What I wanted to do was to have all the four gospels put together in so simple a manner that it would be easy to read. If I did the work of putting the gospels together then the reader would not have to go through the difficult process themselves.

So now, the reader can simply read, knowing that he or she is reading a composite reading of the four gospels that has the combined information found in Matthew, Mark, Luke, and John.

Yet at the same time, because of the features of this composite gospel (These features are discussed below), the reader can know where each word comes from, in the real four gospels. So, if a question arises, the reader can stop and turn to their own personal Bible to determine for themselves how the four gospels relate to each other.

I wanted to start with a version of the Bible which is well respected and easy to read. However, I then found that copyright restrictions would prevent unrestricted free posting on the internet or other media. So copyright law would keep me from legally putting this work on the internet for free. The publisher would want royalties. One of the main purposes in producing this Composite Bible is that it would be a free resource to all who have access to the internet.

Also, I would not just have the text of the Bible on my web site, I would be combining the four Gospel's together into one text, so I would be bringing things together in a way that actually changes the text of the Bible itself. This is not wanted by the publishers who own the copyright. They don't even want the punctuation to be changed.

So, I want an easy-to-read version, but virtually all the new easy reading versions are copyrighted. The only ones that are not, are old and archaic like The King James Version and the American Standard Version of 1901, or so I thought. Then I found out that the Rainbow Missions, Inc., has been working to provide a Public Domain update of the ASV of 1901 called The World English Bible. It is not copyrighted! I have found that The World English Bible (WEB) reads very well. So I have chosen the The World English Bible (WEB) to be the version that this Composite Gospel is based.

In addition to The World English Bible, The King James Version (KJV) and The Updated King James Version (UKJV) are also used in spots to allow for a smoother flowing text. When combining text together, it is sometimes helpful to have an alternate way of expressing the thought. This is especially important when there is a combining of text from different sources such as The four Gospels. The text coming from either the KJV or the UKJV is identified by being (enclosed in parentheses). Both the KJV and the UKJV are both within the Public Domain.

I chose to use a Harmony of the Gospels by A. T. Robertson to help me understand more fully how the four Gospels relate to each other in a side-by-side format. However, in the process of using Robertson's harmony, I started to realize that I differed from Robertson, occasionally, on how the original Gospels fit with each other. So this Composite Gospel does not follow Robertson's harmony on every point.

In a Harmony of the Gospels, we obviously can have up to all four books side-by-side. However, in a Composite Gospel, only a single text is used. Often, one of the four Gospels is used as the main text, with bits and pieces of the other three Gospels being inserted where they say more than the main text. If one of the original gospels gives more information than the other three; then, the one having more information is chosen as the main text. However, if all the original gospels are about the same in giving information, then the one that is easiest to read will automatically be picked. So, the composite text has all the information that is contained in all four of the Gospels.

It is my purpose to make the sentence structure as simple as possible. In looking over the four Gospels, I have found that Matthew has a very simple and direct way of writing. Mark, on the other hand seems to have a more complicated style of writing. Luke, seems to be awkward at times. So, when more than one of the original gospels are about equal in information and coverage, Matthew is usually chosen as the main source of the text. Then the specific facts, the bits and pieces, are then inserted from the other of the four original gospels to make the composite gospel more complete. So, the same information that is found in the different original gospels, is now contained in this Composite Gospel.

Another important aspect of this Composite Gospel, is that there is a need to keep the reader connected to the original four Gospels while reading the composite text. If the reader looses contact with the original presentation of the Gospel, as is found in the Bible, than this new composite Gospel could have a negative effect on the reader. It is important that the reader knows where the words are coming from in this Composite Gospel.

So, an important feature of this Composite Gospel is that the text itself is color-coded. Each Book has its own specific color as you will see when you click to the actual Composite Gospel.

Also, the words of the four original gospels are used rather extensively, almost exclusively, as is. Only a few words, mostly connecting words have been added or changed in the text to allow the composite text to read well. These added or changed words have their own distinctive color (purple).

