- To save this word, you'll need to log in. Log In
Definition of synoptic
Examples of synoptic in a sentence.
These examples are programmatically compiled from various online sources to illustrate current usage of the word 'synoptic.' Any opinions expressed in the examples do not represent those of Merriam-Webster or its editors. Send us feedback about these examples.
Word History
Greek synoptikos , from synopsesthai
1763, in the meaning defined at sense 1
Dictionary Entries Near synoptic
synoptic meteorology
Cite this Entry
“Synoptic.” Merriam-Webster.com Dictionary , Merriam-Webster, https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/synoptic. Accessed 13 Aug. 2024.
Subscribe to America's largest dictionary and get thousands more definitions and advanced search—ad free!
Can you solve 4 words at once?
Word of the day.
See Definitions and Examples »
Get Word of the Day daily email!
Popular in Grammar & Usage
Plural and possessive names: a guide, commonly misspelled words, how to use em dashes (—), en dashes (–) , and hyphens (-), absent letters that are heard anyway, how to use accents and diacritical marks, popular in wordplay, 8 words for lesser-known musical instruments, it's a scorcher words for the summer heat, 7 shakespearean insults to make life more interesting, 10 words from taylor swift songs (merriam's version), 9 superb owl words, games & quizzes.
What Is a Synopsis and How Do You Write One?
What to Put In and What to Leave Out
- An Introduction to Punctuation
- Ph.D., Rhetoric and English, University of Georgia
- M.A., Modern English and American Literature, University of Leicester
- B.A., English, State University of New York
In the 19th century, a synopsis was a classroom exercise used for teaching traditional grammar but today, the accepted definition of a synopsis is a general overview of an article, essay, story, book, or other written work. In the field of publishing, a synopsis may serve as a proposal for an article or book. In feature writing and other forms of nonfiction, a synopsis may also refer to a concise summary of a polemic argument or event. You might also find a synopsis included in a review or report.
Fast Facts: Synopsis
Pronunciation: si-NOP-sis
Etymology From the Greek, "general view"
Plural : synopses
Adjective : synoptic
Synopsis vs. Outline
Some people use the terms outline and synopsis synonymously and they really are very similar. When it comes to fiction, however, the distinction is more clearcut. While each may contain similar information, a synopsis is an overview that summarizes the main plot points of the work, whereas an outline functions as a structural tool that breaks the plot down into its component parts.
If you think of it in terms of a novel, the synopsis would be similar to the book jacket copy that tells you who the characters are and what happens to them. It usually also gives readers a feeling for the tone, genre, and theme of the work. An outline would be more akin to a page of chapter listings (provided the author has titled the chapters rather than just numbering them) which functions as a map that leads the reader from the beginning of a literary journey to its final destination or denouement.
In addition to crucial information, a synopsis often includes a thematic statement. Again, thinking in terms of fiction, it would identify the genre and even subgenre, for example, a romance Western, a murder mystery, or a dystopic fantasy and would also reveal something of the tone of the work—whether dark or humorous, erotic or terrifying.
What to Include and What to Leave Out
Since a synopsis is a condensation of the original material, a writer must be sure to include the most important details so that the reader will be able to fully comprehend what the work is about. Sometimes, it's hard to know what to put in and what to leave out. Writing a summary requires critical thinking . You're going to have to analyze the original material and decide what the most important information is.
A synopsis isn't about style or details, it's about supplying enough information for your audience to easily understand and categorize the work. A few brief examples might be permissible, but numerous examples, dialogues, or extensive quotations have no place in a synopsis. Do, however, keep your synopsis true to the plot and timeline of the original story.
Synopses for Non-Fiction Stories
The purpose of a synopsis for a work of nonfiction is to serve as a condensed version of an event, a controversy, a point of view, or background report. Your job as a writer is to include enough basic information so that a reader can easily identify what the story is about and understand its tone. While detailed information is important when telling the larger story, only the information crucial to comprehending the "who, what, when, where, and why" of an event, proposal, or argument is necessary for the synopsis.
Again, as with fiction, the tone and the eventual outcome of your story will also likely come into play in your summary. Choose your phrasing judiciously. Your goal is to use as a few words as possible to achieve maximum impact without leaving out so much information that your reader ends up confused.
