One of the advantages of four Gospels is we are provided comparisons. In trying to understand what the inspired Gospel writer is telling us, it is sometimes helpful to see how a particular story is reshaped or how it is bundled with other stories.
The parable of the wedding feast occurs in two locations in the New Testament. Matthew 22 and Luke 14. Luke places it much earlier in his Gospel than Matthew. That is a helpful reminder that much of the Gospel story is not on a time line. This should come as no surprise. In the early church, one of the first mentions of the authors of the Gospel tell us that Mark wrote down the teaching of Peter, 'though not in order.' This is how human memory works. Many of us can recall in great detail some event from the past, yet we can not remember if it is ten or twenty years ago. "Remember the time...." we enthusiastically ask. Another problem is Jesus' life style. The trouble with Jesus is He was a traveling preacher. He spent hours teaching and preaching in one town after another. No doubt some people came to Him to talk and ask Him to explain things. Probably, He told and retold stories, each time with a twist.
Last night I watched the debates. I can tell you Herman Cain has a "9-9-9" tax plan. Yet there are probably four different, though similar, quotes from that event alone which refer to his plan. So three 'different' versions could be produced from one single appearance. How many times did Jesus tell stories about crops, sheep, and landowners?
Jesus probably talked for hours every days, formally or informally. Add it up. Imagine He spent a minimum of two hours a day doing some kind of sharing, instruction or reflecting. If His ministry was one year, that is easily 700 hours of teaching and even up to 2500. If His ministry was longer, maybe three years we are now looking at 2,000 to 7,500 hours. Our Gospels record less than a couple of hours of dialogue each. Mark has less than an hour's content. Think about all that content....
So every parable of Jesus is two things. One, it is a particular version of a teaching. Little details about characters or numbers could be changed without damaging the point He was making. My guess is those details were fluid in the disciples' retelling. The other thing each parable is (and this is important) is an opportunity for the Gospel writer to explain who Jesus is and what He means. In other words, the authors have a vision of the Lord which shapes their telling. Matthew uses different terms than Luke or Mark. Each one emphasizes different aspects of the story. Each one places the parable in a context to shed light on the identity of the Lord. We can learn as much from that as we can the actual parable!
Whatever else we know, it is clear that Matthew, Mark and Luke have followed each other closely in many places. Someone wrote the initial Gospel. The others wrote to supplement, and I assume, to improve on, what they read. They wanted to clarify the Jesus story for their readers (and us). So changes are made to do just that. The changes are based on the eyewitness testimony of many. The changes are made to give a fuller view. The church acknowledges four of these as authoritative. They are trustworthy.
As we look at Matthew and Luke we will see how each has shaped the telling of the parable. God inspired these two men to tell us, not a newspaper account of a singular event, but, rather, a teaching of Jesus, shaped by other teaching of Jesus, and influenced by teaching about Jesus (remember the Gospels are written some fifteen to fifty years after Jesus). The Gospels are a venue to encounter Jesus. We are blessed to have them.
No comments:
Post a Comment