PDA

View Full Version : Why Four Gospels?"



Sojourner
Nov 26th 2011, 06:55 PM
One of the first Bible-based books I read as new Christian was a tiny little tome entitled, "Why Four Gospels?" by Arthur W. Pink. I was amazed at the way Pink demonstrated the Gospels' undeniable divine inspiration by pointing out how God's Spirit had guided the writers to add or omit details from each Gospel, to form a perfect composite of Jesus. Pink presents the four Gopels as a composite portrait of Jesus--like a photo taken of each side of a house: each photo portrays the same house, while depicting details common to all four sides, and unique details not seen in the others. Pink points out the distinguishing characteristics of Jesus specific to each Gospel, as well as those which dovetail precisely into a harmonized narrative of the life and ministry of Jesus. Here are a few highlights:

Matthew, emphasizes Jesus as the Jewish Messiah, and traces Jesus' genealogy back to Abraham, showing Jesus' earthly claim to the throne of David. Matthew also cites more OT prophecies fulfilled by Jesus than the other four Gospels combined. The link between the Old Covenant and the New Covenant, Matthew's Gospel breaks the 400 years of silence after Malachi. Just as Moses was sent as the deliverer after four centuries of no word from God, Jesus was sent 400 years after the final prophecies of Malachi were given--prophecies that were fulfilled by both He and John the baptizer.

Mark emphasizes Jesus the servant, skipping over His birth and genealogy, to reveal the hard-working minister of the Gospel. The majestic imagery that so marks Matthew's Gospel is not to be found in Mark. Rather the picture of a man laboring tirelessly for the sake of His Father's kingdom is in view. Only in Mark for instance, do we read of Jesus being so exhausted at the end of a day of ministering, that He had to be physically helped into a boat by His disciples. This exhaustion is why He was sound asleep in the storm-tossed ship until the disciples woke Him with their fearful cries. (Mark 6:36-39).

Luke portrays Jesus as the Savior not only of Israel, but of all mankind, which is why Jesus' genealogy is traced all the way back to Adam, rather than stopping at Abraham. And if Luke was indeed a Gentile as many Bible scholars believe, than that is another reason that "the beloved physician" and companion of Paul was chosen to record this Gospel. Rather than the Jewish character we see in Matthew, Luke showcases the humanity of Jesus. For instance, it's only in Luke that we see the parable of the Good Samaritan, in which Jesus seeks to show that those generally considered outcasts by the Jews were not outcasts to God--Who is no respecter of persons, but is ultimately the Savior of all mankind.

Finally, John presents Jesus as He was before He was Jesus--as the very glory and likeness of God Himself, before the creation of man. As with the other Gospels, there are passages peculiar to John that accentuate traits not highlighted in the synoptic Gospels. Matthew, Mark, and Luke convey a composite picture of Jesus' humanity, but in John, it is the deity of the Word of God robed in that humanity that is portrayed. "To wit that God was in Christ, reconciling the world to Himself."

I've owned a copy of "Why Four Gospels?" for some 30 years, and have garnered insight from it, into the meticulous guidance of the Holy Spirit in the formation of the Gospels--both in choosing who would record the words, how they were worded, and what was included or omitted in each one. And I learned also that, Pink only scratched the surface with regard to his observations. Like finding the surface streaks of gold in a mine, the promise of even greater riches lie below for those willing to dig for it. I was thrilled to find that the text is now freely available on the internet. I highly recommend it as an asset for the diligent workman who does not already have it in his library:

http://www.pbministries.org/books/pink/4_gospels/index.htm (http://www.pbministries.org/books/pink/4_gospels/index.htm)

Kahtar
Nov 26th 2011, 10:17 PM
Pink is one of my most favored commentators. he presents a perspective that few others do. Yet occasionally I find some small thing I disagree with him on.
What I do like about him is that he reveals the existence of that surface steak of gold you spoke of, even though he only scratches the surface, pointing the way for further and deeper study. He does that very well in Genesis and Exodus also. By the time you go clear through his Genesis book, you are completely and hopelessly convinced beyond all doubt that the scripture we have today is the inspired word of God, and that every word is there for a reason, and, in many cases, every letter.........

Sojourner
Nov 26th 2011, 11:03 PM
Pink is one of my most favored commentators. he presents a perspective that few others do. Yet occasionally I find some small thing I disagree with him on.
What I do like about him is that he reveals the existence of that surface steak of gold you spoke of, even though he only scratches the surface, pointing the way for further and deeper study. He does that very well in Genesis and Exodus also. By the time you go clear through his Genesis book, you are completely and hopelessly convinced beyond all doubt that the scripture we have today is the inspired word of God, and that every word is there for a reason, and, in many cases, every letter.........

