New Testament: The Synoptic Gospels

Time to finish off my approximate chronological reading of the New Testament. To recap:
First, I read the authentic letters of Paul, which he wrote between 50-58 CE. He explains that God had chosen him as the apostle to the Gentiles (non-Jews), to preach the good news that Jesus had put an end to the Law of Moses, that the world is gonna end any day now, and that anyone who accepts Jesus' resurrection gains eternal life.

Then I read the Gospel of Mark, written ~70 CE. Mark's Jesus is a wild anarchist who wanders around Judea performing underwhelming miracles, drowning pigs, cursing trees, neglecting basic hygiene, preaching parables, and warning people that the world is gonna end any day now.

The authorities decide to arrest Mark's Jesus after he and his gang smash up the stalls in the Jerusalem Temple. Judas betrays him with a kiss; Jesus is crucified and three days later his female disciples find his tomb empty. An angel tells them not to worry: Jesus has resurrected. They run off screaming. (Some years later, Mark's resurrection narrative was extended, so Jesus actually meets with his disciples and tells them to preach the news to the world.)

Then I read the Gospel of Matthew, written in the 80s CE. Around this time, the Jewish Christians were competing with the Pharisees (who became the Rabbis, the leaders of Judaism to this day) and the Pauline Christians (who based their beliefs on the teachings of Paul, see above) over who was the true Israel.

Matthew emphasizes Jesus' Jewishness. Matthew's Jesus forbids his disciples from preaching to Gentiles and declares that he is definitely not here to abolish the Law of Moses. He rants about the Pharisees and warns his followers that there will be a lot of fake Christians who think he has come to abolish the law, but they are totally going to hell.

Matthew's gospel is clunky and irritating. The author is obsessed with prophecy fulfilment. He embellished Mark's narrative, adding an infancy narrative and making the miracles more impressive.
Yesterday I read the Gospel of Luke, also written in the 80s CE. Luke's Jesus is the most likeable so far. He is a wild altruist; he is far more peaceful than Mark's or Matthew's. This is more what I was expecting. The author of Luke was a Pauline Christian who wrote a Gentile-friendly gospel. Luke's Jesus preaches to non-Jews, and is all about social justice.

The author of Luke did a better job of embellishing Mark's narrative. He added more detailed infancy and resurrection narratives, and focused on making Jesus a more likeable, rather than more magical, character. Luke made the wise decision to omit the parts where Jesus neglects basic hygiene and shouts at a tree, because these episodes do not present us with a positive view of Jesus' mental health. Luke's Jesus does not smash up the temple stalls.

Interestingly, Luke decided to change Jesus' last words on the cross from "My God, my God, why have you forsaken me?” to "Father, into your hands I commit my spirit." He also omitted Jesus' inarticulate scream which follows his last words in both Mark and Matthew.
'The Gospel of Luke' is the best of the three 'Synoptic Gospels' (the gospels which tell roughly the same story, although with many differences).

Next: 'The Acts of the Apostles'