The Four Gospel Accounts

By Jeff Curtis

   Note: since we haven’t a Sunday morning Bible class, I thought it would good to work on our study of Matthew and the Gospels.

   We begin with a study of the life of Jesus Christ as told by the first four books of the New Testament, each of which is named after its author.

Matthew – a former tax collector and an apostle of Jesus.

Mark – the John Mark of the book of Acts, a young preacher of the apostolic age.

Luke – Dr. Luke, who accompanied Paul on several of his missionary journeys, including the trip to Rome.

John – a former fisherman and the “beloved” apostle.

    This study, as a kind of harmony of the Gospels, brings together the four accounts of His life into one story. Later, thorough commentaries will be written on the books of Matthew, Mark, Luke and John individually.

Four Accounts of One Story

   The books of Matthew, Mark, Luke and John are often called “the Four Gospels,” but actually they are four accounts of the one gospel. The term “Gospels” has been used to refer to the first four books of the New Testament since around the second or third century.

   The first three books are generally called “the synoptic” Gospels. “Synoptic” combines with a Greek word for “together” with a word meaning “to see or view.” “Synoptic” then means “to view together.” The first three books are designated “the synoptic Gospels” because they present similar views of Jesus. All of them were probably written before the destruction of Jerusalem in AD 70.

    The book of John is sometimes called the “autoptic (self-view) Gospel” because it takes a somewhat different approach that the other three. The word “autoptic” can also have the idea of an eyewitness. John’s account was probably written later than the first three, in the AD 90s.

Why Four Accounts?

   Why did God give us four books that cover the same period of time and the same story? In the Scriptures, other periods of time are covered by more than one book (many events in 1Samuel through 2Kings are also reported in 1&2 Chronicles), but to have four accounts of the same story is unusual.

   In the early history of the church, men speculated as to why there were “four accounts. One guess was that “four is the (symbolic) number of man.” We don’t know why God decided on this specific number, but the fact that He inspired multiple accounts indicates several truths.

(1) Four accounts show how important the story of Jesus is.

(2) Four accounts impress the need to authenticate the story of Jesus. Moses said that “on evidence of two or three witnesses a matter shall be confirmed (Deut. 19:15). Four witnesses are even better.

(3) Four accounts reveal the multifaceted nature of Jesus. One writer could probably never do Him justice.

   In the National Gallery in London there are three representations on a single canvas of Charles I. In one his head is turned to the right; in another, to the left; and in the center we find the full-face view. This is the story of this production. Van Dyck painted them for Bernini, the Roman sculptor, that he might by their help make a bust of the king. By combining the impressions so received, Bernini would be better able to produce a “speaking” likeness. One view would not have been enough.

   It may be true that the Gospels were intended to serve the very purpose of these portraits. Each represents a different aspect of our Lord’s life on earth. Together we have the complete picture. He was a King, but He was the Perfect Servant, too. He was the Son of Man, but we must not forget He was the Son of God!

When a Tradition is Bad

by Jeff Curtis

    Jesus was losing His patience with the self-righteous and self-serving Pharisees. He didn’t bother to deny their charge or even answer it directly. Instead, He leveled an accusation at them: “³ He answered and said to them, “Why do you also transgress the commandment of God because of your tradition? ⁴ For God commanded, saying, ‘Honor your father and your mother’; and, ‘He who curses father or mother, let him be put to death.’ ⁵ But you say, ‘Whoever says to his father or mother, “Whatever profit you might have received from me is a gift to God”— ⁶ then he need not honor his father or mother.’ Thus you have made the commandment of God of no effect by your tradition” (Matthew 15:3-6).

     Originally, the purpose of the traditions was to place a hedge around the law of Moses, to help the Law was not violated. As time went by, however, as new rules multiplied, they related less and less to the original precepts – until finally they even went contrary to those commandments.

     A tradition that was bad;

     Christ could have given many examples of this (Mark 7:13), but He confined Himself to one: “For God commanded, saying, ‘Honor your father and your mother’; and, ‘He who curses father or mother, let him be put to death’” (Matthew 15:4). Mark wrote, “For Moses said…” (Mark 7:10), which is another proof that Jesus believed that Moses spoke by inspiration from God when he gave the Law.

     The first of the commandments listed by Jesus was one of the original Ten Commandments (Exodus 20:12; Deut. 5:16). The second was included in the laws that expanded and applied the Ten Commandments (Exodus 21:17; Lev. 20:9). These two commandments covered the positive and negative aspects of an individual’s relationship with his parents. He was to respect and appreciate His father and mother. This included caring for their needs when they were old (Proverbs 23:22; 1Tim. 5:8). He was not to do anything that would indicate disrespect.

     Unfortunately, a man-made tradition had evolved, nullifying those commandments. Jesus’ eyes must have flashed as He indicted Hi accusers: “⁹ He said to them, “All too well you ^[a]reject the commandment of God, that you may keep your tradition. ¹⁰ For Moses said, ‘Honor your father and your mother’; and, ‘He who curses father or mother, let him be put to death.’ ¹¹ But you say, ‘If a man says to his father or mother, “Whatever profit you might have received from me is Corban”—’ (that is, a gift to God), ¹² then you no longer let him do anything for his father or his mother, ¹³ making the word of God of no effect through your tradition which you have handed down” (Mark 7:9-13).

     “Corban” is an Aramaic word meaning “offering” or “gift.” A Jew could make a vow that a certain portion of what he owned was “Corban,” “a gift” dedicated to God. Those resources might remain in his possession until his death – at which time they became the property of the temple – but as long as he lived, those assets were considered untouchable. According to Jesus, if a man made such a vow, the Pharisees would “no longer permit him to do anything for his father or mother.” The rabbis had a saying: “It is hard for the parents, but the law is clear, vows must be kept.” The Old Testament rule was that vows were to be kept (Numbers 30), but to apply the laws regarding vows in such a way that the fundamental principles of the Ten Commandments were set aside was ridiculous.

     Apparently, sad episodes similar to this occurred in the Lord’s day. Jesus concluded this part of His indictment, “Thus you have made the commandment of God of no effect by your tradition” (Matthew 15:6b). According Mark, He added, “And many such things you do” (Mark 7:13b). W