Structured Stories with Eyewitness Control

Structured Stories with Eyewitness Control
Exploring Verbal Agreement

By: Erick Nelson
Last Updated: Monday May 24, 2004

* Print Landscape - Wide Pages *

We have, first, taken a look at the traditional solution to the Synoptic Problem and discovered some apparent weaknesses. Next, we looked at five representative arguments which are thought to be powerfully converging evidence for a direct literary dependence.

Does the kind and degree of verbal identity drive us to posit a direct literary dependence as the only, or at least most plausible, explanation?

Amazingly, both Funk in The Five Gospels and Linnemann in Is There a Synoptic Problem? - scholars who disagree about almost everything else, agree that there is about 50% verbal agreement in the material shared by all three synoptics. The irony, of course, is in the fact that Funk considers this figure so high that it can only be explained by direct dependence, and Linnemann considers the figure so low as to rule it out!

But simply counting vocabulary is not sufficient for this study. What would constitute proof of direct literary dependence?

We should find several sets of extended passages that are exactly verbally identical. The more and longer we find, the stronger the case.

We should have some reason to rule out a common source.

I will concentrate on the first point. Take any parallel gospel translation, where they set the four gospels side by side. What do you find? There are clearly passages completely unique to one of the gospels. There are passages that have common content between two or more gospels. There are passages that have an interesting mixture of verbal similarity and difference, as we saw in the Feeding of the Five Thousand example.

But where are the passages of extended verbal identity?

High Similarity - Still Differences

Let us try to find the very closest examples of verbal identity. The following snippets are among the very best I could find. In a rather quick survey of an English parallel gospels book, I found no passages, not one, that maintained exact identity for full length of a medium-to-long parable or saying. I found no "extended verbal identity", as I would define it.

Second - the best I could find were a few - not many - passages like the one below, the parable of the sower. This has, at first glance, nearly one-to-one verbal identity. But upon closer inspection you can see that there are nagging little differences, for no apparent motive. Why are there any differences at all, and why are they these particular differences?

Mark 4:3-9
"Listen to this! Behold, the sower went out to sow;

and it came about that as he was sowing, some seed fell beside the road, and the birds came and ate it up.

And other seed fell on the rocky ground where it did not have much soil; and immediately it sprang up because it had no depth of soil.
Matt 13:3b-9

"Behold the sower went out to sow;
and as he sowed, some seeds fell beside the road, and the birds came and ate them up.

And others fell upon the rocky places, where they did not have much soil; and immediately they sprang up, because they had no depth of soil.
Luke 8:5-8

"The sower went out to sow his seed;
and as he sowed, some fell beside the road; and it was trampled under foot, and the birds of the air ate it up.

And other seed fell on rocky soil, and as soon as it grew up, it withered away, because it had no moisture.

And after the sun had risen, it was scorched; and because it had no root, it withered away.
And other seed fell among the thorns, and the thorns came up and choked it, and it yielded no crop.

And other seeds fell into the good soil and as they grew up and increased, they yielded a crop and produced thirty, sixty, and a hundredfold.

And He was saying, "He who has ears to hear, let him hear."

But when the sun had risen, they were scorched, and because they had no root, they withered away.
And others fell among the thorns, and the thorns came up and choked them out.

And others fell on the good soil, and yielded a crop, some a hundred-fold, some sixty, and some thirty.

He who has ears, let him hear.

And other seed fell among the thorns; and the thorns grew up with it, and choked it out.

And other seed fell into the good soil, and grew up, and produced a crop a hundred times as great."

As He said these things, He would call out, "He who has ears to hear, let him hear."

Observations. Why?

Matthew uses the plural; Mark and Luke use singular. Could be style preference?

The seed falls either on the rocky: ground, places, soil. Different words in Greek? - why?

Luke says it had no moisture, instead of depth of soil. Why?

Matthew and Luke leave out "and it yielded no crop" - redundant?

