says this.

  • Supports · WEB

    John 13, World English Bible: the supperJohn 1-21, WEB (ebible.org), searched for “born”, “Bethlehem”, “parable”, “demon”, “unclean spirit”, “cast out”, “cup” and “bread”

    Cited · Link answered, 19 October 2026 · The cited passage was read, 23 September 2026

    No birth story (Bethlehem appears only as a question, 7:42). “Parable” once, at 10:6, of the sheepfold saying. “Demon” only in accusations against Jesus (7:20, 8:48-52, 10:20-21), never an exorcism. “Cup” only at 18:11. The citation is to John 13 because the searched chapters are not each in the evidence list.

  • Qualifies · WEB

    John 13, World English Bible: the supperJohn 13:26

    Cited · Link answered, 19 October 2026 · The cited passage was read, 23 September 2026

    The source reads: Jesus therefore answered, “It is he to whom I will give this piece of bread when I have dipped it.” So when he had dipped the piece of bread, he gave it to Judas, the son of Simon Iscariot.

    There is bread at John’s supper, which is why “no account of the last supper as a meal with bread and cup” was wrong; there are no words over it.

  • Context · WEB

    Matthew 26, World English Bible: the Passover and the supperMatthew 26:26-27

    Cited · Link answered, 19 October 2026 · The cited passage was read, 23 September 2026

    The source reads: As they were eating, Jesus took bread, gave thanks for it, and broke it. He gave to the disciples and said, “Take, eat; this is my body.” He took the cup, gave thanks, and gave to them, saying, “All of you drink it,

What this does not establish

That John lacks these is a fact about the text. Why (whether its author knew the others and chose differently) is argued.

Corrected

23 September 2026. Previously: “and no account of the last supper as a meal with bread and cup.” John 13 is a supper, and bread is given at it (13:26). What John lacks is the words over bread and cup that Matthew 26:26-28 has.

Claim 15 · checked 23 September 2026 · AI-assisted audit

Claim: It has long discourses the others do not,

Kind
Describes a Bible passage. What a biblical passage says, in this page’s words. A fact about the text, separate from whether an event happened.
Review
Source checked. The cited passage was read, and it says this.

  • Supports · WEB

    John 14, World English Bible: the start of the farewell discourseJohn 14:1-3, the start of a discourse that runs to 16:33, followed by the prayer of 17

    Cited · Link answered, 19 October 2026 · The cited passage was read, 23 September 2026

    The source reads: “Don’t let your heart be troubled. Believe in God. Believe also in me. In my Father’s house are many homes. If it weren’t so, I would have told you. I am going to prepare a place for you.

What this does not establish

Matthew has long discourses of its own, such as chapters 5 to 7; the point is that John’s are not in the others.

Claim 16 · checked 23 September 2026 · AI-assisted audit

Claim: a ministry that runs through three Passovers where the others narrate one,

Kind
Describes a Bible passage. What a biblical passage says, in this page’s words. A fact about the text, separate from whether an event happened.
Review
Source checked. The cited passage was read, and it says this.

  • Supports · WEB

    John 2, World English Bible: the temple, at the start of the ministryJohn 2:13

    Cited · Link answered, 19 October 2026 · The cited passage was read, 23 September 2026

    The source reads: The Passover of the Jews was at hand, and Jesus went up to Jerusalem.

  • Supports · WEB

    John 6, World English Bible: a second PassoverJohn 6:4

    Cited · Link answered, 19 October 2026 · The cited passage was read, 23 September 2026

    The source reads: Now the Passover, the feast of the Jews, was at hand.

  • Supports · WEB

    John 12, World English BibleJohn 12:1

    Cited · Link answered, 19 October 2026 · The cited passage was read, 23 September 2026

    The source reads: Then, six days before the Passover, Jesus came to Bethany,

  • Supports · WEB

    Matthew 26, World English Bible: the Passover and the supperMatthew 26:2; and Matthew 1-28, Mark 1-16, Luke 1-24, WEB, searched for “Passover”

    Cited · Link answered, 19 October 2026 · The cited passage was read, 23 September 2026

    The source reads: “You know that after two days the Passover is coming, and the Son of Man will be delivered up to be crucified.”

    In the other three every Passover of the ministry is the last one (Matthew 26, Mark 14, Luke 22). The only other is Luke 2:41, in Jesus’ childhood.

What this does not establish

Neither John nor the others states how long the ministry lasted. "Years rather than about one" was an inference from the Passovers, and the page now states the Passovers instead.

Corrected

23 September 2026. Previously: “a ministry lasting years rather than about one,” No Gospel gives the length of the ministry. The durations are inferred from the Passovers each narrates, which is what can be checked.

Claim 17 · checked 23 September 2026 · AI-assisted audit

Claim: and it places the cleansing of the temple at the beginning rather than at the end.

Kind
Describes a Bible passage. What a biblical passage says, in this page’s words. A fact about the text, separate from whether an event happened.
Review
Source checked. The cited passage was read, and it says this.

  • Supports · WEB

    John 2, World English Bible: the temple, at the start of the ministryJohn 2:13-15

    Cited · Link answered, 19 October 2026 · The cited passage was read, 23 September 2026

    The source reads: The Passover of the Jews was at hand, and Jesus went up to Jerusalem. He found in the temple those who sold oxen, sheep, and doves, and the changers of money sitting. He made a whip of cords and drove all out of the temple,

  • Supports · WEB

    Matthew 21, World English Bible: the temple, in the last weekMatthew 21:12 (also Mark 11:15, Luke 19:45, read), after the entry into Jerusalem

    Cited · Link answered, 19 October 2026 · The cited passage was read, 23 September 2026

    The source reads: Jesus entered into the temple of God and drove out all of those who sold and bought in the temple, and overthrew the money changers’ tables and the seats of those who sold the doves.

Other readings

Some harmonisers, following the order of the texts, count two cleansings rather than one moved.

Claim 18 · checked 23 September 2026 · AI-assisted audit

Claim: It is not a fourth version of the same shared material. It is a separate work with separate priorities.

Kind
This page’s reading. A judgement the page makes from the evidence. Others read it differently.
Review
A judgement, not a fact. Reviewed for whether it is fairly put and follows from the checked claims. No source can confirm it.

Follows from the differences checked in the paragraph before.

Other readings

Whether John’s author knew one or more of the other three and reworked them is argued; “separate” here means separate in shape and aim, not necessarily in ignorance of the others.

Corrected

23 September 2026. Previously: “It is not a fourth version of the same manuscript tradition.” A manuscript tradition is the copies of one text. The point is that John does not draw on the material the other three share, which is a different claim.

Claim 19 · checked 23 September 2026 · AI-assisted audit

The divergences are specific and checkable

Claim: The divergences are specific and checkable

Kind
This page’s reading. A judgement the page makes from the evidence. Others read it differently.
Review
A judgement, not a fact. Reviewed for whether it is fairly put and follows from the checked claims. No source can confirm it.

