On a Friday, Bloody Friday

Pilate, having passed sentence, handed Jesus over to be crucified. On this all the evangelists agree, although they disagree on the details. Matthew stays close to Mark, only adding the story of Pilate posting a guard at the tomb. Luke, as usual, goes off in his own direction and John focuses on aspects of the story that fits his theology.

The Way of the Cross

Mark/Matthew mention that after Jesus is scourged the soldiers mock him as King of the Jews, much as he was mocked as a false prophet after his Sanhedrin trial. The soldiers placed a cloak around him and crown of thorns on his head and pressed Simon of Cyrene to carry the cross, presumably because Jesus was too weak to carry it.

Luke (23:26-32) keeps the mention of Simon but eliminates all reference to Jesus being scourged, mocked, or crowned with thorns. Only Luke relates the scene of a large crowd of people following Jesus with the women mourning and lamenting him. Jesus tells them to weep for themselves and their children. What does Jesus mean with his proverb about the green wood and the dry? Perhaps that is his way of saying that if he can be treated this way by the Jewish leaders now, how much worse will the Romans treat them during the Jewish revolt that results in the destruction of Jerusalem.

The Johannine Jesus, scourged and crowned earlier as part of Pilate’s attempt to avoid the sentence of crucifixion, carries his own cross to Golgotha.

The Crucifixion

Mark/Matthew mentions it was 9 am when Jesus was crucified on Golgotha (translated as “Place of the Skull”) with two bandits to either side of him. He is offered, and refuses a drugged wine, and his clothes are divided among the soldiers. The charge – “King of the Jews” – is inscribed above his head. Jesus is reviled by three groups: passersby, the chief priests and scribes, and those crucified alongside him.

Luke typically avoids Hebrew-sounding names like Golgotha, only referring to it as “the place called the Skull.” As he is being crucified, the Lucan Jesus says, “Father, forgive them for they know not what they do” (Lk 23:34). This verse is not found in the oldest and most important copies of Luke, so there is question as to whether they were original or added by a later copyist in imitation of Stephen’s words in Acts 7:60. Luke preserves Jesus being taunted by the rulers (but not the people in general), the soldiers, and one of those crucified alongside him.

John expounds upon the details of the charge above his head and the division of clothes. Pilate’s choice of words causes a controversy with the Jewish leaders and John sees the untorn tunic as either symbolic of the garment of a high priest or as a symbol of unity, we can’t be sure. John eliminates the taunts. He is also the only evangelist to feature the Mother of Jesus at the foot of the cross alongside Mary Magdalene and the Beloved Disciple. This scene is loaded with symbolic and theological importance that will have to be discussed in more detail at a later time.

Christ Crucified (1632) by Diego Velazquez

The Death of Jesus

According to Mark/Matthew, at noon darkness covered the land until 3 pm when Jesus said his only words (“My God, my God, why have you forsaken me?”). “My God” in Hebrew is “Eli”, so it is understandable that a bystander would think Jesus is calling on Elijah, but it doesn’t make much sense that a natural response would be to lift a vinegary wine-soaked sponge up on reed to Jesus’ lips.

Luke also mentions the darkness over the land (attributing it to an eclipse) but moves up the offer of vinegary wine to the mocking by the soldiers. There’s no confusion of a call on Elijah because, instead of quoting Psalm 22, Jesus’ last words are from Ps 31:6: “Father, into your hands I commend my spirit.”

John does not mention the darkness at noon; in John's timeline, it was noon when Pilate condemned Jesus to death. John is the only evangelist to state that Jesus specifically said, “I thirst,” so the wine would was not offered in mockery, but in response to his request. But just to confuse things, instead of offering the sponge on a reed, John has it stuck on the fernlike hyssop, totally unsuitable for that purpose. This is undoubtedly a reference to Exod 12:22 where hyssop is to be used to sprinkle the blood of the paschal lamb on the doorposts of the Israelite home at Passover. After taking the wine, Jesus says his final words in John, “It is finished,” and dies.

The Aftermath

The Synoptic evangelists make a point to mention that at the moment of Jesus’ death on Golgotha, the veil in the Temple was torn. (Matthew further adds that the earth quaked, tombs were opened, and the dead were raised.) There’s symbolism here, but exactly what is debatable. A common interpretation is that since the veil separates God’s presence in the Holy of Holies from the people, Jesus’ death removes that barrier.

In both Mark and Matthew, the centurion overseeing the crucifixion, seeing how Jesus died, declared, “Truly, this man was the Son of God.” It is the first time in the entire Gospel of Mark that a human being testified to Jesus’ true identity. In Luke, the centurion says, “This man was innocent beyond doubt.”

John has no Roman centurion or torn veils. Only John mentions that towards sundown Pilate gave orders to break the legs of the crucified to hasten their deaths. Since Jesus was already dead, that was not necessary and so he is the Passover lamb whose bones were not broken. But he was stabbed in the side to make sure he was dead and blood and water came forth, possibly symbolizing baptism and Eucharist.

The Burial

Meanwhile, Joseph of Arimathea asked Pilate for the body. Mark said Joseph was a respected member of the Sanhedrin who was waiting for the kingdom of God. Matthew specifies that Joseph was a rich man and also a disciple of Jesus – but not a member of the Sanhedrin. Luke clarifies that although Joseph was a member of the Sanhedrin, he was a good and just man and had not consented to the council’s decision and actions.

Women who had accompanied Jesus from Galilee watched at a distance while Joseph wrapped Jesus’ body in a linen cloth and laid him in a nearby tomb. Luke also specifies that, watching where and how Jesus was buried, the women went off to prepare spices and oils to bury him properly. This is the evangelists’ way of preparing the reader for the return of the women to the tomb on Easter Sunday to anoint the body.

In John, Joseph of Arimathea is a secret disciple of Jesus who asks Pilate for the body. The Johannine-only character of Nicodemus arrives with a hundred pounds of myrrh and aloes to give Jesus a burial fit for a king, following appropriate Jewish burial customs, not the quick wrapping as in the Synoptic gospels. 

With Jesus now in the tomb, we close the Passion Narrative and the close alignment of the evangelists. The Resurrection Narratives veer off in wildly different directions with almost no parallels.

Incidents and Accidents, Hints and Allegations

With the Last Supper now over, the passion narrative in the Gospel of John begins to align with the Synoptic Gospels as Jesus takes his disciples to a spot on the Mount of Olives. Mark (14:32) identifies the location as Gethsemane (from the Hebrew name for “oil-press”) and John (18:1) calls it a garden, but Luke (22:39) identifies it as their customary place on the Mount of Olives. Most likely it was an olive garden. John (18:2) agrees that the spot was well-known to Judas as a place where Jesus often met with his disciples.

The Agony in the Garden

While the Fourth Gospel proceeds directly to the arrest, the Synoptic Gospels have Jesus retreat a distance from his disciples to pray to his Father to “remove the cup” of suffering he is about to undergo. After this, according to Mark and Matthew, Jesus returns to the disciples three separate times only to find them sleeping. Luke puts the disciples in a better light by having Jesus return only once to find the disciples sleeping. Not only that, but he provides “sorrow” (22:45) as the reason for their slumber, although insomnia would seem to be a more common condition for someone in that state.

