JESUS CHRIST

A supposed letter of Clement of Alexandria (c. A.D. 150-c. 200) refers to a second edition of the Gospel of Mark, a private account, known today as the “Secret Gospel of Mark.” A medieval copy of the letter was purportedly discovered in the Greek Orthodox monastery of Mar Saba in the Judean wilderness in 1958 and was published in 1973 (see The Secret Gospel of Mark, 15-17).

The letter provided a previously unknown tradition about Mark and his writing activities. “As for Mark, then, during Peter’s stay in Rome he wrote an account of the lord’s doings, not, however, declaring all of them, nor yet hinting at the secret ones, but selecting those he thought most useful for increasing the faith of those who were being instructed. But when Peter died a martyr, Mark came over to Alexandria, bringing both his own notes and those of Peter, from which he transferred to his former book the things suitable to whatever makes for progress toward knowledge (gnōsis). Thus he composed a more spiritual Gospel for the use of those who were being perfected. Nevertheless, he yet did not divulge the things not to be uttered, nor did he write down the hierophantic teaching of the Lord, but to the stories already written he added yet others and, moreover, brought in certain sayings of which he knew the interpretation would, as a mystagogue, lead the hearers into the innermost sanctuary of that truth hidden by seven veils. Thus, in sum, he prearranged matters, neither grudgingly nor incautiously, in my opinion, and, dying, he left his composition to the church in Alexandria, where it even yet is most carefully guarded, being read only to those who are being initiated into the great mysteries.”

A second passage, although extremely short, fills the well-known awkward gap in Mark 10:46 when Jesus Christ came to Jericho. Following Mark 10:46a, “And they came to Jericho,” and before Mark 10:46b, “and as he went out of Jericho,” the Secret Gospel of Mark add the phrase, “And the sister of the youth whom Jesus loved and his mother and Salome were there, and Jesus did not receive them.” This interesting addition includes a reference to Salome, who is mentioned only in Mark (see Mark 15:40; 16:1) and in a parallel to the story of the “beloved disciple” in John (see John 13:23; 19:26; 20:2; 21:7, 20, 24).

Scholarly debate on the validity of the report of the discovery and the authenticity of the letter itself has been at times acrimonious, and there have been charges of forgery-some suggesting the document is an ancient forgery and/or that the discoverer forged it and fabricated the story of discovery itself. Although some scholars reject the “Secret Gospel,” as they do all other non-canonical texts, others have argued that canonical Mark postdates the Secret Gospel, believing that the canonical Mark is based on the Secret Mark. Additionally, interpretations of the Secret Gospel passages preserved in Clement’s letter also generate debate among scholars, some of whom have provided highly controversial interpretations of the meaning. Unless scholars can access the original document, many believe that it is not fruitful to consider it as an authentic ancient text that provides additional insights to the Gospel of Mark.

The Synoptic Gospels-Matthew, Mark, and Luke-contain a significant number of similarities in wording and order of events as they relate the life of Jesus Christ. Some of those similarities are rather distant, but other parallels are so significant that it appears that the authors borrowed from one another when they wrote. The challenge that has faced scholars has been to unravel the direction of borrowing; and no easy solution exists that would explain which gospel was written first, second, or third.

Faced with this challenge, scholars have concluded that the Gospel of Mark was written first. That conclusion is based on the fact that Matthew and Luke often correct difficulties in Mark’s grammar and geography as well as reordering the events as he recorded them. Building on this conclusion, scholars then noticed that Matthew and Luke share a significant number of stories that are not found in Mark but that are shared only between them. To explain the origin of these stories, or more properly sayings, scholars hypothesized that another gospel existed alongside the Gospel of Mark that Matthew and Luke used as a source when composing their gospels.

Remnants of that hypothetical source are preserved in roughly sixty-five sayings of Jesus Christ that Matthew and Luke used when composing their gospel accounts. Scholars have dubbed this source Q, an abbreviation for the German word for “source” (quelle). Unfortunately for the theory, no ancient author ever referred to this source, nor have any fragments of it ever turned up in archaeological digs or in ancient libraries. The purportedly lost gospel Q is a scholarly construct that helps explain how the gospels are genetically related through the sources they used when they wrote. Other theorists dispense with Q altogether, instead arguing that Mark was first, but then Luke borrowed from Mark and eventually Matthew borrowed from Mark and Luke. Both hypotheses face the issue of internal consistency and sometimes contradictory evidence.

