Stevens dates Matthew as being published in AD 31–38 and Mark as AD 38–44. Again, this is on the premise that the resurrection was in AD 30. Stevens notes the parallels between Matthew 24 (the Olivet Discourse) and Paul's letters to the Thessalonians as a basis for arguing that Matthew…
In Against Heresies 3.1.1, Irenaeus correlates Matthew's publication with when Peter and Paul began preaching in Rome, which I argue refers to Rome, the empire. This article reviews a similar usage of Rome, as the empire, found in 1 Maccabees 8.
Leithart addresses three questions which arise because of the similarities and differences between Matthew, Mark, and Luke: "Where do the Gospels come from? Which Gospel comes first? Do any of the evangelists [Gospel authors] use the writings of other evangelists?"
The most popular modern hypothesis for explaining the publication order of the Synoptic Gospel is that Mark was published first, followed by Matthew and Luke, each having used Mark and other sources without having consulted each other. Variations exist on this hypothesis; but consistently, Mark is claimed to have been…
In 1792, John Eveleigh delivered the annual Bampton Lectures at Oxford. At the time, Eveleigh was the provost of Oriel College, one of the colleges of Oxford, and prebendary of Rochester Cathedral. The lectures were published under the title: A View of Our Religion: With Regard to its Substance, With…
A kind review by Pastor Joel Grassi over at Commonwealth Community Baptist Church in the Bronx, NY. Click HERE to download. Also, a nice discussion of the book on his radio program, Walking in the Word, on July 28, 2025 at t=10:30. Click HERE to listen.
Two great interviews recently over at the Bible and Theology Matters podcast, hosted by Dr. Paul Weaver of Dallas Theological Seminary. “Matthew or Mark?: Which Gospel was Written First?” — with Dr. William Varner. (Including a quick mention of my book!) “The Synoptic Problem: Why Four Gospels?” — with Dr.…
Ferry to San Juan Island (WA)
In previous articles, I have illustrated Mark’s tendency towards omitting Matthew’s Old Testament quotations, when covering the same episode as Matthew, while at the same time inserting a few words which allude to the underlying OT passage itself. I am presently aware of six instances of this behavior. Correspondingly, I…
In a prior article it was observed that Oliver Buswell acknowledged that his interpretation of the Olivet Discourse was impacted by his assumptions regarding the date of Matthew’s Gospel. I suggest that publication assumptions can likewise impact one’s interpretation and application of the Sermon on the Mount. Specifically, I suggest…