As I write these blogs I am attempting to present a chronological gospel, a single story. Not all stories, not all events, not all teachings are in each of the gospels. The first three of the gospels are mostly the same. It is usually taught that Mark was the first to be written, but I think it was Luke. It is logical to see Luke writing his two volume set at some point during Paul’s imprisonment in Rome, starting with the gospel account and continuing with his second volume, the book of Acts, until his story caught up to his present situation, at the end of two years awaiting the conclusion of Paul’s case. In this scenario, we can confidently place Luke in A.D. 61-62.
Mark followed, sometime in the mid-60’s, followed closely by Matthew. We simply are not sure when John was written. Most believe it was written toward the end of the century, but some place the date right before the destruction of Jerusalem by the Roman general Titus in A.D. 70.
While the first three gospels are consistent with each other, John is not.
-
John contains no narrative parables, no account of the transfiguration, no record of the Lord’s Supper, no mention of the Lord’s temptation, and no report of Jesus casting out demons.
-
John contains a great amount of material not recorded in the other gospels: extended conversations with Nicodemus, the Samaritan woman, and the disciples, as well as significant miracles…turning the water into wine at Cana, and the resurrection of Lazarus.
-
John recounts an extensive ministry in Judea, while the other gospel writers focus on the Galilean ministry. John describes multiple trips to Jerusalem, and is the only one to describe the early cleansing of the Temple that I talked about yesterday.
-
John’s Jesus has a different style to his teaching, discoursing on themes of light, life, witness and truth, while Jesus in the other gospels argues forcefully and consistently on the theme of the Kingdom of God.
This is not to say that John is unreliable. It’s just that John had a specific purpose to his writing, and he remained true to that purpose. In fact, John is the only gospel writer to provide an explicit statement of purpose. He said, “Jesus did many other miraculous signs in the presence of his disciples, which are not recorded in this book. But these are written that you may believe that Jesus is the Christ, the Son of God, and that by believing you may have life in his name.” This purpose statement reflects John’s intention to present selective accounts of Jesus ministry, aimed at showing the reader that Jesus is really the promised Messiah.
Additionally, no other gospel addresses the theme of truth as frequently as John’s. He cites signs and a parade of witnesses to support his main thesis. The trustworthiness of these witnesses, plus his own explicit claim to have been an eyewitness, is central to his purpose and is a reminder to us that accuracy was deeply important to him.
I like the differences between the gospels. To me they support the authenticity of the story they each tell. I know that if four individuals were chosen to record and write about the same ongoing story today, each account would be different and unique. That doesn’t make the stories false; it makes them rich in different details and full of the character we see in the gospels. For the next several blogs I will be working out of John, glad for his greater detail and his conviction of the truth.
Prayer: “Great Father of all Truth, I thank you for faithful witnesses who wrote from their experience and understanding the fascinating story of Jesus. I ask you to drive its truth deep into my heart and behavior so that it lives as Jesus intended. I am glad that the story of your passion for us in Jesus challenges my mind and imagination. Help me to see and live by its truth. Amen”