A heading; the passage and table below bear it out verse by verse.

Claim 20 · checked 23 September 2026 · AI-assisted audit

Claim: Matthew and Luke both give Jesus a genealogy, and between David and Joseph the two lists are largely different names.

Kind
Describes a Bible passage. What a biblical passage says, in this page’s words. A fact about the text, separate from whether an event happened.
Review
Source checked. The cited passage was read, and it says this.

Matthew runs from David through Solomon to Jacob, father of Joseph; Luke from Joseph son of Heli back through Nathan to David. Shealtiel and Zerubbabel are in both.

  • Supports · WEB

    Matthew 1, World English BibleMatthew 1:6-7, 12, 16

    Cited · Link answered, 19 October 2026 · The cited passage was read, 23 September 2026

    The source reads: David the king became the father of Solomon by her who had been Uriah’s wife. Solomon became the father of Rehoboam. ... After the exile to Babylon, Jechoniah became the father of Shealtiel. Shealtiel became the father of Zerubbabel. ... Jacob became the father of Joseph, the husband of Mary,

  • Supports · WEB

    Luke 3, World English BibleLuke 3:23, 27, 31

    Cited · Link answered, 19 October 2026 · The cited passage was read, 23 September 2026

    The source reads: being the son (as was supposed) of Joseph, the son of Heli, ... the son of Joanan, the son of Rhesa, the son of Zerubbabel, the son of Shealtiel, the son of Neri, ... the son of Mattatha, the son of Nathan, the son of David,

Claim 21 · checked 23 September 2026 · AI-assisted audit

Claim: All four describe the discovery of the empty tomb, and they differ on who went, how many figures were there, and what was said.

Kind
Describes a Bible passage. What a biblical passage says, in this page’s words. A fact about the text, separate from whether an event happened.
Review
Source checked. The cited passage was read, and it says this.

  • Supports · WEB

    Mark 16, World English BibleMark 16:5-6

    Cited · Link answered, 19 October 2026 · The cited passage was read, 23 September 2026

    The source reads: Entering into the tomb, they saw a young man sitting on the right side, dressed in a white robe; and they were amazed. He said to them, “Don’t be amazed. You seek Jesus, the Nazarene, who has been crucified. He has risen! He is not here.

  • Supports · WEB

    Matthew 28, World English BibleMatthew 28:5-6

    Cited · Link answered, 19 October 2026 · The cited passage was read, 23 September 2026

    The source reads: The angel answered the women, “Don’t be afraid, for I know that you seek Jesus, who has been crucified. He is not here, for he has risen, just like he said.

  • Supports · WEB

    Luke 24, World English BibleLuke 24:4-5

    Cited · Link answered, 19 October 2026 · The cited passage was read, 23 September 2026

    The source reads: behold, two men stood by them in dazzling clothing. Becoming terrified, they bowed their faces down to the earth. The men said to them, “Why do you seek the living among the dead?

  • Supports · WEB

    John 20, World English BibleJohn 20:12-13

    Cited · Link answered, 19 October 2026 · The cited passage was read, 23 September 2026

    The source reads: and she saw two angels in white sitting, one at the head and one at the feet, where the body of Jesus had lain. They asked her, “Woman, why are you weeping?”

Claim 22 · checked 23 September 2026 · AI-assisted audit

Claim: These are not differences hidden in the Greek. They are visible in any translation, on facing pages.

Kind
This page’s reading. A judgement the page makes from the evidence. Others read it differently.
Review
A judgement, not a fact. Reviewed for whether it is fairly put and follows from the checked claims. No source can confirm it.

Follows from the checked claims above: every difference listed is visible in the WEB.

Corrected

23 September 2026. Previously: “These are not contradictions hidden in the Greek.” Whether the differences are contradictions is what the harmonising tradition, later on the same page, disputes. The sentence’s point is only that they are visible, and "differences" says that without settling the rest.

Claim 23 · checked 23 September 2026 · AI-assisted audit

Claim: The morning at the tomb, as each Gospel tells it.

Kind
Framing. Signposting. It asserts nothing a source could check.

Claim: Mark

Kind
Framing. Signposting. It asserts nothing a source could check.

Claim: Three women named

Kind
Describes a Bible passage. What a biblical passage says, in this page’s words. A fact about the text, separate from whether an event happened.
Review
Source checked. The cited passage was read, and it says this.

  • Supports · WEB

    Mark 16, World English BibleMark 16:1-2

    Cited · Link answered, 19 October 2026 · The cited passage was read, 23 September 2026

    The source reads: When the Sabbath was past, Mary Magdalene, and Mary the mother of James, and Salome bought spices, that they might come and anoint him. Very early on the first day of the week, they came to the tomb when the sun had risen.

Claim 29 · checked 23 September 2026 · AI-assisted audit

Claim: One young man in a white robe, inside

Kind
Describes a Bible passage. What a biblical passage says, in this page’s words. A fact about the text, separate from whether an event happened.
Review
Source checked. The cited passage was read, and it says this.

  • Supports · WEB

    Mark 16, World English BibleMark 16:5

    Cited · Link answered, 19 October 2026 · The cited passage was read, 23 September 2026

    The source reads: Entering into the tomb, they saw a young man sitting on the right side, dressed in a white robe; and they were amazed.

Claim 30 · checked 23 September 2026 · AI-assisted audit

Claim: They tell nobody, and the oldest copies end there

Kind
Describes a Bible passage. What a biblical passage says, in this page’s words. A fact about the text, separate from whether an event happened.
Review
Source checked. The cited passage was read, and it says this.

  • Supports · WEB

    Mark 16, World English BibleMark 16:8

    Cited · Link answered, 19 October 2026 · The cited passage was read, 23 September 2026

    The source reads: They went out, and fled from the tomb, for trembling and astonishment had come on them. They said nothing to anyone; for they were afraid.

  • Supports

    Pentecostal hermeneutical reconsideration of the longer ending of Mark 16:9–20p. 2

    Cited · Link answered, 19 October 2026 · Read in full, 23 September 2026

    The source reads: The most ancient extant versions of the gospel end at 16:8. ... The most important manuscripts end at 16:8, including the two most respected manuscripts (the 4th-century codex Sinaiticus or

  • Qualifies · WEB

    Mark 16, World English Biblefootnote to Mark 16:9

    Cited · Link answered, 19 October 2026 · The cited passage was read, 23 September 2026

    The source reads: The translators of the World English Bible regard Mark 16:9-20 as reliable based on an overwhelming majority of textual evidence

    The translation the page quotes prints verses 9 to 20, in which Jesus appears to Mary Magdalene, so "the book ends" was not true of it.

Other readings

Most scholars take 16:9-20 as a later addition; the WEB’s translators, and traditions that read the Majority Text, hold it to be part of Mark.

