Embed Size (px)
Citation preview
Page 1
The History of the Bible Session 06: Topic 2.1.1
The Gospels
Overview of Session 2.1.1 The gospels 2.1.1.1 External History 2.1.1.2 Internal History 2.1.1.3 The Gospel of Mark. 2.1.1.3.1 Compositional History 2.1.1.3.2 Internal Contents 2.1.1.4 The Gospel of Matthew 2.1.1.4.1 Compositional History 2.1.1.4.1.1 External History 2.1.1.4.1.2 Internal History 2.1.1.4.2 Internal Contents 2.1.1.5 The Gospel of Luke 2.1.1.5.1 Compositional History 2.1.1.5.2 Internal Contents 2.1.1.6 The Gospel of John 2.1.1.6.1 Compositional History 2.1.1.6.2 Internal Contents
Detailed Study2.1.1 The gospels Onepointatthebeginningisimportanttolayonthetable.InthepagesoftheNewTestamentonefindsthe gospel, but not the gospel(s).TheGreekwordthatistranslated“gospel”bymostEnglishtranslationsisto; eujaggevlion(toeuangelion).InsidetheNewTestament,thewordreferstothemessageofsalvationpreachedbyearlyChristiansthatcenteredontheredemptionachievedbythedeathandresurrectionofChrist.NotuntilthesecondChristiancenturydoesthewordtakeontheadditionalmeaningofacertainkindofChristianwriting that tells the story of Jesus in written form.
2.1.1.1 External History. Methodology: How does one determine who wrote each gospel? Thecompositionalhistoryofeachofthegospelsdependsupontheinterpretationofsetsofdatathatliebothinsideeachdocumentaswellasoutsideit.Onemustcloselyexaminebothsetsofinformationandevaluatethereliabilityofeach.Thedatainsideeachdocumentislargelydeterminedbyapplyingmethodsofliterarycriticismtoeachgospel.Itemssuchasnarrativeperspective,spatialfocus,writingstrategy,useoftheGreeklanguageetc.arethoroughlyexaminedinordertocreatea“writerprofile.”Thedataoutsideeachdocumentisprimarilyathoroughex-aminationofearlychurchtraditionsregardingthecompositionalhistory.Onehastowadethroughvaryingperspectives,siftthroughtraditionstotrytodistinguishbetweenlegendandfact,etc. Thenmakeacomparisonofbothsetsinordertodeterminecommonelementsthatmeshwellwithoneanother.Thosecommonelementsthatcreatetensionbecomethechallengeindrawingconclusionsaboutanswerstothe“reporter”questionsofwho, when, where, to whomandwhy. Usually, one begins with the assumptionoftheearlychurchtraditionsaboutauthorship,andseeswhetherornotthe“writerprofile”gen-eratedfromdatainsidethegospelwillfittheearlytradition.Ifso,thenahighdegreeofcertaintyabouttheaccuracyofthosetraditionscanbeconcluded.Whenthetwosetsofdatahardlymatchup,thenonehastoseriouslyquestiontheaccuracyofthechurchtradition.Andalso,onemustseektopostulateanalternativecompositionalhistory.Thesomewhat technicalprocedure todoingall thisanalysis isknownasHistoricalCriticism.InthestudyoftheBiblethecommonlabelforthisisBiblicalCriticism. Additionally,withthefourcanonicalgospelsonemustprobetheliteraryrelationshipamongthesefourwritings,sincewiththefirstthreesomuchcommonmaterialexists,alongwithacommonoverarchingstruc-tureinpresentingthestoryofJesus.ThiswillleavetolasttheissueofhowtheGospelofJohnrelatestotheSynopticGospels(Matthew,Mark,andLuke).TheprocedureforevaluatingthesemattersisknownasSourceCriticism.InNewTestamentapplicationtothegospels,itgrowsoutoftheSynopticProblem, i.e., how thefourgospels,andinparticularthefirstthree,areconnectedtooneanother. Butwaitaminute!Dowereallyneedtodoallthis?Doesn’teachgospeldocumenthaveatitlethatsays
Study byLorin L Cranford
Page 2
“TheGospelaccordingto.....”?True,thistitleisatthebeginningofeachgospel.But--andit’sabigone--thattitlewasn’tintheoriginaldocument.Itwasaddeddecadesafterthewritingofeachgospelaccount.Itisthestartingpointforidentifyingthedominatechurchtraditionabouttheauthorshipofeachgospel.Also,helpfultodeterminingtheearlychurchtraditionsisapostscriptinsertedattheendofeachNTdocumentinsomeofthelaterGreekmanuscriptsoftheNewTestament.UpuntilthemiddleofthetwentiethcenturyanEnglishtranslationofthesewasincludedintheKingJamesVersion,buttheyarerarelyincludedevenintheKJVeditionstoday.Theremainavailable insomeprintedGreektextcriticalapparatuses.Typically, theseindicatetheassumedlocationandtimeofwriting,aswellasthesupposedauthor.Althoughofnorealuseforcriticalinvestigation,theydoprovideaquickthumbnailsketchofthedominantchurchtraditionregardingtheexternal history.2.1.1.2 Internal History. Definitions. The label “InternalHistory”canbeunderstood tomeanseveraldifferent things,someofwhichoverlaponeanother.AsIwillusethetermhere,itwillrefertothehistorydescribedbythetextitself.Thissense,ratherthanthehistoryabouttheoriginofthedocumentinwhichthetextisfound,i.e.,ExternalHistory.Withthegospelaccounts,thiswillfocusonwhatJesussaidanddid.Somemethodologicalimplica-tions grow out of this. Methodology. First, theBiblestudentneedstotracedownand identifyeachactionandeachsayingofJesusasrecordedbyeachofthegospelwriters.Inpartthisinvolvesdeterminingnaturalliteraryunitsofmaterialthatcancomprisewhatiscommonlyreferredtoasa“pericope.”ThetechnicalmethodcentraltothisiscalledFormCriticism,comingfromitsGermanoriginsknownasFormgeschichte. For a listing of these pericopesforeachgospelthatIdevelopedyearsago,see“TheListofX’sGospel”intheNew Testament StudyAidsatCranfordville.com.Oncethistaskhasbeencompleted,thenacarefulexaminationofhoweachgospelwriterusesthese“buildinglocks”toputhisdistinctstoryofJesustogetherisnecessary.Theresultisa“gospel”accountofJesus,ratherthanabiographyofJesus.TheimportanceofthisliteraryformistoremindusthateachstoryofJesushasthemotivationofencouragingfaithinJesusasthemeansofsalvation,asboth Luke1:1-4andJohn20:31stress.ThetechnicalmethodofanalysishereiscalledRedactionCriticism, from its German beginnings, Redaktionskritik. Next,acarefulcomparisonofhoweachof thefourgospelwriterstelltheirstoriesofJesusisnecessary.Nowwe’redealingwithSourceCriticism, otherwise known in German as Literarkritik.Withthefirstthreegospels,thisturnsintoaquesttounderstandhowthesegospelaccountsareconnectedtoeachotherliterarily.Thenecessityofsuchananalysiscomesfromtherealitythat“91% of Mark’s content is found in Matthew, and 53% of Mark is found in Luke.” Thisquestiscalled“theSynopticProblem.”Twogeneralviewpointsdominatecurrentthinking:1)The Two Source Hypothesis--theviewthatMatthewandLukeuseacopyofMarkalongwithanothersourcecalledQ(fromGermanwordQuellemeaningsource).TheMarkansourceiseasytodetect;thestoriesofMatthewandLukethatarefoundinMark.TheQsourcesurfaceswherethesamestoriessurfacecommontoMatthewandLukebutarenotfoundinMark.VariationsofthisviewpointwillbefoundamongNewTestamentscholarsoverthepasttwocenturies.2)The Two Gospel Hypothesis--theviewthatMatthewisthefirstgospeltobewritten.Lukehadaccesstoitwhenwritinghisgospel.ThenMarkhadbothMatthewandLukeinhand,andhechosetowriteascaleddownversionofthesetwosources.Thefollowingchartillustratestheapproaches.
