answersLogoWhite

0


Best Answer

The four gospels are all the same story, but written from four different points of view. The differences depend on which occurences particularly influenced or made their mark on the writers, what they personally witnessed, etc.

User Avatar

Wiki User

16y ago
This answer is:
User Avatar
More answers
User Avatar

Wiki User

8y ago

It seems that Luke viewed Christ's teaching from a historical or narrative point of view while Matthew, being a tax collector, looked at it from a legal point of view.

Other areas of difference may relate to the people addressed. Matthew is clearly writing for a Jewish audience, while Luke is addressing Gentiles. Thus Matthew has more detail familiar to Jewish people such as fulfilled prophecy and numerous references to Jewish laws and customs and legal disputes about the sabbath. Luke has more of a personal touch and has little of these Jewish elements so prominent in Matthew.

Luke also, in line with his stated aim of giving an account 'in order' follows a definite chronological sequence. He also has access or uses additional sources which accounts for much of the different material, particularly noticeable in the infancy narratives. It is considered that Jesus' mother Mary was the source for much of this.

This answer is:
User Avatar

User Avatar

Wiki User

7y ago

We must not assume that the four New Testament gospels are independent eyewitness accounts or separately based on apostolic testament, because they were originally anonymous and were only attributed by the early Church Fathers to the disciples whose names they now bear, later in the second century. In fact, scholars say that the author of Matthew relied on Mark's Gospel for everything he knew about the life and mission of Jesus, as well as relying on the hypothetical 'Q' document for additional sayings material.

Matthew contains some 600 of the 666 verses of Mark, often using exactly the same wording in the Greek language. As a result, much of what is in Mark will be found in Matthew, although sometimes with elaborations. For example, in Mark, the stories of John the Baptist and the baptism of Jesus are dealt with in ten verses, but take 17 verses in Matthew's Gospel. In Mark, the story of the temptation in the wilderness takes just one verse (Mark 1:13), but consists of ten verses in Matthew (Matthew 4:2-11) - using material from the 'Q' document.

In a few cases, the author of Matthew appears to have corrected what he saw as errors in Mark's Gospel. In Mark, Jesus went across the Sea of Galilee to the land of the Gerasenes*, a town far away from the Sea and across a river, and healed the demon-possessed man. The story remains much the same in Matthew but the location was changed to 'Gadarenes', a more geographically realistic location. In another passage, Mark's Gospel has the storm whipping up waves that threatened to sink the fishing boat. Matthew and Luke, possibly more familiar with Palestine, remove the references to the storm waves that threatened to sink the fishing boat.

The similarities also flow from Matthew to Mark. Mark's Gospel originally ended at verse 16:8, with the young man telling the women that Jesus was risen, and they fled in terror telling no one - thus no resurrection appearances. With no guidance from Mark, each of the later gospel authors had to create his own resurrection appearances, to prove to the readers that Jesus really had risen from the dead. In Matthew's case, Jesus first appeared to the two women as they walked back to tell the disciples; in Luke's case, Jesus appeared to the two men as they walked on the road to Emmaeus. When the 'Long Ending' was eventually added to Mark, it included a passage in which Jeus appeared to "the two of them", thus harmonising with both Matthew and Luke.

Footnote

*The KJV Bible has changed the text in Mark to 'Gadarenes' in conformance with Matthew, but some other English translations, such as the New American Bible (NAB), have kept the original text.

This answer is:
User Avatar

User Avatar

Wiki User

12y ago
A:Both gospels were written anonymously in Greek Koine, and only attributed to the apostles whose names they now bear later in the second century. The Gospels of Matthew, Mark and Luke are known as the synoptic gospels because they agree moderately well on the life and mission of Jesus, but Matthew and Luke are the least similar of the synoptics.

Scholars now know that the authors of Matthew and Luke used Mark's Gospel as their principal source. Whenever they agree with Mark, the text is identical in Greek - something that could not have happened unless one gospel was being copied. Luke differs in that it has a 'Missing Block' a sequence of probably thirteen pages that were missing from the copy of Mark that its author was using as his source.

Scholars have also identified a hypothetical document, now known as the Q document as the source of additional sayings attributed to Jesus by both Matthew and Luke. Whenever the two evangelists used a saying from the Q document, they provided the same text for the saying itself, but described a completely different context in which Jesus spoke.

A similarity of concept is that both contain nativity accounts of the birth of Jesus, as well as genealogies of his earthly father, Joseph. However, the stories themselves and the genealogies are almost as different as they can be.

