Ever wonder how to properly extend fully heterosexual manlove in confusing times?  Well, worry no longer.  There is a complete video professor like tutorial now available to help you show the love:

Full details with print instructions (like men will read the instructions) are available here.

(HT - Matt Ortiz)

Spurgeon's Thermopylae - received this today from Kairos Journal:

The pulpit has become dishonored; it is esteemed as being of very little worth and of no esteem. Ah! we must always maintain the dignity of the pulpit. I hold that it is the Thermopylae of Christendom; it is here that the battle must be fought between right and wrong; not so much with the pen, valuable as that is as an assistant, as with the living voice of earnest men, “contending earnestly for the faith once delivered unto the saints.” In some churches the pulpit is put away; there is a prominent altar, but the pulpit is omitted. Now, the most prominent thing under the gospel dispensation is not the altar, which belonged to the Jewish dispensation, but the pulpit. “We have an altar, whereof they have no right to eat which serve the tabernacle;” that altar is Christ; but Christ has been pleased to exalt “the foolishness of preaching” to the most prominent position in his house of prayer. We must take heed that we always maintain preaching. It is this that God will bless; it is this that he has promised to crown with success. “Faith cometh by hearing, and hearing by the Word of God.” We must not expect to see great changes nor any great progress of the gospel, until there is greater esteem for the pulpit—more said of it and thought of it. “Well,” some may reply, “you speak of the dignity of the pulpit; I take it, you lower it yourself, sir, by speaking in such a style to your hearers.” Ah! no doubt you think so. Some pulpits die of dignity. I take it, the greatest dignity in the world is the dignity of converts—that the glory of the pulpit is, if I may use such a metaphor, to have captives at its chariot-wheels, to see converts following it, and where there are such, and those from the very worst of men; there is a dignity in the pulpit beyond any dignity which a fine mouthing of words and a grand selection of fantastic language could ever give to it. . .2

Footnotes:

1 “Preaching for the Poor,” in Spurgeon's Sermons, 2nd ed. (New York: Sheldon & Company, 1861), 157-158. Preached January 25, 1857, on Matthew 11:5.
2 Earlier in the same sermon, he developed his point of accessibility: “If they are preached to in fine terms—in grandiloquent language which they cannot lay hold of—the poor will not have the gospel preached to them, for they will not go to hear it. They must have something attractive to them; we must preach as Christ did; we must tell anecdotes, and stories, and parables, as he did; we must come down and make the gospel attractive. The reason why the old Puritan preachers could get congregations was this—they did not give their hearers dry theology; they illustrated it; they had an anecdote from this and a quaint passage from that classic author; here a verse of poetry; here and there even a quip or pun—a thing which now-a-days is a sin above all sins, but which was constantly committed by these preachers, whom I have ever esteemed as the patterns of pulpit eloquence.” Ibid., 153.

I just saw a commerical for a new ABC show called "Big Shots" and one of the guys on the show made a profound statement.

Men...we're the new women

Unfortunately, I have no context for the quotation nor do I know what was meant by the statement.  Yet I do think that we have swung a pendulum hard to one side in our culture.  Some love to assume that we still live in a world where boys are taught that "real men don't cry."  We are hardly living in that world any longer.  We live in a society where boy behavior is medicated, the height of masculinity is being "real" enough to whimper with your friends and passivity reigns in the chests of many men.  

I love the word's of a Father to a son as he is about to pass away:

1 When David's time to die drew near, he commanded Solomon his son, saying, 2 “I am about to go the way of all the earth. Be strong, and show yourself a man, 3 and keep the charge of the Lord your God, walking in his ways and keeping his statutes, his commandments, his rules, and his testimonies, as it is written in the Law of Moses, that you may prosper in all that you do and wherever you turn, 4 that the Lord may establish his word that he spoke concerning me, saying, ‘If your sons pay close attention to their way, to walk before me in faithfulness with all their heart and with all their soul, you shall not lack a man on the throne of Israel.’ 1 Kings 2:1-4

On a positive note - if you are a husband or a father - take a moment and read this

Continued from The Gospels - A Reliable and Biased Testimony to an Unparalleled Life

In terms of historical attention, the gospel of Mark has been a bit of a little step brother to the longer gospels of Matthew, Luke and John.  In fact, many in the ancient world considered Mark to serve the church as a sort of abstract, or a short outline version, of the Gospel of Matthew.[1] Historically there has been much more preaching on John and Matthew. Even today, you will not find as many sermons preached from Mark's gospel as you will from the more theological gospel of John.[2]  In recent times much more scholarly focus has been given to this gospel due to its helpfulness in a solution to the Synoptic Problem (see above).  The work is a mere sixteen chapters and is a fast paced accounting of the teaching and life of Jesus.  It contains no birth narrative as do Matthew and Luke and is very concerned with presenting Jesus' Passion Week as the focus of the story.  In fact, about half of the book is about the last week of Jesus life.  This will be only a brief introduction to the background of the book and its teaching.  For those who want more just follow the yellow brick road called the footnotes.  I am convinced that Jesus just loves footnotes.  At least I do.

Authorship of Mark

All of the gospels do not have the authors name as part of the text itself, but the four gospels have never really been anonymous in church history.  The author's name which is associated with the book is that of a man named Mark.  This person is mentioned several times in the New Testament and was commonly known as John Mark.  The earliest church traditions all associate this gospel with Mark and his task to record the account of the apostle Peter in writing.  The earliest sources we have are from the writings of Papias a church leader in Hierapolis and Irenaeus bishop in Lyon (modern day France).  Papias' work survives in a text written by the prominent early church historian Eusebius.  It reads as follows:

And the Elder said this also: "Mark, having become the interpreter of Peter, wrote down accurately whatever he remembered of the things said and done by the lord, but no however in order." For neither did he hear the Lord, nor did he follow him, but afterwards, as I said, Peter, who adapted his teachings to the needs of his hearers, but not as though he were drawing up a connected account of the Lord's oracles.  So then Mark made no mistake in thus recording some things just as he remembered them.  For he took forethought for one thing, not to omit any of the things that he had heard, nor to state any of them falsely. [3]

It is estimated the Papias tradition is very early and dates perhaps to within 90-100 AD.[4]  Irenaeus, writing in the second century recorded the following:

After their departure, Mark, the disciple and interpreter of Peter, did also hand down to us in writing what had been preached by Peter. Luke also, the companion of Paul, recorded in a book the Gospel preached by him.[5]