Matthew leaves out "to hear", Luke takes it

To me, the most interesting difference is Mark's 30, 60, 100. Luke summarizes to just 100, which might be understandable. By why does Matthew reverse the order to 100, 60, 30?

Now this might seem like nit-picking. But my point is: Does the literary form force us to conclude that the gospels copied each other? I say, No. Even in this, one of the most generous cases I could find, there are still enough differences to postulate, at the very least, a more complex relationship.

Four Cases

CASE 1 - Content Words

Remember that the agreed count of identical words, where Matthew, Mark, and Luke provide the same content, is approximately 50%. First, we must consider how they are counting the words to arrive at 50%. As I looked into this, I ran across a web site that showed how the words could be color-coded to show identity and difference. This site is at:

http://www.mindspring.com/~scarlson/synopt/harmony/

This is the parable of the old and new wine. Look at this example carefully. Words in bold black show verbal identity across the three accounts.

Matthew:

9:17 Neither is new
wine put into old wineskins;
otherwise
the skins burst,
and the wine is spilled,
and the skins are destroyed;
but new wine is put
into fresh wineskins,
and so both are preserved

Mark:

2:22 And no one puts new
wine into old wineskins;
otherwise the wine
will burst the skins,
and the wine is lost,
and so are the skins;
but one puts new wine
into fresh wineskins

Luke:

5:37 And no one puts new
wine into old wineskins;
otherwise the new wine
will burst the skins
and will be spilled,
and the skins will be destroyed.
38 But new wine must be put
into new wineskins.

According this this means of reckoning, there are about 20 verbal identities, and about 15 differences, which is over 50%. But isn't that misleading? This brings up my first rule:

1a. Words entailed by the content don't necessarily count as "verbal identity."

Look at the content of this parable. It, after all, about old wine and new wine, with old wineskins vs. new wineskins! Therefore, in order to have this story at all we need to use the words:

old, new

wine, skins, wineskins

into

And my next point is this. Articles, conjunctions, and other little words are so common and necessary for any writing that they do not necessarily point to literary dependence or verbal identity.

1b. Articles, conjunctions, and other little words don't necessarily count as "verbal identity."

the, and, but, otherwise

... which leave the word "burst" as the only candidate for meaningful verbal identity (for our purposes), and even this would arguably fit as a "content word", since you have to find some word for what happens when the wineskin breaks open.

Given the above, I would view these as non-identical phrases, because the verbal similarities can be explained by content and little words. And, considering the fact that the verbal similarity is explained by the subject matter and trivially common words, but the verbal difference is unexplained, I would classify this as a passage dispoving literary dependence. Why is the wine "spilled" in Matthew and Luke and "lost" in Mark? Why are the skins "destroyed" in Matthew and Luke but not in Mark? etc. etc.

CASE 2 - Quotable Quotes

If anything would be remembered of Jesus' sayings, it would be Famous Sayings, or Quotable Quotes. Secular analogues to this are: "Give me liberty or give me death", or "I have a dream", or "Ask not what your country can do for you", or "The only thing we have to fear is fear itself." Short, punchy, with a point. That is not to say that Jesus always, or even typically, spoke in sound-bytes, but that this is the kind of passage to be remembered verbatim over the years.

We should find cases where the verbal identity occurs precisely at these crucial passages. Look at the accounts of Peter's confession. All generally the same, with minor differences ... but when it comes to "But who do you say that I am?" and "Peter answered him, Thou art the Christ" - it is word-for-word.

Mark 8:27b-29
He questioned His disciples, saying to them, "Who do people say that I am?"

And they told Him, saying, "John the Baptist; and others say Elijah; but others, one of the prophets.

And He continued by questioning them, "But who do you say that I am?"

Peter answered and said to Him, "Thou art the Christ."
Matthew 16:13-20
... He began asking his disciples, saying, "Who do people say that the Son of Man is?"

And they said, "Some say John the Baptist; and others, Elijah; but still others, Jeremiah, or one of the prophets.

He said to them, "But who do you say that I am?"