The need to explain the gospels in their current forms as a result of ancient authors combining earlier sources is an outgrowth of the scholarly enterprise to examine Christianity as a disjointed conglomerate of fractured communities. Each document-the hypothetical Q, Mark, Matthew, and Luke-represents one of these disparate communities of ancient Christians. In other words, scholars today see the quest to find or establish the hypothetical Q source as a way to find the real Jesus Christ behind the sources as they are recorded in the New Testament.

Interestingly, ancient authors did not see the origin of the gospels in the same way; and, in fact, they believed that Christianity was a literal descendant of the kingdom established by Jesus Christ when he lived on the earth. The gospels record his teachings as they were given to the Apostles and reveal how they should direct the kingdom after his death.

John Kloppenborg has expressed his own views on the importance of Q for understanding Jesus and why the quest to “discover” Q has been so carefully pursued.

“From the standpoint of drawing the map of the theological landscape of the Jesus movement, it is clear that Q represents an important and distinctive moment in early Christian theologizing-in particular, because there is no evidence that Q had developed a view that found particular meaning in the death of Jesus himself.”

John Kloppenborg-Verbin, Excavating Q: The History and Setting of the Sayings Source, (Minneapolis: Fortress Press, 2000),164

The Gospels record very little about Jesus Christ’s life between his birth and baptism. Matthew states that by the time the Wise Men appear in Bethlehem, following his birth, Jesus is no longer an infant but a child, suggesting that Joseph, Mary and Jesus lived in the town of his birth for sometime, maybe as long a two years: “And when they were come into the house, they saw the young child with Mary his mother, and fell down, and worshiped him” (Matthew 2:11, emphasis added). Matthew continues his story as Joseph took Mary and the “young child” to Egypt (Matthew 2:13-14). Both Matthew and Luke agree that at some point Joseph, Mary and Jesus eventually moved to Nazareth at an early age (Matthew 2:19-23; Luke 2:39-40). The only hint about the intervening years, until he began his ministry, is a brief story about Jesus Christ’s journey to Jerusalem when he was twelve’s years of age. Luke notes: “Now his parents went to Jerusalem every year at the feat of the Passover. And when he was twelve years old, they went up to Jerusalem after the custom of the feast. And when they had fulfilled the days, as they returned, the child Jesus tarried behind in Jerusalem; and Joseph and his mother knew not of it. But they, supposing him to have been in the company, went a days’ s journey; and they sought him among their kinsfolk and acquaintance. And when they found him not, they turned back again to Jerusalem, seeking him. And it came to pass, that after three days they found him in the temple, sitting in the midst of the doctors, both hearing them, and asking them questions. And all hat heard him were astonished at his understanding and answers. And when they saw him, they were amazed: and his mother said unto him, Son, why hast thou thus dealt with us? Behold, they father and I have sought thee sorrowing. And he said unto them How is it that ye sought me? Wist ye not that I must be about my Father’s business? And they understood not the saying which he spake unto them. And he went down with them, and came to Nazareth, and was subject unto them: but his mother kept all these sayings in her heart. And Jesus increased in wisdom and stature, and in favour with God and man” (Luke 2:41-52). Luke continues his story by informing us about Jesus Christ’s appearance at the River Jordan, when he was “about thirty years of age” (Luke 3:23). We can only assume that during the period between his birth in Bethlehem and his youth in Nazareth, Jesus lived a rather quiet life as many other Jewish young boys did in similar circumstances.

“From this singular story we may draw a few limited conclusions. Jesus’ childhood is likely to have been in many respects like that of other children of devout Jewish parents-a period of training, growth, development, and learning, especially about the faith. The truly remarkable element in the story is not a revelation that Jesus works miracles, but that Jesus has an extraordinary knowledge of and relationship with God, something that astounded his parents and his teachers. This is an important point, for it is this special and intimate relationship with the Father that comes to light at crisis moments in Jesus; adult life (baptism, transfiguration, the garden of Gethsemane, on the cross). This feather characterized Jesus’ life throughout its all-too-brief span.”

Ben Witherington III is Professor of New Testament at Asbury Theological Seminart in Wilmore, Kentucky.

Ben Witherington III, New Testament History: A Narrative Account (Grand Rapids: Baker Academic, 2001), 92.

What are the Gospels?

The Gospels are four books found in the New Testament that record the stories of what Jesus Christ said and did. They were most likely produced in the second half of the first century, as early as the 60s. Although some scholars date John’s Gospel to the end of the first century in the 90s, others suggest a much earlier date for its composition. Interestingly the oldest extant New Testament text is a fragment from John’s Gospel, dated about AD 125.

