The Diatessaron and Its Relevance to the Study of the Pentateuch

The Christian New Testament begins with the story of Jesus—actually four versions of the story of Jesus, each more or less complete. These accounts of Jesus’ life, the gospels (meaning “good story”), are each named after its purported author, Matthew, Mark, Luke and John.^[1] The gospels each tell the narrative of Jesus’ life and ministry in theological terms. Three of these gospels—Matthew, Mark, and Luke—are very similar, and are referred to as the Synoptic Gospels; John is quite different.

The Diatessaron: A Brief History

The Diatessaron is a harmonized gospel, taking all four of the standard gospels and weaving them into one story. (The word actually means “of the four” in Greek.) Although for a long time scholars believed there was one original Diatessaron, authored by a man named Tatian in the second century C.E.,^[2] most likely several gospel harmonies or Diatessarons were penned between the second and the fourth centuries C.E.^[3] The Diatessaron(s) became the pre-eminent Gospel text(s) in the Syriac^[4] speaking churches of the east until the 5th century.^[5]

Things began to change when the Theodoret (423-457), bishop of Cyrrhus in Syria, moved east. As a Greek-speaking western bishop, he found the idea of a harmonized gospel to conflict with the (western) ideal of four separate gospels. Therefore, he confiscated any harmonized versions in his diocese and replaced them with the separate four.

Despite Theodoret’s replacement of the harmonized gospels as part of the public readings (the lectionary, similar to the Jewish Torah-reading) with the standard gospels, the Diatessaron remained important in private devotional use among the populace, and even the teachers of these churches, well into the 10th century, even as it lost canonical status.^[6]

Why Were These Harmonies Written?

Although we have no written record of why people wrote diatessarons, no preface to any of our manuscripts that explains the rationale for composing such a text, I would suggest that it was written for both pedagogic and public relations reasons. A harmony, namely a single text that brings together the disparate gospel stories, is easier to digest and could get the message out in a simpler and direct fashion to the masses, as well as avoid the pitfalls of the inconsistencies between the texts, which were already noted and critiqued by early Christianity’s opponents.^[7]

Who first had the idea to produce a Diatessaron, and whether it was a person or a community, is unknown. Either way, this idea had ancient precedents. Harmonization, as a literary concept existed in the ancient world such that our author(s) worked within an already known literary framework, and seemingly felt no impunity in reusing other earlier texts.^[8]Scholars note that the four individual gospels are themselves harmonized from earlier texts. Moreover, the Gospels are interpretive texts, meaning they interpret passages from the Hebrew Bible as part of their narratives, to support the veracity of their narrative, citing those texts as needed. The concept of harmonization, I think goes hand in hand with interpretation.^[9]

The Harmonistic Solution

The harmonistic version, by starting (and ending) with John, the more philosophical gospel, and deleting the human genealogies (lineage from Adam, Abraham or David), streamlines the early Christian message by emphasizing Jesus’ divine nature over his human nature. Yet, since the Orthodox church eventually wanted to emphasize Jesus’ full human AND divine natures, those harmonies that did not include the human genealogies were considered suspect by the likes of Theodoret. Moreover, in Theodoret’s day, the fifth century, Christological controversies dominated the Christian elite’s theological agendas. Those harmonies without the genealogies, and perhaps all harmonies by association, became “heretical” (were suspected of demoting Jesus’ human nature) and in need of confiscation.

The Method of Redaction in the Diatessaron

Since we have the four gospels and we know what is in them, study of the Diatessaron offers important insights into how composite texts are created.^[10] Nevertheless, the two disciplines share many similarities, since both are studies of composite texts.

George Foot Moore, in 1890, was the first modern scholar to attempt to compare the methodology and content of the Diatessaron for the benefit of Hebrew biblical scholars. In many ways his pioneering work remains valid, as long as the reader considers that he was studying but one version, the Arabic, out of many.^[11] From his examination, Moore determined that about a quarter of the total number of verses over the four Gospels ended up on the cutting room floor.^[12]

The redactor of the Arabic Diatessaron, Moore argues, follows the framework and chronology of Matthew as his overall organizing principle. Insofar as how he decided which parallels to include and which to cut, the redactor seems to keep parallels only when they are sufficiently different to warrant a repeat, or if they appear at different junctures in the narrative in the different gospels.^[13] Parallel accounts that are more or less identical, and happen at roughly the same point in the story line, are generally cut.

To get a sense of how this looks, we will survey three examples of parallels accounts incorporated into the Diatessaron in three different ways.

Example 1 – Back-to-Back Harmonization: The Opening Story

As an example of a back-to-back harmonization, let us look towards the beginning of the Arabic Diatessaron, which deals with the birth of Jesus.^[14] Two of the standard gospels, Matthew and Luke, begin with Jesus’ birth.^[15] Luke actually opens with the birth of Jesus’ “mentor,” John the Baptist, then segues into the birth of Jesus.^[16] Matthew opens with a genealogy from Abraham to Jesus and then narrates the details of Jesus’ conception and birth.^[17] Matthew does not have a birth narrative of John, rather John appears first already as an adult later in the narrative.

