I. SYNOPTIC Pam.Em. Our first three Gospels present such striking identities in their order of narrative, and, in their use of word, phrase, and continued statement, and at the same time such striking differences in these respects, that we are compelled to ask what theory of their origin will account for these phenomena. The follow ing theories have been propounded: (a) The Suc cessive Dependence Theory: viz. that the evange lists made use of one or more of the Gospels al ready written, so that one of the Gospels is the first and original Gospel. A second writer used the first, and the third used one or both of his predecessors. This is the oldest view, having practically originated with Augustine, and has been worked out into every possible modification. (b) The Documentary Theory; viz. that all three Gospels to some extent made use of a preexisting written source. This theory came from ideas suggested by Le Clere (1716), and was later taken up by Priestley (1777), and finally definite ly formulated by Lessing (1778). This also has received many modifications, according to the view held as to the character of the original document, and also according to the way this theory was combined with the first. ( c ) The Oral Theory; viz. that all three Gospels made use of the common oral tradition, which had be come fixed by use. This was first suggested by Herder (1797) and Eckermann (1806), but fully formulated by Gieseler (1818). It has also
been variously modified according as there have been held to enter into the oral sources written sources as well, or as the Gospels have been held to use each other along with the common sources, or as the common tradition has been held to have undergone various recensions which the Gospels have used in varied combinations. The conclu sions most generally accepted by critics to-day lie within the general sphere of the Documentary Theory, though they involve elements of each of the others. In substance they are, that behind our present chronological Gospels lay two funda mental written sources—one a collection of the sayings of Jesus, known as the Logic of Matthew, and represented most conspicuously, if not ex clusively, in our first and third Gospels; the other a narrative of the events of Jesus' minis try, which is practically, if not absolutely, iden tical with our second Gospel. Besides these main sources, it is held that the writers of the individual Gospels had access to special sources peculiar to themselves, while the writer of the third Gospel made use directly of the first as well as the second. Quite recently the theory has been advanced in Germany that the two main documents referred to above are not primary in character, but composite results of multiple sources whose origin is often, if not always, im possible to trace.