Corrected

23 September 2026. Previously: “They tell nobody, and the book ends” Most manuscripts, and the WEB the site quotes, continue with 16:9-20. The oldest extant copies end at 16:8 (Nel, p. 2).

Claim 31 · checked 23 September 2026 · AI-assisted audit

Claim: Matthew

Kind
Framing. Signposting. It asserts nothing a source could check.

Claim: Two women

Kind
Describes a Bible passage. What a biblical passage says, in this page’s words. A fact about the text, separate from whether an event happened.
Review
Source checked. The cited passage was read, and it says this.

  • Supports · WEB

    Matthew 28, World English BibleMatthew 28:1

    Cited · Link answered, 19 October 2026 · The cited passage was read, 23 September 2026

    The source reads: Now after the Sabbath, as it began to dawn on the first day of the week, Mary Magdalene and the other Mary came to see the tomb.

Claim 32 · checked 23 September 2026 · AI-assisted audit

Claim: An earthquake, and an angel who rolls the stone back

Kind
Describes a Bible passage. What a biblical passage says, in this page’s words. A fact about the text, separate from whether an event happened.
Review
Source checked. The cited passage was read, and it says this.

  • Supports · WEB

    Matthew 28, World English BibleMatthew 28:2

    Cited · Link answered, 19 October 2026 · The cited passage was read, 23 September 2026

    The source reads: Behold, there was a great earthquake, for an angel of the Lord descended from the sky and came and rolled away the stone from the door and sat on it.

Claim 33 · checked 23 September 2026 · AI-assisted audit

Claim: They leave with fear and great joy, and meet Jesus

Kind
Describes a Bible passage. What a biblical passage says, in this page’s words. A fact about the text, separate from whether an event happened.
Review
Source checked. The cited passage was read, and it says this.

  • Supports · WEB

    Matthew 28, World English BibleMatthew 28:8-9

    Cited · Link answered, 19 October 2026 · The cited passage was read, 23 September 2026

    The source reads: They departed quickly from the tomb with fear and great joy, and ran to bring his disciples word. As they went to tell his disciples, behold, Jesus met them, saying, “Rejoice!”

Claim 34 · checked 23 September 2026 · AI-assisted audit

Claim: Luke

Kind
Framing. Signposting. It asserts nothing a source could check.

Claim: The women from Galilee, named afterwards

Kind
Describes a Bible passage. What a biblical passage says, in this page’s words. A fact about the text, separate from whether an event happened.
Review
Source checked. The cited passage was read, and it says this.

  • Supports · WEB

    Luke 24, World English BibleLuke 24:1 and 24:10 (and 23:55, read, for “out of Galilee”)

    Cited · Link answered, 19 October 2026 · The cited passage was read, 23 September 2026

    The source reads: But on the first day of the week, at early dawn, they and some others came to the tomb, ... Now they were Mary Magdalene, Joanna, and Mary the mother of James. The other women with them told these things to the apostles.

    The “they” of 24:1 are “the women who had come with him out of Galilee” of 23:55.

Claim 35 · checked 23 September 2026 · AI-assisted audit

Claim: Two men in dazzling clothing

Kind
Describes a Bible passage. What a biblical passage says, in this page’s words. A fact about the text, separate from whether an event happened.
Review
Source checked. The cited passage was read, and it says this.

  • Supports · WEB

    Luke 24, World English BibleLuke 24:4

    Cited · Link answered, 19 October 2026 · The cited passage was read, 23 September 2026

    The source reads: While they were greatly perplexed about this, behold, two men stood by them in dazzling clothing.

Claim 36 · checked 23 September 2026 · AI-assisted audit

Claim: They tell the eleven, who do not believe them

Kind
Describes a Bible passage. What a biblical passage says, in this page’s words. A fact about the text, separate from whether an event happened.
Review
Source checked. The cited passage was read, and it says this.

  • Supports · WEB

    Luke 24, World English BibleLuke 24:9, 11

    Cited · Link answered, 19 October 2026 · The cited passage was read, 23 September 2026

    The source reads: returned from the tomb, and told all these things to the eleven and to all the rest. ... These words seemed to them to be nonsense, and they didn’t believe them.

Claim 37 · checked 23 September 2026 · AI-assisted audit

Claim: John

Kind
Framing. Signposting. It asserts nothing a source could check.

Claim: Mary Magdalene, the only one named, while it is still dark

Kind
Describes a Bible passage. What a biblical passage says, in this page’s words. A fact about the text, separate from whether an event happened.
Review
Source checked. The cited passage was read, and it says this.

  • Supports · WEB

    John 20, World English BibleJohn 20:1-2

    Cited · Link answered, 19 October 2026 · The cited passage was read, 23 September 2026

    The source reads: Now on the first day of the week, Mary Magdalene went early, while it was still dark, to the tomb, and saw that the stone had been taken away from the tomb. Therefore she ran and came to Simon Peter and to the other disciple whom Jesus loved, and said to them, “They have taken away the Lord out of the tomb, and we don’t know where they have laid him!”

    Only Mary is named, but she says “we”.

Corrected

23 September 2026. Previously: “Mary Magdalene, alone, while it is still dark” John names only Mary, but her words at 20:2 are “we don’t know where they have laid him”, so the text does not say she was alone.

Claim 38 · checked 23 September 2026 · AI-assisted audit

Claim: She fetches Peter and the other disciple, then sees two angels

Kind
Describes a Bible passage. What a biblical passage says, in this page’s words. A fact about the text, separate from whether an event happened.
Review
Source checked. The cited passage was read, and it says this.

  • Supports · WEB

    John 20, World English BibleJohn 20:3, 11-12

    Cited · Link answered, 19 October 2026 · The cited passage was read, 23 September 2026

    The source reads: Therefore Peter and the other disciple went out, and they went toward the tomb. ... But Mary was standing outside at the tomb weeping. So as she wept, she stooped and looked into the tomb, and she saw two angels in white sitting,

Claim 39 · checked 23 September 2026 · AI-assisted audit

Claim: She takes Jesus for the gardener

Kind
Describes a Bible passage. What a biblical passage says, in this page’s words. A fact about the text, separate from whether an event happened.
Review
Source checked. The cited passage was read, and it says this.

  • Supports · WEB

    John 20, World English BibleJohn 20:14-15

    Cited · Link answered, 19 October 2026 · The cited passage was read, 23 September 2026

    The source reads: She, supposing him to be the gardener, said to him, “Sir, if you have carried him away, tell me where you have laid him, and I will take him away.”

Claim 40 · checked 23 September 2026 · AI-assisted audit

How they came to be this way

Claim: How they came to be this way

Kind
Framing. Signposting. It asserts nothing a source could check.

Which one came first

Claim: Which one came first

Kind
Framing. Signposting. It asserts nothing a source could check.

Claim: The standard solution is that Mark was written first and that Matthew and Luke each used it, along with a collection of sayings that has not survived and is referred to only as Q.

