3
Farrer Hypothesis
Summary
The Synoptic problem, which aims to explain the literary relationship between the three
Synoptic Gospels - Matthew, Mark, and Luke - has been a longstanding issue in biblical studies.
Over the years, various hypotheses have been proposed to account for the similarities and
differences among the Gospels, with the Farrer hypothesis and the two-source hypothesis being
two of the most prominent and influential.1
The Farrer hypothesis, named after Austin Farrer, posits that Mark was the first Gospel
written, and that both Matthew and Luke used Mark as their primary source. It further suggests
that Luke used Matthew as another source, thereby eliminating the need for the hypothetical
source, Q.2 In contrast, the two-source hypothesis, also known as the four-document hypothesis,
agrees that Mark was the first Gospel written, and that both Matthew and Luke used Mark as one
of their sources. However, it posits the existence of another source, Q, which contains the
sayings and teachings of Jesus that are shared by Matthew and Luke but not found in Mark. The
two-source hypothesis also proposes that Matthew and Luke had their own unique sources,
called M and L, respectively, which account for the material that is exclusive to each of them.3
1 Goodacre, Mark. The Synoptic Problem: A Way through the Maze. 13-33. Sheffield, England: Continuum International Publishing Group -
Sheffie, 2001.
2 Ibid. 20-24
3 Stacy, Robert Wayne. “The Four Gospels,” 2022.
4
The Farrer hypothesis is less coherent, as it implies that Luke was dependent on Matthew,
yet he changed or omitted some of the material from Matthew. The two-source hypothesis has
more external and internal support than the Farrer hypothesis, as it aligns with the majority of the
early church tradition and the testimony of the church fathers. The Farrer hypothesis contradicts
the majority of the early church tradition and relies more on subjective and speculative analysis.4
Historically, the two hypotheses suggest different sources, dates, and contexts for the
composition of the Synoptic Gospels. The Farrer hypothesis implies that the Gospels were
written in a relatively short span of time and reflect the historical situation and perspective of the
early church in the first century.5 The two-source hypothesis implies that the Gospels were
written in a longer span of time and reflect the historical situation and perspective of the later
church in the second century. Literary and theological implications also differ between the two
hypotheses, with the two-source hypothesis allowing for greater independence and diversity
among the Gospel writers, while the Farrer hypothesis implies a greater degree of dependence
and homogeneity.6
Hence, the Farrer hypothesis and the two-source hypothesis offer distinct explanations for
the literary relationship between the Synoptic Gospels.7 While both hypotheses have their
strengths and weaknesses, the choice between them ultimately depends on the evaluation of the
available evidence and the preference of the scholar or reader. The significance of this issue in
the field of biblical scholarship cannot be overstated, as the Synoptic Gospels continue to be a
primary source of information and inspiration for millions of people around the world.
4 Ibid. 20-30
5 Ibid. 20-30.
6 Ibid. 25-30.
7 Ibid. “The Four Gospels”.
5
Application
When looking at a new biblical passage, situation, or context in light of the Farrer
Hypothesis, it is important to consider the ways in which the Gospel writers may have used their
sources to convey their message. One example of this can be seen in the Gospel of John, which is
often considered to be the most different from the Synoptic Gospels in terms of content and
style.8(89)
In John 4:1-42, we see the story of Jesus and the Samaritan woman at the well.9 This
story is unique in that it is not found in any of the Synoptic Gospels, which suggests that John
may have used a different source for this story. However, when we examine the story in light of
the Farrer Hypothesis, we can see that John may have still been influenced by the Synoptic
Gospels.
For example, John 8:1-11 shared the story of the woman caught in adultery, which will
be compared to the good Samaritan woman.10 Both stories involve Jesus interacting with a
woman who has been marginalized by society and both stories involve Jesus offering forgiveness
and salvation. Additionally, both stories have been criticized by some scholars as being later
additions to the Gospel of John, which suggests that they may have been influenced by the
Synoptic Gospels.
8 Walter A. Elwell, Robert W. Yarbrough. “The Gospel of John.” In ENCOUNTERING the NEW TESTAMENT A HISTORICAL AND
THEOLOGICAL SURVEY, 93–102. Ada, MI: Baker Academic, 2013.
9 Patterson, Dorothy Kelley, and Rhonda Harrington Kelley. The Study Bible for Women: NKJV Edition, Purple/Gray Linen. Edited by Holman
Bible. Holman Bibles, 2016.
10 Ibid. Holy Bible.
6
The evidence strongly suggests that John used Mark as a source for his stories and then
adapted them to fit his own unique theological perspective. This is particularly evident in John's
version of the story of the Samaritan woman at the well, where he emphasizes themes of living
water and worship that are not present in the Synoptic Gospels. It is clear that John was not
simply copying Mark, but was adding his own unique perspective to the story, making it a more
powerful and persuasive account of Jesus' teachings.11 By doing so, John was able to create a
more compelling narrative that resonated with his audience and helped to establish his own
distinct voice in the early Christian tradition.
In conclusion, when we apply the Farrer Hypothesis to a new biblical passage, situation,
or context, it is important to consider the ways in which the Gospel writers may have used their
sources to convey their message.12 By examining the similarities and differences between the
Synoptic Gospels and other biblical texts, we can gain a deeper understanding of the ways in
which the Gospel writers used their sources to create their own unique theological perspectives.
11 Ibid. “The Gospel of John.” 97-100.
12 Ibid. “The Four Gospels,”
7
Bibliography
Goodacre, Mark. The Synoptic Problem: A Way through the Maze. 13-33. Sheffield, England:
Continuum International Publishing Group - Sheffie, 2001.
Stacy, Robert Wayne. “The Four Gospels,” 2022.
Patterson, Dorothy Kelley, and Rhonda Harrington Kelley. The Study Bible for Women: NKJV
Edition, Purple/Gray Linen. Edited by Holman Bible. Holman Bibles, 2016.
Walter A. Elwell, Robert W. Yarbrough. “The Gospel of John.” In ENCOUNTERING the NEW
TESTAMENT A HISTORICAL AND THEOLOGICAL SURVEY, 93–102. Ada, MI: Baker
Academic, 2013.
Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)