- Fernando, Jovita N., Habana, Pacita I., and Cinco, Alicia L. "New Perspectives in English One." Rex, 2006
- Kennedy, X.J., Kennedy, Dorothy M., and Muth, Marcia F. "The Bedford Guide for College Writers." Ninth Edition. Bedford/St. Martin's, 2011
- Brooks, Terri. " Words' Worth: A Handbook on Writing and Selling Nonfiction ." St. Martin's Press, 1989
- How to Write an Abstract
- What Is a Minor Sentence?
- Campaign to Cut the Clutter: How to Recover Hidden Verbs
- Reasons Writers Write
- Writing Prompt (Composition)
- How to Write a Summary (With Examples)
- Learn About Précis Through Definition and Examples
- Bathos: Definition and Examples
- Defining and Understanding Literacy
- Shaping a Positive Attitude Toward Writing
- Writers on Reading
- How to Write a Critical Essay
- personal statement (essay)
- Explore and Evaluate Your Writing Process
- Focusing in Composition
- 12 Writers Discuss Writing
Leticia Mooney. Lightbearer
Pen for hire. Consultant. Coach. Life Reader.
Syntopic reading: What it is and how to do it
You may think you know how to read, but most people don’t.
‘Wait on!’ you’re grumbling. ‘I’m reading this!’
True! Congratulations, you can do the most basic level of reading.
The levels of reading
There are actually 4 levels of reading. The one that you’re taught in school, is Level 1. That’s when you can read a page and make sense of it. I call it ‘basic’ reading; others call it ‘elementary’ reading. It doesn’t matter whether you completed high school or not, the schooling system doesn’t get you beyond basic reading.
Level 2 is Inspectional Reading. If you’re lucky, you went to a high school that taught you how to ask questions of any kind of text, and how to make a book your own. Inspectional reading is a style of reading where you ‘inspect it: You look at all the parts, read the headings and the first sentences, and generally familiarise yourself with the work. If you do do this type of reading, it’s much more likely that you ‘found it’, rather than were ‘taught’ it. In my case, I stumbled upon the technique while coming to grips with an obscene number of texts while in my earliest days at university.
Level 3 is when you become a Demanding Reader. As a demanding reader, you exert effort. You only use this level of reading from texts from which you want to profit (generally speaking). It requires that you ask particular questions of a text, take notes in a particular way, and make the book your own.
Level 4 is the highest and most demanding type of reading of all: Syntopic Reading. When you’re reading at the Syntopic level, you’re working to synthesise material across a discipline (most of the time). Syntopic reading itself has five levels, requires a different approach to inspection, and is the point at which you make the authors work for you rather than you interpreting them .
If you’re interested in this stuff, go and buy (so you can write in) How to read a book by Mortimer J. Adler.
Syntopical Reading: How to do it
If you’re not interested in reading Adler’s book but you want to know how to conduct syntopical reading, then let me have a moment on the moral high-ground: Shame on you. Go and do your homework.
Ah, that’s better.
Now, let’s get cracking.
Syntopical reading has two phases
Phase 1 is Preparation; Phase 2 is Reading.
Preparation phase
During the preparation phase, you compile a bibliography. It requires a deep survey of the field, and you listing them all for yourself in some fashion. Then, you need to understand which books from that list are not just going to be relevant to you, but are both pertinent and fitting.
Reading phase
You can “just read” them. But what’s the point? You’re just doing basic reading if you just read them.
No, no. Syntopical reading is much deeper than this. Here’s how it works:
- Inspect them to find the most relevant passages
- Construct a neutral terminology that you will use. Don’t just pick up the terms that the authors use. This forces the authors to come to terms with you and your goals.
- Create a set of neutral propositions, which is a list of questions that the authors need to answer.
- Spend time defining the issues in the works, by listing all major and minor issues that you identify, on both sides of the subject. You have to interpret the authors, not just copy out what they say. The point is to analyse the work yourself and understand the author’s key positioning, and sometimes that’s not explicit.
- Conduct an analysis of the issue by ordering the questions in such a way as to throw the most light onto the subject as possible.
One of the critical problems, of course, is knowing where to start. If you have access to a syntopicon, like Great Books of the Western World , great! However, even if you do have something like that, there’s a good chance that the world has moved on since it was published.
