The perspectives of the Gospels
A student of mine complained once when my NT colleague insisted that he should be focusing on the perspective of the particular gospel he was reading rather than bringing in viewpoints from the other gospels. ‘Why should I be focusing on a human author’s perspective; after all, aren’t all the gospels Scripture?’ my student asked. This is a common perception and pastors frequently preach through a gospel while drawing on the parallel accounts without ever recognising or communicating the distinct perspectives of each, individual gospel. Contrary to my student’s opinion, making sure that a gospel’s viewpoint is heard is not a focus on human authors but a recognition of God’s purpose in inspiring four gospels rather than one composite account. If God had wanted us to conflate it all into one harmonised report crammed full of detail, He would have given us such a gospel. We respect the integrity of God’s purpose when we aim to do justice to the interpretation of each gospel in honouring the perspective they bring to the table.
I suspect that there is another assumption that affects our attitudes and reading practices in this, namely that we think the value of the gospels is in recording ‘what really happened’. If this is the case, then it makes sense to draw on the details from various witnesses, like a detective builds up a picture from the clues presented from different sources. However, we should take our cue from the way the gospels are constructed. It is clear, for instance, that they operate with a limited number of incidents rather than aim for totality (John 20:30-31; 21:25), even though they know that there is more information out there. Even when the different gospels repeat the same story, they sometimes drop details or include others to highlight particular aspects that they want to draw attention to. When we conflate accounts to get to our agenda of ‘what really happened’, or simply to add another perspective, we muddy the waters and obscure the message that is on God’s agenda.
How can we discern the distinct perspective of each gospel?
While books on the subject may help us, there is no substitute to reading and
re-reading a gospel until we become so familiar with its themes that its
message takes shape in front of our eyes. Repetition in the telling is always a
good clue to what matters, whether it is individual words, phrases or themes
that are repeated. Our engagement with the gospels tends to be piecemeal, an
episode here an incident there, when what is needed is a step back to see the
flow of how the story is built up, how the events connect and unfold.[1] Next
time you read part of a gospel or hear a sermon on it, ask where that incident
sits in the larger story of Jesus and what its particular way of telling the
event communicates about Christ.
[1] For those who are up for a bit of study, this book by Burton H. Throckmorton, Jr., Gospel Parallels: A Comparison of the Synoptic Gospels, 5th rev. ed. (Thomas Nelson, 1992) sets out the synoptic gospels (Matthew, Mark, Luke) side-by-side. It is helpful to spot slight differences of perspective when comparing the accounts repeated in two or more of the gospels.