Kind
What scholars argue. A report of what specialists argue, or where they disagree.
Review
Source checked. The cited passage was read, and it says this.

Claim 43 · checked 23 September 2026 · AI-assisted audit

Claim: It accounts for the shared wording, and for the way Matthew and Luke so often read as tidier versions of Mark rather than the reverse.

Kind
What scholars argue. A report of what specialists argue, or where they disagree.
Review
Source checked. The cited passage was read, and it says this.

What this does not establish

Which text is the tidier version of which is itself the argument; on the Griesbach view Mark is the later, conflating text.

Corrected

23 September 2026. Previously: “It accounts for the shared wording and for the fact that Matthew and Luke frequently smooth out Mark rather than the reverse.” "The fact that Matthew and Luke smooth out Mark" assumes the direction of copying the hypothesis is offered to explain. The pattern is that they read as tidier; that they tidied Mark is the inference.

Claim 44 · checked 23 September 2026 · AI-assisted audit

Claim: It is a reconstruction, not a discovery.

Kind
This page’s reading. A judgement the page makes from the evidence. Others read it differently.
Review
A judgement, not a fact. Reviewed for whether it is fairly put and follows from the checked claims. No source can confirm it.

Follows from the next claim: Q is inferred, not found.

Claim 45 · checked 23 September 2026 · AI-assisted audit

Claim: No copy of Q exists; it is rebuilt from what Matthew and Luke share and Mark lacks.

Kind
What scholars argue. A report of what specialists argue, or where they disagree.
Review
Source checked. The cited passage was read, and it says this.

  • Supports

    Is rewritten Bible/Scripture the solution to the Synoptic Problem?p. 4

    Cited · Link answered, 19 October 2026 · Read in full, 23 September 2026

    The source reads: Q can be reconstructed from Matthew and Luke, since it is therefore within both. ... patterns of agreement in the double tradition (Matthew and Luke agree, meaning Q was the source for both Matthew and Luke)

  • Supports

    Historical, text-immanent and sociological approaches to the interpretation of the Synoptic Gospelsp. 29

    Cited · Link answered, 19 October 2026 · Read in full, 23 September 2026

    The source reads: Matthew and Luke each had access to another source, the hypothetical Q.

  • Context · NPNF (McGiffert)

    Church History, Book 3, Chapter 39: The Writings of Papias3.39.16, McGiffert’s note on Papias’ Matthew

    Cited · Link answered, 19 October 2026 · The cited passage was read, 23 September 2026

    The source reads: It is urged by many that the word λόγια could be used only to describe a collection of the words or discourses of the Lord, and hence it is assumed that Matthew wrote a work of this kind

    Why "nobody in antiquity mentions one" was removed: Papias’ remark about Matthew’s “oracles” has been read as describing a sayings collection.

Corrected

23 September 2026. Previously: “No copy of Q exists and nobody in antiquity mentions one.” The absence of any ancient mention could not be searched, and Papias’ statement that Matthew wrote down “the oracles” has long been read by some as a sayings collection of this kind (McGiffert’s note to Eusebius 3.39.16). The corrected sentence says how Q is known instead.

Claim 46 · checked 23 September 2026 · AI-assisted audit

Claim: The author cited here argues one of the alternatives: that Luke used Matthew as well as Mark, and no lost document is needed.

Kind
What scholars argue. A report of what specialists argue, or where they disagree.
Review
Source checked. The cited passage was read, and it says this.

  • Supports

    Mark S. Goodacre, faculty profileOverview

    Cited · Link answered, 19 October 2026 · Read in full, 23 September 2026

    The source reads: Goodacre is the author of five books including The Case Against Q (Trinity Press International, 2002)

  • Supports

    Is rewritten Bible/Scripture the solution to the Synoptic Problem?p. 3

    Cited · Link answered, 19 October 2026 · Read in full, 23 September 2026

    The source reads: (2) as the common source of Matthew and Luke (Farrer-Goulder, in Foster 2003:314–318); ... Secondly, each posits a direct dependence of Luke upon Matthew (Kloppenborg Verbin 2000:38–39).

    The Farrer-Goulder hypothesis: Mark used by both, and Luke also using Matthew.

  • Supports

    Ten Reasons to Question QNarrative Sequence in Q

    Cited · Link answered, 19 October 2026 · Read in full, 24 September 2026

    The source reads: In other words, it makes good sense on the assumption that Luke is following Matthew as well as Mark.

  • Supports

    Ten Reasons to Question QThe Legacy of Scissors-and-Paste Scholarship

    Cited · Link answered, 19 October 2026 · Read in full, 24 September 2026

    The source reads: The time has now come to get up-to-date, and to dispense with Q too.

  • Context

    The Synoptic Problem: A Way Through the MazeCrossref record

    Cited · Link answered, 19 October 2026 · Catalogue record only, 23 September 2026

    Title, author and date of the book the page cites; its text was not read.

What this does not establish

Goodacre’s books were not read; his argument is read from his own web summary of The Case Against Q. The page reports the position, not whether it is right.

Corrected

23 September 2026. Previously: “The author cited here is the best known advocate of the alternative, that Luke simply used Matthew and no lost document is needed.” "Best known" is a ranking no source read carries, and there is more than one alternative: Malan lists the Augustinian, Griesbach and Farrer-Goulder hypotheses. On the Farrer view Luke used Mark as well as Matthew, which "simply used Matthew" left out.

Claim 47 · checked 23 September 2026 · AI-assisted audit

Claim: The argument is about which account explains the pattern with the fewest inventions.

Kind
What scholars argue. A report of what specialists argue, or where they disagree.
Review
Source checked. The cited passage was read, and it says this.

  • Supports

    Is rewritten Bible/Scripture the solution to the Synoptic Problem?pp. 3 and 5

    Cited · Link answered, 19 October 2026 · Read in full, 23 September 2026

    The source reads: However, simple explanations are more desirable than complex solutions (Kloppenborg Verbin 2000:51–53). ... It solves more problems than do other hypotheses and leaves fewer questions unanswered (Lührmann 1989:61).

Claim 48 · checked 23 September 2026 · AI-assisted audit

What the differences are for

Claim: What the differences are for

Kind
Framing. Signposting. It asserts nothing a source could check.

Claim: Some divergence looks like ordinary transmission: details drifting, names dropping out, an episode remembered in a different order.

Kind
This page’s reading. A judgement the page makes from the evidence. Others read it differently.
Review
A judgement, not a fact. Reviewed for whether it is fairly put and follows from the checked claims. No source can confirm it.

The page’s characterisation of one kind of difference; it names no case.

  • Context

    Synoptics“Oral dependence”

    Cited · Link answered, 19 October 2026 · Read in full, 23 September 2026

    The source reads: Sections are found only in two, or one, of the Gospels because the bond established between the narratives was at times modified to suit the various circles of the hearers

Claim 50 · checked 23 September 2026 · AI-assisted audit

Claim: Papias already reports an elder saying that Mark wrote accurately but "not in order",

Kind
Quotes a source. The words of a named text, checked against the source.
Review
Source checked. The cited passage was read, and it says this.

