Bible Difficulties (69 page)

in the Aramaic Targums, which use the phrase "kingdom of God" almost as consistently as Mark, Luke, and John. Matthew himself uses "kingdom of heaven" thirty-two times and "kingdom of God" only four times [12:28; 19:24; 21:31, 43]. The probabilities are that Jesus used both expressions, but Matthew used "of heaven" as more congenial to his special audience, the Palestinian Jews.)

The Palestinian focus is also found in Matthew's attention to details about contemporary Jewish life and religious customs. The teachings of Jesus was designed to correct unsound interpretations of the Torah that were sophistic evasions of the true intent of God's law; these receive special emphasis in Matthew's gospel. Matthew devotes particular attention to Jesus' teaching ministry and tends to group logically cohesive themes of instruction into major blocks, of which there are four outstanding examples.

Especially prominent are (1) the Sermon on the Mount (which may have been delivered all at one time, though it must have been partially repeated elsewhere, judging from the Sermon on the Plain in Luke 6:17-49); (2) the parables of the kingdom, which are similarly collected in Matthew 13:1-52 but tend to occur separately in Mark and Luke; (3) the Olivet Discourse in Matthew 24 which does not substantially differ from Mark 13

and Luke 21; but insofar as it is tied right in with Matthew 25 (the foolish virgins, the parable of the talents, and the judgment of the nations), it does represent a cluster grouping not found in the others; and (4) the long denunciation of Pharisaical hypocrisy and casuistry in Matthew 23, which is not found in the others.

There is also an interesting tension between the theme of salvation through Christ as being primarily intended for the Jews (in fulfillment of the Old Testament promises and the widening of its scope to the Gentile nations in accordance with the Great Commission

[Matt. 28:16-19]). On the one hand,Jesus emphasizes that His primary mission was to

"the lost sheep of the house of Israel" (Matt 15:24), and that was the ground of His tendency to avoid any of the Gentile areas around Palestine (Matt. 10:5). (Only Mark 7

mentions Jesus' short visit to the region of Tyre.) Jesus even encourages His disciples to follow the teaching of the law of Moses as explained by the scribes and Pharisees (Matt.

23:2). On the other hand, Matthew alone records the visit of the Gentile Magi soon after Christ's birth (Matt. 2:1-12), as if to emphasize the potential outreach of Christ's rule to all the nations of the earth. In the record he gives of the parable of the wicked husbandmen, Matthew records the full text of Jesus' judgment on His unbelieving countrymen: "Therefore I tell you that the kingdom of God will be taken away from you and given to a nation that produces the fruits of it" (Matt. 21:43). The parallels in Mark and Luke summarize His statement by saying simply "shall be given to others."

Mark is not so much concerned with Jesus as the messianic Prophet as he is with Jesus as the Conqueror over Satan, sin, sickness, and death--the Man of action who triumphs as the Suffering Servant (Isa. 53). Mark focuses on Jesus' dynamism and redemptive deeds rather than on His philosophy and theological teaching. In this biography the action moves rapidly, and the characteristic word is "straightway" (
euthys
). The church tradition that Mark, having served at first with Barnabas and Paul, became an assistant to Peter at Rome (if Peter in fact did go to Rome) may be correct. If so,much of his narrative concerning Christ would have tended to summarize Peter's own characteristic 315

presentation of Christ's life and deeds, with its heavy emphasis on the suffering of Christ and the events of Passion Week (chaps. 11-16, nearly two-fifths of the entire text of the Gospel). The detailed reference to Simon of Cyrene, who bore Christ's cross, as the

"father of Alexander and Rufus" may tie in with the Rufus mentioned in Romans 16:13

as a member of the Christian community in Rome.

Mark has several interesting quotations from Jesus'
ipsissima verba
in His native Aramaic, such as
Boanerges
(rendered "Sons of thunder") in Mark 3:17;
ephphatha
(for

'etpattah
, meaning "open up!") in Mark 7:34;
talitha koum(i)
(rendered "Maiden arise!") in Mark 5:41; and
Eloi
(or better
Eli) lema sabachthani
(rendered "My God, My God, why hast Thou forsaken Me?") in 15:34. These sound like explanations intended for Dispersion Jews unfamiliar with Aramaic or for Gentiles, who might especially appreciate these interpretations. Mark also took particular pains to explain Jewish religious customs (cf. Mark 7:3 ff.). Clark Pinnock summarizes Mark's emphasis by saying that Mark is especially concerned to present Jesus as the "Son of God, the glorious Son of man, and the Redeemer" (in Tenney,
Zondervan Pictorial Encyclopedia
, 2:786).