And Simon Peter answered and said, "Thou art the Christ, the Son of the living God."
Luke 9:18-20
... He questioned them, saying, "Who do the multitudes say that I am?"

And they answered and said, "John the Baptist, and others say Elijah,; but others, that one of the prophets of old has risen again."

And He said to them, "But who do you say that I am?"

And Peter answered and said, "The Christ of God."

Mark 8:31-37
And He began to teach them that the Son of Man must suffer many things and be rejected by the elders and the chief priests and the scribes, and be killed, and after three days rise again.

And He was stating the matter plainly. And Peter took Him aside and began to rebuke Him.

But turning around and seeing His disciples, He rebuked Peter, and said, "Get behind Me Satan; for you are not setting your mind on God's interest, but man's.

And He summoned the multitude with His disciples, and said to them,

"If anyone wishes to come after Me, let him deny himself, and take up his cross, and follow Me.

For whoever wishes to save his life shall lose it; but whoever loses his life for My sake and the gospel's shall save it.

For what does it profit a man to gain the whole world, and forfeit his soul?

For what shall a man give in exchange for his soul?

Matthew 16:21-26
From that time Jesus Christ began to show His disciples that He must go to Jerusalem, and suffer many things from the elders and chief priests and scribes, and be killed, and be raised up on the third day.

And Peter took Him aside and began to rebuke Him, saying, "God forbid it, Lord! This shall never happen to You.

But He turned and said to Peter, "Get behind Me, Satan! You are a stumbling block to Me; for you are not setting your mind on God's interests, but man's.

Then Jesus said to His disciples,

"If anyone wishes to come after Me, let him deny himself, and take up his cross, and follow Me.

For whoever wishes to save his life shall lose it; but whoever loses his life for My sake shall find it.

For what will a man be profited, if he gains the whole world and forfeits his soul? Or what will a man give in exchange for his soul?
Luke 9:22-25
... saying, "The Son of Man must suffer many things, and be rejected by the elders and chief priests and scribes, and be killed, and be raised upon on the third day.

And He was saying to them all,

"If anyone wishes to come after Me, let him deny himself and take up his cross daily, and follow Me.

For whoever wishes to save his life shall lose it, but whoever loses his life for My sake, he is the one who will save it.

For what is a man profited if he gains the whole world, and loses or forfeits himself?

Again, the "Get behind me, Satan!" and "If anyone wishes to come after Me, let him deny himself, and take up his cross, and follow me", etc. are world-famous quotes that people still find easy to memorize. In fact, this is exactly what we'd expect to find in three relatively independent accounts which preserve famous quotes.

And so, second major point is:

2. Quotable Quotes are easy to remember and don't necessarily count as "verbal identity."

Here is another example. Just look at the same features - the similarities and the differences. It even predicts that the story would be memorable!

Mark 14:4-9
But some were indignantly remarking to one another, "Why has this perfume been wasted?

For this perfume might have been sold for over three hundred denarii, and the money given to the poor." And they were scolding her.

But Jesus said, "Let her alone; why do you bother her? She has done a good deed to Me.

For the poor you always have with you, and whenever you wish, you can do them good, but you do not always have Me.

She has done what she could; she has anointed My body beforehand for the burial.

And truly I say to you, wherever the gospel is preached to the whole world, that also which this woman has done shall be spoken of in memory of her."

Matt 26:8-13
But the disciples were indignant when they saw this, and said, "Why this waste?

For this perfume might have been sold for a high price and the money given to the poor.

But Jesus, aware of this, said to them, "Why do you bother the woman? For she has done a good deed to Me.

For the poor you have with you always; but you do not always have Me.

For when she poured this perfume upon My body, she did it to prepare Me for burial.

Truly I say to you, wherever this gospel is preached in the whole world, what this woman has done shall also be spoken of in memory of her."
Luke 12:4-8
But Judas Iscariot, one of His disciples, who was intending to betray Him, said,

"Why was this perfume not sold for three hundred denarii, and given to poor people?"

Now he said this, not because he was concerned about the poor, but because he was a thief, and as he had the money box, he used to pilfer what was put into it.