  • Supports · NPNF (McGiffert)

    Church History, Book 3, Chapter 39: The Writings of Papias3.39.15

    Cited · Link answered, 19 October 2026 · The cited passage was read, 23 September 2026

    The source reads: 15. “This also the presbyter ... said: Mark, having become the interpreter of Peter, wrote down accurately, though not in order, whatsoever he remembered of the things said or done by Christ.

What this does not establish

Known only through Eusebius, who quotes Papias, who quotes the elder.

Corrected

23 September 2026. Previously: “Papias already says of Mark that he wrote accurately but "not in order",” Papias attributes the remark to “the presbyter”, not to himself (Eusebius 3.39.15).

Claim 51 · checked 23 September 2026 · AI-assisted audit

Claim: which suggests sequence was understood as flexible early.

Kind
This page’s reading. A judgement the page makes from the evidence. Others read it differently.
Review
A judgement, not a fact. Reviewed for whether it is fairly put and follows from the checked claims. No source can confirm it.

The elder defends Mark’s accuracy while conceding his order, which treats order and accuracy as separable.

  • Context · NPNF (McGiffert)

    Church History, Book 3, Chapter 39: The Writings of Papias3.39.15

    Cited · Link answered, 19 October 2026 · The cited passage was read, 23 September 2026

    The source reads: For he was careful of one thing, not to omit any of the things which he had heard, and not to state any of them falsely.

Other readings

The remark can also be read as a defence against people who faulted Mark’s order, which would mean sequence mattered to somebody.

Claim 52 · checked 23 September 2026 · AI-assisted audit

Claim: Other divergence looks deliberate. Each writer has a shape they are working toward, and moving an episode or changing an emphasis is one of the ways they get there.

Kind
What scholars argue. A report of what specialists argue, or where they disagree.
Review
Source checked. The cited passage was read, and it says this.

Corrected

23 September 2026. Previously: “and moving an episode or changing an emphasis is how ancient writers argued.” A generalisation about how ancient writers argued, which no cited source makes. What the sources carry is the redaction-critical claim that how each evangelist adapted his material shows his aims.

Claim 53 · checked 23 September 2026 · AI-assisted audit

Claim: Distinguishing the two is where much of the scholarship lives.

Kind
This page’s reading. A judgement the page makes from the evidence. Others read it differently.
Review
A judgement, not a fact. Reviewed for whether it is fairly put and follows from the checked claims. No source can confirm it.

A characterisation of the field, kept to “much” rather than a measure.

Corrected

23 September 2026. Previously: “Distinguishing the two is where most of the scholarship lives.” "Most" is a measure of the field that no source read provides.

Claim 54 · checked 23 September 2026 · AI-assisted audit

What lies underneath

Claim: What lies underneath

Kind
Framing. Signposting. It asserts nothing a source could check.

What the underlying events were

Claim: What the underlying events were

Kind
Framing. Signposting. It asserts nothing a source could check.

Claim: Where the accounts diverge, there is usually no third source to check them against.

Kind
This page’s reading. A judgement the page makes from the evidence. Others read it differently.
Review
A judgement, not a fact. Reviewed for whether it is fairly put and follows from the checked claims. No source can confirm it.

For the tomb, the example the page uses, there is no account outside the Gospels and Paul’s list of appearances.

Claim 57 · checked 23 September 2026 · AI-assisted audit

Claim: Choosing between two versions of the morning at the tomb means preferring one text to another,

Kind
This page’s reading. A judgement the page makes from the evidence. Others read it differently.
Review
A judgement, not a fact. Reviewed for whether it is fairly put and follows from the checked claims. No source can confirm it.

Follows from the previous sentence.

Claim 58 · checked 23 September 2026 · AI-assisted audit

Claim: and the criteria for doing that are themselves under attack from inside the field.

Kind
What scholars argue. A report of what specialists argue, or where they disagree.
Review
Source checked. The cited passage was read, and it says this.

  • Supports · Indonesian

    Review of Jesus, Criteria, and the Demise of Authenticity (in Indonesian)p. 149

    Cited · Link answered, 19 October 2026 · Read in full, 23 September 2026

    The source reads: dan buku ini merupakan sebuah karya yang mencoba menunjukkan kelemahan -kelemahan serius dalam kriteria autentisitas.

    Rendered on this page as: and this book is a work that tries to show serious weaknesses in the criteria of authenticity.

Claim 59 · checked 23 September 2026 · AI-assisted audit

Claim: In a 2012 collection, its co-editor Chris Keith argued that the criteria of authenticity depend on form criticism and should be abandoned rather than repaired, while other contributors argued for using them with more caution.

Kind
What scholars argue. A report of what specialists argue, or where they disagree.
Review
Partly checked. Only part of the source could be read. What was not read is listed.

  • Supports · Indonesian

    Review of Jesus, Criteria, and the Demise of Authenticity (in Indonesian)book details and p. 150

    Cited · Link answered, 19 October 2026 · Read in full, 23 September 2026

    The source reads: Chris Keith and Anthony Le Donne (eds.) ... Tahun : 2012 ... Dalam bab pertama, Chris Keith hendak menampilkan kebergantungan kriteria autentisit as terhadap kritik bentuk ... Ia berpendapat bahwa kriteria tersebut sebenarnya tidak bisa direhabilitasi dan seharusnya ditinggalkan.

    Rendered on this page as: Chris Keith and Anthony Le Donne (eds.) ... Year: 2012 ... In the first chapter, Chris Keith sets out the dependence of the criteria of authenticity on form criticism ... He argues that the criteria cannot in fact be rehabilitated and should be abandoned.

  • Supports · Indonesian

    Review of Jesus, Criteria, and the Demise of Authenticity (in Indonesian)p. 151

    Cited · Link answered, 19 October 2026 · Read in full, 23 September 2026

    The source reads: Ia memang tidak menyarankan supaya kriteria ini dikesampingkan seluruhnya, melainkan agar kriteria ini lebih digunakan dengan penuh kehati -hatian.

    Rendered on this page as: He does not suggest that this criterion be set aside entirely, but that it be used with much more care.

    Of Le Donne on coherence; the review says the same of Winter on dissimilarity.

  • Supports

    Jesus, Criteria, and the Demise of AuthenticityCrossref records: volume, 2012; chapter 1 title

    Cited · Link answered, 19 October 2026 · Catalogue record only, 23 September 2026

    Keith, “The Indebtedness of the Criteria Approach to Form Criticism and Recent Attempts to Rehabilitate the Search for an Authentic Jesus”. Keith and Le Donne are the editors.

What this does not establish

The volume was not read. Its argument is known from a published review and from the chapter titles.

