Student’s Name
Professor’s Name
Course
Date
The gospel of Mathew greatly borrows a lot of its narration from Mark thus pointing at copying and editing by Matthew. A historical perspective of the books shows that Mark was written almost forty years after the death of Jesus. It would take another 15 years for Mathew to be written (Muddiman and Barton, p 56). Mathew’s writing were said to borrow heavily from Mark and other existing texts regarding the life of Jesus.
Even though relying on other sources, Mathew is regarded as having copied much or edited Mark’s work to come up with his own gospel. Both authors follow a similar line of events in describing Jesus’s life. Another significant feature found in Matthew is the scattering of phrases used in Mark. While Matthew did not mind following Mark’s ordering and arrangement, he altered phrases and passages already used in Mark as he wished. The changing of Mark’s phrases to elicit different meanings is seen in the scattering of different words and phrases used by Mark in several parts of Matthew. Likewise, some of the differences between the two books are seen in Matthew’s omission of some verses or events that occurred in Mark. The two books seem to follow similar events until a point where Matthew decides to omit some events or verses. Also, another difference is seen in Matthew adding some verses to expand his book from that of Mark. Matthew’s omissions and expansions are thus seen as a means to diverge from Mark’s book. To be specific, only Mathew 1 and 2 are attributed to be Matthew’ original works. Chapters 3 and 4 are highlighted as directly following Mark. However, the later chapters are all depicted as being some form of modifications either by editing, expansion or use of Mark’s work.
A comparison of several chapters and verses from two books shows Mathew copying Mark’s order of events and explanation. One such comparison is seen in Mark 9:2-13 and Matthew 17:1-13. The two book’s explanation on the transfiguration of Christ show similarity. The first verse in both books state “And after six days Jesus took with him Peter and James, and John his brother, and led them up a high mountain by themselves.” The only difference in the two books is seen in Matthew referring to John as “the brother” highlighting a slight addition to a similar statement. Similarity in the second statements from both versions is interrupted by a slight difference from what originally seem to be similar statements. Both books say “And he was transfigured before them”. However the verse’s ending differ in Mark stating that “his clothes became radiant, intensely white, as no one on earth could bleach them” with Matthew opting for the words “his face shone like the sun, and his clothes became white as light.” The two chapters thus clearly illustrate Matthew writing his book by directly copying Mark’s order and even words. Also, Matthew edits Mark’s work by changing phrases.
Another case of Matthew’s editing is depicted in Mark 6: 45-52 and Matthew 14:25-27 and 32-33 which both describes how Jesus walked on water. Mark states in verse 48 that “and about the fourth watch of the night he came to them, walking on the sea. He meant to pass by them, 6.49 but when they saw him walking on the sea they thought it was a ghost, and cried out.” While Matthew uses the exact words in verse 25, an omission is seen in the statement “He meant to pass by them.” Likewise, verse 31 of the same chapter in Matthew states that Jesus immediately reached out his hand and caught him, saying to him, “O man of little faith, why did you doubt?” However, there is no such verse in Mark which talks of Jesus reaching out to Simon Peter and commenting on his faith. Matthew’s words thus show his expansion to Mark’s book. Another omission on the part of Matthew is seen in the verse 51 of Mark saying “And he got into the boat with them and the wind ceased. And they were utterly astounded.” Despite being similar to that of verse 32 in Matthew, the later stops at “ceased” omitting the rest of Mark’s verse. Likewise, the last verses of both books greatly contrasts each other. While Mark talk of the disciple’s hearts being hardened, Matthew says that they were elated and worshiped Christ as the true son of God. The chapter’s events therefore illustrate great similarity by the two books in explaining the same event. Matthew’s edit of Mark’s work is proved in expansion and omission of certain verses found in the gospel of Mark.
In conclusion, it is evident that the gospel of Matthew is directly derived from that of Mark. Matthew is portrayed as strictly following the book of Mark in writing his own book and deploying several skills to elicit some form of differences between them. Particularly, omission and expansion of certain verses in Mark accompanied by changing phrases are regarded as the major ways through which Matthew edited the gospel of Mark to come up with his own book.
Works Cited
Martin, Dale B. New Testament History and Literature. Yale University Press, 2012.
Muddiman, John, and John Barton, eds. The Gospels. Oxford University Press, 2010.