It would be an aid to modern study if we could be certain {15} when and
where the four Gospels were put together in one canon. In the 4th and
5th centuries it was believed by some Christians that the collection
had been made at Ephesus by St. John himself, and that he had prefixed
the names of the writers to the Gospels when he published his own
Gospel. It is at present impossible to discover how far this supposed
fact is legendary or not, but modern criticism has done something to
corroborate the idea that the Gospels were really collected first in
Asia Minor, and if St. John did not make the collection himself, it was
probably made by his disciples soon after his death.
[Sidenote: Their Diversity.]
If we compare the four Gospels together, it is as plain as daylight
that there is a marked difference between the first three Gospels on
the one hand and the fourth Gospel on the other hand. The first three
Gospels are usually called the _Synoptic Gospels_, because they give us
one _synopsis_ or common view of our Lord's work. To a great extent
they record the same events and the same discourses, and in many
passages they express themselves in almost identical words. The
account which they give of our Lord's work is mostly confined to His
ministry in Galilee, the birthplace of our religion, and it includes
only one visit to Jerusalem. But St. John's Gospel differs widely in
language from the other Gospels, and also gives an account of no less
than five visits to Jerusalem, and chiefly describes the scenes
connected with our Lord's ministry in Judaea. Whereas our first three
Gospels can be appropriately printed in three parallel columns, the
greater part of St. John's Gospel cannot be appropriately placed by the
side of the other three. Another most important difference is that St.
John's Gospel is marked by a tone and teaching which are seldom to be
found in the Synoptic Gospels. The difference was well expressed by
Clement of Alexandria, who calls the Synoptic Gospels _bodily_ and St.
John's Gospel _spiritual_; and by Theodore of Mopsuestia, who says that
St. John declared that "doubtless it was not right to omit {16} the
facts told with regard to the sojourn of Christ in the flesh, but
neither was it right to omit the words relating to His Divinity." For
the Synoptic Gospels relate the outward events connected with our
Lord's ministry, while St. John records the discourses and works which
reveal our Lord's heavenly origin and divine authority. Again, the
Synoptic Gospels report Christ's addresses to simple Galilean people,
addresses consisting largely of _parables_; while St. John reports
discourses, frequently expressed in the language of _allegory_, and
uttered to the Jews of Jerusalem or to His own intimate disciples.
[Sidenote: The Synoptic problem.]
Public-domain text, read in full here on John Shaqi.
Reviews
Reviews
No reviews yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this work.
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account