The
gospels were always just there. Parts are
read along with parts of
the Old Testament and parts of other books
Sunday after Sunday in
churches. So it was
a surprise to be asked what a gospel is,
how many there are, who
wrote them, for whom, when and where. I
had decided I needed a bit
more education on such things and signed
up for a short course led by
an old friend. There was homework. I found
things get interesting
when students are asked to try to answer
such questions about gospels
using Wikipedia. I
had an
inkling of some things about gospels from
reading a book by Bishop
Spong, (see July 2017). He told that
gospels grew from liturgical
materials arranged to fit with a first
century synagogue annual cycle
of Old Testament lessons. In the first
century the followers, who
were initially predominantly Jews, would
do what Jesus did – they
would go to synagogue. At that time of
various religious movements in
Judaism, groups could add thoughts after
the service in line with its
theme or festival. Christian materials
could be presented. Each
Christian community would gather its
liturgical material. Spong
suggested that there were various gospels
or collections of
materials, adjusted to suit the style of
the attendees at a
particular synagogue at a particular
place. The liturgical material
would vary according to the synagogue
location and the tastes of the
“new way” congregation of Christians. The
web suggested that there were a lot of
gospels. That word stems from
old english meaning good news. Within the
gospels that good news
could mean the coming of the Kingdom of
God. Or it could mean an
account of the life and teachings of
Jesus. Or it could be a
collection of supposed sayings of Jesus.
There were some about the
infant Jesus. And
in the twentieth century some more were unearthed. The
gospels that gained wider usage in the
Christian communities tended
to be a collections of things about Jesus
that someone wanted others
to know – there is a bit of a sales pitch
in the gospels. They are
all concerned to make sure the reader
knows that Jesus was special
and significant, even if they see
that
in different ways. The
gospel according to Luke claims to write
what was heard from
eye-witnesses or what other people had
heard from eye-witnesses. Most
scholars agree that none of the gospels
were written by
eye-witnesses. Tradition
and early
church figures attached the gospels to
certain known people: Matthew,
the disciple Matthew; Mark, the
interpreter for Peter; Luke the
physician who travelled with Paul; and
John “the disciple whom
Jesus loved” referred to in the gospel –
was considered disciple
John. But all
four gospels are now considered to be
anonymous with the names of
well-known personages attached. Particular
gospels have a flavour that will appeal to
a particular type of
congregation – predominantly Matthew -
Jewish, Mark - secular, Luke
- educated, John - interested in cosmic
and religious significance.
Like
the rest of the New Testament, the four
gospels were all written in
Greek.
Why
are only four gospels in the bible if a
lot were written? The
present four gospels were adopted by
several church centres and
became accepted as canonical – that means
within the line, “the
canon,” that the church drew. The four
emerged around
130 CE
and are know to have been recognized by
Iranaeus, bishop of Lyon,
around 180 CE. They were likely first
confirmed by the Synod of Hippo
Regius, N Africa, 393 CE. And they were
confirmed at the first church
council held at Nicaea.
Whether
true or not, the gospels are a
biographical/historical type of
document – about the life and teachings
of Jesus, his death and
resurrection and his significance. They
also are narrative – they
have characters, plots and settings. And
the gospels take different
perspectives on some of the same events.
The gospels have an agenda –
they aim to encourage belief about
Jesus. This is how they start: Matthew 1:1 Mark
1:1 Luke 1:3 John
1:1 “A
record of the genealogy of Jesus
Christ the son of David, the son
of Abraham.” “The
beginning of the gospel about
Jesus Christ, the Son of God.” “Since I
myself have carefully investigated
everything from the beginning, it
seemed good also to me to write an
orderly account.” “In the
beginning was the Word, and the
Word was with God, and the Word
was God.” Mark
emphasizes Jesus as the Christ and Son of
God. Matthew jumps into
Jesus’ Jewish ancestry, focusing on how
Jesus fulfills the promises
made to Israel. Luke tells us he wants to
write an accurate
historical account. John introduces Jesus as
the pre-existent divine
Word, the self-revelation of God. Despite
the order of the gospels in the bible, Mark
appeared first around
65-75 CE followed by Matthew 75-85 CE, Luke
80-90 CE and John ~90 CE.