Luke came to his task from the perspective of an educated Greek, a physician who took a special interest in the details of Christ's miracles of healing. He was concerned to present a comprehensive, historically accurate biography of Jesus as the perfect Son of Man, bringing out His excellencies and surpassing tenderness in dealing with people.

It was his announced purpose to set forth a carefully researched account, "having investigated everything carefully from the beginning," so that Theophilus and his other readers "might know the exact truth" about the words and deeds of the Lord Jesus. The terms
akribos kathexes
("accurately in correct order") indicate his policy of following fairly strict chronological order in the arrangement of his material and also of including biographical material omitted by the other Synoptists that he felt would help complete the portrait of Jesus in all its beauty and grandeur. (One notable departure from chronological order may be found in his account of Christ's wilderness temptation, and even that exception is disputed by many scholars.) Luke includes more details of our Lord's life than do the other Evangelists. He gives all the background for the birth of John the Baptist and includes all the prophetic utterances that accompanied John's birth as well as that of Jesus. Luke alone records the angelic annunciation to Mary, the visit of the shepherds to Bethlehem, and the birth of our Lord in a stable. He alone narrates Jesus'

presentation in the temple, the prophecy of Simeon, and Jesus' adventure in Jerusalem as a lad of twelve. In chapter 4 Luke tells of Jesus' rejection by the angry mob at Nazareth and alone relates the story of the raising of the dead son of the widow of Nain (Luke 7:11-17).

Much interest is devoted to Jesus' dealings with women and children and His tender regard and consideration for them. Luke mentions not only well-known women like Mary and Martha (who figure so prominently in John's gospel) but also a good many others (perhaps as many as thirteen) not mentioned elsewhere. Of particular moment is the emphasis on Jesus' concern for those who were considered social outcasts, such as Samaritans and publicans (like Matthew-Levi and Zacchaeus), the band of ten lepers 316

(17:11-19), the weeping women of Jerusalem (23:27-31), and the repentant thief who hung on the cross beside Him (23:39-43). Valuable details omitted by others pertain to important developments on Easter Sunday, such as His meeting with the two disciples on the road to Emmaus and His first visit to the assembled disciples after the Crucifixion (24:36-39). Luke alone gives us details of Christ's ascension from the Mount of Olives (24:50-53; Acts 1:9-11).

In his zeal for accuracy and precision, Luke used about 180 terms in his gospel that occur nowhere else in the New Testament, and many of them are rare and technical. He devotes special attention to various types of disease and physical sufferings, such as the

"great fever" that afflicted Peter's mother-in-law (Luke 4:38). Especially noteworthy is his description of Christ's agony in the Garden of Gethsemane, with His sweat dropping from His face and frame like great drops of blood (22:44). Similar attention to detail characterizes Luke's other book, Acts, where in Acts 28, for example, he describes the shipwreck at Melita (Malta)--using at least 17 nautical terms with technical accuracy--the deadly adder that failed to do Paul any harm by its venomous fangs, and the fever and dysentery that afflicted Publius.

Luke, then, is preeminently the gospel of Christ's humanity and His surpassing love and tenderness as the Son of Man. Also, Luke is certainly the most comprehensive of the four biographers in covering the details of Christ's earthly life.

The purpose of this brief characterization of each of the three Synoptists has been to furnish some sort of guideline or rationale in accounting for what each Evangelist includes in his record and what he omitted, and for the particular manner of his presentation. But it should be understood that all three of them accurately related the events of Christ's career and the words of His mouth, even though they included only what was pertinent to their particular approach. When any room is photographed in a person's home, the camera may well capture different views of the contents, depending on the angle from which the picture is shot. All of them are accurate, even though they are by no means identical. The same is true with a classroom of students who are engaged in taking notes on their teacher's lecture. Each student will note at least a few details that are not reported by the others, and yet none of them will be making a false report of what the instructor said.