Two Source View Two Gospel View
Onemajorobjectiveofsuchananalysisforthepastseveralcenturieshasbeentounderstandthe“His-toricalJesus.”Becauseoftheimpactofmodernideasofhistorywithaconcerntoestablisha“factual”under-standingofthepast,manybiblicalscholarssincethe1700shavefeltcompelledtoestablishahistoricalbasisforthelifeofJesususingacceptedstandardsforwriting“modernscientifichistory.”Infact,thispressureiswhatdrovethedevelopmentofHistoricalCriticismbeginninginthe1700sinbiblicalstudies.Addtothisthedevelopmentofmodernbiographyasanimportantpartofwesternliterature.Theinteresttowritea“biogra-phy”ofJesusbasedsolelyon“factual”historybecameintensebythemiddle1800s.Anotherimpetusinthismixturewasthetendencyofthe“officialchurch”tobesoweddedtotheexistinggovernmentalauthoritiesthatChristianitybecameanextensionofgovernmentalpolicies,evenwhenthegovernmentwasadictatorshipimposingenormousinjusticesonitscitizens.ThebiographyofJesusmovementprovidedawaytodistance
Page 3
theJesusofthegospelsfromtheofficialchurchdogmaaboutHim.Usuallythe“historicalJesus”wasmuchmoresympathetictothecriesofinjusticefromEuropeanpeasantsandworkingclasspeople.Assuch,thisJesusservedasacounterbalanceagainstexplodingatheismthroughtheteachingsofKarlMarxandothersinthelate1800sandearly1900s. Tobesure,suchagoal -- toproduceapurebiographyofahistoricalJesus --hassevere limitsanddangers.ItmustignorethegenuinelyreligiousandspiritualsideofthestoriesofJesusinthefourgospels.Modernscientificmethodologycannotaddresstheissueofthegospelsas“sacredscripture”andthedivineinspirationaspect.Methodologically,thisliesbeyonditspurview.Consequently,thegospelsmustbeana-lyzedaspurelyhumanproductsinthisapproach.ImmediatelyissuessuchasJesus’miraclesandHisresur-rectionbecomeseriousbarriersthatusuallygettossedasidebecausethemethodofanalysiscan’tdealwiththemhistorically.Modernhistoryisanaccountingofpurehumanactivity;thedivineliesbeyonditsscopeofconcern. Yet,forseriousBiblestudentscomingtothegospelswantingtolearnaboutJesusbothhistoricallyandspiritually,insightsfromthestudybasedonthismethodologycanbegleaned,althoughtheyarelimited.Onemust“knowwhatisgoingon”ineachassessment.AsDr.ConnerusedtosayatSWBTSinFortWorth,“anoldcowgrazinginthepasturehasenoughsensetograzearoundthecockleburs.Surely,we’vegotenoughsensetodothesamewhenreadingtheviewsofscholars.”FormyperspectiveonalifeofChristwithhistori-calemphasisseemyLife of Christ: Summary ListingatCranfordville.Hyperlinks insidethispageexistateachstagetakingyouintoamuchmoredetailedlisting,andthenathirdlevelcontainssummarycommentaryonmostofthesesegments.RedactionCriticismhasmovedscholarshipmoretowardunderstandingthereli-giousportraitofJesuspaintedbyeachgospelwriter.Thusmanyworkongraspingthe“theologyofMatthewetc.”usingamoreproductivemethodology.
2.1.1.3 The Gospel of Mark. Althoughsomescholarsdisagree,themajoritywilltakethepositionthattheGospelofMarkwasthefirstofthefourgospelstobewritten.Itistheshortestofthefourgospelsinlength.RegardingtheCompositionalHistory,theearliestchurchtraditionrelatestoacommentmadebyPapiasatthecloseofthefirstChristiancentury.Wedon’thavehisoriginalwritingsorevenacopyofthem,butheisquotedbythelaterchurchhis-torianEusebiusthatMarkrecordedthethoughtsoftheapostlePeterregardingtheministryofJesus.
2.1.1.3.1 Compositional History Robert Grant(seebelow)providesthissummaryofthechurchtraditionregardingMark:
TheideathatMarkwroteagospelisattestedbyPapias,earlyinthesecondcentury;hesaysthatMarkneverencounteredJesusbutlaterbecamethediscipleand‘interpreter’ofPeter.OnthebasisofPeter’steach-ingaboutthewordsanddeedsofJesus,hedrewupanaccountwhichwasaccuratebutnot‘inorder’(Eusebius,H.E.3,39,15).PapiasseemstobecontrastingMark’sworkwithagospel‘inorder’andapostolic;probablyhehasJohninmind.AviewlikethatofPapiasisexpressedbyJustin,about150;hereferstoapassageinMark’sgospelasderivedfromPeter.ThePetrineoriginofMarkisalsoattestedbyIrenaeusandClementofAlexandria,thoughClementaddsthestatementthatPeterneithercommendednordisapprovedofMark’swork. Clement’scautionmaybeduetothefactthatinthesecondcenturyGnosticswereespeciallyfondofthegospel.TheCarpocratianslikeditbecauseofitsemphasisonsecretteaching;followersofBasilidesapparentlyusedittoshowthatSimonofCyrene,notJesus,wascrucified(readingMark15:21-4withsevereliteralism).AccordingtoaletterofClementdiscoveredbyMortonSmith,theCarpocratianshadtheirownversionofthegospel,whilethechurchofAlexandriausednotonlytheordinaryversionbutalsoanesotericdocumentbasedupon it.
Fromadevelopingofaninternalauthorprofile,fewitemswillcreatetensionwiththeprofilefromearlychurchtension.Althoughnotallstandinagreementhere,IseelittlereasontoabandonthechurchtraditionregardingtheoriginoftheMarkangospel.
2.1.1.3.2 Internal Contents ThearrangementofMark’sstoryaboutJesusprovideafocusonJesus’ministryinGalileeandonthefinalweekofJesus’lifeinJerusalemleadinguptothecrucifixion.Everythingelseseemsalmosttobeafootnotetothosetwocentralemphases.Foralistingofthepassages(=pericopes)inthegospelseemyGospel of Mark: List of Pericopesatcranfordville.com.HowthisfitsintoahistoricalapproachtoJesuslifeandministrycanbeseenattheLifeofChristpageatCranfordville.com.AhelpfulsummaryofthecontentsisprovidedbyJ.MacRoryintheCatholicEncyclopediaarticle(seebelow):
TheSecondGospel, like theother twoSynoptics,dealschieflywith theGalileanministryofChrist,and theeventsofthelastweekatJerusalem.Inabriefintroduction,theministryofthePrecursorandtheimmediateprepa-
Page 4
rationofChristforHisofficialworkbyHisBaptismandtemptationaretouchedupon(i,1-13);thenfollowsthebodyoftheGospel,dealingwiththepublicministry,Passion,Death,andResurrectionofJesus(i,14-xvi,8);andlastlytheworkinitspresentformgivesasummaryaccountofsomeappearancesoftherisenLord,andendswithareferencetotheAscensionandtheuniversalpreachingoftheGospel(xvi,9-20).ThebodyoftheGospelfallsnaturallyintothreedivisions:theministryinGalileeandadjoiningdistricts:Phoenicia,Decapolis,andthecountrynorthtowardsCæareaPhilippi(i,14-ix,49);theministryinJudeaand(kaiperan,withB,Aleph,C*,L,Psi,inx,1)Peræ,andthejourneytoJerusalem(x,1-xi,10);theeventsofthelastweekatJerusalem(xi,11-xvi,8). Beginningwiththepublicministry(cf.Acts1:22;10:37),St.MarkpassesinsilenceoverthepreliminaryeventsrecordedbytheotherSynoptists:theconceptionandbirthoftheBaptist,thegenealogy,conception,andbirthofJesus,thecomingoftheMagi,etc.HeismuchmoreconcernedwithChrist’sactsthanwithHisdiscourses,onlytwoofthesebeinggivenatanyconsiderablelength(iv,3-32;xiii,5-37).Themiraclesarenarratedmostgraphicallyandthrownintogreatprominence,almostafourthoftheentireGospel(intheVulg.,164versesoutof677)beingdevotedtothem,andthereseemstobeadesiretoimpressthereadersfromtheoutsetwithChrist’salmightypoweranddominionoverallnature.Theveryfirstchapterrecordsthreemiracles:thecastingoutofanuncleanspirit,thecureofPeter’smother-in-law,andthehealingofaleper,besidesalludingsummarilytomanyothers(i,32-34);and,oftheeighteenmiraclesrecordedaltogetherintheGospel,allbutthree(ix,16-28;x,46-52;xi,12-14)occurinthefirsteightchapters.Onlytwoofthesemiracles(vii,31-37;viii,22-26)arepeculiartoMark,but,inregardtonearlyall,therearegraphictouchesandminutedetailsnotfoundintheotherSynoptics.OftheparablesproperMarkhasonlyfour:thesower(iv,3-9),theseedgrowingsecretly(iv,26-29),themustardseed(iv,30-32),andthewickedhusbandman(xii,1-9);thesecondoftheseiswantingintheotherGospels.SpecialattentionispaidthroughouttothehumanfeelingsandemotionsofChrist,andtotheeffectproducedbyHismiraclesuponthecrowd.Theweak-nessesoftheApostlesarefarmoreapparentthanintheparallelnarrativesofMatt.andLuke,thisbeing,probablyduetothegraphicandcandiddiscoursesofPeter,uponwhichtraditionrepresentsMarkasrelying. Therepeatednotesoftimeandplace(e.g.,i,14,19,20,21,29,32,35)seemtoshowthattheEvangelistmeanttoarrangeinchronologicalorderatleastanumberoftheeventswhichherecords.Occasionallythenoteoftimeiswanting(e.g.i,40;iii,1;iv,1;x,1,2,13)orvague(e.g.ii,1,23;iv,35),andinsuchcaseshemayofcoursedepartfromtheorderofevents.Buttheveryfactthatinsomeinstanceshespeaksthusvaguelyandindefinitelymakesitallthemorenecessarytotakehisdefinitenotesoftimeandsequenceinothercasesasindicatingchronologicalorder.Wearehereconfronted,however,withthetestimonyofPapias,whoquotesanelder(presbyter),withwhomheapparentlyagrees,assayingthatMarkdidnotwriteinorder:“Andtheeldersaidthisalso:Mark,havingbecomeinterpreterofPeter,wrotedownaccuratelyeverythingthatheremembered,without,however,recordinginorderwhatwaseithersaidordonebyChrist.ForneitherdidheheartheLord,nordidhefollowHim,butafterwards,asIsaid,(heattended)Peter,whoadaptedhisinstructionstotheneeds(ofhishearers),buthadnodesignofgivingaconnectedaccountoftheLord’soracles[v.l.“words”].SothenMarkmadenomistake[Schmiedel,“committednofault”],whilehethuswrotedownsomethings(eniaasherememberedthem;forhemadeithisonecarenottoomitanythingthathehadheard,orsetdownanyfalsestatementtherein”(Euseb.,“Hist.Eccl.”,III,xxxix).SomeindeedhaveunderstoodthisfamouspassagetomeanmerelythatMarkdidnotwritealiterarywork,butsimplyastringofnotesconnectedinthesimplestfashion(cf.Swete,“TheGospelacc.toMark”,pp.lx-lxi).Thepresentwriter,how-ever,isconvincedthatwhatPapiasandtheelderdenytoourGospelischronologicalorder,sincefornootherorderwouldithavebeennecessarythatMarkshouldhaveheardorfollowedChrist.Butthepassageneednotbeunder-stoodtomeanmorethanthatMarkoccasionallydepartsfromchronologicalorder,athingwearequitepreparedtoadmit.WhatPapiasandtheelderconsideredtobethetrueorderwecannotsay;theycanhardlyhavefanciedittoberepresentedintheFirstGospel,whichsoevidentlygroups(e.g.viii-ix),nor,itwouldseem,intheThird,sinceLuke,likeMark,hadnotbeenadiscipleofChrist.Itmaywellbethat,belongingastheydidtoAsiaMinor,theyhadtheGospelofSt.Johnanditschronologyinmind.Atanyrate,theirjudgmentupontheSecondGospel,evenifbejust,doesnotpreventusfromholdingthatMark,tosomeextent,arrangestheeventsofChrist’slikeinchronologicalorder.
