The Gospels: some special features

We hold the firm conviction that the four gospels (and, indeed, all the books of the Bible) are inspired records.  All the world could not accommodate the full account of Jesus' life (John 21.25).  Therefore we are forced to conclude that under Spirit guidance the four evangelists both selected and arranged the various elements which make each individual gospel.  John states his purpose clearly (John 20.30,31).  In this gospel the teaching and miracles of Jesus are called the 'witness' and 'signs' of Jesus' saving Messiahship.  This is so that we might believe and have life in his name.

For the rest, only Luke indicates a special aim.  This is to give Theophilus evidence for the reliability of the truths in which he had been instructed (Luke 1.4).  The necessity of selection and arrangement of material rested upon all four, but on what special basis did the Spirit guide each writer?  Is it possible to detect any unifying theme peculiar to each gospel?

Some readers may feel such an approach to be an intrusion into the divine mind that has overseen the production of these records.  But God has never discouraged an earnest investigation into His deeper things, provided it is done reverently.  Believers in the past have not felt this to be a forbidden field.  One explanation that has been proposed, and still enjoys wide support, is the allotment of the four cherubic faces (and their symbolic meaning) to the gospels.  This is an application which goes back to Irenaeus in the second century AD.  The fullest modern exposition known to the writer is F Bilton's 'Apocalyptical Consideration of the Four Gospels;' 2nd edition 1956.  Unfortunately many of the passages he refers to are of questionable value to his argument, either because they have parallels in other gospels or because they are of doubtful relevance.

Apart from the coincidence of the number four however, there is not a lot of evidence to support such a connection.  Expositors have differed widely about which face to connect with a particular gospel (almost every permutation has been proposed at some time or other).  For example, if we accept that the lion as referring to kingship, are we to allocate this feature to Matthew, Luke or John? Each of these gospels features the kingship of Jesus in the very first chapter!  Clearly, we need a more objective basis upon which to work.

In an effort to identify a major theme for each gospel, the present writer many years ago took S D Waddy's 'Harmony of the Four Gospels in the Revised Version' and underlined each word or passage which appears to be peculiar to one gospel, especially in a particular context.  It was felt that attention to such passages would aid recognition of any underlying theme for each gospel.  The findings were encouraging and have not only remained valid but have been strengthened by further discoveries, evn though certain problems remain.

Our proposal in a nutshell is simply this; each evangelist (probably amongst many other aims) appears to portray Jesus as the great antitype of a prominent Old Testament figure.  The following notes provide a summary of the evidence to date.  Perhaps the wider audience gained by the publication of this book (REF!!) will allow these issues to be clarified, and will help to distinguish between objective results and subjective impressions - a distinction by no means easy to achieve with a 'pet theory!'

We will take Luke's gospel first because it provides the most conspicuous example of Old Testament connections.  The narrative in the first two chapters features an old priest and a young child in the temple.  Mary's thanksgiving reflects (and quotes from) Hannah's prayer.  The progress of Samuel and Jesus are noted in identical language (Luke 2.52 cp. 1 Samuel 2.26).  The Nazariteship of John the Baptist, mentioned only here, parallels that of Samuel (and of Samson).

The chapters which follow introduce us to Jesus' ministry and are broadly parallel with the records of Matthew and Mark.  Luke's account interposes a block of some nine chapters (from Luke 9:51 onwards) of words and deeds of Jesus on his last long journey up to Jerusalem.  Most of the material in this section is peculiar to Luke.

Jesus sets out in anticipation of his being received up (cp. 2 Kings 2.1 - Septuagint Version).  James and John propose that he emulates Elijah (Luke 9.54).  The allusion to Elisha should be noted (Luke 9 61,62; 10.4), and we are back to Elijah with Christ's references to ravens (Luke 12.24 - 'birds' in Matthew) and to rain from a cloud rising in the west (Luke 12.54 contrast Matthew 16.1-3).

Elisha features again typically when Jesus heals a Gentile leper (Luke 17.11-19) who gives glory to God, and when Jesus weeps over the coming destruction of Israel (Luke 19.41-44 cp.2 Kings 8.11,12).  Meanwhile, the sudden death of the rich fool (Luke 12.13) echoes Nabal's fate.  Back in the earlier section (chapters 3 to 9) Jesus at Nazareth likens his work to that of Elijah and Elisha (Luke 4.26,27), and we also have the raising of the widow's son. (Luke 7.11,17)

Is this all coincidence?  This is unlikely, for Luke's sequel, Acts, starts in a very similar way.  In Acts 1 we have Jesus' ascent to heaven while his disciples look on, and chapter 2 records a rich outpouring of the Spirit on the disciples as promised - all echoing 2 Kings chapter 2.  Ananias' punishment for avarice and deception reflects Gehazi's fate, and Cornelius' baptism calls to mind that of Naaman, an earlier Gentile soldier.  Stephen, stoned to death after being falsely charged with blasphemy, recalls Naboth's sad end.