Amen across the board, brother. Pink had a grasp of fundamental truths, and talent for conveying them succinctly. As you say, there are minor points here and there in his works I differ with, but for the most part, his books are a good addition to any Christian library. I agree completely, that the closer you examine the Scriptures, the more obvious it becomes that they are of divine inspiration--even the symbolism of the numbers is consistent. Our God is an awesome God, and even His written Word has His Spirit in it.

When I discovered "Why Four Gospels?" was in the public domain, I remembered how much I enjoyed it, and thought those who have never read it might benefit from it.

Sojourner
Jan 16th 2012, 12:57 AM
How do you know this man is correct in his assessment of what the Holy Ghost did or did not do concerning what they did or did not leave out? How do you know he know?
How do we know that the assessment of any bible scholar, or anyone else is correct concerning he Scriptures? Test their words against the Scriptures themselves. I have personally found no major discrepancies in Pink's works, but if you know of any, please feel free to submit them for discussion. The search for, and sharing of truth is what this board is all about, after all. Books by scholars are meant to enhance our understanding of the Bible, not replace it as an inspired authority.

Brother Mark
Jan 16th 2012, 12:59 AM
One of the first Bible-based books I read as new Christian was a tiny little tome entitled, "Why Four Gospels?" by Arthur W. Pink. I was amazed at the way Pink demonstrated the Gospels' undeniable divine inspiration by pointing out how God's Spirit had guided the writers to add or omit details from each Gospel, to form a perfect composite of Jesus.

Pink blew me away with some of his writings on Genesis. I need to grab that book and start reading again. I felt like I was drinking from a fire hydrant. There was so much there, I was simply overwhelmed!

Brother Mark
Jan 16th 2012, 01:01 AM
How do you know this man is correct in his assessment of what the Holy Ghost did or did not do concerning what they did or did not leave out? How do you know he know?

I think what the OP was saying was that Matthew leaves out things that Luke puts in. Mark puts in things that Luke leaves out. When you put all 4 of the gospels together, you get a clear picture of Christ. For instance, we can study the parable of the sower and glean truths from it in Mark 4. But when you compare it to Matthew 13, we get an even clearer picture of what God was saying.

Sojourner
Jan 16th 2012, 01:04 AM
Pink blew me away with some of his writings on Genesis. I need to grab that book and start reading again. I felt like I was drinking from a fire hydrant. There was so much there, I was simply overwhelmed!

Hi Mark,
I know what you mean. The man was truly prolific in drawing upon the inspiration of the Spirit in expounding upon profound truths. He is one of my favorite commentators.

Brother Mark
Jan 16th 2012, 10:31 PM
When you live a life of no sin and they hang you on a cross because you resisted sin even till death.

Then you might can say your as righteous as Christ. I really find it very offensive that you believe you are as righteous as My beloved Redeemer.

I cannot help it. I could not hold my peace. Lord I know you understand. amen

You should be overwhelming ashamed of yourself.

eshakita folito moolptrer. amen

Oh I don't mind. Actually, I am very glad you posted. It gives me a chance to explain.
If we are to enter into the heaven, our righteousness must exceed that of the most people! It must exceed the righteousness of the pope, of bishops, of apostles, of Pharisees!

Matt 5:20

20 "For I say to you that unless yourrighteousness surpasses that of the scribes and Pharisees, you will not enter the kingdom of heaven.
NASU

My own righteousness is as filthy rags before my Lord. Instead, I have His righteousness!

2 Cor 5:21
21 He made Him who knew no sin to be sin on our behalf, so that we might become the righteousness of God in Him.
NASU

Since I am not righteous in myself, the ONLY hope I have of entering into the kingdom is to take on the Righteousness of God! How then can this happen?

Rom 4:5
5 But to the one who does not work, but believes in Him who justifies the ungodly, his faith is credited as righteousness
NASU

So I am only clothed in the righteousness of my savior because I have none of my own. Without Him, I am nothing and have no hope. But he took on my sin and gave me His righteousness in exchange!

2 Cor 5:21
21 He made Him who knew no sin to be sin on our behalf, so that we might become the righteousness of God in Him.
NASU

Pardon me while I get up and shout! And give thanks to my Lord and Savior for all He has done for me! (And thanks for the reminder!!!!)

Grace and peace,

Mark

Brother Mark
Jan 16th 2012, 10:33 PM
Where did he say this? I must have missed it.

