Matthew, Mark, and Luke, three men with an extraordinary task, to tell the story of Jesus Christ. But no good deed goes unpunished. And now everybody's asking, why did these three guys contradict each other? We're talking about that and more today on the Clear View Show. You're listening to Clear View Today with Dr.
Abadan Shah, the daily show that engages mind and heart for the gospel of Jesus Christ. I'm Ryan Hill. I'm John Galantis. Welcome to the Clearview Today Show. We've been having so many great conversations this week, and we are excited you're here joining us again to keep talking about the synoptic problem.
This is something that people have been talking about for a long, long, long time, and I'm actually learning a lot on the show. If you listened to the very first episode, you were actually able to hear me learn in real time. Let me not get ahead of myself. Let's introduce our host for the day, Dr. Abadan Shah, who's a PhD in New Testament textual criticism, professor at Carolina University, author, full-time pastor, and the host of today's show.
Dr. Shah, welcome. I'm excited once again to dive into the synoptic problem. That's right. It's not a problem.
It's not a problem. We're going to tell you why. That's right. But before we do that, we do want to let you guys know that we're very, very grateful to be here with you. We love talking to you guys on the Clearview Today Show, but we want you to know everything we do is supported by faithful listeners, just like you and faithful viewers on YouTube and on Pray.com.
And so listen, we want to tell you that if you've been blessed by the things that we've been talking about here on the Clearview Today Show, we want you to show it by considering. Partnering with us financially. You know, everything that we do costs money, and we want to get the message of Jesus Christ out to as many people as we can. And your donations, your contribution to our ministry really, really does make an impact.
So we want you guys to know it's as simple and as easy as it could possibly be. You just go to Abadanshah.com forward slash give. There's a big yellow button that makes it very easy. And if you do want to give to the Clearview Today Show specifically, put it in the memo line. Let us know.
And we're going to send you a little gift. Just something to say thank you for supporting us and for helping us get the gospel of Jesus Christ out to as many people as we possibly can. It's a season of giving, and we're grateful for you giving to the Clearview Today Show. That's exactly right. That's exactly right.
You know, it's mid-November, which means, Ryan, it is like prime Christmas for you. Oh, it's been Christmas for a while for me, bud. It's Christmas October, right? Yeah, that's even a little bit late. Like late September, we start rolling out the Christmas song.
Dr. Sha, two weeks ago, yeah, two weeks, two Sundays ago, by this point, we did our first Christmas song, which was just Joyful, Joyful, We Adore Thee, and everything else was a regular thing. And I was really hesitant because in the past, it's like December, that's the Christmas songs. But the church is starting to get decorated for Christmas in like early November, because Nicole loves Christmas, Ryan loves Christmas, now we have this like Christmas this Christmas campaign that's been going on. 100%.
And so my question to you is, is November too early for Christmas songs in worship? It's no, it's not. You don't think so? Not a full-blown cantata, right? But if you're going to sing.
Like you did. I think you did it very well, which was just uh Enough to people to go, oh, it's Christmas. Yeah, it was like King of Kings. It was King of Kings, which kind of, I don't know how that song became co-opted for Christmas. King of Kings is not a Christmas song, and yet every.
Well, it talks about Jesus. I mean, through the cradle of it is the cradle in the dirt. Yeah, yeah, yeah.
Somehow, these, which is a cool thing, but that got co-opted.
So now that's like a perfect Christmas song you can do at Christmas time. And then we did Joyful, Joyful, We Adore Thee as a tag. But you see people light up. They're like, oh. It's Christmas.
Christmas is here early. Like this. We love it. Yeah, they love it. I'm not going to lie.
When I saw that set list, I was like, Is this real? That is a good way to engage a congregation man. Just give them a Christmas hymn. They love it. They love it.
Anyway, that has nothing to do with the synoptic problem. No, but what we love is talking about the synoptic problem here on the Clear Eatonation. That's right. We love talking about all this stuff. Dr.