Corrected

23 September 2026. Previously: “: a 2012 collection argued that the whole apparatus of authenticity criteria rests on assumptions its users had abandoned elsewhere.” The collection does not speak with one voice: Keith argues for abandoning the criteria, Le Donne and Winter for using them with care. And "assumptions its users had abandoned elsewhere" went beyond anything readable about the book; what the record and review carry is the criteria’s dependence on form criticism.

Claim 60 · checked 23 September 2026 · AI-assisted audit

What has been made of it

Claim: What has been made of it

Kind
Framing. Signposting. It asserts nothing a source could check.

Claim: The church had one Gospel made out of four, and chose to keep the four.

Kind
This page’s reading. A judgement the page makes from the evidence. Others read it differently.
Review
A judgement, not a fact. Reviewed for whether it is fairly put and follows from the checked claims. No source can confirm it.

A one-line summary of the passage that follows it, which carries the evidence.

  • Context

    Tatianparagraph on the Diatessaron

    Cited · Link answered, 19 October 2026 · Read in full, 23 September 2026

    The source reads: Rabbula, Bishop of Edessa (411-435), ordered the priests and deacons to see that every church should have a copy of the separate Gospels (Evangelion da Mepharreshe), and Theodoret, Bishop of Cyrus (423-457), removed more than two hundred copies of the "Diatesseron" from the churches in his diocese .

Claim 62 · checked 23 September 2026 · AI-assisted audit

The harmonising tradition

Claim: The harmonising tradition

Kind
Framing. Signposting. It asserts nothing a source could check.

Claim: Reconciling the four is an old project, and an old defence.

Kind
Historical claim. A statement about the past that historical evidence can test.
Review
Source checked. The cited passage was read, and it says this.

Corrected

23 September 2026. Previously: “Reconciling the four is an old project, not a defensive modern one.” Augustine’s Harmony was itself a defence: its object, in its translator’s words, was “to vindicate the Gospel against the critical assaults of the heathen”. Contrasting it with a defensive modern project misdescribed it.

Claim 64 · checked 23 September 2026 · AI-assisted audit

Claim: Augustine devoted a four-book work to it around 400, answering pagan and Manichaean critics who said the evangelists contradicted each other, going through the apparent discrepancies in order and arguing that the Gospels are complementary rather than competing, including on the genealogies.

Kind
Historical claim. A statement about the past that historical evidence can test.
Review
Source checked. The cited passage was read, and it says this.

  • Supports

    The Harmony of the Gospels: translator’s introductory noticep. 71

    Cited · Link answered, 19 October 2026 · The cited passage was read, 23 September 2026

    The source reads: Its composition is assigned to about the year 400 A.D. ... And it was a favorite method of argumentation, adopted both by heathen and by Manichæan adversaries, to urge that the evangelical historians contradicted each other. ... The plan of the work is laid out in four great divisions. ... In the second, he enters upon a careful examination of Matthew's Gospel, on to the record of the supper, comparing it with Mark, Luke, and John, and exhibiting the perfect harmony subsisting between them.

  • Supports · NPNF (Salmond)

    The Harmony of the GospelsBook II, chapter 3, § 5

    Cited · Link answered, 19 October 2026 · The cited passage was read, 23 September 2026

    The source reads: Furthermore, as to those critics who find a difficulty in the circumstance that Matthew enumerates one series of ancestors, beginning with David and travelling downwards to Joseph, while Luke specifies a different succession, tracing it from Joseph upwards as far as to David, they might easily perceive that Joseph may have had two fathers

What this does not establish

Book I is apologetic, against those who belittled Christ and the Gospels; the harmonising proper is Books II to IV.

Corrected

23 September 2026. Previously: “Augustine devoted a four-book work to it around 400, going through” Added with the correction to the sentence before: the work answered named opponents, which is the reason it exists.

Claim 65 · checked 23 September 2026 · AI-assisted audit

Claim: Whether a given harmonisation works is a question you can actually examine. That the effort is ancient is simply a fact about the history.

Kind
This page’s reading. A judgement the page makes from the evidence. Others read it differently.
Review
A judgement, not a fact. Reviewed for whether it is fairly put and follows from the checked claims. No source can confirm it.

Separates what the page can report (the effort and its age) from what it does not judge (whether any reconciliation succeeds).

Claim 66 · checked 23 September 2026 · AI-assisted audit

What Christians make of four

Claim: What Christians make of four

Kind
Framing. Signposting. It asserts nothing a source could check.

Claim: Christianity did not, in the end, resolve the differences with a single edited Gospel, and it had the opportunity.

Kind
Historical claim. A statement about the past that historical evidence can test.
Review
Source checked. The cited passage was read, and it says this.

  • Supports

    Tatianparagraph on the Diatessaron

    Cited · Link answered, 19 October 2026 · Read in full, 23 September 2026

    The source reads: Rabbula, Bishop of Edessa (411-435), ordered the priests and deacons to see that every church should have a copy of the separate Gospels (Evangelion da Mepharreshe)

Corrected

23 September 2026. Previously: “Christianity did not resolve the differences by producing a single edited Gospel, and it had the opportunity.” For about two centuries Syriac-speaking churches did read a single harmonised Gospel (Catholic Encyclopedia, “Tatian”); the four won out later.

Claim 68 · checked 23 September 2026 · AI-assisted audit

Claim: Tatian made one in the second century, a “combination and collection of the Gospels” called the Diatessaron, and Eusebius reports that it was “still in the hands of some” a century and a half later.

Kind
Quotes a source. The words of a named text, checked against the source.
Review
Source checked. The cited passage was read, and it says this.

  • Supports · NPNF (McGiffert)

    Church History, Book 4, chapter 29: Tatian and the Diatessaron4.29.6

    Cited · Link answered, 19 October 2026 · The cited passage was read, 23 September 2026

    The source reads: But their original founder, Tatian , formed a certain combination and collection of the Gospels , I know not how, to which he gave the title Diatessaron , and which is still in the hands of some.

  • Supports

    The Harmony of the Gospels: introductory essay, on earlier harmoniesp. 67, on Tatian

    Cited · Link answered, 19 October 2026 · The cited passage was read, 23 September 2026

    The source reads: The date of its appearance was between A.D. 153 and 170

  • Supports

    Eusebius of Caesareaon the Church History

    Cited · Link answered, 19 October 2026 · Read in full, 24 September 2026

    The source reads: The tenth book of the Church History records the defeat of Licinius in 323, and must have been completed before the death and disgrace of Crispus in 326 ... The ninth book was completed between the defeat of Maxentius in 312, and Constantine’s first rupture with Licinius in 314.

    Book 9 was finished by 314 and book 10 by 326, so the report in book 4 dates from the early fourth century: roughly 140 to 175 years after 153 to 170.

Claim 69 · checked 23 September 2026 · AI-assisted audit

Claim: In Syriac-speaking churches it was for a time the gospel text in use, until fifth-century bishops replaced it with the four.