Check under my name bro. ;)

In case you or Sojourner missed my response, it's above. :) I always enjoy these situations because they encourage me so much and remind me of all He has done for me!

Kahtar
Jan 16th 2012, 10:37 PM
...............gotcha. ;)

Sojourner
Jan 16th 2012, 10:39 PM
Check under my name bro. ;)

In case you or Sojourner missed my response, it's above. :) I always enjoy these situations because they encourage me so much and remind me of all He has done for me!

Oh, I see. I didn't make the connection, and was totally confused by Bible Jim's words. And you're right Mark, we have to look at things like that as an opportunity. Good perspective, and attitude.

Brother Mark
Jan 18th 2012, 01:47 AM
Greetings everyone. Glad you all are giving me an opportunity to speak well of my Savior! Please let me start by asking a question.

2 Cor 5:21
21 He made Him who knew no sin to be sin on our behalf, so that we might become the righteousness of God in Him.
NASU

In the above verse, who's righteousness do we become?

shepherdsword
Jan 18th 2012, 02:46 PM
I can't believe I have never heard of Pink. I considered myself well learned and here it is,a commentator I have never heard of. This is a delight!

Any of his stuff available online?

Kahtar
Jan 18th 2012, 02:56 PM
I can't believe I have never heard of Pink. I considered myself well learned and here it is,a commentator I have never heard of. This is a delight!

Any of his stuff available online?Just about all of it is online. Free even. Here's the link:
http://www.pbministries.org/books/pink/index.htm
Most of his stuff is quite good. His book on John I found to be a little lacking in a few places. Nor do I agree with all of his doctrinal beliefs. Yet, I highly recommend his Genesis book though. Amazing stuff in there.

Brother Mark
Jan 18th 2012, 03:01 PM
Just about all of it is online. Free even. Here's the link:
http://www.pbministries.org/books/pink/index.htm
Most of his stuff is quite good. His book on John I found to be a little lacking in a few places. Nor do I agree with all of his doctrinal beliefs. Yet, I highly recommend his Genesis book though. Amazing stuff in there.

I second this. I don't buy all his doctrinal beliefs, but his book in Genesis is amazingly detailed yet full of life! His books speak to the spirit warm the soul and amaze the mind. That is a rare combination!

shepherdsword
Jan 18th 2012, 03:06 PM
Thanks Kahtar ,I didn't find the Genesis commentary but I found "Why four Gospels" and will check it out,

repped you but I can't rep Sojourner55 again right now.

Brother Mark is also a refreshing brother.

on a side note:
""May the Lamb that was slain receive the just reward for His sufferings." A quote by Moravian missionary that sold himself (along with a friend) into slavery to reach those that the slave owner prevented from hearing the gospel. "

May the Lord give us all such a heart as that Moravian brother!

Kahtar
Jan 18th 2012, 03:12 PM
Here's the Genesis link:
http://www.pbministries.org/books/pink/Gleanings_Genesis/index.htm

Brother Mark
Jan 18th 2012, 03:15 PM
SW, if or when you start out with the Genesis book, I recommend jumping to Noah and the flood right off the bat. That one really stuck out to me big time! I was utterly amazed at all that was in there about Jesus.

Kahtar
Jan 18th 2012, 03:46 PM
Another excellent work on Genesis (not exactly the subject of the OP, sorry) is Andrew Jukes:
He takes Genesis in a whole different direction, but one that speaks deeply to the spiritual nature within the book, and our own lives.
The problem with this one is it gets sooooo deep it's not always easy to follow. It takes re-reading, thinking and praying to even begin to grasp some of it.
But if you're going to study Genesis, these two books will take you farther than you've ever been, and open up the scriptures in ways you never dreamed were there.
http://www.alampthatburns.net/jukes/types/typesgen-contents.htm
He does have a book on the 4 gospels as well, though I have not read it. I think I will.

jesse
Feb 5th 2012, 10:42 PM
Haha! Your opening statement was exactly what i was looking for in regards to another thread! Hooray! Kingdom of Heaven in Matthew (jewish messiah) And kingdom of God in mark and luke (gentile audience).

Thank you! Thank you!

jesse
Feb 5th 2012, 11:35 PM
This also isn't on subject but is just a question that often haunts me. Isn't it strange that these great writers almost always seem to fall off in the end. I am think of A.W.Pink who was dispensational and then turned to Covenant Theology. And Andrew Jukes who eventually wrote a book about Universal Salvationism. And I believe Billy Graham has gone down the same path.

It sure makes me question a lot.

