 
Exploring the Word of God:

Introduction to the Gospels

###### Copyright 2013 Grace Communion International

###### Cover art by Ken Tunell

###### Scripture quotations, unless noted, are taken from the Holy Bible, New International Version®, NIV®. Copyright ©1973, 1978, 1984 by Biblica, Inc.™ Used by permission of Zondervan. All rights reserved worldwide. www.zondervan.com. The "NIV" and "New International Version" are trademarks registered in the United States Patent and Trademark Office by Biblica, Inc.™

######

## Table of Contents

1. Why Do We Need Four Gospels?

2. Can We Trust the Gospels?

3. The Search for the Real Words of Jesus

4. The Gospels and Us

5. How Do We Know About Jesus?

6. What Jesus' Parables Reveal

7. How Many Points in a Parable?

8. What the Gospels Teach Us About God

9. What the Gospels Teach Us About Jesus

10. What the Gospels Teach Us About the Holy Spirit

11. What the Gospels Teach Us About the Scriptures

12. What the Gospels Teach Us About Angels and Demons

13. The Gospels and the Gospel

About the Authors

About the Publisher

Grace Communion Seminary

Ambassador College of Christian Ministry

**Introduction:** This project began in the mid 1990s. The first volume of _Exploring the Word of God_ was published in 1995. We were not able to print any more volumes, but we continued to study and write articles about Scripture. We have gathered these articles and are publishing them as e-books. We hope you find these studies useful and encouraging.

~ ~ ~ ~ ~

## Why Do We Need Four Gospels?

###### By Tim Finlay

At the heart of Christianity is the person and work of Jesus Christ. So we would expect the Christian Scriptures to include an account of Jesus' life. But why do we have four – the Gospels according to Matthew, Mark, Luke and John? Isn't this redundant? Wouldn't one be enough?

On the contrary, our knowledge of Jesus Christ would be incomplete if we had only one Gospel. Or even if we had three Gospels but were missing one. Matthew, Mark, Luke and John each told the story from a different perspective, because each had a different audience in mind. We tend to blur these four distinctive portraits of Jesus together. But knowing how an act or saying of Jesus fits in with each author's perspective can greatly enhance our understanding of its meaning.

Here is a brief introduction to the particular message and theme of each of the four Gospels. Because of space limitations, we will usually cite locations rather than quote verses in full. But if you look up some of these verses in the New Testament, you will begin to see how each Gospel has a unique message. You will also see how all four work together to build a complete picture of the life and work of Jesus Christ.

### Matthew — the bridge

Matthew's readers were mainly Jewish Christians, and he emphasized Christianity's continuity with the Hebrew Scriptures (what we call the Old Testament) and traditions. Through Matthew we are told the relationship of Jesus to the law and the Old Testament prophets. This Gospel, placed first in the New Testament, is like a bridge from Old to New. Matthew quotes from the Old Testament more frequently than any other New Testament writer.

The most sacred part of the Hebrew Bible was the Torah, the five books containing the law of Moses. Matthew likewise concentrates most of Jesus' teaching in five long discourses as the new covenant counterpart to Mosaic law.

##### 1. In the "Sermon on the Mount," Jesus expanded his disciples' understanding of three central topics: the law, worship and good deeds. (5:1-7:29)

##### 2. Jesus called the apostles and commissioned them to speak for him, just as God had commissioned Moses and the prophets. (10:1-42)

##### 3. In seven parables, Jesus added a new dimension to the understanding of the kingdom of God. (13:1-52)

##### 4. Jesus outlined a code of conduct that would enable his followers to establish and maintain their new-found spiritual relationships. (18:1-35)

##### 5. Jesus showed how and why the old order, with its hypocrisy, must give way to a new age of peace and justice, in which righteousness would be rewarded and evil punished. (chapters 23-25)

#### Matthew encouraged Jewish converts to see their heritage in the context of a greater law, and their history in the light of the spiritual kingdom of God. For Matthew, Jesus' fulfillment of the Scriptures did not mean that those Scriptures had lost their significance and could therefore be discarded. Rather, for Matthew the Hebrew Scriptures gained significance through Jesus and continue to be part of the "treasure" of the scribe trained for the kingdom of heaven (see Matthew 13:52) (Daniel J. Harrington, _The Gospel of Matthew_ , Sacra Pagina series, page 22).

### Mark — 'This is what happened'

Mark's Gospel is fast-moving and dramatic. It reads like a series of eye-witness accounts. Because of this action-packed style, Mark's Gospel is an ideal starting point for discovering who Jesus Christ is and what he is all about.

Mark is more concerned about telling us what happened, rather than when it happened. He writes more like a journalist than a historian. He cuts to the quick, introducing Jesus to people who have perhaps heard of him but don't know him very well yet.

Verbs like "run," "shout" and "amaze" abound in this book. Mark's favorite adverb is _euthys_ , meaning "immediately" or "at once" (it occurs ten times in chapter 1 alone).

Mark does not delay the action by telling us about Jesus' genealogy, or even his birth. Rather, Mark begins with the briefest survey of the ministry of John the Baptist, the baptism of Jesus and his testing in the wilderness by Satan (1:1-13). Then the action begins, and continues nonstop for 16 chapters. Event quickly follows event. On occasion, one story is interrupted to begin another, and the first story finished later.

Mark's account of the events leading up to Jesus' trial and crucifixion is especially detailed and vivid. Mark's purpose is to show that Jesus is the Son of God (1:1). When Jesus is baptized, a heavenly voice proclaims, "You are my Son" (1:11).

Jesus has the authority to forgive sin, a prerogative of God alone (2:5-12). Evil spirits recognize Jesus as the Holy One of God (1:24), the Son of God (3:11) and Son of the Most High God (5:7-8).

#### In Mark's Gospel, the authority of Jesus is stressed by the manner of his teaching (1:22) and by the numerous miracles. But Mark also warns his audience that miracles could be ambiguous. After all, they lead Pharisees and Herodians to oppose Jesus (3:6); cause scribes to think of Jesus as possessed (3:22); leave people from his home-town unimpressed (6:1-3); cause Herod to imagine that Jesus is John the Baptist redivivus [resurrected] (6:14-16); and do not eliminate the disciples' misunderstanding (6:52; 8:17-21) (Ben Witherington III, _The Christology of Jesus_ , page 163).

The point was, nobody in the human realm fully understands this truth. Even Peter, who rightly professes Jesus as the Christ, fails to realize Jesus' purpose: to die and after three days rise again (8:31; cf. 9:12, 31; 10:33, 45). The only human acknowledgment that Jesus is the Son of God, comes from a centurion looking at Jesus on the cross.

This, then, is the message of the Gospel of Mark – that we can fully understand who Jesus is only through his suffering, death and resurrection.

### Luke — for people like us

Luke, like all the evangelists, acknowledges that Jesus was God, but he also stresses his humanity. Luke shows us that, in Jesus, God became a part of his own story, just as some producers will give themselves a small role in their own films. Except that there was nothing small about Jesus' role when he stepped into history!

Luke shows us that Jesus was a real-life person who lived in Galilee and Judea during the reigns of the Roman Emperors Augustus and Tiberius.

Like Matthew, he gives us Jesus' genealogy and an account of his birth. But only Luke records Jesus' circumcision (2:21), his presentation at the temple (2:22-38), his growth as a child (2:40), his meeting at age 12 with the religious teachers in the temple (2:41-51) and his continued development "...in wisdom and stature, and in favor with God and men" (2:52). These details establish Jesus as a historical personality.

At the beginning of his ministry, Jesus proclaimed what his mission was all about: to bring good news to the poor, release to the captives, sight to the blind and freedom to the oppressed (4:18).

Luke shows Jesus as extremely concerned about the welfare of all people, but having special empathy for those who were despised or undervalued by society: the tax collectors, Samaritans, the poor, Gentiles. No class or group was excluded; Christ's message of salvation was for everyone. Luke seems to make a special point of highlighting Jesus' concern for women.

#### Luke features the responsiveness of women (7:36-50; 8:1-3; 8:48; 10:38-42; 13:10-17; 24:1-12). Often it is not just a woman but a widow who is cited, since she represented the most vulnerable status within society (2:37; 4:25-26; 7:12; 18:3, 5; 20:47; 21:2-3). Whether in parable or by example, these women show that they are sensitive to the message of Jesus. Though on the fringes of first-century society, they are in the middle of Luke's story. Often they are paired with men (2:25-28; 4:25-27; 8:40-56; 11:31-32; 13:18-21; 15:4-10; 17:34-35; Acts 21:9-10), a feature suggesting that the Gospel is for both genders (Daniel Bock, in _Dictionary of Jesus and the Gospels_ , page 506).

Many of the most poignant parables that show repentance and forgiveness of sin being offered to everyone are found only in Luke. For example, the good Samaritan (10:30-37), the great feast (14:15- 24), the prodigal son (15:11-31) and the Pharisee and the tax collector (18:9-14).

Luke shows us that God's concern extends to everyone, not just those who are 'good' or naturally inclined to religion. In Jesus Christ, God became one of us, so that he could save all of us.

### John — 'And now for something completely different'

John's was the last Gospel to be written, perhaps 60 or more years after the crucifixion. Rather than tell the whole story, he selects incidents from only about three weeks of Jesus' life. But these he explores in great detail.

John wants to let us know in profound detail who Jesus Christ was, where he came from and what he came to do (8:14). He summed it up in what is perhaps the most often quoted of all Bible verses: "For God so loved the world that he gave his one and only Son, that whoever believes in him shall not perish but have eternal life" (John 3:16).

This Gospel explains God's love and his gift of eternal life, in simple, everyday language that can be understood by anyone. But don't be misled by the apparent simplicity. John's message of Jesus Christ is a deep mine, with many levels of understanding. It will repay a lifetime of study.

For example, John devotes several chapters to Jesus' last talk with his disciples (John 14-17). He explores the relationship between the Father, Son and Holy Spirit. John dwells at length on what may at first seem to be a minor incident. For example, the healing of a blind man (chapter 9), or the chance meeting of Jesus and a Samaritan woman at a well (4:1-26).

But these vignettes were chosen because they illustrated vital lessons for all who would become disciples, not only in his time, but through the ages. John helps the non-believer to believe and the believer to come to a deeper level of understanding.

Whereas Matthew, Mark and Luke show us how Jesus taught in parables, there are no parables in John. Instead, he focuses on the symbols that Jesus used to describe and explain his role as our Savior, each beginning with "I am":

...the bread of life (6:35);

...the true light (8:12);

...the door to life (10:7);

...the good shepherd (10:11);

...the resurrection (11:25);

...the way, the truth and the life (14:6);

...the true vine (15:1).

Like the other evangelists, John tells us of Jesus' miracles: he transforms water into wine (2:1-11), heals a nobleman's son (4:43-54), and a cripple (5:1-16), feeds the five thousand (6:1-14), walks on water (6:15-21), restores a blind man (9:1-41) and raises Lazarus from the dead (11:1-46).

But he doesn't call them miracles. To John, they are _signs,_ and they have a purpose that goes beyond the wonder of the act itself. Each sign tells us more about the overall reason why Jesus Christ came to earth. He came not so that a few could be healed, but so that all could have life (John 10:10).

So, while the other Gospels present Jesus' message in terms of "the kingdom of God," John prefers the term "eternal life." Eternal life, although having magnificent future implications, also becomes a present reality for the believer: "Whoever hears my word and believes in him who sent me has eternal life" (5:24).

###### ~ ~ ~ ~ ~

###### back to table of contents

## Can We Trust the Gospels?

###### Are the Gospels of Matthew, Mark, Luke and John historically reliable documents?  
Has modern New Testament scholarship undermined the historical reliability of the Gospels?  
Can the Scriptures be taken seriously as historical records?

By Jim Herst

It is only fair that the historical reliability of the Bible should be tested by the same criteria that are used to test all historical documents. In his definitive work, _Introduction to Research in English Literary History,_ Professor Charles Sanders explains three basic principles involved in evaluating the reliability of historical documents (p.143 ff.). They are the bibliographic test (have the original manuscripts been handed down faithfully?), the internal evidence test (what the books tell us about themselves) and the external evidence test (an examination of other sources that shed light – such as contemporary ancient literature).

Future articles in this series will evaluate the Gospels in light of internal and external evidence. In this article we will focus on the bibliographic test – how historically reliable the Gospels are in terms of manuscript witnesses to the New Testament in general.

The bibliographic test is an examination of the textual transmission by which the documents have reached us. In other words, since we do not have the original documents (called autographs), how reliable are the copies we have in regard to the number of manuscripts and the time interval between the original and the copies we have?

Let's take a closer look at what biblical scholars call manuscript attestation and time interval.

### 1. How many manuscripts of the Greek New Testament exist today?

There are more than 5,300 known Greek manuscripts of the New Testament. If we add over 10,000 manuscripts of the Latin Vulgate and at least 9,300 other early versions, then we have more than 24,000 manuscript copies of portions of the New Testament. No other document of antiquity even begins to approach such numbers and attestation. In comparison, Homer's Iliad comes second, with only 643 surviving manuscripts. Even then, the first complete preserved text of Homer dates from the 13th century AD.

It is no wonder that S.E. Peters observes that: "On the basis of manuscript tradition alone, the works that made up the Christians' New Testament were the most widely circulated books of antiquity" ( _The Harvest of Hellenism,_ p. 50).

And F.J.A. Hort adds that, "... in the variety and fullness of the evidence on which it rests, the text of the New Testament stands absolutely and unapproachably alone among ancient prose writings" ( _The New Testament in the Original Greek,_ p. 561).

Bruce Metzger, Emeritus Professor of New Testament Language and Literature at Princeton Theological Seminary, also stresses the uniqueness of New Testament textual witnesses compared with other writings of antiquity. He states: "The works of several ancient authors are preserved for us by the thinnest possible thread of transmission" ( _The Text of the New Testament,_ p. 34).