Jesus therefore said, "Let her alone, in order that she may keep it for the day of My burial.

For the poor you always have with you; but you do not always have Me."

CASE 3 - Key Phrases

Another example is Jesus' pronouncement about what defiles a man. This is an important saying, because it contradicts the traditional view regarding ritual cleanliness. Here, the verbal similarity is clear, but the saying is more complex and thus its actual structure is a bit more fluid.

Mark 7:20-23
And He was saying, "That which proceeds out of the man, that is what defiles the man.

For from within, out of the heart of men, proceed the evil thoughts, fornications, thefts, murders, adulteries,

deeds of coveting and wickedness, as well as deceit, sensuality, envy, slander, pride and foolishness.

All these evil things proceed from within and defile the man."
Matt 15:18-20
"But the things that proceed out of the mouth come from the heart, and those defile the man.

For out of the heart come evil thoughts, murders, adulteries, fornications, thefts, false witness, slanders.

These are the things which defile the man; but to eat with unwashed hands dos not defile the man."

What you find are key phrases or key words in various order. You've got "defile(s) the man" at the beginning and the end. "Out of the heart" and "evil thoughts" carry the message. The lists of evil acts have mostly the same words, but in slightly different order.

These act as mini-Quotable Quotes, easy to remember. Where the entire passage is not uniform, the key terms stand out. Key Phrases are often part of Content, because they are the key thoughts. So our next rule is:

3. Key Phrases are part of Content and are easy to remember, and so they don't necessarily count as "verbal identity."

CASE 4 - Liturgical Phrases

There are cases where certain phrases are judged to be part of liturgy. 1 Cor 11 provides an interesting case, where Paul specifically says that he "received" the teaching about Jesus' words concerning the "body and blood" of the new covenant.

The verbal identities between Mark and 1 Cor 11 are certainly not due to the latter's dependence on the former. They do show a mutual dependence upon the basic concept, and the key phrases, of the liturgy of the early church.

Mark 14:22-25

And while they were eating, He took some bread, and after a blessing He broke it; and gave it to them, and said,

"Take it; this is My body."

And when He had taken a cup, and given thanks, He gave it to them; and they all drank from it.

And He said to them, "This is My blood of the covenant, which is poured out for many.

Truly I say to you, I shall never again drink of the fruit of the vine until that day when I drink it new in the Kingdom of God."
Matt 26:26-29

And while they were eating, Jesus took some bread, and after a blessing, He broke it and gave it to the disciples, and said,

"Take, eat; this is My body."

And when He had taken a cup and given thanks, He gave it to them, saying "Drink from it, all of you;

for this is My blood of the covenant, which is poured out for many for forgiveness of sins.

"But I say to you, I will not drink of this fruit of the vine from now on until that day when I drink it new with you in My Father's Kingdom."
Luke 22:17-20

And when He had taken a cup and given thanks, He said, "Take this and share it among yourselves;

for I say to you, I will not drink of the fruit of the vine from now on until the kingdom of God comes."

And when He had taken some bread and given thanks, He broke it, and gave it to them, saying, "This is My body which is given for you; do this in remembrance of Me."

And in the same way He took the cup after they had eaten, saying, "This cup which is poured out for you is the new covenant in My blood."
1 Cor 11:23-26
For I received from the Lord that which I also delivered to you,

that the Lord Jesus in the night in which He was betrayed took bread;

and when He had given thanks He broke it, and said, "This is My body which is for you; do this in remembrance of Me."

In the same way He took the cup also, after supper, saying, "This cup is the new covenant in My blood; do this, as often as you drink it, in remembrance of Me."

For as often as you eat this bread and drink the cup, you proclaim the Lord's death until He comes."

Which brings me to my fourth point:

4. Liturgical Phrases don't necessarily count as "verbal identity."

CASE 5 - Quotation of Scripture

This should be obvious, but I include it for completeness. In one high-level explanation of the Synoptic Problem, I ran across the statement that the introduction of John the Baptist is a good example of high verbal identity. However, when we look at it we see that this is primarily because they all quote the Old Testament! Obviously, they are depending upon a common source for their wording.