Sojourner
Feb 6th 2012, 12:16 AM
This also isn't on subject but is just a question that often haunts me. Isn't it strange that these great writers almost always seem to fall off in the end. I am think of A.W.Pink who was dispensational and then turned to Covenant Theology. And Andrew Jukes who eventually wrote a book about Universal Salvationism. And I believe Billy Graham has gone down the same path.

It sure makes me question a lot.

Hello Jesse,
While I'm not sure about the others, I do know that Pink changed his views about Dispensationalism. Personal perspectives change sometimes, as one delves deeper into the Word, and gains a fuller understanding. Whether or not we agree with those changes, does not alter revealed truths, or diminish contributions made by those whose lifetime of study have added to our knowledge.

ClayInHisHands
Feb 6th 2012, 12:24 AM
Hello Jesse,
While I'm not sure about the others, I do know that Pink changed his views about Dispensationalism. Personal perspectives change sometimes, as one delves deeper into the Word, and gains a fuller understanding. Whether or not we agree with those changes, does not alter revealed truths, or diminish contributions made by those whose lifetime of study have added to our knowledge.

You are right, however it should cause us to maybe go back and examine them a little deeper to make sure we weren't deceived possibly. Obviously this would be something the Holy Spirit would convict us of but above that, if we were deceived then we should make a rule that if that were to occur we would go back and examine even if we feel confident that He's not convicting, because if we are deceived we may think we are fine because we don't feel convicted. Whew! That was a mouthful. :lol:

Sojourner
Feb 6th 2012, 12:39 AM
You are right, however it should cause us to maybe go back and examine them a little deeper to make sure we weren't deceived possibly. Obviously this would be something the Holy Spirit would convict us of but above that, if we were deceived then we should make a rule that if that were to occur we would go back and examine even if we feel confident that He's not convicting, because if we are deceived we may think we are fine because we don't feel convicted.

I learned a long time ago that there are two aspects of Biblical interpretation:

1). what God says
2). What man says God says.

Sometimes they are the same, and sometimes they are not. Obviously one should become firmly grounded in sound Bible doctrine, guided into truth by the Holy Spirit, before venturing off into the world of extra-Biblical writings. That original grounding should only come from a Spirit-filled preacher or teacher, and many do not take care at that point early in their walk. But I am persuaded that God will not allow any person to stray from the truth if he or she is asking Him for proper guidance. If more people did that, fewer would fall prey to spiritual predators like Jim Jones and David Koresh.

ClayInHisHands
Feb 6th 2012, 12:50 AM
I learned a long time ago that there are two aspects of Biblical interpretation:

1). what God says
2). What man says God says.

Sometimes they are the same, and sometimes they are not. Obviously one should become firmly grounded in sound Bible doctrine, guided into truth by the Holy Spirit, before venturing off into the world of extra-Biblical writings. That original grounding should only come from a Spirit-filled preacher or teacher, and many do not take care at that point early in their walk. But I am persuaded that God will not allow any person to stray from the truth if he or she is asking Him for proper guidance. If more people did that, fewer would fall prey to spiritual predators like Jim Jones and David Koresh.


Not to go off on something entirely different, but would you agree or what you said, am I safe to assume you were insinuating that if one were God's child, that he or she would never REALLY TRULY BE DECEIVED because if he or she is deceived, then they may not even in fact be or have ever been God's to begin with? Not baiting you, I think this to probably be the truth, so I only ask you is all.

Sojourner
Feb 6th 2012, 01:00 AM
Not to go off on something entirely different, but would you agree or what you said, am I safe to assume you were insinuating that if one were God's child, that he or she would never REALLY TRULY BE DECEIVED because if he or she is deceived, then they may not even in fact be or have ever been God's to begin with? Not baiting you, I think this to probably be the truth, so I only ask you is all.

Wow, that's a long sentence. But no, I'm not saying that at all., and I'm not even sure how you read it that way. What I said was, God will answer a person's petition to show them the truth. Jesus said that the Spirit of truth would lead us into all truth. Many are deceived today, only because they trust the wrong people--whether it be pagan religion, or a Christian cult. I take it you agree that God will not ignore a new believer who seeks His truth, right?

Brother Mark
Feb 6th 2012, 01:02 AM
Not to go off on something entirely different, but would you agree or what you said, am I safe to assume you were insinuating that if one were God's child, that he or she would never REALLY TRULY BE DECEIVED because if he or she is deceived, then they may not even in fact be or have ever been God's to begin with? Not baiting you, I think this to probably be the truth, so I only ask you is all.

Depends. For one to not be deceived, wouldn't one have to know all things? Is "I don't know" deception?