Dr. Metzger gives three pertinent examples: _The History of Rome,_ by Vellius Paterculus, survived to modern times through only one incomplete manuscript – a manuscript that was subsequently lost in the seventeenth century after being copied by Beatus Rhenanus at Amerbach. A second example is the _Annals_ of the famous historian Tacitus, the first six books of which are in a single manuscript dating from the ninth century. And the only known manuscript of the _Epistle to Diognetus,_ an early Christian composition which editors usually include in the corpus of the Apostolic Fathers, perished in a fire at the municipal library in Strasbourg in 1870.

Metzger writes: "In contrast with these figures, the textual critic of the New Testament is embarrassed by the wealth of his material" (p. 34).

### 2. How long is the interval of time between the composition of the books of the New Testament and the dates of the earliest of our manuscripts?

The great biblical scholar Sir Frederic G. Kenyon, who was the director and principal librarian of the British Museum, and second to none in authority for issuing statements about manuscripts, concluded that:

#### besides number, the manuscripts of the New Testament differ from those of the classical authors, and this time the difference is clear again. In no other case is the interval of time between the composition of the book and the date of the earliest extant manuscripts so short as in that of the New Testament. ( _Handbook to the Textual Criticism of the New Testament,_ p. 4)

Dr. Kenyon goes on to explain that the books of the New Testament were written in the latter part of the first century. He points out that "... the earliest extant manuscripts, trifling scraps excepted, are of the fourth century – say from 250 to 300 years later."

This may seem a considerable interval, but it is nothing compared with the gap that separates the great classical authors from the earliest surviving manuscripts of their works. For example, scholars believe that they have, in all essentials, an accurate text of seven plays of Sophocles. Yet the earliest substantial manuscript upon which it is based was written more than 1,400 years after the poet's death!

Writing along similar lines, F.F. Bruce, former Professor of New Testament Studies at the University of Manchester, explains that, of the 14 books of the _Histories of Tacitus_ (circa A.D. 100), only four and one-half survive ( _The New Testament Documents,_ p.16). And his minor works ( _Dialogus de Oritoribus, Agricola, Germania_ ) all descend from a 10th-century copy.

Bruce also points out that _The History of Thucydides_ (circa 460-400 BC) comes to us from eight manuscripts, the earliest dating from circa A.D. 900 along with a few papyrus scraps from the beginning of the Christian era.

"The same is true for Herodotus," Bruce says, "Yet no classical scholar would listen to an argument that the authenticity of Herodotus or Thucydides is in doubt because the earliest manuscripts of their works which are of use to us are over 1,300 years later than the originals" (pp. 16-17).

Harold Greenlee agrees with Bruce, and states the obvious conclusion: "Since scholars accept as generally trustworthy the writings of the ancient classics—even though the earliest manuscripts were written so long after the original writings, and the number of extant manuscripts is in many cases so small – it is clear that the reliability of the text of the New Testament is assured" ( _Introduction to New Testament Textual Criticism,_ p. 16).

### Gospel truth

As we mentioned earlier, the bibliographic test examines the quality of the textual transmission by which documents reach us. And in this context, the New Testament – including the Gospels of Matthew, Mark, Luke and John – sits right at the top of the class.

But the bibliographic test cannot establish the "inspiration" of the Gospels. It can't even demonstrate that the content of the Gospels – such as the sayings and actions of Jesus – are "historical fact." Graham Stanton, Professor of New Testament Studies at King's College, University of London, puts it well:

#### No amount of historical evidence for the life and teaching of Jesus ever proves "Gospel truth." After all, some who saw and heard Jesus for themselves drew the conclusion that he was a magician and false prophet. Proof cannot reside either in any new papyrus fragment (however early its date), or in any artifact uncovered by archaeologists. ( _Gospel Truth,_ 192)

Dr. Stanton then concludes:

#### Down through the centuries Christianity has taken many forms – and it still does today. None the less, Christians of all persuasions have always insisted that God has disclosed his purposes for humanity in the life, death, and resurrection of Jesus. So if historical reconstruction of the actions and teaching of Jesus is at odds with this central theological conviction, then "Gospel truth" is called in question. (193)

The historical reconstruction of Jesus' life and ministry is not "at odds with this central theological conviction," but it is in absolute harmony with the most fundamental tenet of the Christian faith, "... that God was reconciling the world to himself in Christ ..." (2 Corinthians 5:19).

### Matthew found at Oxford!

On Christmas Eve, 1994, _The Times_ (London) ran a front-page story entitled: "Oxford papyrus is 'eye-witness record of the life of Christ.'" Apparently a German Bible scholar, Carsten Thiede, had found fragments of Matthew's Gospel at Magdalen College, Oxford. The fragments had been acquired at Luxor in Egypt in 1901 by Charles B. Huleatt, a former scholar at Magdalen. Huleatt gave the fragments to his college that same year.

The first fragment contained parts of Matthew 26:7-8 on one side and parts of Matthew 26:31 on the other. The second fragment contained parts of Matthew 26:10 and of verses 32-33. The third fragment contained parts of Matthew 26:14-15 and of verses 22-23.

They were first published by the famous papyrologist, C.H. Roberts, in 1953. Roberts recognized that, because there was writing on both sides of the fragments, they had come from a codex (the predecessor of the modern book) and not from a papyrus roll.

Collaborating with other scholars of his day, Roberts dated the fragments to the late second century. However, 40 years later, _The Times_ quoted Carsten Thiede as saying that the fragments might date from the middle of the first century, a date which, if confirmed, would revolutionize scholarly understanding of the origins of the Gospels.

_The Times_ pointed its readers to Thiede's forthcoming discussion of his findings in the January 1995 issue of _Zeitschrift für Papyrologie und Epigraphie_ (if any of our readers are interested in learning more about Thiede's views, this article was reprinted in _Tyndale Bulletin_ 46 [1995], pp. 29-42).

As it turned out, there was a serious discrepancy between the sensational claims made in _The Times_ and the cautious tone of the academic journal. Carsten Thiede had actually concluded: "...it may be argued that it (the Matthew papyrus) could be redated from the late second to the late first century, some time after the destruction of the Temple in Jerusalem (in A.D. 70)." However, most scholars today feel that there is no persuasive evidence in favor of a first-century dating of these Magdalen fragments.

In the words of Graham Stanton: "They are certainly not from the first century. They may well be part of the earliest surviving copy of the four Gospels brought together in one codex: our earliest witness to a momentous development within early Christianity."

### Suggestions for further reading

##### Aland, Kurt, and Barbara Aland. _The Text of the New Testament._ Eerdmans, revised edition, 1989.

##### Black, D.A., and D.S. Dockery. _New Testament Criticism and Interpretation._ Zondervan, 1991.

##### Brown, R.E. _The Critical Meaning of the Bible._ Chapman and Paulist Press, 1981.

##### Ladd, G.E. _The New Testament and Criticism._ Eerdmans, 1966.

##### Marshall, I. H., ed. _New Testament Interpretation._ Paternoster, 1977, and Eerdmans, 1978.

##### Metzger, Bruce. _The Text of the New Testament._ Oxford University Press, 1964; revised edition, 1992.

##### Vaganay, L., and Christian-Bernard Amphoux. _An Introduction to New Testament Textual Criticism._ Cambridge University Press, 1991.

### Glossary

##### AUTOGRAPH: A reference to the original manuscript of an author's work. Since we do not possess any original manuscripts of the Bible, scholars must work with later copies.

##### BIBLE: From the Latin, biblia, the name given to the Holy Scriptures that include the Old and New Testaments. Originally the term comes from biblos, the center of the papyrus plant, which was used to create writing material. The written product was then referred to as a biblos. John Chrysostom, Bishop of Constantinople from A.D. 397 to 407, is credited with being the first person to use the plural ta biblia ("books") as a designation for the Old and New Testaments.

##### CODEX: Ancient manuscripts of either papyrus or vellum (made from the skins of cattle or other animals) that were put into book form rather than a scroll.

##### CRITICISM: From the Greek, krino, meaning "to judge, discriminate, decide." Not to be considered as a negative term in New Testament studies.

##### GOSPEL: From the Greek euangelion, meaning "good news." Later designated as a book that tells the good news of the life and teaching of Jesus.

##### PAPYRUS: A plant that grows in the delta area of the Nile in Egypt that was used as a writing material from the fourth century BC to the seventh century AD.

##### SCROLL, ROLL: The product of pasting parchment or papyrus sheets side by side to form a long continuous strip that could be rolled up to make a scroll.

##### TESTAMENT: From the Latin testamentum, which was used to translate the Hebrew and Greek words for "covenant." Since the time of Tertullian it has been used to designate the two main divisions of Scripture: the Old and New Testaments.

##### VULGATE: The Latin version of the Bible produced by Jerome in the fourth century AD and ratified by the Council of Trent in 1546 as the official Scripture for the Roman Catholic Church.

###### ~ ~ ~ ~ ~

###### back to table of contents

## The Search for the Real Words of Jesus

###### Some scholars think the Gospels attribute sayings to Jesus  
he never made. The Gospel writers denied that they  
put their own ideas on Jesus' lips. Who is right?

By Paul Kroll

In the 1990s, a group of scholars called the Jesus Seminar created headline news, especially in the United States. To put it simply, they questioned whether the Bible is the inspired word of God.

The seminar was composed of specialists in the New Testament Gospels. They taught at leading universities and seminaries in North America and represented every major Christian denomination and tradition. The Jesus Seminar staked out a heady goal for itself. It hoped to recover the actual words Jesus spoke, uncover what he really thought and discover which deeds recorded in the Bible he accomplished.

At its spring 1991 meeting, the Jesus Seminar concluded its first phase—six years of debating and voting on the words of Jesus. In that autumn, the seminar began its second phase, analyzing the biblical accounts of Jesus' life and deeds.

During their quest to discover the true voice of Jesus, the seminar rejected about 80 percent of his words, calling them later creations. The discarded words of Jesus included statements:

**About his death.** Most seminar members are convinced Jesus did not predict his death as the Gospel accounts describe. Nine in 10 think "Jesus had no special foreknowledge of his death," says Robert W. Funk, the Jesus Seminar's founder.

**On the cross.** The Gospels attribute some well-known statements to Jesus as he was dying. Among them is: "My God, My God, why have You forsaken Me?" (Matthew 27:46, New King James throughout). Such sayings were all dismissed by the seminar as the later "work of the individual evangelists."

**During a Jewish trial.** All four Gospels describe a Jewish trial and condemnation of Jesus before his crucifixion (see, for example, Mark 14:53-65). An overwhelming majority of the Jesus Seminar (97 percent) do not think any such trial occurred. "The Jewish role in these events is a figment of Christian imagination," wrote Dr. Funk in _The Fourth R,_ a publication of the seminar's Westar Institute.

**After the resurrection.** All four Gospels end with Jesus talking with and teaching the disciples _after_ his resurrection. The Jesus Seminar does not accept any after-death words of Jesus. It says Gospel "statements attributed to the risen Jesus are not admissible as evidence for the historical Jesus."

**Not overheard by others.** On several occasions the Gospel writers report Jesus' conversations when neither they nor other humans were present. These conversations include Jesus' words during his time in the wilderness and his prayer in the Garden of Gethsemane the night of his arrest. The seminar dismisses these verbal portraits. "Words attributed to Jesus in the absence of an auditor," said the seminar, "are assumed to be the fiction of the storyteller." They "cannot be used to determine what Jesus said."

**About founding a church.** In Matthew 16:18, Jesus reportedly said, "I will build My church." The seminar disagrees that Jesus could make such a statement. "Jesus had no intention of starting a new religion," Dr. Funk says, stating the seminar's majority position. "He had no idea that a new religion would transpire or that he would become a cult figure in it." In Dr. Funk's view, Jesus "would have been appalled by it."

**In exalted titles.** In the Gospel of John, Jesus refers to himself in exalted "I am" statements. He says "I am the bread of life," "the light of the world," "the resurrection and the life" (John 6:48; 8:12; 11:25). Throughout John, Jesus stresses his preexistence and preeminence. "Before Abraham was, I AM," he says (John _8:58). "_ I and My Father are one" (John 10:30). The Jesus Seminar does not think Jesus viewed himself this way, says Marcus Borg, a critical scholar and seminar member. "In the judgment of the seminar (and of most mainstream scholarship since the last century)," he writes, "Jesus did not speak that way." Dr. Funk says the seminar scholars almost unanimously feel that Jesus "didn't think of himself as divine."

**About the Second Coming.** The Gospels record Jesus' insistence that he would return to set up the kingdom of God on earth (Matthew 24:29-31; Luke 21:25-27). Most seminar participants do not think Jesus expected to return. "The Jesus Seminar thinks he didn't speak of the coming of the Son of Man at all," said Dr. Borg. Almost all the Fellows (97 percent) believe Jesus did _not_ expect to return or usher in a new age "either now or in the distant future," says Dr. Funk.

**Referring to fulfilled Scriptures.** The Gospel writers have Jesus apply several Hebrew scriptures to his life and ministry (Luke 4:16-21; John 5:39-46). The Jesus Seminar rejects these as words put on the lips of Jesus. Dr. Funk says, "The Christian community culled the Hebrew Scriptures for proof that Jesus was truly the Messiah." The Gospel writers, especially Matthew, made "the event fit the prophecy."

### Were Jesus' teachings changed?

The seminar believes most of Jesus' statements and teachings as reported in the Gospels are inaccurate. The Gospels are called "gilded portraits" of Jesus. This premise, the seminar points out in its _Gospel of Mark,_ is "shared by all critical scholars of whatever theological persuasion."

Did the Gospel writers create their own fake Jesus narratives and statements, or did they faithfully preserve his teaching? The question is of more than casual academic interest. If the Gospel writers perpetrated a theological hoax, their Gospels would not be "gospel truth." How could they be the word of a God who does not lie? (Titus 1:2).