Nevertheless, if you do have access to a syntopicon, that’s an excellent gateway.
The point of syntopic reading is to come to terms with an entire field, issue, argument, or discipline, for whatever purpose you are chasing. It’s important to keep direct quotes from the authors as evidence for your issues identification, and from the questions that they answer, so that you can demonstrate enough distance; this is what Adler terms ‘dialectical detachment’.
Syntopical reading is the most demanding level of all four levels of reading. It enables you to force authors to come to terms with your subject, question, argument, or issue. Its benefits are not just academic; once you know how to deploy syntopical reading, you will know how to assess any issue, in any text (not just in books), and to be able to construct a narrative out of a field with relatively little effort. In so doing, you grow not just your general knowledge, but also your mind.
Published by Leticia
Similarities and Differences: The Synoptic Problem
In yesterday’s post I mentioned my New Testament class, and that one of the main lessons I’m trying to convey in it is that each of the Gospels has to be read for what *it* has to say. This requires the reader to bracket information that is conveyed in some other Gospel (or that they’ve heard before elsewhere), to see what the meaning of this particular text is.
That shouldn’t be such a hard idea to grasp. If I write a book about Jesus, I don’t expect or want my readers to read my book in light of what some other author said (say, Reza Aslan or Bill O’Reilly), interpreting my views in light of the other person’s views, as if my views, as I state them, are not enough or sufficient. And yet people regularly read the Gospels as if Mark must mean the same thing that John does, or that this passage in Matthew makes best sense in light of that other passage in Luke, and so on. We don’t do that with books generally. So why do it with the Bible?
I think the answer is that we do it with the Bible because (a) historically that’s how it’s always been done; (b) the fact that all these Gospels are bound together in the *same* book encourages us to do so; and (c) for some of us (not including me), the *whole book* is inspired, and so in fact there are not four authors of the Gospels, but one. The One.
But I think it’s a lousy reading strategy, even if someone *does* think that God inspired the whole thing. The meaning of each of these books opens up when you realize that they each are conveying their own distinctive message.
And that’s why I focus so much, at the beginning of the semester, on the differences among the Gospels. These differences, especially the discrepancies, show that the Gospels are each trying to convey different messages.
In my opinion, recognizing the stark differences among the Gospels –in the small details, in the major points, and in the overall portrayals of Jesus – opens up meaning, rather than shutting it down. The differences can go a long way in showing what each author wants to say.
This is clearly seen by some of the methods scholars use to study the Gospels. Since the 1950’s one of the most popular approaches to the Gospels is through “redaction criticism.” A “redactor” is an editor. Studying a “redaction” means studying the editorial changes that an author has made to the sources that he has used in writing up his account. The easiest way to do redaction criticism, then, is to compare an author’s source with his rewriting of his source, to see what he has added to It, what he has taken away from it, and what he has altered in it. For the Gospels, this means it can be of utmost value to decide whether any of the Gospel sources still survives, for the purposes of comparison.
This is one of the reasons why the “Synoptic Problem” is so important to solve. The term Synoptic Problem is a technical term for a specific issue, namely why Matthew, Mark, and Luke have so many similarities – in which stories they tell, the sequence in which they tell them, and the words with which they tell them (verbatim, word-for-word agreements in places!) – and yet also have so many differences. If there were not extensive similarities, there would be no “problem.” But how does one explain these similarities (and these differences)? The answer that has been around for a very long time indeed is that the similarities are there because these books utilize some of the same sources (they, or two of them, are copying) and the differences are there because the authors have altered the sources they have used.
I sometimes have difficulty convincing my students that if two documents have word-for-word agreements(whether a newspaper article, an ancient narrative, or a plagiarized term paper), then someone is copying someone. And so I do a little experiment with them. I did it this last week. I walk into class, and start fussing around in front of the room (of 240 students). I put down my bag; I take out my books; I take off my coat; I put my books back in the bag; I fiddle with the powerpoint; I walk around; I put my coat back on – I do things. Students are puzzled. And then I tell them each to take out a piece of paper and a pen and to write down everything they’ve seen me do since I came into the room.
