| About this site |
| About us |
| Our beliefs |
| Your first visit? |
| Contact us |
| External links |
| Good books |
| Visitor essays |
| Our forum |
| New essays |
| Other site features |
| Buy a CD |
| Vital notes |
| Spiritual/ethics |
| Spirituality |
| Morality/ethics |
| Absolute truth |
| Peace/conflict |
| Attaining peace |
| Religious tolerance |
| Religious hatred |
| Religious conflict |
| Religious violence |
| Laws and news |
| Religious laws |
| Religious news |
|
|
 | Very few details about the life of Jesus appear in the Epistles of Paul and other writers. 1 |
| There is almost no mention of Jesus in non-Christian writings of the 1st century CE. |
| The Gospels in the Christian Scriptures (New Testament) form the main basis for our understanding of the life of Jesus. |
As with so many factors in Christianity, religious conservatives and liberals differ greatly in their methods of approaching the Bible and studying the Gospels. This leads them to totally two wildly different sets of beliefs about Jesus: his purpose, life, actions, statements, status, etc. Many, perhaps most, Christians hold beliefs that are intermediate between the extremes shown below:
|
Very conservative Christians |
Very liberal Christians |
||||||||||||||
| Basic beliefs: They generally
believe in the inerrancy, infallibility
and inspiration by God of all verses in the Bible, as they were originally
composed. The Bible is unique among books in the world; God
influenced each of its authors so that their writings were totally
free from error. Further, religious conservatives feel that passages
should be literally interpreted, unless there are obvious
indications that a verse should be understood symbolically.
Although the four gospels were written by men with different outlooks and backgrounds, all are consistent with each other and with the truth about Jesus. A passage written by John is as valid as one written by Mark. |
Basic beliefs: They view
the holy books of Christianity and other religions as having been written by authors who
were promoting their own spiritual and religious thoughts, and those
of their group. Their writing was not directly controlled by God.
The gospels show a clear evolution of theological belief over time. The earliest sections of the first known gospel, "Q" appears to have been written circa 50 CE. 4 It presents Jesus as a very human Jewish teacher, prophet, and healer. The final canonical gospel, John, appears to have been written by a group of believers in the very early 2nd century CE. It portrays Jesus as a god-man, savior of the world, having existed since the creation of the universe. |
||||||||||||||
| Duration and locations of Jesus' ministry: John implies that Jesus' ministry lasted at least three years. John 2:13, 6:4 and 11:55 mention three Passovers. John 5:1 implies a fourth. John deals mainly with Jesus' ministry in and around Jerusalem; the other gospels discuss his activities in Galilee. | Duration and locations of Jesus' ministry: The gospels disagree about both duration and location of Jesus' ministry. John implies a three year or longer ministry, spent mainly in Jerusalem and elsewhere in Judea. The other gospels imply a one year ministry in the Galilee. | ||||||||||||||
| The writers: The authors of the four gospels were named Matthew, Mark, Luke and John. Matthew and John were disciples of Jesus. Mark may have been the young man who fled the Garden of Gethsemane. Both Mark and Luke were Paul's helpers. | The writers: None of the gospel authors' names or identities are known. None were eyewitnesses to Jesus' ministries. They had to rely upon second and third hand stories about Jesus. It is possible that all were children or not yet born at the time of Jesus' ministry. | ||||||||||||||
| Dates written: Paul Benware estimates that Matthew was written circa 45-55 CE, only 12 years after Jesus' execution; Luke in either 58 or 65; Mark circa 66; John circa 85 to 95 CE. 2 Since the Holy Spirit prevented any errors, all of the gospels are consistent and free of error. | Dates written: Mark was written circa 70 CE, some 40 years after Jesus' execution. Matthew was written circa 80; Luke circa 90 and John circa 100 CE. The four gospels demonstrate how theological beliefs evolved significantly during the 70 to 80 years from Jesus' death to John. | ||||||||||||||
| Synoptic Problem: Many passages in the synoptic gospels (Matthew, Mark, Luke) are identical or almost exact. One reason for this is that all three authors based their writing on an oral tradition passed down from decade to decade. Another is that all of the authors were guided by the Holy Spirit in their writing so that they described events exactly as they occurred, without error. Finally, Matthew and John were disciples and thus were eyewitnesses to Jesus' ministry. They recorded exactly what they saw. Mark may also have been a follower of Jesus. | Synoptic Problem: Many passages in the synoptic gospels (Matthew, Mark, Luke) are identical or almost exact. Most scholars believe that Matthew and Luke were, in part, copied from Mark. Many believe that a prior gospel "Q," now lost, was also used by both Matthew and Luke. 4 Analysis of passages that are similar but not identical is called "redaction criticism." It can give insight into the order in which the Gospels were probably written, their date of composition, and the development of theological beliefs in the early Christian movements. | ||||||||||||||
| Differences in John: John's mission was to write a gospel for the emerging Christian church. The other gospel writers directed their gospels to specific groups: Jews and Gentiles (both Roman and Greek). So it is to be expected that their emphasis would be different. John mainly recorded Jesus' ministry in Judea, near Jerusalem; the other gospel writers discussed his ministry in the Galilee. But all four gospel writers were preserved from error by the Holy Spirit. Their writings are inerrant, and all useful for the understanding of the gospel. | Differences in John: The Gospel of John differs significantly from the other gospels in theme, content, time duration, order of events, and style. "Only ca. 8% of it is parallel to these other gospels, and even then, no such word-for-word parallelism occurs as we find among the synoptic gospels." 3 John reflects a Christian tradition that is quite different from that of the other gospels. It was rejected as heretical by many individuals and groups within the early Christian movement. It came close to being rejected when the choice of books for the Bible was settled. John is of little help in uncovering the historical Jesus. | ||||||||||||||