In the same way we are to fit together the testimony of each of the three Synoptists.

Each one is on the alert for details that fit in with his own special view of Jesus, and so there are naturally going to be inclusions and omissions that correspond with the particular aim of each Evangelist. (Students of classical Greek literature notice a similar phenomenon in regard to Plato's portrait of Socrates, his revered teacher in Athens, and the quite different emphasis of Xenophon, who was another of Socrates' pupils. Plato dwells on his teacher's skill in dialogue and his masterful treatment of philosophical themes: Xenophon in the
Symposium
concentrates on the character and personality of Socrates, as indicated by various anecdotes from personal experience. The two witnesses bring out different aspects of their master, but neither is in error!) 317

As we deal with episodes in our Lord's life that are of such importance that all three (or even John as well) furnish an account, our task is to line them up beside one another and see how each fits in with or supplements the others. In almost every case, a careful consideration will yield a synthetic account that bears a resemblance to a stereophonic player as contrasted with a monaural player or a trio of monaural recorders. Some writers deprecate Tatian's
Diatessaron
(which interweaves material from all four Gospels to form a composite, sequential account of Jesus' works and words), but with dubious justification. Essentially the same method is followed in every inquest or court hearing where multiplicity of witnesses are to be heard. Each of them may contribute differing details that bears on the case, but the judge and jury that hear the various testimonies are expected to fit together the contribution of each witness into a self-consistent, coherent picture of the entire episode or transaction.

Bible critics who have never had any training in the law of evidences may decry the

"harmonistic method" all they wish; but like it or not, it is essentially the harmonistic method that is followed every day that court is in session throughout the civilized world.

This method has a very definite bearing on valid procedures in biblical criticism, as well as in the practical conduct of a tort or criminal action, or even a contract case in a court of law, today. Then the critics would find that most of their artificial, logically fallacious and basically biased approaches to the text of Holy Scripture would be successfully challenged by even the most inexperienced attorney and thrown out by the presiding judge. From a truly scientific and objective approach such as is followed in a responsibly conducted action at law, the three Synoptists have nothing to fear so far as credibility and verification are concerned. The same is true with the rest of Scripture.

318

Matthew

From which of David's sons was Jesus descended? In Matthew 1:6 Jesus' ancestry is
traced through Solomon, while in Luke 3:31 it is traced through Nathan.

Matthew 1:1-16 gives the genealogy of Jesus through Joseph, who was himself a descendant of King David. As Joseph's adopted Son, Jesus became his legal heir, so far as his inheritance was concerned. Notice carefully the wording of v.16: "And Jacob begat Joseph the husband of Mary, of whom was born Jesus, who is called Christ" (NASB).

This stands in contrast to the format followed in the preceding verses of the succession of Joseph's ancestors: "Abraham begat [
egennesen
] Isaac, and Isaac begat Jacob, etc."

Joseph is not said to have begotten Jesus; rather he is referred to as "the husband of Mary, of whom [feminine genitive] Jesus was born."

Luke 3:23-38, on the other hand, seems to record the genealogical line of Mary herself, carried all the way back beyond the time of Abraham to Adam and the commencement of the human race. This seems to be implied by the wording of v.23: "Jesus...being (as was supposed) the son of Joseph." This "as was supposed" indicates that Jesus was not really the biological son of Joseph, even though this was commonly assumed by the public. It further calls attention to the mother, Mary, who must of necessity have been the sole human parent through whom Jesus could have descended from a line of ancestors. Her genealogy is thereupon listed, starting with Heli, who was actually Joseph's father-in-law, in contradistinction to Joseph's own father, Jacob (Matt. 1:16). Mary's line of descent came through Nathan, a son of Bathsheba (or "Bathshua," according to 1 Chron. 3:5), the wife of David. Therefore, Jesus was descended from David naturally through Nathan and legally through Solomon.

Does not Matthew 1:9 err in listing Uzziah as the father of Jotham?

Matthew 1:9,which gives genealogy of Jesus through His legal father, Joseph, states,