The oldest traditions all hold that Mark was the other who arranged the teachings of Peter to give a written account of Jesus Christ to the church.  In addition to the tradition there is good internal evidence in the book that Mark's gospel greatly reflects the preaching of Peter that we see in the book of Acts.[6]  New Testament scholar Daniel Wallace provides a great summary of the internal connection with Mark and Peter; I will quote him at length:

• John Mark had contact with Peter from no later than the mid-40s (Acts 12:12) and it appears that the church met at Mark's own residence.
• Both Peter and Mark were connected to the churches in Antioch and Jerusalem.
• Paul sent Mark from Rome to the Colossian church and to Philemon in 60-62.  If Peter were in Rome at this time, Mark would have had contact with him there.
• 2 Timothy 4:11 we find Paul giving Timothy instructions to bring Mark with him from Ephesus to Rom (c. 64).  It is possible that he had been outside of Rome since his departure in 62.
• Mark is with Peter in Rom in c. 65 (1 Peter 5:13) perhaps after his return at Paul's request.  Peter also calls Mark his "son" in this passage indicating a more long-standing relationship.
• The book of Mark's outline follows the Petrine teaching recorded in Acts 10:36-41.  (1) John the Baptist  (2) Jesus Baptized by John (3) Jesus' miracles show he is from God (4) he went to Jerusalem (5) was crucified (6) he was raised on the third day.  This shows that perhaps Mark even received a framework for the oracles of Jesus from Peter.
• The low view of Peter and the other apostles in Mark shows that the person writing was not trying to put them on a pedestal.  A non-apostolic writer would have done this unless he was recording what he actually had received from Peter.[7]

So we have good reasons, both external testimony from tradition and content of the book itself that John Mark arranged the instruction of Peter who gave eyewitness testimony to the life and teaching of Jesus Christ his Lord.

Who was John Mark

John Mark is mentioned several times in the New Testament as an associate in ministry of both Peter (1 Peter 5:13) and Paul (Acts 12:25, 15:37-39; 2 Timothy 4:11).  In some ways he is one of the key players in the early church as he is a disciple and co-laborer of the two men who most shaped the Christian movement after the ascension of Jesus.  In the early days in Jerusalem the church apparently met in his house (Acts 12:12), the same house in which the last supper was held.[8] He exhibits great ability as a storyteller and takes us on a journey to the central focus of the gospel - the death, burial and resurrection of Jesus.

One of the things I appreciate most about John Mark is that he is a bit of a comeback kid.  In his relationship with Paul we see him as one of the earliest missionaries taking the gospel out into the world.  Then apparently he becomes a little freaked out in the field and abandons the mission.  This of course had Paul a little miffed and Paul and Barnabas actually part ways.  Paul simply doesn't trust him after Mark punked out on him.  Yet Barnabas, whose name means son of encouragement, gives him a second chance and Mark was greatly used by God.  He eventually becomes Peter's right hand man and what God does in his relationship with Paul is amazing.  Paul's last comments about him are very endearing.  Just before Paul's death, he asks Timothy to send for John Mark; apparently he wanted his friend at his side in his last days.

Dating of Mark

Many events factor into a dating of the gospel of Mark and knowing some important and confirmed/accepted times from the first century is always helpful.  These dates will be brought into our discussion of a date for Mark's writing.

Event	Date (AD)
Fall of Jerusalem	70
Martyrdom of Paul and Peter	64-68
Epistles of Paul	45-68
Some Oral Tradition	32-70
Crucifixion of Jesus	32

In looking at Mark's date we find several important issues.  First, if we accept the tradition that he recorded the teaching of Peter then we must place it somewhere in the locus of the life of the apostle.  Second, if one finds the two source/Markan priority hypothesis as a good solution to the Synoptic Problem, then Mark must precede Matthew and Luke and this affects its dating.  Third, we have testimony from the early church that Mark wrote either just before or just after the death of Peter which we date to the persecution under Nero after a great fire in 64 AD.  With the theme of suffering so prominent in Mark and Peter's execution in the mid sixties, most prefer a date for the gospel between 60 and 70, usually right around 65. 

Yet some who favor Markan priority place it in the mid 50s[9] for the following reasons.  If Mark was written first then the gospel of Luke must be dated after Mark.  Dating Luke's gospel is not so difficult.  We know from the text itself that the same author composed by Luke and Acts as a two part volume with Luke compiled first.  A few dates help us position Luke-Acts.  First, Acts has no mention of the fall of Jerusalem which we date conclusively to 70AD.  This would be strange if this painful event had already occurred.  This gives us confidence to place the writing of Acts to before 70.  Additionally, Acts also ends with Paul living under house arrest in Rome.  We estimate that Paul is martyred in between 64-68 so this would place Acts some time before his death.  If Luke came before Acts we find that gospel coming on to the scene in the very early part of the 60s with some placing it around 62AD.  So if one favors the thesis that Mark was written first, then a date preceding Luke, sometime in the late 50s seems to be preferred.  However, if you hold to the tradition that Matthew was first, then Mark can be happy at around 65AD.  With either consideration, Mark is one of the earliest gospels recorded to pass the teaching and story of Jesus on for generations to come. 

Provenance of Mark

Here is our big word for the day...provenance.  It simply means the origin of the writing or the place where it was written. The church has always held that the gospel was written from Italy, in the imperial capital of Rome.  The use of technical Latin terminology, the use of Roman accounting of time (6:48; 13:35) all point towards Rome. Mark's use of the Greek version of the Old Testament, his explanation of Jewish customs and practices, his translation of Aramaic terms indicate he was writing with a Gentile audience in mind. [10]   Finally, Mark's lack of inclusion of a Jewish genealogy for Jesus perhaps points to a Roman audience as well.  We have no good reason to doubt that the gospel originated in the first century Christian community in Rome. 

Context and Purpose of Mark

Ben Witherington's commentary on Mark calls to mind two very important cultural contexts which are in play in Mark's gospel.  First, the culture of early first century Galilee/Judea in 20-30 AD and second, the mid first century culture of Rome in the 60s.[11]  It is an interesting fact that both contexts presented great difficulty for both the Jewish and early Christian communities.  Galilee/Judea was under Roman occupation and rule where Jesus and his following appeared a religious-political threat to imperial power.  Rome in the mid 60s presented an intense, though brief, time of suffering and persecution under the maniacal leadership of Nero.  That story needs a brief explanation.