OneofthestylistictendenciesoftheMarkangospelisitsextensiveuseofactionorientedverbs,alongwithtemporaladverbssignalingquickmovementoftime.Infact,theuseoftheseadverbsissoextensivethatit’sdifficulttoconcludethattheyalwayshavecognitivemeaning.AnimportantimplicationofthisliterarystrategyisthatthegospelpaintsapictureofJesusasadecisiveleaderwhoknewexactlywhathewantedtodo,anddidit.Jesusquicklymovedfromoneeventtothenext,everincontrolandalwayswithdeliberate-ness.VerylikelyMarkisintentionallypaintingJesusalongthelinesofthetraditionalRoman“bios”(ancientbiographyform).InRomanculture,agreatleaderhadtobeadecisivepersonwho“tookcharge”ofeverysituation.Heneededtoknowwhathewasdoingandbeabletohandleeverysituationthatwasthrownathim.InMark’sportraitofJesus,wefindsuchapersonasthefounderoftheChristianmovement.VerypossiblythispointsustowardMark’stargetaudienceofRomanswhocouldacceptJesusbetterifhe“fitthemold”ofRo-manthinkingaboutqualitiesofgreatness.Additionally,narrativecriticalanalysishassuggestedthatMark’sgospelpointstowardanarrationalinitialreadership,wholivedeitherinGalileeornorthofthereintheRomanprovinceofSyria.ThisstandsincontrasttotheearlychurchtraditionwhichbelievedthegospelwaswritteninRomanfairlysoonafterthemartyrdomoftheapostlePeterthereinthemid60s.
Page 5
ForahelpfultreatmentofthethemesandtheologicalslantoftheGospelofMark,seethearticleintheBaker’s Evangelical Dictionary of Biblical Theology on the Theology of Mark.Thiswillrepresentaverycon-servativeassessmentofthecontentsofthegospel,buttheauthor,HerbertL.Swartz,hasgivenasolidsum-maryofthecontentswiththetheologicalthemespresentinthematerial.
How do I learn more about the Gospel of Mark?Online sourcesWikipedia:http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gospel_of_Mark EncyclopediaBritannica(1911ed):http://www.1911encyclopedia.org/Gospel_Of_St_Mark Baker’sEvangelicalDictionaryofBiblicalTheology,“Mark,Theologyof”: http://bible.crosswalk.com/Dictionaries/BakersEvangelicalDictionary/bed.cgi?number=T463 NewTestamentGateway,“TheGospelofMark”:http://ntgateway.com/mark/
Thislinkiswhatisknownasa“gateway”leadingtonumerousURLsdealingwiththegospelofMark.Oneneedstoexercisecautionaboutthesekindsoflinks,sincethesecondaryURLswilltypicallycontainawidevarietyofmaterialsofdifferingquality.
Religiononline,“TheGospelofMark”:http://www.textweek.com/mkjnacts/mark.htmAnothergatewaypagewithevenmoreURLstreatingtheGospelofMark,andgreaterdiversityofbothviewpointandqualityofcontent.
CatholicEncyclopedia,“TheGospelofMark”:http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/09674b.htm
RobertM.Grant,AHistoricalIntroductiontotheNewTestament,“TheGospelofMark,”chap.8: http://www.religion-online.org/showchapter.asp?title=1116&C=1228
Print Sources
AnnotatedBibliographyatcranfordville.com:http://cranfordville.com/NT-BiblioCom.htmlLocatedintheBibliographysectionofcranfordville.comisagrowingnumberofreferencestohardcopytreat-mentsontheGospelofMark.Thisincludesbothcommentariesandarticles.
2.1.1.4 The Gospel of Matthew. The GospelofMatthewshowsupfirstinthelistofdocumentsintheNewTestament.Acoupleofreasons,amongothers,mostlikelylaybehindthis.Foronething,thegospelhasapowerfulJewishChristiantoneanddevotesconsiderableefforttolinkingJesustotheOldTestamentscripturesasthefulfillmentofMes-sianicprophecyintheProphetssectionoftheHebrewBible.Logically,then,itservessomethingasa“paperclip”linkingthetwotestamentsoftheChristianBibletogether.TheotherprobablereasonisthatmostofthechurchfathersconsideredMatthewtohavebeenthefirstgospeltocomeintowrittenform.Althoughmostcontemporaryscholarsarenotsopersuaded,thiswasacommonlyheldviewpointforthefirstseveralcentu-ries of the Christian era.
2.1.1.4.1 Compositional History Decidingupontheissueofauthorshipofthefirstgospelhasprovokedconsiderabledifficultyandsubsequently a wide diversity of viewpoint in the modern era.
2.1.1.4.1.1 External History EarlychurchviewpointabouttheauthorshipofthefirstgospelwasstronglyorientedtowardMatthew, a taxcollectoralsonamedLevi,whobecameoneofthetwelveapostles.ThismeansthatMatthewmovedfromthefringeofreligiouslifeasaJewtoadevoutcommitmentasaChristian.AsataxcollectorhehadconstantcontactwithGentilesandalsoworkedwith theRomans in taxingtheJewishpeople.Giventhenotoriouscorruptionofthetaxsystematthattime,MatthewwasengaginginacareerthatpreventedhimfrombeingaseriouslyreligiousJewishmaleworshipinginthetempleetc.AsafollowerofJesus,however,hemovedtoaverypassionatelycommitteddiscipleofJesus.ThisisthegeneralpictureofMatthewemergingfrombothchurchtraditionandthefewreferencestohiminsidethegospelsoftheNewTestament.Thusthelabel“TheGospelaccordingtoMatthew”cametobeattachedtothisdocumentsomeyearsafteritscompositionreflect-
Page 6
ingthischurchfatherviewpoint.
