Parallel Chapter Ten

Click here for audio

Chapter 10

Passion Narrative, Death and Resurrection

           The Passion Narrative is the most famous and most intriguing stories of the Bible. What did Jesus know, when did He know it and how is that message conveyed are interesting questions to be answered? How did it happen and who were the players in the crucifixion of Jesus are important not only for history but are important in order to convey the story. Is the Jewish religious leadership the guilty party alone or do the Romans and Pilate share in that? Why would that make a difference to the story line and who would stand to gain by being guiltless of the crime? So many things at play during that week we celebrate when we celebrate Holy Week in the church.

           For the most part I have left John’s Gospel out of the discussion but when it comes to the passion narrative I want to include John. Why? First and foremost John intends that the reader understand that Jesus is God and understands Himself to be God. So throughout the narrative we find references to Jesus acknowledging Himself in that way. Interestingly enough, we also find references in John to a subordinate role as Son of God.  Many of the things in the synoptic Gospel accounts are left out of John’s Gospel. Did he know of the other stories and figured to add onto the storyline, filling in what they had left off? On the other hand, did he simply want to project a different story of Jesus? Maybe the answer is yes and yes!

           We start with Jesus in Jerusalem as we saw in the story from last session.  Jesus and the disciples have arrived at the time of Passover, a high celebration in the Jewish world. It is a chance to remember their roots and the miracle of God through Moses parting the Red Sea (may be Reed Sea), leading the children of Israel into the wilderness where they receive the Ten Commandments and eventually land back in Israel, their ancestral home. Jesus in Matthew prophesizes His death while Mark and Luke simply discuss the desire of the Sanhedrin to bring it about. Matthew takes the viewpoint that Jesus clearly knows what is coming. This fits the need to convey to the Jewish people, Matthew’s audience that Jesus is the Messiah and clearly is following the path that God has set before Him.

           We come to this curious story of the oil. Why is it here? Luke has it earlier in the ministry in Chapter 7 while Matthew and Mark include it as part of the Passion narrative. All three use it as a strong statement for faith that Jesus will not be with them forever and the faith of this young woman who brings the oil is important. Matthew and Mark also use it as a stepping off point for Judas while Luke states that Satan enters into Judas as the reason for his betrayal. Many theologians believe that the point Matthew and Mark are making is that Judas was trying to force Jesus hand to become the Messiah image that Judas had, rather than the plan that God had.

           All four Gospel accounts are very similar in the preparation for the Passover meal, that Jesus indicates a person already chosen to play a part by providing the Upper Room. Then we come to the Last supper or institution of the Holy Communion we celebrate today. In all four Gospel accounts, Judas is identified as the person who will bretray Jesus. All four indicate that Judas participates in the meals though John never mentions the Last Supper, as we understand it. John has a foot washing as the center part of this gathering and then an extensive final teaching of the disciples. Luke has an argument among the disciples about who is the greatest disciple. Luke includes the line, “…my body given for you…”. Why is this important? Every time you hear someone say, “this is my body broken for you” it violates the scripture and suggests then that Jesus is not the Messiah. Why? Because in order for Jesus to be the Messiah, his death must complete the prophetic message and in Numbers 9:12, the body of the Messiah would not be broken. Therefore Luke’s interpretation is correct and more likely the words of Jesus at the table.

           Following the meal Jesus tells the disciples that all will betray Him. Peter of course denies it and Jesus tells the Cock crows three times story. Luke is a little different in the telling but the story is the same. John does not include it in his recount of events but then John does not include the Last Supper in the same way the other writers do.

           From here we move the Gethsemane though again, Luke descirbes it differently as going back the Mount of Olives. Matthew and Mark have Peter, James and John going with Him while Luke has all the disciples. Matthew has Jesus praying, My Father, Mark, Abba, which translates Daddy, and Luke simply Father. Mark’s writing is to the Gentile, which makes the prayer more endearing and intimate. In Luke’s Gospel Jesus, anguish is so great He actually is bleeding. Some years ago, I read an account that extreme anguish can in fact cause bleeding. There on the Mountain, or in the Garden, Jesus is arrested. Judas who uses a kiss to identify Jesus leads the arresting body. An interesting side note is that the Mafia use this scripture reference for their famous “Kiss of Death.” In the story, the synoptic writers say one of the disciples cuts off an ear of one of the arresting body while John identifies this person as Peter. Why? Maybe John wants to elevate Peter in the eyes of the faithful. There is a curious element to the story in Mark. It concerns a young man who forever remains unidentified that is arrested but slips away naked. Who is this young man? Over the generations there is has been much speculation.

           Now comes the heart of the passion story. Jesus is hauled off to the Sanhedrin who has no authority to do what they desire. Their desire is to put Jesus to death believing that by doing so Jesus ministry will end. In the story in Matthew, Mark and Luke, Jesus is hauled before the Sanhedrin who finds Him guilty. Small surprise there of course. Then He is hauled before Pilate because the Sanhedrin does not have the power to put a person to death. Pilate cannot resolve Jesus guilt so he allows the promise of setting a Hebrew free to prevail. The crowd stirred up by the Sanhedrin of course calls for Jesus to be crucified. In the Luke story, Pilate sends Jesus to Herod who then sends Him back to Pilate. In the Gospel of John, Pilate begs for the truth of what constitutes sending Jesus to His death. In the three synoptic Gospels Pilate washes His hands of the matter. You might wonder at the reason for this in the Gospels and there has always been much speculation. All four accounts have different audiences but likely want to express the same thing, that Rome did not crucify Jesus, the Jewish leadership did. This would have allowed the Christian movement to thrive if their focus is on the Jewish Leadership and not on Rome.

           From this point on several important points. Much of the story of Jesus crucifixion is written in a similar way in the four Gospels. Since Jesus death is a historical event, the sequence of events would be documented and the writers would want to share it with us. The three synoptic writers include a story about a Cyrene named Simon who carries the cross when Jesus, already beaten and weak, cannot do so. In Matthew Jesus is offered wine with gall early in the story. Matthew likely includes it to make a connection with the prophecy in Psalm 69. Jesus however refuses it and most scholars would point to the idea that Gall would have meant poison. Mark indicates it is wine mixed with Myrrh, the burial perfume. Luke and John do not mention Jesus being offered anything to drink. Matthew focuses on the prophetic message from the 22^nd Psalm and recounts the events to assure that Jesus fulfills them.

           We have the story of the Two Thieves that is included in all four Gospel accounts. John does not identify them. Matthew indicates they taunted Him. In Mark’s rendition the thieves do not taunt Jesus while Luke has one taunting and one asking for Jesus to remember him. It is the Luke account that points current day belief in an immediate arrival into heaven upon death.

           Jesus death is a dramatic event in Matthew, Mark and Luke but in different ways. In Matthew, Mark and Luke the Temple curtain is torn in two, in Matthew and earthquake occurs. John’s rendition simply calls us to read that Jesus died. It is important to note that in John’s Gospel account, Jesus is in control even at the end of His life and He determines when it happens. I might add that over the years I have seen numerous examples of will power over death in the end transition of life. So I personally find it no surprise that Jesus could decide the moment. Luke has the guard say that Jesus was innocent while Matthew and Mark have him saying, Jesus really was the Son of God. Again, remember who the audience and what the writer is trying to convey. John makes no mention of an explanation upon Jesus death.

           Upon His death, all four Gospel accounts indicate that Joseph of Arimathea, a rich man, comes to take His body to the tomb. Two important points about this. The first is that this fulfills the prophecy in Isaiah 53:9 that the Messiah would be buried in a rich man’s tomb. Second, this happens before sundown in order that Passover can begin for the parties involved. The Hebrew tradition would require Jesus body be placed in the grave before sundown or the people performing that service would not be able to participate in the Passover celebration. In John’s account, Nicodemus is also involved. Mark includes the identification of one of the Mary’s as Jesus mother though the other three do not. This will be important to the continuation of the story.