In the early days of Nero's reign Christians lived in relative peace in the empire.  They were seen with some suspicion due to their rejection of pagan gods and festivals as well as their preaching of the gospel.  Aggressive seeking of converts put them at odds with the established and ancient religions of the day.  Though Peter and Paul were executed for their leadership in preaching the gospel, aggressive, wide spread persecution of Christians as a class of people was not yet the reality.  This changed around 64 AD with a widespread fire in Rome.  The cause of the fire is uncertain with some blaming the emperor as the source.  Nero, however, found a different scapegoat to turn suspicion away from him.  He blamed the Christians.  This was significant for two reasons. First, he was the first emperor to treat the Christians as followers of a different religion than that of the Jews.  This made them believers in a new religion, not an ancient and accepted faith.[12]  Second, he declared open season on Christians and set off unprecedented abuse of Christian people. After the time of Nero's persecutions, a brutal account was recorded by the ancient historian Tacitus.  Oh, how our sisters and brothers suffered for the sake of the name of Christ.  Here is the account of Tacitus:

But all human efforts, all the lavish gifts of the emperor, and the propitiations of the gods, did not banish the sinister belief that the conflagration was the result of an order. Consequently, to get rid of the report, Nero fastened the guilt and inflicted the most exquisite tortures on a class hated for their abominations, called Christians by the populace. Christus, from whom the name had its origin, suffered the extreme penalty during the reign of Tiberius at the hands of one of our procurators, Pontius Pilatus, and a most mischievous superstition, thus checked for the moment, again broke out not only in Judaea, the first source of the evil, but even in Rome, where all things hideous and shameful from every part of the world find their centre and become popular. Accordingly, an arrest was first made of all who pleaded guilty; then, upon their information, an immense multitude was convicted, not so much of the crime of firing the city, as of hatred against mankind. Mockery of every sort was added to their deaths. Covered with the skins of beasts, they were torn by dogs and perished, or were nailed to crosses, or were doomed to the flames and burnt, to serve as a nightly illumination, when daylight had expired. Nero offered his gardens for the spectacle, and was exhibiting a show in the circus, while he mingled with the people in the dress of a charioteer or stood aloft on a car. Hence, even for criminals who deserved extreme and exemplary punishment, there arose a feeling of compassion; for it was not, as it seemed, for the public good, but to glut one man's cruelty, that they were being destroyed.[13]

Nero sounds like a pretty big jerk to me and just making an educated guess I imagine that he received a really, really warm reception in the afterlife.  The themes in Mark reflect this context of suffering and persecution.  In the gospel Jesus is presented as the suffering servant, wrongly and brutally punished by the hand of Rome.  Christians in Rome under Nero's reign would have understood this message.  Follow the example of Jesus in the midst of suffering. 

Such is our own call - we are called to Jesus and to live together in his mission.  Whether we live in times of open suffering or lulled to sleep by comfort and familiarity we must be shaken loose from our current views of life in order to follow Jesus in our world today.  We need his life and story to constantly define our own.  This is our invitation, to see Jesus as the founder and perfecter of our faith, the definer of life and the person whose story gives us signposts for ever turn of life ahead.

---

[1] William L. Lane, The Gospel According to Mark; the English Text with Introduction, Exposition, and Notes (Grand Rapids,: Eerdmans, 1974), 3.

[2] This is not a scientific survey, but if you compare the two pages on SermonCloud.com and you will see the disparity.  Mark - http://www.sermoncloud.com/sermons-on-Mark/ and John - http://www.sermoncloud.com/sermons-on-John/

[3] Lane, 8.

[4] James R. Edwards, The Gospel According to Mark (Grand Rapids, Mich: Eerdmans, 2002), 4.

[5] Irenaeus, Against Heresies(Christian Classics Ethereal Library, accessed August 15 2007); available from http://www.ccel.org/ccel/schaff/anf01.ix.iv.ii.html.

[6] Lane, 10-12.

[7] Daniel Wallace, Mark: Introduction, Argument, and Outline(Bible.org, accessed August 15 2007); available from http://www.bible.org/page.php?page_id=1093.

[8] Edwards, 5.

[9] This is the position favored in Carson, Moo, and Morris.

[10] Lane, 25.

[11] Witherington, 31.

[12] Ibid., 34-35.

[13] Tacitus, The Annals (MIT Internet Classics Archive, accessed August 15 2007); available from

Matt Ortiz, pastor of Crossroads Church in National City, California posted this funny video on a pastor's forum.  It was produced by the Latino Comedy Project.

 

Biochemist and intelligent design proponent Michael Behe was on Colbert Report recently.  Not much depth here, but it is fun and I'm glad Behe went on.  Just a few seeds put out there cannot hurt.  Most Americans don't think as much about science so having this on Colbert probably exposed some people who normally are not asking certain questions. Here is a link to the 5 minute video. 

On a similar topic - Intelligent ID the Future interviews Walt Ruloff, executive producer of the coming documentary Expelled. 

Some of you know that I spent six years at Virginia Tech starting a ministry there with varsity athletes, a large portion of which were on the Hokie football team.  I have been asked several questions over the years about Mike and have been somewhat hesitant to speak.  For one, I do know Mike and spent some time with him at Tech before he went big time.  Second, when someone has that much spotlight on him, is given that much money it is a little tough to know what affect that has on a person.

Some of you may have seen the press conference where Vick issued his apology.  If not it is available here.

I guess the most frequently asked questions I have been asked about Mike are: 1) Do you think he did it (recently this has been asked over and over) 2) What do you think he thinks about God?  The second question is of more interest to me.  You see, I do pray for Mike and have since 1998 when I first met him.  As he is likely to go off to jail in the near future my prayer remains what it was after our discussions about Jesus on the VT campus.

• That he would learn the gospel of grace proclaimed in the New Testament.
• That someone would have both the time and opportunity to teach him about life and godliness.  Our few times were cut short by too much fame, way too quick.

He did cruel things to both animals and to himself.  There is no excuse for this.  But I do pray that he is established in the Jesus he spoke of so publicly today.  Will this happen? I really don't know.  But I still hope so...

Well, I took the book The Physics of Christianity with me on vacation in late July looking forward to a refresh of some of my undergraduate course work at UNC Chapel Hill and to see how a contemporary Physicist integrates his scientific work with the doctrines of the Christian Faith. Let me be honest up front that I only got about half way through the work and was tracking with it at a level of investigation to review the book here on the blog. To be frank, I simply didn't finish the book...as it got more and more bizarre as I read on and we ran out of vacation time.

