The Literary World of Matthew, Mark, Luke, and John (Part 2 of 2)

Authorial Distinctiveness 

Historically, at least as far back as Taitian’s Diatessaron in the second century,¹ the Gospels have been studied together as a collective whole, harmonizing the parallel accounts to construct an amalgamated composite of Jesus’ life. In so doing, however, the differences among the accounts are often overlooked or trivialized, and the unique focus of each Gospel writer ignored.

In the modern era, conservative scholars have been preoccupied with fitting all of the details of the four Gospels together into a harmony of the life of Christ. Liberal scholars have been just as preoccupied with stressing the theological distinctives of each Gospel. Each of these approaches, when employed to the exclusion of the other, leads to a distorted understanding of the texts. Theology without harmonization discovers only distinctions and alleged contradictions without seeing how much the Gospels have in common and how they can be combined into a harmonious whole. Harmonization without appreciation for the theological distinctives of the Gospels trades the inspired form of the text for a humanly created one.²

Words on a page detached from the inspired author are void of any real authority or communicative value.³ The written text is derived from a real person, guided by God’s Spirit, who seeks to communicate. Each Gospel offers a unique perspective, showing deliberate interest in certain aspects of what Jesus said and did, retelling the story in ways relevant to and meaningful for a particular reading audience.⁴ While “authorial intent” (what an author hopes or wishes to communicate) may be a debatable concept, “communicative intent” (what an author communicates intentionally in a text) is more readily discernable,⁵ though not without careful attention to contextual matters of authorship, audience, historical-sociocultural setting, circumstances, literary conventions, etc. 

Authorial Selectivity

The Gospel writers were not creators of the material they transmitted. Nor were they mere compilers. They were authors, albeit “authors in the sense that, with the Spirit’s help, they creatively structured and rewrote the material to meet the needs of their readers.”⁶ Brevity, omission, abridgment, emphasis, and focused precision are among the plethoric narrative options for any given author. The Gospels are “selective documents” in that they provide less information than was available (note John 20:30-31; 21:25), leading interpreters to ponder why each contains the accounts it contains and why the accounts are arranged as they are.⁷ Matthew, for example, tends to use quantity of elements to teach about Jesus, conveying the stories with brevity, while the other Gospels tend to highlight details. When Matthew reports the Lord healing many people inflicted with a variety of ailments (Matt. 15:30-31), Mark focuses on just one of them (Mark 7:31-32). 

Independent Witnesses 

Without compromising their collective integrity, the noticeable differences among the Gospels confirm each one as an independent witness.⁸ Rather than contradict, they confirm, supplement, and complement one another.⁹

--Kevin L. Moore

Endnotes:

     ¹ Also evident in the writings of Tatian’s teacher and mentor Justin Martyr. See K. L. Moore, “Challenging the Integrity of the Gospels: a Response (Part 2),” Moore Perspective (14 Sept. 2022), <Link>. 

     ² C. L. Blomberg, Jesus and the Gospels (2nd ed.) 205. Robin Griffith-Jones describes the tendency to combine all the different accounts into one as an attempt “to dish up a single, digestible Jesus—and so would lose the flavor of these four wonderful courses. The gospels offer us a far more inviting, exciting, and nourishing meal than any such reduction can encourage us to look for” (The Four Witnesses ix). Steve Walton encourages conservatives not to throw the Synoptics into a blender for harmonization. Biblically-grounded theology is not dependent on all the Gospels saying exactly the same thing. There are many witnesses but just one Gospel (“I. Howard Marshall’s Luke: Historian and Theologian 50 Years Later,” ETS 73rd Annual Meeting, 17 Nov. 2021).

     ³ Even the “anonymous” epistle to the Hebrews reflects the author’s familiarity with his readers (5:12; 6:9-10; 10:34; 13:7, 18-25) and an obvious link with them (13:18, 19, 23).

     ⁴ All four Gospels follow a rough general outline of Jesus’ ministry, death, and resurrection, with a fairly detailed and consistent passion narrative but a “largely discontinuous and episodic” ministry narrative (C. H. Dodd, The Interpretation of the Fourth Gospel 447-48). 

     ⁵ See esp. J. K. Brown, Scripture as Communication (2nd ed.) 5, 12, 23. It is important to note, however, that if an author is writing to a community with whom he has spent considerable time verbally instructing (e.g., Paul and the Corinth church), he can readily assume a high level of familiarity with his intentions.

     ⁶ G. D. Fee and D. Stuart, How to Read the Bible for All Its Worth (4th ed.) 146.

     ⁷ D. M. Doriani, “Matthew,” in ESV Expository Commentary 8:28.

     ⁸ See K. L. Moore, “The Synoptic Problem and Markan Priority: Part 1,” Moore Perspective (3 June 2012), <Link>.

     ⁹ John Chrysostom observed: “And why can it have been, that when there were so many disciples, two write only from among the apostles, and two from among their followers? (For one that was a disciple of Paul, and another of Peter, together with Matthew and John, wrote the Gospels.) It was because they did nothing for vainglory, but all things for use. ‘What then? Was not one evangelist sufficient to tell all?’ One indeed was sufficient; but if there be four that write, not at the same times, nor in the same places, neither after having met together, and conversed one with another, and then they speak all things as it were out of one mouth, this becomes a very great demonstration of the truth” (Homily 1.5).