Shah, if someone's listening for the very first time, do you want to catch them up to speed? This was actually sent into us by someone noticing that John was different than the other three. And so I actually learned that John has nothing to do with the synoptic problem at all. And something else, since y'all brought up Christmas, we're going to talk about Christmas. Let's do it.
I'll leave it. We're going to talk about Christmas.
So, for the benefit of those who are listening for the first time, whether listening or watching, synoptic problem. Refers to something, I don't like the word problem because I believe the word of God holds together just fine. If there's a problem, it's in our understanding or lack thereof. Synoptics. Synoptic Gospels Matthew, Mark, Luke.
Why are they similar in so many places? But at the same time, why are they different in other places? Last couple of shows, we talked about Jesus' response to little children being brought to him. And the disciples try to shoe him away, shoo them away. And so Matthew 19, Mark 10, Luke 18 have the same account.
And yet there are Subtle and not so subtle differences. in their renditions.
So Matthew, I believe, says heaven. Matthew says heaven, heaven, and then Mark and Luke say God, for of such is the kingdom of God. Let the little children come to me, for of such is the kingdom of God. But then also, Mark says Jesus was greatly displeased. And then he says what he says.
So why are these differences there? Did Jesus say kingdom of God or did he say kingdom of heaven?
So go back and listen to the other two shows because we cover a lot of information that I don't want to go over again and take up time for this from this show. Right, right. But we covered a lot on what could have been the scenario. And in the process, we also. Are explaining to you the various suggestions by scholars over the centuries.
We talked about. You know, way back in patristic times to the Augustinian hypothesis, which is Matthew first, then Mark, then Luke, Mark using Matthew, and Luke using Matthew and Mark. Then we mention the Griesbach hypothesis. Again, Matthew is first. Then look?
and then Mark used Matthew and Luke. Then we talked about uh the The two source hypothesis. Two source hypothesis claims that. It is mark and q. and that Matthew used Mark and Q, and Luke used Matthew I'm sorry, Mark and Q, but Matthew and Luke did not use each other.
That's the two source, also I think referred to as the Oxford hypothesis. Then you had the four source. Here you have The same thing, mark and q. and you have Matthew using mark and q, and Luke using Mark and Q. But then there was a special M source, like John said, Mario source.
Wahoo, yeah. Uh, that Matthew used. And then an L source, which is the Luigi source. Luigi source, of course. And Luke used the L source.
Renowned by scholars the world over. Yes, Luigi source. That becomes the four source. And then last week or last year, we also talked about The two gospel hypotheses. Here you have Matthew, Luke.
And Mark. Right? Matthew, Luke, and Mark.
So it is. Matthew first, Luke used Matthew, and Mark used. Matthew and Luke.
Now, I know people are thinking, come on. Do scholars just say, What hasn't been done? I'm going to go for that. Maybe, but I think. They're also making a lot of arguments based on certain examples.
And none of these arguments, like none of these scenarios have been ridiculous. Like there's some credibility or some at least. Yes, some plausibility to each of them.
So I think they can be like... They come up with one of these scenarios to try to solve the problem of another one. And then they're like, oh, okay, this actually makes some sense and then go down. I like our discussion yesterday, which is that a lot of times they will go down this road and then they'll bring their biases into where it's like, I have to keep chasing this because it must be this. Like I've gone too far to turn back, if that makes sense.
Yeah.
So. Back in patristic times and even up until the 18th, 19th century, people were okay with Matthew being the first because external evidence or patristic evidence favored. Matthew being the first gospel written. But then for various reasons, one I think I think is the impact of evolutionary, Darwinian evolutionary theory about creation, where everything started out small and then progressively became bigger. I think that mindset was applied to scripture.
Where Mark is the shorter of all the Gospels. even the synoptics.
So Mark had to be first. Because you would have to add things, right? You have to add things away. And their argument is it's easy to add than to take away. But, John, you made a case, and I think there are scholars who do not like market priority who make the same case that it is easy to cut back than to add.