It begins with some big claims that all of the discoveries of modern physics confirm the Christian narrative and its categories. The existence of God as the first cause of the universe, the triunity of this God and beliefs such as the resurection of the dead and eternal life. All fine and dandy. What followed was a pretty approachable discussion of some modern physics. General relativity, quantum mechanics and the standard model for particle physics were all on the docket. I will say that for the uninitiated it will be difficult reading. I did 3 years of a BS in Physics before switching to Applied Computer Science and I found the reading accessible. I kept thinking...you need at least some basic understanding of physics and an analytic mind to follow this.

After the general introductions the book just started getting odd. The singularity at the beginning of this universe, the singularity at the end of this univers and the singularity which began the "multiverse" becomes "Father, Son and Holy Ghost" - The quantum reality of the multiverse and tunneling theory become the means by the multiverse Jesus walks through walls and rises from the dead. Most bizarre was that the resurrection and eternal life become us uploading into supercomputers buried deep in bedrock safe from nuclear blasts. We'll live forever singing Kum Ba Yah in the matrix. No kidding. And I thought being banished to Chiron Beta Prime would be a ride.

Here is an example of someone fully trained and convinced in his own field (Physics) and wandering around in one he clearly does not understand (theology). I applaud Tipler's boldness and zeal and certainly his theories are very interesting if you are a fan of sci-fi. Yet the Christianity of this book was unrecognizable once Tipler's theory of everything had its way.

One final note - here is a full review of the book by Canadian Journalist Denyse O'Leary - something I am unable to do as I did not have the time to finish the work as vacation was a bit short this summer. I wish Tipler the best in his efforts to integrate Physics and faith - a much needed enterprise.  I would only suggest having some theological dialog partners and perhaps reading a few simple catechisms along the way.

Posted this on the Inversion Blog, but thought it worth sharing here:

Some of you know that we have a crusade in favor of reading going on at Inversion. It manifests itself in several ways. Before starting a new series we have long articles, at intersections we have papers and then there is the one year old tradition of the "junk drawer" in the notes on Thursday nights.

I found this video to be very helpful in the cause...

The Medieval Help Desk - too funny...

Further evidence has been found that our crusade for reading is very much needed.

 

A few weeks ago a friend of mine asked if the POCBlog community would be part of fund raising for Jacob's Well.  I said, I never thought of it.  Then last night an anonymous friend added an ingredient that will provide a fun online experiment for us all.  Most of you know that we are working on moving to NJ to plant churches in the coming days. We are in the process of raising funds for the project and thought this would be a great thing for all of us here at the blog to participate in.

So, most of you know that Howard Dean turned eyebrows after raising gobs of cash using the Internet in the 2004 democratic presidential campaign.  My thought is...so if this guy leveraged the power of the web to raise millions for the kingdoms of this earth, I figured we could combine to make a viral effort to raise some for the Kingdom. 

Here is the game plan:

• An anonymous donor has offered to match all gifts to Jacob's Well up to 35 thousand dollars to get our fund raising started.  A huge blessing. That is 350, $100 dollar donations to match (or a combination of other amounts)
  
• If we all chip in here I think we can knock it out as a blog community making some sort of internet/church planting history. Will be cool to see what we can do together.  Kasey and I will kick in the first $100.00.

Here's how we do it - read these instructions

• You will need to create a user account with user name and password to give online. Please make note of this information.  Once logged in you will need to enter amount, frequency of the gift (Monthly/Yearly or One Time), select the fund “Offerings.” In the sub fund drop-down select “Jacob’s Well—Church Plant.” 
  
• Click this link to contribute online.

Spread the word - post this link on your blog, MySpace, Facebook, send out to your lists etc. 

Note: All donations go into a specified church planting account managed here by Fellowship Bible Church - a member of the Evangelical Council for Financial Accountability. 

Thanks - lets pray this thing gets viral and see how this spreads out.
Blessings,
Reid

Hey guys, I just received word that Sovereign Grace Ministries just made their entire MP3 message Library free.  Here is the note from the ministry:

You may or may not be aware that all of the MP3 messages on the Sovereign Grace Store have been made FREE to download and can be searched by topic, event, or speaker. ENJOY and spread the word!

Add Sovereign Grace to the many great downloadable sources available online. 

Here is the link

My friend Dr. Bruce Ware will be leading a bi-annual theology conference at Southern Seminary in Louisville.  The following is from a release that gives the rationale behind the initiative:

The theology conference will begin after Ware’s tenure as president of the Evangelical Theological Society and will be held on the Southern Seminary campus. Ware, who formerly served as senior associate dean, will now serve as director of the conference, launching a biannual conference designed to engage contemporary issues from the standpoint of confessional conviction.

Moore said Ware is a natural choice to lead the conference because of his scholarly engagement of numerous issues within the evangelical world. Ware has opposed open theism in books such as “God’s Lesser Glory: The Diminished God of Open Theism” and “God’s Greater Glory: The Exalted God of Scripture and the Christian Faith” and has defended the historical doctrine of the Trinity in “Father, Son, and Holy Spirit: Relationships, Roles and Relevance.”

"Bruce Ware is the Athanasius of contemporary evangelicalism, confronting error, be it open theism or evangelical feminism, with the glorious truth of Scripture,” Moore said.

“Professor Ware is the natural choice to lead the Southern Seminary Conference on Theology. He is respected all around as one of the most significant thinkers in American Protestantism today. He understands the issues. And he has the courage and conviction to speak to issues others may find controversial or uncomfortable. I look forward to working with Professor Ware on leading a conference that doesn't just address ideas, but changes lives."

Dr. Ware is a man that can walk within various confessional traditions and contemporary movements.  I have been with him in edgier settings in Seattle and with more traditional people in Nashville and he is very effective in both. He is a guy that is gracious, winsome, humble, bold and compelling.  Not to mention he is spooky smart. This is a good thing. 

Now some of you are already "conference addicts" - my advice is this.  Pick one or two things to be involved with to sharpen your saw - but then stay in the field doing real ministry.  Conference hopping without real ministry is counterproductive.  The same might be said of blogging...

Congrats Dr. Ware and godspeed.   

According this AP story, one out of four adults did not read a single book last year.  Is there hope for us?  Well, maybe these critters will read.  Not likely.

I'll refer back to my protest in favor of books...continuing a crusade in favor of reading...not backing down one bit.