Is there no room for "we see through a glass darkly"?

Weren't the apostles deceived about Jesus but grew in knowledge and grace?

Have you ever had God change your mind on a subject? If so, were you deceived prior to having your mind changed? And if you were, then were you really saved?

Seems to me that's a very high standard to meet. I would say one can be deceived and still be saved. Was the older brother deceived in the story about the prodigal son? Was he still a son?

ClayInHisHands
Feb 6th 2012, 01:09 AM
Wow, that's a long sentence.

That's what I thought. :lol:


I take it you agree that God will not ignore a new believer who seeks His truth, right?

Yes I agree wholeheartedly. I meant if someone who was believing the lie or the wrong people you mentioned(cult, etc.) would not truly be building upon the Rock and thus wasn't a believer to begin with because they believed in a lie to begin with.

However, in some cases it wouldn't be the case. Depending on which lie there faith was built upon.

Mark F
Feb 7th 2012, 03:22 AM
I am curious, on page one there are quotes from Bible Jim, but I don't see the posts, where did they come from. Periodicall I see people respond to quotes from people who have not posted in the thread, what is up with that?


Good topic btw, I have read M.R. Dehahn "Adventures in faith, studies in the life of Abraham", sound similar to Pink. Thanks for posting the link Kahtar, I will check it out. "Portraits of Christ in Genesis" is another, they are rich in what they show us of Christ.

Sojourner
Feb 7th 2012, 06:33 AM
I am curious, on page one there are quotes from Bible Jim, but I don't see the posts, where did they come from. Periodicall I see people respond to quotes from people who have not posted in the thread, what is up with that?


Good topic btw, I have read M.R. Dehahn "Adventures in faith, studies in the life of Abraham", sound similar to Pink. Thanks for posting the link Kahtar, I will check it out. "Portraits of Christ in Genesis" is another, they are rich in what they show us of Christ.

Unfortunately, Bible Jim and a few cronies persisted in being rude and insulting, and had to be shown to the door. All of their posts were subsequently deleted.

Mark F
Feb 7th 2012, 11:36 AM
Oh I see.

The subject though your OP quite deep I think if followed out. As with Christ in Scripture, inexhaustable is probably a better term.

The four gospels have been related to the colors of the "door" of the Tabernacle. They are said to represent these four aspects (for lack of better term) of Jesus character and nature.

Purple: Matthew, his royalty as King of the Jews.
Scarlet: Mark, for His shed blood.
White: Luke, for His perfect righteousness.
Blue: John, for His deity.


The one curtain, or "the door" in which all who enter must pass has woven though out all these colors representative of the Person and work of Jesus. We who have the risen Savoir, the completed canon have so much given to us, what a blessing!

Sojourner
Feb 7th 2012, 06:34 PM
Oh I see.

The subject though your OP quite deep I think if followed out. As with Christ in Scripture, inexhaustable is probably a better term.

The four gospels have been related to the colors of the "door" of the Tabernacle. They are said to represent these four aspects (for lack of better term) of Jesus character and nature.

Purple: Matthew, his royalty as King of the Jews.
Scarlet: Mark, for His shed blood.
White: Luke, for His perfect righteousness.
Blue: John, for His deity.


The one curtain, or "the door" in which all who enter must pass has woven though out all these colors representative of the Person and work of Jesus. We who have the risen Savoir, the completed canon have so much given to us, what a blessing!

Students of the Word have also noted the similarity between the pictures of Jesus portrayed in each Gospel, and the four faces on the four living creatures around the throne of God, as portrayed in the book of Revelation:

The face of a lion................ Matthew: Jesus as the lion of the tribe of Judah
The face of calf................... Mark: Jesus as the hard-working servant
The face of a man................Luke: Jesus as the savior mankind, as well as the Jewish Messiah
The face of a flying eagle..... John: Jesus as the heavenly, eternal Word

And you're right, the depth of Scripture is such that it is an inexhaustible mine of truth and knowledge. The deeper we dig, the more precious the find. Hundreds of sermons have been built on one or two verses of Scripture. The Bible is as unfathomable as the starry heavens above us, and shines just as beautifully.

Mark F
Feb 7th 2012, 09:46 PM
Students of the Word have also noted the similarity between the pictures of Jesus portrayed in each Gospel, and the four faces on the four living creatures around the throne of God, as portrayed in the book of Revelation:

The face of a lion................ Matthew: Jesus as the lion of the tribe of Judah
The face of calf................... Mark: Jesus as the hard-working servant
The face of a man................Luke: Jesus as the savior mankind, as well as the Jewish Messiah
The face of a flying eagle..... John: Jesus as the heavenly, eternal Word


Yes, yes I forgot about that paralell, thank you.