This answer is:
User Avatar

User Avatar

Wiki User

13y ago

Luke's Gospel is similar to Mark's Gospel because the author of Luke relied on Mark for his knowledge of the life and mission of Jesus, often copying Mark word for word in the Greek language. It is similar to Matthew's Gospel because the author of Matthew also relied on Mark and also copied most of Mark almost word for word in Greek Koine. However, there is a "Missing Block" in Luke, corresponding to probably thirteen pages of Greek text that were missing from the copy of Mark that the author of Luke was using.

Further similarities exist between Luke and Matthew because both relied on the hypothetical 'Q' document for additional sayings attributed to Jesus. Both gospels use more or less the same words in the Greek language for each of these sayings but, because Q was only a list of sayings without information about when or where Jesus might have told them, each one places them in a different context.

John's Gospel is similar to Luke's Gospel because it was inspired that Gospel, although a small amount of material was taken direct from Mark. However, the author of John's Gospel was more willing to change details and chronological order. So, while the Cleansing of the Temple occurs right at the end of Jesus' mission in Luke's Gospel, it occurs at the beginning of John. Luke says that the women were the first to find the tomb to be empty, but John's author seems unwilling to let the women have the honour of first discovering that the tomb empty. John says they ran back to the disciples as soon as they saw the stone moved. To harmonise somewhat with Luke's Gospel, John has Mary Magdalene return after the disciples had left and look into the empty tomb.

This answer is:
User Avatar

User Avatar

Wiki User

11y ago
A:While Matthew and Luke do agree moderately well on the material both sourced from Mark's Gospel and the hypothetical 'Q' document, material unique to Matthew disagrees strongly with material unique to Luke's Gospel.

We only have to look at the two nativity accounts, which Raymond E. Brown (An Introduction to the New Testament) says are "massively different" and virtually irreconcilable. In Matthew's infancy narrative, Bethlehem was the home town of Mary and Joseph. There is no suggestion in Matthew of a census or of a journey from Nazareth to Bethlehem. The wise men found the young family in their house, not in a stable; they fled from Bethlehem to Egypt and after the death of Herod began the journey back to Bethlehem but, being warned in a dream, turned aside and travelled to a city called Nazareth instead. In Luke's infancy narrative, Mary and Joseph lived in Nazareth in Galilee and travelled to Bethlehem, where Jesus was born, for a census controlled by the Syrian governor Quirinius; a few weeks after the birth of Jesus, the young family travelled to Jerusalem to present Jesus at the Temple, then returned peacefully to their home in Nazareth.

Another example is in the story of the empty tomb. Matthew chapter 28 says that just two women, Mary Magdalene and the other Mary, came to see the sepulchre. There was a great earthquake and an angel came down from heaven and rolled back the stone from the tomb and sat upon it. He told them that Jesus was risen, so they did not go into the tomb, but went quickly to tell the disciples. Luke chapter 24 says that Mary Magdalene, Mary mother of James and a number of other women brought spices to anoint Jesus. Finding the stone already rolled away, they went in and found the body of Jesus missing. Two men in shining garments told them that Jesus had risen.

In Matthew's Gospel, Jesus appeared only once to the disciples, in Galilee. Here, he told them to travel the world and spread the gospel. In Luke's Gospel, he met the disciples in Jerusalem on the evening of his resurrection and took them out on the road to Bethany, where he was taken bodily up to heaven. Once again, the disagreement here is total.

An underlying difference is in the ways in which the two evangelists sought to strengthen the case for Christianity of a true religion. Matthew seeks to demonstrate the antiquity of Christianity, by more frequently referring to the Hebrew scriptures and showing them as foreshadowing or prophesying events in the life of Jesus. Luke places more emphasis on historical relevance by setting gospel events in the context of other well-known events, although Raymond E. Brown (An Introduction to the New Testament) says that sometimes it does so inaccurately.

This answer is:
User Avatar

User Avatar

Wiki User

7y ago
When was Jesus born?Matthew 2:1. Now when Jesus was born in Bethlehem of Judaea in the days of Herod the king. Herod died 4 BCE.

Luke 2:1, And it came to pass in those days, that there went out a decree from Caesar Augustus that all the world should be taxed. (And this taxing was first made when Cyrenius was governor of Syria.) Syrenius became Governor of Syria in 6 AD.

Where did Joseph and Mary live before the birth of Jesus?They lived in Nazareth, and traveled to Bethlehem because of a census. Luke 2:1-7.