Christ in Gethsemane (1886) by Heinrich Hofmann. This painting has been reproduced countless times in kitschy religious art.

The familiar term “agony in the garden” comes from Luke 22:43-44 in which God answers Jesus’ prayer by sending an angel to strengthen him and “in his agony” his sweat fell to the ground like drops of blood. These verses are missing from several of the oldest manuscripts of Luke and are bracketed in many modern English translations. NT scholars are divided on whether these verse are original to Luke or were added later.

In this context, “agony” does not have the connotation of extreme pain. Instead it refers to the moment of tension of an athlete poised at the starting line, sweat beginning to break out. In this case, Jesus is tense as he is about to begin his trial. Although a common understanding is that Jesus’ sweated blood, the verse only says that his sweat dripped like blood.

The Arrest

At this point in Mark (14:43-52), Judas arrives with a crowd to arrest Jesus. Judas tells them that they are to arrest the man that he identifies with a kiss. Someone draws and sword and severs the ear of the high priest’s slave and all the disciples flee, including a lightly-clad young man who left his linen cloth behind to run away naked.

Matthew (26:47-56) is mostly faithful to Mark. He clarifies that the person who severed the ear of the slave was one of the disciples and Jesus urged him to sheathe his sword “for all who take up the sword will perish by it.” The call to sheathe the sword matches John (18:10-11) and John identifies the sword wielder as Peter and the servant as Malchus.

The Taking of Christ (c. 1602) by Caravaggio

Luke’s account of the arrest (22:47-53) abbreviates Mark so much that his narrative is close to being nonsensical. Judas approaches Jesus to kiss him without any explanation. The disciples ask if they are to use the swords in their possession and, before Jesus can answer, attack the high priest’s slave. Only in Luke, however, does Jesus heal the ear of the slave. Along with Matthew, Luke deletes the strange reference to the naked young man. Indeed, because of the high esteem in which he holds the disciples, Luke eliminates any reference to them fleeing.

In John’s brief account of the arrest (18:2-12), Jesus identifies himself (“I am”) rather than have Judas identify him and submits to arrest as long as the other disciples are free to go. The Johannine Jesus is in complete control of events.

Interrogation and Denials

After the arrest, the evangelists differ on the details of what happened next. According to Mark (14:53-65), Jesus was led to the high priest and assembled members of the Jewish council (Sanhedrin) for a night trial where witnesses were presented and Jesus was convicted of blasphemy and condemned to death. This is followed by abuse and mockery. While this is going on, Peter is in the courtyard denying and cursing Jesus (14:66-72). Matthew (26:57-75) agrees with Mark, but notes the name of the high priest was Caiaphas.

In John (18:13-27), Jesus is brought to a high priest, but in this case it is Annas, the father-in-law of Caiaphas. John has Annas interrogate Jesus before sending him on to Caiaphas for transfer to Pilate. The abuse is limited to Jesus being struck by a guard for being less than deferential to the high priest. While Jesus is being passed back and forth, the Beloved Disciple was able to get Peter into the courtyard where he three times denied that he was either a disciple or present at Jesus’ arrest.

Christ before Caiaphas (c. 1630) by Matthias Stom. Great use of light in this one.

Luke (22:54-71) splits the difference. Just as in the other gospels, Peter follows Jesus to the courtyard of the high priest, but the Sanhedrin doesn’t gather until morning. Sitting around the fire with others, Peter denies he knows Jesus, denies he is one of the disciples, and even denies being a Galilean. As the cock crows, Jesus – who apparently was also in the courtyard all this time – turns to look at him and Peter remembers the prophecy. Jesus is also mocked and beaten before any sort of hearing. Luke’s account of the Sanhedrin hearing is different in that no witnesses are presented and there was no mention of the charge of blasphemy or passing of a death sentence. It is more like Annas' interrogation in John.

The differing details have caused NT scholars to debate which version of events are most likely to be historical. Was Jesus convicted by the Sanhedrin after a trial or did he only have a preliminary interrogation before being delivered to Pilate? In other words, how big a role did the Jewish authorities play in the execution of Jesus? We’ll discuss this more next week when we get to Jesus’ trial before Pilate.

These three scenes would have had special importance for the early Christians. Although Mark has Jesus prostrate on the ground praying that “the hour might pass” from him, he did accede to the Father’s will. Some of the disciples tried to resist his arrest with a sword, but Jesus accepted his fate “so that Scripture might be fulfilled.” Peter may have committed the worst sin in the early Church, that of renouncing Jesus, but he would regain his faith and become the head of the Church. The example of Jesus taught the early Christians the proper way to respond when faced with persecutions and death. Peter taught them that even if they failed, redemption was still possible.

After-Supper Conversation

Luke is the only one of the synoptic evangelists to recount a conversation between Jesus and his disciples after the Last Supper. John has a lengthy one that runs from the end of Chapter 13 to the end of Chapter 17. But in Mark (14:26) and Matthew (26:30), after the words instituting the Lord’s Supper, each evangelist has Jesus and the disciples simply sing a hymn and leave for the Mount of Olives.

In order to create a post-Supper discourse (Lk 22:21-38), Luke cobbled together material from his various sources: Mark, Q, and L. There are four distinct units that are only loosely connected:

1. Jesus foretells his betrayal (vv. 21-23). Summarized from Mark and transposed from before the supper.
2. Dispute about greatness (vv. 24-30). Reworked from Mark, with L and Q additions, and transposed from earlier in the ministry.
3. Peter’s denial predicted (vv. 31-34). Mostly L material added to Mark and transposed from the walk to the Mount of Olives.
4. Purse, bag and sword (vv. 35-38). L material.

Looks like the Beloved Disciple has had too much to drink. Inspired by Leonardo’s masterpiece, Jacopo Bassano’s Last Supper (1542) depicts the crucial moment when Jesus announces one of those at table will betray him. 

Jesus Foretells his Betrayal

Luke abbreviates the parallel passage in Mark (14:18-21) which takes place before the words instituting the Lord’s Supper. Relocating the scene to take place after the meal allows Luke to make it part of the post-Supper discourse. It also heightens the drama because it lays bare the fact that one of Jesus’ disciples who has just shared the bread and the cup will betray him.

In Mark (and Matthew), Jesus first announces to the disciples that one of them will betray him and they each immediately take turns asking him, “Is it I?” John’s Gospel has a much lengthier scene (13:21-30) in which the Beloved Disciple asks Jesus to name his betrayer and Jesus identifies Judas by handing him a morsel of food. Only John describes Judas departing from the supper.