Mark F
Feb 8th 2012, 12:19 PM
Students of the Word have also noted the similarity between the pictures of Jesus portrayed in each Gospel, and the four faces on the four living creatures around the throne of God, as portrayed in the book of Revelation:

The face of a lion................ Matthew: Jesus as the lion of the tribe of Judah
The face of calf................... Mark: Jesus as the hard-working servant
The face of a man................Luke: Jesus as the savior mankind, as well as the Jewish Messiah
The face of a flying eagle..... John: Jesus as the heavenly, eternal Word

And you're right, the depth of Scripture is such that it is an inexhaustible mine of truth and knowledge. The deeper we dig, the more precious the find. Hundreds of sermons have been built on one or two verses of Scripture. The Bible is as unfathomable as the starry heavens above us, and shines just as beautifully.


Yes, yes I forgot about that paralell, thank you.

And I remember the standards that stood for the four divisions of (army)tribes around the Levites in the camp in the wilderness. Numbers 2 has this but I cannot find where the four divisions of three tribes had a standard that had an ox, a man, an eagle, and a lion. I will look this evening.

Kahtar
Feb 8th 2012, 02:25 PM
Mark, I think you will find those represented, more or less, in the prophetic blessings giving to each by Jacob. The lion of the tribe of Judah is most clear.

undelay
Feb 19th 2012, 01:35 AM
Students of the Word have also noted the similarity between the pictures of Jesus portrayed in each Gospel, and the four faces on the four living creatures around the throne of God, as portrayed in the book of Revelation:

The face of a lion................ Matthew: Jesus as the lion of the tribe of Judah
The face of calf................... Mark: Jesus as the hard-working servant
The face of a man................Luke: Jesus as the savior mankind, as well as the Jewish Messiah
The face of a flying eagle..... John: Jesus as the heavenly, eternal Word

Stuff like this is why I came back after a hiatus.

Gibberscrib
Mar 24th 2012, 10:38 PM
I think that that's true, but I also think on top of that, the perspectives of the people who wrote the gospels should be taken into account: A tax collector, a young man, a doctor, and a...John's the hard one...friend, net mender, I don't know. I do think that a part of each of their personalities come out in the gospels.

Gibberscrib
Mar 24th 2012, 10:45 PM
Where does Mark emphasize Him as a servant?
What does an eagle have to do with a word?
...not trying to be contentious, just trying to get it and see if it really fits.
thanks.

Sojourner
Mar 24th 2012, 11:21 PM
Where does Mark emphasize Him as a servant?
What does an eagle have to do with a word?
...not trying to be contentious, just trying to get it and see if it really fits.
thanks.

Hi Gibberscrib,

Welcome to the board. Let's see...if you compare Mark's Gospel to the other three, you'll notice that he makes no mention of the birth of Jesus--as in Matthew and Luke. And he certainly puts no focus on His preincarnate glory, with which John uniquely opens his Gospel.

Whereas Matthew and Luke both dedicate their first two chapters describing the events and circumstances surrounding Jesus' birth, Mark (after a brief reference to Jesus being the fulfillment of Elijah's prophecy), begins describing Jesus' selection of the Apostles, and beginning of ministry by verse 14!

This focus on His works and service effectively emphasizes Jesus' servitude, rather than His other attributes, as showcased in the other narratives. These are just a few things off the top of my head, but there are other points. Check out Pink's book for the others--then do some study on your own. :) God bless

Gibberscrib
Apr 12th 2012, 03:20 PM
That sort of makes sense. I guess I just don't see the revelation of who Jesus is in a gospel based on what it doesn't have. I've just read Mark several times and have never seen Him as a servant in it, and John 13 seems to explicitly reveals Him as Servant, but, probably not the whole gospel of John. I understand that the different gospels emphasize different things, I just really want to get at the true intentions of the authors--with the Holy Spirit of course. Yes, I'll do some studying on this...thanks for your input...

Sojourner
Apr 12th 2012, 04:59 PM
That sort of makes sense. I guess I just don't see the revelation of who Jesus is in a gospel based on what it doesn't have. I've just read Mark several times and have never seen Him as a servant in it, and John 13 seems to explicitly reveals Him as Servant, but, probably not the whole gospel of John. I understand that the different gospels emphasize different things, I just really want to get at the true intentions of the authors--with the Holy Spirit of course. Yes, I'll do some studying on this...thanks for your input...