           The creed tells us eloquently that Jesus has been crucified, dead and buried. On the third day, the women go to the tomb to finish the hurried job of preparing the body for death. In the Hebrew tradition, the body would be covered with oils, perfumes to mask the smell of death. Those perfumes would include Myrrh, which has a rich fragrance. The body then would be wrapped, first with a face cloth over the face and then cloth would be placed around the entire body as it lay there on the stone tomb surface. In Matthew’s Gospel account we have two Mary’s that go, Mary Magdalene and the other Mary who is not clearly identified. Is this mother Mary? In Mark’s account, Mary Magdalene and Mary, mother of James and Salome who is thought to be Jesus mother’s cousin goes to the tomb in the morning. Luke’s account includes Mary Magdalene, Mary mother of James and other women. John’s account only includes Mary Magdalene. Only Mary Magdalene is in all the accounts as having gone to the tomb.

There are other differences as well. In Matthew, a great earthquake moves the stone from in front of the tomb and an Angel appears to the women who tells the women to go and tell. Jesus appears to them before they leave the tomb area.  This would set the stage for the belief that Mary Magdalene is the first true apostle of Jesus to go and tell. In Mark, the stone is already rolled away and an angel tells them to go and tell. Curiously, it also says that they tell no one. Luke’s account also has the stone rolled away but there are two angels in the tomb. The women are not told to go and tell but to remember His words. This sets the stage for a great visual in that the two angels are at each end of the tomb, an image that should have brought the Ark of the Covenant into view for the listener. John’s Gospel has no angels, Mary goes and tells Peter, John the tomb is empty, they check out the empty tomb and leave, and then Jesus confronts Mary. Why are they different? Wrong question maybe! Each author is remembering the story in his or her own way. The basic story line stays in sync, Jesus is out of the tomb, risen indeed, the woman or women arrive and find it empty and then the telling that Jesus is risen begins.

From that point the writers all diverge. Matthew moves to Jesus meeting the disciples on the mountain and gives them the Great Commandment to go and change the world. There is no mention of the ascension of Jesus in Matthew. Mark has a short version where Jesus does not appear to the disciples but they begin the work of witness. The longer version of Mark has this curious story of the two men on the road to Emmaus who meet Jesus along the way. Then Jesus meets the eleven in the Upper Room and gives them a different version of the Great Commission before he ascends to heaven. Luke’s Gospel account is the same story as in Mark. Did Mark not know this story and then add it later or did someone else know the story in Luke and make an addition to Mark? We don’t know. John’s account has Jesus appearing in the Upper Room to the ten disciples, less Thomas, and then a week later to them all where we get the doubting Thomas story. Jesus encounters Peter and offers him forgiveness, not once but three times to overcome Peter’s denial. Peter asks Jesus what will happen to John at this point and Jesus tells him it is not his worry, simply follow Jesus. This may have been written by John to let us know that he alone of all the original disciples lives a long life. There also is no ascension story in John.

We have come to the end of this parallel study. My hope is that I leave you with a couple of important points. One, ask the right question, which is not why they are different, but who is their audience. Two, to look at the differences and realize that these oral traditions include what the writer knew or has heard. Where they are all the same or similar, even if it occurs at different times in the account, we are confident the basic story is true. Matthew is preaching to the Jewish people in and around Jerusalem and his Gospel is a series of preaching stories collected in a way to make it easy to teach the story. His emphasis is on assuring the Jewish people understand Jesus to be the Messiah. Mark and Luke are preaching to the Gentile and Roman people throughout the Mediterranean. Their desire is to share the teachings of Jesus while lifting Jesus up to be the Son of God. Their focus allows the reader to see the authority of Jesus in His teaching in order to make disciples, followers of Jesus. John’s Gospel is to the Roman and the Greek and clearly wants the reader to know that Jesus is God.  

^NRS Joshua 24:15 Now if you are unwilling to serve the LORD, choose this day whom you will serve, whether the gods your ancestors served in the region beyond the River or the gods of the Amorites in whose land you are living; but as for me and my household, we will serve the LORD."

Parallel Chapter Nine

Click here for audio

Chapter 9

Jesus in Jerusalem and the Olivet Discourse

           We will explore Jesus ministry in Jerusalem just before the Passion narratives along with the Olivet Discourse, the message He gave the disciples about the end in the Mount of Olives. We begin the story with his entrance into Jerusalem. For the reader this is a curious story. Why would He ride in on a donkey? The donkey story is important in several ways and is repeated but all four Gospel writers. Donkeys were used by conquering leaders to denote that they come in peace, not war. This story is also important in that it is another fulfillment of prophecy (Zechariah 9:9). All four accounts are basically the same, there were great crowds singing and waving palms and placing in His path. This was an ancient custom done to welcome hero’s into the city and is the reason we now have Palm Sunday. There is one curious exception in that Luke remarks that Jesus weeps over the city and what is to come of it.

           This narrative immediately finds Jesus seeking His way into the city and into the Temple where He has an angry confrontation with the Temple money changers. In that day and time, your money must be exchanged for Temple money and your sacrifice had to be with Temple bought birds and animals, a way for the leadership to make money from the people. Jesus overturns the tables and in the Gospel of Mark and Luke makes the remark that His house is intended to be a house of prayer. John has this story early in his narrative in the 2^nd chapter will the three synoptic writers include in towards the end. Did it happen? Wrong question! Since all four gospel writers account for it there is high likelihood that the story is true. Why is it important? For all four writers it sets the stage for the leadership of the Jewish religion to be against Jesus and sets up the passion narrative.

           Matthew and Mark have a strange story of the fig tree withering. One can only wonder why Jesus would be angry at a tree that did not have fruit to the point of condemning it forever. More than likely the story is simply a pretext for the statement on faith that follows. Oddly, Luke does not include it at all.   

           All three writers again include the story where the Jewish leaders question Jesus on what authority He speaks. All three use almost the same words in telling the story, which leads us to believe the story is true and probably came from the same source. Interestingly enough, Jesus never answers their question but leaves them in a quandary over His question about whether John the Baptizer was sent by God. The conclusion of Mark and Matthew’s narrative on Jesus ministry in Jerusalem ends with the question posed to Him by the Jewish leaders, what is the greatest commandment. They had hoped to set Him up to accuse Him. However, He responds with the Shema, the Jewish prayer from Deuteronomy (6:4-9) and the message from Leviticus (19:18) to Love God and love neighbor. Again, Luke diverges from this in that this story comes much earlier in his narrative and it is the lawyer who responds with the answer.  Jesus then leads us into the Good Samaritan parable in Luke’s Gospel.

           We come now to what is known as the Olivet Discourse. It is not in the Gospel of John. It is prefaced as the disciples wanting to know when the end of days of coming and what will be the signs. Curiously, Mark tells us that Peter, James, John and Andrew request the telling while Matthew and Luke tell us that all the disciples are involved in the conversation. It starts with the prophetic message that the Temple will be torn down with no stone still resting on top of another. This in fact happens in 70 AD when the army of Rome destroys Jerusalem. Historians remark on the fact that much of the Temple was wrapped in gold and the stones were likely taken down to recover it.

           Jesus words are repeated by all three writers that in the end there will be rumors of wars, nation against nation and many will come saying that they are the Messiah (in Matthew) or from God. Famines and earthquakes will be prevalent, persecution of the disciples and followers of Jesus will happen. Jesus gives hope in that the Kingdom will be preached in all the world before the end comes. Several things to note, all three writers discuss being persecuted while Luke in chapter 12 and 21 says not to prepare an answer but let the Holy Spirit speak through them. All of this leads to the destruction, which comes after the desolating sacrilege in Matthew and Mark and the surrounding armies in Luke. Some suggest that this is a future event yet to happen while others point to the battles between 40 AD and 70 AD where Antiochus IV set up a statue of Zeus and Emperor Caliqula in the Temple. Emperor Hadrian set up a statue of Jupiter on top of the rubble of the Temple following its destruction in 70 AD.