Dispute About Greatness

In Mark’s gospel, on the road to Jerusalem, there’s a scene where James and John asked to sit at the right and left hand of Jesus in his kingdom (Mk 10:35-40). (Matthew softens the rudeness of the request by having Mother Zebedee do the asking.) Jesus denied the request, but the other ten became indignant at the sons of Zebedee and this leads to Jesus’ advice (Mk 10:41-45) that the greatest of the disciples must be the servant to all.

Luke dispenses with Mark’s framing story, possibly because it painted James and John in a bad light. Instead, Luke’s frame is the previous announcement of Jesus’ betrayal. Not only did the disciples begin to question who would betray Jesus, but a dispute also arose as to which of them was the greatest. Luke wants us to see that, having been told the depths to which one of them could sink, the natural inclination would be to assert their bona fides as a faithful disciple.

Luke reworks Mark, but also includes some of his own material, such as v. 27: “For who is greater, the one who sits at table or the one who serves? Is it not the one at the table? But I am among you as one who serves.” This echoes the Last Supper scene in the Fourth Gospel (13:3-17) in which Jesus girds himself in a towel and washes the feet of the disciples. It also recalls Lk 12:37 where Jesus blesses the slaves whom the master finds awake on his return: “He will gird himself and have them sit at table, and he will come and serve them.”

Luke also calls upon a saying taken from the Q tradition. Matthew locates this saying (19:28) after his well-known response to the rich young man, “It is easier for a camel to go through the eye of a needle than a rich man to enter the Kingdom of God.” Jesus tells Peter and the other disciples that although they have left everything to follow him, they will be rewarded in the new kingdom by sitting on twelve thrones judging the twelve tribes of Israel. Biblical scholars believe that in choosing twelve disciples to be his inner circle, Jesus was symbolically reconstituting the twelve tribes of Israel, a necessary prerequisite to bring about the Kingdom of God.

Peter’s Denial Predicted

In Matthew and Mark, Jesus predicts Peter’s denial on the walk to the Mount of Olives. Once again, Luke agrees with John in having the prediction made while they are all still at supper.

Luke introduces the prediction by having Jesus announce that Satan demands to sift the disciples like wheat, but he is praying for Simon’s faith not to (permanently) fail. And, when he has recovered, he is to strengthen his brother disciples. With his typical bravado, Peter declares that he is ready to go to prison and death and Jesus replies with the well-known prediction, “I tell you, Peter, the cock will not crow this day until you have denied three times that you know me.” The use of the name “Simon” at the beginning of the unit and “Peter” at the end is evidence that this unit is a composite from different sources.

A somewhat less reverent version attempts to portray biblical scenes using Lego minifigures.

Purse, Bag and Sword

In the final unit of the post-Supper discourse, Jesus asks his disciples to recall the time he sent them out on a missionary journey without “purse, bag or sandals” (Lk 10:1-12). They did not lack for anything then due to the hospitality they received, but from now on they will experience hostility. So they will need to bring a purse or bag if they have one. And if they lack it, they should sell their cloak to buy a sword because Jesus – and by extension, his disciples – will be counted as outlaws.

The disciples understand the literal sense of his words and say, “Here are two swords.” To which Jesus responds, “Enough!” in the sense of, “Enough of that!” Jesus’ exasperated reaction tells us he was speaking metaphorically. He meant “sword” as a symbol for crisis or discernment. A loose translation of the verse would be “sell your cloak and buy yourself trouble.”

Verse 38 has frequently been understood as Jesus essentially saying, “Yes, two swords are enough for our purposes.” But this interpretation flies in the face of a Lucan Jesus who preached the love of enemies (6:27-36) and lived out that teaching (9:51-56; 23:34).

Luke’s post-Supper discourse is not a grand farewell address as in John’s gospel, but there is a common theme of Jesus preparing his disciples for what is to come (betrayal, Peter’s denial) and giving them final instructions (serve others, be ready for rejection). The remainder of the chapter will see Jesus’ predictions become reality.

The New Passover

All four gospels recall Jesus’ last meal with his disciples as one with special significance. For the synoptic gospels it was a Passover meal and, during it, Jesus intoned a special blessing over the bread and wine. John differs from the synoptics in that his last supper was not a Passover meal and the symbolic act was one of foot washing. I’ll leave a discussion of John’s last supper to a later time. In this article, I will just focus on what the synoptic evangelists have to say about the last supper.

Passover Preparations

After describing how Judas offered to betray Jesus, Mark then proceeds to the preparations for Passover (14:12-17). Matthew (26:17-19) abbreviates the story, but Luke (22:7-13) stays fairly close to Mark. It is Passover eve, or the Preparation Day in which lambs begin to be slaughtered in the Temple court for use at the Passover supper. Upon being asked where they would celebrate the Passover, Jesus provides some odd instructions. 

He sends two disciples – Luke names them Peter and John – into the city where they will follow a man carrying a water jar. The man will lead them to a house with a furnished upper room where the disciples will prepare for the supper. Since it was typically the woman’s job to carry water, perhaps this particular man was part of a community, such as the Essenes, that did not admit women. It seems that Jesus had already made prior arrangements.

Growing up, I think just about every Catholic home had a framed Last Supper print similar to this. No, it's not da Vinci's famous mural, but a painting done in his style by Austrian artist H. Zabateri (1859-1945).

Reinterpreting Passover

As the supper begins in Mark and Matthew (Mk 14:18-21; Mt 26:21-25), Jesus foretells his betrayal before he blesses the bread and wine. In Luke, he does this after the blessing, most likely in order to add it to his lengthy discourse after the meal.

For the supper itself, Mark (14:22-25) and Matthew (26:26-29) describe the blessing and breaking of the bread, followed by Jesus giving thanks and sharing the cup. In Luke (22:15-20), Jesus shares the cup, breaks the bread, and then shares a second cup. Luke’s longer account deviates from Mark in other respects and can be broken down into two parts. 

In the first part (vv. 15-18), Jesus more clearly ties his supper to the Passover meal, twice asserting (“for I tell you”) his belief that the fulfillment of Passover will occur in the messianic banquet (Is 25:6) of the Kingdom of God:

He said to them, “I have eagerly desired to eat this Passover with you before I suffer;
for I tell you, I will not eat it until it is fulfilled in the kingdom of God.”
Then he took a cup, and after giving thanks he said, “Take this and divide it among yourselves;
for I tell you that from now on I will not drink of the fruit of the vine until the kingdom of God comes.”

In the second part (vv. 19-20), Jesus reinterprets the signature foods of the meal. In a traditional Passover meal, the head of the house would say, “This is the bread of affliction which our fathers had to eat as they came out of Egypt.” Jesus, instead, identifies the bread with himself:

Then he took a loaf of bread, and when he had given thanks, he broke it and gave it to them, saying, “This is my body, which is given for you. Do this in remembrance of me.”
And he did the same with the cup after supper, saying, “This cup that is poured out for you is the new covenant in my blood.”

There is a clear connection between the mentions of Jesus’ imminent suffering and death in the first part of the unit and his body and blood in the second part. His death is salvific because his body is “given for you” and his blood is “poured out for you.” Exodus 24:3-8 described one covenant sealed with blood between God and his people. This will be a “new covenant” confirmed with “my blood.” Being “poured out” is an allusion to the Suffering Servant passage of Isaiah 53:12.