Related Posts: Literary World of Matthew, Mark, Luke & John Part 1, Luke's Prologues and Making the Gospels

 

Image Credit: https://www.jw.org/en/bible-teachings/questions/gods-thoughts/

 

The Literary World of Matthew, Mark, Luke, and John (Part 1 of 2)

Authors can reasonably assume their readers share their world and apprehend what they mean. Since the Gospels present the life of Jesus in the historical, sociopolitical, cultural environment in which he lived, to truly understand Jesus (what he said, how he taught, what he did), we need to understand his world. But as we learn about Jesus through the communicative efforts of Matthew, Mark, Luke, and John, we also need to appreciate their circumstances and that of the reading audiences for whom they wrote. These authors intended to be understood, not by twenty-first-century westerners but within their own literary-cultural environment shared with those with whom they interacted.¹

Invariably “shared histories, assumptions, and experiences shape how these authors’ words and phrases might be heard…. We need more than the words on the page. We need to be oriented to the background assumed by people in the NT era. We need context.”² A high view of scripture and its self-claims of divine inspiration does not ignore the fact that the Gospel message is presented “in specific, historical situations,” and “the way we listen to God (our interpretive approach) must honor the way God chose to communicate.”³

Historically Relevant Historiography 

Historians, interested in real people and actual events, are naturally limited to the amount of information they can realistically put into writing. It is necessary, therefore, to be discerning and to restrict reporting to what is deemed most significant. None of the Gospels professes to be exhaustive. The aim of the ancient historian was to depict historical accounts so that readers could learn political, moral, or religious principles.⁴ Otherwise, what would be the point? “Ancient writers were more highly selective, ideological, and artistic in narrating the great events of their day or the lives of key individuals. They arranged material thematically as well as chronologically.”⁵

In the ancient near eastern and Greco-Roman worlds, literature was designed to be read aloud, with oral and aural features and rhetorical clues mostly foreign to other cultures with much higher literacy rates.⁶ The historian’s methodology (familiar to his contemporary audiences) was not entirely the same as that of modern times and westernized societies. While completeness and accuracy were important, he was not preoccupied with linear thinking and was less concerned about chronological arrangement and precision of dating. Long before the present-day copyright mentality, the meticulous documenting of sources was not necessary. In ancient oral cultures an author could reasonably assume his readers or listeners were familiar with and could easily recognize quoted materials and allusions.⁷ “It would be sheer anachronism and a monstrous injustice to evaluate Matthew, Mark, and Luke [and John] by twenty-first-century standards of precision, some of which they probably never even could have imagined! Theirs was a world without any symbol for a quotation mark or any felt need for one.”⁸

More Than Historians and Biographers

Matthew, Mark, Luke, and John were historians in the sense they have provided accurate and relevant historical information. But they were more than historians. They were also biographers in the sense of having provided a biographical record of the life of Jesus. But they were more than biographers. First and foremost they were theologians and evangelists. All four, according to the biblical record, were actively involved in the evangelistic enterprise.⁹

Each Gospel seems to have a special theological emphasis, i.e., Jesus portrayed as Messiah in Matthew, Savior in Luke, Suffering Servant in Mark, and the Son of God in John. Each appears to have been arranged so that readers might learn about Jesus, his teachings, and his works in order to be transformed by what they encounter. Merely gleaning factual information without attention to the kerygmatic function of these writings misses their primary purpose. Trying to identify a specific genre according to the historical-literary approach is otherwise futile,¹⁰ as “we will inevitably miss some of the important points being made by the author or text.”¹¹ Perhaps “theological biographies” most adequately describes the unique genre of the canonical Gospels,¹² while “narrative Christology” is an apt description as well.¹³

--Kevin L. Moore

Endnotes:

     ¹ “If reader and writer share the same social system, communication is highly probable. But if reader and writer come from mutually alien social systems, then as a rule, non-understanding prevails … Should a translation of the wording (words and sentences) be offered, apart from a comparative explanation of the social systems involved, misunderstanding inevitably follows” (B. J. Malina, The Social World of Jesus and the Gospels 8; see also J. K. Brown, Scripture as Communication 24-27).

     ² J. B. Green and L. M. McDonald, The World of the New Testament 1-2.

     ³ J. Scott Duvall and J. Daniel Hays, Grasping God’s Word (3rd ed.) 116-117.

     ⁴ See R. Nocolai, “The Place of History in the Ancient World,” in A Companion to Greek and Roman Historiography, ed. J. Marincola 1-14; also I. H. Marshall, Luke: Historian and Theologian 21-22.

     ⁵ C. L. Blomberg, Jesus and the Gospels (2nd ed.) 121; also The Historical Reliability of the NT 25.

     ⁶ On the oral and aural features of Mark’s Gospel, as a composition designed to be read aloud, see C. Bryan, A Preface to Mark 67-162; cf. also M. Hengel, Studies in the Gospel of Mark 52; M. A. Tolbert, Sowing the Gospel 72, 82. It has been estimated that in the world of the Roman Empire, particularly among non-Jews, only about 10 and at most 20 per cent of the entire population could read, and in the western part of the Empire no higher than 5 to 10 per cent (W. V. Harris, Ancient Literacy 130-45).