How does the Arabic Diatessaron deal with the parallel accounts of the birth of Jesus in these two gospels? Some of the Arabic harmonies included the genealogies and some did not, but all seem to have included a doubling of the birth of Jesus, taken from the first chapter of Luke and Matthew in which the Matthian piece is inserted into the Lucan narrative such that they seemingly complement rather than contradict each other as their details vary.

The two birth narratives of Jesus sit one after the other in mostly sequential pattern, following the birth of John (as it is in Luke), and provoking few obvious inconsistencies.

Nevertheless, the careful reader will notice that the stories are actually different.

• In Luke, the angel is named Gabriel; in Matthew it is an unnamed angel.
• In Luke, Jesus is announced to Mary; in Matthew the announcement is made to Joseph.
• In Luke, the virgin Mary’s pregnancy is foretold to her; in Matthew it seems to come as a surprise.
• In Luke, the angel’s revelation comes when Mary is awake; in Matthew it comes as a dream revelation to Joseph.
• In Luke, Mary is told to name Jesus; in Matthew, Joseph is told that his name will be Immanuel.

Luke begins with a long description of the prediction of John the baptists’ birth, the interactions of his mother Elizabeth and her cousin, Mary, the prediction of Jesus’ birth to Mary and John’s birth itself as background to the birth of Jesus. The Arabic Diatessaron then starts with this narrative, but before continuing with Jesus’ birth according to Luke, it includes the birth narrative according to Matthew. Matthew introduces the birth, Luke contextualizes it within a larger historical framework.

[I skip here Luke 1:2-25, since it deals only with the birth of John.] Now in the sixth month the angel Gabriel was sent from God into Galilee, unto a city named Nazareth. To a virgin betrothed to a man whose name was Joseph, of the house of David; and the virgin’s name was Mary. And the angel came in unto her, and said unto her, Hail, thou that art full of favour, our Lord is with thee: O thou blessed among women. And when she beheld him, she was troubled at his saying, and was considering what this salutation might be. And the angel said unto her, Fear not, Mary: for thou hast found favour with God.,Thou shalt now conceive, and bring forth a son, and shalt call his name Jesus. He shall be great, and shall be called the Son of the Most High: and the Lord God shall give unto him the throne of his father David: And he shall reign over the house of Jacob forever; and of his kingdom there shall be no end. Mary unto the angel, How shall this be done unto me since no man hath known me? And the angel answered and said unto her, The Holy Spirit shall come, and the power of the Most High shall descend upon thee: Wherefore also that which shall be born of thee, shall be holy and shall be called the Son of God. And, behold, Elisabeth thy kinswoman, , she also hath conceived a son in her old age: and this is the sixth month with her, that is called barren. For nothing shall be difficult to God.. Mary said, Behold I am the handmaid of the Lord; be it done unto me according to thy word. And the angel departed from her. (=Lk 1:26-38) [I skip again here Luke 1:2-39-80, since it deals only with the birth of John] Now the birth of Jesus the Messiah was on this wise: In the time when his mother was given in marriage to Joseph, before they came together, she was found with child of the Holy Spirit. And Joseph her husband was a just man and did not wish to expose her, and he purposed to put her away secretly. But when he thought of this, the angel of the Lord appeared unto him in a dream, and said unto him, Joseph, son of David, fear not to take Mary thy wife, for that which is begotten in her is of the Holy Spirit. She shall bear a son, and thou shalt call his name Jesus, and he shall save his people from their sins. And all this was that the saying from the Lord by the prophet might be fulfilled: Behold, the virgin shall conceive, and bear a son, And they shall call his name Immanuel, which is, being interpreted, With us is our God. And when Joseph arose from his sleep, he did as the angel of the Lord commanded him, and took his wife; and knew her not until she brought forth her firstborn son. [=Mt. 1.18-25] And in those days there went forth a decree from Augustus Caesar that all the people of his dominion should be enrolled. This first enrolment was while Quirinius was governor of Syria. And every man went to be enrolled in his city. And Joseph went up also from Nazareth, a city of Galilee, to Judaea, to the city of David which is called Bethlehem (for he was of the house of David and of his tribe). Mary his betrothed, she being with child, to be enrolled there. And while she was there the days for her being delivered were accomplished. And she brought forth her firstborn son; and she wrapped him in swaddling cloths and laid him in a manger, because there was no place for them where they were staying. And there were in that region shepherds abiding, keeping their flock in the watch of the night. And behold, the angel of God came unto them, and the glory of the Lord shone upon them; and they were greatly terrified. And the angel said unto them, Be not terrified; for I bring you tidings of great joy which shall be to the whole world; there is born to you this day a Saviour, which is the Lord the Messiah, in the city of David. And this is a sign for you: ye shall find a babe wrapped in swaddling cloths and laid in a manger. And there appeared with the angels suddenly many heavenly forces praising God and saying, Praise be to God in the highest, And on the earth peace, and good hope to men. And when the angels departed from them to heaven, the shepherds spake to one another and said, We will go to Bethlehem and see this word which hath been, as the Lord made known unto us. And they came with haste, and found Mary and Joseph, and the babe laid in a manger. And when they saw, they reported the word which was spoken to them about the child. And all that heard wondered at the description which the shepherds described to them. But Mary kept these sayings and discriminated them in her heart. And those shepherds returned, magnifying and praising God for all that they had seen and heard, according as it was described unto them. And when eight days were fulfilled that the child should be circumcised, his name was called Jesus, being that by which he was called by the angel before his conception in the womb. [=Lk 2.1-22]^[18]

