This study of the Synoptic Gospels requires that the three be harmonized into a single chronological flow of events. This follows the approach commonly displayed in Bible appendices, in which similar or identical events within the Synoptic Gospels are placed side-by-side in chronological order. For this study, the chronology of the Synoptic Gospels have been divided into 160 distinct "Topics". A segment of those 160 Topics, i.e. Topics 23-61, is shown in the following chart to illustrate two characteristics of such an organization. 

1. Topical accounts within the Synoptic Gospels do not appear consistently in all three Gospels. 
   
   Furthermore, a detailed reading of those individual accounts that do appear in more than one, will often reveal unexplained discrepancies between them.
   
   

2. Some of those Topical accounts, clearly descriptive of the same event, do not appear at the same time in the overall chronology. For example, the particular segment chosen in the above chart shows two such examples.

• Why does the Sermon on the Mount appear to be taught at two different times, i.e. first in Topic 23 (Matthew 5-7), and then later in Topic 48 (Mark 3. 13-19; Luke 6.20-49)? 

• Why does Jesus appoint and send His 12 Apostles to preach the Gospel in Topic 42 (Matthew 10.1-42), but then appoints them again later in Topic 47 (Mark 3.7-12; Luke 6.12-19), though does not send them until still later in Topic 61 (Mark 6.13-19; Luke 9.1-6)? 

These kinds of apparent flaws have engendered consternation by serious Bible students, and caused Bible critics to charge that  the individual accounts were (a) inaccurate or incomplete in the first place, (b) manufactured at some later time, or (c) corrupted through the centuries. Of course, if any of these criticisms were valid, the Synoptic Gospels could no longer be read as the inspired product of the Holy Spirit.

The difficulties just identified have prompted scholarly examinations of the individual Synoptic Gospel accounts, searching for ways to maintain the inerrancy of Scripture. Many Bible scholars have conducted such efforts over the years, with convincing explanations for many of the anomalies. This is especially true with respect to apparent disparities in the accounts of those events during the final days of Jesus' ministry, following the Olivet Discourse, including His betrayal, crucifixion, burial, and resurrection.

However, these efforts do not negate the even more basic question: Why is there more than one Synoptic Gospel at all? After all, Jesus lived just one life, so why couldn't all of the important events have been placed in just one chronological account? Surely, such a simplification would have been easier to read, and would have greatly reduced the sniping by Bible skeptics who unceasingly search for alleged conflicts. In fact, would this not have been a more desirable literary arrangement for the Holy Spirit to most clearly set down the life of Jesus Christ?

Possible answers to this question have been pursued generally along two lines of reasoning. 

1. One is to suppose that Matthew, Mark, and Luke provide confirmation from three independent witnesses. 

2. The other is to suppose that the three Synoptic Gospels are actually written to three different groups of people, each describing Jesus Christ in a different way.

Surely the first line of reasoning would be strengthened if the three Gospels produced an obviously consistent result, however the diversities shown in the above "Harmony of the Synoptic Gospels" appear to indicate just the reverse of that assumption. Therefore, let's consider the possible merits of the second approach. 

Suppose that the Holy Spirit provided three Synoptic Gospels, because the Lord wanted to address three different groups of people with similar, but distinct, messages about the good news of the Lord's coming. In this regard, conservative Bible scholars generally agree that Matthew appears to be directed to Israel, whereas both Mark and Luke appear to be intended for the Gentiles. Certainly, if God planned to deal with each of three groups in somewhat different ways, and at different times, this might enable a rationale to explain the distinctions noted. At least this idea would make sense with respect to Israel, because it is clear that they reacted to the presentation of the Gospel in a manner quite different from the Gentiles. Their general response to Jesus Christ was one of rejection, with the consequence that they were condemned by the Lord, and eventually expelled from the Land for almost 1900 years. In contrast, history records that literally hundreds of millions of Gentiles have believed, and have received the new Covenant of Grace during the Times of the Gentiles.

If the Synoptic Gospels are actually intended for the three groups of people, a more detailed study of each of those Gospels might help us identify who they are. Accordingly, here are summaries of each of the Gospels, along with specific Scriptures that appear to be relevant to this assumption.

MATTHEW

• Matthew begins with a genealogy tailored for a Jewish audience, beginning with Abraham, proceeding through the list of the kings of Judea, and ending with Jesus Christ (Matthew 1.1-17). As such, it establishes Jesus as a legal descendant of David through His adoptive father, Joseph, thereby identifying Him as the long expected King of the Jews. 

• Matthew fulfills 14 Old Testament prophecies about the coming of the Messiah, more than either Mark or Luke, therefore is most appropriate for Israel. 

• Matthew describes Jesus Christ as the one who fulfilled the Law, and contains the most detailed account of the Law contained in the Synoptic Gospels. 

• Matthew describes Jesus Christ as "King" in the following ways: 

• Only Matthew records His genealogy through all of the kings of Judea from David, thereby certifying that Jesus is in the kingly line. 