They lived in a house in Bethlehem, and moved to Nazareth after returning from Egypt. Matthew 2:1-2, 11,22,23.

Did Jesus, Mary, and Joseph go to Egypt or Nazareth?They went to Egypt after Jesus' birth. Matthew 2:13.

They went to Nazareth after Jesus' birth. Luke 2:30.

Who visited Jesus when he was born?The Three Magi according to Matthew. No mention of the Shepherds.

The Shepherds according to Luke. No mention of the three Magi.

Another Answer

Matthew simply has a lot less detail. Luke includes the visit of the angels to the shepherds, the shepherds' subsequent visit to see Jesus and details even of the accommodation and what Jesus was wrapped in. He also mentions the census, the specific reason for them being in Bethlehem, as a historical marker of the event, no doubt familiar to people of his day.

Matthew wished to demonstrate Jesus as the Messiah of Israel and thus fulfilling Old Testament prophecy. So, in line with this purpose, he includes the Old Testament connections and excludes the specific details which Luke includes.

Answer1. When was Jesus born?

Matthew 2:1: "In the days of Herod". Note; Herod died 4BCE

Luke 2:1-7: "When Cyrenius was governor of Syria". Note; Cyrenius became Governor of Syria 7 CE (AD)

2. How many generations were there from David to Jesus?

Matthew 1:6-16: Twenty-eight

Luke 3:23-31: Forty-three

3. To whom did the angel announcing the miraculous conception appear?

Matthew 1:20,21: To Joseph

Luke 1:26-38: To Mary

This answer is:
User Avatar

User Avatar

Wiki User

7y ago

All four New Testament gospels were written anonymously in Greek Koine, and only attributed to the apostles whose names they now bear later in the second century. The Gospels of Matthew, Mark and Luke are known as the synoptic gospels because they agree moderately well on the life and mission of Jesus.

Scholars now know that the authors of Matthew and Luke used Mark's Gospel as their principal source. Whenever they agree with Mark, the text is identical in Greek - something that could not have happened unless one gospel was being copied. Luke differs in that it has a 'Missing Block' a sequence of probably thirteen pages that were missing from the copy of Mark that its author was using as his source.

Scholars have also identified a hypothetical document, now known as the Q document as the source of additional sayings attributed to Jesus by both Matthew and Luke. Whenever the two evangelists used a saying from the Q document, they provided the same text for the saying itself, but described a completely different context in which Jesus spoke. However the Q material does not appear in Mark's Gospel.

In a few cases, the authors of Matthew and Lukeappear to have corrected what they saw as errors in Mark's Gospel. In Mark, Jesus went across the Sea of Galilee to the land of the Gerasenes*, a town far away from the Sea and across a river, and healed the demon-possessed man. The story remains much the same in Matthew but the location was changed to 'Gadarenes', a more geographically realistic location. In another passage, Mark's Gospel has the storm whipping up waves that threatened to sink the fishing boat. Matthew and Luke, possibly more familiar with Palestine, remove the references to the storm waves that threatened to sink the fishing boat.

The similarities also flow from Matthew and Luke to Mark. Mark's Gospel originally ended at verse 16:8, with the young man telling the women that Jesus was risen, and they fled in terror telling no one - thus no resurrection appearances. With no guidance from Mark, each of the later gospel authors had to create his own resurrection appearances, to prove to the readers that Jesus really had risen from the dead. In Matthew's case, Jesus first appeared to the two women as they walked back to tell the disciples; in Luke's case, Jesus appeared to the two men as they walked on the road to Emmaeus. When the 'Long Ending' was eventually added to Mark, it included a passage in which Jeus appeared to "the two of them", thus harmonising with both Matthew and Luke.

Footnote

*The KJV Bible has changed the text in Mark to 'Gadarenes' in conformance with Matthew, but some other English translations, such as the New American Bible (NAB), have kept the original text.

This answer is:
User Avatar

User Avatar

Wiki User

7y ago

All the New Testament gospels were written anonymously, but it was once thought that Matthew's Gospel was written by an apostle for a predominantly Jewish audience.

Matthew makes somewhat more use of the Hebrew scriptures than the other gospels, and the author has been described as "overly fond of the miraculous".

This answer is:
User Avatar

User Avatar

Wiki User

7y ago

There are numerous differences between Luke's nativity account and that of Matthew. In Luke's Gospel, Nazareth was the home town of Joseph and Mary, whereas in Matthew's Gospel Bethlehem was their home town and when they eventually travelled to Nazareth, it was so that Jesus would be called a Nazarene (Matthew 2:23: And he came and dwelt in a city called Nazareth: that it might be fulfilled which was spoken by the prophets, He shall be called a Nazarene.)