     ⁷ “Usually the writer was expecting the hearers to recognize the material and therefore did not call attention to it…. New Testament writers often quoted hymnic fragments, standardized arguments (topoi), [the OT] and early kerygma, often without identifying it” (E. R. Richards, “Reading, Writing, and Manuscripts,” in The World of the NT [eds. J. B. Green and L. M. McDonald] 357). “In the first-century Jewish context it does not seem to have made much difference whether a passage of Scripture is explicitly quoted or alluded to” (D. W. Pao and E. J. Schnabel, “Luke,” in Commentary on the NT Use of the OT, eds. G. K. Beale and D. A. Carson 251).

     ⁸ C. L. Blomberg, The Historical Reliability of the NT 25; also Jesus and the Gospels (2nd ed.) 128.

     ⁹ Matt. 10:1-8; 28:18-20; Acts 13:5; 15:39; 16:10-16; 1 Cor. 15:11; Col. 4:10-14; Philem. 24; 2 Tim. 4:11. 

     ¹⁰ Proposed classifications have included history, technical treatise, ancient memorabilia, aretalogy (narrative of miraculous deeds), peripatetic biography, Greco-Roman popular biography, aretalogical biography, laudatory biography, tragic drama, and a unique literary (gospel) form. See J. E. Toews, “The Synoptic Problem and the Genre Question,” Direction10.2 (April 1981): 11-18.

     ¹¹ J. G. Crossley, Reading the New Testament 24.

     ¹² C. L. Blomberg, Jesus and the Gospels (2nd ed.) 122.

     ¹³ M. E. Boring, Mark: a Commentary NTL 8.

Related Posts: Literary World of Matthew, Mark, Luke & John (Part 2)

 

Image credit: https://patternsofevidence.com/2020/05/29/investigating-the-original-languages-of-the-bible/

What are we asking of God when we pray, “Lead us not into temptation”? (Part 3 of 3)

While the heavenly Father does not tempt anyone to sin, he does allow it. He even escorts us into precarious situations that challenge and test our faith. The purpose, it seems, is to elicit greater dependence on him and ultimately strengthen our faith and prepare for eternity.

As we acknowledge our own human frailties and weaknesses, we have God’s permission to ask in prayer, “bring us not into temptation” (Matt. 6:13a).¹ However, if we are unwilling to avail ourselves of all that he provides to help us along the way, we are missing a key component of the petition, “your will be done on earth as also in heaven” (v. 10b). Whether or not he responds to our requests according to our shortsighted preferences, we can be assured that he always answers according to his perfect will (1 John 5:14-15).²

Heavenly Provision

1. God provides opportunities to learn, develop, and grow. It is not in our best interest to be completely shielded from life’s troubles and Satan’s attacks. Like a responsible and caring parent raising children in a perilous environment, the Lord “proves” or “disciplines” those he loves (Heb. 12:6-11). How else are we to foster notable qualities like patience, humility, courage, compassion, empathy, endurance, and strength of character? 

The Lord’s purpose is not fulfilled by removing challenges, though he does help us through.³ “My brethren, consider it all joy whenever you are encompassed by various trials [πειρασμοῖς], knowing that the testing of your faith produces perseverance; and let the perseverance have its complete work, so that you may be mature and complete, lacking nothing …. Blessed is the man who endures trial [πειρασμόν], that having been approved he will receive the crown of life which [God] promised to the ones loving him” (Jas. 1:2-4, 12).

2. God provides the avenue of prayer. Jesus lived each day on earth as a vulnerable human being, having no unfair advantage over the rest of us.⁴ No wonder he spent so much of his time in prayer⁵ and taught his disciples to do the same.⁶ We should not attempt to combat Satan and his evil forces alone. 

With ready access to the divine power source, we especially need to pray for one another: “Our Father … give us this day … forgive us … bring us not … deliver us …”⁷ Neglecting prayer leaves us ill equipped to resist the devil’s assaults. “But to the One having power above all things to do exceedingly beyond what we ask or think, according to the power working in us; to him be the glory in the church and in Christ Jesus to all the generations forever and ever. Amen” (Eph. 3:20-21). 

3. God provides the Holy Spirit. As Jesus walked the earth in human flesh, at his baptism the Spirit of God came “upon” [ἐπί] him (Matt. 3:16; Luke 3:22; 4:18a), entering “into” [εἰς] him (Mark 1:10) and accompanying him thereafter.⁸ At the same time, his autonomous free will and personal accountability remained intact.⁹

As penitent believers at baptism we also receive the Holy Spirit, who accompanies us thereafter.¹⁰ We are “in” [ἐν] Christ when we have been baptized “into” [εἰς] him (Rom. 6:3; Gal. 3:27), thus having heard and believed the word of truth and having entered Christ, we are “sealed with the Holy Spirit of promise, who is a guarantee of our inheritance unto the redemption of the possession, unto the praise of his glory” (Eph. 1:13-14). At the same time, our autonomous free will and personal accountability remain intact.¹¹

We are to glorify God in our bodies because we belong to him and have his Spirit abiding in us (1 Cor. 6:18-20; cf. Rom. 6:1-23; 1 Thess. 4:1-8). To continue in sin is to “grieve the Holy Spirit of God, by whom you were sealed for the day of redemption” (Eph. 4:30). As we prayerfully persevere through life’s challenges and eagerly anticipate the heavenly reward, “the Spirit also joins to help in our weaknesses,” interceding for us (Rom. 8:25-27). Note the cooperative effort when “you [all]” put to death the deeds of the body “by the Spirit” (Rom. 8:13; cf. v. 16; Eph. 3:16-17).  