           Matthew and Mark talk about the false prophets that will try and pervert the followers. Luke does as well but has it much earlier in the conversation in chapter 17. We end with Jesus telling us in all three Gospel accounts that we are to be alert, diligent and prepared for the end. Matthew and Mark tell us that no one knows the hour of the end while Luke uses a parable of the buds on a fig tree.

           Is this Olivet discourse events that are yet to happen or those that already have passed us in the ancient past?

Parallel Chapter Eight

Click here for audio

Chapter 8

Ministry in Judea

           We are going to explore Jesus ministry in the Judean region of Israel. John puts this ministry following a visit to Jerusalem, which the other Gospel accounts do not mention. John may have wanted to show a desire by Jesus to win over the leadership of Israel and have them acknowledge Him as Messiah. If that had happened the world would have changed dramatically and the need for the crucifixion may have no longer been needed. John may have wanted the Gentile world to know that Jesus had the desire to bring change without the necessity of sacrifice. In the four Gospel accounts, His ministry in Judea is where most of His teaching occurs.

           I often refer to this section as the Beginning of the End since it is here that Jesus begins the process of making true disciples, teaching the hard lessons of discipleship and setting His vision on Jerusalem, death and resurrection. It is during this period of time that He begins to let the disciples in on the coming events and how their world is about to dramatically be changed. But it is also a time of testing for them, assuring that they understand the lessons He is teaching them.

           We begin with an interesting account in Matthew 19 about the confession of Peter. Jesus reaches out to the disciples asking them who they believe Him to be. Peter says that Jesus is the Messiah. It is at this point that Jesus tells Peter that he will be the person who will build the new church of followers of Jesus. It is important to note here that the other two Gospel accounts do not make this assertion so it is possible that Matthew, speaking to the Jews, is trying to increase their awareness of Peter’s importance and authenticate the movement. What is also interesting is that Matthew’s account does not follow the departure of the other disciples who find Jesus teaching too difficult.

Jesus begins the process of telling the disciples what the future holds though it is doubtful that they truly understood until after His death and resurrection. All three follow this story in the same way so it is highly likely that Jesus did in fact have this conversation with the disciples and it is recorded here. Why is it important? For us the readers thousands of years later, we know by this account that at this point in time Jesus had full knowledge of what awaited Him in Jerusalem. This is immediately followed by the transfiguration story where Jesus meets Elijah and Moses on the mountaintop and is transfigured into the heavenly image. Again, did this story happen in this way is not the question though the fact that all three accounts report it is important. This event would mark the disciples for the future and gave them a glimpse of how Jesus really is. Matthew and Mark follow this story with the story of Elijah. The reasoning for this account is to show fulfillment of the prophecy that Elijah would come before the Messiah. Both authors want the reader to see John the Baptizer as the spirit of Elijah who would come to proclaim the coming of the Messiah. Surprising Luke does not include it in his Gospel account.

Jesus continues to teach the disciples and admonishes them to stay faithful not only to the teachings but not to teach others differently than what they have been taught. All three share the same story although Mark tells it earlier in the ministry than Matthew and Luke. Do not cause others to stumble is the way Jesus admonishes all of us to stay faithful and that we are to be judged more harshly as teachers if we teach a false Gospel. (See James 3:1 to see this understanding stated for those who teach.)

Several of the stories we are familiar with like the sending of the seventy out into the world ahead of Jesus and storing treasures in heaven are only in the Gospel accounts of Matthew and Luke. There is a possibility that Mark was not familiar with those stories or that they had no special relevance for his ministry to the Gentile world. It is interesting that Matthew sends the seventy out much earlier than Luke does. Luke’s accounts suggests that Jesus sends them out to pave the way for His movement toward Jerusalem.

We then come to another story that is included in all three Gospel accounts. Interestingly enough, John does not include this account in his account of Jesus teaching. Matthew includes it earlier in the ministry than Luke and Mark likely because it fit better there. Mark and Luke indicate that the first will be last and the last will be first and in fact this all Mark has to say about this. Matthew and Luke spend more time focusing on how hard it is to be a follower and included. Another interesting note is that Matthew and Luke both allude to a future time when the followers will come to Israel, from the east and then the west, the north and then the south. For those who may be interested in “End times” revelation, this is precisely how the repopulation of Israel by the Jewish people has taken place and the migration from the south is the most recent large migration of people into Israel.

Finally, we come to the story known as “The Day of the Son of Man”. All three Gospel writers account for this story and most theologians believe this is Jesus teaching on how He will return. It is a prophetic message of the coming again of God and in fact Matthew and Mark use the same words as clearly referencing the Day of the Lord in Joel 2: 30-31. Jesus message from these three Gospel accounts in many ways is a parallel to the Parables where He preaches to be prepared and ready for His return.

In the next chapter, we will explore Jesus entrance into Jerusalem and the Olivet Discourse.

Parallel Chapter Seven

Click here for audio

Chapter 7

Parables

Parables are metaphorical stories that share a strong message but often hide the antagonist to protect the writer or speaker. Jesus loved to speak in parables, at least according the synoptic writers. Luke includes 24 (18 are unique), Matthew 23 (11 unique) and Mark 8 (2 unique) in their teachings of Jesus. Interestingly enough John according to many scholars has none. John does include some short analogies that some scholars point to as parables. Again the question is not why is John different but what is it that John is trying to say. John writes from the point of view of history, looking back at his time with Jesus, even to the point of spending a great deal of time sharing their lack of understanding at what Jesus was trying to tell them. John’s point in all this is that Jesus is truly who He said He was.

For the synoptic writers the most important thing to be learned from Jesus was faith. Jesus focus was on believing in the power of God, believing in who Jesus was and spending time trusting God in all that we do. The first parable that I highlighted is the parable of the sower. What makes this parable important is that all three writers spend time not only sharing the parable, but also sharing the meaning of the parable with a caveat. That caveat is that Jesus shares with them that not understanding the meaning is paramount to not believing.

^NRS Matthew 13:1 The reason I speak to them in parables is that 'seeing they do not perceive, and hearing they do not listen, nor do they understand.' ¹⁴ With them indeed is fulfilled the prophecy of Isaiah that says: 'You will indeed listen, but never understand, and you will indeed look, but never perceive. ¹⁵ For this people's heart has grown dull, and their ears are hard of hearing, and they have shut their eyes; so that they might not look with their eyes, and listen with their ears, and understand with their heart and turn-- and I would heal them.' ¹⁶ But blessed are your eyes, for they see, and your ears, for they hear.

^NRS Mark 4:11 And he said to them, "To you has been given the secret of the kingdom of God, but for those outside, everything comes in parables; ¹² in order that 'they may indeed look, but not perceive, and may indeed listen, but not understand; so that they may not turn again and be forgiven.'" ¹³ And he said to them, "Do you not understand this parable? Then how will you understand all the parables?

^NRS Luke 8:1 ¹⁰ He said, "To you it has been given to know the secrets of the kingdom of God; but to others I speak in parables, so that 'looking they may not perceive, and listening they may not understand.'

All three writers use parables then to promote the idea that it is through faith alone that understanding comes from the teachings of Jesus.

           All three writers include some of the favorites, the Parable of the Mustard Seed that shares that the kingdom of God starts out with a small glimmer of faith and grows into a strong tree that can support the birds of the air. By the way, “Birds of the Air” was a saying in Jesus day often referring to the Gentile nation who moved about while most Jews were born, lived and died within 30-40 miles of their home.

