Reading the Gospels Together
Some Conclusion – Part 3
As we begin to think of the creation of the gospels as
taking place in some fashion like I have described above we can come to another
important conclusion. While the gospels all reflect upon real historical events
surrounding the ministry, death, and resurrection of Jesus, the storyline of
each gospel is the creation of that author and does not reflect the order in
which all of those historical events actually happened – and in fact, at times
the gospel writers have taken liberty with those historical events shaping them
to fit their needs. For example, I think Mark, Matthew, and Luke reflect the
historical fact that Jesus celebrated Passover on the night in which he was
betrayed. John probably knew that too, but he took liberty with the story
because he decided it was more powerful to tell his readers that Jesus was
slaughtered with the Passover lambs since he was the lamb of God who takes away
the sin of the world. When we begin to think that each gospel writer is responsible
for creating their own storyline a whole world of possibilities opens for us to
hear their message more clearly. And we are less likely to get hung up on all
the differences we encounter. And we are less likely to be bothered by the fact
that John’s storyline is vastly different from the storylines of the three
synoptic gospels. None were reflecting the order in which the historical events
really happened! And even when we look at the three synoptic gospels we see
changes. To be sure, because they chose to make Mark the backbone of their own
gospels, Matthew and Luke were in some ways bound by Mark’s storyline. But each
did not hesitate to make changes at times. And each were did not hesitate to
add new things into Mark’s storyline.
And, if we are able to accept the thought that each gospel
writer is the one who is really responsible for their own storyline which does
not necessarily reflect the actual order in which things happened we are then
able to ponder how that very storyline becomes a tool for each gospel writer to
tell their particular story. They did not organize things haphazardly but with
great intention. And it is fascinating to discover why they did what they did.
For example it is fascinating to track Mark’s creation of the part of his
gospel where Jesus is attempting to teach his disciples that it was necessary
for him to go to Jerusalem, be handed over by the religious leaders and be
killed and on the third day rise. Mark begins with a strange story of a blind
man who needs to be healed twice, tipping his hand that the disciples who see
partially need to see further. Then he constructs a series of three predictions
by Jesus of his coming betrayal, death, and resurrection – all of which are
misunderstood by his disciples. And finally Mark finishes with the story of
anther blind man, Bartimeaus, who sees and follows. All of that is purely the
construction of Mark, the brilliant storyteller and gospel proclaimer! There
are many other examples like that and it is indeed fascinating to attempt to
follow the logic of each gospel writer as they spin forth their storyline. But
that discovery is only possible if we accept the conclusion that they are the
ones who created the storyline in the first place.
And once we begin to realize that each gospel writer is the
creator of their own storyline a further conclusion becomes available –
especially as we begin to read all four gospels together. Of course it is also
in reading all four gospels together that we run into the differences which
have been the focus of this study. Sometimes when we run into these differences
we may be able to get a clearer picture on the historical reality that finally
evades us. As I have said above we will never be able to get back to “what
really happened.” But, especially when we listen to John and the synoptic
gospels together we might be able to see a bit clearer. For example, Mark tells
his readers that Jesus came to Jerusalem once at the end of his ministry and
spent one day or at most two arguing with the religious leaders before he was
arrested, crucified, and rose from the dead. Matthew and Luke, because they
have been following Mark’s storyline tell their readers essentially the same
thing – though they both seem a bit uneasy about it, especially Luke. And in
fact in the arrest scene Mark even lets slip the words from Jesus, “Day after
day I have been with you in the Temple teaching.” Something begins to not add
up. And then we hear John tell his readers that Jesus arrived in Jerusalem in
the fall of the year for the Feast of Booths and never really left the confines
of Jerusalem until Passover five months later when he was crucified and rose
from the dead. During that time in John’s gospel there is a continual argument
between Jesus and the religious leaders that builds to the arrest. Perhaps this
time John reflects actual reality better than Mark. We can’t say that for sure
but reading the gospels together does hint at that possibility. And we begin to
wonder if Mark has not invested something in bringing Jesus to Jerusalem for
one powerful week to highlight the death of the Crucified Messiah. And thinking
in this way only adds to the power of Mark’s story!
There is one more important question that needs to be
addressed. If we begin to think of the gospels in the way we have been speaking
of them in this study, how are we to think of them as the Word of God? And how
are we to understand the inspiration of scripture? Those are huge questions
that deserve more reflection than I can provide here. But let me attempt to
address them. How are the gospels the Word of God if they contain
irreconcilable differences and do not all say the same thing? I would say that
are the Word of God because of what they do to us as their readers. God is
happy to embrace the creative skills of their writers even if those skills lead
them to say different things. The gospels are not God’s Word because of their
consistency but because God speaks through them. And that’s what God’s Word
always does. The whole of the Bible is like that. Mark created his gospel and
did it rather brilliantly in my opinion – but it is God who speaks through
Mark’s creation to create and sustain faith. What then about inspiration?
Certainly any serious reading of the four gospels leads to the honesty that God
did not dictate to each writer what they have written – the inspiration of
scripture cannot be that given what we read in the Bible. On the other hand
each gospel writer writes as a believer. And if we believe their story that
God’s Spirit is present in the world then we can also rejoice that God has
inspired them to write – to use the creative skills God has given them to
proclaim God’s message. God puts great faith in their ability! God is a part of
their lives and God moves them to proclaim. I think that’s what the inspiration
of scripture is really about – God working in the lives of people to proclaim
God’s Word and yet God trusting in their efforts. And the inspiration of
scripture does not stop back then – it continues as God’s Spirit lives within
us. God is still working in and through the writings of those first gospel
writers. God speaks through them to create and sustain faith within us. Thanks
be to God!