I then collect four papers, at random, and tell everyone that we are going to do a synoptic comparison. And I read, one by one, each paper, asking everyone else if anyone has a *single sentence* that is just like one of the four. The four are always completely different. And no one – ever, in my 30 years of teaching – has a sentence (or even four or five words in sequence) the same as any of the four.
Then I ask them what they would think if I picked up four papers from the class, and two of them had an entire paragraph, word for word the same. What would they think then? And of course they say “Someone was cheating.” Yes, of course! Someone was copying someone else. But then I ask, what if I didn’t do this exercise today, but I waited forty, fifty, or sixty years, and I didn’t ask you, but I asked four people each of whom knew someone who had a cousin whose wife was next door neighbors with someone whose brother once knew someone in the class to write what happened that day – and they had entire sentences that were exactly alike, word for word?
Inevitably someone cries out from the back row: It’s a miracle!!!
Yup, it’s a miracle. Or someone’s copying someone. Or both. But if someone’s copying someone, it’s important to know who’s copying whom, and once that problem is solved, and if it turns out that one of the Gospels was a source for the other two, then you can see how the other two changed that one, and by doing so, you can figure out what was of utmost importance to them in their retelling of the stories.
More on that anon.
Share Bart’s Post on These Platforms
30 comments.
I love the way you teach your students with your experiment. It was these type of experiences in college that always made the biggest impact on me. Bravo. 🙂
I was thinking about what you said here in regards to the “Synoptic Problem”. Something doesn’t quite feel right to me about this but I’m not sure I can put my finger on it. I think it has to do with the authors of Matthew and Luke would have copied, or more importantly, felt the need to copy the stories about Jesus from Mark and “Q”.
Why would they have copied so heavily from Mark and “Q” instead of just writing about the oral traditions that they had heard?
Any thoughts?
My sense is they copied earlier sources because they considered them reliable and useful for their own accounts.
I was just thinking about this very issue yesterday and then you posted this. “It’s a miracle!” This kind of common-sense explanation is one of the reasons I enjoy your work.
Do you think Matthew and Luke were written to replace Mark, and if so, what’s your take on why Mark never vanished but Q did?
I think Luke was (given 1:1-4). Don’t know about Matthew. Wish I knew why Q disappeared! Mark was seen as apostolic, so it stuck.
“…what if I didn’t do this exercise today, but I waited forty, fifty, or sixty years, and I didn’t ask you, but I asked four people each of whom knew someone who had a cousin whose wife was next door neighbors with someone whose brother once knew someone in the class to write what happened that day…”
Awesome analogy 😀 Do some students really suggest it’s a miracle?? Gave me a good chuckle.
For anyone who wants to study the Synoptic Problem, as its basic and cheapest form, below is two links that may be helpful. One is a book you can buy (not the best translation, but it does its job). Second, Mark Goodacre has made available online his downloadable book on the Synoptic Problem for FREE! Dr. Goodacre does not believe in Q and he gives his examples, along with the majority scholarly view on Q. Great book with examples. Have a highlighter handy!!!!
http://www.amazon.com/Synopsis-Gospels-Revised-Standard-Version/dp/1585169420/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1392224104&sr=8-1&keywords=synopsis+of+the+gospels https://archive.org/details/synopticproblemw00good
Great student copying example and I love the back row “It’s a miracle.” This student example really makes the problem clear. Now, how to determine who is copying whom?
Excellent teaching technique. That’s the kind of lesson that a student never forgets, and finds useful later in life in some seemingly totally unrelated context.
Your “How Jesus Became God,” although not out yet, pre-order sales has put it near top on three Amazon Canada categories!
#2 in Books > Christian Books & Bibles > Jesus > Historical Jesus #4 in Books > Christian Books & Bibles > Jesus > Christology #9 in Books > Christian Books & Bibles > Reference > Criticism & Interpretation
Those wacky Canadians! 🙂
My Old Testament lecturer did a similar play-act (involving two other lecturers) in front of our class of 70 students. The point was to have us appreciate the differences between eyewitness accounts. The result? Not one of our 70 accurately recorded the sequence of events. But that wasn’t the real shocker. The most detailed and comprehensive account, one that looked like a true eyewitness account, written by a well-educated officer in the armed forces, the account that anybody would accept as the most accurate and authoritative … was totally wrong. After that exercise we had a running joke: this document is an eyewitness account, so it’s obviously wrong!