Suppose, as the seminar maintains, the Gospel writers created Jesus' sayings. Let us say for argument's sake the seminar has discovered the almost inaudible voice of the true "historical Jesus" amidst the cacophony of purported faked conversations and bogus narratives in the Gospels.

What are the consequences to us of a Jesus who had no concept of dying for humanity's sins; did not found his church; did not think of himself as divine? On what basis can the Christian hope of the resurrection and salvation be established?

Consider the implication of just one seminar claim—that Jesus did not announce his return to set up the kingdom of God on earth. If this claim were true, it would put the Christian hope in serious jeopardy. The Bible links the resurrection of the dead and salvation with Jesus' return (see Matthew 24:29-31; 1 Corinthians 15:51-52; 1 Thessalonians 4:13-17).

We need to know whether the Gospels are the true word of God or the fraudulent words of men. The Jesus Seminar, of course, does not think the biblical Gospels are the word of God. Dr. Borg writes in _The Fourth R, "_ The gospels are human documents, not 'divine' documents." Like other Christian writings and creeds, the Gospels are "human products" and should not be "accorded divine status."

"There is a price one pays" for considering the Gospels as purely human products, admits Dr. Borg. The consequence is that "there are no divinely guaranteed formulations of truth." According to Dr. Borg, "The Gospels are seen as _the developing tradition of the early Christian community"_ and "reflect the viewpoints of their authors" and "the Christian communities for which they spoke."

The Gospel writers, however, repudiate these notions. They claim to have accurately portrayed Jesus' life and teaching.

### John a trustworthy witness

The writer of the Gospel of John claims he was an eyewitness of _all_ the teachings and circumstances of Jesus' life that he writes about. He maintains his Gospel is a true account of Jesus' thoughts and words.

John said of himself and his Gospel: "He who has seen has testified, and his testimony is true; and he knows that he is telling the truth" (John 19:35). A second time he says: "This is the disciple who testifies of these things, and wrote these things; and we know that his testimony is true" (John 21:24).

John was there when Jesus spoke and worked; he knew Jesus personally. In a letter to the church, John wrote of this Jesus "which we have heard, which we have seen with our eyes, which we have looked upon, and our hands have handled" (1 John 1:1).

John, in this same epistle, when speaking of Jesus, insists that he and the others "have seen, and bear witness, and declare to you that eternal life which was with the Father and was manifested to us" (verse 2). John maintained that he wrote a true testimony of Jesus' words and works: "That which we have seen and heard we declare to you" (verse 3).

### Mark knew eyewitnesses

As a teenager, Mark may even have seen and heard Jesus. The Gospel of Mark refers to "a certain young man" who followed the arrested Christ and then fled (Mark 14:51-52). Many scholars think that this story, which plays no role in the Gospel and is not found in any other Gospel, is a cryptic reference to the author.

Mark clearly had access to Jesus' teachings through these important eyewitnesses when writing his Gospel. For this reason, we can have confidence in what Mark reported of Jesus' words, teachings and life.

The Gospel of Mark was written by an individual who may have been only a _partial_ witness to Jesus' life and teachings. Should this invalidate his Gospel account? Mark was intimately associated with the apostles and eyewitnesses. He was the cousin of Barnabas, a co-worker with Paul (Colossians 4:10) and is further identified as John Mark in Acts 12:12.

Robert H. Stein, professor of New Testament at Bethel Theological Seminary, points out that Mark "lived in Jerusalem and his home was a center of the early church." Because of this, "He was no doubt privy to much eyewitness testimony," writes Dr. Stein.

The Bible tells us Mark was closely associated with the apostle Paul in preaching the gospel message (Acts 12:25; 13:5; 15:36-39). Mark is called a fellow laborer with Paul (Philemon 24). At the end of his life, Paul instructs Timothy: "Get Mark and bring him with you, for he is useful to me for ministry" (2 Timothy 4:11). As well, a close relationship existed between the apostle Peter and Mark, evidenced by Peter's reference to him as "my son" (1 Peter 5:13).

###### ~ ~ ~ ~ ~

###### back to table of contents

## The Gospels and Us

###### The witnesses to Jesus' life and their associates affirm  
that they correctly passed on Jesus' teachings to us.  
Can we believe their testimony?  
Where do we stand if we disbelieve?

Jesus did not write any of the Bible. Neither does the risen Christ speak directly to all the church today. We live about 2,000 years after Jesus' earthly ministry ended. We don't have tape recordings of what Jesus said. We may even lack the exact wording of his teaching.

Of course, the issue is not over _exact_ words or whether the Gospels contain Jesus' precise statements. The issue is whether the Gospels give us God the Father's word as taught by Jesus and as faithfully described and applied by his authorized representatives, the apostles and their co-workers.

We cannot run and hide from our dependence on those who wrote the New testament Gospels. They are unique individuals in the history of the church. These writers saw Jesus' mighty works and heard his words, or they worked closely with people who had. Only these individuals were in a position to pass on to us the correct Jesus traditions.

Those who had been with Jesus in the flesh, such as the original apostles, said they witnessed his words and teaching. Because they saw and heard Jesus, they believed (John 20:24-29). But what about those living after the apostolic age—perhaps in our day? On what basis can we believe? Jesus said of us: "Blessed are those who have not seen and yet have believed" (verse 29).

We have not personally heard Jesus teach what is written in the Gospels. We did not experience his miracles. We did not observe his crucifixion and resurrection. Nor can we prove in a scientific sense that they occurred. We are called on to believe _without_ having seen what we must believe in.

What are we to do? We must see Jesus Christ through the writings of the eyewitnesses and their associates. We have the choice of either believing or rejecting what the witnesses and their co-workers said of Jesus. If we spurn their testimony, we have no foundation or authority for what we believe as Christians. It is that simple.

Critical scholars do not accept the claims of the witnesses or Gospel writers. They want corroborating, scientific proof. Robert W. Funk, the Jesus Seminar's founder, says the Jesus Seminar's conclusions about Jesus' words are not determined "by prior religious convictions, but by the evidence." Seminar member Marcus Borg writes, "One cannot settle historical questions by 'belief.'"

However, there is no escaping belief. All attempts at a 'scientific,' critical-historical analysis of Jesus' teachings must ultimately fail. Everyone begins with certain beliefs about what could or could not happen.

By what test can we determine whether Jesus arose from the dead? Or that the disciples talked with the risen Jesus? Or that Jesus' miracles occurred? Or that statements in the Hebrew Scriptures were fulfilled in Jesus' life? No scientific, historical or critical analysis can discover to everyone's satisfaction the yea or nay of such things.

Judging the Bible through human logic forces critical scholars into circular reasoning. They must _first_ decide what they think Jesus taught or how he spoke. For example, would he talk about a climactic end of the age? Or would he predict his own death? Then the seminar analyzes the Gospels to see if they fit the portrait of Jesus it has constructed.

The Gospel writers do not ask us to enter into this spiral of intellectual uncertainty. They simply say to individuals through the ages: Put your confidence in what we have said about Jesus.

John said he knew he was telling the truth about Jesus (John 19:35). Luke said his account was an accurate one (Luke 1:1-3). Matthew and Mark also present their Gospels as faithful reflections of the teachings and work of Jesus of Nazareth. Do we have the spiritual ears to believe what they wrote—to believe God directed their witness? (2 Timothy 3:16; 2 Peter 1:20-21).

### Luke used eyewitness testimony

The author of the Gospel of Luke probably was _not_ an eyewitness of Jesus' life and teachings. Luke, however, puts forth strong reasons why we should consider his Gospel trustworthy. He said his Gospel is solidly based on the teachings of "those who from the beginning were eyewitnesses and ministers of the word" (Luke 1:2). Luke also claimed to have had "perfect understanding of all things from the very first" (verse 3). Because of this, Luke felt qualified to write "an orderly account" of the teachings "most surely believed" among members of the church (verses 3 and 1).

In Acts, Luke commented further on his purpose for writing his Gospel: to deal with "all that Jesus began _both to do and teach,_ until the day in which He was taken up" to heaven (Acts 1:1-2, emphasis ours).

Luke was the equivalent of our modern investigative reporter. According to Acts 21:15 through 27:2, Luke spent considerable time in Judea. He had ample time and opportunity to investigate what he wrote about Jesus. Luke could have referred to various written documents and oral reports detailing the teachings and circumstances of Jesus' life. As well, he no doubt consulted witnesses and church leaders at the church in Jerusalem.

Luke traveled with Paul and would have known what Paul taught. (Notice the references to "we" and "us" in Acts 16:11-15 and 20:6-16, for example.) He was Paul's "beloved physician" (Colossians 4:14) and a fellow laborer (Philemon 24). Luke stood by Paul to the end during his final persecution at Rome, even though others fled (2 Timothy 4:11).

We should consider that Luke's Gospel was researched and written more than 1,900 years closer to Jesus' life than were the conclusions of the Jesus Seminar. Whose testimony has the advantage of proximity to apostolic times? The reader can have confidence that Luke based his Gospel on the true apostolic witness to Jesus' teachings.

### Early church teachings

Clearly, the Gospel writers did not create spurious "Jesus sayings." Nevertheless some critical biblical scholars, such as the Jesus Seminar members, argue that the early church created Jesus' sayings to justify its teachings.

If this argument were valid, "We would expect to find those needs reflected and dealt with in the Gospels," writes New Testament scholar Robert Stein in _The Synoptic Problem._ This need for justification would be, he says, especially true regarding "the most important religious issues that the early church faced."

The most volatile issue would have concerned the physical circumcision of gentile converts. "If the early church was creating gospel traditions to meet its religious needs," wrote Dr. Stein, "one would expect to find something on this subject."

However, no "circumcision materials" exist in the Gospels. The four Gospels contain only a single reference to circumcision, and it doesn't deal with the controversy in the church (John 7:22-23). The lack of circumcision material in the Gospels is evidence "in favor of the view that the church tended to transmit the Jesus traditions faithfully," Dr. Stein points out.

On the other hand, the book of Acts deals with the circumcision controversy in detail. The apostles and elders even meet to decide this question (Acts 15:1-29). However, no "Jesus sayings" are cited to justify their decision that gentiles did not need to be circumcised.

A careful reading of Acts shows the church's teaching on circumcision does not rely on the sayings of Jesus. No "Jesus proof texts" are cited. The church acts in Jesus' name and by his authority, but does not invent any sayings to prove their point.

Bible scholar Thorlief Boman has observed that there are 24 speeches in the book of Acts. These account for about 300 of Acts' 1,007 verses. In these speeches, there is only a single saying of Jesus (Acts 20:35). This lack of Jesus' sayings and stories demonstrates, says Dr. Boman, "that the church did not create sayings of Jesus and read them back upon the lips of Jesus."

In the words of British biblical scholar, George B. Caird, there is "not one shred of evidence that the early church ever concocted sayings of Jesus in order to settle any of its problems."

### For further reading:

##### Ben Witherington III, _The Jesus Quest: The Third Search for the Jew of Nazareth_ (InterVarsity, 1995).

##### Darrell Bock, "The Words of Jesus in the Gospels: Live, Jive, or Memorex?" in _Jesus Under Fire_ (edited by Michael J. Wilkins and J. P. Moreland; Zondervan, 1995).

##### Richard B. Hays, "The Corrected Jesus," _First Things_ 43 (May 1994): 43-48.

###### ~ ~ ~ ~ ~

###### back to table of contents

## How Do We Know About Jesus?

###### The Gospels are not the only historical record of Jesus.  
Classical historians mention him, too. Or do they?

By Jim Herst

The four evangelists, Matthew, Mark, Luke and John, have given us a remarkable record of the life and work of Jesus Christ. But some people discount them as biased. They want to see evidence of Jesus from historians who were not themselves part of the Christian community.

It seems that such independent corroboration does, indeed, exist. Tantalizing scraps of evidence have come down to us in the writings of ancient historians like Josephus, Tacitus and Suetonius.

But can we trust them? Do they really reinforce the Gospels with independent, unbiased evidence of Jesus?

Christians must "fight fair." Before we set too much store by these ancient records as sources, we must ask if they are reliable. Perhaps these historians were not really saying what some Christian writers want to make them say. But does it really matter? Let's take a closer look.

### The Greco-Roman sources

1) Tacitus

The first Roman historian to mention Christ is Tacitus, who wrote his last significant work, the Annals, around A.D. 115. In this treatise, Tacitus describes the great fire of Rome during the reign of Nero and the emperor's subsequent persecution of the Christians there. He states:

"Nero created scapegoats and subjected to the most refined tortures those whom the common people called 'Christians'....Their name comes from Christ, who, during the reign of Tiberius, had been executed by the procurator Pontius Pilate" (Annals 15:44).

At first glance, this is an impressive passage for the Christian apologist. But let's dig a little deeper. Where did Tacitus get his information about Jesus' execution? It is doubtful that he was quoting an official Roman document from the period because, as scholars are quick to point out, he mistakenly calls Pilate a procurator when he was actually a prefect.

Perhaps Tacitus received it from his close friend Pliny the Younger, who may well have shared the knowledge he had acquired from contact with Christians in Asia Minor. But even if this is the case, the most we can say is that Tacitus is simply repeating what Christians of his day were saying about their origins. There is not much basis here for concluding that he was presenting independent testimony about the historical figure of Jesus.

2) Suetonius

In his biography of the emperor Claudius, written around A.D. 120, Suetonius writes about the expulsion of the Jews from Rome in A.D. 49. He states: "Since the Jews were constantly causing disturbances at the instigation of Chrestus, he [Claudius] expelled them from Rome" (Claudius 25:4).

Chrestus was a popular misspelling of the Greek _Christos_ (Christ). Some scholars believe that Suetonius may have used a source that understood "Chrestus" to be Jesus. But he obviously misunderstood the police records, thinking that "Chrestus" was the name of some Jewish slave who became a ringleader during the riots of A.D. 49. Suetonius' account makes for interesting reading. But, again, it is far from being an independent witness to the historical Jesus.