Mark's Gospel doesn't represent Jesus as a servant because of specific references to the word "servant." Rather, it is seen in the comparative emphasis on Jesus' servitude, compared to the other Gospels. Matthew and Luke detail the birth, infancy and lineage of Jesus. John starts his narrative with the preincarnate Jesus in heaven, and shows more of Jesus' heavenly relationship, as in John 14-17. Mark, on the other hand, begins with the actual ministry of Jesus--the labors of Jesus as the hard-working Servant of God. Hence, the the symbol of the calf, which is a beast of burden. The distinction in attributes is inherent in both the introduction and general emphasis shown in each Gospel.

The four Gospels are like four pictures of the same house, each depicting one side. In each picture, you will see elements common to all four (general structure, windows, bricks/siding, etc.), and in each picture you will see elements unique to that picture (doors, porches, electrical/telephone wires, etc.). With the Gospels, we see four different perspectives of the same Jesus, with parallel passages depicting the same events, yet also things unique to each Gospel. As with the pictures of the house, the four Gospels together, form a complete composite picture of Jesus, showing all His attributes.

I believe one of the main reasons we have four Gospels is seen in the standard for confirming the truth of testimony: corroboration by 2 or 3 witnesses--established under the law for capital offenses (Deut 17:6; 19:15), but expanded for purposes of general testimony in the the NT (Matt 18:16; 2 Cor 13:1). Two or three witnesses were required, but the Lord went one better by giving four witnesses, testifying to the truth about Jesus.

Camellia
Apr 13th 2012, 12:51 PM
One of the first Bible-based books I read as new Christian was a tiny little tome entitled, "Why Four Gospels?" by Arthur W. Pink. I was amazed at the way Pink demonstrated the Gospels' undeniable divine inspiration by pointing out how God's Spirit had guided the writers to add or omit details from each Gospel, to form a perfect composite of Jesus. Pink presents the four Gopels as a composite portrait of Jesus--like a photo taken of each side of a house: each photo portrays the same house, while depicting details common to all four sides, and unique details not seen in the others. Pink points out the distinguishing characteristics of Jesus specific to each Gospel, as well as those which dovetail precisely into a harmonized narrative of the life and ministry of Jesus.
I've owned a copy of "Why Four Gospels?" for some 30 years, and have garnered insight from it, into the meticulous guidance of the Holy Spirit in the formation of the Gospels--both in choosing who would record the words, how they were worded, and what was included or omitted in each one. And I learned also that, Pink only scratched the surface with regard to his observations. Like finding the surface streaks of gold in a mine, the promise of even greater riches lie below for those willing to dig for it. I was thrilled to find that the text is now freely available on the internet. I highly recommend it as an asset for the diligent workman who does not already have it in his library:

http://www.pbministries.org/books/pink/4_gospels/index.htm (http://www.pbministries.org/books/pink/4_gospels/index.htm)


I have just found this post. I have only read the Introduction so far, but already I have learned so much! I am a new Christian and this looks ideal for me. I am looking forward to reading the book about Genesis, which others have mentioned.

But, please could someone tell me what are the faults in Pink's doctrine, so that I can avoid them?

Thank you so much for the link.

Sojourner
Apr 14th 2012, 12:05 AM
Hi Camellia, welcome to the board! What most differ with Pink on, really amounts to a matter of opinion. None of his beliefs would be considered Biblically unsound, so you can feel free to benefit from the depth of his insight and observations in the Scriptures, without worrying about false teachings or anything. Still, it's important for new Christians to be firmly grounded in the truths of the Bible before they start reading books about the Bible.

Kahtar
Apr 14th 2012, 04:25 PM
But, please could someone tell me what are the faults in Pink's doctrine, so that I can avoid them?
He is very much dispensational. Some are okay with that, others not. And as was common in his time, very much anti-Roman Catholic. Those are the two glaring points I've noticed that I personally don't agree with. But the rest I find quite valuable.

Sojourner
Apr 15th 2012, 12:24 AM
He is very much dispensational. Some are okay with that, others not. And as was common in his time, very much anti-Roman Catholic. Those are the two glaring points I've noticed that I personally don't agree with. But the rest I find quite valuable.

Yeah, that's the only point of contention I have with Pink also. However, what many are unaware of is, he changed his views about that perspective in his later years.

Kahtar
Apr 16th 2012, 03:16 AM
I was not aware of that either.