Now disagreements abound as to exactly “when” and “how” the Spirit operates (directly, instrumentally through scripture, both?), and we surely want to avoid subjective and extreme views that twist or strain or contradict clear biblical teaching.¹²  Meanwhile let us be content knowing that God’s Spirit is so much bigger than anything we can fully comprehend, and even if we do not have it all figured out, we can still be thankful he is who he is and does what he does. At the end of the day, whether or not I believe it or fully understand it or can adequately explain it, the reality of what God does is not jeopardized or thwarted by my personal ignorance and limitations. Irrespective of the specific details of “when” and “how,” we can be assured that the Lord is present and working in our lives, which is really all we need to know. 

4. God provides his inspired word. Whatever the Holy Spirit did for Jesus, throughout his entire earthly ministry Jesus still relied on and utilized his knowledge of God’s word.¹³ The psalmist prayed, “Your word I have hidden in my heart that I might not sin against you” (Psa. 119:11), and Jesus likewise repelled the devil’s temptations by appealing to the sacred scriptures (Matt. 4:4, 7, 10; Luke 4:4, 8, 12). 

The Holy Spirit is distinct from the written word of God, yet the Spirit and the word are inseparable. Without the Holy Spirit we would not have God’s word (Eph. 3:3-5; 6:17), and without God’s word we would have neither knowledge of nor the possibility of receiving God’s Spirit (Acts 19:2; Eph. 1:13). The word of God is “the sword of the Spirit” (Eph. 6:17) which effectively works in those who submit to it (1 Thess. 2:13; 2 Tim. 3:16-17; Heb. 4:12).  

5. God provides angelic ministration. We know that God providentially works in the lives of his people,¹⁴ and angels appear to be the agency through which he works.¹⁵ “Are not [angels] all ministering spirits being sent forth [presently and continuously] for service for those who are to inherit salvation?” (Heb. 1:13-14). God’s holy angels, with superior power and strength (Heb. 2:6-7; 2 Pet. 2:11), are concerned about and invested in our spiritual well-being.¹⁶ Even Jesus benefitted from their help.¹⁷

6. God provides the church. Christianity was not designed as a personal religion to be experienced independently and privately. We are part of a spiritual family, members of one body, joint-citizens of a heavenly kingdom. Despite the personal struggles each person faces, we are engaged in a spiritual warfare together, a collaborative effort as fellow-soldiers fighting side-by-side.¹⁸

A key term in God’s salvific plan is ἐκκλησία (“church”), occurring about 114 times in the Greek NT and always referring to a collectivity of people.¹⁹ The plethoric NT directives involving “one another” simply cannot be obeyed on an individualistic basis.²⁰ “Therefore confess your sins to one another and pray for one another that you may be made whole; a righteous one’s effectual prayer avails much” (Jas. 5:16; cf. v. 19; Gal. 6:1-2). Each person is accountable to God, and the gospel is to be obeyed on an individual basis, yet every baptized believer is expected to look beyond self as part of a larger community of the Lord’s people.²¹ 

Conclusion

Satan tempts. God provides. We decide which path to follow. When we ask in prayer, “bring us not into temptation” (Matt. 6:13a), let us earnestly appropriate the Lord’s ample provisions as we also pray, “your will be done on earth as also in heaven” (v. 10b).

--Kevin L. Moore

Endnotes:

     ¹ Unless otherwise noted, scripture quotations are the author’s own translation.

     ² Matt. 6:10; 26:39; Acts 18:21; 21:14; Rom. 1:10; 15:30-33; 1 Cor. 4:19; 2 Cor. 12:7-9; Jas. 4:13-15; 1 Pet. 3:17; 4:19.

     ³ Rom. 5:3-4; 8:28; Phil. 1:12-14; 2:12-13, 17-18; 1 Cor. 10:13; 2 Cor. 4:6-18; 12:5-10; Heb. 11:8-40; 12:1-11; cf. also 2 Cor. 1:8-11; 6:1-10; Rev. 3:10. 

     ⁴ John 1:14; 2 Cor. 8:9; 13:4; Phil. 2:5-8; Heb. 2:9-18; 4:15; 1 John 4:2; 2 John 7. Jesus is explicitly referred to as “man” no less than 36 times in the NT, and as “the son of man” an impressive 82 times (almost entirely as a self-description). Whatever he needed on earth to confirm his identity and message was supplied to him by the heavenly Father (Matt. 9:8; 12:28; Luke 4:14-19; John 3:2; 5:30-47; 6:27, 57; 7:16; 8:16-18, 26, 29, 38, 40, 54-55; 9:4; 10:18, 25, 32; 11:4, 41-42; 12:49-50; 14:10; 16:32; Acts 2:22; 10:38).   