| Gospel content: Each of the four
gospels is different. Although each stands on its own merits as an
accurate description of the life of Jesus, Matthew and Luke contain
information about Jesus' birth and childhood not found in the other
gospels. John contains descriptions of Jesus' early ministry. Luke
describes his later Perean ministry. 2
Most of the content of the gospels should be interpreted literally. There are hundreds of apparent contradictions in the Bible:
|
Gospel content: The gospels
contain a mixture of:
|
||||||||||||||
| Interpreting the gospels: Only those who are born again can understand the Gospels. After a person is saved, the Holy Spirit inhabits their body and helps her/him gain an understanding of the Bible's meaning. The gospels, and other parts of the Bible, are normally interpreted literally. Historic beliefs of the Christian religion are accepted as truth: the atonement, biblical inerrancy, incarnation, biblical inspiration, justification, regeneration of the spirit, resurrection, salvation, the second coming, the Trinity, the virgin birth, etc. Faced with apparent contradictions, a believer can take advantage of the harmonizing efforts of past theologians and guidance of the Holy Spirit. | Interpreting the gospels: A main activity of liberal theologians over recent generations has been to study the gospels and other early Christian documents intensely, searching for the "historical Jesus" -- the actual statements and acts of Yeshua of Nazareth. This involves stripping away the magical healing and miracle passages, removing anti-Jewish religious propaganda, deleting text that represents theological beliefs that only developed decades after Jesus' death, detecting distortions in the original oral transmission, removing events in Jesus' life which are copies of those in other god-men's lives. Not much is left. But we can get a glimpse of what the real Jesus was like. | ||||||||||||||
| Other writings: The extra-canonical gospels and acts -- those writings by early Christians that were not accepted into the Bible -- are of little importance. Most are heretical in nature and can be safely ignored. They were all rejected by the early Christians when the canon was established. | Other writings: About 45 of other gospels, many "acts" and epistles etc. were widely circulated within the early Christian church. Analysis of these writings -- particularly the Gospel of Thomas -- can help us understand the words and actions of Jesus, as perceived by the early Christians. |
Further gospel interpretation by conservative Christians:
| The authors of the gospels described Jesus from different viewpoints: Matthew presents Jesus as king; Mark as the servant of God. Luke emphasizes Jesus' humanity. John describes Jesus as the Son of God, the savior of humanity. |
| The gospels were written for four different audiences: Matthew for the Jews, Mark for Roman gentiles, Luke for Greek gentiles, and John for the developing Christian church. |
| "...what they wrote is accurate, without error, directed by the Holy Spirit, and is therefore authoritative in our lives." 2 |
| Material in the gospels are not necessarily presented in chronological order. Jesus' aggravated assaults in the temple appears early in John's gospel, but near the end of Jesus' ministry in the synoptic gospels: Matthew, Mark and Luke. |
| The gospels are not historical biographies in the modern sense. Their purpose was to preach "the gospel, the good news," not to record in detail every event during Jesus' ministry. |
| The gospels present Jesus as the Son of God, the Lord and Savior of humanity. "Throughout the gospels, Jesus appears as more than a man. His message, his deeds and his person force the reader to decision." 1 |
Sponsored link:
Further gospel interpretation by liberal Christians:
Conservative Christians attempt to understand the meaning of the inerrant gospel texts, in the light of the Church's traditional beliefs concerning Jesus -- the virgin birth, incarnation, resurrection, etc. Religious liberals approach the same texts from a different point of view. They assume that the gospels are errant, since they were written by ordinary people. They believe that the sayings and acts of the historical Jesus have been deliberately obscured or distorted by the Gospel writers, in order to:
| Fulfill various prophecies in the Hebrew Scriptures (Old Testament). |
| Reflect the conflicts that the Christian movements were having with the Jewish and Roman authorities, late in the late 1st century and early 2nd century, when that the Gospels were being written. |
| Reflect the evolving theology of the early Christian movement. |
| Disguise the humanity and shortcomings of Jesus in order to make him act less as a human being and more as a god-man and miracle worker. |
| Add descriptions of imaginary, magical events, in order to prove the deity of Jesus, and allow Christianity to compete with other religions in the Mediterranean area. |
| Insert some material from Pagan religions in the Mediterranean area. |
A major breakthrough in the liberal interpretation of the Gospels was been the recreation of the long-lost Gospel of Q. The earliest part of that gospel appears to date from about the year 50 CE -- only two decades after Jesus' execution, and decades earlier than the first canonical gospel was written. Q seems to have been the earliest attempt to record the life of Jesus in written form. It may thus be the most accurate portrayal of Jesus. 4 It describes Jesus as a itinerant Jewish rabbi/teacher who was motivated by a desire to spread his beliefs to his fellow Jews in Galilee. He taught a message of compassion, inclusion, and personal freedom in a culture that was extremely oppressive, insular and restrictive. He had no interest in spreading his beliefs beyond the Jews, to the Greeks and other gentiles. It contains nothing about Jesus' crucifixion, resurrection, and ascention.