Although the Gospels appear first in sequence in the New Testament, they were written after some of Paul’s letters-these letters are the earliest documents in the New Testament dating from as early as AD 49 through the 50s. In the earliest letters Paul refers to the important events of Jesus’ death, burial and resurrection. However, the Gospels provide detailed information about those events found nowhere else in the New Testament. Additionally, the Gospels contain information about his birth and ministry and therefore are essential sources for any attempt to reconstruct the live of Jesus of Nazareth.

The Gospel, an English term deriving from the Old English godspel, means “good news.” Gospel is a translation of the Greek euangellion and refers to the good news of Jesus Christ and the salvation he made possible. Eventually, the term was applied to the four written narratives that preserved the memory of Jesus’ words and deed. Scholars have been interested in understanding what the Gospels are-what kind of genre. Recently, some scholars have argued that they are best understood as ancient biographies. If this is true, this may help the reader understand the original purpose for their production.

Scholars have been interested in the sources behind the Gospel account. Mark’s Gospel, most likely the oldest Gospel, is often identified as “Peter’s Memoirs,” because much of the content may have come directly from Peter himself. Matthew and Luke are thought to have been composed shortly after Mark’s Gospel began to circulate. There is significant and overwhelming internal evidence that Matthew and Luke used Mark as a source. However, Matthew and Luke added special material such as a birth narrative to their accounts (see Matthew 1–2 and Luke 1–2).

Because of the relationship between them, the Gospels of Matthew, Mark, and Luke are referred to as the “Synoptic Gospels,” derives from Greek words that mean “look like.” John stands apart from the Synoptic Gospels and is sometimes identified as the “Fourth Gospel,” because John provides the most unique material about Jesus Christ, estimated to be as much as ninety percent, of the Gospel accounts.

All the Gospels were first composed in Greek. The Greek texts of the Gospels sometimes reveal an earlier Aramaic strata of material, especially as they record the words of Jesus Christ. In a few cases the Greek text preserves a transliteration of Aramaic phrases from Jesus’ lips (see for example Matthew 27:46).

No original texts of the Gospels, identified as “autographs,” survived from antiquity. Only copies of copies exist today, the earliest of these are only fragments. These important early witnesses are mostly held in libraries and archives. The earliest manuscripts were all preserved on papyrus and written with black ink. Presently, more than five thousand New Testament manuscripts have been discovered from the period before printing. Scholars study these manuscripts in order to identify what the original text may have read when they were first composed.

Although the Gospels themselves do not always agree on geographic reference points or on a strict chronological narration of events, many scholars argue that on the essential matters, the Gospels tell the same story. Interestingly, they all focus on the last twenty-four hours of Jesus Christ’s life and each provides an empty tomb story. In these Gospels we discover what the earliest Christians believed about Jesus and how Jesus was remembered.

“Insofar as Jesus is a unique figure in the ancient world (e.g. the Christian claims about the “resurrection” of Jesus are without real analogy), then the accounts of his life, death, and resurrection are without analogy. For example, no Jew wrote a comparable life of JohananbenZakkai or Hillel. But the nature of the NT Gospels as in some sense “biographies,” at least as understood in the ancient world, should alert us to the riches they contain and the complexities which any reading of them involves.”

Christopher Tuckett is a lecturer in the Faculty of Theology, Oxford University, Oxford, United Kingdom.

Christopher Tuckett, “Gospels” in Eerdmans Dictionary of the Bible (Grand Rapids: Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing, 2000), 523.

“Only with respect to Jesus were the various individuals pieces assembled to form a portrait in their own right-a fact of theological and Christological importance. In concentrating the readers’ attention upon the person of Jesus through writing a biography, the early Christian gospel writers were asserting something which was never said of a rabbi-that he was centre stage as the embodiment, or even replacement of Torah, a unique individual revealing God in his deeds and words, life, death and resurrection. The desire to make this deliberate Christological claim forced the early Christian writers to move out from the Jewish tradition of stories and anecdotes to use a Greek genre of continuous biographical narrative. The actual writing of a gospel was an Christological claim in itself and also contributed toward the ‘parting of the ways’ between the early Christian and the developing rabbinic tradition.”

Richard A. Burridge is Dean of King’s College London and is a member of the Church of England’s General Synod.

Richard A. Burridge, What Are the Gospels? A Comparison with Graeco-Roman Biography (Grand Rapids: Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Company, 2004), 339-40.