3) Pliny the Younger

Pliny the Younger was proconsul of Bythinia, in Asia Minor, between A.D. 111 and 113. Pliny wrote a letter to the Emperor Trajan asking for advice on how to deal with the rapid growth of the Christian community in his area. Among other things, he describes the Christian custom of holding weekly meetings to sing praises "to Christ as to a god" (Letter 10. 96).

This passage is significant, because it is the only non-Christian source that tells us that Christians treated Christ as a "god." But Pliny is merely describing an element of Christian worship. His comments say nothing about the historicity of Jesus.

4) Lucian

The Roman satirist Lucian of Samosata lived from A.D. 115-200. In _The Passing of Perigrinus,_ Lucian mocks the Christian life, describing Christians as those who worship "that crucified sophist [Jesus] himself," and live "under his laws." Again, we learn only what some educated people from the second century may have heard about Jesus. Lucian is definitely not an independent source of historical knowledge concerning Jesus of Nazareth.

5) Josephus

Perhaps the most significant "witness" to the life of Jesus in ancient literature is in the writings of Joseph ben Matthias, better known as Flavius Josephus (named after his patrons, the Flavian emperors Vespasian, Titus and Domitian). Josephus lived from A.D. 37 to 100, and wrote two famous works: _The Jewish War_ , which was initially drafted in Aramaic, and then translated into Greek five to ten years after the destruction of Jerusalem in A.D. 70. His second work, _Jewish Antiquities_ , was completed more than a decade later. This work was much longer, and recounts Jewish history from creation to the Jewish revolt against Rome (A.D. 66-70).

Contrary to what many Christians may think, Josephus does not give us much information about Jesus. In his 28 volumes of Jewish history, there are only two passages that mention Jesus. And even these references are difficult to assess. The trouble is that Josephus' writings were preserved for posterity by Christians (the Jews disowned him as a traitor). The texts available to us today contain statements that were added later by Christian editors. This is clearly seen in the famous Testimonium Flavianum, "the testimony of Josephus," found in Antiquities 18:63-64. It reads as follows:

#### At that time there appeared Jesus, a wise man, _if indeed someone should call him a man_. For he was a doer of startling deeds, a teacher of people who receive the truth with pleasure. And he gained a following both among many Jews and among many of Greek origin. _He was the Messiah_. And when Pilate, because of an accusation made by the leading men among us, condemned him to the cross, those who had loved him previously did not cease to do so. _For he appeared to them on the third day, living again, just as the divine prophets had spoken of these and countless other wondrous things about him_. And up until this very day the tribe of Christians, named after him, has not died out.

Scholars of Josephus have been divided over the authenticity of this entire passage, although both sides acknowledge the obvious Christian additions (marked in italics above).

On one hand, some scholars argue for the genuineness of the passage (without the italicized parts). They stress that the language and grammar are typical of Josephus' style and language.

The other school of thought argues that the passage is bogus. They point to the clear Christian redaction. But they also emphasize that there are only three Greek manuscripts of Book 18 of _The Antiquities_ – the earliest dating only to the 11th century – and the text of these is often in doubt.

The other well-known passage in _Antiquities_ is the reference to "James, the brother of Jesus who was called the Christ" ( _Antiquities_ 20:200). Scholars generally agree that this is authentic Josephus. They do so for several reasons: First, this narrative is found in the major Greek manuscript tradition of _Antiquities_ without variation. Second, Christian editors would not refer to James as "the brother of Jesus." Instead, they would use the reverential phrase, "the brother of the Lord" (see, for example, Paul's description of James in Galatians 1:19).

Third, the famous fourth-century church historian Eusebius also quotes this passage in his _Ecclesiastical History_ (2.23.22). Interestingly, Eusebius does not quote the Testimonium Flavianum.

### How do we know about Jesus?

The most we can say, then, is that Josephus is our only independent source of information about the historical Jesus. And, as we have seen, only one of his brief references to Jesus is generally recognized by the scholarly community.

So let's ask again the questions we posed at the beginning. Do these passages provide any real basis for a knowledge of Jesus as a historical figure? I think you will agree that the answer is "No." More importantly, should we use these passages as a primary means by which we bolster our faith in Jesus of Nazareth? Again, I hope you would agree that the answer is an emphatic "No!"

Our faith in Jesus Christ is not based on a few brief texts in the writings of Jewish and Greco-Roman historians – however fascinating they may be. How do we know about Jesus? Primarily through the most reliable witnesses, the Gospels – the great theological histories of Matthew, Mark, Luke and John.

Some Christians may be disappointed that all the substantial evidence for Jesus comes from Christian sources. If you are disappointed, here are a couple of questions you might want to consider:

First, why would Jesus leave any traces on the pages of secular history? He was virtually unknown – an traveling teacher who enjoyed limited popularity within a small community in a remote province on the eastern edge of the Roman empire. In the words of John P. Meier, professor of New Testament at the Catholic University of America in Washington D.C.: "Jesus was a marginal Jew leading a marginal movement in a marginal province of a vast Roman empire. The wonder is that any learned Jew or pagan would have known or referred to him at all in the first or second centuries" ( _A Marginal Jew,_ p. 56).

Second, does the fact that our evidence for Jesus comes from Christian sources mean that the evidence is too biased to be trusted? New Testament scholar Dr. R.T. France, former principal of Wycliffe Hall, Oxford University, gives us an excellent answer:

#### The Gospel writers tell us about Jesus because they think he is worth telling about, and they want others to follow him as well. But what worthwhile history or biography has ever been written by people who have no personal interest in what they write? Why should a 'bias' in favor of the subject render the history unreliable? Surely those who had been captivated by Jesus might be expected to take pains to pass on truth about him ( _Jesus 2000,_ p. 15).

Matthew, Mark, Luke and John certainly passed on the truth about Jesus. But each did so in his own unique way.

###### ~ ~ ~ ~ ~

###### back to table of contents

## What Jesus' Parables Reveal

About one third of Jesus Christ's recorded teachings  
are in the form of parables. What do they mean?

By Norman Shoaf

The good Samaritan. The pearl of great price. Counting the cost. The good shepherd. New wine in old wineskins. The prodigal son. Sheep and goats. Who hasn't heard of at least a couple of these? Jesus' New Testament parables are among the most powerful ideas in Western civilization!

These lessons are at the core of Christ's teaching. Nearly 2,000 years after Jesus gave them, his parables still sparkle with simple yet sublime insights about life—and startling yet comforting revelations about God's kingdom. But what, exactly, are parables? And what did Jesus intend that we learn from his parables?

### Understand the genre

First, let's understand that the Bible consists of different types of writing. As we read and study the Bible, we should recognize each type of genre, or in other words, literary style. You wouldn't read a recipe for lasagna as you would a suicide note. A court summons is no comic strip. Subway graffiti does not a thank-you card make. A love letter is not an encyclopedia article. They are different types of writing, produced by different authors for different audiences. They also invite different responses.

### Were parables used to hide the truth?

Mark 4:10-12 is one of the most difficult passages in the New Testament. These verses, with parallels in Matthew 13:10-15 and Luke 8:9-10, indicate that Jesus wanted to _hide_ truth as well as reveal it. Mark 4 opens, "He taught them [a crowd] many things by parables" (verse 2). The chapter then relates the parable of the sower (verses 3-8).

Jesus' disciples didn't get the point. "When he was alone, the Twelve and the others around him asked him about the parables. He told them, 'The secret of the kingdom of God has been given to you. But to those on the outside everything is said in parables so that, "they may be ever seeing but never perceiving, and ever hearing but never understanding; otherwise they might turn and be forgiven"'" (verses 10-12). Here Jesus quoted Isaiah 6:9-10.

Is the kingdom of God a secret, given only to a chosen few? Did Jesus tell his parables, which seem so simple, so accessible and so timeless, to keep outsiders from understanding the truth? Does God not want to forgive sinners?

No one can come to Christ unless first drawn by God the Father (John 6:44). Yet God does not want "anyone to perish, but everyone to come to repentance" (2 Peter 3:9). In fact, God "commands all people everywhere to repent" (Acts 17:30). The explanation of the parable has in fact been published in the Bible, so that everyone can read it.

Jesus directed the story of the sower to each listener "who has ears to hear" (Mark 4:9). Jesus' message demands that we respond. "This is the one I esteem," God says, "he who is humble and contrite in spirit, and trembles at my word" (Isaiah 66:2). But not everyone approaches the truth of God in the same manner.

Jesus intended that people understand the parable of the sower. After all, he went right on to explain it (Mark 4:14-20). Different people respond differently when confronted with the truth. Some of the sown seed (representing the Word of God) is eaten by birds (snatched away by Satan). Some falls on shallow soil and fails to survive in the hot sun (hearers not rooted in the truth). Some is choked by thorns (cares of this life). But some of the seed falls on good soil and produces a crop (hearers who accept God's truth and produces spiritual fruit).

_The International Standard Bible Encyclopedia_ says: "Jesus' teaching confronted people with radical demands, and not all were willing to comply. Some followed Him in discipleship, but others were actually driven further from the Kingdom.... It is not intellectual but volitional blindness and deafness that is in view" (vol. 3, page 657).

Jesus' listeners saw salvation personified in Jesus, the Son of God. They heard the most important message ever preached. Yet most didn't understand—they failed to believe and become converted! Matthew 13 includes this episode at the point when Jesus began to concentrate on private teaching of his disciples, rather than public preaching. John 12:40 quotes Isaiah 6:10 at this same point.

Jesus' message was not well received by hard-hearted people. What kind of heart do you have to hear the Savior of the world?

Many types of writing make up the Bible. Parables, or parabolic passages, concentrated in the Gospels, are one of those genres. The Bible also contains legal codes, such as those you can read in the books of Moses. You will find poetry in the psalms and elsewhere. There are also prophecies, histories, hymns, letters and speeches in the Bible. There are allegories, metaphors, similes, epics, riddles and wise sayings. Bible students call yet other sections didactic, apocalyptic and eschatological. They are all inspired by God. They are "God-breathed" and "useful for teaching, rebuking, correcting and training in righteousness, so that those who belong to God may be thoroughly equipped for every good work" (2 Timothy 3:16-17).

But we need to see these different literary genres—parables included—for what they are, in their contexts. We need to learn as much as we can about who wrote them, and why, and to whom. Legal codes and delicate poetry are different. Sweeping epics are not science texts. Letters may whisper personal details about their writers even as they defy being used to nail down historical or prophetic dates. Metaphors aren't meant literally. Failure to understand the literary style can lead to misunderstanding and misinterpretation. How, then, should we look at Jesus' parables?

### The background to Jesus' parables

Jesus' parables have been called "heavenly stories with earthly meanings," or "earthly stories with heavenly meanings." But there is more to them than that. Both the Hebrew word _masal_ and the Greek _parabole_ are broadly used of proverbs, allegories, riddles, illustrations and stories. They can refer to any striking speech formulated to stimulate thought.

Interpreter C.H. Dodd, in his 1935 classic _Parables of the Kingdom,_ defined a parable as "a metaphor or simile drawn from nature or common life, arresting the hearer by its vividness or strangeness, and leaving the mind in sufficient doubt about its precise application to tease it into active thought" (page 16). _The International Standard Bible Encyclopedia_ states that parables are "almost always formulated to reveal and illustrate the kingdom of God" (vol. 3, page 656).

Parables are present, but not common, in the Old Testament. Perhaps the parable that most closely resembles Jesus' parables is Nathan's story of the pet lamb, which moved King David to repent (2 Samuel 12:1-13). Judges 9:8-15 and 2 Kings 14:9 symbolize kings and nations as talking plants and a wild beast; these passages are more like fables.

Was Jesus thinking of Ezekiel 17:22-24 when he told the parable of the mustard seed (Mark 4:30-32 and parallel passages)? His parable of the wicked tenants (Mark 12:1-9) echoes Isaiah 5:1-7 (the song of the vineyard). Jesus' parables often referred to nature to picture the spectacular growth of God's kingdom from a small beginning.

Outside the Gospels, the Greek _parabole_ appears in the New Testament only in Hebrews 9:9, where the New King James Version says the tabernacle (verse 8) and sacrifices were "symbolic" for the present time, and in Hebrews 11:19, which says that Abraham, "figuratively speaking,'' received Isaac back from death after proving he was willing to sacrifice his son.

### Jesus' teaching was unique

Early rabbis included parables in their writings. These parables began or ended with, and explained, Old Testament texts. Jesus' use of parables differed markedly. "The NT parables," notes _The International Standard Bible Encyclopedia,_ "almost never function in this way [to explain Old Testament passages]: Jesus came not to exegete Scripture, but to reveal the new age of God's kingdom" (ibid.).

Thus, as we saw above, Jesus Christ's "nature parables" (for example, the mustard seed) showed how God's kingdom would start small but become all-encompassing. The kingdom's present aspects would seem unspectacular, its ultimate realization amazing.

His "discovery parables" (the hidden treasure, Matthew 13:44; or the pearl of great price, verses 45-46) show that God's kingdom is so valuable we can happily abandon all else for it. His "contrast parables'' (the rich man and Lazarus, Luke 16:19-31; or the Pharisee and the tax collector, Luke 18:9-14) illuminate how much God loves even the lost and dispossessed and welcomes them into fellowship with him.

The "a fortiori parables"—those that ask "How much more..." (the friend at midnight, Luke 11:5-8; or the persistent widow, Luke 18:1-8)—show how much God can be trusted to act righteously. If even humans won't act in certain evil ways, Jesus asked, "How much more will your Father in heaven give...?" (Luke 11:13).

"The parables focus on God and his kingdom and in doing so reveal what kind of God he is, by what principles he works, and what he expects of humanity," comments the _Baker Encyclopedia of the Bible_ (vol. 2, page 1609).

