Part 2
Last time we decided to test the theory that the Four Gospels relate to the four aspects of Jesus represented by the four faces of the Cherubim. There are several theories as to which gospel links with which cherubic face, but we decided to test the one:
Matthew the lion; MARK the ox; LUKE the man; JOHN the eagle – so that in these Jesus is said to be represented as:
- Matthew the king;
- Mark the servant;
- Luke the man;
- John the Son of God.
The way in which each gospel writer could have emphasized these aspects of Jesus is by the exclusion of less relevant events and sayings in his life, or by giving prominence to certain details.
“There seem to have been recognized limits to the size of ancient books. The three longest books of the New Testament (Matthew, Luke and Acts) are almost exactly the same length.” (The Bible Handbook, J.Angus p.647)
This means that each gospel writer was bound to omit much detail of Christ’s life. This we know is the case; the gospels are fax from being four summaries of the life of Christ. In many cases they pose problems of order or details – we are not sure of the full chronological facts because so much apparently necessary information is left out.
But this is to beg the question, for the gospels as they stand will give to us what God intended for us. If God wants us to see four aspects of Jesus from these gospels, then the problems posed by the critics disappear. As Bro. Hilton said,
“We shall endeavour to show that the alleged discrepancies of the four gospels demonstrate their divine inspiration, exhibiting superhuman guidance …we do not know of any other explanation to meet the reasonable difficulties of sincere seekers after truth with regard to these gospel problems.” (Apocalypse and Gospels, F.Bilton 1955)
Our method will be to list those items in which each gospel is unique, and the ways in which emphasis is given to certain events and sayings. This will give us the basis for weighing up the evidence for ourselves. If any reader has extra evidence, for or against, please join in the discussion. At certain times I will refer to a theme as all four gospel writers deal with it, so that some comparisons will be made as we go along. At the end there will be a summary, but the real evaluation will have to be by each of us for ourselves.
The Writers
It is interesting that the four gospel writers came from very diverse backgrounds, and these link fairly well with our theory:
Matthew (Jesus as God’s king) A tax collector; one who worked for the most powerful earthly king of those days, the Roman Caesar, and who would be well aware of the meaning of power and authority.
Mark (Jesus as God’s servant) Mark was not an apostle, but a younger man than most of them, and a servant of the apostles. The apostles met at Mark’s parents’ house after the ascension (Acts 12:12), and it may well have been the place where the Last Supper was held. When Paul and Barnabas set off to preach they had Mark as their minister or servant (Acts 12:25, 13:5).
Luke (Jesus as the true Man) Luke was a Gentile, and so his gospel is freer from Jewish associations, able to present Jesus as the complete man. Luke was also a doctor, one concerned intimately with people and aware of the human point of view.
John (Jesus as Son of God) John was the closest person to Jesus. He is generally identified as the disciple whom Jesus loved (John 13:23) and it was to him that Jesus committed the care of his mother as he hung on the cross (John 19:25-27). It would be fitting that to him should be given the task of portraying the most sublime aspects of the work of Jesus.
These characteristics of the writers do not prove very much. The real evidence must be sought in the text of the gospel themselves, and only if the theory is upheld can we then see how fitting are the particular characteristics of each author.
Characteristics of Matthew’s Gospel
Obviously it would be unreasonable to expect each gospel to treat entirely of one aspect of Jesus. We are looking for a general emphasis, but we expect other aspects to figure also. We therefore have to decide whether the emphasis we see is significant, and each reader will have to make a personal assessment on this.
Many commentators are agreed that the kingly aspect is well portrayed by Matthew. The gospel is mainly addressed to Jews, and so it does not explain Jewish customs as Mark and Luke do. If we regard the gospel as showing to Israel the ways of their true king, in contrast to the misuse of the Law and the priesthood, then much is made clear.
It is an exposition of the “kingdom of heaven” (or of the heavens, more correctly), a phrase which occurs 32 times in Matthew and nowhere else in the New Testament. Yet this has many Old Testament associations, for God revealed Himself to Israel as the One who rules from the heavens over the earth, and the king appointed by God to rule in Israel was to be “a man under authority”, ruling for God (compare with Matt.8:9). Here is a list of some items which Matthew emphasises, which accord well with this theme:
1:1 Jesus CHRIST (i.e. the Messiah) is described as the theme of the book.