2.1.1.4.1.2 Internal History RobertM.Grantprovidesasummaryoftheinternalprofileoftheauthorusingliterarycriticalmethodsofanalysis:
Matthewcontainsatotalof18,300wordsandusesavocabularyof1,690words;heistheonlyNewTestamentwriter touse112of these (ofwhichseventy-sixoccur in theSeptuagint).Amonghis favouriteexpressionsarethese:mentionofGodas‘Father’forty-livetimes(comparedwithfiveinMark,seventeeninLuke)--including‘ourFather’,‘yourFather’,‘theFatherintheheavens’,‘theheavenlyFather’--andofthekingdomas‘thekingdomoftheheavens’‘fulfil’(inregardtoprophecy),‘righteousness,hypocrite’‘weepingandgnashingofteeth’.Inaddition,therearesomewordswhicharelesssignificanttheologicallybutequallycharacteristicofhisvocabulary:verbsofmotionsuchas‘withdraw’(‘anachorein’)and‘cometo’or(‘approach’),(‘proserchesthai’),andfavouriteconnectiveslike‘then’‘(‘tote’,ninetytimes),‘thence’(‘ekeithen’),and‘justas’(‘hosper’). Lesssignificant,butratherstriking,ishisrepetitionof‘formulas’suchas‘fromthenhebegan’(4:17,16:21),‘donotsupposethatIcame’(5:17,10:34),‘sonsofthekingdom’(8:12,13:38),‘toouterdarkness’(8:12,22:13,25:30),‘thelostsheepofthehouseofIsrael’(10:6,15:24).Specialnoticeshouldbegiventotheformula,‘Hewhohasears,lethimhear’(11:15,13:9,43)andthesummariesofJesus’healings(4:23-4,8:16,9:35,14:35)Matthewalsolikestoendsectionsofteachingwiththeexpression,‘AndithappenedwhenJesusfinished’(thesewords,orequivalent);itoccursfivetimes(7.28,11:1,13:53,19:1,26:1),perhapsasareflectionofthefivebooksofMoses. Hearrangeshismaterialsrathersystematically;thushisgospelbeginswithalistingofthefourteengenerationsfromAbrahamtoDavid,thefourteengenerationsfromDavidtotheBabyloniancaptivity,andthefourteengenera-tionsfromtheBabyloniancaptivitytoJesusChrist(1:1-17).ThesayingsofJesusareoftenarrangedingroupsofthrees,fivesandsevens. ItisthusallthemoresurprisingwhenwefindmorethanadozensayingsofJesusgiventwice,aswellasfoursectionsofnarrative.SincealmostallofthesayingsareparalleledonceinMark(usuallyinthesamecontextasinMark),themostlikelyexplanationisthatwhenMatthewfoundthemnotonlyinMarkbutalsoinsomeothersource--perhapsoraltradition--heusedthemtwice.Itispossiblethathehadalreadywrittensomethinglikeagospel(Papias’s‘compilationofdominicaloracles’?)andthenreviseditcompletelybyincorporatingMarkinit. ThetheoryofAugustinethatMarkisnothingbutanabbreviationofMatthewisuntenablebecausewherethetwogospelsareparallelthestyleofMatthewisalmostalwayssuperiortothatofMark.ItisreasonabletosupposethatMatthewimproveduponMark’sstyle,notthatMarkpervertedMatthew’s. Ithasbeenclaimedthat thegospelcannothavebeenwrittenbyanapostlebecauseof itsuseofMark;anapostlecannothaverelieduponabookwrittenbyonewhowasnotanapostle.Thisclaimdoesnotseemveryconvincing.Wecannottellwhetherornotanapostlewouldhavefollowedsuchaprocedure.AnapostlemighthavebelievedthatMark’soutlinewaslargelycorrectbutneededsomerevisionandsomesupplementation.AnapostlewhoproclaimedthegospelamongJewsmighthavebelievedthatJewishChristianity,thoughultimatelyonlyapartofCatholicChristianity,deservedmoreadequaterepresentationthanitfoundinMark.Buttosaywhathemightormightnothavethoughtisnosubstituteforexaminingthegospelitself. TheauthorofthisgospelpresentshisportraitofJesusinamannernotunlikethatusedbytherabbis.Heisdeeplyconcernedwiththefulfillmentofprophecy;indeed,mostofwhatJesusdidheregardsastakingplace‘thatthescripturemightbefulfilled’.ThusthevirginalconceptionwasforetoldinIsaiah7:14,thebirthofJesusatBeth-leheminMicah5:2,the‘massacreoftheinnocents’inJeremiah31:15,andJesus’absenceinEgyptinHosea11:1.OthereventsinthelifeofJesusaregivenpropheticantecedentsinthesameway.
ThisauthorprofilefromwithinthedocumenthasdifficultymatchingtheprofileofMatthewderivedfromearlychurchtradition.Forme,aparticularlytroublesomepointishowaJewishtaxcollectorrelegatedtothefringeoffirstcenturyJewishreligiouslifecouldwriteagospelusingsomeofthemostskilledpatternsofar-gumentationthatonlythefinestJewishrabbisofthatdayknewhowtouse.Thisposesalargebarrieragainstacceptingtheearlychurchviewofauthorship,becausenoplausibleexplanationtoexplainthisdiscontinuityhassurfacedthusfar.Forme,asettledconclusionontheauthorshipofthefirstgospelremainsinsuspen-sion,sincenootherindividualofthattimesurfacesasaviablepossibility. AcommonRedactionalscenarioseestheMattheangospelproducedinthe70sineitherDamascusorAntiochbytheMatthean“school”--disciplefollowersofMatthew‘’--inordertostrengthenJewishChristiansinthatregionagainstthegrowingJewishnationalismfollowingthedestructionofthetempleinJerusalemin70AD.Judaismstruggled,attimesindesperation,inthedecadesaftertheRomandestructionofJerusa-lemtofindwaysofsurviving.Muchpressurewasplacedonso-called“splintergroups”ofJewstoadoptarigidviewofthe“traditionsofthefathers”asasurvivaltactic.ChristianJewswereamongthosepushedtoabandontheir“heretical”beliefsand“comebackhome”tothesynagogueasamatterofnationalpride.TheMattheanGospelwasacommunityproducturgingJewishChristianstorealizethatJesuswasnoaberrationfromtheOldTestament.Tothecontrary,hestoodasthefulfillmentandcontinuationofwhatGodhadprom-isedtheJewishpeopleintheOldTestament.ThustobeaChristianwasindeedtobepluggedintowhere
Page7
everyfaithfulJewshouldbe.
2.1.1.4.2 Internal Contents OneofthethingsthatdistinguishesMatthewfromMarkisthestartingpointofthegospel.OnlyMatthewandLukecontainthe“Christmasstories”aboutJesus’birthandisolatedeventsinhischildhood.Astheabovechartindicates,MatthewbeginswiththeannouncementtoJosephandMaryaboutthesupernaturalconcep-tionandbirthofJesus.ButbothgospelwritersonlytouchoneventsofthefirstfewyearsofJesus’lifeandthenjumptothebeginningofpublicministrywhenJesuswasthirtyyearsold(cf.Luke3:23), the age when Jewishyoungmenwereconsideredtobeadults.SothelaterchildhoodandyouthofJesusareskippedoverbybothgospelwriters.Lukestatesexplicitlythathisgrowingupwasnormalineveryway(Lk.2:52):“AndJesusincreasedinwisdomandinyears,andindivineandhumanfavor.”ThusnothingintheseyearscontributestothetheologicalportraitofJesusthatthegospelwritersarepaintingwiththeirgospelaccounts. Thearrangementofmaterial in theMattheangospelhasbeenanalyzeddifferentways.Onecommonliteraryapproach, thathaspowerfularguments in its favor, is tosee thematerial largelydividedbetweennarrativeandspeechsegments.Fivespeechsectionsthatmimicthe“fivebooksofMoses”--averypopularapproachfromthegroupingofthePsalmsonwardinJewishcircles--provideanchorpoints.Narrativemate-rialfillsinthegapsbetweenthesespeechsectionsasisreflectedinthefollowing outline: ThePrologueMatt.1-2 BookOne:TheSonbeginstoproclaimtheKingdomMatt.3:1-7:29 Narrative:BeginningsoftheministryMatt.3:1-4:25 Discourse:TheSermonontheMountMatt.5:1-7:29 BookTwo:ThemissionofJesusandhisdisciplesinGalileeMatt.8:1-11:1 Narrative:ThecycleofninemiraclestoriesMatt.8:1-9:38 Discourse:Themission,pastandfutureMatt.10:1-11:1 BookThree:JesusmeetsoppositionfromIsraelMatt.11:2-13:53 Narrative:JesusdisputeswithIsraelandcondemnsitMatt.11:2-12:50 Discourse:JesuswithdrawsfromIsraelintoparabolicspeechMatt.13:1-53 BookFour:TheMessiahformshischurchandprophesieshispassionMatt.13:54-18:35 Narrative:TheitinerantJesuspreparesforthechurchbyhisdeedsMatt.13:54-17:27 Discourse:ChurchlifeandorderMatt.18:1-35 BookFive:TheMessiahandhischurchonthewaytothepassionMatt.19:1-25:46 Narrative:Jesusleadshisdisciplestothecrossasheconfoundshisenemies.Matt.19:1-23:29 Discourse:TheLastJudgmentMatt.24-25
TheClimax:Death-ResurrectionMatt.26-28 FromWednesdaytoThursdaynightMatt.26:1-75 FromFridaymorningtoSaturdayMatt.27:1-66 FromSundaytotheEndoftheAgeMatt.28:1-20 Againfromahistoricalstandpoint,MatthewcloselyfollowsMarkfromthebeginningoftheGalileanmin-istryforward.ThemajorexceptionisthatMatthewhasJesustalkingalotmorethandoesMark.Inanycase,oneof thedistinctive themes is theverystrongemphasisuponJesusas the fulfillmentofOldTestamentprophecy.
How do I learn more about the Gospel of Matthew?Online:
ScotMcKnight,Baker’sEvangelicalDictionaryofBiblicalTheology,“Matthew,Theologyof”: http://bible.crosswalk.com/Dictionaries/BakersEvangelicalDictionary/bed.cgi?number=T466
Wikipedia,“TheGospelofMatthew”: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gospel_of_Matthew
EncyclopediaBritannica(1911ed),“TheGospelofStMatthew”: http://www.1911encyclopedia.org:8000/Gospel_Of_St_Matthew
Page8
NewTestamentGateway,“TheGospelofMatthew”: http://ntgateway.com/matthew/
Thislinkiswhatisknownasa“gateway”leadingtonumerousURLsdealingwiththegospelofMatthew.Oneneedstoexercisecautionaboutthesekindsoflinks,sincethesecondaryURLswilltypicallycontainawidevarietyofmaterialsofdifferingquality.