In Memory of Me

The Lucan Jesus instructs his disciples to repeat his actions “in remembrance” of him, just like the yearly Passover meal was repeated in order to make present God’s saving act in the past. Jesus’ own body and blood will replace the Passover lamb as the sign for how the Kingdom of God will be realized from now on.

In light of how important Jesus’ words instituting the Lord’s Supper are, there is disagreement over exactly what those words were. Mark/Matthew present one version and Luke/Paul present another. Luke’s wording is very similar to what Paul hands on in 1 Cor 11:24-25:

And when he had given thanks, he broke it and said, “This is my body that is for you. Do this in remembrance of me.”
In the same way he took the cup also, after supper, saying, “This cup is the new covenant in my blood. Do this, as often as you drink it, in remembrance of me.”

In contrast, the Marcan Jesus says of the bread, “Take; this is my body.” And, for the cup, “This is my blood of the covenant, which is poured out for many.” Mark lacks the explanation that Jesus’ body is “for you” and the command to “do this in remembrance of me.” Mark also misses the allusion to the “new covenant” in Jer 31:31, but does capture that Jesus’ blood is to be “poured out,” something that is missing in Paul. The reference to “many” is another allusion to Is 53:12 where the Suffering Servant “bore the sin of many.” It really means “for all,” not just one or a few.

Matthew slightly alters Mark’s words. The Matthean Jesus doesn’t just tell the disciples to “take” the break but to “take, eat.” Similarly, when it comes to the cup, the Matthean Jesus asks the disciples to “drink of it, all of you.” The cup isn’t simply “poured out” but is poured out “for the forgiveness of sins.” Matthew is attempting to explain that Jesus’ sacrifice on the cross forgives sins in the way that the blood of sacrificial animals in the OT forgave sins.

When Jesus tells his disciples that the bread is his body (Greek, soma), he is referring to his entire “self.” As biblical scholar Rudoph Bultmann once wrote, “A man does not have a soma; he is soma.” Jesus is not sacrificing his physical human body, but his entire life, everything he is. When Jesus says “do this,” he is not simply urging his disciples to relive the supper. He is asking them to give of their entire being.

The Woman with the Alabaster Jar

The gospels of Matthew, Mark and Luke are referred to as the synoptic gospels (from synopsis, “seeing together”) because they present many of the same stories, frequently in the same sequence, and many times with the same words. This is not unexpected since most biblical scholars believe that both Matthew and Luke used Mark as one of the sources for their gospels. By way of contrast, however, even a casual reader of the NT will notice that the Gospel of John is markedly different. For example, in John’s Gospel there are no narrative parables, no exorcisms and few relatively miracles, and extended discourses instead of proverbial “sound bites.”

General Comments on the Passion Narratives

That said, the Fourth Gospel does start to track more closely with events in the synoptic gospels beginning with the arrest in the garden and continuing to Jesus’ burial. This suggests that a common tradition of Jesus’ passion (from the Greek, “to suffer”) was known separately to both Mark and John. This passion tradition probably was not a full-fledged narrative source, but more likely a collection of individual episodes that Mark and John each shaped to their purposes. A certain sequence – arrest before trial, trial before crucifixion, etc. – is inherent in the events being described and that is why the chronology is the same.

In the Revised Common Lectionary used by many Christian denominations, Passion (Palm) Sunday gospel reading rotates between Matthew, Mark, or Luke in a three-year cycle. The Good Friday gospel reading always comes from John. The reading from John starts with the arrest in the garden, but the readings from the synoptic gospels begin with the Last Supper. This is partly due to the fact that passages from John’s Last Supper are read on Holy Thursday, but also because the Last Supper is a more intrinsic part of the passion narrative in the synoptics than it is in John.

While each evangelist shows Jesus coming into conflict with religious authorities, it is in the days just prior to the Passover festival that a conspiracy to eliminate Jesus develops. According to Mark (14:1-2), the “chief priests and scribes” sought to arrest and execute him “by stealth” to avoid igniting a riot during the festival.

From Head to Toes

At this point, Mark turns to the story (14:3-9) of an unnamed woman anointing the head of Jesus with an alabaster jar of expensive ointment (made from real nard!) at the home of Simon the leper in Bethany. Upon hearing complaints that the money spent on the ointment – 300 denarii, equivalent to 300 days’ wages – could have been given to the poor instead, Jesus admonished them, saying the woman performed a good service in anointing his body prior to burial. (Words in italics are common to more than one version of the story.)

Jesus Anointed at Bethany by contemporary artist Anthony Falbo 

Matthew (26:6-13) also reports the story of the anointing in Bethany, but Luke does not because he already recounted a similar story earlier in his gospel (7:36-50). In Luke’s version, Jesus was at the house of Simon the Pharisee in Galilee, when an unnamed sinful woman washed his feet with her tears, dried them with her hair, and then anointed his feet with an alabaster jar of ointment. When the Pharisee complained that the woman was a sinner, Jesus tells a parable of two debtors, compares the reception he received from Simon with that of the woman, and then forgives her sins.

Luke seems to have conflated two separate stories involving Jesus and unnamed women. In one story from his private “L” tradition, a sinful woman washes Jesus’ feet with her tears and dries them with her hair. In the second story from Mark, the unnamed woman anoints Jesus’ head with expensive ointment just prior to his crucifixion.

What’s odd about Luke’s conflation of two stories is that John does the same thing! In his telling of the story (12:1-8), six days before Passover Jesus is at the home of Lazarus in Bethany. While Lazarus’ sister Martha served dinner, his other sister Mary anointed the feet of Jesus with a pound of expensive ointment (made from real nard!) and then wiped it off with her hair. Judas objects to the extravagance saying the perfume could have been sold for 300 denarii and the money given to the poor.

The tendency to blur the stories together continued in Christian preaching. The virtuous Mary of Bethany in John became muddled with the sinful woman of Luke and confused with Mary of Magdala. What is the most likely sin of a woman? Prostitution, of course. And so we end up with a tradition of Mary Magdalene as a reformed prostitute! (For more on what we know from the gospels of Mary of Magdala, check out my later article.)

Enter Judas

Returning to Mark’s chronology (14:10-11), after the anointing in Bethany, Judas approached the chief priests and offers to betray Jesus; they offer him money. Because Luke omitted the anointing scene, Judas’ offer of betrayal is part of the same unit with the plotting of the chief priests (Lk 22:1-6). Some scholars think Mark intentionally inserted the anointing at Bethany to separate this unit since that is his rhetorical style, sometimes referred to as Mark’s “sandwich technique.” He will start an episode, cut away to something else, and then return to conclude the episode.

Mark calls the betrayer “Judas Iscariot” and re-introduces him as “one of the Twelve.” Scholars have debated the meaning of “Iscariot” without any resolution as to whether it refers to a nickname, his place of birth, or something else. We really just don’t know. That he was one of Jesus’ inner circle was truly scandalous to the early Christians.