And the first three, known as the synoptic
gospels, have evident
common elements beyond the baptism by John
the Baptist, crucifixion
and resurrection that all four gospels
share.
The
crucifixion and the continuing growth of the
movement after Jesus’
death are recognized in more than one Roman
historical document.
Matthew could have been written in Antioch,
3rd
largest city in the Roman Empire with
sizable Christian and Jewish
populations. Mark was first thought to
have been written in Rome, but
that is now unlikely and Syria-Palestine
more probable. Luke has been
linked to Antioch and Rome – where the
other book that is
associated with whoever authored Luke,
Acts of the Apostles, ends.
But any urban setting would fit. John is
unlikely to be the disciple
referred to in the text as the beloved
disciple. However, the
follower who wrote the gospel did have a
following referred to now as
the Johanine school. The early church
identified Ephesus as the place
where John’s gospel was written through a
reference to a “John
the elder” living there, but Alexandria
and Palestine are also
possible locations. It is
the Roman testimony to the vitality
of the movement after Jesus’ death that
gives a clue to its
significance. Jesus seems to have struck a
chord with people of his
time. He seems to have encouraged the
followers to take on active
roles in the rural and urban communities
doing the same things he had
done pointing to an impending kingdom of God
and recruiting other
followers to become active in it. The
movement possibly allowed
ordinary people, not only the elite, to
organize and to build and
maintain their own support communities, free
of the limits imposed by
society’s norms and the norms of the
religious leadership of
Judaism of the day. That seems to be the new
way. In the gospel and
epistles we see the “new way” that is
inclusive and caring as
well as emerging notions of Jesus as
reflecting God in some special
way. The letters of St. Paul, the oldest
Christian writings, are
testimony to inclusive caring communities in
major centres across the
Roman world by the mid first century.
When the
study looked at particular events or
teachings, we found that the
synoptic gospels differed in the details of
their accounts of some
events. For example the Lord’s prayer hardly
exists in Mark. There
is just a dangling reference to receiving
forgiveness to the extent
that we forgive. But Matthew and Luke had a
more or less common
version of the Lord’s prayer. However our
leader suggested that the
phasing of the prayer is such that it is
unlikely Jesus said it. It
is more likely liturgical material used by
Christians in services.
The
story of the sower is common to all three
synoptic gospels. Yet the
subtle differences are there. Basically,
some seed fell on the path;
some on stoney ground; some among thorns;
some on good soil. What
does that refer to? The seed is the word and
the landing of the seed
is how the word is heard by people. For
Mark, those who hear the word
on the path, have it quickly snatched by
Satan. Those who hear the
word among thorns get caught up in concerns
of the world and wealth.
Those who hear on good soil hear, accept and
bear fruit. For Matthew
those who hear the word and don’t understand
it are on the path
where the evil one snatches it away; the
person who hears on rocky
ground and rejoices, but has no depth, falls
away when trouble or
persecution comes; for those who hear among
the thorns, the cares of
the world and the lure of wealth choke the
word; on good soil, the
person who hears and understands bears fruit
and yields many times.