           Another of the parables worth noting is the Parable about “He who has ears”. All three use it to again emphasize that faith is the primary objective of following Jesus. Followers of Jesus who have such faith then would have opened to the teachings in such a way that they would understand the message that God is trying to convey to the world through them. Some of the more famous parables appear only in Matthew and Luke. The Parable of the Leven Bread and the Parable of the Lost Sheep do find their way into Mark’s story. Interestingly enough Mark has the least of the parables in his Gospel. Did he not know them or in his effort to preach to the Gentile world did he not find them as important. Again, maybe not the right question.

           All three writers also address the idea of what is the most important commandment. All three show it as a test given to Jesus by the Sanhedrin to try and trip him up.

^NRS Deuteronomy 6:1 Now this is the commandment-- the statutes and the ordinances-- that the LORD your God charged me to teach you to observe in the land that you are about to cross into and occupy, ² so that you and your children and your children's children may fear the LORD your God all the days of your life, and keep all his decrees and his commandments that I am commanding you, so that your days may be long. ³ Hear therefore, O Israel, and observe them diligently, so that it may go well with you, and so that you may multiply greatly in a land flowing with milk and honey, as the LORD, the God of your ancestors, has promised you. ⁴ Hear, O Israel: The LORD is our God, the LORD alone. ⁵ You shall love the LORD your God with all your heart, and with all your soul, and with all your might.

This prayer, called the Shema, from verses 4 and 5 is foundational to the Hebrew understanding of what is important and is considered even today to be the greatest commandment God has given us. In all three synoptic gospel, Jesus answers correctly by repeating the Shema. Then He adds to it remarking that we are to love one another as well. Luke takes it a step further with the Good Samaritan. Matthew might well have left that part out since it would not have found favor among the Hebrew people while Mark reaching out the Romans may well have left it out because they would not have truly understood the significance.

           Only Matthew and Luke have included the parable of the Great supper that many believe points to the day of judgement that will come, who will find favor, and who will not. However, all three use this parable to share that we are to be the enhancers of God’s word, to be the preservers of the Word throughout the ages.

Parallel - Chapter Five

Click here for audio

Chapter 5

Miracles

           Miracles are at the center of the modern day focus on Jesus life. More than anything else, the non-believing population scrutinizes miracles stories as fables and myth. Are they? Maybe that is not the right question here. Maybe the right question is why the writers spent so much time including them in the story of Jesus. Of the stories in the Gospel accounts, the miracle stories are clearly a favorite subject matter. Matthew has 22 miracles, Mark 18 while Luke has 21. John on the other hand only has 7 miracle stories and John indicates that they are in the Gospel so that the reader would know that Jesus is God, a central point of John’s Gospel. I have included 16 miracles that move across the synoptic gospel accounts. Some of the more famous have been left out with the most likely reason being that they only exist in one of the Gospel accounts. However, there are some exceptions. The raising of Lazarus from the dead appears in both John (11:38-53) and Luke (7:12-17). What should be of note here is that Luke never identifies who the man is that is raised from the dead and the story is very different. Luke may have been trying to hide Lazarus identity. There are stories of that time that suggest that the Jewish leadership would have placed a bounty on Lazarus head in fear if what his resurrection might truly say about Jesus.

           Of the 16 miracles, please note that four of them also appear in John as part of his seven. They are the healing of the Paralytic (chapter 5: 8-9), the centurion (chapter 4: 46-54), the feeding of the five thousand (chapter 6: 1-15), and Jesus walking on water (chapter 6: 16-21).

           The three synoptic writers desire to make a statement about who Jesus is. In order to justify their position, it is important that Jesus show His divine nature. Power over nature, exorcism of demons and healing are all considered to be part of the power of God alone in Jesus day. Hence, the special emphasis of healing (8 of the 16), exorcism (4 of the 16) and power over nature (4 of the 16). Matthew clearly is focused on telling the story to the Jewish community and proclaiming Jesus as Messiah. In order to justify that position Jesus must have divine ability that cannot be attributed to medicine or known healing practices of the day. No-one was able to heal Lepers in Jesus day except Jesus. No-one could fix hemorrhage problems or birth defects. So Matthew focuses on those kind of healing to lift up. Matthew identifies Jesus miracles on Exorcism (3 of the 15), healing (8 of the 15) and power over nature (4 of the 15). Luke on the other hand is a doctor as we understand his background. We also know that he worked with Paul. His focus was on the Gentile world and proclaiming Jesus to be the Son of Man. Luke wants us to see the humanity in Jesus and wants the Gentile world to understand Jesus as fully human and fully God. Luke focuses then more on the healing miracles (7 of the 12), power over nature (2 of the 12) and exorcism (3 of the 12).

           Remember that Mark’s gospel is focused sharing that Jesus is God to the Roman world. So his focus is shared on the exorcism of demons (4 out of 16), healing (8 out of 16) and the power over nature (4 out of 16). It is important to Mark that the reader experience his viewpoint that Jesus is good over evil so much of healing narrative also shows issues with the Jewish leadership. Mark and Matthew have two feeding stories. Did both happen? Mark and Matthew felt compelled to include them both. Remember that Luke’s focus is on the healing much more than power over nature.

           The list of sixteen miracles that I have included share Jesus power over nature, His ability to exorcise evil spirits and His healing power. Several of them have a great powerful message of faith like the Centurion who asks for healing even though Jesus is not physically there. If we read the accounts, note the differences and ask yourself how the version fits in the greater story and the audience of the writer.

           Many of the commentaries that I use include a note that not a single healing was for the sole purpose of physical healing. In Jesus day, to be ill, often meant to be excluded from family and community. Healing by Jesus not only addressed the physical issue, but also restored people to community, family and God.

Parallel - Chapter Four

Click here for audio

Chapter 4

Ministry Into Galilee

The three synoptic writers in this section are telling the story of Jesus through his ministry. Throughout the dialogue, there will be miracles, healings and teaching that will occur at different times. Why? Maybe the writer is creating a narrative to lead a person to the conclusion that Jesus is who He says He is. Maybe to set the stage for the conclusion of the story. Whatever the reason, the narratives flow and stories that were likely oral traditions handed down are placed in strategic points in the story. For example, the rejection of Nazareth story. Matthew and Mark appear to tell the story late in the ministry of Galilee. Luke puts it up front. To what purpose? Matthew and Mark may have been working to present Jesus in a positive light and felt the story of His rejection by His own people would have caused harm to the authenticity of whom He is. Remember that both are likely writing to people in Israel and neighboring countries. Luke on the other hand wants to discount it early and get on with Jesus ministry. When did it happen? Wrong question? What does it tell us? How our own may be the first to believe we are someone different than who they believe we are.

So what are the narratives that are shared? All three share the beginning of Jesus ministry into Galilee. Jesus preaching at Nazareth is in all three accounts but in very different places within the story. Again, the right question is who is correct but rather what story are they trying to tell and where does this account fit within that story. The preaching at Nazareth is a rejection story. Jesus own family and friends reject his preaching because they believe they know Him. But do they? The right question might be that this is a metaphor for the fact that Jesus people, the Jews reject Him and the writers hide it in the account this way. But by doing so they can tell the rejection story. All three writers share the story of the calling of the disciples but Luke places it with a miracle. Again, what is that Luke is trying to say that the others did not feel the need to include a miracle story. We find the woman with ointment story again in all three but Matthew and Mark include it as part of the passion. Why? Maybe they feel that there should be a story about the worth of Jesus. All three share the collusion story with Satan. Each at different times and Matthew includes it twice. Is the significance that Jesus discounts His detractors or that the collusion story was a way to discount Jesus and to tell it is necessary for the greater story? Finally we see that the Pharisee’s need a sign to believe. Is this story simply about the Pharisees’ or is it about all of us?

All three writers move Jesus onto Galilee following the Temptation story and the arrest of John the Baptist. It might well be that John has served his purpose in the narrative and his arrest has spurred Jesus into the limelight now. Matthew spends time placing the exact location for the Jewish people he is reaching out to. Mark and Luke simply say he moves into Galilee, though Luke makes a point to tell us that Jesus is full of the spirit. Matthew and Mark begin to tell us that the Kingdom is near. Matthew is speaking to the Jew and their understanding of the Kingdom is Heaven. Mark is speaking to the Roman and they are more likely to connect with God’s having a kingdom.