Mr. Ehrman, I’m currently in a conversation with a friend who is very much of the ‘NT Wright’ variety – i.e. not a full fundamentalist, but very much a maximalist when it comes to the gospel traditions. We’re discussing Matthew’s slaughter of the infants (2:16-18). I’ve explained why I don’t think it’s historical: It’s late (~80yrs after the event), no other ancient source mentions it, it’s clearly part of Matthew literary technique trying to portray Jesus as a ‘new Moses’ and to fulfill as many prophecies as he can, and that it is very hard to reconcile with Luke’s account (i.e. if Luke’s birth account is historical [which I also doubt], it makes it very hard to reconcile with Matthew’s) etc. He still maintains that it’s “probably true” simply because he considers Matthew a reliable historical source, and that we know Herod was a badass so it’s not implausible. And of course his “faith experience” helps him too… apparently 😉
But thinking about this pericope has led me to some other questions that I couldn’t easily find answers for online. Was hopeing you could help: What is the first reference to Matthew 2:16-18? I assume it’s a Church Father of some kind? I’ve read a lot of the Church Fathers, though not all, and certainly not extensively. I don’t recall any mentioning it. Also, what is the oldest manuscript of Matthew (complete or fragmentary) that contains Matthew 2:16-18? If you know these off the top of your head, let me know. But OK if you’re too busy!
I think the *question* is whether Matthew is a reliable source, so that cannot, at the same time, provide the *answer* (!) Just because Herod was a badass doesn’t mean he slaughtered the boys in Bethlehem. One needs *evidence*.
Off hand I don’t know who first referred to the slaughter of the innocents, but I would imagine it is in Origen and before him possibly Tertullian or Irenaeus?
Perhaps Justin Martyr – Dialogue With Trypho, 78
“Herod, when the Magi from Arabia did not return to him, as he had asked them to do, but had departed by another way to their own country, according to the commands laid on them; and when Joseph, with Mary and the Child, had now gone into Egypt, as it was revealed to them to do; as he did not know the Child whom the Magi had gone to worship, ordered simply the whole of the children then in Bethlehem to be massacred”
Yes, but he’s getting this from Matthew…..
I strongly agree with you, toejam.
I think this method of teaching is an example of why I think you are really a national treasure or, really a world treasure. To be able to express the logic of your views without all the academic crud which which some would use is refreshing. Some doctors cannot explain an illness to a patient without using Latin terms – they are often speaking but not communicating. I precision and jargon are needed within your field, but when speaking to the layman or students it can get in the way. That you can explain clearly without really simplifying provides a great service in your field.
I have recently reread your book entitled “God’s Problem.” This time it occurred to me that the theodicy problem also applies to all animal species not just humans. In other words, if God exists, then He/She has created a world in which He/She allows a lot of animal suffering. Indeed, the survival of the fittest depends on certain species destroying other species.
“And yet people regularly read the Gospels as if Mark must mean the same thing that John does, or that this passage in Matthew makes best sense in light of that other passage in Luke, and so on. We don’t do that with books generally. So why do it with the Bible?” I think another reason you haven’t listed, is that church-goers assume all the authors of the NT knew each other well, or knew the apostles or their hand-picked successors from whom they got their stories. They imagine all the authors came from a closely knit Christian community. If they had views or information inconsistent with each other, they would have ironed out the differences through their years of interaction. They imagine the authors are like leaders of a large American church or of a denomination (say Southern Baptist). If leaders of the church independently issue booklets about a topic, there is an assumption that they broadly share the same views, expressed with different nuances. Hence to dispel the presumption of uniform views among NT authors, it is necessary to show we have no prior evidence of a common early Christian community where everybody got their stories from the same source.
Good point!
Do matthew and luke reproduce markan wording and ORDER even when the two are at pains to alter mark?
Yes, sometimes.
You have stated previously that historians can not say whether miracles actually have occurred. So what would your reaction be if someone actually suggested a miracle explains why the synoptic gospels are so similar? Presumably you could not refute this.
Yet you seem a lot more dismissive of this possibility than of the possibility that Jesus rose from the dead. What is the difference?