In Luke's Gospel, an angel actually appeared to Mary to announce that Jesus would be born out of her. In Matthew's Gospel, an angel appeared to Joseph with the same message, but only in a dream. It is hard to visualise how the two appearances could be harmonised in the real world.


Luke's Gospel has Joseph and Mary travel from Nazareth to Bethlehem for the census, which must have been in 6 CE, but also says that Jesus was born in the reign of King Herod, who died ten years earlier. Matthew's Gospel does agree that Jesus was born in the reign of King Herod, but has the young family flee to Egypt until after the death of Herod. In contrast, Luke says that shortly after the birth of Jesus, the young family travelled peacefully back to their home in Galilee, stopping off in Jerusalem. While it is certainly possible that Matthew's magi and Luke's shepherds both visited Jesus in Bethlehem, it is not possible for the family to both flee direct to Egypt and at the same time travel via Jerusalem to Nazareth. Attempts to harmonise these things can only be accepted on the basis of faith, not logic.

This answer is:
User Avatar

Add your answer:

Earn +20 pts
Q: What makes Luke's Gospel similar to other Gospels?
Write your answer...
Submit
Still have questions?
magnify glass
imp
Continue Learning about Religious Studies

What is different about the 4 Gospels of the New Testament?

The four canonical Gospels are recognized by Christians as being those written by Matthew, Mark, Luke and John. The Gospels take their names from their assumed authors and comprise the first part of the New Testament compilation.The four Gospels — Matthew, Mark, Luke, and John — each present the life and/or ministry of Jesus from the author's point of view.


What limits do the Gospels have as a historical source?

The gospels are unique documents, they are not stories based on facts, they are not academic historical documents, they are recounts of personal experiences of several members of a community, they are written to help people to the conversion of faith, for which it is evident the intention and the bias of the writings, is a truthful record of historical facts


Why is Matthew's Gospel placed first in the New Testament?

The author we know as Matthew used the Gospel According to Mark as his primary source for information about the life of Jesus. But he added to this, using sayings from a sayings gospel we call the Q document. Unlike Mark's Gospel, the Gospel According to Matthew also contains a version of the story of the birth of Jesus, and his genealogy back through Joseph and King David.


Did any of the authors of the Bible ever actually meet Jesus?

The Matthew recorded in the gospels as being a disciple of Jesus would of course have met him. However, scholars say that the Gospel According to Saint Matthew, although later attributed to Matthew, was not really written by him. The 'Matthew' who wrote the Gospel does not appear to have met Jesus, because he used Mark's Gospel and the 'Q' document as the main sources for his Gospel.


Were Matthew and James the Less brothers?

A:The original New Testament gospel, now known as Mark's Gospel, refers to Levi, son of Alphaeus, as a tax collector. However, for some reason, Mark never again refers to Levi, but introduces Matthew and James, son of Alphaeus, as disciples in the list of the twelve disciples (verse 3:14-19). Since Levi and James are both sons of Alphaeus, it would seem that they must have been brothers. John is described as the brother of James, son of Zebedee, in the list in which the disciples are introduced, but Matthew is not described either as the son of Alphaeus or as the brother of this James. There is therefore no reason to believe that the author of Mark was portraying Matthew as either the tax collector or as the brother of James, son of Alphaeus. Because Mark does not refer to Levi again, this causes a possible problem for the authors of the other New Testament gospels that are now known to have been derived from Mark's Gospel. Luke more or less faithfully copies Mark, using the name Levi in the corresponding place, as the former tax collector, while John makes no mention of him. The author of the gospel now known as Matthew's Gospel tried to resolve the difficulty by placing the disciple Matthew in the position of the tax collector whom Jesus called to follow him. Because of this usage in Matthew, it has become accepted by Christians that Matthew and Levi were one and the same person. Although Matthew's Gospel does not say so, this could mean that Matthew was a son of Alphaeus and that James was his brother.

Related questions

Do any scriptures tell me with no doubt that Jesus is God?

AnswerJohn's Gospel tells us, several times, that Jesus is God. However, if you are looking for a reference about which there is no doubt, this is not it. You should hold doubts if only John's Gospel makes this unequivocal claim, while the earlier gospels do not do so.


What is the difference between the synoptic gospels and John's Gospel?