     ⁵ Matt. 11:25-26; 14:23; 26:39-44; 27:46; Mark 1:35; 6:45; 14:32-39; Luke 5:16; 6:12; 9:18; 10:21; 11:1; 22:39-45; 23:[34], 46; John 11:41-42; 12:27-28; 17:1-26; Heb. 5:7.

     ⁶ Matt. 6:5-13; 7:7-11; 11:29; 26:41; Mark 9:29; 14:38; Luke 11:1-4, 9-13; 18:1, 7, 10-14; 22:40, 46; John 15:16; 16:23-24.

     ⁷ John 17:20; Acts 12:4; Jas. 5:14-16. Paul regularly prayed for his brethren (Rom. 1:9-10; Eph. 1:16; Phil. 1:3-4; Col. 1:9-12; cf. 1 Thess. 1:2; 3:10; 2 Thess. 1:11) and requested their prayers on his behalf (Rom. 15:30-32; 2 Cor. 1:11; Eph. 6:19-20; Phil. 1:19; Col. 4:3, 4; Philem. 22; cf. 1 Thess. 5:25; 2 Thess. 3:1-2).

     ⁸ Matt. 12:28; Luke 4:1, 14-21; Acts 10:38-39; metaphorically described as a spiritual anointing (Luke 4:18; Acts 4:27; 10:38; cf. Heb. 1:9). On the anointing of 1 John 2:20, 27, see K. L. Moore, “The ‘Anointing’ in 1 John,” Moore Perspective (31 Aug. 2016), <Link>. On the anointing of 2 Cor. 1:21, see K. L. Moore, “Who is ‘Anointed’ in 2 Cor. 1:21?” Moore Perspective (7 Sept. 2016), <Link>.

     ⁹ Matt. 11:27; 26:39; Luke 10:22; 22:42; John 5:30; 6:38; 7:17-18.

     ¹⁰ Acts 2:37-38; 5:32; Rom. 8:9-11; 1 Cor. 6:19; 2 Cor. 5:5; Gal. 3:14; Tit. 3:5-6; 1 John 3:24; 4:13; cf. Luke 11:13. See K. L. Moore, “God’s Indwelling Spirit,” Moore Perspective (26 Aug. 2015), <Link>.Jesus was “full” [πλήρης] of the Holy Spirit (Luke 4:1), and faithful Christians in the early church were “full” [πλήρης] of wisdom, faith, and the Holy Spirit (Acts 6:3, 5; 11:23-24); cf. Rom. 15:13-14. This does not mean the Holy Spirit does for everyone all that he did for Jesus, and vice versa. The Spirit operates “as he wills” (1 Cor. 12:11), apparently with respect to circumstances and need (cf. Matt. 25:15; 1 Cor. 2:1-5). 

     ¹¹ Rom. 2:6-10; 6:12-13, 16-19; 8:5; 11:22-23; 12:1-2, 9, 18, 21; 13:12-14; 14:5, 12; 1 Cor. 6:18; 7:36; 8:9; 10:6-10, 12, 14, 24; 14:40; 15:33; 16:13-14; 2 Cor. 2:9; 5:9; 6:1, 12-13; 7:1-2; 8:3, 12, 19; 9:2, 7; 13:5; Gal. 1:6; 2:10-13, 17; 4:9, 18; 5:1, 4, 7, 10, 13-16, 24-26; 6:1-10; Eph. 4:1-3, 14-17, 22-32; 5:1-21; 6:11, 13-18; Phil. 1:9-11, 27; 2:2-5, 12-16; 3:12-17; 4:1, 9; Col. 1:23; 2:6-8; 3:1-17; 4:5-6; 1 Thess. 1:3, 9; 2:12; 3:8; 4:1-8, 10-12; 5:8, 21-22; 2 Thess. 1:3-4; 2:15; 3:6, 11-15; 1 Tim. 1:5-6, 18-19; 3:2, 8-11, 15; 4:15-16; 5:20; 6:3-14, 17-21; 2 Tim. 1:13; 2:12, 15, 19, 22-26; 3:14; 4:7; Tit. 1:6-9; 2:1-8, 11-12; 3:1-11, 14; Philem. 21; Heb. 12:1-2; Jas. 2:14-26; et al. 

     ¹² While open to anything the Lord provides to aid in our spiritual walk, we ought to be sensible enough not to attribute to God or to his Spirit thoughts, feelings, or experiences for which he may not be responsible. Since each of us will be held accountable for every careless word spoken (Matt. 12:36), we must be careful not to presumptuously credit the Lord with specific activities that cannot be substantiated in his inspired word. How do I know I have God’s Spirit living within me? The Bible tells me so.