The calling of the Disciples follows a similar thread in all three though Luke actually calls them later in the story than Matthew and Mark. Luke adds a miracle maybe to explain to the Greeks, his audience, why they would leave everything they own and follow Jesus. The commissioning of the twelve and all disciples follows a similar story line. That the work will be hard, that those who follow will be few. That they have a task ahead of them to feed the hungry, take care of the poor and heal the sick. Further, that they are to live lives trusting God for provision and not rely on personal wealth.

The woman with the ointment story is interesting if not important in many ways. Matthew and Mark place the story later than Luke does. Why? Maybe Luke felt that the story makes us think about what we are to give up for Jesus as more important than it being included in the passion narrative. Maybe Matthew and Mark want us to sense the loss of Jesus and what His worth to us is. What we do know is that the story itself is important to the message of what Jesus thinks is important, loving one another over worldly possessions.

Throughout Jesus ministry, there were those who attempted to discount who He was. Mark very early in the story addresses one of the rumors or stories that was widely circulated that being that Jesus was actually in collusion with Satan and that is where His power came from. Mark brings this story early to discount it. Matthew and Luke wait until they have shared miracles, healings and teachings to discount it.

Finally, in this chapter we find the need for signs. The Pharisee’s keep asking Jesus to perform a sign so that they might know whom He is. But true faith requires no signs and in fact, Jesus points to the Old Testament story of Jonah as a sign that they have completely missed. Is this a prophetic voice in Matthew that Jesus will be in the tomb three days? For Matthew it would have been important to tell it this way so that the reader might realize that Jesus pointed to what would happen and then fulfilled it. 

Parallel - Chapter Three

Click here for audio

Chapter 3

Prepare the Way, Baptism and Temptation

This chapter will explore the Gospel accounts of Jesus baptism. Was it necessary and why did it happen as they detailed it? What was the story line that they felt needed to be told? Why is there a temptation story in all three of the Gospel accounts? These are intriguing questions for a Disciple to ponder, reflect and then discern what God is trying to tell us.

Mark begins his account of Jesus with the story of John the Baptist. Why? Remember that Mark’s account is written for the Romans. For Roman citizens Jesus birth lineage would have no meaning. For all the writers, the connection of John to the prophecy of one bringing a voice from the wilderness would precede the Messiah was important. John the Baptist certainly fits this description. Matthew and Luke needed the reader to know the lineage of Jesus to bring Him in line with David, so their story started there. It may also be of interest that Matthew and Luke may have both been familiar with the birth narrative while Mark may not have been. Or this leads us back to the discussion of Q, the narrative that has never been found or Q could have been a common narrator that both the writers of Matthew and Luke were familiar with.

Let’s start with John. What we know of John from Luke’s Gospel is that he is related to Jesus through Mary (Luke 1:36). Mark’s Gospel begins with John the Baptizer. Mathew and John simply indicate that John the Baptizer comes out of the wilderness as if he is a wild man from God. That may not be far from the truth as we study the extent of John’s ministry. Historically we know that John existed and Herod of Antipas, the son of the Herod of Jesus birth, had him beheaded. John preached a sermon of repentance and baptized through the water a baptism of repentance. This custom of cleansing with water comes through the Jewish purification rituals that had existed for centuries. But John adds a twist in that he indicates that the cleansing must come from within. Come to the water and repent your sins before God and be forgiven for those sins and go forth in grace and mercy before God. John is often thought to fulfill the prophecy of Micah 4:1-5 and the prophecies of Isaiah 40:3 which tell us that one would come out of the world before the Messiah paving the way for his arrival. Is the similarity between John and Elijah a possibility that the writer desires you to make that connection? Regardless of what you believe in that regard, John did in fact pave the way for Jesus ministry. He brought together a group of followers, some of them would go on to follow Jesus, and he began the people thinking about repentance to God. 

What is it that the writers of the Gospel want us to hear in the message of John? So what exactly was John offering? John was offering hope in the midst of great unrest and struggle. On the one hand the people were struggling with the hard hand of Rome. Taxes were taking a heavy toll and Rome would put up with very little before lashing out at the inhabitants of Israel. On the other hand, they were struggling with their own religious identity. The leadership which called themselves Jewish clearly was more Roman than Jew. Herod was not a well-liked leader and many would long for his removal. The Religious leadership of the day in the Sanhedrin, the Sadducees and Pharisees seemed more about law than they did about forgiveness and repentance. So John’s message of hope in the midst of this tension was well received. Josephus, the historian indicates that large crowds followed him wherever he went. And what he invited folks to do is to get right with God. Not in the legalistic way that the Sadducees and Pharisees were demanding, but in the old way of the prophets. And his message that one was coming after him that would be the Messiah gave people hope that freedom was on the way. All three of the synoptic Gospel accounts lift this Messianic message about Jesus and a baptism of the Holy Spirit. It should be noted that John differentiates between his baptism of repentance and the baptism that Jesus will bring.

All four Gospel writers spend time with the Baptism story. In fact it does a number of important things for the greater story of Jesus. First it promotes the idea that Jesus has been chosen specifically by God for the message He brings. Second, the Gospels of Mark, Luke and Matthew indicate that God declares Jesus to be His Son. All three synoptic Gospel accounts use this baptism to begin the story of Jesus ministry. Matthew and Luke have birth narratives but we hear nothing about what Jesus message is until after the baptism story. So for all the Gospel accounts, the Baptism of Jesus is the beginning of His ministry. Why reveal it in such a way? First, that God proclaimed Jesus as God’s Son and with whom God is well please gives Jesus authority to preach and teach. Secondly the baptism of Jesus clears the way for his message of repentance, forgiveness and love amidst the struggles of legalism and law that exists. 

One of the most discussed questions of the Gospel accounts of Jesus is whether He needed to be baptized or not. There are really two theories that dominate the argument. The first is that Jesus, having been born of God, is born pure from sin. If this is the case then why get baptized at all. Those who support this argument would say that Jesus receives baptism from John in order to be obedient to the will of God. So does He need it? NO! But He needs to do it in order that God will be pleased with Him and so it is out of obedience. The second theory is more controversial. Because Jesus was born to a human mother, then all the inherent natures of Adam are also in Jesus. In other words, Jesus has the inherent nature we all have to be disobedient to the will of God and so baptism becomes necessary to cleanse that nature. We have the temptation story to use as argument that the latter rather than the former reason is true.

So what is the purpose of the Temptation story? We should note that the story is not part of John’s Gospel. John clearly wants us to know that Jesus is God right from the very beginning and having a temptation story lends nothing to that proclamation so it is clearly missing. Matthew, Mark and Luke though have the story intertwined in the beginning of his ministry. Why? To tell a story within a story I believe. First we have the baptism of Jesus and God proclaims Him to be God’s Son. And then we have Jesus tempted in the wilderness by Satan in the stories in Matthew and Luke which truly parallel one another. In Mark, it simply says that Jesus went into the wilderness and was tempted but does not lead us on an elaborate story of that temptation. Is it possible that Mark was unaware of the actual events? Now if Jesus could not be tempted why have the story? What if Jesus could be tempted in His humanness? What if the Jesus temptation story is for us more so than for Jesus? What if the story is to show us what perfection in human form looks like? Jesus being tempted by Satan would lead one to believe that He could be tempted and yet He never succumbs to that temptation. He is tempted in His hunger, He is tempted in His belief in who He is, and He is tempted in His power and authority. Yet, in all of that, Jesus never wavers in His obedience to follow God’s will. In the story, we have the perfect example of what it means to live as we were originally designed to live.  

Parallel - Chapter 2

Click here for audio

Chapter 2

Birth Narrative and Childhood

First things first!