It seems a fair inference from the above that the Spirit through Luke has guided him to record many incidents in Jesus' life which either echo or parallel incidents recorded in Samuel and Kings.  Personally, Jesus appears as the antitype of Samuel 'and all the prophets' (a phrase occurring 14 times in the New Testament, but only in Luke and Acts) but especially Elijah and Elisha.  True, Luke (as all the Evangelists) makes frequent references to other portions of the Old Testament.  For example he writes of 'the finger of God' (Luke 11.20 citing Exodus 8.19 or 31.18) and his arrangement of the 'beatitudes' to give four blessings and four woes matches Deut 28 (Luke 6.20-26; cp. Deuteronomy 28.3-6, 16-19).  Nevertheless, the bias towards the historical books seems indisputable.  Is then, a comparable theme traceable in the other gospels?  If so, it would do much to confirm our thesis.

Even a superficial reading of Matthew reveals its special interest in Jewish affairs.  Jerusalem is twice called 'the holy city,' and Canaan 'the land of Israel.'  Concerning Sabbath observance, only Matthew adds Jesus' reference to the priests profaning the Sabbath blamelessly.  Secondly, we have, in the Olivet prophecy, the additional 'pray ye that your flight be not ... on the Sabbath day.'  'His blood be on us, and on our children' is an ominous Jewish reference.  A happier one is Christ's invitation to adopt his light yoke in place of the burdensome yoke of the Law (Cp. Acts 15.10).  The substitution of the phrase 'kingdom of heaven' for 'kingdom of God' (except in two places) reminds us of Jewish reluctance to mention the name of God.

What, then, are we to make of a gospel which begins 'the book of the generation of...' (cp. 'These are the generations of...' 14 times in Genesis and Exodus), and that continues with Joseph's dreams (four of his and two more in this gospel; none elsewhere in the New Testament).  Note the predominance of dreams in Genesis in the Old Testament and the mention of several incidents in Jesus' life.  Several of these are especially connected with Moses' experiences - the 'massacre of the infants' and his flight to safety until those who sought his life had died.  Further coincidences mirror Israel's experience.  We have 'Out of Egypt have I called my son' and the baptism and wilderness temptations (although these two are not peculiar to Matthew).

But then comes 'the Sermon on the Mount' which is structured like the giving of the Law, with the Beatitudes in place of the Decalogue (The Mosaic Law, literally 'the ten words').  The new Moses is also called 'meek' here - twice in fact (Luke 11.29; 21.5; cp. Numbers 12.3), and only in Matthew's account of the transfiguration is it stated that Jesus' face shone (cp. Exodus 34.29).  In all there are eight appearances of Jesus on a mountain, four peculiar to Matthew; the book of Exodus records eight occasions when Moses met God on Mount Sinai.  Perhaps there is not such a persuasive case here as there is in Luke.  Nevertheless there is obviously some support, both direct and circumstantial, for the proposition that Matthew sets Jesus forward as the prophet like Moses.

In this gospel the words are very simple and yet the teaching is so profound at many levels.  So we must repeat the qualification that we are attempting only to identify one particular theme without prejudice to the many others, others which may lie barely hidden under the surface.  (There are, for example, many Exodus types in John).  The first point to be mentioned is that the kingship theme is more prominent in John than in the other three gospels, as a concordance check will quickly verify.  The very first occurrence (John 1.49) identifies the King of Israel with the Son of God.  Only one Old Testament character corresponds to such a description - Solomon, to whom the Davidic covenant is expressly applied: 'I have chosen him to be my son, and I will be his father.'(1Chronicles 28.6).  John portrays a greater than Solomon 'in all his glory', and the Son's glory is very prominent in this gospel (John 1.14; 2.11; 8.54 etc).  We even have Solomon's 'judgement of two harlots!' (John 4.16-18; 8.3-11).  Another striking fact in John's record is the extraordinary parallel between certain sayings of, or about, Jesus, and passages in the writings of Solomon.  Some of these are shown below:

(All quotations come from the RSV)

It is suggested, therefore, that John's gospel portrays Christ, the King as a 'greater than Solomon.'