• Only Matthew records His worship by the Magi, when they asked "where is He who has been born King of the Jews? (Matthew 2.2)

• Only Matthew describes Him as the King who will Judge the nations (Matthew 25.31-34).  

• Matthew is the 40th book in the Bible, thereby defining it to be the Gospel of testing for Israel. 

• The Great Commission recorded in Matthew is to "Go therefore and make disciples of all the nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit, teaching them to observe all things that I have commanded you; and lo, I am with you always, even to the end of the age" (Matthew 28.20).

On the basis of this broad summary, the Gospel of Matthew appears to occur at the correct place in the Scriptures, and to contain the kind of material most appropriate for a Jewish audience. It presents Jesus Christ as Israel's promised Messiah King, and offers the Gospel of the Kingdom to them. Matthew frames the promise to the readers as the "Kingdom of Heaven" in 33 separate texts, a term understood to be the sum total of all the prophecies of the Old Testament concerning the coming of the King from Heaven to set up a Kingdom on this earth with Heaven's standard (Daniel 7.27). Unfortunately, Israel fulfilled their first century role by rejecting their Messiah, as  predicted in the Old Testament. Once that rejection became an established fact, the Lord's plan for the Gentiles could be fulfilled. Therefore, the remaining two Synoptic Gospels should be directed to people groups not of Israel.

MARK

• Mark declares that this is "The beginning of the Gospel of Jesus Christ" (Mark 1.1). This was the Gospel that was completed by Paul, the Apostle to the Gentiles for the Church Age (Romans 1.16). 

• Mark contains no genealogy related to an earthly Kingdom, consistent with the idea that these readers, upon receiving Jesus Christ, would be destined for a Heavenly inheritance. 

• Mark contains no prophecies concerning the coming of Messiah, but only prophecies concerning the Gentiles and final Judgement. 

• Mark does not mention the Law, an appropriate omission if it is to have no authority over those who receive the new Gospel of Grace. 

• Mark omits any mention of the prophesied "King", except in scorn. 

• Mark is an action Gospel of deeds rather than theology, recording 20 of 36 miracles contained in all three of the Synoptic Gospels. Certainly, miracles would have the greatest power to attract Gentiles who have no understanding of Biblical genealogies, the Law, or Old Testament prophecies concerning the coming of Messiah. 

• The "Great Commission" recorded in Mark is to "Go into all the world and preach the Gospel to every creature. He who believes and is baptized will be saved; but he who does not believe will be condemned" (Mark 16.15-16).

It is seen that the Gospel of Mark emphasizes those attributes of Jesus Christ that would attract Gentiles to Him, while de-emphasizing His connections with the Old Testament, for which they would be uninformed. Mark presents Him, not as King for the Messianic Kingdom, but as Servant with all of the power of God. The promise offered to these readers is the "Kingdom of God", a term used in Scripture to describe the universal Kingdom, not limited to just the earthly Millennial Kingdom, but to one that also includes Heaven. As such, this Gospel prepares these Gentile readers for a Heavenly inheritance, and to a Savior whose objectives for His people are completed in Paul's letters to the Church during the Church Age.

LUKE

• Luke contains a genealogy from Jesus back to Adam, thereby showing that Jesus was a man of earthly lineage. Unlike the Matthew genealogy that relates Him to Israel's promised Messiah through Abraham and the kingly line, this genealogy relates Him to all humanity, and shows Him to be the fulfillment of the "proto evangelum" recorded in (Genesis 3.15) for all mankind. 

• Luke contains no prophecies concerning the coming of Messiah, but only prophecies concerning the Gentiles and final Judgement. 

• Luke does include provisions of the works of the Law in (Luke 6.20-49), indicating that the readers will be subject to some of its provisions. 

• Luke omits any mention of the prophesied "King", except in scorn. 

• Luke refers to Jesus in human terms, as the "Son of Man", and describes Him in many stories and illustrations as the Friend of sinners. 

• The Great Commission recorded in Luke is that "repentance and remission of sins should be preached in His name to all nations, beginning at Jerusalem" (Luke 24.47).

The Gospel of Luke does not emphasize miracles like the Gospel of Mark, but stresses another attraction, i.e. He is a compassionate Friend. Again, His connection with Old Testament prophecies of the Messianic Kingdom are absent, for Gentiles would be uninformed concerning those promises. However, portions of the Sermon on the Mount, concerning rules for an approved life, are reiterated (Luke 6.20-49), suggesting that aspects of the Law will also have application to these readers. As in the case of Mark, the readers of Luke are told of the "Kingdom of God", a term used in Scripture to describe the universal Kingdom, not limited to just the earthly Millennial Kingdom.

However, the disparate records given of the Great Commission by Mark and Luke suggest another striking distinction between these two Synoptic Gospels. Notice that the key word in Mark's Great Commission is "believe", i.e. "faith", with no mention of "repentance". Conversely, the key word in Luke's Great Commission is "repentance", with no mention of "believe". The fact that this distinction is generally maintained throughout both of these Gospels raises an issue, because the two words convey different meanings, as seen by the following definition.