     ¹³ Matt. 4:4, 7, 10; 5:5, 17; 7:12; 9:13; 10:35-36; 11:10, 13; 12:7, 16-21; 13:14-15, 34-35; 15:4, 8-9; 18:16; 19:4-5; 19:18-19; 21:1-5, 13, 16, 42; 22:31-32, 37-40, 43-45; 23:39; 24:15; 26:31, 54, 56; 27:46; Mark 2:25-26; 4:11-12; 7:6-7, 10; 9:12-13, 48; 10:5-9, 19; 11:17; 12:10-11, 26-, 29-31, 36-37; 13:14; 14:27; 15:34; Luke 2:46-47; 4:4, 8, 12, 17-21, 24-27; 6:3-4, 9; 7:27; 8:10; 10:12, 26-28; 11:29-32, 51; 12:27; 13:35; 16:31; 17:26-32; 18:20; 19:46; 20:17, 37-38, 41-44; 22:8, 11, 15, 37; 23:30, 46; 24:27, 32, 44-47; John 3:14; 5:38-47; 6:32, 45, 49, 58; 7:19, 22, 38, 8:39-40; 10:34-35; 12:14-16; 13:18; 15:25; 17:12.

     ¹⁴ Gen. 45:5-7; 50:20; Prov. 2:6-8; Acts 11:21; 26:22; Rom. 8:28; 1 Cor. 10:13; 2 Cor. 2:12; 1 Thess. 3:11; 2 Tim. 4:17-18; cf. Esth. 4:14; Philem. 15. 

     ¹⁵ Beyond the visible and communicatory activities of angels throughout the OT record and in the early developmental stages of the Christian movement, note the Lord’s providential working, not restricted to the miraculous, through the instrumentality of angels: Matt. 28:2; Acts 5:19; 12:23; Heb. 13:2; Rev. 7:1; cf. Psa. 91:11-12; Matt. 24:31; Luke 16:22; Heb. 12:22-24. See Wayne Jackson, “Do Angels Minister to Christians Today?” Christian Courier (accessed 5 Sept. 2022), <Link>.

     ¹⁶ Matt. 18:10; Luke 12:8-9; 15:7, 10; 1 Cor. 4:9; 1 Tim. 5:21; Rev. 3:5. See K. L. Moore, “Questions About Angels,” Moore Perspective (26 May 2013), <Link>.

     ¹⁷ Matt. 4:11; Mark 1:13; Luke 22:43 (textual variant); cf. Matt. 26:53; Heb. 2:9.

     ¹⁸ See K. L. Moore, “Putting on God’s Whole Armor … in Context,” Moore Perspective (28 Oct. 2015), <Link>.

     ¹⁹ See K. L. Moore, “The Church of the NT,” Moore Perspective (18 July 2014), <Link>; and “Where’s the Church in the Gospel Plan of Salvation?” Moore Perspective (16 Feb. 2016), <Link>.

     ²⁰ The reciprocal pronoun ἀλλήλων (“one another”) is found no less than 100 times in the Greek NT. See K. L. Moore, “Individualism vs. Collectivism,” Moore Perspective (17 July 2019), <Link>.

     ²¹ Acts 2:41-47; Rom. 12:4-16; 1 Cor. 1:10; 10:24, 33; 12:12-27; Phil. 1:27–2:4; Heb. 3:13; 10:23-25; 1 Pet. 4:10.

Related Posts: Lead Us Not Into Temptation Part 1, Part 2, Supply in Your Faith Godliness

Related Lessons: Zach Bauman’s 6 Steps to Help in Your Struggle with Sin 

Image credit: adapted from https://godinallthings.com/2015/01/28/praying-with-your-life/

What are we asking of God when we pray, “Lead us not into temptation”? (Part 2 of 3)

Temptation to sin does not emanate “from” [ἀπό] God but from our own desires and self-deception when the devil is not resisted and the divine will is ignored or rejected (Jas. 1:13-15; 4:7). What, then, does Jesus mean when he teaches his disciples to pray, “bring us not into temptation”? In addition to what was considered in the previous post, Christ’s own experience provides the best commentary.

The Beginning of the Lord’s Ministry

At Jesus’ baptism the Holy Spirit came upon him, along with heavenly confirmation as God’s Son.¹ Immediately afterwards he was conducted into the wilderness (presumably in the Jordan Valley district),² where he spent the next forty days facing the devil’s temptations (Matt. 4:1-11; Mark 1:12-13; Luke 4:1-13). 

Luke reports that Jesus was “led” [ἄγω], Matthew says he was “led up” [ἀνάγω], from the low-lying Jordan River to a higher elevation, whereas Mark gives a more intense description of Jesus being “driven out [ἐκβάλλω] into,” implying a compelling force that is identified by all three Synoptics as τό πνεῦμα (“the spirit”). Most English translations have interpreted the expression as “the Spirit” (capital ‘S’) in reference to the Holy Spirit, albeit without conclusive specification in the original Greek texts.³

Word Analysis

Whenever the noun πνεῦμα is qualified in the NT with the genitival ἁγίου (“holy”) or τοῦ θεοῦ (“of God”), it almost certainly refers to the divine personage of the Holy Spirit of God.⁴ However, without these qualifiers the same expression can apply to one’s own internal “spirit,”⁵ or to a nonhuman (evil) “spirit.”⁶ Matthew, Mark, and Luke do not employ modifiers here, so was Jesus driven out into the wilderness by the Holy Spirit, by his own convicted spirit, or by the devil?

