Matthew was written first. And it is theorized that mark and luke borrow heavily from Matthew, and put a different spin on things. John does the same, but his spin is that Jesus is the almight son of god, that preforms miracles. there is little mention of Jesus being divine from the other writers.
see link "Q Document"This is indeed a difficult and complex question, with literally hundreds of books being written about what is commonly called the 'synoptic problem'. Some ideas would be these:Firstly, they all had access to eyewitness material, either from their own experience (in the case of Mathew) or from those who did. So their would have been common elements.
Secondly, the material they described was of a similar nature and in many cases required a similar, almost identical vocabulary to describe it.
Thirdly, they had a number of sources at their disposal, both written and oral. What is difficult to ascertain is who borrowed from who as their certainly seem to be some striking similarities in some of the accounts.
Matthew and Luke were also based in part on the hypothetical sayings document known as the 'Q' document. This material common to both gospels is presented mainly in the form of parables. However, since Q provided no information about the time or context in which Jesus might have spoken these parables, the two evangelists had to place them in their own contexts, which could vary between the two gospels.
The principal stories actually in all three include:
Once again, Luke follows Mark less closely than does Matthew, introducing a further trial by Herod Antipas
Nothing that follows the crucifixion is really common to all three synoptic gospels, because Mark originally ended at verse 16:8, with the young man telling the women that Jesus was risen and they told no one. The authors of Matthew and Luke had to create their own endings, and each ending is entirely different to the other. The "Long Ending" (verses 16:9-20) was added to Mark's Gospel long afterwards to provide the necessary resurrection appearances and to more or less harmonise it with Matthewand Luke.
One of the most significant similarities between the three, at least in regards to their differences with John, is the prophecy of end times. This theme is nearly completely absent from John. As for other similarities, there is only one Passover in these three whereas there are three in John throughout Jesus' ministry, some of the miracles are the same, Jesus was tried and crucified by the Romans, his tomb was empty, and although the earliest manuscripts of Mark end at the empty tomb, they all three agree that Jesus was resurrected. It should be noted that the devil is in the details here. None of the accounts completely agree with one another when it comes to details.
Apart from the Missing Block, Luke's Gospel contains much of the material from Mark, although with some alterations or elaborations. The author of Luke was unaware of the chiastic structure in Mark's account, but otherwise followed it more or less faithfully, adding material from 'Q' and further material unique to Luke.
In the Passion story, Mark breaks down the last twenty four hours into eight intervals of just three hours, with important event associated with each interval. Luke follows these events, but omits some of the careful timing inherent in Mark. Luke contains some elaboration in the passages about the Garden of Gethsemene and the arrest, but omits the story of the young man fleeing naked. Again, the story of Peter's denials contains some elaborations, but is recognisably similar.
The trial story in Luke is quite close to Mark's, except for the addition of the passage in which Pontius Pilate attempts to get Herod Antipas to take responsibility for the execution of Jesus. There are further elaborations in the crucifixion story, but once again it is recognisably similar to the original. The most noteworthy changes are that one of the two thieves crucified with Jesus repented, and the different last words of Jesus. For Luke, his last words were, "Father, into thy hands I commend my spirit." The pagan centurion spoke the same words as in Mark, not sarcastically (as in Mark) but to glorify God.
The four books of The Bible that tell of Jesus' life are Matthew, Mark, Luke, and John. These New Testament books are collectively known as the Gospels.
In the new testament only a total of four books are called the goospel books. They are the gospel of Matthew, the gospel of Mark, the gospel Luke and the last gospel the gospel of John.
Luke was not Jewish; he was a Gentile. Matthew, Mark, and John were Jewish.
There are 27 books in the New Testament. They are: Matthew, Mark, Luke, John, Acts, Romans, 1 Corinthians, 2 Corinthians, Galatians, Ephesians, Philippians, Colossians, 1 Thessalonians, 2 Thessalonians, 1 Timothy, 2 Timothy, Titus, Philemon, Hebrews, James, 1 Peter, 2 Peter, 1 John, 2 John, 3 John, Jude, and Revelation.
Mark and Luke were not one of the Twelve Disciples.
Matthew, Mark, Luke and John (bless this bed that I lay on...)
The first FOUR books are the Gospels as it tells the story of Jesus Christ while he lived among the people. The first three books are Matthew, Mark and Luke.
The first four books of the New Testament are called the Gospels.Matthew, Mark, Luke and John
Matthew, Mark, Luke and Johm
Matthew, Mark, and Luke
Matthew Mark Luke and John
The four books of The Bible that tell of Jesus' life are Matthew, Mark, Luke, and John. These New Testament books are collectively known as the Gospels.
The gospels: Matthew, Mark, Luke, and John
Matthew, Mark, Luke, and John.
The names of the first four books of the New Testament are Matthew, Mark, Luke and John.
The four books in the gospel are Matthew, Luke,Mark and John.
The Gospels are the books of Matthew, Mark, Luke, and John. They are the first four books of the New Testament.