I had a professor in Seminary who started a New Testament class with this line, “Everything you have learned about Jesus healing and other miracles is a myth.” I remember many of the class got up and walked out at that point. The class was excellent for those of us that stayed. What he wanted us to understand is that we were not there at those events, so we simply have the accounts of those that were. It is faith in the end that allows our unbelief because of the lack of materialistic tangible evidence to be overwhelmed by the accounts of witnesses who gave their very lives for that witness. I mean really, who would give their lives for a lie. Maybe one or two might do such an unthinkable thing, but thousands and thousands across the generations. Not likely and this strong testimony has brought many to Christ.

In order to fully understand the birth narratives we have to realize that there is an audience for each of the Gospel writers and it affects the story they tell. All too often we have bought into the nativity scenes that I love so much and collect which include both shepherds and Magi together in a winter scene with snow on the ground. So let me be like the Professor I had so many years ago and work through some of the issues we have with birth narratives.

Is December 25^th the day?

Bible says in Luke 1: 24-36 that Jesus is conceived in the sixth month of Elizabeth’s pregnancy. Zacharias was a priest serving in the temple during the course of Abijah (shifts for serving, twice a year). Historically we place this around June, meaning John was conceived in June. Six months brings us to December which means John was born in March and Jesus likely around September. We have further evidence in Luke 2: 7-8, the shepherds were watching their fields by night. Shepherds typically would have taken their sheep into winter quarters in the late part of October since Israel is wet and cold in the December.

Why then December 25^th?

December 25^th was a holiday long before it became an official Christian holiday in the fourth century. The holiday was to celebrate the winter solstice and praise of the sun god across a number of civilizations and understandings. It was the practice of the early church to take these pagan holidays and make them Christian holidays. You may glean whatever you want from that, but suffice it to say that we celebrate the birth of the light of the world during the darkest time of the year for the Northern Hemisphere.

What year did it happen?

We are not certain of the date. The original Gregorian calendar is off anywhere from 4-10 years in its year 0. We know some facts that help us to pinpoint it a little better. Herod died between 4 BC and 1 BC. New evidence suggests the 1 BC date is more accurate. Herod was alive when Jesus was born in both the Matthew and Luke narratives. Herod’s decree to kill all the male children 2 and younger place the date of the Magi at the latest to be 1-2 BC and probably before that since some point to March of 1 BC for his death. Further confusion comes from the Luke story that Quinarius was Governor. Quinarius became the Governor almost 10 years after Herod’s death. Luke and Matthew both had agendas for their stories though they would have incorporated truth in them to validate the stories.

How many Magi?

In Matthew’s story (Matthew 2: 1-12) no number is given and it is likely that there were more than three. Three has been the traditional number because of the number of gifts but in truth, the Magi would have come with greater numbers to see this fulfillment of prophecy. We believe the Magi to be those who followed closely Astrology and were descendants likely of the Court of Daniel under Nebuchadnezzar. They would have known the prophecies concerning the Messiah and would have been looking for signs in the heavens.

Was the Star real?

Certainly the Magi followed something. Over the centuries there has been much debate about what they saw. Unable to pinpoint an exact date creates some confusion among scientists as to exactly what they saw. Without holding out the possibility of some miraculous image that God put there, there are accounts of at least one super nova, a comet and a conjunction of the planets during the time period Jesus birth could have come. There is also the account of a conjunction between Jupiter, a sign of royalty, the moon and Venus in the constellation Aries which occurred in 4 BC and then again in 2 BC.

Did they really bring gifts?

More than likely! They would have come expecting to find a King since the prophecy that they believed to be fulfilled would be the King of Israel in the same nature as David. The actual gifts listed in Luke have significant meaning to the life and death of Jesus. Gold represents the idea that He was King. Frankincense was a healing balm which could lead us to the miracles of His healing or His need for healing at the hands of the Romans and Jewish leadership at the end. Myrrh was also a healing balm but more importantly was used to disguise the stench of death in the tomb. We can glean the significance of this gift.

Interestingly enough gift giving was part of the pagan practice of winter solstice and praise to the appropriate sun god. Santa Clause was a take-off on a real saint. The true story of Santa Claus begins with Nicholas, who was born during the third century in the village of Patara. At the time the area was Greek and is now on the southern coast of Turkey. His wealthy parents, who raised him to be a devout Christian, died in an epidemic while Nicholas was still young. Obeying Jesus' words to "sell what you own and give the money to the poor," Nicholas used his whole inheritance to assist the needy, the sick, and the suffering. Under the Roman Emperor Diocletian, who ruthlessly persecuted Christians, Bishop Nicholas suffered for his faith, was exiled and imprisoned. The prisons were so full of bishops, priests, and deacons, there was no room for the real criminals—murderers, thieves and robbers. After his release, Nicholas attended the Council of Nicaea in AD 325. He died December 6, AD 343 in Myra and was buried in his cathedral church.

Was Jesus born in a stable?

Stables were not the norm in first century Israel with the exception of the Roman’s or the very affluent. Most people kept their animals in their homes, if they had a little money they might have multiple levels within their homes with the animals in the basement or in a cave adjacent to the home. More than likely Mary and Joseph’s situation would have found them in crowded quarters when her time comes due and she was probably moved to the basement or cave to get the birth away from others. Remember that 30 % of Hebrew children did not make it through birth. There were no drugs or medical procedures to make the process easier so it would have been painful and loud. Not to mention that a manger makes a perfect first crib.

Was Mary Pure from Birth?

This has long been a Catholic position that Jesus was born without sin because He was born to Mary who also was divinely born. There is no scriptural evidence of this and so most Protestant churches discount this stance. Mary is simply a young woman with whom God finds favor and she brings the burden of being the mother of the Son of God.

There is no record of the slaughter of the innocents, did it happen?

Bethlehem was a small town and the number of young males under the age of two would likely have been so small that any record of such an event would have gone virtually unnoticed. The better question is could Herod have done such a thing. Herod was an evil person who had his wife and two sons killed just because he was concerned they wanted his throne. To have Magi come looking for the new King of Israel would undoubtedly have caused him to become angry enough to eradicate such a threat to his rule.

So what do the Gospels say and why do they say it?

Dr. Efird from Duke Seminary often says that we need to ask the right question when it comes to scripture. To understand the right question here we need to ask ourselves who the audience is for each Gospel author. Let’s start with those who have no birth narrative, Mark and John.

Mark is writing the Gentile world, specifically to the Roman world and where Jesus was born is insignificant to the idea that he was born. In fact, it serves Mark’s Gospel account better to leave this omission hanging out there because it doesn’t matter where God’s servant came from. That Jesus would come as both servant and Lord is a great paradox that Mark would want to be absorbed by the Roman reader. To come to know that God reaches out to the world, regardless of where you came from is further stated when we have no family status to bind us.

John is writing the intellect of his day. John’s focus in making a connection between Logos (Word) and the idea of logic used to support a claim and its authenticity. So John begins his narrative by indicating what Christian’s embrace, the idea that Jesus is part of the Trinity and has always been. That this birth is truly unique in the history of the world, that God had become flesh and lived among us. John has no desire to get bogged done in the controversy of a virgin birth that swelled around the early church so he simply doesn’t spend time there. He states what he knows to be truth.

Matthew is clearly writing to the Jew, the nation of Israel when he writes the birth narrative. Matthew believes that Jesus is the fulfillment of the plan that God put in place with Abraham for the nation of Israel. Interestingly he flows us through this elaborate genealogy that includes four women, five if you include Mary. Matthew may have had several things in mind in doing this. Tamar mothers an ancestor to David, Rahab assures the nation survives; Ruth’s son is David’s grandfather, and Bathsheba whose son is Solomon. Since Joseph is not the biological father to Jesus and lineage was traced in the ancient world through the male, maybe he was trying to proclaim Jesus rightful lineage through Mary. But maybe even more important two of the women were Gentiles. Matthew may well be trying to tie together the rightfulness of a Gentile/ Jewish Christian faith nation.