Continued from The Books of the New Testament

Skeptics throughout the ages have asked whether the gospels are to be trusted because they were written by biased people, the followers of Jesus himself.  They surely must have had a skewed point of view as to who this Jesus is.  After all, you cannot trust someone's biggest fans to give an objective account of someone's life...can you?  Recently this skepticism has been found unwarranted for a couple reasons.  First, we know that eyewitness accounts are always the most reliable when looking at events that we ourselves did not observe.  If the gospels demonstrate themselves to be the testimony of eyewitnesses they are then the most trustworthy views of Jesus we possess.  Second, the claim that someone is unable to correctly convey a story because they are "biased" is highly unwarranted.  We will look at each of these issues.

Eyewitness Testimony in the New Testament

When asking the question "What happened with this Jesus guy?" the first persons we should ask are those who walked with him, talked with him and lived their lives with him.  Or as 2 Peter 1:16 rightly records, those who were eyewitnesses of his majesty.  This requires us to look at the claims of the gospels to be just that - a written record of eyewitness testimony.  This was a view taken for granted for years until the advent of critical scholarship in the 19^th century where the origin and source of all the gospel writings was brought into question.  Revisionist historians and liberal New Testament scholars began to claim the gospels were 3^rd or 4^th century compilations of Christian communities which did not reflect anything close to eyewitness testimony. 

However, there has been much movement in New Testament studies over the last several decades which has ruled out the revisionist ideas of liberal theology.  The late 3^rd and 4^th century dates have been utterly repudiated and we have been able to date all the gospels conclusively to the first century.  This has been due to amazing archaeological discoveries such as a fragment of John's gospel dating to around 125 AD.  Additionally, recent scholarship has shown that there are very good reasons to understand the gospels as testimony.  In 2006 Scottish Richard Bauckham published Jesus and the Eyewitnesses - the Gospels as Eyewitness Testimony which makes a strong case for our understanding the gospels as containing the testimony of those who knew the life and teaching of Jesus directly.  More and more scholars are coming to the position which the church has always held.  The gospels are the most reliable portrait of the life and teaching of Jesus because they contain the accounts of the people who were there.  But where these people just Jesus fan boys, too biased to be trusted?  Good question.

Bias is not Always Bad 

The question of bias is important, after all, the gospel writers did not leave us with a simple narrative that records nothing more than rote historical facts.  No, they were convinced of the truth of Jesus' teaching and their account of history contains the teaching of theology about Jesus as well as historical data.  Yes, there are towns, rulers, times and places mentioned, but also teaching as to the identity of Jesus and his mission from God.  But does this one sided account, that of Jesus' followers, disqualify their testimony as being valid?  In fact I will argue that if you want to know something about something or someone, you are better off asking people who are passionately committed to the story he shares.  A few examples can help us see that Bias is not always bad.

One example comes from the world of technology and through a simple question.   If you desire to know about the ins and outs of Macintosh computers, would you ask someone has never touched a Mac to be your teacher?  Of course not...who would you ask?  You probably would ask one of those MacIdolaters who are loyal subjects of the cult of Steve Jobs.  You know that crazy Apple guy who has to put down Windows every time the subject arises.  You know the guy who is flossing[1] his iPhone for all to see.  You may be that guy.  My point is this.  The people from whom you will get the best information about Macs are probably the ones who are the most biased; the ones who are passionate about their elite computers.  In like manner, NASCAR fans should be consulted on the intricacies of Stock car racing, indie rockers should be the ones you talk to about what is happening in the music scene and his original followers are the ones we should consult about Jesus Christ.   

One final example of a more serious kind should be mentioned.  To exclude a person who was involved with an event, who passionately cares that the story be told, as being a reliable witness would be quite odd indeed.  This sort of reasoning would rule out the accounts of Jewish historians of the Holocaust.  They are most interested as they were the ones most closely involved with this horrific course of events.  We would not think of discounting someone's testimony because they are "biased" against the Nazi's because their family went through the Holocaust.  No, rather we trust them as they were the closest people to the events and care most passionately about conveying and passing on this history.[2] 

Until someone is shown to be an unreliable witness we ought to take their word for something until they are shown to be not trustworthy.  The philosopher Immanuel Kant rightly showed some time ago that an assumption that all people are lying all the time is self-refuting.  We should assume truth telling unless we have good reason to think that someone is not telling the truth.[3]  If we find that someone is in their right mind and capable to tell the truth, is willing to do so, his words are recorded and preserved with integrity and his testimony is validated by other witnesses, we should trust the words of that person.[4]  It seems that this is precisely the sort of reality that we find in the writers of the gospels. 

It was their intention to tell the truth

• Most of them were religious Jews who thought that intentional falsification (lying) was a direct violation of one of the Ten Commandments.  Lying was not a virtue in their community.  This does not mean there were not religious Jews who were liars at the time, but it was not a virtue extolled in the community.
• The New Testament writers were concerned with "delivering" the teaching of Jesus and the gospel to the next generation in their writing.  The Apostle Paul specifically says that he delivered or passed on to the Corinthian church the gospel.  This gospel was considered by the early Christians as a matter "of first importance." See 1 Corinthians 15:1-3.  There is good evidence that they believed they were passing on what they saw as a holy tradition through their writings.^[5]

They were able to tell the truth

• They were a culture steeped in a tradition of oral teaching and memorization.  In fact, scholars have shown that ancient peoples could memorize massive amounts of information, with an important focus on maintaining the very words of their teachers.[6]
• If they experienced any external pressure it was against the preaching of their message. They gained nothing in the way of position, power and possessions for faithfully telling the Jesus story.  To the contrary most of them were killed for it.  

 Their Words Preserved Accurately

• It is beyond the scope of this paper but there is good textual evidence that we have the New Testament documents today in a form that is extremely close to the original manuscripts.  This is non controversial.  Most scholars agree that the current Greek texts of the New Testament are very accurate.  To put it simply, we have pretty much what was written.  Interesting enough, one of the few controversial passages, Mark 16:9-20, is in the gospel of Mark.
• Additionally, there was very little time between the actual events of Jesus and the writing of the New Testament.  The less time that passes the less likely legendary development occurs.  The gospels were all finished by around 90AD with Mark and Matthew likely within just a few decades of the resurrection of Jesus.  In the period in which the gospels were written down many eyewitnesses of the events would have still been alive.  As Richard Bauckham states, "The Gospels were written within living memory of the events they recount.  Mark's gospel was written well within the lifetime of many of the eyewitnesses, while the other three canonical Gospels were written in the period when living eyewitnesses were becoming scarce, exactly at the point in time when their testimony would perish with them were it not put in writing"[7]

They are Corroborated/Validated by Others

• If an author shows that he tells the truth on matters that are verifiable externally, he is thought to be a reliable witness.  The New Testament writers note at least thirty historically confirmed people in their works. The gospels in general and the passion narrative in particular find corroboration in several ancient sources outside of the New Testament.^[8]  In addition, we find quotations at length from the gospels in the sermons and writings of the early church fathers.
• When the gospels are examined, they show a strong historicity which is only doubted when a bias against the supernatural is brought to bear.  Many skeptics have written off the testimony of the gospels because they were written down by men who believed in God, who record the occurrence of the miraculous and the resurrection of an incarnate Savior God.  Yet such bias against the supernatural is just the work of a closed mind.  Someone who says - I cannot believe the words of the New Testament because I don't believe in God or miracles - is already closed off to any amount of evidence.  They are saying "I don't believe because I don't believe."  Such views are intellectually stifling and hardened to what God might say if they simply read the gospels with an open heart and mind to see the unparalleled life of Jesus on display.