Jesus' use of parables was so masterful, and the kingdom-centered message of his parables so revolutionary, that no other New Testament personality tried to copy this aspect of his teaching. The uniqueness of Jesus' parables bolsters their place at the core of our Savior's message for humanity.

Even critics as extreme as those who make up the Jesus Seminar, who discard much of the Gospels as fabrications by early Christians, believe that in the simple, moving and transcendently beautiful messages of the parables we come as close to the historical Jesus as we are likely to get.

### Parables in the Synoptic Gospels

When reading the four Gospels, you have probably noticed similarities in the accounts by Matthew, Mark and Luke. Their books are called the Synoptic Gospels—meaning "from the same perspective." On the other hand, John's Gospel is obviously written from a different perspective. The authors of these books probably used some of the same source material for their accounts. For example, Luke, in the introduction to his account, freely states he used several sources for his research.

### Hearing Jesus' message

Jesus was a master storyteller. His parables contain striking images, dramatic action and bold character development, all built around universal themes that have touched people for two millennia. Yet the parables offer minimal detail. Often Jesus provided no clear explanations for the stories, leaving them open to multiple interpretations through the ages. So how can we know what the parables of Jesus mean? Some interpreters make the mistake of reading more into some parables than Jesus ever intended. In the other ditch are those who fail to catch what some parables clearly emphasize.

Until this century, most interpreters _allegorized_ the parables. This means they looked for symbolic significance in as many details in the stories as possible. Augustine (A.D. 354-430), an early church father, explained the parable of the good Samaritan (Luke 10:30-37) in this way:

The man going down from Jerusalem pictured Adam leaving the peaceful place that was Eden. The robbers who beat him were the devil and his demons, who persuaded Adam to sin. The priest and the Levite (the Law and the Prophets) offered the victim no help, but the Samaritan (Christ) rescued him, pouring oil and wine (comfort and exhortation) onto the man's wounds. The donkey on which the Samaritan, or Christ, placed the man symbolized the church: the apostle Paul was the innkeeper. This is going too far, reading into the parable far more detail than Jesus intended (Paul was not even a Christian yet!)

By contrast, many modern interpreters have abandoned the allegorical approach. They try to reject the temptation to read their own ideas into the parables, which they believe has led to centuries of abuse of Jesus' message. These interpreters believe that each parable has only one main point. Others argue that a parable might make up to three main points, one for each of the main characters in the story.

This was the case, they point out, with parables in classical Greek literature, and this is how Jesus' listeners, in the culture of his day, would have looked at his parables. This view sees the parable of the good Samaritan simply as an exhortation to imitate the Samaritan's outgoing concern for his neighbor. This interpretation seems consistent with the explanation Jesus himself gave for this parable (verse 37).

The story of the rich man and Lazarus (Luke 16:19-31) is another example. It's hard to wrench from this parable exact details about the afterlife. Jesus was drawing on images from Jewish and Egyptian folklore, which his listeners would have realized, to show the gulf between arrogant people in this world and those who by humble submission to God come to be in the kingdom of God.

Many modern Bible students try not to over-interpret the parables. Nevertheless, they believe Jesus gave some details not just to add spice to his stories, but to make important points.

### "Parables" in John

The Gospel of John does not contain the word _parable._ But John 10:6, following verses 1-5, Jesus' metaphor of the Good Shepherd, and John 16:25, 29, following verses 20-24, about the woman in travail, translate as "figure" the Greek _paroimia,_ meaning "wise saying" or "riddle."

More than once, the Greek translation of the Old Testament uses _paroimia_ for the Hebrew _masal._ The Good Shepherd and the woman in travail are similar to the shorter parables in Matthew, Mark and Luke. A.M. Hunter, author of _According to John,_ identifies the following "parables" in the book of John:

None of these "parables" takes the same form as the longer parables in Matthew, Mark and Luke. Yet Jesus' unique style of teaching is still apparent. Thus these "parables" help establish the historical continuity between the fourth Gospel and the Synoptic Gospels.

### Let the parables speak to you

If we want to understand God's Word, we need to let the parables speak to our day with vigor and importance. "Parables require their hearers to pass judgment on the events of the story and having done so to realize that they must make a similar judgment in their own lives," states the _Baker Encyclopedia of the Bible_ (vol. 2, page 1609).

How can you judge your own life by hearing the messages of Jesus' parables? Study each parable thoroughly, laying aside any preconceived idea of what you think it says—or that you would like it to say. Look at the context in which you find the parable. Doing so may offer clues about its meaning. (But understand that the Gospels often record Jesus' parables without telling exactly when he gave them, or to whom, or why.)

Take note of the "rule of end stress." The climax—and point—of most parables comes at the end. Look for principles that reveal what God is like, what his kingdom is all about, how he wants to relate to humanity—and how he expects us to respond to him.

What does the parable tell you about your relationship with God and Christ? The answers you find to this question are the most important points of truth in the Bible, for, as Jesus said. "This is eternal life: that they may know you, the only true God, and Jesus Christ, whom you have sent" (John 17:3).

How does God want a citizen of his kingdom to behave? All of Jesus' parables contain parts of the answer to this question, for the present and future realities of the kingdom of God are what Christ's life, work, message, death, resurrection and High Priesthood are all about.

What is your attitude toward that kingdom? "Again," Jesus said in a parable, "the kingdom of heaven is like a merchant looking for fine pearls. When he found one of great value, he went away and sold everything he had and bought it" (Matthew 13:45-46).

###### ~ ~ ~ ~ ~

###### back to table of contents

## How Many Points in a Parable?

Book review: _Interpreting the Parables_ by Craig L. Blomberg. 1990.  
Downers Grove, Illinois: InterVarsity Press. 334 pages.

By Michael Morrison

Scholars have often proclaimed that each of Jesus' parables makes only one main point. Classic analyses by Adolf Jülicher, C.H. Dodd, Joachim Jeremias and Robert Stein decry the overly allegorical approaches of medieval commentators, who saw spiritual significance in every detail.

But scholars do not agree on what the _main_ point of each parable is. Several points often vie for priority. Some scholars try to generalize the lesson so much that the parable teaches little at all. Some focus on what the parables say about God; others focus on the kingdom of God or on his disciples or his church.

Craig Blomberg (Ph.D. from Aberdeen, now a professor at Denver Seminary) responds to the problem of parable interpretation. In the first half of his book, he surveys ancient and contemporary approaches, effectively challenges the prevailing consensus and offers a moderate approach. In the second half, he applies his principles to Jesus' 36 parables, giving helpful summaries of different scholars' views on each parable and concisely summarizing the parables' teaching.

### Problems of the consensus

In the introduction, he summarizes "the scholarly consensus" (pages 15-19): "Modern scholarship has...rejected allegorical interpretation."

A major reason is that no consensus could be reached on what each of the details represented. For example, the prodigal son's robe was variously interpreted as

#### standing for sinlessness, spiritual gifts, the imputation of Christ's righteousness, or the sanctity of the soul. Clearly all of these views recognized that the father gave the robe to the prodigal to indicate his restoration to the family. But it was impossible to agree on how to match the robe with one particular aspect of a new Christian's relationship with his heavenly Father. Presumably the lesson to be learned is that the robe is not meant to be allegorized.

But the one-point approach also has weaknesses. Scholars who strenuously object to allegory admit that Jesus' audiences would have understood some of the major features to correspond to facets of the real world. And scholars who stress "only one main point" nevertheless manage to combine two or more points into some of their summary sentences.

"The parables as they appear in the Gospels do have a few undeniable allegorical elements." (Blomberg writes "as they appear in the Gospels" because some scholars recognize allegorical elements but claim that they are developments of the early church rather than being authentic words of Jesus. Allegory, some say, is an inferior form of rhetoric and would therefore not be used by Jesus.)

### Allegorical features

Blomberg then presents his own approach, gathering supporting evidence from a variety of scholars. (The book has copious footnotes, which increases its usefulness.) Part of the debate is semantic, concerning the definition of allegory:

#### Several scholars with cross-disciplinary expertise in Western literature and biblical studies...affirm that most of the major narrative parables of Jesus are, by every standard literary definition of the word, genuine allegories.... A parable may be an allegory even if [all] its constituent elements do not involve separate metaphors, so long as the overall point of the parable transcends its literal meaning (e.g., the story is about the kingdom of God rather than just, say, farming, fishing or banqueting). (pages 42-43)

#### A mixture of parable and allegory was both common and well-liked in ancient Judaism.... Standard metaphors (most notably the king standing for God)...were so frequently used by the rabbis that Jesus' audiences almost certainly would have interpreted them in fairly conventional ways. (page 37)

#### The parables regularly contain not only common, down-to-earth portraits of Jewish village life but also "extravagant" and unrealistic features which point to more than one level of meaning.... Although these features appear implausible as descriptions of normal events, they make excellent sense when interpreted allegorically. (pages 45-46)

#### The parables...are much more allegorical than is usually acknowledged.... Given proper definition the parables may and ought to be termed allegories, but...this in no way requires a return to the more arbitrary exegesis which often characterized past generations. (pages 20, 23)

Blomberg, though accepting parables as allegorical, cautions against allegorizing every detail. He provides a much-needed control, noting that most parables contain three main characters or groups of characters.

#### Each parable makes one main point per main character — usually two or three in each case — and these main characters are the most likely elements within the parable to stand for something other than themselves, thus giving the parable its allegorical nature.

As another reasonable control, he says "all allegorical interpretation must result in that which would have been intelligible to a first-century...audience" (page 163).

#### The frequent use of contrasting characters suggests that Jesus originally intended in many of his parables both a message for his enemies and one for his disciples. (page 88)

#### Each parable looks slightly different depending on which character a given member of its audience identifies with.... The parts of a particular parable most likely to be invested with allegorical import are the two or three main characters which regularly appear as images of God, his faithful followers and the rebellious in need of repentance. (pages 148-149)

### Rabbinic parables

Most of us have little background in first-century Judaism. We will therefore find the description of Jewish parables instructive (pages 59-65):

#### Rabbinic parables almost always begin with an introductory formula which parallels those found in the Gospels.... Often the logic...argues that "if such-and-such is true with men, how much more so with God."... The length and structure of the rabbinic parables also resemble those of the parables of Jesus....

#### The parables of Jesus and the rabbis further share common topics and imagery.... Judah the Prince used to cite this parable: To what is the matter like? To a king who possessed a vineyard which he handed over to a tenant.... R. Meir illustrated it by a parable. To what is the matter like? To a king who prepared a banquet and invited guests.... The rabbis interpreted their parables in a variety of ways, but almost always with some allegorical element.

Parables "lead the reader unwittingly along until he acknowledges the validity of the vehicle (picture-part) of the parable and is therefore forced to side with the story-teller concerning the tenor (spiritual truth) involved as well." The classic example of this is Nathan's parable to David, containing obvious allegorical elements. (We are not addressing in this review whether Jesus' parables made spiritual truths clearer or hidden. Even his disciples did not understand many of the things he taught in the plainest of language.)

Jesus' parables were unlike the rabbis' in at least two major ways:

#### The vast majority of the rabbinic parables staunchly reinforce conventional Jewish values, serving primarily to exegete Scripture. They thus stand in marked contrast to Jesus' often "subversive" counterparts, which almost never refer back to God's written word, but gain their force from the personal authority of Christ.... The parables of Jesus further distinguish themselves by their consistent reference to the kingdom of God. (pages 66-67)

### Limited allegorical interpretations

The second half of this book comments on the meanings of each of Jesus' parables, surveying previous interpretations and cautiously seeking concise statements on the parable's major points. We would disagree with a few of his specific interpretations, but I think we can agree with most of his analyses.

I encourage you to read the book yourselves; here I will simply point out that Blomberg's review of the history of the interpretation of many of the parables supports his three-point thesis:

#### Much of the time scholarly skepticism stems from pitting against one another different interpretations of a parable, when in fact those interpretations each complement one another.... No need remains for choosing one of the lessons at the expense of the others. (page 211)

#### Once we do not restrict a parable to making only one main point, we can see that the parable addresses both of these issues.... It seems unnecessary to choose between these. Each by itself seems somewhat truncated and together they yield good sense.... Several commentators...fail to admit that their encapsulation of the parable's one main point actually combines two independent thoughts. (pages 232, 246, 265)

#### Debates about which of these principles was the original point of the parable are futile once it is seen that all were intended from the outset. Jeremias, in fact, makes three very similar points in his exposition without acknowledging that they are distinct lessons. (page 243)

#### Often the history of interpretation of a given parable discloses that three complementary themes have vied for acceptance as the main point of the story. In no instance has any reason emerged for jettisoning any of these themes, except for the arbitrary assertion that parables make only one point. (page 252)

### Conclusion

After discussing all the parables, Blomberg summarizes what they teach:

#### Jesus clearly has three main topics of interest: the graciousness of God, the demands of discipleship and the dangers of disobedience.... The central theme uniting all of the lessons of the parables is the kingdom of God. It is both present and future. It includes both a reign and a realm. It involves both personal transformation and social reform. (page 326)

Blomberg's book offers a reasonable approach that avoids fanciful allegory on the one hand and reductionistic summaries on the other. By focusing on main characters, it suggests where to look for each parable's significance, and a controlled way to develop the teachings of the parables for modern audiences.

###### ~ ~ ~ ~ ~

###### back to table of contents

## What the Gospels Teach Us About God

By Michael Morrison

The Gospels are books about Jesus Christ. But these four books also tell us much about God the Father. Even though he is often hidden behind the scenes, he is the most important person in the story. Everything depends on him. Even Jesus' importance is best understood when it is seen in relationship to God — Jesus is the Son of God, the the One sent by God, the Messiah anointed by God. Jesus' importance is received from God; his authority, power and teaching come from God the Father. His mission was to serve God, to bring glory to God, to further God's purpose and God's kingdom and God's plan for the salvation of his people.

