Over the centuries men have sought to determine all that they could about Jesus, who he was, what he did and what he was ‘really’ like. This pursuit has not always led not to a better understanding of who Jesus was, what he did and what he was ‘really’ like. Instead it has often led to a more confusing and convoluted view.
The confusion has come about as men have studied the writings of various authors over the years. As more and more documents surface, more and more information has been added to the mix. The dilemma is that more information doesn’t necessarily sharpen the focus but it tends to dull the focus.
The first accounts of Jesus were not found in the ‘Gospels’ but in the writings of Paul, Peter, James and John. The ‘Gospel’ accounts were written a few decades later. Matthew was written from first hand memory of walking, talking, eating with Jesus. Mark was a disciple of Peter and wrote down the account of the life of Jesus as told by Peter. Luke, a physician, researched what had already been written and interviewed people who had walked, talked and ate with Jesus. Luke’s goal was to write an accurate and detailed account of the life of Jesus. John, the disciple who was given responsibility for Mary, the mother of Jesus wrote the last account. The accounts of these various men who had lived with Jesus give us an accurate, though limited, look at the who, what, where and how of Jesus.
As the years, decades and even centuries passed more and more people wrote about Jesus. Some of them were disciples of disciples of disciples of disciples who wrote what they had heard. The quandary is that those authors were years, decades and even centuries removed from walking, talking and eating with Jesus. They were not ‘eye witnesses.’ Their contribution didn’t focus the picture of Jesus - It made everything fuzzy.
Now ‘scholars’ argue about documents that were written five centuries after Jesus - not much help!
I want to help you see Jesus!
No comments:
Post a Comment