Mark 1:2-6
Even as it is written in Isaiah the prophet,

Behold, I send my messenger before they face, Who shall prepare they way;

The voice of one crying in the wilderness, Make ye ready the way of the Lord, Make his paths straight;

John came, who baptized in the wilderness and preached the baptism of repentance unto remission of sins. And there went out unto him all the country of Judea, and all they of Jerusalem; and they were baptized of him in the river Jordan, confessing their sins.

And John was clothed with camel's hair, and had a leathern girdle about his loins, and did eat locusts and wild honey.
Matthew 3:1-6
And in those days cometh John the Baptist, preaching in the wilderness of Judea, saying

Repent ye; for the kingdom of heaven is at hand. For this is he that was spoken of by Isaiah the prophet, saying,

The voice of one crying in the wilderness, Make ye ready the way of the Lord, Make his paths straight.

Now John himself had his raiment of camel's hair, and a leathern girdle about his loins; and his food was locusts and wild honey.

Then went out unto him Jerusalem, and all Judea, and all the region round about Jordan; and they were baptized of him in the river Jordan, confessing their sins.
Luke 3:3-6
And he came into all the region round about Jordan, preaching the baptism of repentance unto remission of sins; as it is written in the book of the words of Isaiah the prophet,

The voice of one crying in the wilderness, Make ye ready the way of the Lord, Make his paths straight,

Every valley shall be filled, And every mountain and hill shall be brought low. And the crooked shall become straight, And the rough ways smooth; And all flesh shall see the salvation of God.

From A.T.Robertson's Harmony

We see, highlighted in bold blue, the Old Testament passages quoted by the gospel authors. The verbal identity shared between them is obviously attributed to the Old Testament passage itself. Note that the content of all three is similar, but the wording is actually different. And so, my fifth rule is:

5. "Quotes of others sources (such as Old Testament) do not count as "verbal identity."

Conclusion

In this section, I first made the point that finding even striking verbal identity does not necessarily indicate direct dependence unless one can give an account of the remaining differences. The combination of similarities and differences would call for a more complex source.

Then, I questioned the significance of the "50% verbal identity" which has been calculated. Rather than rely upon word counts, I said, it would be more sensible to examine larger units - whole passages of identical wording. There may be some, but frankly I haven't found any.

Where we find the most verbal identities, it is not fair to attribute every identity to literary dependence. In fact, we should go by the principal that every identity that can be easily explained in another way should be excluded from the analysis. I proposed these principles:

1a. Words entailed by the content don't necessarily count as "verbal identity."

1b. Articles, conjunctions, and other little words don't necessarily count as "verbal identity."

2. Quotable Quotes are easy to remember and don't necessarily count as "verbal identity."

3. Key Phrases are part of Content and are easy to remember, and so they don't necessarily count as "verbal identity."

4. Liturgical Phrases don't necessarily count as "verbal identity."

5. "Quotes of others sources (such as Old Testament) do not count as "verbal identity."

Once these passages have been eliminated we might take a look at the percentage of remaining words which are exactly identical. At that point, we might start to build a case for the contention that direct dependence yields the best explanation for the data.

It is clear to me that Direct Literary Dependence simply does not account for the data.

In the next section, I will take a close look at the three sets parallel passages used by Robert Stein to demonstrate verbal agreement. It's clear that there are many, many passages where the differences stand out. But it's important to engage the best arguments, the best examples, and the best evidence in favor of Literary Dependence before we can make up our minds with complete confidence. So let's tackle those.

