Mathiew had corrected Mark's Gospel

by comparing the parallel verses of Mark and Luke to Mathieu one realizes that Matthew's translator had a morbid passion to add the title " Son of God "

for exemple :
Mt 4/3 ' 3 And the tempter came to him , saying, If thou be the Son of God , command that these stones become bread "

Mt 4/6 : '6 and said, If thou be the Son of God, cast thyself down: for it is written :' He will command "

Mc1 / 13 : "13 And he was in the wilderness forty days, tempted by Satan ; and he was with the wild beasts ; and the angels ministered to him . "


we see that St. Mark avoids the name of the Son of God . it is the same for all the verses .



I- Mt4 / 3: Mt4 / 7 text Mc1 / 13:

II- Mt 12/50 has Mc3 / 35 ; Lk 8/21

III- MT16 / 16: Mc : 8/29 ; Lk 9/20 :

IV- MT14 / 33: MC6 / 51 :

V - MT20 / 23: MC10 / 40:

VI- MT26 / 29: to MC14 / 25 ; Luc 22/18 :

VII- MT27 / 40: to MC15 / 30; LC23 / 35

VIII -Mt 27/43 to MC15 / 32; Lk 23/39

 

There are two issues which you have juxtaposed here, together with the issue of the synoptic problem in general.

so:

The Synoptic problem in brief:
Matthew, Mark and Luke, are sometimes called the ‘Synoptic Gospels’ as they have common stories, narrative and language, and they can be laid in parallel to compare the accounts. This has given rise to the theory of ‘Q’ and two source theory fairly widely accepted by scholars. John clearly stands apart for the first three Gospels.


The Messianic Secret in Mark
There are numbers of times in the Gospel of Mark where it is clear that the messiahship of Jesus was not so widely declared. Many scholars accept an early dating of the Gospel of Mark, certainly the briefest of the Gospels, and if you accept a theory of 'Q' being a source either written or oral, Mark may be closest to it. It may well be that part of the purpose of Mark was to get the story written down so it didn't get lost or distorted. In a sense then the Gospel of Mark is addressed to the belivers, to keep our story in tact.


The Jewishness of Matthew
The Gospel of Matthew is the most 'Jewish' or the Gospels. It addresses an audience where much of the understanding of the Old Testament can be assumed. The Gospel may well have been an account designed to make the appeal of Jesus within the context of the Jewish heritage. The term Son/Sons of God and the notion of God as Father, are found in the Old Testament, and as such the application of these terms to Jesus makes Davidic sense.


The Gentile appeal of Luke
The Gospel of Luke generally thought to be the latest of the synoptic Gospels, is considerably less Jewish and coinsistent with a broader approach to a gentile world. The role of women seems to make a greater prominence in Luke, suggestive of a broader appeal that the narrower confines of the Jewish heritage of Matthew.


John
Most scholars see John as being later, more theological, and making a strong appeal to those who are not in power. In John 4 in the account of the encounter with the Samaritan Woman at the well Jesus is described as the 'Saviour of the Cosmos'.

I suspect that 'morbid passion' may in fact be more of a Jewish predisposition.

 

Here are some verses in Mark where Jesus is called the Son of God.

• 1:1 – Gospel opening: The beginning of the good news of Jesus Christ, [the Son of God].
• 1:11 – At Jesus' Baptism: And a voice came from heaven, “You are my Son, the Beloved; with you I am well pleased.”
• 1:24 – At the first Exorcism: and he cried out, “What have you to do with us, Jesus of Nazareth? Have you come to destroy us? I know who you are, the Holy One of God.”
• 3:11 – Evangelist's summary: Whenever the unclean spirits saw him, they fell down before him and shouted, “You are the Son of God!”
• 5:7 – Gerasene demoniac: And he shouted at the top of his voice, “What have you to do with me, Jesus, Son of the Most High God? I adjure you by God, do not torment me.”
• 9:7 – At the Transfiguration: Then a cloud overshadowed them, and from the cloud there came a voice, “This is my Son, the Beloved; listen to him!”
• 12:6 – Parable of the Wicked Tenants: “He had still one other, a beloved son. Finally he sent him to them, saying, 'They will respect my son.' ”
• 13:32 – Apocalyptic Discourse: “But about that day or hour no one knows, neither the angels in heaven, nor the Son, but only the Father.”
• 14:60-62 – At Jesus' Trial: Then the high priest stood up before them and asked Jesus, “Have you no answer? What is it that they testify against you?” / But he was silent and did not answer. Again the high priest asked him, “Are you the Messiah, the Son of the Blessed One?” / Jesus said, “I am; and 'you will see the Son of Man seated at the right hand of the Power,' and 'coming with the clouds of heaven.' ”
• 15:39 – At the Crucifixion: Now when the centurion, who stood facing him, saw that in this way he breathed his last, he said, “Truly this man was God's Son!”
  
  

So we see Mark does not have an issue with calling Jesus the Son of God.

You are cherry picking verses trying to sow discord and confusion. Again. Unlike the Koran, the Bible was written by many inspired men over a period
of centuries. The dating of the 4 Gospels, written by 4 different men at 4 different times to 4 different audiences.

Matthew 60's to at late as 70 AD. Jewish audience hence the Mosaic references

Mark 50's AD Addressed to the Early Church in Rome and Italy.

Luke @ 63 AD. Acts of the Apostles (Acts) and Luke were written by Luke at the same time and thought to be one long book broken into two books.
Acts of the Apostles still has St Paul in Rome under arrest. Paul was martyred in 64 AD. Addressed to the Greeks/Gentiles.

John 70 to 90 AD. Written to the Church at large to combat the infiltration of gnosticism into Christianity.

Fr. Mark​