Mark provides no motive for Judas’ act of betrayal. Matthew said he did it for the money (thirty pieces of silver). In the story of the anointing in Bethany, John tells us (12:6) that Judas was the treasurer and would take from the purse. While Judas was simply greedy in Matthew, in John he was a greedy thief.

Luke provides a different motivation: “Satan entered into Judas.” This is an allusion to the end of the temptation episode (4:13) where the devil “departed from [Jesus] until an opportune time.” Well, he’s back! Curiously, John uses almost the same words in 13:27: “Satan entered into him.” So not only does John provide the mundane motivation of greed, but he also adds the Lucan motivation of demonic possession.

Next week we will continue our journey through the passion narrative with the Last Supper and the institution of the eucharist.

What's the Catch?

Let’s say that you are asked to write the screenplay for a movie about the life of Jesus. In your source material (the Gospel of Mark), Jesus begins his ministry in Galilee by calling the first disciples (Mk 1:16-20): Simon and Andrew, John and James. They were fishermen and he tells them, “Follow me and I will make you fishers of men.” And they left everything behind and followed him. After this, Mark records a typical day in the life of Jesus (Mk 1:21-39) where, on one Sabbath in Capernaum, he exorcises a man possessed by an unclean spirit, heals Simon’s mother-in-law as well as many others, and leaves town early the next day.

The sequence of events bothers you as a screenwriter because it doesn’t seem plausible that four fishermen would just leave their families and business behind to follow some stranger who happened to be passing by. You need to establish a motivation for the characters in your movie. So you transpose the Capernaum events to occur before the calling of the first disciples. That way, the audience will have seen there’s something special about Jesus. And you will also have Jesus perform a miracle for the fishermen – not just healings or exorcisms – to provide motivation for them to drop everything and follow Jesus.

Alternate Versions of the Same Event?

This is exactly what Luke did with his gospel. We have already discussed how Luke transposed Jesus’ rejection in Nazareth from later in Mark (6:1-5) to the inauguration of his public ministry. Luke follows this with his version of Mark’s events in Capernaum (Lk 4:31-44). Only then does Luke recount the calling of the first disciples (Lk 5:1-11). He uses Mark’s call of the first disciples – along with 4:1-2 – as a frame, but uses his special “L” material as the centerpiece.

The story of the miraculous catch of fish is not in Mark, but it does have similarities to a post-resurrection story found in John (21:1-14). In the Johannine account, the disciples – among whom were Simon Peter and the sons of Zebedee – had returned to their old jobs as fishermen. Having caught nothing all night, a stranger on the shore suggested they cast their net over the right side of the boat and they caught so much fish, they couldn’t pull it into their boats and had to drag it ashore. Only then did they recognize the stranger on the shore “was the Lord.” This story in John is immediately followed by its sequel (21:15-23) in which Jesus twice tells Simon Peter (vv. 19, 22) to “follow me.”

Just like in John’s version, in the Lucan account, Simon and the sons of Zebedee had fished all night and caught nothing. Jesus directed them where to cast their nets and they brought in an extraordinary haul of fish, so much so their nets were near breaking and the boats almost sinking. Simon Peter reacts by saying, “Depart from me, Lord, for I am a sinful man.” Jesus responds, “Do not be afraid; from now on you will be catching men.” And then we rejoin the Marcan frame with the disciples leaving everything behind to follow Jesus.

“You’ve seen the catch, now here’s my offer: Follow me.” The Miraculous Draught of Fishes (1545) by Jacopo Bassano

Internal Clues

There are obviously some differences between the two stories – Jesus on the boat in Luke, on the shore in John, for example – but they have similar DNA. Biblical scholars believe that we’re looking at one miracle story that was recalled slightly differently in the sources available to John and Luke.

One clue is Simon’s name in v. 8. This is the only time in Luke’s gospel that he is referred to as “Simon Peter.” Otherwise, Luke calls him “Simon” prior to Jesus giving him the name “Peter” in Lk 6:14. In John’s “fish catch” story he is consistently referred to as “Simon Peter,” so Luke is probably reflecting his private source (“L”) in using the double name.

So is it a miracle story from Jesus’ ministry (Luke) or a post-resurrection encounter (John)? Again, scholars believe that the internal evidence in Luke’s story points to it being a post-resurrection story, and a key point is Simon Peter’s reaction in v. 8.

Faced with the miraculous catch of fish, a natural reaction might be gratitude for the catch or awe at the magnitude of haul. Instead, Simon falls to his knees in front of Jesus and says, “Depart from me, Lord, for I am a sinful man.” The fear, the feeling of unworthiness, and addressing Jesus as “Lord” are consistent with a post-resurrection context in which Peter had previously denied Jesus and feels guilt or shame. Jesus’ reassuring words of “Do not be afraid” are almost standard in post-resurrection appearances.

The events in Luke’s account take place in a boat, so when Simon tells Jesus to “depart from” him, it is not clear how he expects Jesus to do that. However, it would make sense if the original setting took place on land and/or Peter had just recognized the risen Jesus.

Combine this with a setting in which the disciples had returned to fishing in Galilee and the focus on a missionary call specifically to Peter, and perhaps the core of this story is the first post-resurrection appearance to Peter. If this hypothesis is true, the point of the story would be to explain the rehabilitation of Peter after his denial of Jesus and confirm his apostolic mission.

Catchers of Men

Note how Luke changes the challenge of Jesus from “you will be fishers of people” in the Marcan account to “you will be catching people” in the Lucan version. One obvious reason is the grim fate of the fish brought up in the nets. The words usually translated as “catching people” literally means “taking people alive.” Luke wants to put a positive spin on the commission.

The fish are symbolic of the success the disciples will have in bringing in followers. Despite their skill, the disciples cannot do it alone, but with the power of Jesus behind them their achievements will surpass their wildest dreams.

Our Homeboy Jesus

If you have ever watched one of those movies “based on a true story,” you may have noticed a disclaimer in the end credits that goes something like this:

This is a dramatization inspired by certain actual events. Some of the names have been changed and some of the events, dialogue and chronology have been fictionalized for dramatic purposes.

It’s a fact of life that the motion picture medium is different from the written word. An author can explain background at length on the printed page in ways not available to the director in a two-hour movie. So the script writer will reshuffle events and combine characters to tell the story in a fashion that will be intelligible to an audience who has little or no familiarity with the original events.

Inspired by Actual Events

Luke takes that approach with the Third Gospel. It opens (1:1-4) with an acknowledgement of the existence of other gospels (“many have undertaken to set down an orderly account of the events”) and explains “I too decided, after investigating everything carefully from the very first, to write an orderly account.” He will incorporate the pre-existing material into his own work, but Luke feels he has a free-hand to shape the material to suit his theological needs because his sources did the same.