Religiononline,“TheGospelofMatthew”: http://www.textweek.com/mtlk/matthew.htm
AnothergatewaypagewithevenmoreURLstreatingtheGospelofMatthew,andgreaterdiversityofbothviewpointandqualityofcontent.
CatholicEncyclopedia,“TheGospelofMatthew”: http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/10057a.htm
RobertM.Grant,AHistoricalIntroductiontotheNewTestament,“TheGospelofMatthew,”chap.9: http://www.religion-online.org/showchapter.asp?title=1116&C=1229
Print Sources AnnotatedBibliographyatcranfordville.com: http://cranfordville.com/NT-BiblioCom.html
LocatedintheBibliographysectionofcranfordville.comisagrowingnumberofreferencestohardcopytreatmentsontheGospelofMatthew.Thisincludesbothcommentariesandarticles.
2.1.1.5 The Gospel of Luke. Thethirdgospelof the four is the longestofallandcontainsunquestionably thehighest levelwritingskillsinthelinguafrancaofthatday,KoineGreek.TheauthorofthisdocumentwasveryskilledinhisGreeklanguageabilities,andalsoreflectsadeepknowledgeoftheGreeklanguagestyleofwritingfoundintheSeptuagint,theGreektranslationoftheOldTestament.Asisthecasewiththeothergospels,thisdocumentdoesnotnameitsauthor.Thetitle,“TheGospelaccordingtoLuke,”reflectsawidespreadearlychurchtradi-tion about authorship.
ThisgospeldocumentislinkedtothebookofActsthroughtheProloguesofeach: Luke 1:1-4 Acts 1:1-5
1 Sincemany have undertaken to setdown an orderly account of the events thathavebeen fulfilledamongus,2 justas theywerehandedontousbythosewhofromthebeginning were eyewitnesses and servantsoftheword,3Itoodecided,afterinvestigat-ingeverythingcarefullyfromtheveryfirst,towriteanorderlyaccountforyou,mostexcel-lent Theophilus, 4 so that you may know the truth concerning the thingsaboutwhichyouhavebeeninstructed.
1Inthefirstbook,Theophilus,IwroteaboutallthatJesusdidandtaughtfromthebeginning2untilthedaywhenhewastakenuptoheaven,aftergivinginstructionsthroughtheHolySpirittotheapostleswhomhehadchosen.3Afterhissufferinghepresentedhimself alive to them by many convincing proofs, appearing tothemduringfortydaysandspeakingaboutthekingdomofGod.4Whilestayingwiththem,heorderedthemnottoleaveJerusalem,buttowaitthereforthepromiseoftheFather.“This,”hesaid,“iswhatyouhaveheardfromme;5forJohnbaptizedwithwater,butyouwillbebaptizedwiththeHolySpiritnotmanydaysfromnow.”
ThefirstwordsofActs1:1makeitclearthatthegospelwaswrittenfirst.TheauthorintentionallylinksActsbacktothegospelwithhisdepictionofthefinalscenesofthegospelinLk.24.Thetwovolume“set”thenat-temptstotellthestoryofJesus,followedbythefirstthreedecadesoftheChristiancommunityoffaiththatJesusleftbehind.Inthatsequel,PeterandPaularethetwocentralfiguresdescribedfromabout30to60AD.WhetherLukeintendedtoaddathirdvolumetothissetisdebatedamongscholars.WewilladdressthatquestioninouroverviewofthebookofActs. QuitepopularforthelasthalfcenturyistheviewthatLukeintendedtowriteaHeilsgeschictlicheHistorie (SalvationHistory)thatfocusedonthreeerasofGod’sredemptiveactivity:1)TheOldTestamentisthestoryofGod’sactivitywiththecovenantpeopleofIsrael;2)thegospelisthetransitionofthatsalvationhistorytotheredemptiveaccomplishmentinJesus,thenewcovenant,withJohntheBaptistasthetransitionalfigurefromtheoldtothenew;3)thebookofActsistheclimaxofthatsalvationhistorythatshareshowthenewcovenantcommunitybegansharingthewitnessofsalvationtotheentireworld.ProfessorHansConzelmann firstsetforththisproposalinthe1950swithhisstudyofLuke-ActstitledIn der Mitte der Zeit,andlatertrans-latedintoEnglishasThe Theology of St. Luke.ForathoroughevaluationofConzelmann’sproposalseeW.
Page9
C.Robinson,Jr.,“Luke,Gospelof,”Interpreter’s Dictionary of the Bible,Supplementaryvolume. WecanconfidentlyconcludethatwehaveacommonauthorbetweenthesetwodocumentsintheNewTestament.Shouldtheybestudiedjointly,orshouldtheybestudiedseparately?NewTestamentscholarshipisdividedonthatquestion.Inthebibliographylistedbelow,youwillfindstudiestakingoneortheotherap-proach.
2.1.1.5.1 Compositional History ThearticleinWikipediaonLukedoesaprettygoodjobofsummarizingtheearlychurchtraditionaboutthisgospel’sauthor:
NowhereinLukeorActsdoesitexplicitlysaythattheauthorisLuke,thecompanionofPaul.Theearliestsur-vivingwitnessesthatplaceLukeastheauthoraretheMuratorianCanon(c.170),thewritingsofIrenaeus(c.180),andtheAnti-MarcionitePrologue(secondhalfofthe2ndcentury).[1][2]AccordingtotheCatholicEncyclopedia,theevidenceinfavorofLucanauthorshipisbasedontwomainthings:first,theuseof“we”inActschapters16,20,21and27suggeststhewritertraveledwithPaul;second,intheopinionoftheRomanCatholicwritersoftheency-clopedia,the“medicallanguage”employedbythewriteris“identicalwiththoseemployedbysuchmedicalwritersasHippocrates,Arctæus,Galen,andDioscorides”.[3]Accordingtothisview,Paul’s“dearfriendLuketheDoctor”(Col4:14)and“fellowworker”(Phm24)makesthemostlikelycandidateforauthorshipoutofallthecompanionsmentionedinPaul’swritings. Modernscholarshipdoesnotunanimouslyagreeonthesepoints,statingthattheauthorofLukewasanony-mous.Anumberoftheoriesexistregardingthefirstperson(“we”)passages.AccordingtoV.K.Robbins,thefirstpersonnarrationwasagenericstyleforseavoyages.RobbinsgoesontodiscusswhythebookofActsalsousesfirstpersonnarrationonlandandwhyitisabsentfrommanyotherseapassages.ItisalsopossibleafirstpersontraveldiarycouldhavebeenincorporatedintoActsfromanearliersourceortheauthorcouldsimplyhavebeenuntruthfulaboutbeingacompanionofPaul.Additionally,thethesisthatthevocabularyisspecialtoaphysicianwasquestionedbyH.J.CadburyinhisdissertationThe Style and Literary Method of Luke,whicharguedthatsomeofthevocabularyisfoundinnonmedicalworksaswell. TheevangelistdoesnotclaimtohavebeenaneyewitnessofJesus’life,buttohave“investigatedeverythingcarefully”and“writ[ten]anorderlyaccount”“oftheevents...justastheywerehandedon...bythosewhofromthebeginningwereeyewitnesses”(Luke1:1-4).Accordingtothetwo-sourcehypothesis,themostcommonlyacceptedsolutiontothesynopticproblem,Luke’ssourcesincludedtheGospelofMarkandanothercollectionoflostsay-ingsknownasQ,theQuelleor“source”document.Themoretraditionaltheory,advocatingMatthewastheearliestGospel,whichthetwo-sourcehypothesisusurpedasfavourite,isknownastheAugustinianhypothesis. ThegeneralconsensusisthatLukewaswrittenbyaGreekforgentileChristians.TheGospelisaddressedtotheauthor’spatron,themostexcellentTheophilus,whichinGreeksimplymeansFriendofGod,andmaynotbeaname,butagenerictermforaChristian.TheGospelisclearlydirectedatChristians,oratthosewhoalreadyknewaboutChristianity,ratherthanageneralaudience,sincetheascriptiongoesontostatethattheGospelwaswritten“...sothatyoumayknowthecertaintyofthethingsyouhavebeentaught”(Luke1:3-4).