In closing, the gospel literature is unique indeed.  It is part biography, part history, part theology yet passionately what Bauckham simply calls testimony. 

Understanding the Gospels as testimony, we can recognize this theological meaning of the history not as an arbitrary imposition on the objective facts, but as the way the witnesses perceived the history, in an inextricable coinherence of observable event and perceptible meaning.  Testimony is the category that enables us to read the Gospels in a properly historical way and a properly theological way.  It is where history and theology meet.[9] 

Let's go get some history and theology, in a portrait of the person of Jesus, truthfully set forth in the gospel of Mark.

---

[1] See the Urban Dictionary for a definition of the word floss - The Urban Dictionary, (accessed August 14 2007); available from http://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=floss.

[2] For a more sophisticated look at the uniqueness of Holocaust testimonies see the treatment in Richard Bauckham, Jesus and the Eyewitnesses : The Gospels as Eyewitness Testimony (Grand Rapids, Mich.: William B. Eerdmans Pub. Co., 2006), 493-502.

[3] James Porter Moreland, Scaling the Secular City : A Defense of Christianity (Grand Rapids, Mich.: Baker Book House, 1987), 137-138.

[4] Ibid., 138.

[5] Ibid., 144.

[6] See particularly chapters 10 and 11 of Bauckham, 240-263.

[7] Ibid., 7.

[8] See the chapter "The Corroborating Evidence" interviewing history professor Edwin Yamauchi in Lee Strobel, The Case for Christ : A Journalist's Personal Investigation of the Evidence for Jesus (Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan, 1998), 73.

[9] Bauckham, 5,6.

For some reason God has made my theological studies take the long route home. After starting at one institution and playing around in some philosophy classes at a large state school, I have been slowly picking away at a degree at Southern Seminary. I take a class here and there, mostly during January and Summers when my ministry load is not as heavy. This makes the following exhortation perhaps easier for me but I still think it holds for all engaged in theological training.

Over my years of study I have found it quite natural to pass on and actively teach the things I am learning to those I serve in ministry. Whether it was athletes I was walking with in campus ministry or this weekend with some young adult leaders, I have found natural ways of translating that which I am learning into active ministry and discipleship.

Think about it for a moment. We can easily think that our course work will "apply some day" when I am in ministry while we study away. Yet the hard work of on the street ministry is connecting deep theological and biblical insight to common situations and people outside the academic guild. God has you studying XYZ, perhaps doing a pile of reading. Could it be that something you are reading is actually for the people you work with, walk with in church or your family? Now, some of you are thinking...yeah, how do I teach infralapsarianism to the guys I work with? Or, how do I talk about federal headship with my kids? Or, how do I teach the significance of chiastic structure to my Sunday School class? Such is your task to translate doctrine into people's real worlds. I have a firm conviction that what we are learning, can be readily conveyed to others. But it takes some meditation, it takes some work. It takes knowing the content of your studies and the world of people around you - and bridging those worlds.

Here is a simple example. In reading for a church history class I saw the same thing repeated about three times about the nature of the early spread of the Christian church. Over and over the author stated that the Christian gospel spread not primarily through preachers and missionaries, important as they may be, but rather through ordinary people, merchants, servants, families and friends. In encouraging some of our young adult leaders to live the gospel out in the open world, I shared this with them. It has always been the case that the gospel has spread through nameless Christians who faithfully live for Christ and share the good news of God's forgiveness through the work of Jesus on the cross

So here is my simple exhortation - teach someone what you are being taught. Your preparation for ministry will be significantly different in two ways. First, you will learn how to think and minister deep things at a popular level, moving your people towards depth and conviction. Second, you will not leave seminary and think "all that stuff I was taught doesn't help real world people" and be begin to dumb everything down because you have not learned to do the hard work of translating.

In fact, if you are a parent - this is a great parenting deal.  Just teach your kids what you are learning about in life.  Translate it into their world and level of understanding.  Whether science, current events, sports, stuff you are reading, Bible, technology, history, gardening etc.  Now, you may ask "What if I am not learning anything?" - My reply: quit being a moron and learn something.  And make it helpful, good and useful knowledge...your kids need to know more than Xbox Live.

On Science

• A very interesting article on cosmology is available over at the American Scientist. It summarizes contemporary inflationary big bang theory and the poor state of modern cosmological speculation.    

Technology

• Arm wrestling arcade game - for real men only...this one breaks arms of girly men
  
• Cool WordPress Theme for Mac fans - the little bomb at the bottom of the screen is what happens when Macs crashed.  Yes, I know they told you Mac's never crashed - but believe me, I used to TA a class on them in college and yes they certainly did.  If you have a Mac Classic in your house that you made into fishbowl then this is for your blog.

Just for Fun

• What men do when they don't have jobs and a mission - they devise ways they can be like Jason Bourne. Don't try these at home.

General News

• This...is just nasty: A Beijing factory recycled used chopsticks and sold up to 100,000 pairs a day without any form of disinfection, a newspaper said on Wednesday, the latest in a string of Chinese food and product safety scares.

Continued from Introduction to the New Testament... 

The New Testament, shared by Protestants, Catholics and Eastern Orthodox Christians is comprised of 27 individual books of varying length and literary genre.  A genre is simply a kind of writing.  Poetry, narrative stories, legal literature, prophecies are simple examples of different literary genres.  The New Testament contains four main genres of literature: gospel, narrative, epistle/letter and apocalyptic.  Many of these genres contain different sub genres such as parables, poems, creedal material as well as personal testimony.  The following is only a brief description of the parts of the New Testament.