Biblical scholars know that one of Luke’s sources was the gospel of Mark. We’ve seen how Luke follows Mark’s structure in beginning his account of the public ministry with John the Baptist and Jesus’ baptism, followed by Jesus being tempted in the desert. Here is where Luke departs from Mark’s chronology. After the temptation in the desert, Mark announces the arrest of John the Baptist and Jesus’ return to Galilee (Mk 1:14). Over the course of the next few chapters, Mark documents the calling of the first disciples and various healings and parables. It is not until chapter 6 that Mark recounts Jesus’ return to Nazareth where he is rejected (6:1-6). Matthew follows Mark’s chronology and doesn’t report Jesus’ rejection in Nazareth until halfway through his gospel (13:54-58).

In contrast, Luke goes his own way in placing Jesus’ rejection in Nazareth (4:16-30) as the kickoff of his public ministry. Why? One reason seems to be that Luke wants to use this scene to highlight two themes of his gospel: Jesus as fulfillment of the OT and Jesus as the “sign to be contradicted” promised in Simeon’s prophecy (Lk 2:34). A second reason is that it portrays Jesus as “teacher,” another favorite theme for Luke (Jesus is described as “teacher” 13 times in the gospel).

Fictionalized for Dramatic Purposes

Luke takes the barebones of the Marcan account (“he began to teach in the synagogue and many who heard him were astonished”) and fleshes it out with details: Jesus stood up to read, was given the book of Isaiah, reads the passage (a composite of Isaiah 61:1-2 and 58:6), gave the book to the attendant, and sat down with all eyes fixed upon him. ). In the synagogue, the reading of Scripture would be done standing while the interpretation would be done while seated. Luke builds the tension as the audience – both in the synagogue and readers of the gospel – wait to hear Jesus say, “Today this scripture has been fulfilled in your hearing.”

Initially, his audience seemed impressed and ask, “Is this not Joseph’s son?” One gets the impression of “hometown boy makes good.” After this, though, the episode gets a little incoherent.

In the Marcan source, the reaction of the Nazarenes is more along the lines of “who does he think he is?” They call him “the carpenter, the son of Mary” and take offense with him. That’s when Jesus says, “A prophet is not without honor, except in his own country, and among his own kin, and in his own house.” The implication is that his immediate and extended family also rejected him (in Mark’s gospel, Jesus’ family thought he had lost his mind) and Jesus marveled at the lack of belief in Nazareth.

The rejection in Nazareth makes sense in the context of Mark (and Matthew) because this occurs after Jesus has already spent considerable time touring Galilee preaching and healing. But in Luke, no miracles or healings have yet been reported. His initial reception in Nazareth seems quite receptive.

“Well, that escalated quickly.” Jesus is Rejected in his Hometown, woodcut from Images of Scriptural History (1593) planned by Jerome Nadal, S.J. 

Things Get Ugly

That’s when we see material that only appears in Luke’s version of the story. Jesus cites a proverb (“Physician, heal thyself!) and discerns the crowd desires to see him perform miracles like he did at Capernaum. But Luke has not reported any miracles performed in Capernaum! This is a giveaway that this passage originally occurred later in the ministry and, although Luke moved it to the beginning of the ministry, he didn’t bother to eliminate the inconsistency.

It’s at this point (v. 24) that Jesus delivers the “no prophet without honor” line from Mark except Luke leaves off the part (in italics in the quote above) about the prophet being rejected by his kin since, in Luke’s gospel, the family of Jesus were believers. Vv. 25-27 are also lines only found in Luke as Jesus compares himself to the prophets Elijah and Elisha who were sent to help non-Israelites.

In the final verses (28-30) we finally see those in the synagogue filled with rage, determined to throw him off a cliff. Because Nazareth wasn’t built on a cliff, this may be an example of Luke’s fuzzy geography, or he may have wanted to foreshadow the crucifixion. Luke’s vague description of Jesus’ escape (“he passed through the midst of them and went on his way”) should not be considered a miracle because that would have given the Nazarenes the miracle they were hoping to see.

Looking back on how Jesus’ message was received over the course of forty years, Luke summarizes the gospel message in this passage. Jesus was rejected by his own but found acceptance among Gentiles. Jesus proclaimed himself as the fulfillment of OT promises, but provoked the fury of his co-religionists. Initially drawing crowds eager for the next miracle, the same crowds turned against him and sought to destroy him. Jesus escaped with his life this time because his hour had not come, but the clock is ticking.

The Real Temptations of Christ

Temptations are funny things. Some things that are irresistible enticements for one person don’t even merit a second thought for another. For an ordinary mortal, turning a stone into bread isn’t a temptation, it’s an impossibility. Yet it is these sort of “temptations” that confront Jesus immediately after his baptism in Matthew and Luke.

The Synoptic Temptations

Mark’s account of the temptation in the desert is terse:

And the Spirit immediately drove him out into the wilderness. He was in the wilderness forty days, tempted by Satan; and he was with the wild beasts; and the angels waited on him. (Mk 1:12-13)

Both Matthew (4:1-11) and Luke (4:1-13) expand upon this brief statement with three specific temptations of the devil, and Jesus dismisses each temptation with a quote from Deuteronomy:

1. Turn stones into bread. – “one does not live by bread alone” (Deut 8:3)
2. Throw yourself from the pinnacle of the Temple. – “you shall not tempt the Lord” (Deut 6:16)
3. Worship me and gain the kingdoms of the world. – “you shall worship the Lord” (Deut 6:13)

The fact that Matthew and Luke cite both the same temptations and OT quotes is strong evidence that each drew from a common tradition that was unknown to Mark. Biblical scholars call this hypothetical collection of sayings the Q document.

The major difference between Matthew and Luke in this episode is that Luke reverses the order of temptations #2 and #3 so that the climax occurs at the pinnacle of the Temple. So which order was original in Q? Most commentators think Matthew retains the original order as the devil raises the stakes – as well as the altitude – throughout and the Deuteronomy quotes appear in reverse order. As we have seen in the discussion on the infancy narrative, Luke has a fascination with the Temple and Jerusalem, beginning and ending his gospel in the Temple. A significant chunk of his gospel (9:51-19:27) is dedicating to describing Jesus’ journey to Jerusalem, a feature unique to Luke.

If Matthew is closer to the Q source, Luke modifies it in an effort to make the temptations more believable. In Matthew, the devil asks the hungry Jesus to turn all the stones into bread. Not wishing to turn the desert into a bakery, Luke’s devil suggests he only transform one stone. Similarly, Matthew’s devil takes Jesus to a “very high mountain” to show him all the kingdoms of the world. Perhaps knowing that no mountain is tall enough to see the entire world, Luke’s devil shows Jesus all the kingdoms of the world in an instant.

The variation on the order of the temptations is a good sign that we’re not dealing on the level of history, but of theology. The point of the desert temptation scene seems to be that Jesus is recapitulating the history of Israel with his forty days representing Israel’s forty years wandering in the desert. In the context of the citations from Deuteronomy, Moses reminds the Israelites of how, during those forty years, they were humbled by hunger, tested God, and tempted to follow foreign gods. But, unlike Israel, Jesus did not succumb to these temptations.