A reader who was unfamiliar with the gospels in their separate form could likely read this passage as a smooth narrative. There are no obvious or blatant contradictions between the Matthew and Luke materials and the passages are spliced in such a way as to make them read consecutively, in the order of their occurrence.

Since we have the gospels separated out, it is relatively easy for us to pick up on the discontinuities in the Diatessaron’s presentation. The work would be much harder if all we had was the final product, since it would be a challenge to delineate the sources in the first place. This is what makes the Diatessaron such a useful example of a harmonized text.

Example 2 – The Spliced Version of the Meeting of Jesus and John

The next sequence tells of the first meeting between Jesus and John the Baptist as grown men (according to Luke they had “met” previously as in-utero infants, as their mothers were first cousins). The Gospel of John introduces John the Baptist as a witness to Jesus’ messianic status (he is the “Word” in the opening paragraph), but we get no biographical information about him there; that information the Harmony draws from Luke (that he is son to a priest, Zacharias, and to Elisabeth, cousin to Mary). Thus, the harmony functions to bring all the narrative pieces together in a more comprehensive manner.

In the following chart, I bring the English translation of the Arabic Harmony printed edition, from 1888, in comparison to the standardized Gospel texts of John, Luke and Matthew. I cite them in the King James Version so that the English is equally antiquated (the Harmony was translated in 1910).

The textual description of the interaction between John and Jesus, in which John baptizes Jesus and Jesus is divinely claimed through the appearance of a white dove above his head, is a composite text made up of several verses from three of the Gospels woven tightly together.^[19] Since we have the separate gospels, we can see exactly how this particular harmonizer did his work. Again, if all we had was the final product, and read it carefully, we might suspect that it was a patchwork, but it would be very challenging to figure out what verses came from what source.

Example 3 – Duplicating Stories in Different Timeframes

As in the Pentateuchal narratives, there are, at times, similar narratives that repeat within the final text; for example, in both Genesis 12 and 20 Abraham tries to pass off Sarah as his sister. In most cases, where the gospels tell the same story, at the same point in the narrative sequences, the Arabic harmony drops all but one version, though sometimes they are interwoven, as we saw above. Yet at others, if the details are significantly different and they appear in different narrative timeframes, the redactor includes them both but not necessarily in the timeframes in which they appear in their individual gospel source.

Often the author understands these various versions of a narrative as different enough to string them together in a sequence as pieces of a larger narrative. This is evident, for example, in the calling of the first disciples. The story of the calling of Simon (Peter) and Andrew appears in all of the gospels at (John 1.35-51; Mt. 4.18-22, 16-17-18; Mk 1.16-20; 3:16 and Luke 5.1-11; 6.14). The three synoptic Gospels separate the calling of these first disciples and the renaming of Simon as Peter. In John, they happen all at once. The Arabic harmony—which includes John, Matthew, and Luke only—places them in the Harmony’s fifth and sixth chapters.^[20]

The Diatessaron pulls these three versions of the narrative at the beginning and end of a larger sequence in which disciples of various kinds are called. This section stretches from Chapter 5.4 to 6.4. The sequence begins with John, segues into Jesus teaching in the synagogues of the Galilee, where he performs a miracle or two (making of the wine at the marriage at Cana) and ends with Mathew and Luke. Because the harmonizing author wants to streamline his narrative, this approach to solving the doublets is his least favorite option. He more often then not brings narrative parallels together, either in sequence or by interweaving them.

Conclusion

In short, as I understand it, the gospel harmonies or diatessarons came together as pedagogic tools in the hand of educators and especially missionaries in various geographies and chronologies of the Christian world. One gospel, with a simple message of salvation, would be an easier sell, then four, surely. A gospel harmony in some important sense seeks to erase both the narrative and the theological differences between the gospels by harmonizing them, but in so doing radically alters and distorts the perspective of each individual text. Clearly, the harmonizers gave little thought to the original authors’ feelings and in some sense butchered their predecessor’s work in the process. Yet they did so because they felt compelled to tell an accessible and meaningful theological narrative.

Although the process that produced the diatessarons was centuries later than the time when scholars believe the Pentateuch was created by combining or harmonizing pre-existent sources, it reflects well how and why ancient authors brought very different sources together into a single final work. In the end, like Moore, I believe that Diatessaronic studies sheds some needed light on the processes behind the creation of the Torah, and dispels the notion that the methods posited for the Torah’s redactor are unattested and impossible in antiquity.