Absolutely right! A historian cannot say that it was not because of a miracle. But if it was a miracle, the historian has nothing to say about it. The BIG problem is that if the similarities were due to a miracle — what does one do with the contradictions?
I am not sure why you would expect there to be no contradictions if a miracle was involved. I can not rate one form of miracle as more probable than another. Maybe leaving some contradictions makes it a lesser, and therefore more probable, miracle. Or maybe the contradictions are there as a test of faith.
Would you agree that historians of early Christianity should try to give a non-miraculous explanation of how belief in the resurrected Jesus arose?
Yup. In fact, I do so in my forthcoming book. And interesting, it’s a non-miraculous explanation that believers could accept on miraculous grounds! 🙂
I agree that the Algonquin Round Table Fallacy (that all gospel writers knew each other and socialized and therefore straightened out any inconsistencies before sending it off to the publisher) is probably the main reason readers of the Bible never notice or even suspect the inconsistencies of the various accounts of the Bible.
But the Anthology Fallacy is a close second reason — and equally important — that the inconsistencies and contradictions are overlooked. Most people read the Bible like an anthology with one Editor In Chief (God who never makes mistakes or allows mistakes). Instead it is like an Internet aggregator that simply collects posts/emails and rewrites the posts/news wires or provides the links to the articles listed.
A third reason is the Truth of the Printed Word Fallacy. If something is printed, especially in a book, it must be true. In modern times people in the U.S. assume certain political propaganda is true simply because somebody has put it in a book. Or on the Internet. Everybody knows that if you read it on the Internet, it must be true. Right!?
YOUR COMMENT:
In my opinion, recognizing the stark differences among the Gospels –in the small details, in the major points, and in the overall portrayals of Jesus – opens up meaning, rather than shutting it down. The differences can go a long way in showing what each author wants to say.
MY QUESTION AND COMMENT:
Why should I care what the authors of the Gospels want to say if their words are not inspired by God?
Its like Solomon said, ‘it’s a striving after wind’
I say it’s a waste of time. Let’s focus on the real inspired words of God!
Leave A Comment Cancel reply
You must be logged in to post a comment.
- Each blog member is allowed to make 2 comments a day.
- Comments posted must be limited to 200 words or less.
- All comments will be moderated by the post author before release.
- Please post respectful comments even when you have strong opinions.
- Please keep your comments relevant to the issues discussed in the post.
- If you would like to ask a question, simply ask it in your comment.
- Please ask only one question per comment posted.
Look up a word, learn it forever.
/səˈnɑptɪk/.
Other forms: synoptically
If you’ve heard of a movie synopsis, which gives an overview of the plot, you can guess what synoptic means: summarizing. At the end of your 900-page treatise on morals, try to give a synoptic conclusion to drive your ideas home.
Synoptic can be broken down to syn- , meaning together, and -optic , meaning view or sight. So something that is synoptic pulls everything together. At the end of a long day touring your great aunt’s ancestral home, hearing endless stories about every dinner party she ever gave and all the people that ever stayed there, you might synoptically comment, “Basically she cooks well and has lots of fancy friends.”
- adjective presenting a summary or general view of a whole “a synoptic presentation of a physical theory”
- adjective presenting or taking the same point of view; used especially with regard to the first three gospels of the New Testament “ synoptic sayings” synonyms: synoptical same closely similar or comparable in kind or quality or quantity or degree
Vocabulary lists containing synoptic
Find lists of GRE words organized by the letters of the alphabet here: A , B and C , D , E and F , G and H , I , K -O , P , Q, R & S , T, U, V, and W .
After his release from prison, Shadow joins up with the mysterious Mr. Wednesday and finds himself embroiled in a war between old and new gods.
Vocabulary.com and the New York Times Learning Network have teamed up to launch a Vocabulary Video contest. Just create a short (15 seconds or less) video that defines or teaches any of the words in the Times' Word of the Day collection, post it online, and submit a link to your video in the Learning Network's comments section . Click on these links to learn more about the eligible words: List 1 , List 2 and List 3 .
Sign up now (it’s free!)
Whether you’re a teacher or a learner, vocabulary.com can put you or your class on the path to systematic vocabulary improvement..