Gibberscrib
Apr 16th 2012, 04:43 AM
Thanks Sojourner,

Yeah, I see what you mean more now. Probably, each of the gospels has Him as a Servant, Lion, Word, Messiah, but you're saying the emphasis is different on each. I didn't mean that I didn't see a specific reference of the name "Servant", I meant that I saw Him in John 13 as a servant washing the disciples feet, but that is missing in Mark. I think it's entirely possible that you're right and I promise you I will go through the gospels again and see if I can see what you are seeing, and the book of revelation--because I've always read this portion of scripture about the living creatures, not as something symbolic but as real living creatures in heaven. I would equate it to seeing the archangel Michael and declaring that His face is symbolic for the book of Acts. That's just how I see it, but I'm definitely going to look into what you're saying, because I know I've been wrong before, and I could be wrong now--I lean a little too much towards the exegetical side of things...thanks for taking the time to write me and challenge me. And, I loved what you had to say about the two or three witness--that seems totally right--I think that's true. Well, time to read...

God's legacy
Jul 20th 2012, 02:57 AM
One of the first Bible-based books I read as new Christian was a tiny little tome entitled, "Why Four Gospels?" by Arthur W. Pink. I was amazed at the way Pink demonstrated the Gospels' undeniable divine inspiration by pointing out how God's Spirit had guided the writers to add or omit details from each Gospel, to form a perfect composite of Jesus. Pink presents the four Gopels as a composite portrait of Jesus--like a photo taken of each side of a house: each photo portrays the same house, while depicting details common to all four sides, and unique details not seen in the others. Pink points out the distinguishing characteristics of Jesus specific to each Gospel, as well as those which dovetail precisely into a harmonized narrative of the life and ministry of Jesus. Here are a few highlights:

Matthew, emphasizes Jesus as the Jewish Messiah, and traces Jesus' genealogy back to Abraham, showing Jesus' earthly claim to the throne of David. Matthew also cites more OT prophecies fulfilled by Jesus than the other four Gospels combined. The link between the Old Covenant and the New Covenant, Matthew's Gospel breaks the 400 years of silence after Malachi. Just as Moses was sent as the deliverer after four centuries of no word from God, Jesus was sent 400 years after the final prophecies of Malachi were given--prophecies that were fulfilled by both He and John the baptizer.

Mark emphasizes Jesus the servant, skipping over His birth and genealogy, to reveal the hard-working minister of the Gospel. The majestic imagery that so marks Matthew's Gospel is not to be found in Mark. Rather the picture of a man laboring tirelessly for the sake of His Father's kingdom is in view. Only in Mark for instance, do we read of Jesus being so exhausted at the end of a day of ministering, that He had to be physically helped into a boat by His disciples. This exhaustion is why He was sound asleep in the storm-tossed ship until the disciples woke Him with their fearful cries. (Mark 6:36-39).

Luke portrays Jesus as the Savior not only of Israel, but of all mankind, which is why Jesus' genealogy is traced all the way back to Adam, rather than stopping at Abraham. And if Luke was indeed a Gentile as many Bible scholars believe, than that is another reason that "the beloved physician" and companion of Paul was chosen to record this Gospel. Rather than the Jewish character we see in Matthew, Luke showcases the humanity of Jesus. For instance, it's only in Luke that we see the parable of the Good Samaritan, in which Jesus seeks to show that those generally considered outcasts by the Jews were not outcasts to God--Who is no respecter of persons, but is ultimately the Savior of all mankind.

Finally, John presents Jesus as He was before He was Jesus--as the very glory and likeness of God Himself, before the creation of man. As with the other Gospels, there are passages peculiar to John that accentuate traits not highlighted in the synoptic Gospels. Matthew, Mark, and Luke convey a composite picture of Jesus' humanity, but in John, it is the deity of the Word of God robed in that humanity that is portrayed. "To wit that God was in Christ, reconciling the world to Himself."

I've owned a copy of "Why Four Gospels?" for some 30 years, and have garnered insight from it, into the meticulous guidance of the Holy Spirit in the formation of the Gospels--both in choosing who would record the words, how they were worded, and what was included or omitted in each one. And I learned also that, Pink only scratched the surface with regard to his observations. Like finding the surface streaks of gold in a mine, the promise of even greater riches lie below for those willing to dig for it. I was thrilled to find that the text is now freely available on the internet. I highly recommend it as an asset for the diligent workman who does not already have it in his library:

http://www.pbministries.org/books/pink/4_gospels/index.htm (http://www.pbministries.org/books/pink/4_gospels/index.htm)

It'a a testimony of truth. Like four witnesses to an event. If they were all identical as in the justice system, it might look like they were guilty of collusion. But their perspectives are all different with details of the same fundamental beliefs and accounts of Jesus's ministry in perfect harmony.