Another answer from our community:John differs from the synoptic Gospels because it is not just listing events in the life of Jesus and reporting His teachings. John is more thematic in nature and provides more theological discourse on the person and work of Christ. John also focus' on events in Judea rather than the Galilean ministry. The synoptic Gospels of Matthew, Mark and Luke are called such because they contain a brief review, summary or synopsis of Jesus' life and teachings. John is recognized as somewhat different with a lot less detail in terms of coverage of events but a much greater degree of theological detail focused around people's reactions to Jesus work and teachings and ensuing discussions. Thus John's different structure which is more theological and not a summary of all Jesus said and did is classified as non-synoptic.Another answerThere are four gospels in the New Testament: Matthew, Mark, Luke and John. Three gospels, Matthew, Mark and Luke, are called the synoptic gospels because they agree moderately well on the life and teachings of Jesus, although each is a little different from the other two.John's Gospel is quite a good deal different from the other gospels. Some scholars believe that John was originally written in a Gnostic community and was subsequently edited to remove some of the more clearly Gnostic material, although the gospel still has a Gnostic flavour. John is the only gospel that states Jesus to be God and to have been pre-existing. John also contains a good deal of material that is not in the other gospels, including a much longer account of the appearances of the risen Jesus. Although some say that this gospel is concerned with themes rather than the chronological order of events, it is nevertheless true that events are certainly placed in a different sequence compared to the other gospels.Scholars have noted that the events in the mission of Jesus, as described by the synoptic gospels, could have taken place in as little as one year, but the events described in John's Gospel would require four years. John appears to differ from the other three gospels in several ways. For example, in John the ministry of Jesus seems to last several years, whereas in the other gospels it appears to be limited to about one year. Also, John give an important role to the un-named "disciple whom Jesus loved", but the other gospels don't even mention such a person. Also, in John, Jesus performs several major miracles that aren't recorded in the other gospels, such as the resurrection of Lazarus and the changing of water into wine at the wedding in Cana. John depicts Jesus somewhat differently than the other gospels do. Some people have said that this is because John tries to show the spiritual side of Jesus, whereas the other gospels mainly try to show his human side.


What makes John's Gospel different from the other gospels?

A:The Gospel According to St John differs to such an extent from the synoptic gospels (Matthew, Mark and Luke) that Origen (Commentary on John) felt obliged to defend the Gospel, saying, "Although he does not always tell the truth literally, he always tells it spiritually." To understand both the similarities and the differences among the four New Testament gospels, it needs to be understood that all the New Testament gospels were originally anonymous and were only attributed to the apostles whose names they now bear later in the second century. Biblical scholars say there is no good reason to accept those attributions, so we do not really know who wrote the four New Testament gospels.The reason for the relatively close similarities in the synoptic gospels (Matthew, Mark and Luke) has also been established. By lying these gospels in parallel and reading them synoptically ('with the same eye') in the original Greek language, it can readily be seen that there is a literary dependency among these gospels. Scholars have established that Mark's Gospel was written first, around 70 CE, and that the other two synoptic gospels were, to a large extent, copied from it.Until early in the twentieth century, most scholars accepted that John's Gospel was independent of the synoptic gospels. However, further study has shown that it was inspired by Luke's Gospel, although many of the passages in Luke, or their chronological sequence, have been changed almost beyond recognition. Some material was actually taken direct from Mark, but the author of John usually preferred to be guided by Luke. Thus, John was further removed from the original gospel, Mark, which in itself would result in more differences. It was also written somewhat later than the others and was intended for a different theological environment.


What Jewish holidays were Jesus and his disciples celebrating the night of his arrest?

In the synoptic gospels, Jesus and his disciples were celebrating the Jewish Passover on the night of his arrest; the Last Supper was their Seder meal. In John's Gospel, Jesus was arrested on the night before the Passover, thus instead of a detailed mention of the Last Supper, we have the account of Jesus washing their feet. The gospel says that Jesus was crucified on the day prior to the Passover, and makes greater use of Passover imagery than do the other gospels.


Gospel song with what is this makes you love?

a song of praise ....


What is today's gospel about?

The real meaning of the gospel is the same anytime or age. The gospel is how - God makes bad people good. For many people today the gospel is a social gospel. But the gospel is not about improving peoples lives, giving them food or financial aid or fighting for their rights. These are all good things but they are not the gospel.


What makes Scotland similar?

Similar to what?


Why is the length of Jesus' public ministry in John's Gospel different from that in the synoptic Gospels?

