317-548-2146

With regards to my current level of knowledge of the Gospels, I would not say that I am highly confident in my understanding. Dr. Rusty Small mentioned in this week’s video that Paul receives much more attention than the Gospels especially in Protestantism. I would agree with his statement and acknowledge that it applies to me and my studies. Regarding my general understanding of the Gospels, I have fond memories of the book of Luke. I grew up in a very small farming community. When I was in middle school, a gentleman from church took a small group of youth through the book of Luke. He went chapter by chapter and verse by verse. It was my first significant exposure to the Gospels. Accordingly, regarding introductory issues, I always believed that the titles of the Gospels reflected the authorship and never questioned the assumption. It was not until I started graduate school that I even thought about the issue of apostolic authorship and its implications. Furthermore, the idea of oral transmission and form criticism had never entered my mind, let alone authors such as Gunkel, Noth, and von Rad.

As a member of a local Protestant church the settings of the Gospels always seemed very simple to me. The setting of the Gospels was where Jesus was born, where He ministered, and ultimately where he died and resurrected from the dead. However, in my later studies, the setting took on a whole new life of its own. Certainly, geography is important, but as a young member of my church I probably could not have told you exactly where Jerusalem was located and certainly would not have been able to explain the relationship of the geographical setting in Scripture to modern day Iraq, Turkey, and the rest of the Mediterranean region. Furthermore, if I would have been asked about setting, I would likely have only thought about geography and not the cultural, cognitive, or broader religious setting that faced Jesus and His disciples during the first century. In fact, I remember years ago listening to a lecture on the distinction between the Hebrew and Greek civilization and thinking it had little to do with Scripture. However, now it is difficult to read the Gospels without recognizing the important influence of the Hellenistic culture that spread through the region as a result of the aggressive initiatives of Alexander the Great. It is also difficult to read the message of the Evangelists without recognizing the backdrop of the pagan religions due to the influence of the Roman empire. And, of course, the intertextual connections between the Gospels and the Hebrew Scriptures are unmistakable.

Regarding the outline and structure of the Gospels, during my undergraduate years in accounting I would have likely explained that the Gospels were about the life of Jesus. I would probably not have used the term “biography” to explain the Gospels, but it would not have been unreasonable. Since then, I have discovered that certain scholars believe that the focus of study needs to be on the community surrounding the development of the Gospels rather than on Jesus. Furthermore, the word “synoptic” was not in my vocabulary and the “synoptic problem” was not even recognized as a problem until my first Introduction to New Testament class at Liberty. In other words, growing up in my local church I would  have outlined the Gospels as a story of Jesus’s miraculous birth, His ministry, and His dying for my sins, but I do not think I would have spent much time thinking about the unique content of the Fourth Gospel. However, in my Introduction class I was required to write a brief history of the synoptic problem. I can remember thinking how odd I thought it was to discuss a Q source that nobody had ever seen but apparently existed to provide material to the Evangelists. Regardless of the oddity, I discovered various modern proposals to the problem including Lessing’s Ur-Gospel, Herder’s fixed oral gospel, Schleiermacher’s sayings-source, Griesbach’s “Two-Gospel” Hypothesis, and Weisse’s popular “Two-Source” Hypothesis. Since this class was my first graduate course taken in biblical studies, I was a little shell-shocked. It was difficult to believe that so many theories could exist to a problem that I had not even known existed. Currently, I do not have an answer for the synoptic problem, but it would not be surprising to someday be able to verify that Matthew and Luke had a copy of portions of Mark’s book that they used as a reference.

