Hi Kiran @Kiran, an insightful question. Brian @brianlalor is definitely on the right track regarding different perspectives of the same event. Author J. Warner Wallace has written a few books that can help your understanding from this viewpoint. Two such books are “Cold-Case Christianity” and “Forensic Faith”. Mr. Wallace was a former LA cold-case detective who was an atheist but came to faith because he could see tools he used in being a detective demonstrated in the same ways throughout the Gospels. In fact, he said if he had four witnesses to a crime who all told the same story without variation, he would be suspect because people see things differently. What’s important is that they still are giving evidence to the same event. So, the fact that the event occurred is the main point.
So, the first thing to focus on is the event over the various versions. Also, keep in mind that the Gospels were not written at the time they were happening. They weren’t written until much later as the Holy Spirit guided the writers. In the case of the “Book of Mark”, Mark was a close relative or associate of Peter. So, his gospel is one told to him by Peter. As was mentioned by Brian, Luke was also not an apostle, but a doctor who paid close attention to detail because that characteristic was indicative of the profession. He opens the Book of Luke explaining why and how he wrote his epistle.
Another reason is that each of the Gospels have a focus. For instance, Matthew was writing to Jews, and his emphasis was on the validity of Jesus as Messiah. Mark focuses on Jesus’ works and miracles. Luke’s version is most “orderly” and has a more historical accounting of Jesus and the fact that Jesus loved all people–Luke, himself, being a gentile. (He also wrote the Book of Acts and accompanied Paul on his journeys). John’s focus is on the love of Christ and specifically states that he wrote his account that people would believe in Christ (John 20:31).
However, having said all this, it is important to study the timing and placement of the events in each account. For instance, a favorite “contradiction” skeptics like to point out is the feeding of the 5000 vs 4000. Yet, these are two separate events. Without going into all the research here, you can glean this information. In fact, Mark tells of the two separate accounts in his gospel (Mark 6:30-44; Mark 8:1-13).
I recently did a personal study of Jesus’ raising of Lazarus. The chronology and locations were very important when putting the story together to make sense of the timing recorded in that account.
So, we have to look at each book separately and concentrate on their themes and emphasis. Then, it might behoove one to do some research to put the chronology together to help convey the logical timing in order for the various accounts to make sense, remembering that the eyewitness accounts are from different perspectives.
Keep in mind that timing in some cases in Scripture isn’t as crucial as the message being conveyed. Think of them being told as you would if you returned from a mission trip. The stories you would have to tell may not be in the correct order, but as they came to mind and you wanted to relay them. Yet, a good Bible “detective” can often work out the correct chronology with some research. If not, is it really important to the message?