A:New Testament scholars have traced the stories of the mission of Jesus in the synoptic gospels and find they involve a period of apparently less than one year. This does not mean it could not actually have been somewhat longer, but this is all that is found. Luke's Gospel states that John the Baptist began to preach in 28 CE, thus suggesting that the crucifixion of Jesus could have been in 30 CE. John's Gospel makes it clear that, in the author's view, the mission of Jesus took three years, with Jesus going to Jerusalem for the annual Passover festivals. It can not be assumed that the author of John somehow knew more than the other authors, since it has now been established that the anonymous author of this gospel based it loosely on Luke's Gospel. Assuming Luke is correct on the date on which John began to preach, the crucifixion of Jesus in John's Gospel could not have been before about 33 CE.


Who wrote the gospel of Thomas?

A:The Gospel of Thomas is a sayings gospel, very similar to the hypothetical 'Q' gospel, but with a moderately gnostic slant. It contains no narrative about events in the life of Jesus and no sayings relevant to the crucifixion. It was once thought to have been a second-century gospel, perhaps on the Christian ego-centric view that only the New Testament gospels could have been written in the first century, but is now more widely acknowledged as likely to have been written around the same time as Mark, or even a little earlier. This would make it the earliest gospel of which we have a copy today. The absence of narrative indicates that GThomas was not written by an eyewitness to the life and mission of Jesus. John Dominic Crossan (The Birth of Christianity) argues that both GThomas and Q were derived from an even earlier source known as the Common Sayings Tradition. The fact that GThomas is entirely derivative makes it difficult to imagine who wrote this gospel.What we can say we do know is that the Gospel of Thomas was written around 70 CE or a little earlier, and that its author had to rely on an earlier source, to which he added a mildly gnostic flavour. At this stage, we do not know who could have written the Gospel of Thomas.


What is different about the 4 Gospels of the New Testament?

The four canonical Gospels are recognized by Christians as being those written by Matthew, Mark, Luke and John. The Gospels take their names from their assumed authors and comprise the first part of the New Testament compilation.The four Gospels — Matthew, Mark, Luke, and John — each present the life and/or ministry of Jesus from the author's point of view.


What is the main message of the Gospel of Matthew?

The main message of the Gospel of Matthew is to present Jesus as the long-awaited Messiah and to emphasize the importance of following his teachings, particularly the Sermon on the Mount. It also highlights the fulfillment of Jewish prophecies and the universal nature of Jesus' mission.


Why is John's Gospel different from the synoptic gospels?

A:The Gospel According to St John differs to such an extent from the synoptic gospels (Matthew, Mark and Luke) that Origen felt obliged to defend the Gospel, saying, "Although he does not always tell the truth literally, he always tells it spiritually" (Origen, Commentary on John). Part of the explanation is that all the New Testament gospels were originally anonymous and were only attributed to Matthew, Mark, Luke and John later in the second century. Biblical scholars say there is no good reason to accept those attributions, and that none of the gospels could have been written by an eyewitness to the events described.Scholars have demonstrated that Matthew and Lukewere largely based on Mark's Gospel, which explains the consistency among the three synoptic gospels. Matthew and Lukealso both copied sayings material from the hypothetical 'Q' document.John's Gospel was much later, written early in the second century, and further removed from Mark's Gospel. The fourth gospel was inspired by Luke's Gospel, but the author felt free to change details for theological reasons. He also knew Mark's Gospel, as a small amount of material and literary styles were used direct from Mark. John's Gospel was written at a time when anti-Jewish sentiment was at its height in the early Church, reflected in stronger sentiment in John and the more frequent references to generic 'Jews' rather than Pharisees and scribes. The author can also be seen to have dealt with issues that had arisen in his time, by inserting events and dialog into his gospel account.Answer:Part of the enigma of John is its distinctiveness from the other three canonical Gospels. John does not tell of Jesus' birth in Bethlehem; scarcely mentions the kingdom of God; has no parables; has no list of the twelve disciples; has nothing like the Sermon on the Mount; has no healing of lepers; has no bread and wine at the last supper; and never mentions demons. John reports Jesus' extended discourses rather than the Synoptic short, pithy sayings. In the Synoptics, Jesus spends His entire ministry in and around Galilee and makes on trip to Jerusalem, just a week before His death. According to John, however, Jesus made four trips to Jerusalem (John 2:13, 5:1, 7:10, 12:12) and spent a significant part of His ministry in Judea. The Gospel of John gives a distinctive account of Jesus' "signs", His words, and His ministry. The roots of the Johannine tradition reach back to the ministry of Jesus, and the Gospel stands on eyewitness testimony (John 19:35-35, 21:24-25).