Mark 4:3-9 "Listen to this! Behold, the sower went out to sow; and it came about that as he was sowing, some seed fell beside the road, and the birds came and ate it up. And other seed fell on the rocky ground where it did not have much soil; and immediately it sprang up because it had no depth of soil.	Matt 13:3b-9 "Behold the sower went out to sow; and as he sowed, some seeds fell beside the road, and the birds came and ate them up. And others fell upon the rocky places, where they did not have much soil; and immediately they sprang up, because they had no depth of soil.	Luke 8:5-8 "The sower went out to sow his seed; and as he sowed, some fell beside the road; and it was trampled under foot, and the birds of the air ate it up. And other seed fell on rocky soil, and as soon as it grew up, it withered away, because it had no moisture.

And after the sun had risen, it was scorched; and because it had no root, it withered away. And other seed fell among the thorns, and the thorns came up and choked it, and it yielded no crop. And other seeds fell into the good soil and as they grew up and increased, they yielded a crop and produced thirty, sixty, and a hundredfold. And He was saying, "He who has ears to hear, let him hear."	But when the sun had risen, they were scorched, and because they had no root, they withered away. And others fell among the thorns, and the thorns came up and choked them out. And others fell on the good soil, and yielded a crop, some a hundred-fold, some sixty, and some thirty. He who has ears, let him hear.	And other seed fell among the thorns; and the thorns grew up with it, and choked it out. And other seed fell into the good soil, and grew up, and produced a crop a hundred times as great." As He said these things, He would call out, "He who has ears to hear, let him hear."

Mark 8:27b-29 He questioned His disciples, saying to them, "Who do people say that I am?" And they told Him, saying, "John the Baptist; and others say Elijah; but others, one of the prophets. And He continued by questioning them, "But who do you say that I am?" Peter answered and said to Him, "Thou art the Christ."	Matthew 16:13-20 ... He began asking his disciples, saying, "Who do people say that the Son of Man is?" And they said, "Some say John the Baptist; and others, Elijah; but still others, Jeremiah, or one of the prophets. He said to them, "But who do you say that I am?" And Simon Peter answered and said, "Thou art the Christ, the Son of the living God."	Luke 9:18-20 ... He questioned them, saying, "Who do the multitudes say that I am?" And they answered and said, "John the Baptist, and others say Elijah,; but others, that one of the prophets of old has risen again." And He said to them, "But who do you say that I am?" And Peter answered and said, "The Christ of God."

Mark 8:31-37 And He began to teach them that the Son of Man must suffer many things and be rejected by the elders and the chief priests and the scribes, and be killed, and after three days rise again. And He was stating the matter plainly. And Peter took Him aside and began to rebuke Him. But turning around and seeing His disciples, He rebuked Peter, and said, "Get behind Me Satan; for you are not setting your mind on God's interest, but man's. And He summoned the multitude with His disciples, and said to them, "If anyone wishes to come after Me, let him deny himself, and take up his cross, and follow Me. For whoever wishes to save his life shall lose it; but whoever loses his life for My sake and the gospel's shall save it. For what does it profit a man to gain the whole world, and forfeit his soul? For what shall a man give in exchange for his soul?	Matthew 16:21-26 From that time Jesus Christ began to show His disciples that He must go to Jerusalem, and suffer many things from the elders and chief priests and scribes, and be killed, and be raised up on the third day. And Peter took Him aside and began to rebuke Him, saying, "God forbid it, Lord! This shall never happen to You. But He turned and said to Peter, "Get behind Me, Satan! You are a stumbling block to Me; for you are not setting your mind on God's interests, but man's. Then Jesus said to His disciples, "If anyone wishes to come after Me, let him deny himself, and take up his cross, and follow Me. For whoever wishes to save his life shall lose it; but whoever loses his life for My sake shall find it. For what will a man be profited, if he gains the whole world and forfeits his soul? Or what will a man give in exchange for his soul?	Luke 9:22-25 ... saying, "The Son of Man must suffer many things, and be rejected by the elders and chief priests and scribes, and be killed, and be raised upon on the third day. And He was saying to them all, "If anyone wishes to come after Me, let him deny himself and take up his cross daily, and follow Me. For whoever wishes to save his life shall lose it, but whoever loses his life for My sake, he is the one who will save it. For what is a man profited if he gains the whole world, and loses or forfeits himself?