The Gospels make no effort to prove that God exists — they seem to assume that the readers already believe in the God revealed in the Old Testament. They believe that he is eternal, almighty, personal, omnipotent, omniscient, holy, righteous and gracious.

A basic understanding of God is assumed in the Gospels, and important additional information about him is revealed. Let us survey the four Gospels to see how Jesus and the apostles understood God.

1. Did Jesus speak with authority? Matthew 7:29. Where did he get his authority? John 5:19; 8:28; 12:49; 14:10. Where did he come from? John 8:42. Why was he sent? Luke 4:43; John 3:17; 4:34; 5:36; 6:38-39; 9:4.

**Comment:** These are just a few of the scriptures that tell us that God the Father sent Jesus the Son into the world to accomplish the Father's purpose. In John, more than 30 verses tell us that the Father sent the Son, and in 14 additional verses, Jesus refers to "the one who sent me." Jesus is telling us something about God — not only is Jesus identified as the one who was sent, the Father is identified and described in terms of his relationship to Jesus. The God we are interacting with is the one who sent Jesus.

2. During Jesus' ministry, it was revealed that he was the Son of God. What did he then reveal about the Father? John 1:18; 14:9; 17:26; 17:4. And what did the Father himself reveal about Jesus? Matthew 3:17; 17:5.

**Comment:** Jesus shows us what God the Father is like. He shows us the Father's love, his compassion and mercy, his righteousness, humility, authority, words, work and truth — even his glory. In Jesus Christ, the Father is made visible so that we can know him. We worship a Father who is very much like his Son.

Although the Father is greater than the Son, they are also one. They have a reciprocal relationship: the Son is in the Father, and the Father is in the Son. Jesus brings glory to the Father, and the Father gives glory to the Son. The Son testifies concerning the Father, and the Father testifies concerning the Son.

3. In the Sermon on the Mount, Jesus taught about the Father. What kind of love does the Father have? Matthew 5:45. Can he be trusted to take care of us? Matthew 6:8, 26-32;18:14. How should we respond to him? Matthew 5:44; 6:33.

4. Does God reward his children? Matthew 6:1-6. How do we speak to him? Luke 11:1-13;18:1-8. What are we to pray for? Matthew 5:44; 7:11; 9:38; 18:19. Whose will is to be done, in prayer as well as in other aspects of life? Matthew 6:10; 7:21; 12;50;26:39, 42.

5. What is the Father's role in the work of the Son? Matthew 11:25-27; 13:11; 16:17;19:26; 20:23. People can come to the Father only through Jesus Christ, but how do people get to Jesus? John 6:44, 65.

**Comment:** Jesus' ministry was all done under the direction of the Father. Throughout the Gospels we are reminded that Jesus worked according to a plan. It was predicted in Scripture, and it had to be done in a particular way to fulfill what God had already predicted.

The Father directed Jesus in what to do and what to say, and the Son was obedient. Jesus prayed often, and he knew his Father's will. His authority and power came from the Father, and the Father supported him and honored him for his work.

6. How did Jesus describe his relationship with God? John 3:35; 5:20; 10:17; 14:3;17:24. What special term did he call him? Mark 14:36. Where was he to go after his work on earth had been done? John 13:1; 14:28; 16:10; 20:17.

**Comment:** In the Old Testament, God is called Father less than 1 percent of the time, never in prayer. Yet Jesus always addressed God in this way (except when he quoted an Old Testament prayer). His disciples only rarely called God Father; almost all the occurrences of "Father" are spoken by Jesus.

Jesus had an unusually close relationship with God, as shown by the word Abba. This was an Aramaic word for father, used by children and adults to refer to their human fathers. Jesus used this familiar term when he prayed, and apparently he taught his disciples to use it, too. Paul used this Aramaic word when he wrote to the church at Rome, confident that they also knew the word because it had been taught to them (Romans 8:15).

Abba shows a personal and close relationship — Jesus was aware that he had a unique relationship with God. He was loved by the Father, even before the world began, and he loved and trusted the Father. When his work was done, he returned to the Father to be with him in his glory.

7. May we also share in this relationship and look to God as our Father? Matthew 6:14-15, 32;7:11; John 1:12-13; 14:23. What does the Father send to us? John 14:26.

**Comment:** Jesus gave us the right to become children of God — yet we are not children in exactly the same way that Jesus is. He was a born Son of God; we are adopted children of God. We experience a Father-son relationship with God when we have faith in Jesus as the Son of God (John 8:42). We are to respond to him with worship, praise, honor, prayer, love, faith and obedience — to the Son as well as to the Father.

### Parables of the Father

1. Some of Jesus' parables tell us what the Father is like. Jesus tells us that the Father will act like the king in the parable of the unmerciful servant (Matthew 18:23-35). Was the king willing to forgive the debt? Verse 27. Why was this forgiveness taken away? Verses 28-35. How did Jesus make the same point in the Sermon on the Mount? Matthew 6:15. How is it expressed in Luke 6:36?

2. In the parable of the workers (Matthew 20:1-15), the Father is like the landowner who paid each worker a day's wage, even if he worked only one hour. What does this tell us about God? Verse 15.

3. In the parable of the tenants (Matthew 21:33-43; Luke 20:9-16), the Father is like a landowner who eventually sent his son to collect rent. What happened to the son? Luke 20:15. And what happened to the tenants? Verse 16.

4. In the parable of the wedding banquet (Matthew 22:2-13), the Father is like a king who prepared a wedding banquet for his son. Who is invited to the wedding? Verse 9. What happens to those who don't respond properly? Verses 7, 11-13.

5. In the parable of the lost sheep and the parable of the lost coin (Luke 15:3-10), the Father is represented as a man or woman who seeks something that is lost. What is the point that Jesus made? Verses 7, 10. In the parable of the prodigal son, the Father eagerly desires the return of his son (verse 20). How does he greet him? Verses 22-24. What is the lesson we can learn? Verse 32.

**Comment:** These parables do not give a complete portrait of the Father, but they do sketch some important aspects. Here we see a Father who is generous, willing to forgive, eager to invite and eager for us to return. In fact, the Father is so eager for our salvation that he took the initiative to send his Son to seek for us, to invite us and to ensure that we can come.

In the parables, we also see another aspect of God: a Father who makes requirements, who is critical of people who do not rejoice when sinners turn to God. Moreover, the Father is willing to judge and punish those who disobey. "Be afraid," Jesus said, "of the One who can destroy both soul and body in hell" (Matthew 10:28). "Worship the Lord your God, and serve him only" (Matthew 4:10).

###### ~ ~ ~ ~ ~

###### back to table of contents

## What the Gospels Teach Us About Jesus

By Michael Morrison

It is difficult to summarize in this short space what the Gospels say about Jesus Christ. These four books contain more than 100 pages of information about Jesus, and much of it seems important. Perhaps we can summarize the Gospels by looking at three questions: 1) Who is this person? 2) What did he do? 3) What does he mean for us today?

### Who is this person?

Jesus looked like an ordinary person. He was born in an ordinary way, in humble circumstances. Like other Jewish boys, he was circumcised. As a firstborn child, he was dedicated at the temple. Two pigeons were sacrificed, showing that the family was poor (Luke 2:24; Leviticus 12:8).

Like other children, Jesus grew physically, intellectually and socially. Later, he was known as "the carpenter, the son of Mary" (Mark 6:3). He walked and worked like other people did. He ate, slept and became tired and hungry and thirsty. Later, he died, as all people do.

Jesus did have a special interest in religion. His family went to Jerusalem for the Passover every year, and when Jesus was 12, the temple teachers were surprised at how much he knew (Luke 2:46-47).

His cousin John was also religious — and quite out of the ordinary. John lived in the wilderness, eating strange food and wearing strange clothes. He preached repentance, and baptized people as a symbol of forgiveness. Crowds of people came to rededicate themselves to God. Jesus also came, and he was baptized.

### Extraordinary behavior

At Jesus' baptism, something extraordinary happened — a voice from heaven, and something like a dove came upon him (Luke 3:22). This was a major turning point in his life. His behavior suddenly changed. He quit his job, moved to the desert and stopped eating for 40 days.

When Jesus came back to the synagogue at Nazareth, he practically claimed to be the Messiah when he said that God had anointed him to preach. He announced that he was the fulfillment of Scripture (Luke 4:16-29).

Jesus began to do some extraordinary things: turning water into wine, feeding thousands of people, healing all sorts of diseases, giving sight to the blind, even raising the dead. He commanded demons to leave, and they obeyed! Repent, he preached, for the kingdom of God is near.

### Could this be the Messiah?

No way, said the experts. They liked Jesus when he was 12, not now. He disrupted temple-related businesses, turned over tables and drove out the animals (John 2:13-17). He publicly criticized the Jewish leaders, calling them blind leaders, snakes, children of the devil, sons of hell (Matthew 15:14; 23:15, 33; John 8:44).

And no one ever taught like Jesus did. What extraordinary things he said about himself! Such as, If you don't do what I say, you will not be in the kingdom of God. No one comes to God except through me. I am the judge of your eternity. I can forgive your sins (Matthew 7:26; 9:2-6;10:33; 16:27; John 5:22; 14:16).

Moses is not enough, Jesus said. Moses said one thing, but I teach something else (Matthew 5:21-39). He claimed to be greater than the temple, greater than Solomon and Jonah (Matthew 12:5-8, 41-42). He said that people should be more righteous than Pharisees, but he ignored their rules about ritual washings and Sabbath-keeping.

Who is this man? Where did he get these extraordinary ideas?

If Jesus didn't do any miracles, his teachings might have been ignored as ridiculous. But his miracles gave evidence that he really could forgive sin, he really could bring spiritual light to the blind and he really did have authority from God. This man could not be ignored.

The people saw Jesus' miracles, and they wondered, Could he really be the Messiah? (John 7:25-31, 40-44). Could this person who criticizes our traditions really be anointed by God?

### Extraordinary shame

Jesus often called himself the Son of Man. Sometimes this phrase meant "an ordinary person." Sometimes it referred to an extraordinary person — someone "like a son of man" coming with the clouds of heaven, crowned and given great glory (Daniel 7:13-14). Jesus said that he would come in great glory, at the right hand of God (Matthew 24:30). This was such a bold claim that the high priest accused Jesus of blasphemy (Matthew 26:64).

Paradoxically, Jesus also used the phrase Son of Man to predict his own death on a cross (Matthew 20:18-19; 26:2) — but crucifixion was the most shameful way for any Jew to die. "Anyone who is hung on a tree is under God's curse" (Deuteronomy 21:23).

How could anyone have both shame and glory? How could a blasphemer be honored by God? If Jesus were the Messiah, why did he say that the people would reject him and kill him? A dead Messiah made no sense.

That's why Peter said, Not so, Lord! We will never let this happen to you! But Peter could not stop the envy of the Jewish leaders, nor the injustice of the Roman rulers. Peter was powerless against sin and evil.

And so Jesus, once hailed by the people as a king, was soon rejected, betrayed, deserted, condemned, beaten and crucified. The disciples' hopes were crushed. Some left town; some planned to return to the fishing business.

The Gospels do not hide the shameful death of Jesus. Indeed, all four books spend a disproportionate amount of space on this tragic event. These books were designed to tell us what Jesus did (Acts 1:1), but they give a lot of space to Jesus' suffering and death. Could it be that his death is part of what he did? Could it be that his manner of death was part of his ministry? What made his death so newsworthy in the eyes of the Gospel writers?

### Extraordinary revaluation

Even in death, Jesus was a controversial figure. One Jewish leader asked for permission to put him in a brand-new tomb. Other Jewish leaders posted a guard.

Early on a Sunday morning, some women came to put burial spices on his body, but they came back with a strange report. There was an earthquake, they said, and an angel rolled the stone away, the guards fainted and Jesus suddenly appeared to the women.

The disciples "did not believe the women, because their words seemed to them like nonsense" (Luke 24:11). Even after Peter examined the evidence, "he went away, wondering to himself what had happened" (verse 12).

It was not long before Peter became convinced about what had happened. But why? If God wanted Jesus to be alive, why did he allow him to die in the first place? Is this what Jesus was all about?

"Beginning with Moses and all the Prophets, Jesus explained to them what was said in all the Scriptures concerning himself" (verse 27). The disciples began to learn a new understanding of Jesus — not just his resurrection, but also the purpose of his death, the meaning of his life and most astonishing of all, who he was.

Who was this man from Nazareth? He called himself the Son of Man. Blind men and a Canaanite woman called him Son of David, another name for the Messiah. Demons called him Son of God — but could they be right?

Nathanael, Peter and Martha also called him the Son of God. He accepted that title in front of the high priest, and was condemned for it. The crowds ridiculed him for it, but the centurion said, "Surely he was the Son of God!" Mark, Luke and John begin their books by calling him the Son of God — not a child of God in the same way that believers are, but Son in an unprecedented way.

### Extraordinary person

Despite appearances, Jesus did not begin in the usual way, Matthew and Luke tell us — he was conceived by the Spirit of God. Even when he was a baby, the Magi worshiped him. His disciples fell on their knees and worshiped him (Matthew 2:11; 14:33; 28:9, 17).

John tells us something even more astounding: that Jesus was, from the beginning of time, the Word of God, who "was with God, and the Word was God." Through him all things had been created (John 1:1-3). John calls him "God the One and Only" (verse 18). Thomas called him "My Lord and my God" (John 20:28). Jesus said he had the glory of God "before the world began" (John 17:5).

Who was this person? He was God, worthy of worship and honor and absolute obedience.

How could Jews ever come to believe such an idea? Not easily! But the Gospel writers had seen the evidence, and they report to us the evidence that convinced them. They describe for us a Jesus who is both ordinary and extraordinary at the same time.