Regarding major theological themes, once again I would have thought the question was a little odd until I began a more serious track of study. It seemed obvious that the theme of the Gospels was that Jesus came to earth, was crucified on a cross, and died for my sins. Jesus is the entire theme of the Gospels. However, later in life I started asking many questions about the Gospel stories that everyone else at church seemed to already know the answer, but I did not. The questions seemed so simple, and I was embarrassed to ask. For example, why did Jesus have to die on a cross rather than some other form of methodology? What did Christ’s work really mean? Why did Jesus have to raise from the dead? Now I realize that many (maybe most) people in church do not have definitive answers to these questions. In fact, many scholars do not either. Various theories of atonement have been argued for centuries. Furthermore, the importance of the resurrection certainly must go beyond the mere “proof” that Jesus was the Messiah, especially in light of the participation language in Paul’s epistles (cf. Gal 2:20-21; Eph 1:7, 11; Col 3:1). The point is that the thematic initiatives move beyond simplistic answers and into topics that likely fit a meta-narrative. Themes like Christology, the kingdom of God, eschatology, the incarnation, ethics, discipleship, prayer, salvation, forgiveness, as well as the cross and resurrection all provide thematic initiatives in the Gospels.

One particular theme or motif in the book of Matthew is of significant interest to me personally, which is the theme of righteousness. I have been fascinated by the language of righteousness in Pauline scholarship for many years. In fact, it is the reason that I started a master’s degree in theological studies and continued on to a master’s degree in divinity in pastoral counseling before entering the PhD program in biblical exposition. I had been studying the concepts of righteousness in the book of Romans, teaching a few classes, and integrating both ideas of justification and participation into a Christian counseling modality. However, interestingly, laypersons were accusing me of teaching heresy when, in fact, some of the individuals simply had not been exposed to the topics in their local churches.

Understanding the Gospels 182x300 - A Basic Understanding the Gospels

Understanding the Gospels: A Guide for Preaching and Teaching

Furthermore, I had no idea the topic was such a heated debate in scholarly circles, and, at the time, I had never heard of anything called the “New Perspective on Paul.” However, I was having a very difficult time understanding exactly what this term meant and what its implications were for the Christian life. Since that time, I have come to recognize that these questions are far from settled. Specifically, regarding the theme in the First Gospel, Kolawole Oladotun Paul suggests that the concept of righteousness “arguably forms the central significant theme of Matthew’s gospel.”[1] Further, Matthew Jensen explains that, since F. C. Bauer, scholars of the New Testament have been intrigued by the “apparent differences between Jesus and Paul.”[2] Accordingly, I am interested in Matthew’s take on the term and how it can ultimately be juxtaposed against Paul’s understanding. I believe that a study of the theme of righteousness in Matthew provides a potential topic for the class research paper and may enhance my future studies including the direction of my dissertation.

______________________________________________

[1] Kolawole Oladotun Paul, “A Critical Examination of the Concept of Righteousness in the Gospel of Mathew,” Asia-Africa Journal of Mission and Ministry 20 (August 31, 2019): 96.

[2] Matthew D Jensen, “Justification in Jesus and Paul: Two Voices in Unison,” The Reformed Theological Review 77, no. 3 (December 2018): 173.

 

Bibliography

  • Jensen, Matthew D. “Justification in Jesus and Paul: Two Voices in Unison.” The Reformed Theological Review 77, no. 3 (December 2018): 172–192.
  • Paul, Kolawole Oladotun. “A Critical Examination of the Concept of Righteousness in the Gospel of Mathew.” Asia-Africa Journal of Mission and Ministry 20 (August 31, 2019): 97–106.
     
Wilder - A Basic Understanding the Gospels
Derek Wilder Executive Director
DEREK WILDER, PhD, is the Executive Director of Lives Transforming Group, Inc., a Christian counseling ministry focused on personal transformation, and the author of FREEDOM and Minds on Fire. Wilder has a Master of Theological Studies, an MDiv in Pastoral Counseling, and a PhD in Biblical Exposition. Wilder's scholarly focus lies in Pauline studies, with his doctoral dissertation specifically examining the ontological implications present in the eighth chapter of Paul's Epistle to the Romans. Wilder, an adjunct professor, founded Convergence Therapy, integrating cognitive therapy and grace-based theology into the accredited college course: “Thought Life & Spirit Growth.”