Well, it's at least at least talking for today's, that's what we see. We just don't see people who edit works adding onto it. You almost always trim things, cut things. Yeah.
So. case can be made either way. But under the marketing priority, I want to mention one more view, which I mentioned towards the tail end of last show, which is known as the Farrar Golder Good Acre hypothesis, which is mark first. And then Matthew, and then Luke. Where Matthew used Mark, and Luke used Mark and Matthew.
No place for Q. No place for Q. There's also the two gospel hypotheses, which is Matthew, Luke, Mark, as I mentioned a few moments ago. Again, no place for Q. Whether you go with Matthew in priority or Mark and priority, people have said the whole Q thing's got to go.
And just in case you're listening for the first time today, Q is this hypothetical source that Matthew and Luke would have used? Probably. Yeah, that's what they claim. Gotcha.
Okay. Yep.
So now looking at these three Gospels. Do you want to look at some of the similarities that they have in them? Like we looked at the one about the little children, but are there others that we can look at? And that's one of those, I would say. Fall under the triple tradition category.
Triple tradition means all three gospels. Under the synoptic heading, have that account. But then there are differences. Using those differences and similarities, we can. choose one of these theories that we've been talking about.
But how about when It is a double tradition. And double tradition is when Matthew and Luke are similar, but then Mark goes a certain way. And since you all just talked about Christmas and nativity, and Christmas will be here in less than a month, why don't we go? And look at the Christmas account in Mark. Let's do it.
Can you find the Christmas account in Mark? Is it in Mark? I saw Ryan start looking through. I was like, it is not in Mark.
So, what's the very first thing? How does Mark start? Mark starts with John the Baptist. And baptizing Jesus. That's Mark chapter 1.
What happened to the nativity? Yeah, it's not there. What about the shepherds? What about the ship? I mean, Mark does not talk about Christmas.
Do you like him? I mean, I like it because it's the word of God, but do you like Mark? Mark's going to be further down on my list because of it. It's a mark against him. You're definitely.
Oh, very good.
So you're definitely not putting any mark in priority now. No. Because how are you going to have the story of God no Christmas? That's right. I don't know what you're doing.
Hey, is that like we're joking around, but is that like a legitimate case against Mark? Like that there's no Christmas? No. Like that, it's the incomplete story of God? Do people know it's not that.
Those who hold the mark on priority will say that, see, it's kind of cut to the chase. Let's talk about the prophecies being fulfilled. Jesus is doing ministry. We're not worried about him being a baby in the manger and a little boy at the temple and growing up. No, let's get to it.
Hmm. See, I would that that's weird. I mean, I guess I get that, but I would think that Jesus' birth. is so significant because if he's he's either the messiah or he's not. And the consequence, the like specifications of the Messiah's birth are very specific in the Old Testament.
So I would think that.
Well, they believe that plenty of prophecies have been given about his life, his death, his sacrifice, his resurrection.
So, birth, yeah, it's important, but yeah, let's do like they think it goes without saying that that yeah, he was born, okay.
So, but but I would say the birth narratives matter. Not that Mark made a mistake. I think Mark had a different purpose.
Okay. So let's go look at the birth narratives. Sure.
So, John, if you want to find Matthew chapter 1. Mm-hmm. And Ryan, if you want to find Luke chapter 1.
Okay. You start at verse 1? Um, Matthew chapter 1. Uh, what do you have? What is the heading there?
The book. Oh, the heading is the genealogy of Jesus Christ.
Okay, uh, Ryan, Luke chapter one. Luke chapter one, I had dedication to Theophilus. And then what happens after that? And then John's birth announced as Zachariah. Wait, wait, we need to talk about Jesus' birth.
Alright, so nothing there.
Well, we keep going down. Where do we find Jesus' birth? I have Christ's birth announced to Mary.
Okay. In verse 25. In verse 25. Luke 126. Oh.
So it begins to show up later. We're talking about John first.
So Matthew doesn't get into all those. you know, find details, but definitely um Luke does.