Opting more for Iago or Emperor Palpatine, contemporary liturgical painter Eric Armusik foregoes a more devilish look for Satan in his The Temptation of Christ (2011).

Temptations in the Fourth Gospel

Both Matthew and Luke retain Mark’s chronology with the temptation in the desert serving as the conclusion of Jesus’ preparation for his public ministry. The Fourth Gospel does not present a similar episode. In John’s gospel, as we previously saw, there is no explicit baptism by John and Jesus gathers his first disciples on his return to Galilee before returning to Judea to begin his own brief baptizing ministry. Although there is no dramatic scene of the devil tempting Jesus in the Fourth Gospel, we do see echoes of the temptation episode scattered in chapters 6 and 7 of John.

1. John 6:1-15 is John’s version of the feeding of the multitude, the only miracle of Jesus that appears in all four gospels. Mk 6:45 (paralleled by Mt 14: 22) says that immediately after the miracle, Jesus made his disciples leave in a boat while he dismissed the crowd. John provides the reason: When Jesus realized that the crowd was about to “take him by force to make him king, he withdrew again to the mountain by himself” (v. 15). This attempt to make Jesus a political leader is thematically similar to temptation #3 above where the devil offers Jesus the kingdoms of the world.

2. The feeding of the multitude in Mark, Matthew and John – but not Luke – is immediately followed by the miracle of Jesus walking on water. The next day, the crowds follow Jesus to the other side of the sea. Thus begins (6:26-34) the Bread of Life discourse in John. The crowd asks Jesus for a sign, saying that Moses gave them manna in the desert. Jesus in the Fourth Gospel does not quote Deut 8:3, but his response is similar to his dismissal of temptation #1 that it is not earthly bread that gives life, but that which comes down from heaven.

3. After completion of the Bread of Life discourse in John 6, the brothers of Jesus suggest that he travel to Jerusalem for the festival of Tabernacles to work his signs and show himself to the world (7:1-9). Jesus rebuffs their suggestion because his “time has not yet come.” The similarity here is the enticement in temptation #2 to become a spectacle by performing a public act of power in Jerusalem.

The parallels between the three Q temptations and those presented in John are quite interesting. For the modern reader, the temptations as presented in John are more believable than the dramatic temptations presented in Matthew and Luke. But the gospels were not written as biographies of Jesus. They were written to present Jesus’ message of salvation. In such a document, presenting a confrontation between the devil and Jesus gets the theological point across more efficiently than describing three separate occasions in the life of Jesus wherein he was tempted to perform miracles for his own benefit or to gain political power.

Or, as I learned from Spider-Man: “With great power there must also come great responsibility.”

Beginning from the Baptism of John

[As I wrote up this week’s article, it quickly grew to be twice the length of a normal article, so I will divide it into two posts. The second half will be posted in a day or two.]

In Acts of the Apostles 1:15-26, the disciples had to choose a replacement for Judas. Peter lays out the qualifications: “one of the men who have accompanied us during all the time that the Lord Jesus went in and out among us, beginning from the baptism of John until the day when he was taken up from us” (vv. 21-22a). Indeed, all four gospels start the public ministry of Jesus with John baptizing in the wilderness. But in so doing, they expose an awkward fact: John baptized Jesus.

Damage Control

In being baptized by John, Jesus assumed an inferior position as a disciple of John. This was an embarrassment to the early Church, particularly in its dealings with the followers of John the Baptist during the spread of the ministry. Jesus accepting John’s baptism for the repentance of sins also raised awkward questions about the sinlessness of Jesus. This inconvenient truth of Jesus being baptized by John required some “damage control” on the part of the evangelists.

Mark (1:9-11) gets the baptism of Jesus out of the way as quickly as possible and uses the occasion to reveal Jesus’ vision of God declaring, “You are my Son…I am well pleased.” Matthew (3:13-17) presents John humbling himself before Jesus, saying, “I need to be baptized by you.” In true Matthean style, Jesus intones that John must baptize him “to fulfill all righteousness.” The Gospel of John (1:29-34) avoids the subject altogether. In the Fourth Gospel, the evangelist has the Baptist recount how he saw the Spirit descend upon Jesus like a dove – the same language used in the synoptic accounts of Jesus’ baptism – but the evangelist avoids saying this occurred at the moment of Jesus’ baptism.

Luke (3:21-22) has one of the oddest approaches to the story. He doesn’t deny that Jesus was baptized, but he does avoid stating that John did the baptizing. Like Matthew, he recounts some of John’s preaching and adds some ethical teaching, but then he ushers John off the stage with his arrest by Herod Antipas. In the gospels of Mark and Matthew, John’s imprisonment is announced right after Jesus’ baptism, but Luke contorts the chronology (and logic of the story) by placing the baptism of Jesus after John is out of the picture. It’s not a goof because in several speeches in Acts of the Apostles, the speaker (like in the example above) recalls how the gospel story began with John’s baptism of repentance, but in every case Luke avoids mentioning that Jesus was also baptized by John.

“The Baptism of Christ” (1515) by Joachim Patinir

The Historical John the Baptist

What do we really know about John the Baptist? Just as with Jesus, the gospels provide most of the information we have of the Baptist, but the Jewish historian Josephus also mentioned John in Antiquities (18.5.2). Josephus’ description of John’s ministry of baptism, his popularity and his execution by Herod Antipas is consistent with what the gospels tell us.

Both the synoptic gospels and the Fourth Gospel cite Isaiah 40:3 as the rallying cry of the Baptist: “The voice of one crying in the wilderness: Prepare the way of the Lord, make straight his paths.” The Qumran community – from whose library we got the Dead Sea Scrolls – also used this quote from Isaiah to explain why they formed their community in the desert.

Mark provides only a small sample of John’s preaching (Mk 1:7-8) describing “a mightier one” who is coming after him, one whose sandals John is not fit to untie (the role of a slave was to untie the master’s sandals and wash his feet). John’s water baptism is a promise of the baptism in the Holy Spirit that will come with his successor. This saying is repeated in Matthew and Luke who both used Mark as their source material, but also in the Fourth Gospel (John 1:26-27), suggesting that this tradition is very old.

Both Matthew and Luke have more to say about John’s preaching, using almost the same words. Biblical scholars hypothesize that the two evangelists used a lost collection of sayings – dubbed Q, from the German word Quelle (“source”) – that Mark did not know about. Two “Baptist blocks” of material from Q related to John can be found in Mt 3:7-12 (which matches Lk 3:7-9 and Lk 3:15-18) and Mt 11:2-19 (which matches Lk 7:18-35).

The First Baptist Block of Sayings

The beginning of the first Baptist block portrays John as a fiery preacher of the imminent wrath of God: “The axe is laid to the root of the trees and every tree that does not bear good fruit is cut down and thrown into the fire” (Lk 3:9). The second half of the first Baptist block continues the fiery theme with the “mightier one” clearing out the threshing floor, gathering the wheat into the granary and burning the chaff. The implication is that to avoid the coming judgment one needs to repent and bear the fruit of repentance; simply being a “child of Abraham” will not save you.

