which is your favorite Gospel?

[© tweed]

which is your favorite Gospel?

[DC Al Fine]

Luke with John a close runner up.

[7,052,770]

Mark I guess.  John is easily the worst.  SO boring.

[Okay, maybe Mike Johnson is a competent parliamentarian.]

Luke with John a close runner up.

This, but John isn't as directly comparable, narratologically, to the other three as they are to one another.

[True Federalist (진정한 연방 주의자)]

The Gospel of Wealth

More seriously, Matthew

[TJ in Oregon]

John and I'm quite shocked to be the first person to vote as such. John captures a sense of hunger that the other three don't in their writing, which makes it far more interesting to read. Not that the other three aren't good to read as well.

[7,052,770]

John and I'm quite shocked to be the first person to vote as such. John captures a sense of hunger that the other three don't in their writing, which makes it far more interesting to read. Not that the other three aren't good to read as well.

You like that long boring monologue that goes on for chapters and chapters?

[All Along The Watchtower]

John and I'm quite shocked to be the first person to vote as such. John captures a sense of hunger that the other three don't in their writing, which makes it far more interesting to read. Not that the other three aren't good to read as well.

+1

[I spent the winter writing songs about getting better]

I voted for Matthew. The last line is my favorite in the whole Bible.

[The world will shine with light in our nightmare]

John, for John 13:35 alone.

[Oldiesfreak1854]

I like them all, but in terms of the writing style, probably Mark.  My family has always appreciated the writing style of Luke, though, and we usually read from Luke 2 at Christmas and Luke 22-24 at Easter.  Obviously, I would never want to break that tradition.  I also really enjoy John, especially for his account toward the end where Jesus asks Peter whether he loves Him.  John 3:16, 14:1-3, and the last verse of the book are great, too.  And of course, there are some things that only appear in John (such as Jesus raising Lazarus, turning water into wine, and talking with his disciples in the Upper Room after the Last Supper).    While Matthew is good, too, it probably ranks last on my list.
I voted Mark, for the reason listed above, but I'm surprised to be the first vote for it.

[the man with no name...and now muted]

I like them all...but Luke and John, having been written later, display interesting historical self-perspectives, with both assuming most readers are familiar with previous gospel books.

[politicus]

Luke with John a close runner up.

Why? I always found Luke much too sentimental.

1. John
2. Matthew
3. Mark - basically just the short version of Matthew

[Consciously Unconscious]

Definitely Luke.  I love the style and the actual story.

[© tweed]

I voted Mark btw, I like the "and they were afraid" before the plagiarized addendum.

[© tweed]

I voted Mark btw, I like the "and they were afraid" before the plagiarized addendum.

oh, and the messianic secret, of course.

[I spent the winter writing songs about getting better]

Here's something I really like from John that was pointed out in this year's Easter sermon:

You must be logged in to read this quote.

A comment about how it was quite funny one of the things that's sure to be mentioned is not just that "the other disciple" is the one whom Jesus loved, but also that he ran faster than Peter and made it to the tomb first. And then that it's even funnier when you consider that he's the one who wrote the book.

[anvi]

I've had to think about this for a while, strangely enough.  Anyway, I finally chose Matthew, since its version of the Sermon on the Mount and its 25th chapter have always appealed to me.  Luke comes a close second.  Mark is too terse.  I rank John last, despite its often quite beautiful literary flourishes and its philosophical touches, because the anti-Jewish rhetoric in it is especially troubling. 

[The Mikado]

Matthew.  I don't see how any non-Christian could pick John, and Matthew is better-written than the other two Synoptics.

[CatoMinor]

John, though Mathew a close second for the fact it was the first book of the Bible I ever read.

[Oswald Acted Alone, You Kook]

Here's something I really like from John that was pointed out in this year's Easter sermon:

You must be logged in to read this quote.

A comment about how it was quite funny one of the things that's sure to be mentioned is not just that "the other disciple" is the one whom Jesus loved, but also that he ran faster than Peter and made it to the tomb first. And then that it's even funnier when you consider that he's the one who wrote the book.

Does your church teach that John and Jesus were gay? (Seriously, there are people who actually believe that.)

[CatoMinor]

Here's something I really like from John that was pointed out in this year's Easter sermon:

You must be logged in to read this quote.

A comment about how it was quite funny one of the things that's sure to be mentioned is not just that "the other disciple" is the one whom Jesus loved, but also that he ran faster than Peter and made it to the tomb first. And then that it's even funnier when you consider that he's the one who wrote the book.

Does your church teach that John and Jesus were gay? (Seriously, there are people who actually believe that.)

Wut........

[Oswald Acted Alone, You Kook]

Here's something I really like from John that was pointed out in this year's Easter sermon:

You must be logged in to read this quote.

A comment about how it was quite funny one of the things that's sure to be mentioned is not just that "the other disciple" is the one whom Jesus loved, but also that he ran faster than Peter and made it to the tomb first. And then that it's even funnier when you consider that he's the one who wrote the book.

Does your church teach that John and Jesus were gay? (Seriously, there are people who actually believe that.)

Wut........

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sexuality_of_Jesus#The_beloved_disciple