We still have Mark to consider; here we have a special difficulty in that only 31 verses are reckoned to be peculiar to this gospel.  There are, in the main, a number of particular sayings or additional details on matters already covered by Matthew and Luke, together with one parable (the growing seed) and two healing miracles (the deaf stammerer and the blind Bethsaidan) not found elsewhere.  But before considering these, let us take our present findings so far and set them in their Old Testament framework, following the arrangement used in Hebrew Bibles, viz. the Law, the Prophets and the Psalms or 'Writings.' (cp. Luke 24. 44).  If listed in this order, dividing (as Jews do) the central portion into two, we have the following comparisons:

In support of the wider reference of each gospel (i.e. to a whole section of the Old Testament) we have already noted that Matthew has rich allusions to Genesis as well as to Moses' history in Exodus onwards.  The Acts has been likened to the book of Joshua in the matter of conquest and settlements of the land (corresponding to the progress of the gospel and the founding of ecclesias).  There are interesting parallels and contrasts here, such as Paul's escape by being let down from the city wall (cp. the spies' escape), and his pointed denial that he had coveted anyone's gold, silver or apparel.  (Acts 20.33).  Contrast Achan! (Joshua chapter 7)

The last section, the 'Writings,' contains all Solomon's literary output; it ends with the books of Chronicles, whose selective history has remarkable correspondence with the book of Revelation (e.g. 1 Chronicles 28-29).  This describes the great public occasion when the Father (David) hands over the kingdom to the son (Solomon).  This is done before representatives of the 24 divisions of priests and Levitical singers, army divisions totalling twice 144,000 men, and an unnumbered multitude of Israelites (cp. 1 Chronicles 27.23,24).  Similarly at the beginning of Revelation the Father (God) hands over the kingdom to the Son (Jesus), giving him at the same time a Spirit-guided scroll - a specification of future operations.  The connection with John is obvious here.

Does Mark then, fit into the gap shown in the table?  We are encouraged by the fact that this gospel commences with a composite quotation from Isaiah and Malachi!  Further study has yielded the following supportive evidence.

The parable of the growing seed (Mark 4.26-29) has common ground with the thought of Isaiah 55.10,11, but is indisputably based on Joel 3.13, from which it actually quotes.  The word 'grow' - literally 'lengthen' - occurs only here in the New Testament, and (in the Septuagint), only in Isaiah 44.14 and Ezekiel 12.25,28.  Mark's additional words in the next parable (Mark 4.32) are most directly related to Ezekiel 17.23 and 31.5,6 (cp. Daniel 4.12).  Jesus' 'cushion' in Mark 4.38 appears elsewhere only in Ezekiel 13.18,20.  The two special healing miracles (Mark 7.31-37 and 8.22-26), connected by Jesus' use of saliva and his fingers in both cases, are founded in Isaiah 35.5,6.  (The Greek 'speaking with difficulty' is only in Mark 7.32 and Isaiah 35.6 Septuagint; the Hebrew derivitive of 'ephphatha' also occurs in Isaiah 35.5)

Perhaps these are only 'straws in the wind,' but at least they are blowing in one direction and appear in some of the unique and therefore key passages of this gospel.  To these might be added: 'Be still' (Mark 4.39), said to the storm, a command which occurs in the Old Testament (Isaiah 41.1; Habbakuk 2.20 and Zechariah 2.13 with reference to the troubled sea of nations, otherwise only to Israel in Deuteronomy 27.9).  At Jesus' arrest the fleeing young man seems to fulfil Amos 2.16.  Mark's addition to the false witnesses' evidence, 'I will build another (temple) without hands,' goes back (on Stephen's testimony) to Isaiah 66.1,2.  This list is by no means exhaustive and we are confident that further ties remain to be identified.

Who is it, then, that Mark is portraying as the Old Testament type of Jesus?  The answer should be obtainable from these 'latter prophets,' perhaps with special reference to Isaiah.  Daniel, strictly speaking, should not be included here, as Hebrew Bibles include his book in the 'Writings' sections.  Nevertheless Austin Farrar, in his book 'St Matthew and St Mark' (London: Dacre Press 1954), detects a close parallel between the literary structure of Daniel and Mark's gospel.

In the past, Bible students have seen Jesus in Mark as a servant of all, and have therefore linked the gospel with the ox-face of the cherubim.  This identification is not at present obvious, but if valid, immediately suggests 'the suffering servant' so prominent in Isaiah.  However, this is a direct prophecy rather than a type.  So the 'typical identity' remains unresolved.

The great attraction of this little study is that it binds the two Testaments more closely together, revealing further hidden patterns in the priceless treasure of the 'Word of God' in our hands.  "The glory of God is to conceal a thing, but the glory of (future) kings is indeed to search it out." (Proverbs 25.2)