TheearlychurchisveryunitedinitsdesignationofLukethephysician,mentionedinCol.4:4andPhm.24,asthesourceofbothLukeandActs.Tobesure,variousexplanationscanbegivenforthe“we”sectionsinActsandtheir relationship to thequestionofauthor.Butstillverycommonis theolderviewthat thesesectionsreflectthewriterofActsjoiningthemissionarygroupasitcameintoMacedoniaonthesecondarymissionaryjourney.AtthispointthewriterofActsessentiallyshiftsfromtellinghisstoryfroma“theydidthis;theydidthat”toa“wedidthis;wedidthat”perspective.AsaphysicianLukewouldhavebeenaslave,sincethevastmajorityoflawyersanddoctorsinthatRomanworldwereslaves.OneshouldrememberthatmanyslavesinthefirstcenturyRomanworldwereamongthemosthighlyeducatedofthattime.Everylargeestateneededhighlyeducatedslavestotakecareofthehealthofthefamilyandlegalexpertstointerpret legalmattersintheRomancourtsystem.VerypossiblyTheophiluscouldhavebeenLuke’sownerwholoanedhimouttoPaulbecauseofPaul’songoinghealthissuesmentionedafewtimesinthelettersofPaul.Theunder-standingisthatLukethenremainedwiththeapostleuntilhismartyrdominRomeinthemid60s.SometimeafterthatLukecompletedthewritingofthesetwodocumentsaftercollectingdataduringhistravelswiththeapostleforoveradecade. Whenonelooksattheauthorprofilecompiledfrominsidethegospelthemainfeaturesdonotseriouslydisputetheearlychurchtradition.Quiteclearlythereisa“universal”perspectiveinwhichJesusisstressedastheSaviorforalltheworld,ratherthanjustfortheJewishpeople.ThisisnottosuggestthattheothergospelsdonotpresentJesusasauniversalSavior,butLukefocusesonthismorethantheothers.Lukegreatlyem-phasizesJesusministrytothelowlyandoutcastsofsociety,whichisinlinewithwhatonewouldexpectifaslaveweredoingthewriting.Forme,amuchhigherconfidenceintheearlychurchtraditionaboutauthorshipcanbegivenherethanforthefirstgospel.
2.1.1.5.2 Internal Contents VincentTaylor (Interpreters Dictionary of the Bible, iPreach) provides a helpful summary of the con-
Page 10
tents:4.Distinctivecharacteristics.a. Universalism.ThisqualityhasalreadybeennotedintheaccountofthesermonatNazareth,inthereferencestothewidowatZarephathandNaamantheSyrian(4:25-27).Itrunsthroughoutthegos-pel--inthebirthstories,wherethepromisedsalvationisdescribedasa“lightforrevelationtotheGentiles”(2:32);intheparableofthegreatsupper,inwhichtheservantisbiddento“goouttothehighwaysandhedges,andcompelpeopletocomein”(14:23);andinthestoryoftheappearancetotheElevenaccordingtowhichthedisciplesaretopreachrepentanceandtheforgivenessofsins“toallnations,beginningfromJerusalem”(24:47). b. An interest in social relationships.Thisconcernappearsinthebeatitudesaddressedtothepoorandwoesaddressedtotherich(6:20-26).Illustrationsfromfinancearefrequent--e.g.,inmanyoftheparables,suchasthetwodebtors,therichfool,thetowerbuilder,therichmanandLazarus,andthepounds.Therearealsoseveralrefer-encestoalmsgiving(11:41;12:33),andfrequentallusionstolodgingandentertainment(2:7;9:12;21:37;also7:36ff;10:38ff;13:26;etc.). c. A deep concern for outcasts, sinners, and Samaritans.See5:l-11;7:36ff;9:51-55;10:29-37;17:11-19;18:9-14;19:1-10;23:39-43.TheremarkofHarnackhasoftenbeenquoted:“Hehasaboundless--indeedapara-doxical--loveforsinners,togetherwiththemostconfidenthopeoftheirforgivenessandamendment.” d. An interest in stories about women.ThisinterestisillustratedinportraitureoftheVirgin,Elizabeth,Anna,thewidowatNain,thepenitentharlot,theministeringwomenfromGalilee,MarthaandMary,thebentwoman,andthewomenmentionedintheparablesofthelostcoinandtheunjustjudge.Thesameinterest,itwillberecalled,ismanifestintheActsinthestoriesaboutTabitha,Lydia,Priscilla,andthefourdaughtersofPhiliptheevangelist. e. An emphasis on joy, prayer, and the Holy Spirit.Theangelicmessagetotheshepherdsspeaksof“goodnewsofagreatjoywhichwillcometoallthepeople”(2:10).Prayerismentionedin5:16;6:12;11:1;22:32,41-42.OnthecrossJesusprays:“Father,forgivethem;fortheyknownotwhattheydo,”andcommendshimselftotheFatherinthewords:“Father,intothyhandsIcommitmyspirit”(23:46).TheHolySpiritismentionedin4:1,14,andagainat10:21,andthegiftoftheSpirittothedisciplesispromisedinthewords:“Behold,IsendthepromiseofmyFatheruponyou;butstayinthecity,untilyouareclothedwithpowerfromonhigh”(24:49).ThesesameinterestsareabundantlyillustratedintheActs. f. An emphasis on the graciousness and severity of the demands of Jesus.ThegraciousnessoftheLu-kanJesusisuniversallyrecognized.AtNazareth“allspokewellofhim,andwonderedatthegraciouswordswhichproceededoutofhismouth”(4:22).Tendernessandcompassionshineinthenarrativesofthewomanofthecity,Zacchaeus,andthepenitentbandit.Itisnotalwaysimmediatelyrecognized,however,thatalongwiththisgracious-nessthereisanimperiousnoteinthesayingsofJesus.Withoutcounselinghatred,hedemandsundividedloyaltytohimselfinthesaying:“Ifanyonecomestomeanddoesnothatehisownfatherandmotherandwifeandchildrenandbrothersandsisters,yes,andevenhisownlife,hecannotbemydisciple”(14:26);thissayingappearsinamorechallengingformthanintheparallelinMatt.10:37.Completerenunciationisrequiredinthewordswhichfollowtheparableoftherashking:“Sotherefore,whoeverofyoudoesnotrenounceallthathehascannotbemydisciple”(14:33).Thesayingonsalt(14:34-35;cf.Matt.5:13;Mark9:50),whichclosesthisgroup,appearsinaformmoresearchingandmoreabsolutethanintheparallelversions:“Saltisgood;butifsalthaslostitstaste,howshallitssaltnessberestored?Itisfitneitherforthelandnorforthedunghill;menthrowitaway.Hewhohasearstohear,lethimhear.” g. The stress on the lordship of Christ.ThesonshipofChrist,whilefullyrecognizedinLuke(cf.1:35;3:22;4:3,9;10:22), isnotemphasizedtothedegreeillustratedinthePaulinelettersandtheJohanninewritings.Thestresslies,asindeeditdoesinthecaseofPaul,uponthelordshipofChrist.ThisistruealsooftheActs.Infact,wemaysaythattheChristologyofLuke-ActsisthatofprimitiveChristianity.Theevangelistusesthetitle“theLord”atleasteighteentimes,andinvariouscombinationsnearlyfiftytimesintheActs.Therecanbelittledoubtthatitexpressesanattitudeofmarkedreligiousveneration. h. The interest taken in the Passion.InthisrespectthegospelresemblesMark,butthereisperhapsagreaterinterestinitstragicaspects.In9:51JesussetshisfacetogotoJerusalem.In12:50,inasayingfoundonlyinLuke,Jesussays:“Ihaveabaptismtobebaptizedwith;andhowIamconstraineduntil it isaccomplished!”(cf.Mark10:39).InreplytothethreatsofHerodAntipas,hesays:“Behold,Icastoutdemonsandperformcurestodayandtomorrow,andthethirddayIfinishmycourse”(13:32);and,attheLastSupper,hequotesIsa.53:12inthewords:“Itellyouthatthisscripturemustbefulfilledinme,‘Andhewasreckonedwithtransgressors’;forwhatiswrittenaboutmehasitsfulfilment’”(22:37).Thelastclauseinthispassagehasevengreaterpointif,withanumberofscholars,itisrendered:“Formylifedrawstoitsend.”InLuke,ChrististhedivineSonandLordwhoinfilialobediencefulfilsaministryofgracewhichculminatesinsuffering,death,andresurrection.
LukemakesextensiveuseofbothMarkandQassources,butalsohasalargeamountofothermateri-alsthatarefoundexclusively inhisgospelaccount--morematerial thanfromMarkandQ.Hisresearchwasthoroughasheindicatedinhisprologue(Luke1:1-4).AndinthatthoroughnesswehaveamarveloustreasureofinformationaboutandinterpretationofJesusthatisindispensable.
Page 11
How do I learn more about the Gospel of Luke?Online:
J.JuliusScott,Jr.,Baker’sEvangelicalDictionaryofBiblicalTheology,“Luke-Acts,Theologyof”: http://bible.crosswalk.com/Dictionaries/BakersEvangelicalDictionary/bed.cgi?number=T450
Wikipedia,“TheGospelofLuke”: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gospel_of_Luke
EncyclopediaBritannica(1911ed),“TheGospelofStLuke”: http://www.1911encyclopedia.org/Gospel_Of_St_Luke
NewTestamentGateway,“TheGospelofLukeandActs”: http://ntgateway.com/lukeacts/
Thislinkiswhatisknownasa“gateway”leadingtonumerousURLsdealingwiththegospelofLuke.Oneneedstoexercisecautionaboutthesekindsoflinks,sincethesecondaryURLswilltypicallycontainawidevarietyofmaterialsofdifferingquality.
Religiononline,“TheGospelofLuke”: http://www.textweek.com/mtlk/luke.htm
AnothergatewaypagewithevenmoreURLstreatingtheGospelofMatthew,andgreaterdiversityofbothviewpointandqualityofcontent.