Kind
Historical claim. A statement about the past that historical evidence can test.
Review
Source checked. The cited passage was read, and it says this.

  • Supports

    Tatianparagraph on the Diatessaron

    Cited · Link answered, 19 October 2026 · Read in full, 23 September 2026

    The source reads: The "Diatesseron" or "Evangelion da Mehallete" (the Gospel of the mixed) was practically the only gospel text used in Syria during the third and fourth centuries. Rabbula, Bishop of Edessa (411-435), ordered the priests and deacons to see that every church should have a copy of the separate Gospels ... and Theodoret, Bishop of Cyrus (423-457), removed more than two hundred copies of the "Diatesseron" from the churches in his diocese

What this does not establish

The source is a 1912 reference article; it does not say how complete the change was or how quickly it happened.

Corrected

23 September 2026. Previously: “It was set aside.” "It was set aside" left out that the Diatessaron was the gospel of the Syriac churches through the third and fourth centuries, and that setting it aside was a fifth-century act of named bishops.

Claim 70 · checked 23 September 2026 · AI-assisted audit

Claim: Irenaeus, writing against groups that used a single Gospel or rejected one of the four, says flatly that “it is not possible that the Gospels can be either more or fewer in number than they are”, and reaches for the four winds and the four faces of the cherubim to say why.

Kind
Quotes a source. The words of a named text, checked against the source.
Review
Source checked. The cited passage was read, and it says this.

  • Supports · ANF (Roberts and Rambaut)

    Against Heresies, Book 3, chapter 11, section 8: why there are four Gospels3.11.7 to 3.11.9

    Cited · Link answered, 19 October 2026 · The cited passage was read, 23 September 2026

    The source reads: For the Ebionites , who use Matthew's Gospel only, are confuted out of this very same ... It is not possible that the Gospels can be either more or fewer in number than they are. For, since there are four zones of the world in which we live, and four principal winds ... For the cherubim , too, were four-faced ... Others, again (the Montanists ), that they may set at nought the gift of the Spirit ... do not admit that aspect [of the evangelical dispensation] presented by John's Gospel

Corrected

23 September 2026. Previously: “Irenaeus, arguing in the other direction,” Irenaeus is not answering Tatian or any harmony. His targets in 3.11.7 to 3.11.9 are the Ebionites and Marcion, who used one Gospel, and those who rejected John.

Claim 71 · checked 23 September 2026 · AI-assisted audit

Claim: Four accounts, not harmonised, is what the churches chose to keep.

Kind
Historical claim. A statement about the past that historical evidence can test.
Review
Source checked. The cited passage was read, and it says this.

  • Supports

    Tatianparagraph on the Diatessaron

    Cited · Link answered, 19 October 2026 · Read in full, 23 September 2026

    The source reads: and Theodoret, Bishop of Cyrus (423-457), removed more than two hundred copies of the "Diatesseron" from the churches in his diocese .

Corrected

23 September 2026. Previously: “Four accounts, not harmonised, is what the church chose to keep.” The choice was made by churches separately and at different times, the Syriac ones last.

Claim 72 · checked 23 September 2026 · AI-assisted audit

Claim: For Irenaeus the four are “the Gospel under four aspects, but bound together by one Spirit”.

Kind
Quotes a source. The words of a named text, checked against the source.
Review
Source checked. The cited passage was read, and it says this.

What this does not establish

What one second-century bishop wrote. It is not offered as a description of how any church now accounts for the differences.

Corrected

23 September 2026. Previously: “Some traditions read the differences as four witnesses to one event, in the way that testimony varies without being false. Others read them as four theologies, each true to what it was written to say.” The two readings are not held by different traditions: both run through the same writers. Irenaeus has one Gospel “under four aspects”, and Augustine assigns each evangelist a theme while defending their harmony.

23 September 2026. Previously: “Christian readers have taken the differences as four witnesses to one event, in the way that testimony varies without being false, and as four theologies, each true to what it was written to say. The two are not exclusive: Augustine gives” Owner’s rule: only what a credible source verifies is shown. The two readings were stated for Christian readers at large, and whether they fairly represent Catholic, Orthodox and Protestant accounts, inerrantist ones among them, was marked for a theologian. Attributed instead to the two writers the passage already relies on, in Irenaeus’ own words; “The two are not exclusive” went with the sentence it answered.

Claim 73 · checked 23 September 2026 · AI-assisted audit

Claim: Augustine gives each evangelist his own emphasis and still defends their agreement.

Kind
Historical claim. A statement about the past that historical evidence can test.
Review
Source checked. The cited passage was read, and it says this.

Added with the correction to the sentence before; its opening clause was removed with that sentence (see claim 73).

  • Supports · NPNF (Salmond)

    The Harmony of the Gospelscontents of Book I, chapters 3 and 4

    Cited · Link answered, 19 October 2026 · The cited passage was read, 23 September 2026

    The source reads: Chapter 3 Of the Fact that Matthew, Together with Mark, Had Specially in View the Kingly Character of Christ, Whereas Luke Dealt with the Priestly. Chapter 4 Of the Fact that John Undertook the Exposition of Christ's Divinity.

  • Supports

    The Harmony of the Gospels: translator’s introductory noticep. 71

    Cited · Link answered, 19 October 2026 · The cited passage was read, 23 September 2026

    The source reads: In the second, he enters upon a careful examination of Matthew’s Gospel, on to the record of the supper, comparing it with Mark, Luke, and John, and exhibiting the perfect harmony subsisting between them.