1:1 The descent is traced from David and Abraham, emphasising the kingly line, and the Abrahamic covenant of the land, but also of blessings for all mankind.
1:2 The full genealogy is through the royal line of kings (eg. verse 6).
1:22 “That it might be fulfilled.” Matthew particularly emphasizes the Old Testament prophecies, in line with his theme of the Messiah who should come. This expression is used about 10 times in Matthew but nowhere else. He also has over 60 references to the Old Testament in his gospel (1:20-24 is unique to Matthew).
2:1 The visit of the wise men is exclusive to Matthew. Their particular interest was in the King of the Jews” (v.2), one who should “rule my people Israel” (v.6). Although they seem to have been important people they came to worship Jesus, as a great ruler-to-be, and the record contrasts the evil earthly ruler, Herod, with the one who was to be God’s king. This conflict goes on through the chapter including the flight into Egypt (v.13-15) and the massacre of the infants (v.16), which again are unique to Matthew, showing the impotence of the world’s rulers in the face of the Messiah.
2:15 “My Son”. The greatness of the king is emphasised, as in 1:23. 3:2 “The kingdom of heaven.” See above. Showing Christ’s authority.
3:3 “Prepare” – this was the way of preparing a route for the eastern kings who came to claim their right over a city.
3:7 “Wrath to came”. The coming judgment is because Jesus has the power and authority to act, to purge those who do not accept his rule.
3:11 Again the emphasis is on authority, and judgment. (Luke’s record of John the Baptist has a slightly different emphasis – the remission of sins.)
ch.5 -7 The Sermon on the Mount. This is most fully recorded by Matthew. Here we have the king giving to his subjects (the disciples) the noble laws of his kingdom, higher than the Law of Moses given to an unfaithful people. However, this law is firmly’ rooted in the Old Testament (5:17 – 20), while the king can pronounce “But I say…” (v.22) on his own authority.
5:34-35 Jerusalem, the city of the great king.
6:13 In the Lord’s Prayer this gospel adds, “For thine is the kingdom, the power and the glory.” (But this passage is disputed by some authorities.)
8:9 “I am a man under authority.” Thus the centurion, who is under the control of Rome, recognizes the authority of Jesus, who is under God.
8:11 The Abrahamic promise fulfilled – many(Gentiles) coming to the kingdom.
(It might be objected that both the previous items are also recorded by Luke. However, there is a close similarity between the themes the two gospels are portraying. The “Son of Man” phrase denotes both the lowly human origin which Jesus shared with us, but it also (eg. Ps.8) denotes Jesus’ victory over sin, so that he could become the first true MAN, to have dominion over “all things” (Gen.1:26, Phil.2:8-11), and his kingdom could have worldwide scope. So we can see why Luke also mentions these events.)
9:27 “Thou son of David.” While the other writers record this phrase in other places, only Matthew records this one.
9:33 “It was never so seen in Israel.” Here is the true king in action. This is the second miracle uniquely recorded by Matthew.
13:24,44,45,47 Matthew emphasizes the parables of the kingdom; these are only in his gospel. There are 10 parables unique to Matthew; all with a kingdom theme. They are: The tares (13:24-30), The hid treasure (13:44-46), The pearl (13:45), The drag-net (13:47), The unmerciful servant (18:23-35), The labourers in the vineyard (20:1-15), The two sons (21:28-32), The marriage of the king’s son (22:1-14), The ten virgins (25:1-13), and The talents (25:14-30).
17:24-27 Only Matthew records the finding of tribute money in the fish’s mouth. Again Jesus is seen as an authority in contrast to Rome.
25:31-46 Here pre – eminently Matthew sees the king who “shall come in his glory” and judge the nations. This could perhaps be seen as the climax of Jesus’ ministry as Matthew records it, for in the next chapter is the start of the crucifixion narrative, but up to now Matthew has given us one piece of evidence after another that Jesus is the Messiah, God’s appointed king.
The Origin of the Organic World – Part One