CatholicEncyclopedia,“TheGospelofLuke”: http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/09420a.htm
RobertM.Grant,AHistoricalIntroductiontotheNewTestament,“TheGospelofLukeandtheBookofActs,”chap.10: http://www.religion-online.org/showchapter.asp?title=1116&C=1230
RichardAnderson,GospelofLukewebsite: http://www.geocities.com/gospelofluke/ AwebsitedevotedtothestudiesofLukeActs.
TheLukesite: http://home.freeuk.net/thelukesite/Luke.htm AwebsitedevotedtothestudiesofLukeActs,basedintheUnitedKingdom.
Print Sources
AnnotatedBibliographyatcranfordville.com: http://cranfordville.com/NT-BiblioCom.html
LocatedintheBibliographysectionofcranfordville.comisagrowingnumberofreferencestohardcopytreatmentsontheGospelofLuke.Thisincludesbothcommentariesandarticles.
2.1.1.6 The Gospel of John. ThefourthgospelgoesitsowndistinctwayintellingthestoryofJesus.Ithardlyfollowsthesamese-quenceofthesynopticgospels.Matthew,MarkandLukedevoteconsiderablespacetoJesus’ministryinGalilee(Mt.51%;Mk.53%;Lk.24%),whileJohnusesonly15%ofhisgospeltodescribethatsameministry.TheonesegmentthathestressesalongwiththesynopticgospelwritersisthelastweekofJesus’earthlylife, whichisknownasthePassionofChrist.ButhereJohnseldomdescribesthesameeventsthatarefoundinthefirstthreegospels.EvenmoredistinctiveisthatalmostmostnoneoftheeventsorsayingsofJesusfoundinthesynopticsallthroughJesus’earthlylifeshowupinJohn,asacomparisonofthepericopes of the four gospelsreveals. AnothermatterthatwillplayanimportantroleinunderstandingtheoriginofthegospelisthetraditionallinkingofthegospelwiththethreelettersbythesamenameandthebookofRevelation.Thesefourdocu-mentsintheNThavebeenseenasoriginatingfromthesamesource,andthusareinnerconnected.Conse-quently,whenthereligiousbeliefsystemofthesedocumentsisdiscussedoftenthediscussiontakesplaceunderthelabel“TheTheologyofJohn”or“JohannianTheology.”Additionally,authorshipissuesofeachof
Page 12
thesefourdocumentsistypicallydiscussedintermsofwhetherornotthesamepersonisresponsibleforallfourdocuments.Butseriousobstaclesquicklyarisewhenapproachingthesedocumentsfromacommonauthorshipassumption.Eachdocumentmustbetakenonitsownterms.Rev.1:4aloneidentifiesJohnasitsauthor.
2.1.1.6.1 Compositional History TheearlychurchtraditionabouttheoriginofthefourthgospelisratherunifiedabouttheapostleJohn,althoughnotasunifiedasthequotebelowfromhighlytraditionalistCatholicEncyclopediapresentsit:
Theevidencegivenbytheearlyecclesiasticalauthors,whosereferencetoquestionsofauthorshipisbutinci-dental,agreeswiththatoftheabovementionedsources[earlyversions].St.DionysiusofAlexandria(264-5),itistrue,soughtforadifferentauthorfortheApocalypse,owingtothespecialdifficultieswhichwerebeingthenurgedbytheMillennarianistsinEgypt;buthealwaystookforgrantedasanundoubtedfactthattheApostleJohnwastheau-thoroftheFourthGospel.EquallyclearisthetestimonyofOrigen(d.254).HeknewfromthetraditionoftheChurchthatJohnwasthelastoftheEvangeliststocomposehisGospel(Eusebius,“Hist.eccl.”,VI,xxv,6),andatleastagreatportionofhiscommentaryontheGospelofSt.John,inwhichheeverywheremakesclearhisconvictionoftheApostolicoriginoftheworkhascomedowntous.Origen’steacher,ClementofAlexandria(d.before215-6),relatesas“thetraditionoftheoldpresbyters”,thattheApostleJohn,thelastoftheEvangelists,“filledwiththeHolyGhost,hadwrittenaspiritualGospel”(Eusebius,op.cit.,VI,xiv,7). OfstillgreaterimportanceisthetestimonyofSt.Irenaeus,BishopofLyons(d.about202),linkedimmediatelywiththeApostolicAgeasheis,throughhisteacherPolycarp,thediscipleoftheApostleJohn.ThenativecountryofIrenaeus(AsiaMinor)andthesceneofhissubsequentministry(Gaul)renderhimawitnessoftheFaithinboththeEasternandtheWesternChurch.HecitesinhiswritingsatleastonehundredversesfromtheFourthGospel,oftenwiththeremark,“asJohn,thediscipleoftheLord,says”.InspeakingofthecompositionoftheFourGospels,hesaysofthelast:“LaterJohn,thediscipleoftheLordwhorestedonHisbreast,alsowroteaGospel,whilehewasresidingatEphesusinAsia”(Adv.Haer.,III,i,n.2).Ashere,soalsointheothertextsitisclearthatby“John,thediscipleoftheLord,”hemeansnoneotherthantheApostleJohn. WefindthatthesameconvictionconcerningtheauthorshipoftheFourthGospelisexpressedatgreaterlengthintheRomanChurch,about170,bythewriteroftheMuratorianFragment(lines9-34).BishopTheophilusofAnti-ochinSyria(before181)alsocitesthebeginningoftheFourthGospelasthewordsofJohn(AdAutolycum,II,xxii).Finally,accordingtothetestimonyofaVaticanmanuscript(CodexReginSueciseuAlexandrinus,14),BishopPa-piasofHierapolisinPhrygia,animmediatediscipleoftheApostleJohn,includedinhisgreatexegeticalworkanac-countofthecompositionoftheGospelbySt.JohnduringwhichhehadbeenemployedasscribebytheApostle.
In the PBSbroadcastabouttheGospelofJohnsomeyearsback,thishelpfulsynopsisfromthecontentsofthegospelisprovidedregardingaprojectedJohanninecommunityasthesourceofthegospel:
“InthebeginningwastheWord,andtheWordwaswithGod,andtheWordwasGod.HewasinthebeginningwithGod,andthroughhimwereallthingsmade.”Thesewordsoftheopeningprologueofthefourthgospelprovideacluetothenatureofthiswork:itstandsapartfromthethreesynopticgospels.Ithasoftenbeencalledthe“spiritualgospel”becauseofthewaythatitportraysJesus.IfMatthew’sJesusresemblesMosesandLuke’sJesusresemblesaGreekphilosopherorasemi-divinehero,John’sJesusresemblestheJewishidealofheavenlyWisdom.SomeJewishworkswrittenseveralhundredyearsbeforeJohn’sgospelportrayedWisdomasGod’sheavenlyconsort.ThisWisdom,picturedasabeautifulwoman,livedwithGodandparticipatedincreation.Anotherpartofthemythregardingherwasthatshedescendedtoearthtoimpartdivineknowledgetohumanbeings.ButshewasrejectedandsoreturnedtoGod.AnotherinterestingfeatureofJohn’sgospelisthatJesusspeaksinlongmonologues,ratherthanpithystate-mentsorparables.HeopenlyproclaimshisdivinityandinsiststhattheonlywaytotheFatheristhroughhim.Motifsoflightanddarknessarewoventhroughoutthegospel:thesearenotsimplyliterarymotifs,butdevicesthatgivecluesaboutthecommunityforwhichJohnwaswritten.Itwasacommunityunderstress.ThegospelitselfsuggeststhatitsmemberswereinconflictwiththefollowersofJohntheBaptistandwereundergoingapainfulseparationfromJudaism.Thegroupitselfwasprobablyundergo-ingdesertionandinternalconflict.TraditionhascreditedJohn,thesonofZebedeeandanapostleofJesus,withtheauthorshipofthefourthgospel.Mostscholarsdisputethisnotion;somespeculatethattheworkwasactuallyproducedbyagroupofearlyChris-tianssomewhatisolatedfromotherearlyChristiancommunities.TraditionalsoplacesitscompositioninornearEphesus,althoughlowerSyriaorLebanonaremorelikelylocations.Themostlikelytimeforthecompletionofthisgospelisbetween90and110CE.Thecentralthemeofthisworkisascent/descent.Jesusispresentedasonewhotravelsfreelybetweenthedualrealmsofheavenandearth.AsWayneMeekshaswritten,heis“theStrangerfromHeaven.”He--andhealone--knowstheFather;beliefinhimistheonlywaytoreachtheFather,theonlywaytosalvation.ThebelieversofJohn’scommunitycanseeintothisspiritualandredeemingcosmos;theiropponentscannot.TheopponentsofJesusare“theJews”,whocannotorwillnotrecognizewhoheis.TheauthorofJohndeliber-atelycreatesastorythatmaybeinterpretedontwolevels.Thatis,thestorythatJohntellsofJesus’encounterwiththeJewsconsciouslyparallelsthetensionsbetweenJohn’scommunityanditscontemporaryJewishopponents.Hiscommunityisbeingexpelledfromthesynagogues,becausetheybelieveinJesusastheMessiah;theJews
Page 13
inJohn’sgospelsimplycannotgrasphistrueidentity.Theyconstantlyask“Whereareyoufrom?”and“Whereareyougoing?”Jesusrespondsbysayingwhereheisgoingtheycannotgo;theythinkthatheintendstotravelabroad.“DoesheintendtogototheDiasporaamongtheGreeksandteachtheGreeks?”Inthisgospel,theJewscannotknowbecausetheyarefromthedarkness;Jesusandhisfollowersarefromthelight:“Youarefrombelow,Iamfromabove;youareofthiscosmos,Iamnotofthiscosmos.”(8:23)Thesethemesoflightanddark,knowingandunknowing,convergeinthecrucifixionofJesus.JohnmakesadeliberatepunontheGreekword“tobecrucified”,whichalsomeans“tobeliftedup.”Asintheothergospels,theendisnottheend.JohndescribesthesceneoftheemptytombandJesus’appear-anceamongthedisciples.ThomasstilldoubtsthatthefigurebeforehimisreallyJesus.Jesusinstructshimtofeelthewoundathisside,whereuponThomasisconvinced.Jesus,inatellingreferencetothosewhoaccepthim,says:“Blessedarethosewhohavenotseenandyethavecometobelieve.”JustasJesusaddresseshisdisciples,theauthorofJohnaddresseshiscommunity.Andheoffersthemreassur-ance:“NowJesusdidmanyothersignsinthepresenceofhisdisciples,whicharenotwritteninthisbook.ButthesearewrittensothatyoumaycometobelievethatJesusistheMessiah,theSonofGodandthatthroughbelievingyoumayhavelifeinhisname.”(JN20:30-31).AsPaulaFredriksenhaswritten,“TheycouldthusseethemselvesastheysawtheirSavior:aloneinthedark-ness,yetthelightoftheworld.”