So, how about the genealogy? Let's focus on the genealogy between. Matthew and Luke.
Mark doesn't have the genealogy. All right.
So starting in verse 1, the book of the genealogy of Jesus Christ, the son of David, the son of Abraham, Abraham begot Isaac, Isaac begot Jacob, Jacob begot Judah and his brothers, Judah begot Perez. And Zareh, and Zareh by Tamar, Perez begot Hezron, Hezron begot Ram, Ram begot Aminadab, Aminadabon, on and on and on. I didn't know how long to go. It goes all the way up to David, it goes from Abraham to David.
So, how about we go to Luke chapter 3 and verse 23? What do you have there, Ryan? Luke chapter 3 and verse 23 says: Now, Jesus himself began his ministry at about 30 years of age, being as was supposed, the son of Joseph, the son of Helli, the son of Metat, the son of Levi, the son of Melchi, the son of Jannah, the son of Joseph, the son of Madatiah. The son of Amos, the son of Nahum, the son of Elsie, Esli, the son of Nagai, the son of Moth, the son of Manitai, the son of Semai. Are we gonna pause there?
Backwards, all the way back to the son of Adam, the son of God. Yes.
So I guess the question is, uh what is happening here? Yeah, one one starts at Abraham, leaves out Adam to Noah, and everybody up till Abraham. Right. And then it goes to the back. This one goes backwards from Jesus all the way back to Adam.
Right. So, I mean, it is very interesting that the genealogies are backwards. But also, there are elements that are different. There are elements that are different.
So, if you go back to, especially when it comes to David, okay, so see if y'all can find. The portion in Matthew where we come to David, and the portion in Luke where we come to David, and what do you find there?
So it's same genealogy. It says David the king begot Solomon by her who had been the wife of Uriah.
Solomon begot Rehoboam, Rehoboam begot Abajah, and Begajah begot Asa, and then it goes on from there.
Okay. So you have. You have David's name mentioned, right? And you have Solomon's name mentioned, okay? On and on.
Now, how about in Luke's. Luke's genealogy, what is happening there?
So Luke says the son of Nathan, the son of David, the son of Jesse. Oh, wait. Nathan. Yeah.
Nathan? Yeah.
Hold on, man.
So that's the. It's not like a nickname for Solomon, is it? No, that's a no person. No, that's a different person.
So when you look at these genealogies, what you find is that it is for one. One is going through the line of um In my opinion, both of them are coming through the line of Joseph. Mm-hmm. They're not the genealogy of Mary. Right.
Well, it says it in if you go down to verse 16, and Jacob begot Joseph, the husband of Mary, of whom. Was born Jesus, who is called Christ. Right. And how about the other one? It starts with Jesus about 30 years of age, being, as was supposed, the son of Joseph, the son of Heli, the son of Metat, and then both of them are.
Joseph. Joseph. They're not married. Which is weird because Joseph has no biological connection to Jesus. That's the better way to say it, yeah.
Right. Because That is not the main thing. The main thing is that he is the Son of God. Mary is the virgin who carries the Son of God. but he is given the royalty Through Joseph.
From both sides of the family.
So he's from his mom's side and his dad's side.
Okay, so it's of Joseph. Maybe this is the way I was going to frame it, maybe the inappropriate way to frame it. He is. He is legitimate. because he was not born through this biological line.
And yet also He is born through this biological line through Joseph. He is connected to this. It's not a. Inherits the title. He doesn't like bypass the line by being born of a virgin.
Right. Okay. Yeah.
Yeah, he he is royalty from Joseph's side. Both Joseph's dad's side of the family and Joseph's mom's side of the family, they were both royalty. That's why, when it came time. for them to register Where did we go? To Bethlehem.
What was in whose town was Bethlehem? Mary's town. Oh, Davidstown. Right, Davidstown, right. Oh, was it Joseph's town?
Joseph's town. Yeah.