Matthew uses the Magi as proof that Jesus is who He is proclaimed to be, anointed by none other than the Magi who anoint those who are born to be Kings and Rulers. Jesus bloodline is pure and His right to rule the nation of Israel is secure. The further narration of Matthew will go further to establish that Jesus is pure, that He follows the Law of Moses, that He is obedient to God’s will and that what we will see at His death is the true culmination of what God had put in place through Abraham and Jacob. Jesus flight to Egypt remembers for us the story of Joseph and His return the story of Moses and the wilderness fulfilled completely when Jesus becomes the Lamb of God on the cross.  

Luke on the other hand is writing to the Gentile. Unlike John is focused most likely on the intellectual Greek, but Luke is writing to common folk like you and I who have not had the deep rich historical perspective of the Hebrew nation ingrained in us from birth. The census, even though it is clearly out of context, is probably in their to remind us that Rome has placed an unfair burden on the Hebrew people and Herod their puppet is enforcing it drawing resentment and anger. Luke may well have felt that Gentiles needed to understand Hebrew history and context to get what Jesus meant.

His use of Shepherds serves multiple purposes for Luke. Since they are considered the lowest class of people in Jesus day, that they would receive the message and be the first to see Baby Jesus indicates that Jesus has come for the world, not the elite, the religious special people or the affluent. Also we cannot help but make the comparison to David who was himself a Shepherd that God called to rule the nation of Israel. Luke also wants us to get this connection with prophecy that the Messiah would have one who comes before Him, proclaiming the way for Him. This could serve two purposes for Luke regarding John the Baptizer. John the Baptizer’s birth parallels well the story of Abraham and Sarah, barren and aged, who God brings to them a son. John then paves the way for the conclusion of the Israel story as he goes about baptizing a baptism of repentance and proclaiming that the Messiah will follow him. It also assures that John’s role in the story is subservient to Jesus who follows him. Luke is also concerned that we see that Jesus message is for the marginalized, the children, the sick, the poor and women.

Jesus Early Life

What we know about Jesus early life comes more from historical anthropology and archeology than from the Bible. We know that Joseph was a craftsman and his children would have been most likely to become craftsmen as well. So in all likelihood Jesus would have been raised learning Joseph’s craft. Jesus would have spent His early life studying the Torah. He would have learned to read and probably write so He would not have been illiterate. We know from scripture that His knowledge of the scriptures surprised the older, much more learned teachers. We can guess that Mary may well have spent time with Jesus telling Him the story of His birth. How much that would have influenced Him to spend more time in the scriptures is purely room for pondering. We know that He was a Jew, would have been circumcised no later than His eight day of life which (Luke 2: 20) gives us this splendid story of Simeon and Anna in the Temple. The true census which occurred ten to twelve years after His birth may well be what brings Him to Jerusalem or the observance of Passover which every family would have tried to come to the Temple each year to participate in.

Jesus would have grown up in a family with brothers and sisters (identified in Matthew and Mark) and would have had to do whatever the family was required to earn a living. That would mean working in the fields at harvest time. There He would likely have seen the unfairness of labor methods, the rich becoming richer over the efforts of those they hired and treated unfairly. He would have seen the taxation of families and the poverty that was all around him. This would likely have shaped His future and we see this in His teaching use of Vineyards and Laborers. 

Parallel Chapter 1

Click here for audio

If you are reading or desire to use this course, there is a list of parallel scriptures. Unfortunately Blogger does not do well with tables. Please e-mail me at don.jamison@sydenstrickerumc.org and I will be glad to send them to you. 


Introduction

The purpose of this course is to allow us to explore the writings of the Gospel’s. More specifically the parallel writings. As we explore the writings that find themselves in multiple Gospels, we should continually ask ourselves a series of questions.

·       How did the writer hear the story?

·       Why did the writer put it in this particular place in their story?

·       Why did they structure it the way that they did?

·       What story are they trying to tell or authenticate?

I have not included all the parallel’s that occur and offer that there are plenty of great Parallel Bibles around to assist the reader in finding out more. My hope is to illuminate what each writer wants us to hear and by comparing, we can gather a sense of the tremendous story being told by the early Disciples.

Course

Chapter 1     Bible History and Structure

Chapter 2     Birth Narrative

Chapter 3     Prepare the way, Baptism and Temptation

Chapter 4     Ministry into Galilee

Chapter 5     Miracles

Chapter 6     Sermon on the Mount/ Plain

Chapter 7     Parables

Chapter 8     Ministry in Judea and Jerusalem

Chapter 9     Olivet Discourse

Chapter 10   Passion Narrative and Resurrection

Appendix     List of Parallel Scriptures

Chapter 1

Bible History and Structure

Bible History and Structure

The best starting place in dealing with the Bible is to start with the structure of the Bible and discuss the history of each section at that time. To begin, we believe that the Bible is the inspired Word of God, that it illuminates the relationship between God and humanity, that it is the Only source for questions related to Salvation and the Primary source for understanding God at work in the world. The Bible we often refer to as the Protestant Bible is a collection of books written at different times, by different writers and translated in many languages. There are 66 books of the Bible divided into the Old Testament (39 Books) and the New Testament (27 Books). The Old Testament is divided into 5 groupings or divisions.

• The Books of the Law
• The Books of History
• The Books of Poetry
• The Major Prophets
• The Minor Prophets

We understand that originally the Hebrew people divided the Old Testament into three sections.

• The Books of Law, Torah or Pentateuch is considered to have been written by Moses or have been accumulated at or shortly after the time of Moses. These books chronicle the creation story, the flood story and the Exodus Story of the Hebrew people out of Egypt. They include the Mt. Sinai experience where God brought the guidelines for living that encompasses the Ten Commandments. The first five books of the Bible are included in this group, Genesis, Exodus, Leviticus, Numbers and Deuteronomy.
• The Prophets originally included 21 books of the Old Testament. They included Joshua Judges, 1 & 2 Samuel, and 1 & 2 Kings. Then there were the so-called Latter Prophets: Isaiah, Jeremiah, Ezekiel, and the 12 Minor Prophets (Hosea-Malachi).

·       The Writings were considered by the Hebrew people as books that were written by men who were inspired of God but were not prophets. We do not know who collected these books or when some of them were written. This group includes the 5 books of Poetry (Job, Psalms, Proverbs, Ecclesiastes, and Song of Solomon) as well as these remaining 8 books: Ruth, Esther, Lamentations, Daniel, Ezra, Nehemiah, and 1 & 2 Chronicles.

The Hebrew Bible, which became our current Old Testament, came into reality somewhere around 300 years before Christ when the Hebrew Bible was translated into Greek. It included additional books that did not find their way into the Protestant Bible but are part of the Catholic Bible. These books are known as the Septuagint. These books appeared around the time that the Hebrew Bible was translated into Greek and included works that were known at that time. They include Tobit, Judith, 1 & 2 Maccabees, Wisdom, Sirach, and Baruch as well as additions to the Books of Esther and Daniel. These books are often referred to as the Apocrypha. They are not part of the Protestant Bible because Protestant biblical Scholars argued that they were not part of the original Hebrew Bible.

When the Bible was translated into Greek, it was divided into the groupings of present day. These groupings were by literary style more than chronological order or Hebrew definition.

• The first five books, the Books of Law have been left intact.
• They are followed by the Books of History which explains the history of the nation of Israel. They include Joshua, Judges, Ruth, 1 Samuel, 2 Samuel, 1 Kings, 2 Kings, 1 Chronicles, 2 Chronicles, Ezra, and Nehemiah.
• The next grouping is called the Books of Poetry; include the Books of Ester, Job, Psalms, Proverbs, Ecclesiastes, and Song of Solomon. They are sometimes called Wisdom writings as well.
• Isaiah, Jeremiah, Lamentations, Ezekiel, and Daniel have become known as the Major Prophets. They lived between 2700 and 2500 years ago and include prophecies concerning the nation of Israel including prophecies of Christ.
• The final grouping of the current Bible Old Testament include all of the Minor Prophets which include Hosea, Joel, Amos, Obadiah, Jonah, Micah, Nahum, Habakkuk, Zephaniah, Haggai, Zechariah, Malachi. The term minor prophets comes from the length of these books, not the status of the prophet.