The Gospel Literature - Matthew, Mark, Luke and John 

There are four books in the New Testament classified as gospel literature.  The books of Matthew, Mark, Luke and John are considered to be gospels. The word gospel is derived from the Greek term euangélion, which simply means good news or good tidings.  So the gospels are books containing good news, but not just any kind of news.  It would be one thing if a historical rise in the stock market or the fortunes of a nation are recorded dispassionately as history.  That might be interesting, but it would not be world changing.  The New Testament gospels however record something different-they record good news of God's action in history, to bring people into a relationship of love and worship through Jesus Christ.  The gospels are a fairly unique form of writing comprising several literary forms.  In some ways they are part biography, part history and part theology.  They have the goal of presenting and persuading - they endeavor to present Jesus but also to teach us who he is and what our response to him should be.  Each of the gospels had a different audience which originally received the work and each was composed by a different author.  As such they record some of the same details of Jesus' life but at times in different ways.  There is a commonality in the events, but a different recording depending on the purposes of the author and his intended audience.

The Synoptic Gospels

The gospels Matthew, Mark and Luke are known as the Synoptic Gospels, in that each provides a synopsis, or outline of the life and teaching of Jesus.  The word synoptic is derived from two Greek terms that when combined mean to see together.  When examined together, these gospels present a multifaceted view of the life and teaching of Jesus.  There is an interesting body of scholarship whose goal has been to investigate the origin and compiling of the synoptic gospels from early oral tradition and eyewitness accounts.  Scholars call this the synoptic problem.  The question arises from both the similarity and differences between the texts of Matthew, Mark and Luke and the literary and source connections between them.  A complete summary of the synoptic problem is well beyond our purposes here, but I think a brief summary will help you at least know some of the issues.  I will lay out a few of the issues that make the synoptic puzzle an interesting area of New Testament studies.  For those interested in a very brief, approachable, but scholarly summary of the current discussion I recommend Rethinking the Synoptic Problem published by Baker Academic.[1]  It is only about 160 pages so throw it in your Amazon.com shopping cart.

First Issue - We know the Gospels are Compilations 

The fact that the evangelists, the writers of the synoptic gospels compiled their accounts from other sources is non controversial.  It is the clear teaching of the Bible and of church tradition.  For instance, Luke begins his gospel with the following statement:

Inasmuch as many have undertaken to compile a narrative of the things that have been accomplished among us, just as those who from the beginning were eyewitnesses and ministers of the word have delivered them to us, it seemed good to me also, having followed all things closely for some time past, to write an orderly account for you, most excellent Theophilus, that you may have certainty concerning the things you have been taught.

Luke 1:1-4 ESV

A few things should be noted about Luke's goals in writing his gospel.  First, he acknowledges others have taken up the task to compile a written narrative of Jesus.  Second, these compilations are based on eyewitness accounts from those who were with Jesus and ministers of the word.  Third, his concern was to put together a written, orderly, factual account of the teachings of the Christian faith.  Additionally, there is a strong tradition stating that Mark's gospel is a compilation of the account and preaching of Peter which was written around the time of the apostle's death.  We'll have more on that later.   So if the gospels are compilations which were written down at different times, for different communities, by different authors it is likely that they shared some of the same sources and perhaps used one another's writings. 

Second Issue - Same Stories, Different Accountings 

If you ever interact with people who are skeptical about the Bible they are sure to bring up the so called "contradictions" in the gospel narratives.   You see some of the stories are the same, sometimes verbatim (see next issue), but sometimes the stories are similar but have some pretty significant differences.  A quick read of the resurrection narrative accounts in the synoptic gospels will suffice to illustrate.  How many angels were there at the empty tomb?  If you go after answering that question for a moment you run into a feature of the synoptic problem.  My answer?  Probably, at least two...but each does not always get props in the story.

Third Issue - Same Stories, Same Wordings 

Many times the synoptic gospels contain the exact same stories and teachings of Jesus Christ.  This would be rather uninteresting as a mere accounting of the same life would suffice to explain this occurrence.  However, many times in the gospels we find Matthew and Luke repeating Mark almost word for word.  Additionally Matthew and Luke contain some of the same sayings of Jesus that are not found in Mark. This asks the question: Who was using what writings in compiling their work?  In any account, there appears to be a literary interdependence of the synoptic gospels and their sources.  This has led to the dominant position among many scholars today known as the Two Source hypothesis.

The Dominant Solution - Two Source Hypothesis

• Mark was written first.  The view that Mark was the first gospel is simply assumed by many in New Testament studies today. [2] For example, Ben Witherington begins his commentary with a simple statement regarding studies of the gospel of Mark: "The sheer volume of recent studies, however, suggests that we are trying harder to grasp the meaning of this, the earliest of the gospels."[3]  There are many reasons for thinking Mark may have been written first. [4]
• Matthew and Luke had Mark available to them as they wrote
• Scholars have formed a hypothesis (a good and educated guess) of another source which they have called "Q"[5] (from the German quelle for "source").  It is held that this source contained sayings that Matthew and Luke share in common but are absent from Mark.  Q is a working hypothesis used by some scholars.  There is not a single shred of archaeological evidence of its existence.  We do not have one copy of this source.  Yet it is a reasonable inference due to the material shared by Matthew and Luke.  It is questioned by some scholars and an assumed hypothesis by others.
• Today, Markan priority and the use of Luke/Matthew of Mark/Q remains the dominant view.

However, in the last several decades there have been others who are arguing quite convincingly for the priority of Matthew.[6]  This holds promise for a couple reasons.  First, the tradition and teaching of church history is univocal that Matthew was written first.  This was unchallenged for over 1800 years.  Second, this school of thought is giving much more credence to patristic studies, studies of the writings of the church fathers.  For those interested in this school of thought will want to see Why Four Gospels by David Allan Black.[7] 

Let me close briefly by saying that all evangelical scholars-whether those who hold to the two source hypothesis or the priority of Matthew-hold that the synoptic gospels were written down by the inspiration and direction of the Holy Spirit.  All evangelical New Testament scholars agree that each view is compatible with the truth that the writers of the gospels recorded scripture as inspired by God. 

Dr. Craig Blomberg sums this up well: 

...it is important to state up front that none of the major solutions to the Synoptic problem is inherently more or less compatible with historic Christian views of the inspiritation and authority of Scripture. [8]

Though the precise solution to the literary connectedness of the gospels is not of central importance to our faith, it is good to be aware of these issues.  Many so called "contradictions" skeptics claim to find in the synoptic narratives are easily resolved when we realized that each other arranged his material to tell the story of Jesus to a specific audience of Christians from a particular perspective.  Our chief concern with Matthew, Mark and Luke is the person to whom they testify.  Our gaze is the person of Jesus who lived in history, taught us many things, gave his life as a sacrifice for sin and rose from death to set people free.  This Jesus is the Jesus of the synoptic gospels - and to him, the final gospel calls boldly to us...Believe! 

