|
|
|
|
 |
|
|
         
|
LEVEL 4WITNESSES TO MESSIAHj) Matthew's Gospel and Luke's writingsMATTHEWThe nine Books on level 4 of the diagram all mention the earthly life of Jesus. They were either written by one of his 12 Apostles or knew them personally. Matthew reports how Jesus called a man named Matthew to leave his tax collecting and follow him (Mt. 9:9). Mark and Luke record this calling but kindly hide Matthew's identity as a former agent of Rome by calling him Levi. This Gospel openly admits that dishonour by using his name Matthew. This humility, and also Matthew's hiding of the fact that it was he who made the great feast for Jesus in his house (Lk 5:29), strongly confirms his authorship of the Book. This Gospel marks out the main teaching of Jesus in five distinct sermons. In the first Jesus upholds the permanent value of the Law of Moses (5:17-48). The Book ends with his command to teach all nations. During his ministry he often warned against the erroneous teaching and hypocritical pretensions of the Jewish scribes and Pharisees. Although this Gospel fully recognises that the Jews were the chosen people of God, most of its chapters witness to the opening of the door to the world. Some Gentiles were already beginning to have faith in Jesus (Mt 2:1,2; 8:10,11; 15:22). In fact, he said that the kingdom of God would be given to his own new people, the Church (Mt 16:18; 18:17) and would be taken away from the nation whose leaders rejected him and would soon advocate his crucifixion (Mt 21:37-39,43; 22:8,9). LUKEIt is evident, from the introductions of Luke and Acts, that both these Books have the same author. They each feature a long journey, from Galilee to Jerusalem in Luke and from Jerusalem to Rome in Acts. Luke is usually held to have been a non-Jew, because he was not "of the circumcision" (Col 4:10,11,14). Rather, it seems he was not a strict Jew (Acts 11:2). Romans 16:21 shows Lucius, the formal name for Luke, as Paul's kinsman, and thus a Jew. His intimate knowledge of Judaism is too great for a non-Jew. Was it Luke's gospel teaching which was praised by the churches? (2Cor 8:18). Both Luke's writings were addressed to a certain "most excellent Theophilus". The Jewish historian, Josephus, speaks of a high priest Theophilus whom king Agrippa removed from the high priesthood. It is tempting to identify the two. That would explain many things, including why Luke writes so much about the high priest Zacharias and Jesus' childhood temple visits. He gives Theophilus information about king Agrippa in Acts 26. ACTSThe finale of Jesus' earthly ministry, his Ascension to heaven, is mentioned six times in the first chapter of Acts (1:2, 9, 10, 11, 22). It was the vindication of Jesus as Lord, by which Peter decisively ended his first exhortation to the Jews (2:33-36). Luke's presence in the events of Acts is indicated many times by his use of the first person plural, beginning with 16:10. He accompanied Paul on his last voyage to Jerusalem and, more than two years later, on his voyage to Rome. While Paul was in prison in Caesarea, Luke would have been free to interview eye witnesses of the life of Jesus. k) Mark's Gospel and Peter's lettersMARKIn Acts 12:12, Peter is seen in the house of Mark's mother. Much later, in 1 Peter 5:13, Peter writes that Mark is with him. Mark has been thought to be the young man who ran naked to escape apprehension at the arrest of Jesus (Mk 14:51,51). He must certainly have known Jesus. At one point he abandoned his work with Paul and Barnabas (Acts 12:25; 13:13). Later, Paul wrote believers to receive him (Col 4:10) and, before his death in Rome, told Timothy to bring Mark to him (2Tim 4:6,11). Mark therefore went to Rome, and it is there that tradition situates him, recording the Gospel which he had often heard preached by Peter. In Second Peter 1:14-16, Peter himself expresses his purpose to assure that his eyewitness account of Christ's coming would be available at all times after his death. We conclude that it was believers in Rome he was addressing, for he says that Paul too had written them on the same theme as that with which he concludes his own letter (2Pet 3:15,16; Rom 2:4,5). If this Gospel was written late, the common theory that Matthew and Luke copied from it is less likely. The hypothesis of Geisbrecht, that Mark imitates, alternatively, the order of those two other gospels, seems more probable. Moreover, Papias states that Peter taught it, and Mark wrote it out, "without giving systematic arrangement to the Lord's sayings" (Eusebius, the Church History, translated by Paul L. Maier, p.130). The person who did arrange these could therefore have used Matthew and Luke. A late date of writing would let Mark 16:20, describing the dispersion of the twelve, terminate the conclusion of Mark's original work. Only two irregular ancient manuscripts of Mark lack 16:9-20. That passage emphasises the preaching of the Gospel, as do other parts of Mark (Mk 1:1,14,15; 8:35; 10:29). It contains Christ's strong condemnation of the Apostles' unbelief (Mk 16:14). No early Christian writer would have dared to write to disparage them unless he was repeating Peter's actual account of Christ's words. 