- History & Society
- Science & Tech
- Biographies
- Animals & Nature
- Geography & Travel
- Arts & Culture
- Games & Quizzes
- On This Day
- One Good Fact
- New Articles
- Lifestyles & Social Issues
- Philosophy & Religion
- Politics, Law & Government
- World History
- Health & Medicine
- Browse Biographies
- Birds, Reptiles & Other Vertebrates
- Bugs, Mollusks & Other Invertebrates
- Environment
- Fossils & Geologic Time
- Entertainment & Pop Culture
- Sports & Recreation
- Visual Arts
- Demystified
- Image Galleries
- Infographics
- Top Questions
- Britannica Kids
- Saving Earth
- Space Next 50
- Student Center
- Why is the Bible important?
- What language was the Bible originally written in?
- How is the Bible organized?
- When was the Bible written?
- What does the Bible say?
Synoptic Gospels
Our editors will review what you’ve submitted and determine whether to revise the article.
- U.S. Army Center of Military History - Anzio, 1944
- Academia - The Synoptic Gospels an overview.doc
- Catholic Online - Synoptics
- Minnesota State University Pressbooks - The Synoptics: Mark, Matthew, and Luke
- Brigham Young University - Religious Studies Center - The Synoptic Gospels
- Learn Religions - What are the Synoptic Gospels?
- Eternal Word Television Network - 'Dei Verbum' and the Synoptic Gospels
Synoptic Gospels , the Gospels of Matthew , Mark , and Luke in the New Testament , which present similar narratives of the life and death of Jesus Christ . Since the 1780s the first three books of the New Testament have been called the Synoptic Gospels because they are so similar in structure, content, and wording that they can easily be set side by side to provide a synoptic comparison of their content. (The Gospel According to John has a different arrangement and offers a somewhat different perspective on Christ.) The striking similarities between the first three Gospels prompt questions regarding the actual literary relationship that exists between them. This question, called the Synoptic problem, has been elaborately studied in modern times( see also Biblical literature: New Testament literature ).
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
IMAGES
COMMENTS
Synopticity is: 'Approaching history in the way a professional historian would' by drawing together knowledge, ideas and arguments to show overall historical understanding. (QCA's definition)
1. : affording a general view of a whole. 2. : manifesting or characterized by comprehensiveness or breadth of view. 3. : presenting or taking the same or common view. specifically, often capitalized : of or relating to the first three Gospels of the New Testament. 4.
In the 19th century, a synopsis was a classroom exercise used for teaching traditional grammar but today, the accepted definition of a synopsis is a general overview of an article, essay, story, book, or other written work. In the field of publishing, a synopsis may serve as a proposal for an article or book. In feature writing and other forms ...
Syntopic reading is the 4th level of reading ability. This piece tells you what it is, and how to do it, and how to get there. Posted on: 13/04/2019 Written by: Leticia Categorized in: Life & Lollypops Tagged as: reading. You may think you know how to read, but most people don’t. ‘Wait on!’ you’re grumbling. ‘I’m reading this!’. True!
The term Synoptic Problem is a technical term for a specific issue, namely why Matthew, Mark, and Luke have so many similarities – in which stories they tell, the sequence in which they tell them, and the words with which they tell them (verbatim, word-for-word agreements in places!) – and yet also have so many differences.
TLDR. to cut a long story short idiom. trot. upsum. See more results » (Definition of synoptic from the Cambridge Advanced Learner's Dictionary & Thesaurus © Cambridge University Press) Examples of synoptic. synoptic. It is good to see the literature, which is fairly scattered, receiving synoptic attention. From the Cambridge English Corpus.
presenting a summary or general view of a whole. “a synoptic presentation of a physical theory”. adjective. presenting or taking the same point of view; used especially with regard to the first three gospels of the New Testament. “ synoptic sayings”. synonyms: synoptical. same.
Synoptic Gospels, the Gospels of Matthew, Mark, and Luke in the New Testament, which present similar narratives of the life and death of Jesus Christ. The three works are strikingly similar in structure, content, and wording and can be easily compared side by side.
Synoptic definition: Of or constituting a synopsis; presenting a summary of the principal parts or a general view of the whole.
This essay needs a synoptic final paragraph. definition 2: (often cap.) presenting a subject from a similar, common viewpoint, as do the Gospels of Matthew, Mark, and Luke.