Well, if Jesus was God in human flesh, what was he doing on the cross? Why does it seem that the focal point of his ministry is an ignominious death? The Gospels do not give us many details why (other New Testament books give us much more). Jesus did say that he would draw people to himself through the cross (John 12:32). His death would be a means of acquiring disciples.

Jesus said that his death had been predicted in the Old Testament (Matthew 26:24; Mark 9:12; Luke 24:46). So we can look to the Old Testament to learn more. But where does the Old Testament predict someone sent by God to die for others?

In Luke 22:37, Jesus pointed the way by quoting a specific prophecy that "must be fulfilled in me." He quoted from Isaiah 53, which describes a servant who carries our sins, suffers and dies, brings forgiveness, and is honored by God. Jesus saw himself as that servant. He is the one who would "give his life as a ransom for many" (Matthew 20:28).

As a ransom for many, as a sin-bearing sacrifice, Jesus accomplished more in his death than he did in all his miracles. This is the reason he came (John 12:27). There was no other way to achieve his purpose (Matthew 26:42).

What then are we supposed to do with this person? How is he relevant to us today?

John tells us that he wrote his Gospel so that we would believe that Jesus is the Messiah, the Son of God, and by believing we may have eternal life through him (John 20:31). We can have eternal life only by being forgiven, and it is only through the death of Christ that we can be forgiven. It is to him we must respond. We should fall to our knees and confess, My Lord and my God.

###### ~ ~ ~ ~ ~

###### back to table of contents

## What the Gospels Teach Us About the Holy Spirit

By Michael Morrison

The Holy Spirit was an essential part of Jesus' ministry. Not only was Jesus enlivened by the Spirit, Jesus also taught his disciples that the Holy Spirit would be an essential part of their ministry.

1. When and how did the Holy Spirit begin the life of Jesus? Matthew 1:18, 20; Luke 1:35. What did the Holy Spirit do to Jesus at the beginning of his ministry? Luke 3:22; John 1:32-33.

Christ "made himself nothing" (Philippians 2:7), and the Holy Spirit caused Jesus to begin growing in Mary's womb. Although the Spirit remained in Jesus from that moment on, a visible sign was given at his baptism that the Holy Spirit was empowering him.

However, Jesus was not the first person to be given God's Spirit. The Old Testament describes a variety of people who were given power, wisdom and understanding by the Spirit. Jesus said that David — and presumably all other writers of Scripture — spoke by the Holy Spirit in the Psalms (Matthew 22:43).

But in the first century, the Jews had gone a long time without a Spirit-filled prophet. They were waiting for someone to come in the spirit and power of Elijah.

2. Before Jesus was born, was John the Baptist filled with the Holy Spirit? Luke 1:15. Even while Jesus was in Mary's womb, who was filled with the Spirit? Verse 41. What was Elizabeth inspired to say? Verses 42-45. Several months later, what was her husband, Zechariah, inspired by the Spirit to prophesy? Verse 67. And shortly after Jesus was born, did the Holy Spirit move upon yet another person? Luke 2:25-27.

3. After Jesus was baptized and filled with the Holy Spirit, what did the Spirit lead him to do? Luke 4:1. After his victory over the satanic temptations, was he drained of power? Verse 14. What did he tell the people that the Spirit was leading him to do? Verse 18. What emotion filled him because of the Holy Spirit? Luke 10:21.

4. John tells us that God gave Jesus the Holy Spirit without limit (John 3:34). He was filled and led by the Spirit in all his work. One work in particular showed that he was empowered by the Spirit. What did that miracle prove? Matthew 12:28. In his ministry, how did Jesus fulfill a prophecy about God's Spirit? Verses 15-18.

Jesus' comment about "blasphemy against the Spirit" (v. 31) refers to people who become enemies of God (Isaiah 63:10). The Pharisees became worse than unbelievers — they were actively resisting the power of God. By calling Jesus' power satanic, they were fighting against God, making themselves enemies of the only power able to lead them to salvation and forgiveness.

5. What did John the Baptist predict that Jesus would do with the Spirit? John 1:33. When was this done? John 7:39. Is it Jesus who sends the Spirit, or is it the Father? Luke 11:13;John 4:10; 7:37; 14:16, 26; 15:26; 16:7.

Jesus sent the disciples out to preach, heal and cast out demons, and they presumably did this with the same power Jesus had, the Holy Spirit. The Spirit was living with them, but was not yet in them (John 14:17). They would be filled with the Holy Spirit after Jesus had been glorified. Both the Father and the Son would send the Holy Spirit to live within the believers.

6. What does the Holy Spirit do in a person's life? John 3:5; 6:63. What does the Spirit bring to our minds? John 14:26; 15:26. What is the focus of this spiritual work? John 15:26; 16:13-14.

The Spirit of God does not teach us truths about math, but about the Truth, Jesus himself, the way of salvation (John 14:6). The Spirit enabled the disciples to understand what Jesus had taught, and to understand what was "yet to come" — his death and resurrection. By causing the disciples to understand, the Spirit enabled them to preach the good news of life through Jesus Christ.

Jesus sent his disciples with a message, told them to receive the Holy Spirit (John 15:27;20:21-23) and to wait until they received the "power from on high" they needed (Luke 24:49). The gospel work of the church is done in the power of the Holy Spirit.

Through the Spirit-led disciples, the world hears the message of truth, the message of Jesus — but many people do not accept that message (John 14:17). In this way, the Holy Spirit convicts the world of guilt in regard to unbelief and judgment (John 16:8-11). The world may be hostile, but even in times of persecution, the Holy Spirit speaks through the disciples (Luke 12:11-12).

Disciples are baptized into the name of the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit (Matthew 28:19). The Spirit is as much a part of our identity as the Father and the Son are.

Jesus said that he would go away, and yet live in his disciples (John 14:18; Matthew 28:20). He lives in us by means of the Holy Spirit, the Counselor who continues the teaching work of Jesus.

###### ~ ~ ~ ~ ~

###### back to table of contents

## What the Gospels Teach Us About the Scriptures

By Michael Morrison

The Scriptures were an important part of Jesus' work. He used the Old Testament as an authoritative basis for beliefs and behavior. He used the Hebrew Bible to prove his points, to explain his mission and ministry, and to communicate God's will for his people.

Jesus and the Pharisees agreed that God had inspired the Scriptures. Jesus disagreed with them about interpretations, but they all agreed on the basic belief that these writings were true and authoritative.

Since Jesus agreed with the Pharisees on this point, he did not have an occasion to list all his beliefs about Scripture, nor to explain the reasons he had for his beliefs. However, Jesus used the Scriptures so often that we are able to see what he believed about Scripture. The disciples who wrote the Gospels also used Scripture frequently, and we can tell by the way they used the Scriptures that they held the same beliefs.

1. According to Jesus, who wrote the Torah? Matthew 8:4; 19:8. Did he also say that God was the author of at least two of the commands? Matthew 15:4; 22:31-32. How was a human author able to write the words of God? Verse 43. Did the prophets accurately report words God said about himself? Matthew 9:13; 11:10; 12:18; 15:8-9.

2. Matthew mentions numerous Old Testament verses that were fulfilled by Jesus Christ. Who was the source of these verses? Matthew 1:22; 2:15. Matthew tells us that various scriptures were spoken "through" the prophets Isaiah, Jeremiah, Daniel (Matthew 2:17; 3:3; 13:35;24:15). Who was the source?

3. Did Jesus expect all the words of the prophets to be fulfilled? Matthew 5:17-18; 26:24,31, 54, 56. Did he chide the Pharisees for not understanding the prophets? Matthew 12:7;21:16, 42. Did he consider the Scriptures, even though they were written hundreds of years earlier, to apply to his own day? Matthew 15:7; 19:8.

4. How did Jesus use Scripture as a decisive answer to doctrinal questions? Matthew 12:3-5; 19:4; 22:31-32. How did he quote Deuteronomy in response to Satan's temptations? Matthew 4:4, 7, 10. Does this suggest a greater-than-human authority in the Scriptures?

Our Lord clearly had a high view of Scripture. He always treated it as true, as conclusive proof, as correct teaching. It was God communicating through human authors. The message was true.

Jesus understood his own mission in terms of the Old Testament Scriptures: "I have come to fulfill the Law and the Prophets. Everything in them must be fulfilled. I must do this because it has been inspired by the Holy Spirit, and what is written must come to pass. Doctrinal errors exist because you do not know what the Scriptures say. They are the standard of truth" (paraphrase of Matthew 5:17-18; 22:29; 26:54).

5. What was Jesus' attitude toward the Old Testament laws? Matthew 5:18-19. Did Jesus advise people to obey all the laws? Matthew 15:4; 19:17-19; 22:37-40. Did Jesus tell people to obey ritual laws? Matthew 8:4. To obey the Pharisees when they taught the law of Moses? Matthew 23:2-3. Should people obey in even the smallest details? Matthew 5:19; 23:23.

Jesus taught people to obey every law in Scripture, because all the laws had divine authority. The laws told God's old covenant people what he wanted them to do, and they were supposed to do it all.

The ritual laws are still part of Scripture. They describe what God told a specific people to do at a certain time in history. But those laws were not given to the Christian church, and the covenant that framed those laws has been surpassed. Just as we do not have to obey all the instructions God gave to Abraham, we do not have to obey all the instructions God gave to the Israelites.

Those laws were inspired by God for a temporary purpose: "All the Prophets and the Law prophesied until John" (Matthew 11:13).

6. Does the law of Moses give the perfect will of God? Matthew 19:8. Where did Jesus find authoritative guidance? Verses 4-5. Is it enough to keep the letter of the law? Matthew 5:21-22,27-28. Was the law of Moses too strict, or too lenient? Verses 31-32. By what authority did Jesus say this? Verses 22, 28, 32, 34. What is the higher standard that Jesus taught? Matthew 7:12; 22:37-40.

Although Jesus had a high respect for the Old Testament, he taught that it was not a complete guide for godly living. The law of Moses allowed divorce, but divorce is not good. Jesus taught a higher principle, the golden rule, the way of love and mercy. The law of Moses included love, but it did not identify love as the most important principle. Jesus did.

Jesus had high standards about the way humans should treat one another — he was stricter than the Pharisees. But when it came to ritual purity and Sabbath rules, Jesus was more permissive than the Pharisees. Jesus often touched unclean people, and he often healed on the Sabbath even though he could have waited until later.

"When it came to morals (e.g., divorce) Jesus' interpretation was stricter than most of his contemporaries. When it came to [worship] laws (e.g., the Sabbath) Jesus' interpretation was comparatively lenient. Jesus' emphasis seems to have fallen on compassion as over against holiness" (Craig Evans, "Old Testament in the Gospels," _Dictionary of Jesus and the Gospels,_ InterVarsity, 1992, p. 581).

In the Sermon on the Mount, Jesus quoted several laws from the Torah, and then gave his own teaching as the complete word on the subject. In doing this, he put his own words on the level as Scripture, as authoritative instruction from God. His words will never pass away, and it is by his words that people will be judged (Matthew 24:35; 7:24-27; John 12:48). He is the only one who can help us know God (Matthew 11:27).

Jesus spoke with authority; his judgments are certain, and his predictions are guaranteed to come to pass. The Holy Spirit taught his words to the disciples (John 14:26), just as the Spirit inspired the Old Testament writers. These sayings of Jesus suggest that more Scripture was yet to be written, the Scriptures we now call the New Testament. These are the writings that give us the words by which we will be judged — words from and about Jesus Christ.

7. Did Jesus see his own ministry in terms of Old Testament prophecies? Luke 4:16-21. Did he believe that the prophets foretold his suffering, death and resurrection? Luke 18:31-33. Which prophecy of Isaiah applied specifically to him? Luke 22:37. Did he believe that the prophecies were certain to come true? Luke 24:44-47. Did he believe that other prophecies were certain to be fulfilled in the future? Luke 21:22.

Jesus, as a Galilean rabbi who taught in synagogues, would naturally root his ministry in the Old Testament Scriptures. The Bible was the foundation for many of his teachings, for explaining his mission as the Messiah, and for predicting the future judgment. Our Lord was confident that the Scriptures are trustworthy because he believed them to be inspired by God. He based his life and mission on this conviction.

Many of his teachings have Old Testament roots. The parable of the Good Samaritan, for example, reflects the story in 2 Chronicles 28:8-15—the men of Samaria gave food, clothes and medicine to Jews, and used donkeys to help transport them to Jericho. The parable of humility (Luke 14:7-14) develops the thought of Proverbs 25:6-7.

Jesus often referred to Old Testament characters: Abel, Noah, Abraham, Lot's wife, Isaac, Jacob, Moses, Solomon, the Queen of Sheba, Jonah and others. Although he corrected the Pharisees on other matters of biblical interpretation, their acceptance of the biblical story did not have to be corrected.

8. In the Gospel of John, how does Jesus describe the giver of the law? John 7:19, 22. Did he quote part of the law to support the validity of his own teachings? John 8:17-18. Did he expect biblical prophecies to come true in his own ministry? John 13:18; 15:25; 19:24. Which Old Testament author wrote about Jesus? John 5:46.

9. In addition to the books of Moses, what else was included in "the law"? John 10:34. How likely was this word to be true? Verse 35.

Jesus quoted Psalm 82:6, which describes God criticizing leaders who fail to do their duty to help the oppressed. With some irony, he calls these leaders "gods" — mighty ones, elohim, and he gives judgment on them (Psalm 86:1). He calls them "gods" and children of the Most High, but notes that they die like all other human rulers (verses 6-7). The word of God — his judgment on them — came to these unjust leaders.

Jesus is not commenting on the now-dead leaders, nor on the psalm itself. He is using it as a "from the lesser to the greater" argument: "If he called these people gods, these unjust people to whom the judgment of God came, why do you accuse me of blasphemy when I say that I am the son of God? If he can call unjust people gods, why can't I call myself the son of God?"