So it's quite amazing. There's so much we fail to take into account. Yes, Mary sacrificed her womb, which is Amazing. Her reputation, so much went into play there. But Joseph.
gave someone who was not his child Both family sides genealogians said. That's you now. You are the king.
So there was a sacrifice there too. Absolutely. There's a big sacrifice there. Absolutely. Wow.
We tend to think that he just sacrificed his reputation for Mary. Yeah, like I took this girl, who's not my wife, but hey, I'm. No, but he also gave Jesus his surname. Yeah.
which was royalty from both sides of the family. And pledged his allegiance to him, to his own son, through that line. Regarded him as his firstborn when he wasn't Joseph's firstborn. That's right. So even though Solomon was the rightful heir to the throne of David, He lived in a manner that was displeasing to God.
Nathan, on the other hand, was Solomon's older brother through Bathsheba.
Okay. So. You know, so just like his namesake, Nathan the prophet, he represented a godly line. There's no, okay, so that's what I was going to ask. By this point, like, we know that.
When it's Jacob and Esau, right? Which brother it is matters because it's going to be through one line and not the other. At this point, Nathan and Solomon. No matter who it comes through, it's still the line, right? It's still this like grand royal line.
Yeah, because David is the one.
So there's no conflict over whether it was through Solomon or through Nathan. Right. Because they're both connected to David. Yeah, Solomon was the rightful heir. Mm-hmm.
Okay, both are Coming through Bathsheba. But Joseph's one side of the family is through Nathan, Joseph's other side of the family. Is true?
Solomon. Amazing. I mean, this is these are details that we Um That we forget. Right. So I'm wondering now, we get to this place where these genealogies are completely reversed from one another.
And Does it does it? How do I want to say this? Does it affect the impact of Jesus' birth one way or the other? Is this a stylistic thing? Or are they trying to communicate two different things?
I think they're communicating two different things. Because go ahead, I'm sorry. No, no, you're good. I was just going to say, Luke goes all the way back to Adam. That's right.
So I guess my question is: is he trying to communicate something different and therefore he doesn't feel the need to Mention the same things that Matthew mentions, or the same people that Matthew mentions. Right, but he's still grounding Jesus into a real live genealogy. Mm-hmm. If I can say live, some of them, most of them are dead. But in a real genuine genealogy.
Right. Yeah.
Yeah.
Does it have to do with intended audience? Could be. Definitely for Luke, he's going all the way to Adam. And Matthew's going only to Abraham, am I right?
So, more Matthew's written more to the Jewish people, and Luke is written more to the Gentiles.
So, still. demonstrating both From boards. Sides of the spectrum, whether the Jewish spectrum or the Gentile spectrum, he is. Full-fledged. Human.
Or man. But also, he's also royalty in every way. You cannot say, oh, well, but on the mom's side, he's not. And it's like, in the mom's side, he is too. Right.
You cannot deny him the throne. Of David. Right. It seems to me and maybe correct me if I'm looking at this. Wrong.
It seems to me like, let's take the genealogies, Luke and Matthew here. They're both focused on different things, but both are correct. Both are true. Is it fair to say that most of the issues, if not all the issues that people will bring up in the synoptic problems are that way? Where they're they're They're focused on different things, but that doesn't mean that one is wrong and the other is right.
Could we say that about pretty much all these issues? Yeah, I think it's that's why we have to struggle with these things. That's why we have to take time to understand. And if your foundation is faulty, or if you're already starting with the presumption that the Bible has mistakes. Or, this is like any other book, then you're going to have the conclusion that, of course, there are mistakes there.
But I am convinced that this book is the word of God. Why? Because of the work that God has done in my life through Jesus Christ. Amen.
So when I come to this book, I'm not coming to find faults, I'm coming to rectify my misunderstandings and my misreadings, the gaps in my understanding. That's why I'm coming to this book.
So I'm not going to force it. I'm going to find the best of scholarship that is available. I'm going to stay as unbiased as possible. Like, I'm not over here saying, it's the same name, guys. It's the same genealogy.