We come now to the discussion of the New Testament. The New Testament is divided into three groupings.

• The Gospels which include the Books, Matthew, Mark, Luke and John. We believe them to be written after the death of Christ, most likely some 30 - 40 years after his death. The Apostles believed that Christ was coming again in their lifetime, but as they began to die off realized that he might not. So they began to write down the teachings, events in his life and his sayings so that they would survive.
• The Writings or Epistles include Acts, Romans, 1 Corinthians, 2 Corinthians, Galatians, Ephesians, Philippians, Colossians, 1 Thessalonians, 2 Thessalonians, 1 Timothy, 2 Timothy, Titus, Philemon, Hebrews, James, 1 Peter, 2 Peter, 1 John, 2 John, 3 John, Jude. They were written by followers of Jesus. They often were sent to other people to help explain Christianity. Sometimes they were written to counter heresy, or wrongful interpretations of the teachings of Jesus.
• The final grouping is one single Book, The Revelation of John. This book is thought to have been written around 70 AD or 70 years after Jesus died. It contains a future vision of Jesus and the world.

How it came to be

The early Christians continued to hold to the OT as their divinely-given Scripture, but they soon came to realize the need to value 1^st century apostolic writings as well. Through the inspiration of the Holy Spirit, Peter and the others preached on the day of Pentecost (Acts 2). This process of inspiration continued in their preaching and in their writing. It is assumed that all NT books were written before the end of the 1^st century. Paul wrote letters to several churches and asked that they be read publicly when the Christians assembled (I Thessalonians 5:27; Colossians 4:16). Early historical accounts clarify that apostolic writings were read on a regular basis in the Christian assemblies.

In Paul's letter to the Colossians, he commands that they exchange letters with the church of the Laodiceans (4:16). It appears that early Christians soon began to circulate many of the apostolic writings. It is in this way, most likely, that various books of the NT began to be gathered into collections. Peter, in 2 Peter 3:16, indicates already a collection of Paul's letters (notice that Peter calls them "scriptures" and places them alongside that of the OT).

In the 2^nd century, following the death of all the apostles the writings of the apostles became more valuable. The desire to exchange and collect such writings increased. The gospel accounts appear to be quickly accepted by the Christian community. Paul's letters were commonly accepted. There was yet, however, no mention of a canon of the NT; there were only casual collections of writings that were being passed around.

Soon, however, spurious or pseudonymous letters came into circulation among the churches (letters falsely bearing apostolic names and/or claiming apostolic authority). Furthermore, false teachers arose claiming knowledge handed down by tradition. All this led to the beginning of the canon as Christians realized the need to determine what writings were genuine and what writings were not. By the end of the 2^nd century, the idea of a NT canon was clearly understood. The extent of that canon, however, was yet to be determined.

It is important to understand the criteria used by early scholars to determine the canonicity of any book. The true (and obvious) test of canonicity is/was inspiration. If a book was clearly inspired of God, then certainly it was accepted as part of the NT canon. The question then remains: how was inspiration to be demonstrated?

According to history, several books were universally accepted by every church without any doubt or hesitation. These were the four Gospels, Acts, the 13 letters of Paul, 1 Peter and 1 John (20 books). Several years would pass, however, before the acceptance of the complete canon of 27 books as we have today.

In the 3^rd century, Origen, a well-known scholar of that time, gave a list of generally accepted books. He acknowledged the four gospels, Acts, the 13 letters of Paul, 1 Peter, 1 John, and Revelation. He mentioned Jude, wavered in regard to James, 2 Peter, and 2 and 3 John, and he evidently hesitated concerning Hebrews because, as he said, "God alone knows who wrote it."

In the early part of the 4th century, Eusibius expressed the general Christian thought of his time. He accepted Hebrews as authentic and indicated that James, Jude, 2 Peter and 2 John were beginning to find recognition. Finally, it was in 367 that a man named Athanasius first gave a list of canonical books identical with our 27 today. Scholars since that time have generally remained in agreement that the 27 books we have in our NT are all inspired of God and are the only available such writings.

So where did the writings of the Gospels come from? There is almost a universal acceptance that the three writings we know as Matthew, Mark and Luke came from oral traditions that were passed among the early disciples. These oral traditions may well have found their way into printed writings and some suggest that there was early writings referred to now as M and Q that have been lost over time. Most believe Mark is the first text though Matthew has text that Mark does not have. Where Matthew and Luke agree with another text, it is usually Mark that they agree with. Matthew and Luke then probably came about with knowledge of Mark already in existence. Mark is the shortest. Matthew, Mark and Luke all seem to follow the same sequence of order with slight differences. Most likely, these three are independent writings using the available oral and written sources of their time. Acts is generally considered to be part of the writings from this time period and in fact many believe Luke and Acts to have been written together possibly as one manuscript. Matthew, Mark and Luke are called the Synoptic Gospels, synoptic meaning similar or like.

Of the 27 books of the New Testament, it may surprise most people to know that the Epistles, the letters attributed to the early disciples are the oldest. They were likely written while the Disciples still lived which would date them well before 70 AD and most like within the first 30-40 years after Jesus resurrection. Next would come Mark and then Matthew and Luke sometime together. Some attribute these writings to around 90 AD but many theologians argue the destruction of the Temple would have been included if that was the case and it is not. So those folks argue for an earlier date, possibly mid to late 60 years after the resurrection but prior to the Temple destruction. John and John’s Revelation come later probably around 90 to 100 AD. Acts likely came into existence prior to 70 AD but followed Luke in its existence.

           So the question clearly is why study the Gospel in parallel anyway? I believe there is something that can be learned from subtle and sometimes not so subtle different ways the story is told. Each of the writers of the three synoptic Gospels has a story to tell and an audience that they are clearly targeting. So much of what is said is focused on that audience. How the story is told shares a different perspective on how they each heard the words of Jesus plus how the re-telling of miracles, healing and otherwise, shares a perspective on who they believe Jesus to be. For example as we study the birth narrative it is important to understand why Mark doesn’t include it and why Matthew promotes the Magi over the Shepherds.  Some of this has to do with how the oral traditions are shared and who gets to hear what. Some of this has do with what is important about presenting Jesus to the rank and file of their audience.

           Matthew is laid out in a way that you could literally take Matthew apart week by week to preach as sermons. Matthew’s audience we believe are the Jews in and around Jerusalem so the story of Jesus takes into account Herod, the focus of who the people are looking for in a Messiah and what significance the teaching will mean. Hence, Matthew spends a great deal of time telling the story of the Sermon on the Mount in a very orderly way while Luke includes it throughout his narrative. Mark on the other hand may not have had knowledge of the birth narrative when he wrote his Gospel or he may have felt it not strong enough to authenticate the story so he starts his narrative with John the Baptist, which would have been widely known at the time of the writing of Mark. His audience is the Roman people in and around Judea and outward toward Rome. Luke on the other hand is clearly working on the Greek’s in society so he spends a great deal of time on Miracles, on spiritual teaching and spinning the story so that the non-Jew can grasp the significance of Jesus. John’s Gospel also was written for the intellectual Greek and Roman and stands out as different than the other Gospels so will not be included in this work, since there are very few parallel verses with Matthew, Mark or Luke.

           As we study the parallel’s, the right question, as Dr. Mickey Efird would say, is not why are they different, but what does it tell us? So our focus should be on the things that they say together and when they do diverge, what does it have to do with the audience or how the story is being told.