Markan priority is the hypothesis that theGospel of Mark was the first written of the three Synoptic Gospels, and that the two other synoptic evangelists, Matthew and Luke, used Mark's Gospel as one of their sources. The theory of Markan priority is today accepted by the majority of New Testament scholars, who also hold that Matthew and Luke used a lost source of Jesus's sayings called Q. Their conclusion is largely based upon an analysis of the language and content relationship between the various books. Conservative scholars, however, say the Markan priority hypothesis is not consistent with internal evidence and with the testimony of the church fathers.

History

This subject is closely related to the topic of "synoptic gospels", so it may be useful to review that article before reading the following text

Before the

Storr's idea met with little acceptance at the time, with most scholars favoring either Matthean priority, under the traditional Augustinian hypothesis, or the Griesbach hypothesis, or a fragmentary theory. In the fragmentary theory, it was believed that stories about Jesus were recorded in several smaller documents and notebooks and combined by the evangelists to create the synoptic gospels.

Working within the fragmentary theory, Karl Lachmann (1835) compared the synoptic gospels in pairs and noted that while Matthew frequently agreed with Mark

In 1838, two theologians, Christian Gottlob Wilke and Christian Hermann Weisse, independently extended Lachmann's reasoning to conclude that Mark not only best represented Matthew and Luke's source but also that Mark was Matthew and Luke's source. Their ideas were not immediately accepted, but Heinrich Julius Holtzmann's endorsement in 1863 of a qualified form of Markan priority won general favor and is still the dominant hypothesis today.

Contemporary scholars who argue for the priority of Mark often point out the following:

• Chronologically, Matthew and Luke follow Mark most of the time. When Matthew disagrees with Mark's chronology, Luke often agrees with Mark. When Luke disagrees with Mark's chronology, Matthew will always agree with Mark. Matthew and Luke rarely ever disagree together against Mark. Additionally, whenever Luke's chronology does not follow Mark's, there are good practical reasons for the deviation while Mark's deviation from Luke often leads to a more disjointed storyline.
• Whenever Mark and Matthew agree, Mark often has a more verbose version. It is argued that it is unlikely that Mark was inserting details into many Matthean quotes while leaving out huge events such as the birth of Jesus.
• Mark's Greek is more primitive than the other Gospel writers. Often, Luke or Matthew will state a parallel Jesus quote much more eloquently than Mark.
• Mark's Jesus often remarks on contentious issues for the early christians. For example, Mark's Jesus chastises someone for calling him good stating, "No one is good but God." Matthew, on the other hand, amends the statement to allow the possibility of Jesus' divinity.

See also