For Luke, the seed on the path is those who
hear the word of God but
have it snatched from them by the devil so
they may not believe and
be saved. Those on rocky soil, hear and
rejoice. But in a time of
testing they fall away. As for those among
the thorns, they hear but
are chocked by the cares, riches and
pleasures of life. Their fruit
does not mature. Those in good soil, hear
the word in an honest and
good heart and bear fruit with patient
endurance. Subtly different! The way
the 3 synoptic gospels share some events or
teaching have led
scholars to suggest that they drew on some
of the same source
documents. Matthew and Luke seem to draw
about a quarter of their
material from Mark or the same source as
Mark, as well as from one
common source document common to both
referred to as Q as well as
their own individual
sources – say document M and document L. The
sources Mark, Q, M, L
give rise to the four source theory. However
there is a small part of
Mark unique to Mark. Indeed other gospels
have sections that seem to
have been added in a later edition. The
additional endings to Mark’s
gospel are not unique to Mark. John’s gospel
appears to end a bit
abruptly, then adds another concluding
section. The
Gospel according to John is different. Jesus
is in charge – he has
his father’s seal, acts for him. He lays
down his life – his life
is not taken. He makes speeches and his
actions are “signs” of
his cosmic significance – “in the beginning
the word was with
God, the word was God.” This is poetic,
situates things in their
places in a framework and the style with
Jesus in charge reassures in
times of stress and danger for the Christian
community. Such a time
began after Jerusalem fell in 70CE and
enmity grew between Christians
and Jews and Christians were forced out of
the synagogues. Some of
this later reality is projected earlier into
the time of Jesus life
in this gospel and also somewhat in others.
John has
Jesus saying things like “I go to prepare a
place for you” or “in
my father’s house are many mansions” that
are pastoral and
comforting in funerals and times of
persecution. On the other hand,
while the dominant “I’m in charge” Christ
may be reassuring in
such times, “I am the way the truth and the
life no one comes to
the father but by me” does not leave much
space for toleration and
cooperation. There are also passages urging
Christians to love each
other - “love one another as I have loved
you.” Yet the repeated
references to “the Jews” as against Jesus
and his followers has
doubtless fanned antisemitism. Other gospels
also do this, but to a
lesser extent. John’s
gospel seems to undermine the Jesus of the
other gospels who is a man
encouraging followers to take on the things
he is doing to build an
inclusive kingdom of God in the here and
now. There Jesus cured,
healed included those excluded. Here in John
a woman is offered
“living water” when she encounters Jesus at
a well. While the
study session recognized negative aspects to
John’s different
gospel, there remained sympathy for having
it there in the canon –
at least certain parts!
So in
the end what did we think of the four
gospels? One person found Mark
to be the best gospel – it begins and ends
rather abruptly but it
focuses on a human Jesus addressing a
Kingdom of God arriving in our
midst. Another preferred Matthew. Indeed,
Matthew has a strong
introduction and a collection of well
organized teachings and doings
sandwiched between a captivating birth story
– the visit by Magi
and rich gifts – and the resurrection
stories. Two of
us rather liked Luke – so forgive me if I
dwell on his gospel a
bit. Luke too has a stately introduction – a
formal dedication –
with teachings and events sandwiched between
Jesus’ birth story and
baptism and his resurrection stories. But
here the birth story has
skies full of angels telling the poor and
simple – shepherds –
the good news of the birth of Jesus.
Incidentally, Luke’s claim
that he checked his sources partially breaks
down in his birth story.
The timing of the Roman census in Roman
history does not check out
with the ruler Herod. Nor did the census
require people to return to
their home towns. Still, Luke’s manger scene
and angels in the
heavens make a point about the solidarity of
Jesus and the heavens
with the poor and destitute. Moreover Luke
has beautiful liturgical
material like the poetic Magnificat said by
Mary about uplifting the
poor in the impending Kingdom of God. The
Magnificat adds to and
reinforces Luke’s Christmas story
of a poor birth in a setting of homelessness
with visiting shepherds
and animals. Then there is the prophetic
poem, the Song of Zechariah,
and the tranquil Song of Simeon. Several
of us, although we recognized problems with
John’s gospel, felt an
attraction to some of the powerful memorable
poetic lines, the
comforting pastoral components
and his calls that Christians love one
another.
So from
our head scratchings and mumblings we caught
glimpses of why the
early church passed along to us this package
of four gospels from the
end of the first century CE. A big “thank
you” to the leader and
fellow students. It was useful to get
further insights into how the
faith tradition ended up with some of its
mixed bundle of hand-me
down documents! And I got myself a copy of a
new bible as a result:
The New Oxford Annotated Bible. It is a bit
of a solid read, but it
has notes that help answer the questions we
set out to explore –
and more.