John's Gospel - Believe!

John's gospel states its goal forcefully and with clarity in the twentieth chapter of the book.  These are written so that you may believe that Jesus is the Christ, the Son of God, and that by believing you may have life in his name (John 20:31 ESV). John is writing for the purpose of presenting Jesus as the Christ, the one sent from God to deliver his people from sin, and calling us to believe.  It is a narrative of the miracles and teaching of Jesus which has a different feel from the synoptic gospels.  John wrote his material with the divinity of Jesus in the forefront and wants no neutral readers.  To read John is to be brought close to the Son of God in his glory with majesty on display.  The fourth gospel cannot be ignored and calls for a radical commitment of life to the Savior.  All who hear his voice in Scripture will follow and believe and no one who comes to him will he cast out; this is the radical message of John.

Narrative Literature - The Book of Acts

The book of Acts is primarily narrative in nature as it records the unfolding and preaching of the gospel from Jerusalem outward through the Roman Empire.  It begins with the story of the coming of the Spirit at a Jewish feast known as Pentecost and people in Jerusalem becoming followers of Jesus.  It continues with opposition and persecution in Jerusalem and the spread of the gospel outward in the first missionary efforts of the church.  The bulk of the narrative contains the travels of Paul and his companions establishing Christian communities throughout the trade routes of the world.  It tells a story and as such it is narrative literature

Epistles and Letters - From Paul and Others

A large portion of the New Testament is made up of letters written and distributed widely to teach and instruct the early church.  Whereas the gospels lay out the life teaching of Jesus, the epistles expound on the gospel leading us in how to live as followers of Jesus on his mission.  The epistles further explain the gospel, give us instruction on how to move into the world as Christ's followers and teach us how we are to live together as the church.  The letters are usually divided into two groups, the letters of Paul and those known as the general epistles.  We'll look briefly at both groupings. 

Paul's Letters

Much of the New Testament was written by a guy named Paul. Paul was sort of a big time guy in his day that had it on his mind to stamp out the new Christian movement.  As a religious Jew he saw the followers of Jesus as departing from the way of their fathers and began to persecute the church heavily with permission from civic leaders.  On his way to give some people a beat down the tables were turned on him.  Jesus smacked him around, blinded him for a few days and told him that he would now be a Christian and bring the gospel to the Gentiles (non Jews).  Paul then became a pretty radical guy who nobody could silence.  He preached the gospel with courage and at great peril to his own life.  In establishing new churches Paul would write to them, inspired by God, to teach and instruct the new followers in the way of Jesus.  Thirteen of Paul's letters make up a large portion of the New Testament.  Many of the letters are named after cities where the new churches were living.  The book of Romans was written to those in Rome, 1 and 2 Corinthians to the church in Corinth, etc.  If they were written today they would be something like 1 Nashvillians.  The Pastoral Epistles were written to Paul's younger disciples teaching them how to be servant leaders in the church and named after these men.  Finally, Philemon is the name of a friend of Paul and that letter bears his name.  Here is a listing: Romans, 1 and 2 Corinthians, 1 and 2 Thessalonians, Galatians; The Prison Epistles - letters written during his house arrest in Rome - Ephesians, Philippians, Colossians, Philemon; The Pastoral Epistles - 1 and 2 Timothy and Titus 

General Epistles

The remaining letters of the New Testament were written by apostles and early Christian leaders dealing with particular concerns of missional living and doctrine in the early communities.  One book, though early on held to be written by Paul, has remained anonymous in its authorship.  It simply is title the epistle to the Hebrews.  Here is a listing of these books: Hebrews, James, 1 and 2 Peter, Jude, 1, 2 and 3 John 

The Apocalypse - The Revelation of Jesus Christ

The final book of the New Testament has a unique literary genre known as apocalyptic literature.  The word apocalypse comes from the Greek word which means to reveal, to uncover, unveil or disclose.   As such the book is commonly called Revelation.  This book has proved very controversial over the centuries with many schools of thought on how we should interpret it.  The book however is very clear in its purpose from the opening lines.  It is a revelation of Jesus Christ.  Whether the book is about bar codes on our foreheads, apache helicopters, one world government, meteors crashing into the earth or being left behind I will leave up to you.  But one thing we must know, the book is about Jesus, not just the end of the world.  The book is about the worship and praise and ultimate revealing of Jesus Christ.  We would do best to focus here when reading this book. 

That is but a brief fly-over of the New Testament writings, but our focus is on the gospels and the gospel of Mark in particular.  So let us move to the gospel literature, the books that focus us on the life, teaching, death and resurrection of the carpenter from Nazareth.

---

[1] David Alan Black and David R Beck, Rethinking the Synoptic Problem (Grand Rapids: Baker Academic, 2001).

[2] Ibid., 17.

[3] Ben Witherington, The Gospel of Mark : A Socio-Rhetorical Commentary (Grand Rapids, Mich.: W.B. Eerdmans Pub., 2001), 1. Emphasis added.

[4] D. A. Carson, Douglas J. Moo, and Leon Morris, An Introduction to the New Testament (Grand Rapids, Mich.: Zondervan, 1992), 32-36.

[5] More on "Q" can be found at Peter Kirby, Q Document(2001-2006, accessed August 13 2007); available from http://www.earlychristianwritings.com/q.html.

[6] Most influential has been the late William Reuben Farmer, The Synoptic Problem, a Critical Analysis (New York: Macmillan, 1964).  See brief discussion in R. T. France, The Gospel of Mark : A Commentary on the Greek Text (Grand Rapids, Mich.: W.B. Eerdmans, 2002), 42.

[7] David Alan Black, Why Four Gospels - the Historical Origins of the Gospels (Grand Rapids: Kregel, 2001).

[8] Black and Beck, Rethinking the Synoptic Problem, 18.

An Introduction to the New Testament, Gospel
Literature and the Book of Mark
By Reid S. Monaghan

Introduction

Each of our lives is defined by various moments, events and decisions as we travel in life from beginning to end.  The journey we travel has twists and turns, ups and downs requiring a unique perspective if we are "to see" our way forward in the mission of Jesus.  Often people look to the life of Jesus to find a moral example, to find encouragement, or to learn a life lesson.  We find all of these when our gaze finds the living Jesus.  Yet the story of Jesus is much more than the reco