Contextual Analysis

Contextually the Holy Spirit is most likely in view. Matthew reports that at Jesus’ baptism “the Spirit of God” (Matt. 3:16) descended upon him as a dove, identified by Luke as “the Holy Spirit” (Luke 3:22). In Mark’s parallel account this was simply “the Spirit,” then immediately “the S/spirit” drove Jesus out into the wilderness (Mark 1:10, 12). Moreover, Luke prefaces the allusion to the leading of “the S/spirit” (Luke 4:1b) with Christ “full of [the] Holy Spirit” (v. 1a),⁷ while later “Jesus returned in the power of the S/spirit to Galilee” and then applied the scripture to himself, “[The] Spirit of [the] Lord [is] upon me …” (vv. 14, 18). 

Interpreting these references as consistently applicable to the Holy Spirit allows for a smoother and more natural reading (cp. Luke 2:25-27), although the engagement of Jesus’ own internal spirit cannot be totally discounted. He resisted the devil’s attacks by quoting scriptures (Deut. 6:13, 16; 8:3) indicative of his deliberate submission to the Father’s will.  

During the Lord’s Ministry

Following his baptism Jesus was not only “led up” [ἀνήχθη – aorist passive indicative –completed past action] “into” [εἰς] the wilderness to be tempted by the devil (Matt. 4:1), he was “being led” [ἤγετο – imperfect middle or passive indicative – progressive action in the past] “in” [ἐν] the wilderness (Luke 4:1), “being tempted” [πειραζόμενος – present passive participle – continual action] during the entire forty-day period (Luke 4:2a; Mark 1:13). He successfully withstood, and “the devil departed from him until [ἄχρι] an opportune time” (Luke 4:13). The testing thus continued throughout his entire earthly life (cf. Heb. 2:18; 4:15; 5:7), and he persistently withdrew into the wilderness to pray (Luke 5:16).

The End of the Lord’s Ministry

The temptation narrative at the beginning of Christ’s ministry is parallel to a comparable episode near the end of his ministry (Matt. 26:36-44; Mark 14:32-39; Luke 22:39-46). Prior to his tortuous trials and brutal execution, as Jesus falls to the ground in earnest prayer, the inspired writers vividly describe his volatile mental and emotional state as intense “grieving” [λυπέω], “distressing” [ἀδημονέω], “very sorrowful” [περίλυπος], and “sorely dismayed” [ἐκθαμβέομαι], “even to death” (Matt. 26:37-38; Mark 14:33-34). Luke’s account, albeit beset with textual issues,⁸ includes “agony” [ἀγωνία], “and his sweat became like great drops of blood falling down upon the ground” (Luke 22:44), symptomatic of extreme psychological distress.⁹

As recounted in all three Synoptics, from the depths of his anguished “soul” [ψυχή] Jesus repeatedly makes the fervent plea: “My Father, if it is possible, let this cup pass from me. Nevertheless, not as I will but as you [will] …. My Father, if this is not able to pass unless I drink it, your will be done” (Matt. 26:39-44); “he was praying that if it is possible the hour might pass from him, and he was saying, ‘Father, Father, all things are possible for you; take this cup from me, but not what I will but what you [will]’” (Mark 14:35-39); “Father, if you are willing, take this cup away from me; nevertheless, not my will but your [will] be done” (Luke 22:41).

Irrespective of whatever may have been available to assist Jesus through such a trying ordeal, his own volition was clearly not overridden. The same is true of his disciples. In the midst of these ardent prayers, as the ones closest to him struggled with fatigue and worrisome “grief” [λύπη] (Luke 22:45), Jesus admonishes them to be attentive and to pray not to enter into temptation [πειρασμός], “indeed the spirit [τὸ πνεῦμα] is willing but the flesh is weak” (Matt. 26:41; Mark 14:38; Luke 22:40, 46).

Bringing It All Together

A key tenet of the Christian faith is the incarnate humanness of Jesus,¹⁰ having become one of us “in all things” [κατά πάντα] (Heb. 2:17), including being tempted “in all things” [κατά πάντα] as we are (Heb. 4:15). Subject to human weakness,¹¹ he became the supreme example of how to live the human life in complete submission to the Father’s will.¹²

In preparation for his public ministry Jesus was led (driven) in the wilderness to face a nearly six-weeks’ onslaught of the devil’s temptations that did not cease during his time on earth. Near the end of his ministry, as he prayed, “take this cup from me,” he was essentially asking the Father to not carry him into an approaching ordeal that would put his resolve to the severest of tests, but with the caveat, “your will be done.” Knowing first-hand what it is like to face the all-out attacks of the tempter, he also instructed his followers to pray likewise, seeing that “the spirit is willing but the flesh is weak.” Jesus was a man of endless trials and unrelenting prayer, providing a model for how and for what to pray, including the appeal, “bring us not into temptation.”

Although God does not cause temptation, he allows it to happen and even brings us into situations where we are confronted by trials that elicit greater dependence on him and ultimately strengthen our faith.¹³ At the same time, we must be aware of our own human frailties and weaknesses. It is neither abnormal nor inappropriate to plead with the heavenly Father to avoid or escape circumstances that challenge and potentially disrupt our allegiance to his heavenly objective. In view of God’s abiding presence and providential care, “bring us not into temptation” is a needed and comforting plea.

--Kevin L. Moore

Endnotes:

     ¹ Matt. 3:16; Mark 1:10; Luke 3:22; cf. Luke 1:32, 35; Acts 10:38. Unless otherwise noted, scripture quotations are the author’s own translation.

