Join Logos Made Flesh! ►► http://bit.ly/1oLN0Ot

Which gospel should you read first?

The odds are you won't turn to the Gospel of Mark. That’s because, in contrast to Matthew, Luke and John, Mark has so little to offer. It’s the shortest Gospel by far, only 16 chapters. By word count, that's about half the size of the other three. And even the stories Mark tells are nothing special. 90% of them are found in Matthew’s Gospel and 40% are in Luke. So if you read Matthew and Luke you pretty much have Mark.

But contrary to what you might think, Mark is actually the best place to begin reading the gospels. Because Mark was most likely the first gospel written.

The substantial agreement between Matthew, Mark, and Luke, known as the Synoptics because they share this remarkable similarity, indicates that one or more of them copied from one or more of the others. And in almost every instance, Matthew and Luke appear to build on Mark’s foundation.

Mark’s fewer stories, for instance, suggests that Matthew and Luke added to it. Think about it. Which is more likely? That Mark cut stories and sayings of Jesus that he found in Matthew and Luke or that they added stories and sayings that Mark didn’t include?

The same is true for Mark’s poorer writing style and harder sayings. Mark uses colloquialisms, Aramaic terms (the original language of Jesus) and redundancies where Matthew and Luke do not. Mark also records apparent limitations of Jesus’ power and repeatedly emphasizes the stupidity of the disciples. Matthew and Luke, by contrast, are much more positive and thus appear to both improve and soften their source.

All this means, by reading Mark first, you’ll not only understand where, how and why Matthew and Luke add their unique spin to Mark, you won’t find Mark redundant or stale by comparison. By reading Mark first, you’ll encounter this story with the freshness and distinctiveness with which it was meant to be read.

See you next time.