1 PETERThis letter claims to have been written by "an Apostle of Jesus Christ". The author writes: "I exhort ... who am a witness of the sufferings of Christ" and says that he was "begotten again to a living hope by the resurrection of Jesus Christ from the dead" (1:1,3; 5:1). He claims that Christ went into heaven and sat at God's right hand (3:22). 2 PETERThis letter contains such strong claims to be written by an eye witness that it is the special target of unbelievers. Peter says that Jesus told him how he would die (Cf. Jn 21:18,19), and claims to have been with those who saw Jesus' glorious transfiguration (2Pet 1:14, 16-18). He speaks of "the commandment of us, the Apostles of the Lord and Saviour". What especially causes doubt that Peter could have been the author is the fact that he speaks well of Paul and commends his Epistles, equating them with "the other Scriptures". However, Paul himself writes that his preaching is the Word of God and indicates that a verse from the Gospel written by his friend Luke is also Scripture (1Thess 2:13; 1Tim 5:18. See Lk 10:7). l) The Testimony of JohnJOHNJohn’s Gospel gives abundant evidence that it was written by the Apostle, but always does so in a very unobtrusive way. In John 1:37-42, two disciples of John the Baptist, on hearing him speak of Jesus as the Lamb of God, decide to follow Jesus. One of the disciples is Andrew, and the other is unnamed. We read that Andrew "first" calls his brother Peter. The word "first" seems strangely meaningless here, unless it hints that the other disciple also subsequently called his own brother. We may take the word therefore as a hidden clew to James' similar calling of "his own brother" John. Towards the end of the Gospel, John is present a number of times, but never under his own name. He calls himself the disciple "whom Jesus loved" (13:23), who was leaning on Jesus' breast at the last supper. He also refers to himself as "another disciple" (18:15) who followed Jesus to the trial in the High Priest's house, where he was known, and thus was able to enter and bring in Peter. The damsel at the door knew that John was a disciple of Jesus for she said to Peter: "Are you also one of this man's disciples?" (18:17). Even so, Peter was not willing to confess Christ before her. The word "also" is likewise found in the maid's accusation of Peter in the other Gospels, where It is not apparent that the word implies that John too was present. John, however, clears Peter of disloyalty, recording that he thrice reaffirmed his love to Christ, and was ordered to feed the whole flock (21:15-17). John also seems to cloak his identity when he says: "He that saw it bare record, and his record is true and he knows that he says the truth, that you may believe" (19:34,35). What a difficult attempt by the modest evangelist, to hide his identity, while at the same time insisting on his credibility as a witness! 1 JOHNThis letter begins with the affirmation that the author not only saw Jesus, the living Word of God, but also heard him and touched him (1:1-3, 5). His use of the name "the Word" to describe Jesus is one of the many evidences that the author is the same person who wrote the Gospel of John (Jn 1:1, 14). REVELATIONIn this Book the author openly proclaims his identity as John (1:1,4,9; 22:8). Was this "John" the same one who wrote the Gospel? That identity has been denied, because of differences of vocabulary and style between the two writings. However, in both of them may be found many of the same themes, such as the Word, the Lamb, the Son of man in glory, sealing, light, a coming time when none can work and the wife of the Lamb. John was quite conscious of the possibility of using different styles of writing (Jn 16:25; Rev. 1:1). He fitted his vocabulary to different types of recipients, to unbelievers in his Gospel (Jn 20:31), to believers in his first letter (1Jn 2:12-14; 5:13) and to Christ's serving, suffering witnesses in the Revelation (Rev 1:1 and 9). He also needed a special vocabulary for a special subject. Christ in this final revelation receives royal names: "the prince of the kings of the earth", "the Alpha and Omega, the first and the last", "the Amen", "the lion of the tribe of Judah", "Lord of lords and King of kings", "Faithful and True", "the bright and morning star". > Click on Next to move on to the Overview Section 5 or on Back to go to Section 3. |
||||
 |
 |
||||
|
Copyright© BibleIntro.com, 2004 |
