Quite possibly, the gospels are arranged in their current order for a very real purpose, and I have some ideas, at least, about all that.
Matthew: Matthew comes first, having numerous references to the Old Testament. It is in Matthew that we have the characteristic phrase: “that it might be fulfilled as was spoken in the prophets”. Matthew is the “bridge” with the Old Testament — and especially written for the Jews, who were well versed in the Old Testament. If you stand at the end of the Old Testament, he seems to say: ‘Here’s the next logical step: Christ!’
Mark: Mark is the briefest of the four gospels, probably written first (according to many scholars, anyway). In Mark, Jesus is the man of action, the servant who is always doing — performing miracles, helping people, confronting the leaders of Israel. It has very little emphasis on what Jesus said, and much more on what he did.
Luke: Luke was a Gentile (some think he was a Samaritan), and he has written a gospel especially suited to the needs of Gentiles. Many of Christ’s encounters with Gentiles are reported by Luke. Luke was a physician, a companion of the apostle Paul, and spent much time preaching the gospel to Gentiles. An interesting suggestion has been made by certain commentators; it is this: The gospel of Luke might have been a sort of legal brief, or petition, prepared by the scholarly Luke to present to the Roman authorities on behalf of Paul and the Christian cause. This could explain, from one point of view, the abundance of reference to Gentiles, as if Luke (and Paul) wanted everyone to know that this “new religion” was for the whole world and not exclusively for Jews.
John: And then comes John, probably written later, and evidently written to supplement the other three. This Gospel has many actions of Jesus reported by John, and many discourses of Jesus reported by John, which are not recorded in the other three gospels. But more than that, John is on another level. This gospel was intended to present a spiritual, idealistic, universal picture of the life of Jesus. The point here is: John’s gospel is not supposed to be easy. It is intended to be read as an extended, and elevated, statement of the gospel, after the other three gospels are mastered. And it is intended to be interpreted, when it has difficult language, from the vantage point of the more concrete statements of the other three. None of which helps us to understand it better — only to appreciate why it can be so difficult to understand.
An example:
Matthew and Luke tell us about the birth of Jesus, more or less as an ordinary, straight forward (although miracle-filled) factual story. An angel appears to a young engaged woman, and she conceives a child by the power of the Holy Spirit.
As a result, Jesus is born (the Son of God Himself, and the son of Mary), first as a human fetus in the womb, then a fully human baby, a child, and a young man. An extraordinary human being, a human being with the stamp of divinity upon him, a prophet and more than a prophet, the very Messiah, the anointed one of God. But still, for all this, a human being born and living among other human beings, tempted in all points like his fellow humans.
And then comes John:
“In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God… and the Word was made flesh” (John 1:1,14).
This is extravagant, heavenly language; the language of eternity — but also true, on a cosmic, universal level. The point is: If we want a simple statement of who Jesus was and is, we don’t go to John first. We go to Matthew and Luke. After we are sure our understanding is grounded in the facts of the case, and only then, do we read and begin to appreciate John’s statement.
John’s statement will never be easy; it isn’t supposed to be easy. Doing it the other way round (taking John first) is a perfect prescription for confusion. So John is this “heaven’s eye-view” of who Jesus is. Everything that concerns him, everything he says in John, everything he does in John, is seen from God’s perspective. It’s like a study class of angels looking down from heaven and studying these peculiar creatures called men. Peter tells us that even the angels are still seeking to learn more about God’s plan, and especially more about the One who came directly from God in Heaven (1Pet 1:10-12).
We can imagine the angels’ questions:
‘What does this really mean, from God’s point of view?’
‘What is the universal aspect?’
‘What is the timeless, eternal lesson?’
John’s Gospel is certainly the most profound of the four. Ironically, John’s Gospel also has by far the simplest language. John’s favorite words are simple words: life, death, love, hate, dark, light, truth, word, faith. In English, you could almost tell the whole story in one-syllable words:
- God is the Word.
- The Word is light.
- The Word is life.
- That life is a light for men.
- God gave us light through Christ His Son.
- God is love too.
- God’s Son will show us the light and the love of God.
- God so loved the world that He gave His Son, to die for our sins.
- Since he did not sin, God raised him from the dead.
- He is the Son of God; do what he says.
- One day, Christ will come back to rule on this earth.
Simple? Yes, but enormously profound.
So, let’s say that you’ve been reading the Gospel of John for 30 or 40 years, off and on, and you are still not sure what some passages mean, and you think it could have been stated more clearly. Quite possibly, angels in heaven are still feeling the same as you.
Well, I would say: that’s about par for the course. Give it another 10 or 20 years, and, if Christ hasn’t come yet, I can imagine a great-grandpa or a great-granny in a rocking chair whispering, ‘Now I think I understand!’
The Origin of the Organic World – Part One