It is quite impossible to condense the redaction criticism, and other forms of analysis, of tens of thousands of person-years of effort into one essay. There is room for only a few examples:
| Mark includes passages that describe "various degrees of
imperfection in Jesus..." 5 --
passages that Matthew and Luke either minimize or delete. The Gospel of Mark, having being written 10 to
40 years before the remaining gospels, is assumed to include a more
accurate picture of Jesus' character. Later gospels reflected the
evolving theology of the early Christian movement. They began to view Jesus
less as a man -- an itinerate preacher. They described him more as a
perfect god-man -- the Son of God, the Lord and Savior of humanity -- free if
imperfections. Geza Vermes lists parallel passages in the synoptic
gospels which indicate this shift towards perfection: 5
Parallel passages in the synoptic gospels can be read in reverse chronological order, starting with the latest (Matthew), then Luke and finally Mark. One detects a gradual increase in the humanness of Jesus. Jesus becomes less a god-man and more of a itinerate teacher. "...Mark's Gospel brings us nearer to the Jesus of history than any other New Testament writing...Mark is the only evangelist who enables us to hear today an occasional and faint echo of what might have been...Jesus' own words in his own language." 6 | ||||||||||||||
| Luke's claim (in Chapter 1) that he carefully researched other
gospels before preparing his own implies that he is a careful
historian. This can be tested by comparing Luke's text with the
historical record:
The discrepancies between Luke's gospel and the historical record indicate that Luke is not a reliable historian. His text must be interpreted with a grain of salt. | ||||||||||||||
| According to R.W. Funk, "Christian orthodoxy did not emerge immediately after the death of Jesus but developed over decades. As a consequence, traces of later Christian orthodoxy attributed to Jesus or his first followers are anachronistic." 6 For example, Jesus is described in the synoptic gospels as imitating past heroes and Gods. Just as Moses fed the Israelites during the Exodus, Jesus fed thousands on a few loaves and fishes. Both Elisha and Jesus healed lepers. Jesus walked on water just as the Greek God Poseidon did. "Stories echoing Israelite and pagan heroes were strategies in the [Christian first century CE] program to market the messiah to the wider world, and their historicity is thus seriously undermined." 6 |
Using the above and similar methods of analysis, layers of written material that obscure the historical Jesus can be detected and discarded. The authentic words and acts of Jesus can be glimpsed.
Related essays at this web site:
| The inerrancy of the Bible
| ||||||
| The Christian Scriptures (New Testament)
-
| ||||||
| The search for the historical Jesus |
References used:
- Howard Marshall, "The Gospels and Jesus Christ," in David & Pat Alexander, Eds., "Eerdmans Handbook to the Bible," Eerdmans, (1992) Page 468+ This book is out of print but may be available from the Amazon.com online book store
- P.N. Benware, "An outline of Christ's life," in "Survey of the New Testament," Moody, (1990), Page 57+ Review/order this book
- F.V. Filson, "The Literary Relations among the Gospels," essay in C.M. Laymon: "The Interpreter's One-Volume Commentary on the Bible," Abingdon Press, Nashville, TN, (1991) Review/order this book
- Burton L. Mack, "The Lost Gospel of Q: The Book of Christian Origins", Harper, San Francisco, (1993) Pages 73 - 80. Review/order this book
- Geza Vermes, "The changing faces of Jesus," Allen Lane, (2000). Review/order this book
- R.W. Funk and the Jesus Seminar, "The acts of Jesus: What did Jesus really do?," HarperSanFrancisco, (1998) Review/order this book
Copyright © 2000 to 2004 by Ontario Consultants on Religious
Tolerance
Originally written: 2000-JUN-22
Latest update: 2004-OCT-30
Author: B.A. Robinson
|
|