Claim 74 · checked 23 September 2026 · AI-assisted audit

What was read

  • Matthew 1, World English BibleeBible.org, public domain · World English Bible, eBible.orgThe cited passage was read, 23 September 2026 · Public domain
  • Luke 3, World English BibleeBible.org, public domain · World English Bible, eBible.orgThe cited passage was read, 23 September 2026 · Public domain
  • Church History, Book 3, Chapter 39: The Writings of PapiasEusebius of Caesarea, Nicene and Post-Nicene Fathers series II volume 1, Christian Classics Ethereal Library · Tr. A. C. McGiffert, NPNF series II vol. 1, CCEL, with McGiffert’s notesThe cited passage was read, 23 September 2026 · Public domain translation
  • The Harmony of the GospelsAugustine of Hippo, translated by S. D. F. Salmond, Nicene and Post-Nicene Fathers, New Advent · Tr. S. D. F. Salmond, NPNF series I vol. 6, New Advent: contents page, Book I chapter 2, Book II chapter 3The cited passage was read, 23 September 2026 · Public domain translation
  • Jesus, Criteria, and the Demise of AuthenticityChris Keith and Anthony Le Donne, editors, T&T ClarkCatalogue record only, 23 September 2026Crossref records only: the volume and its chapter titles, including Keith, “The Indebtedness of the Criteria Approach to Form Criticism and Recent Attempts to Rehabilitate the Search for an Authentic Jesus”. No abstract; closed.
  • The Synoptic Problem: A Way Through the MazeMark Goodacre, T&T ClarkCatalogue record only, 23 September 2026Crossref record only: The Synoptic Problem: A Way Through the Maze, Sheffield Academic Press, 2001. The publisher’s platform (theologyandreligiononline.com) returned no description; markgoodacre.org answered 401 and 403.
  • Mark 16, World English BibleeBible.org, public domain · World English Bible, eBible.org, Mark 16 with its footnote to verse 9The cited passage was read, 23 September 2026 · Public domain
  • Church History, Book 4, chapter 29: Tatian and the DiatessaronEusebius of Caesarea, Nicene and Post-Nicene Fathers, New Advent · Tr. A. C. McGiffert, NPNF series II vol. 1, New Advent, Book 4 chapter 29The cited passage was read, 23 September 2026 · Public domain translation
  • Against Heresies, Book 3, chapter 11, section 8: why there are four GospelsIrenaeus of Lyons, Ante-Nicene Fathers, New Advent · Tr. Roberts and Rambaut, ANF vol. 1, New Advent, Book 3 chapter 11The cited passage was read, 23 September 2026 · Public domain translation
  • Matthew 28, World English BibleeBible.org, public domain · World English Bible, eBible.orgThe cited passage was read, 23 September 2026 · Public domain
  • Luke 24, World English BibleeBible.org, public domain · World English Bible, eBible.org; Luke 23:55 also readThe cited passage was read, 23 September 2026 · Public domain
  • John 20, World English BibleeBible.org, public domain · World English Bible, eBible.orgThe cited passage was read, 23 September 2026 · Public domain
  • John 2, World English Bible: the temple, at the start of the ministryeBible.org, public domain · World English Bible, eBible.orgThe cited passage was read, 23 September 2026 · Public domain
  • John 6, World English Bible: a second PassovereBible.org, public domain · World English Bible, eBible.orgThe cited passage was read, 23 September 2026 · Public domain
  • John 12, World English BibleeBible.org, public domain · World English Bible, eBible.orgThe cited passage was read, 23 September 2026 · Public domain
  • John 13, World English Bible: the suppereBible.org, public domain · World English Bible, eBible.orgThe cited passage was read, 23 September 2026 · Public domain
  • John 14, World English Bible: the start of the farewell discourseeBible.org, public domain · World English Bible, eBible.orgThe cited passage was read, 23 September 2026 · Public domain
  • Matthew 21, World English Bible: the temple, in the last weekeBible.org, public domain · World English Bible, eBible.orgThe cited passage was read, 23 September 2026 · Public domain
  • Matthew 26, World English Bible: the Passover and the suppereBible.org, public domain · World English Bible, eBible.orgThe cited passage was read, 23 September 2026 · Public domain
  • Matthew 3, SBL Greek New TestamentSociety of Biblical Literature and Logos Bible Software, eBible.org · SBL Greek New Testament (2010), eBible.orgThe cited passage was read, 23 September 2026 · Copyright 2010 Society of Biblical Literature and Logos Bible Software; CC BY 4.0 (eBible.org copyright page); quoted brieflyText-critical sigla (⸀) in the eBible text are left out of excerpts.
  • Luke 3, SBL Greek New TestamentSociety of Biblical Literature and Logos Bible Software, eBible.org · SBL Greek New Testament (2010), eBible.orgThe cited passage was read, 23 September 2026 · Copyright 2010 Society of Biblical Literature and Logos Bible Software; CC BY 4.0 (eBible.org copyright page); quoted briefly
  • SynopticsFrancis Gigot, Catholic Encyclopedia vol. 14, New Advent · Catholic Encyclopedia (1912), vol. 14, transcribed by New AdventRead in full, 23 September 2026 · Public domainA Catholic reference work of 1912. Used for the name, the pattern of agreement and the history of the question, not for the current state of the field.
  • Is rewritten Bible/Scripture the solution to the Synoptic Problem?Gert J. Malan, HTS Teologiese Studies 70(1), open access · Publisher PDF, HTS 70(1), art. 2101, 10 pagesRead in full, 23 September 2026 · Open access; quoted brieflyRead from the PDF text layer, as saved by the pilot audit.
  • Historical, text-immanent and sociological approaches to the interpretation of the Synoptic GospelsFrancois P. Viljoen, in Reformed theology today, ed. Vorster and Van der Walt, AOSIS, open access · AOSIS open-access PDF of the whole volume (Reformed theology today, 2017), chapter 3, pp. 25 to 36Read in full, 23 September 2026 · CC BY-NC-SA 4.0; quoted brieflyRead from the PDF text layer. Page numbers are the book’s own.
  • Mark S. Goodacre, faculty profileScholars@Duke, Duke University · Scholars@Duke profile page, overviewRead in full, 23 September 2026 · Copyright Duke University; quoted briefly
  • Eusebius of CaesareaFrancis Joseph Bacchus, The Catholic Encyclopedia vol. 5 (1909), New Advent · Catholic Encyclopedia (1909), New AdventRead in full, 24 September 2026 · Public domainUsed only for when the Church History was written.
  • Ten Reasons to Question QMark Goodacre, The Case Against Q web pages · markgoodacre.org, page last updated 10 January 2003, read in fullRead in full, 24 September 2026 · Copyright Mark Goodacre; quoted brieflyThe author’s own overview of the arguments in The Case Against Q.
  • Pentecostal hermeneutical reconsideration of the longer ending of Mark 16:9–20Marius Nel, Verbum et Ecclesia 41(1), open access · Verbum et Ecclesia 41(1), 2020, article 2089, PDF from the journalRead in full, 23 September 2026 · CC BY 4.0
  • Review of Jesus, Criteria, and the Demise of Authenticity (in Indonesian)Stefanus Kristianto, Sola Gratia 6(1) · Book review in Indonesian, 5-page PDF linked from the Crossref record; the PDF’s running head reads Jurnal Theologia Aletheia 20(14), March 2018Read in full, 23 September 2026 · Open access; quoted brieflyThe only readable account of the volume’s contents found. Excerpts are Indonesian, with the audit’s English as a rendering.
  • The Harmony of the Gospels: translator’s introductory noticeS. D. F. Salmond, Nicene and Post-Nicene Fathers series I volume 6, Christian Classics Ethereal Library · Salmond’s introductory notice, NPNF series I vol. 6, CCELThe cited passage was read, 23 September 2026 · Public domain
  • The Harmony of the Gospels: introductory essay, on earlier harmoniesM. B. Riddle, Nicene and Post-Nicene Fathers series I volume 6, Christian Classics Ethereal Library · Riddle’s introductory essay, NPNF series I vol. 6, CCELThe cited passage was read, 23 September 2026 · Public domain
  • TatianPatrick Healy, Catholic Encyclopedia vol. 14, New Advent · Catholic Encyclopedia (1912), vol. 14, transcribed by New AdventRead in full, 23 September 2026 · Public domain