It's just the way you're reading it. Don't worry about that. Let's keep going. No, we stop. We stop and we talked about: wait, this one is going all the way to Adam.
This one is going all the way to Abraham, only to Abraham. Matthew has 41 names, Luke has 77 names. We're not like. You know, sweeping these things under the rug, we're mentioning all these things. Right.
So, do you, so, in your opinion, just you. Do you feel wi would Jesus be born through Solomon's line, Nathan's line? Or is it is it is it that neither one really do matter? David is the is the linchpin there? Uh David is the linchpin, but I think it matters whether he is the rightful heir or the righteous heir.
Okay. Because Nathan was named after Nathan the prophet. He was a better man than Solomon. But Solomon had been chosen by David To be the next king, the wise man. You know, he was chosen by David to follow.
I mean, you know, David had three other children. I mean, I'm sorry. He had three other children with Bathsheba. He has Shemua, Shobab, Nathan, and Solomon. Nathan first.
And then I think Solomon and the others. But anyways, um.
So I would say Nathan was more of a righteous heir.
Solomon was more of a rightful heir. But Joseph's lineage from his mom's side and his dad's side goes straight to Either Nathan or to Solomon to justify that Jesus was, I mean, you cannot take. They're thrown away. Scholars tell us That it you could deny your flesh and blood if you wanted to. But you could not deny your adopted Son.
Because you chose to make this happen. When a child is born to you, I mean, I hate to say that you sort of stuck with it, right? This is from a lineup. This is my daughter. This is what it is.
Yeah, every time I look at Pop-Tarts grounded in my carpet, I feel like, yeah, basically, this happened. But when you go to the, you know, and find that child and you adopt that child, you chose that child.
Now you cannot deny them. Yeah.
That's a good point. That's a great point.
So, adoption. is str a stronger bond than even Your flesh and blood. Because you're chosen. You're chosen. Wow.
You made that choice. To to take them, you cannot now throw them away. Wow. So we are adopted into the family of God. All of the ways that it's hemmed in together.
Wow. Yes.
And somebody may say, ah, you're looking for too many things.
Okay, I'm sorry. I'm sorry. You must have a brainless religion. You just need something very cut and dry, simple, laid out, perfect. You know, ABC, I know, make a sentence out of it.
I don't know. We like complexity. It's not detrimental to our faith. And there are people who will try to make it detrimental to your thing.
So if you, you're, you're going to be in a position one day, we didn't think we would be, but we were in a pizza shop over in what is city's high point. High point. Yeah, high point. Yeah.
You know, we didn't think it was going to happen to us, but it did. There's going to come a day where someone throws that in your face. Look, the genealogies are completely different. Whose son is he? Whose descendant is Jesus?
Is he Nathan or is he Solomon's? And you'll be like, I don't know. I guess it doesn't really matter. You're not going to win that person. Yeah.
But the whole thing of showing that Jesus is both the righteous and the rightful heir and that he is the chosen son of Joseph, that then shows us that we are the chosen children of God, adopted into his family, never to be forsaken. Man, God's word is just so beautiful. That's right. And how it all weaves together and shows us the true complexity of who God is. That's right.
So beautiful. Guys, make sure you join us tomorrow. We're going to continue this discussion. I'm having a blast. Yeah, this is really.
Fantastic. This is really cool. Guys, make sure you join us. Whoever sent this in from Chicago, I'm going to give you a little gift because these are my favorite episodes we've been through. Absolutely.
Absolutely. Thank you to our sponsors for making today's episode possible. And don't forget that if it was your first time joining us, write in and let us know. Let us get to know you a little bit. You're fine, man.
You're fine.
Okay. One more time though, I don't want to. Stupid cough. I'm already upset. And if today was your first day joining us, write in and let us know.
We want to get to know you a little bit. 252-582-5028. Thanks so much for joining the conversation today. Don't forget that you can support us financially at Abinanshah.com forward slash give. That's right.
We love you guys, and we will see you tomorrow on the QB Today show.