Comparingthesetwoprofiles--oneoutsideandoneinside--isnotallthateasy.Thecomparisonsug-geststhepossibilityoftheapostleJohn,butdoesn’tconclusivelypointthatdirection.Thusdogmaticconclu-sionsonthis issuewouldbevery inappropriate,andprobablywouldsaymoreaboutthescholarshipandknowledgeofthepersondrawingsuchconclusionsthantheywouldsayabouttheevidenceitself.
2.1.1.6.2 Internal Contents Whenoneseekstounderstandthecontentsofthegospel,thefirstcriticalpointistorealizetheroleofthe Prologue(1:1-18)fromaliteraryview.Inthisformalannouncementofbeginnings,thefourthgospelintro-ducesthereadertothekeythemes,e.g.,light/darkness,logos,JohntheBaptizeretc.thatwillprovidetheinterpretativefilterthroughwhichthestoryofJesusistold.Eventafterevent,everysayingintheremainderofthegospelwillbelinkedinsomewaytothisprologuefoundationforthegospel.OnecannotunderstandtheverydifferentwayJohntellshisstoryofJesuswithoutthisbackgroundknowledge. ThiscosmologicalvantagepointwithissuesofthedivinelogosandtherulersofdarknesslockedinalifeanddeathstruggleisreflectedinJesus’constantconflictwiththeJewishreligiousleaders.TheofteninabilityofpeopletounderstandwhatHewastryingtosaytothemhasitsrootsinthelimitationofdarknessonthemindsof thoseseeking tounderstandcosmic lightand infinitewisdom. InmanyconversationsJesuswillseemto“talkabovetheheads”oftheindividualsconversingwithhim.Sometimesasimplequestionputtohimlauncheshimintoalongdiscourseonadeeplyprofoundspiritualtopictherushespastthepointofthequestionraisedtobeginwith.ReadcarefullytheconversationwithNicodemusinchapterthreeforanillustra-tion. The emphases in the fourth gospel, notably in the pericopesofthegospel,stressmanydifferenttopicsthatarenotfoundinthesynopticgospels.ForachartedcomparisonofthisseemydetailedLifeofChrist at Cranfordville.Veryrarelyareanyoftheepisodes,thatarerecordedinanyorsomeofthesynopticgospels,alsorecordedinthefourthgospel.DifferencesinsourcesofinformationaboutJesusprobablyaccountsforsomeofthis.John’sgospelseemstodrawheavilyfromfirsttheBookofSignsthatliesbehindmuchof1:19-12:50,andsecondfromtheBookofGlorywhichisbehindthematerialin13:1-20:31. GaryM.BurgeintheveryconservativeBaker’sEvangelicalDictionaryofBiblicalTheology has a helpful summationofthis:
The Structure of the Gospel.TheFourthGospelisorganizedintotwoprinciplesectionsandtheseareframedbyaprologue(1:1-18)andanepilogue(21:1-25),eachofwhichwerelikelyaddedatsomelaterdateeitherbytheGospel’sauthororoneofhisfollowers.TheprologueintroducestheincarnationofthepreexistentWordandpoeti-callysetsthestageforallthatistofollow:GoddiscloseshisSonintheworldofdarkness;heispopularlyrejected;aselectgroupoffollowersdiscoverlife;andeventhoughthedarknesstries,itcannotdefeatthisSon.ThefirstsectioniscommonlycalledtheBookofSigns(1:19-12:50)inordertodescribehowJesusappearswithinJudaismreplacingitsinstitutions(thetemple,sacredwells,teachers)andfestivals(Passover,Tabernacles).Heof-fersoverwhelmingmessianicgiftsthatexploitimagesintrinsicintheJewishsettinginthenarrative(wine,wisdom,water,healing,bread,light,life).ThefinaleventistheraisingofLazarus—whichutterlydisclosesJesus’identity—aswellassealshisfate.ButeventhoughJesusexperienceshostilityamongtheJewishleadersinJerusalem,stillhediscoversreceptivityinGalilee(2:11;4:45;7:1;etc.)andattheendofthissection,GreeksfromGalileeeagerlylineuptofollowhim(12:20-26). ThesecondsectioniscalledtheBookofGlory(13:1-20:31)becausenowJesustakesasidehisfollowers,wash-estheirfeetathisfinalPassovermeal(13:1-20),andexhaustivelyexplainstothemwhoheisandwhatwillhappen(13:31-17:26).ButhintedthroughouttheGospelisthenotionthattheimpendingcrossofChristwillbenotragedy,
Page 14
butatimewhenhisglorywillbecomevisibletoall(3:13-15;13:31;17:1-5).ThecrossisonemoresigngiventodisclosethatJesushasbeensentbytheFatherandisnowreturningtohim.ForJohn,thiscrossisvoluntary(10:11,17,18).Christisdeparting,havingcompletedtheworkhesetouttodo.Butbeforehegoes,hedistributesgiftstoallamonghisfollowers(20:19-29),blessingthemonemoretime. Mostscholarsthinkthattheearliestendingofthegospelisin20:30-31andthatchapter21isalateradditionnodoubtfromthesameJohanninesourcesthatsuppliedtheoriginalGospel.Ifitissecondary,itneverthelesshastheringofhistoricityandtheechoofJohanninelanguage.Jesusmakesaresurrectionappearanceandcommissionshisfollowersinanticipationofhispermanentabsence.
Butitishowthesetwosourcesareusedthatgivethedistinctivetonetothefourthgospel.ThisisdrivenmostlybythedesiretointerpretJesusinwaysthathelpedhimseemrelevantandessentialtotheChristiancommunityinthelatefirstcentury.
How do I learn more about the Gospel of John?Online:
J.JuliusScott,Jr.,Baker’sEvangelicalDictionaryofBiblicalTheology,“John,Theologyof”: http://bible.crosswalk.com/Dictionaries/BakersEvangelicalDictionary/bed.cgi?number=T390
Wikipedia,“TheGospelofJohn”: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gospel_of_John
EncyclopediaBritannica(1911ed),“TheGospelofStJohn”: http://www.1911encyclopedia.org/Gospel_Of_St_John
NewTestamentGateway,“TheGospelofJohn”: http://ntgateway.com/john/
Thislinkiswhatisknownasa“gateway”leadingtonumerousURLsdealingwiththegospelofLuke.Oneneedstoexercisecautionaboutthesekindsoflinks,sincethesecondaryURLswilltypicallycontainawidevarietyofmaterialsofdifferingquality.
Religiononline,“TheGospelofJohn”: http://www.textweek.com/mkjnacts/john.htm
AnothergatewaypagewithevenmoreURLstreatingtheGospelofMatthew,andgreaterdiversityofbothviewpointandqualityofcontent.
CatholicEncyclopedia,“TheGospelofJohn”: http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/08438a.htm
RobertM.Grant,AHistoricalIntroductiontotheNewTestament,“TheGospelofJohn,”chap.11: http://www.religion-online.org/showchapter.asp?title=1116&C=1231
TheFourthGospelandJohn’sEpistles:HomePageforResearch: http://www.fourthgospel.com/ AwebsitedevotedtothestudiesoftheJohanninewritings
Prof.FelixJust,S.J.,TheJohannineLiteratureWeb: http://catholic-resources.org/John/ AwebsitedevotedtothestudiesoftheJohanninewritings.Veryhelpfulandextensivesource.
Print Sources
AnnotatedBibliographyatcranfordville.com: http://cranfordville.com/NT-BiblioCom.html
LocatedintheBibliographysectionofcranfordville.comisagrowingnumberofreferencestohardcopytreatmentsontheGospelofJohn.Thisincludesbothcommentariesandarticles.