In making this argument, Jesus mentions, almost as a parenthetical thought, that "Scripture cannot be broken." He was not trying to prove this idea. Rather, it was a point on which he and the Pharisees agreed, and all he needed to do was to mention it. Human words can be broken. They can fail, but Scripture cannot. Its words are trustworthy, because they are inspired by God. The Scriptures are the standard of truth, the accurate record of God's revelation, and the ultimate authority for all matters of doctrine, faith and practice.

###### ~ ~ ~ ~ ~

###### back to table of contents

## What the Gospels Teach Us About Angels and Demons

By Michael Morrison

### Angels

Angels are spirit beings, messengers and servants of God. They have a special role in four major events of Jesus' life, and Jesus referred to them on occasion as he taught about other subjects.

The Gospels are not designed to answer all our questions about angels. They give us only incidental information as angels enter the story.

Angels appear before Jesus does. Gabriel appeared to Zechariah to announce that he would have a son, John the Baptist (Luke 1:11-19). Gabriel also told Mary that she would have a son, Jesus (vv. 26-38). Joseph was told about it by an angel in a dream (Matthew 1:20-24).

An angel announced the birth of Jesus to shepherds, and a host of angels sang praises (Luke 2:9-15). An angel again appeared to Joseph in a dream to tell him to flee to Egypt, and when it was safe to return (Matthew 2:13, 19).

Angels are mentioned again in Jesus' temptation. Satan quoted a verse about angelic protection, and angels ministered to Jesus after the temptation (Matthew 4:6, 11). An angel helped Jesus in Gethsemane during a later temptation (Luke 22:43).

Angels had an important role in the resurrection, too, as mentioned in all four Gospels. An angel rolled back the stone and told the women that Jesus was risen (Matthew 28:2-5). The women saw one or two angels inside the tomb (Mark 16:5; Luke 24:4, 23; John 20:11). Divine messengers showed the importance of the resurrection.

Jesus said that angels will again play a major role when he returns. Angels will come with him and will gather the elect for salvation and evildoers for destruction (Matthew 13:39-49;24:31).

Jesus could have had legions of angels, but he did not ask for them (Matthew 26:53). He will have them when he returns. Angels will be involved in the judgment (Luke 12:8-9). Perhaps this is when people will see angels "ascending and descending upon the Son of Man" (John 1:51).

Angels may appear as a person, or with unusual glory (Luke 2:9; 24:4). They do not die and do not marry, which apparently means that they have no sexuality and do not reproduce (Luke 20:35-36).

Jesus said that "little ones who believe in me" have angels in heaven who care for them (Matthew 18:6, 10). Angels rejoice when people turn to God, and they bring the righteous to paradise (Luke 15:10; 16:22).

### Demons

Jesus also said that the devil has "his angels" (Matthew 25:41). These are more commonly called demons, or evil or unclean spirits. The chief demon is Satan (which means "the adversary"), also called the devil (one who leads others astray), Beelzebul (lord of the house), the evil one, the enemy, the tempter, or the prince of this world.

More than any other section of Scripture, the Gospels often mention demons — but as with angels, the Gospels do not answer all our questions — they simply give us incidental information about demons as they touch on the story of Jesus. In almost all cases, the stress is that Jesus already has absolute power over all evil spirits.

Demons caused a wide variety of problems for people: illness, muteness, blindness, screaming, partial paralysis, unusual strength, convulsions, wounds and insanity. Some people were completely possessed by multiple demons; others were only partially influenced.

Jewish and pagan exorcists had elaborate rituals and words (Matthew 12:27; Mark 9:38), but Jesus simply told the demons to leave, and they did. He used his own authority over them. He gave that authority to his disciples (Matthew 10:1; Luke 10:17), but they were not always successful (Mark 9:18).

Satan is the chief enemy of the gospel (Matthew 13:19), but he cannot stop it. Jesus defeated him in several ways. Jesus resisted his temptations (Matthew 4:1-11), liberated his captives (Luke 13:16) and thwarted his desire through prayer (Luke 22:31-32).

In a parable, Jesus described himself as tying up Satan and taking his possessions (Matthew 12:29). He spoke of seeing Satan fall (Luke 10:18). Through his death on the cross, Jesus drove Satan out (John 12:31-32). Satan was condemned (John 16:11).

Just as our salvation and God's kingdom is already here, but not yet in its fullness, so also is Satan's defeat. He has been defeated, but he still works against the gospel. Jesus predicted that victory would be complete at the end of the age (Matthew 13:39-42; 25:41). There is a time appointed for the devil and his angels to be punished (Matthew 8:29).

###### ~ ~ ~ ~ ~

###### back to table of contents

## The Gospels and the Gospel

By Jim Herst

After a three-year study (1991-94), George Barna arrived at a sobering conclusion: "Spiritually speaking, many Christians try to run before they have learned to walk. Lacking the fundamentals, they eventually get snarled up in their faith, hindered by the absence of a strong foundation on which to build their faith."

Barna, founder and president of The Barna Research Group of Glendale, California, believes that most Christians do not live with a holistic biblical worldview. "Their decisions," he says, "are made 'off-the-cuff,' based on whatever seems right at the moment — without prayer, without a biblical checkpoint, without a true concern for how Jesus might have dealt with the same situation" ( _The Barna Report,_ vol. 2., 1994).

Many Christians do not know God's word well enough. Is it any wonder that the faith of so many is weak? "Faith comes by hearing and what is heard comes through the word of Christ," wrote Paul in his letter to the Romans (10:17). So why not read the words of Christ, beginning with the Gospel of Matthew?

You probably know many individual scriptures and parables from this Gospel. But have you ever read it right through, as a story? When you do, it will give you a different impression.

We suggest you use a modern version, such as the New International Version, or the English Standard Version. We've given you some notes and background information. We also prepared an outline, which may help as a road map. But now we would like to get out of your way and let you begin to read Matthew's words for yourself. His Gospel has 28 chapters. If you read only one a day, you can read through the book in four weeks.

The major purpose of the Gospel writers was to record Jesus' teachings on the kingdom of God and to proclaim the good news of salvation that God offers us through Jesus.

It is common for Christians today to speak about "the four Gospels" — referring to Matthew, Mark, Luke and John. And that's fine as far as popular usage goes. But we should always remember that these four books do not reflect four different gospels, or four different messages. One of the great foundational doctrines of the New Testament is that there is only one gospel, "the gospel of Jesus Christ" (Matthew 1:1).

The early church never spoke of "the Gospel of Matthew," "the Gospel of Mark" or "of Luke" or "of John." They distinguished these four accounts of the "one story" by using the Greek preposition _kata,_ meaning "according to." The church used the terms "the Gospel according to Matthew" or "the Gospel according to Mark." For them, it was always the one and the same gospel, brought into being by four different authors. King's College professor Graham Stanton puts it well when he describes the writings of the evangelists as "One Gospel: Four Gospellers" ( _Gospel Truth? New Light on Jesus and the Gospels,_ p. 96).

In fact, the word gospel was not originally used in a literary sense of a Gospel writing; it always designated the Christian message of salvation through Jesus Christ. It was not until the year A.D. 150 that the word was first used in the sense of a Gospel writing.

The English word gospel comes from the Middle English word godspel, literally "good spell," with the idea of being a "good tale." The Greek word behind the concept is _euangelion,_ meaning "good news." This good news is that we can have eternal life through Jesus Christ our Lord. It is nowhere better described than in Paul's letter to the church at Corinth: "Now I would remind you, brothers and sisters, of the good news that I proclaimed to you ... that Christ died for our sins in accordance with all the scriptures, and that he was buried, and that he was raised on the third day in accordance with the scriptures, and that he appeared to Cephas and then to the twelve" (1 Corinthians 15:1, 3-5).

This gospel is "the power of God for salvation to everyone who has faith" (Romans 1:16). It was preached and received "not as a human word but as what it really is, God's word, which is also at work in you believers" (1 Thessalonians 2:13). It is "a message by which you and your entire household will be saved" (Acts 11:14).

###### ~ ~ ~ ~ ~

###### back to table of contents

######

## About the Authors...

Tim Finlay and Jim Herst were GCI employees who worked on the series Exploring the Word of God. They wrote most of the articles on the Old Testament, which are now published as e-books. Tim went on to earn a doctorate and now teaches full-time at Azusa Pacific University and part-time at Grace Communion Seminary.

Paul Kroll and Norman L. Shoaf were GCI employees. Paul wrote most of the articles on the book of Acts, now published as a series of e-books.

Michael Morrison received a PhD from Fuller Theological Seminary in 2006 and is Dean of Faculty and Instructor in New Testament for Grace Communion Seminary.

###### ~ ~ ~ ~ ~

###### back to table of contents

## About the Publisher...

Grace Communion International is a Christian denomination with about 50,000 members, worshiping in about 900 congregations in almost 100 nations and territories. We began in 1934 and our main office is in North Carolina. In the United States, we are members of the National Association of Evangelicals and similar organizations in other nations. We welcome you to visit our website at www.gci.org.

If you want to know more about the gospel of Jesus Christ, we offer help. First, we offer weekly worship services in hundreds of congregations worldwide. Perhaps you'd like to visit us. A typical worship service includes songs of praise, a message based on the Bible, and opportunity to meet people who have found Jesus Christ to be the answer to their spiritual quest. We try to be friendly, but without putting you on the spot. We do not expect visitors to give offerings—there's no obligation. You are a guest.

To find a congregation, write to one of our offices, phone us or visit our website. If we do not have a congregation near you, we encourage you to find another Christian church that teaches the gospel of grace.

We also offer personal counsel. If you have questions about the Bible, salvation or Christian living, we are happy to talk. If you want to discuss faith, baptism or other matters, a pastor near you can discuss these on the phone or set up an appointment for a longer discussion. We are convinced that Jesus offers what people need most, and we are happy to share the good news of what he has done for all humanity. We like to help people find new life in Christ, and to grow in that life. Come and see why we believe it's the best news there could be!

Our work is funded by members of the church who donate part of their income to support the gospel. Jesus told his disciples to share the good news, and that is what we strive to do in our literature, in our worship services, and in our day-to-day lives.

If this e-book has helped you and you want to pay some expenses, all donations are gratefully welcomed, and in several nations, are tax-deductible. If you can't afford to give anything, don't worry about it. It is our gift to you. To make a donation online, go to www.gci.org/participate/donate.

Thank you for letting us share what we value most — Jesus Christ. The good news is too good to keep it to ourselves.

See our website for hundreds of articles, locations of our churches, addresses in various nations, audio and video messages, and much more.

Grace Communion International  
3129 Whitehall Park Dr.

Charlotte, NC 28273-3335

1-800-423-4444

www.gci.org

### You're Included...

We talk with leading Trinitarian theologians about the good news that God loves you, wants you, and includes you in Jesus Christ. Most programs are about 28 minutes long. Our guests have included:

Ray Anderson, Fuller Theological Seminary

Douglas A. Campbell, Duke Divinity School

Elmer Colyer, U. of Dubuque Theological Seminary

Gordon Fee, Regent College

Trevor Hart, University of St. Andrews

George Hunsinger, Princeton Theological Seminary

Jeff McSwain, Reality Ministries

Paul Louis Metzger, Multnomah University

Paul Molnar, St. John's University

Cherith Fee Nordling, Antioch Leadership Network

Andrew Root, Luther Seminary

Alan Torrance, University of St. Andrews

Robert T. Walker, Edinburgh University

N.T. Wright, University of St. Andrews

William P. Young, author of _The Shack_

Programs are available free for viewing and downloading at www.youreincluded.org.

### Speaking of Life...

Dr. Joseph Tkach, president of Grace Communion International, comments each week, giving a biblical perspective on how we live in the light of God's love. Most programs are about three minutes long – available in video, audio, and text. Go to www.speakingoflife.org.

back to table of contents

##

Grace Communion Seminary

Ministry based on the life and love of the Father, Son, and Spirit.

Grace Communion Seminary serves the needs of people engaged in Christian service who want to grow deeper in relationship with our Triune God and to be able to more effectively serve in the church.

Why study at Grace Communion Seminary?

 Worship: to love God with all your mind.

 Service: to help others apply truth to life.

 Practical: a balanced range of useful topics for ministry.

 Trinitarian theology: a survey of theology with the merits of a Trinitarian perspective. We begin with the question, "Who is God?" Then, "Who are we in relationship to God?" In this context, "How then do we serve?"

 Part-time study: designed to help people who are already serving in local congregations. There is no need to leave your current ministry. Full-time students are also welcome.

 Flexibility: your choice of master's level continuing education courses or pursuit of a degree: Master of Pastoral Studies or Master of Theological Studies.

 Affordable, accredited study: Everything can be done online.

For more information, go to www.gcs.edu. Grace Communion Seminary is accredited by the Distance Education Accrediting Commission, www.deac.org. The Accrediting Commission is listed by the U.S. Department of Education as a nationally recognized accrediting agency.

back to table of contents

## Ambassador College of Christian Ministry

Want to better understand God's Word? Want to know the Triune God more deeply? Want to share more joyously in the life of the Father, Son and Spirit? Want to be better equipped to serve others?

Among the many resources that Grace Communion International offers are the training and learning opportunities provided by ACCM. This quality, well-structured Christian Ministry curriculum has the advantage of being very practical and flexible. Students may study at their own pace, without having to leave home to undertake full-time study.

This denominationally recognized program is available for both credit and audit study. At minimum cost, this online Diploma program will help students gain important insights and training in effective ministry service. Students will also enjoy a rich resource for personal study that will enhance their understanding and relationship with the Triune God.

Diploma of Christian Ministry classes provide an excellent introductory course for new and lay pastors. Pastor General Dr. Joseph Tkach said, "We believe we have achieved the goal of designing Christian ministry training that is practical, accessible, interesting, and doctrinally and theologically mature and sound. This program provides an ideal foundation for effective Christian ministry."

For more information, go to www.ambascol.org

~ ~ ~ ~ ~

back to table of contents

###

