2,32 - Harmony and Diversity of the Gospels
May 08, 2005 | Comments: 2Biblical Hermeneutics Part Second Chapter 32
Herein we find a discussion of the harmony and diversity of the four gospels, which the author acclaims as the most valuable documents ever produced in the history of humanity. The four witnesses have much in common, but also much in their matter and presentation which differs. At bottom, the credibility of each hinges upon the reality of the resurrection. Our studies of the gospels can be aided by good gospel harmonies. These can be useful aids to exegesis, historical analysis and apologetics, but should not be pressed to provide an exact chronology of events, since this was the intent of none of the gospel writers.
A study of the gospels should include attention to their origin, the plan and purpose of each writer, and their particular distinctives. The source of each gospel is mainly the primitive apostolic oral tradition, which was the substance the apostles’ preaching and teaching. Each of the evangelists took this material and suited his arrangement and presentation to his particular intended audience: Matthew to the Jews, Mark to the Romans, Luke to the Greeks and John to the Church. These variations are divinely ordained to fully present the person and work of Christ to all the diverse peoples of the world. The four together have an essential harmony, and present a powerful and full-orbed witness which is only enhanced by their diversity.
Comments
Have you ever found the harmony of the four to take away from one author’s telos? Have you used Calvin’s “Harmony of the Gospels” in your studies? Are there any differences among the Gospel accounts that particularly befuddle you? How do you help a congregation devoted to Bible Study to understand and accept a lesson like, “The Gospel authors were not particularly interested in chronology of events. Therefore, don’t force a strict chronology on them.” I have faced the same challenge with the lesson on the autographs of scripture being inspired while the copies and translations we presently possess are not inspired. To many devoted students of the word, both of these lessons sound heretical if not liberal.
Nathan on May 18, 2005 at 06:08 PM
As we discussed in person over coffee, I’m not particularly fond of harmonies. I completely agree with Terry that to attempt to construct an exact chronology of the four is to steal the life from them, and to impose upon them something completely foreign to the authors’ purposes. It was manifestly God’s plan that we possess a four-fold gospel record. When I read Calvin’s Harmony, it is not because it is a harmony per se, but because it is Calvin’s exposition of a gospel text. The value in a good harmony is the light that parallel accounts may provide in the exegesis of your text.
The preacher and teacher should be concerned about resolving apparent contradictions in the gospels, and educating his hearers concerning the structure of the gospels, i.e. not primarily chronological, to the extent that such things are a hindrances to God’s people hearing and receiving the Word with faith.
Andrew on May 21, 2005 at 11:42 AM