So, not only will the reader of this composite Gospel have a simple reading of the combined information found in the four Gospels, but, as they are reading the text, they will know from what original Gospel book they are reading. Also, the verse numbers, at the beginning of each new verse, is the actual verse as found in the Bible, of the specific Gospel being used at the moment. So it should be an easy matter for the reader to note the color of the verse number and open up the Bible and find the exact verse that they are reading.

As a teacher, I have found that it is often helpful to restate important concepts, to say things more than once in different ways, so that the idea can sink into the minds of my students. Since I have found that the writers of the four Gospels often complement each other by saying things in different ways, I have often placed their comments together in much the same way as I might say it as a teacher, in class.

Here is an example where both Matthew and Mark are saying about the same thing, yet I found it helpful to have the text restate this important concept more than once: "The time is fulfilled, and the Kingdom of God is at hand! Repent, and believe in the Good News." "Repent! For the Kingdom of Heaven is at hand."

Having the text restate important concepts could encourage some to look at the text of Matthew and Mark (in this example) to note the difference for themselves. Also, having various text restated should not detract us from having a free flowing composite text of the four Gospels since these four books are often very brief in their presentation; And we, in common conversation, often repeat ourselves for added emphasis.

However, the restating of various text does go against the way most translations of the Bible are rendered. Most translators do a word for word translation, and even if the meaning of the english word is somewhat different from the word in the original language, causing much of the idea to be lost in the translation; It is done anyway. The word for word translation tradition is followed religiously.

I believe that since this new text is a composite text of the four original gospels, there needs to be some sort of indication, within the text itself, that there are differences between the various original Gospels. The restating of various important concepts will help show these differences and at the same time, adding a richness to the story of the Gospel.

There is a certain amount of loss when four different books are combined into a single account of what happened. Often in the past, there have been attempts to make a single composite Gospel. It is said that they wrote these combined works with a certain amount of freedom. This freedom of expression is sometimes necessary since the four original gospels are quite different. Just by its very nature, a Harmony of the gospels is more accurate since there is no loss of information. A Harmony preserves even the differences in style as they originally were written, except for the fact that the actual language is different.

However, in this Composite Gospel, an easier reading of the four Gospels together was the objective. So features were incorporated into this Composite Gospel that are designed to somewhat limit the loss that is inherent in a composite text.

Just by having the actual text of the four original gospels identified by color, allows the reader to be fully aware what original book they are actually reading. So, if the reader wants to keep the different styles in mind, they need not be confused.

So, being able to restate important concepts in different ways, using the different original Gospels, is a way to show some of the variation that is found between the different original Gospels. In addition, the adding of the color-coded text also allows the reader to see where these restated concepts come from. It is an important tool in allowing the reader to start seeing the differences, found in the four original Gospels.

As I was working on this Composite Gospel, I started to see parallels between different texts that most theologians do not see as being connected to the same event. It must be that Jesus must have repeated Himself over and over again to different groups of people because they all must have needed the same help in their lives.

We need to start comparing all that Jesus taught. Also, there are sometimes a progression of events, or a progression of ideas that should be compared and studied, like the subject of the fig tree: The Barren Fig Tree which looks at sections 55, 123, 146, 149, 165.

So, this Composite Gospel does not limit itself to what the Harmony of the Gospels describes as being the same event. That is the purpose of the fourth part of the Composite Gospel: The special comparison page.

There are some parts that are not easy to bring together into a single text. There are some places where the Gospel writers seem to disagree with one another to the point where it is virtually impossible to bring the text together. There are a few examples where I thought it important that the reader see the difference in approach, so that the reader can realize how these books were initially written.

So in these few places, parallel text is placed side-by-side to allow the reader to see for themselves how different they are from each other. Below is a listing of these few places. Underneath each heading is an explanation as to why they were left as parallel text and not as a composite text. In these examples, only the parallel text is shown. The rest of each example can be found in the Composite Gospel itself.