     ² Luke says he “returned” [ὑποστρέφω] (4:1), not to his home environment of Galilee (cf. v. 14) but to an uninhabited region where he was accustomed to withdrawing for periods of prayer. In Luke 5:16 the imperfect verb ἦν with the present participle ὑποχωρῶν indicates a customary or habitual practice, something Jesus did “often” (CSB, NASB, NKJV) or “frequently” (BSB, NET); “he continued his habit …” (ISV). Cp. Luke 22:39.

     ³ The rendering “the spirit” occurs in the American King James Version in Matt. 4:1 and Mark 1:12, and in the Douay-Rheims Bible in Matt. 4:1. The verbal ἀνάγω (Matt. 4:1) is never used elsewhere in the NT for an internal leading. The verbal ἐκβάλλω (Mark 1:12) typically involves an outward force, with the possible exception of Matt. 12:35 and its textual variant τῆς καρδίας (“of the heart”); cp. Luke 6:45. The verbal ἄγω (Luke 4:1) almost always refers to an external leading, although in 1 Cor. 12:2 irrational impulses and in 2 Tim. 3:6 various passions do the leading. Moreover, ἄγω was something done to Jesus by the Spirit, by the devil, and by antagonists (Luke 4:1, 9, 29). Elsewhere in the NT this is an action involving God (Rom. 2:4), Christ (Heb. 2:10), and the Spirit (Rom. 8:14; Gal. 5:18).

     ⁴ Matt. 1:18, 20; 3:11, 16; 12:28, 31-32; 28:19; Mark 1:8; 3:29; 12:36; 13:11; Luke 1:15, 35, 41, 67; 2:25, 26; 3:16, 22; 4:1a; 10:21; 11:13; 12:10, 12; cf. also Matt. 10:20; 12:18; Luke 4:18.

     ⁵ Matt. 5:3; 26:41; 27:50; Mark 2:6; 8:12; 14:38; Luke 1:17, 47, 80; 8:55; 9:55; 23:46; cf. Luke 24:37, 39.

     ⁶ Matt. 8:16; 10:1; 12:43, 45; Mark 1:23, 26-27; 3:11, 30; 5:2, 8, 13; 6:7; 7:25; 9:17, 20, 25; Luke 4:33, 36; 6:18; 7:21; 8:2, 29; 9:39, 42; 10:18-20; 11:24, 26; cf. Luke 13:11; 24:37.

     ⁷ Compare Luke 1:15; Acts 6:3, 5; 7:55; 11:24.

     ⁸ While undisputed in the Byzantine Majority Text, the editors of UBS⁵ and NA²⁸ have enclosed Luke 22:43-44 in double square brackets, considering the verses to have been absent from the original and added in the early stages of transmission. On the diverse manuscript evidence, see P. W. Comfort, A Commentary on the Text and Manuscripts of the NT 235-36; B. M. Metzger, A Textual Commentary on the Greek NT (2nd ed.) 151. Unlike other textual variants, this passage does not depend on parallel accounts or provide an explanation to the narrative. In fact, angelic activity is thematic in Luke’s writings (Luke 1:11-19, 26-38; 2:9-13, 15, 21;  4:10; 9:26; 12:8-9; 15:10; 16:22; 20:36; [22:43]; 24:23; Acts 5:19; 6:15; 7:30, 35, 38, 53; 8:26; 10:3, 7, 22; 11:13; 12:7-11, 15, 23; 23:8-9; 27:23), and as a physician Luke would surely have an interest in bloody sweat. Notwithstanding the possibility of accidental omission, absence from some manuscripts (passed on to others) could be due to scribal excision as an attempt to harmonize Luke’s report with the other Gospels or to avoid the perception of Jesus’ heightened human weakness. For a fairly balanced assessment of the textual issues, see Dirk Jongkind, “Luke 22:43-44. An early addition?” Evangelical Textual Criticism (16 March 2018), <Link>.

     ⁹ Medically, hematidrosis (bloody sweat), albeit rare, is the result of capillaries hemorrhaging into the sweat glands due to extreme mental anguish. See W. D. Edwards, W. J. Gabel, F. E. Hosmer, “On the Physical Death of Jesus Christ,” JAMA 255:11 (21 March 1986): 1456.

     ¹⁰ John 1:14; Phil. 2:5-8; 1 John 4:2; 2 John 7. See K. L. Moore, “Jesus Christ: the Son of Man,” Moore Perspective (23 July 2017), <Link>.

     ¹¹ 2 Cor. 13:4; cf. Isa. 53:2-12; 2 Cor. 8:9; Phil. 2:5-8; 1 Pet. 3:18. 

     ¹² Luke 5:16; John 5:30; 6:38; 8:29; 12:27-28; 18:11; cf. Matt. 26:39-44; Mark 14:35-39; Luke 22:41.

     ¹³ 2 Cor. 12:5-10; Heb. 11:8-40; 12:1-11; Jas. 1:2-4, 12.

Related Posts: Lead Us Not Into Temptation Part 1, Part 3

 

Image credit: https://katholicbeadsandmore.com/blogs/2022/tagged/lent