Luke interrupts the first Baptist block of material from Q with vv. 10-14, verses which have no parallel in Matthew. In Luke, John offers ethical advice on how one can act to show repentance. He tailors his advice to reflect his audience. For the multitudes, share your coat or food. For the tax collectors, collect no more than is required. For soldiers, no extortion or intimidations; be content with your pay. This ethical advice has an echo in Josephus who wrote that the Baptist preached “cultivating virtue and practicing justice toward one another and piety toward God.”

Josephus provides a political reason for Herod’s arrest and execution of the Baptist: “Herod began to fear that John’s powerful ability to persuade people might lead to some sort of revolt.” Herod considered it wiser to arrest John before the situation got out of control and imprisoned him in the mountain fortress of Machaerus on the east side of the Dead Sea. Mark (6:17-29) and Matthew (14:3-12) provide more details on the reasons behind the imprisonment and death of the Baptist, but Luke is satisfied in only the briefest note (3:19-20).

The Second Baptist Block of Sayings

The second “Baptist block” can be divided into three units. In the first unit (Lk 7:18-23), the imprisoned John sends his disciples to ask Jesus if he is “the one to come.” Jesus tells them to report what they see – the blind see, the lame walk, etc.

The second unit (Lk 7:24-28) is a carefully crafted composition consisting of Jesus’ rhetorical question (and three different answers) to the crowds concerning John: “What did you go out to see?” The final answer emphatically praises John as more than a prophet, saying none born of women is greater than him, yet the least in the kingdom of God is greater than John.

In the third unit (Lk 7:31-34) Jesus compares the current generation to children in the marketplace. Like the children who refused to dance to the flute, John fasted and avoided strong drink. Like the children who refused to mourn, the Son of Man (Jesus’s term for himself) did not fast and drank wine. John was called a mad man and Jesus was called “a glutton and a drunkard, a friend of tax collectors and sinners.”

[In part two, we will look at a tradition buried in the Fourth Gospel that seems to have been suppressed in the synoptic gospels and put the pieces together to give us a picture of how John influenced Jesus.]

The Apostles Go to the Movies

Before starting a discussion on the infancy narratives, how about some “gospel truths” for background?

1. Mark is the oldest gospel (written around 66-70 CE). Mark begins his gospel with the baptism of Jesus by John the Baptist. Mark never mentions the name of Jesus’ legal father, Joseph.
2. Matthew and Luke used Mark as a basis for their own gospels (80-90 CE), but added additional material not found in Mark. Some of the supplementary material in Matthew has parallels with additions in Luke, but some non-Marcan material is only found in Matthew or only found in Luke.
3. Because so much of the material in Matthew, Mark and Luke are similar, they are called the synoptic gospels.
4. John’s gospel (90-100 CE) is very different and not based on Mark. Outside of the passion narrative, there are very few points of contact with the synoptic gospels. After a brief prologue on how the divine Word existed before creation and became flesh, John’s gospel opens with Jesus’ baptism. 
5. The infancy narrative in Matthew appears in the first two chapters and contains material that is exclusive to Matthew.
6. The infancy narrative in Luke appears in the first two chapters and contains material that is exclusive to Luke.

This brief survey highlights the peculiar nature of the infancy narratives. They seem to be prefixed to the gospels of Matthew and Luke like the prologue of a novel. The prologue sets the stage for what is to come, but you could skip it and not have missed anything crucial to the plot. There are no references in the rest of Matthew and Luke to anything that occurs in the infancy narratives.

Unlike the narratives and sayings from the public ministry which have the authority of the disciples standing behind it, there were few witnesses to the events being described in the infancy narratives. Theoretically, Matthew or Luke could have spoken to people who were alive during the time of Jesus’ ministry, but it is highly unlikely that any family members privy to the events of Jesus’ birth would have still been alive when Matthew and Luke wrote their gospels. And, if so, why are the stories so different?

While the two infancy narratives are completely distinct, there are a few points of agreement between them that may indicate a core of common tradition:

• Mary conceives after she has been betrothed to Joseph but before they live together.
• The conception of the child is through the Holy Spirit.
• Joseph is of Davidic descent.
• An angel announces the birth of the child, that he is to be named Jesus, and that he is to be Savior.
• The birth takes place after the parents have come to live together.
• The birth takes place in Bethlehem but the child is reared in Nazareth.
• The birth occurs during the reign of Herod the Great.

There are other infancy narratives in works that never became accepted as part of the NT (that is, non-canonical gospels), but these date from a later period (2nd century CE) than the four canonical gospels and seem to have been influenced by them, so they do not provide us with any independent information. Our only source of knowledge of the infancy of Jesus (such as it is) are in the first two chapters of Matthew and Luke.

So why do Matthew and Luke each provide an infancy narrative while Mark and John are unconcerned about the early life of Jesus? Let’s look back at the “gospel truths” above. The one main point of contact among all four canonical gospels is the passion narrative (#4). This suggests that the story of Jesus’ death and resurrection was the most primitive core of early Christian preaching. 

Stories and sayings from Jesus’ public ministry became attached to the passion narratives. Mark was the first to do this (#1 above) and there may have been a collection of sayings from which Matthew and Luke both drew (#2). For Mark, the baptism of Jesus is when God reveals who Jesus is and marks the start of his ministry. This is a critical moment in all four canonical gospels. 

But for Matthew and Luke it wasn’t enough. Jesus couldn’t have become God’s son only at his baptism. By prefixing the infancy narratives to their gospels, Matthew and Luke showed that Jesus was the Son of God from his conception and birth. The evangelists are not merely relating biographical information; they are making a proclamation of the good news of salvation.

In Talladega Nights, Ricky Bobby (played by Will Ferrell) liked the Christmas Jesus best: “When you say grace, you can say it to grown-up Jesus, or teenage Jesus, or bearded Jesus, or whatever you want.”

It’s like one of those movies with a big twist (for example, The Sixth Sense, Fight Club, The Usual Suspects) that cause you to re-evaluate everything you thought was going on in the movie. The director provides you with a series of brief flashbacks so you can see how previous scenes now need to be understood.

For the early disciples of Jesus, the resurrection event was that twist. They thought Jesus was going to bring about his new kingdom, only to have their hopes dashed to pieces by his crucifixion. But the resurrection appearances caused them to re-evaluate the events around Jesus’ death. That, in turn, caused them to interpret the sayings and works of his ministry in a new light. Eventually, this train of thought led to the angel’s proclamation of Jesus as savior in the infancy narratives. 

The understanding of who Jesus was worked its way backwards from his resurrection to his baptism by John to his conception and birth. The adult Christ is very much a part of the infancy narrative.

Or, as Ricky Bobby in Talladega Nights would say, “Dear eight-pound, six-ounce newborn infant Jesus, don’t even know a word yet, just a little infant and so cuddly, but still omnipotent.”