{"id":2884,"date":"2023-04-23T19:47:51","date_gmt":"2023-04-23T19:47:51","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/elbespurling.com\/salvation\/?page_id=2884"},"modified":"2024-07-18T01:44:34","modified_gmt":"2024-07-18T01:44:34","slug":"16-the-second-gospel","status":"publish","type":"page","link":"https:\/\/elbespurling.com\/salvation\/?page_id=2884","title":{"rendered":"Chapter 16: The Second Gospel"},"content":{"rendered":"\n
<\/div>\n\n\n\n

Chapter 16<\/mark><\/h3>\n\n\n\n

The Second Gospel<\/mark><\/h1>\n\n\n\n
<\/div>\n\n\n\n

The Gospel of Jesus Christ 2.0<\/h2>\n\n\n\n
\"\"<\/a>
Artist depiction of the author of the second gospel<\/figcaption><\/figure>\n\n\n\n

In the years after its initial publication, we can surmise that the first gospel was copied and shared among various communities and spread eastward around the Mediterranean from Rome. Each new community coming into contact with the anonymous document may have been split over whether it was a report of actual history or allegory for higher level doctrine. One thing we can say for certain, however, is that within less than a decade, a trend would begin in which other writers would take this document and feel qualified to make significant changes to it, adapting it to the beliefs and needs of their own churches. This process is how the second gospel came to be composed1<\/a><\/sup>Note: While most scholars currently hold the gospel known to us as Matthew to be the second-written gospel, I believe this is based on outmoded scholarship and faulty logic as explained here: https:\/\/www.alangarrow.com\/synoptic-problem.html<\/span>\u2014a gospel no longer extant, but whose material has been largely pieced together by modern scholars who recognized the extent to which the gospel known to us as Luke later incorporated nearly all of its material.2<\/a><\/sup>BeDuhn, J. (2013). The First New Testament: Marcion’s Scriptural Canon. Polebridge Press.<\/span><\/p>\n\n\n\n

\"\"<\/a>
Map of the Roman Empire with the west coast of Asia Minor in red<\/figcaption><\/figure>\n\n\n\n

This writing\u2014not a truly new gospel, but a revision of the first\u2014was likely composed in a city on the west coast of Asia Minor.3<\/a><\/sup>Attridge, H.W. The Gospel of Luke: A Novel for Gentiles. PBS Frontline. https:\/\/www.pbs.org\/wgbh\/pages\/frontline\/shows\/religion\/story\/luke.html#:~:text=Luke%20was%20probably%20writing%20in,places%20like%20Ephesus%20or%20Smyrna.<\/a><\/span> This was a region frequented by Paul as well as and other apostles about whom Paul frequently complained. The area\u2019s population was dominated by Gentiles, but included minority Jewish populations in many of its larger cities. While there isn\u2019t enough data available to take even an educated guess about the identity of the author, we can be certain that they had a copy of the first gospel in front of them as they wrote.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Changes to the gospel they received begin right from the start. Seeming to have taken issue with the idea of Jesus needing the baptism of John for the cleansing of sins, much less the notion of Jesus being tempted by Satan, the second gospel\u2019s author removes these opening stories and begins his revised story of Jesus\u2019s ministry on Earth with the succinct introduction: \u201cIn the fifteenth year of Tiberius Caesar, when Pilate was governing Judea, Jesus came down to Capernaum, a city of Galilee.\u201d4<\/a><\/sup>BeDuhn, J. (2013). The First New Testament: Marcion’s Scriptural Canon. Polebridge Press.<\/span> This sets the story in 26 CE, a much more precise date than the first gospel offers, and suggests that whatever the first gospel\u2019s author thought about the historicity of their writing, the second gospel\u2019s author seems to more clearly intend for their account of Jesus\u2019s life to be taken literally.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

\"\"<\/a>
Artist depiction of the preaching of John the Baptist<\/figcaption><\/figure>\n\n\n\n

Though the author does not allow John to baptize Jesus\u2014and later skips over the story of the Baptist\u2019s death by beheading\u2014John does <\/em>make appearances in the second gospel, and is very highly praised. Jesus, in fact, is said to refer to John as \u201cthe greatest among those born of women\u201d.5<\/a><\/sup>BeDuhn, J. (2013). The First New Testament: Marcion’s Scriptural Canon. Polebridge Press.<\/span><\/p>\n\n\n\n

\"\"<\/a>
Artist depiction of Jesus descending to Capernaum<\/figcaption><\/figure>\n\n\n\n

This particular phrasing leaves us to wonder: does the author of the second gospel believe Jesus <\/em>was born of a woman? If so, how could he describe John this way, implying that John is greater even than himself, the very Son of God? Or is it that the author does not<\/em> believe Jesus was born of a woman? If that\u2019s the case, then why does he retain the story from the first gospel in which Jesus is told by a disciple \u201cYour mother and your brothers have stood outside wanting to see you\u201d? This brief mention of Jesus\u2019s family, in which he snubs them, is the only appearance they make in the second gospel. None of his family members are mentioned by name, and none are given any lines of dialog. It leaves open the question: when the author began this work by stating \u201cJesus came down to Capernaum\u201d, did he mean that he \u201ccame down\u201d from some other unspecified earthly location, or did he mean directly from heaven<\/em>?6<\/a><\/sup>BeDuhn, J. (2013). The First New Testament: Marcion’s Scriptural Canon. Polebridge Press.<\/span><\/p>\n\n\n\n

\"\"<\/a>
Artist depiction of the residents of Nazareth attempting to push Jesus off a cliff<\/figcaption><\/figure>\n\n\n\n

Even the link to Nazareth as Jesus\u2019s hometown seems to be intentionally broken by this author, substituting nearby Capernaum as the starting point of Jesus\u2019s ministry on Earth. When Jesus does visit a synagogue in Nazareth\u2014whereas in the first gospel Jesus simply could work no miracles there and was disrespected by the residents\u2014here he enrages the congregation so much that they run him out of town and are about to throw him off a cliff when he somehow passes through the crowd and escapes.7<\/a><\/sup>Luke 4:28-30<\/a>. The Bible. New International Version.<\/span> Some have read into this account the implication that Jesus was not fully physical, and could thereby pass through an angry mob like a ghost to escape, though this notion is gainsaid later in the gospel where Jesus\u2019s corporeality is emphasized.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

In this presentation of Jesus\u2019s narrow escape from Nazareth, the second gospel\u2019s author has taken a story from the first gospel and changed it to better suit his own beliefs or agenda. But for much of the second gospel\u2019s narrative, stories from the first gospel are simply copied directly, or only very slightly reworded. This is the case for the next 10 stories in a row as Jesus begins his traveling ministry of healings and exorcisms. The author then decides to insert 5 original stories, the first of which is one of the most famous in all the gospels.8<\/a><\/sup>BeDuhn, J. (2013). The First New Testament: Marcion’s Scriptural Canon. Polebridge Press.<\/span><\/p>\n\n\n\n

<\/div>\n\n\n\n

The Sermon on the Plain<\/h2>\n\n\n\n

In the narrative of the first gospel, Jesus and his disciples now come to a lakeside surrounded by a great multitude. While the author of that gospel immediately moves on from there, the second gospel\u2019s author chooses this point to interrupt the narrative and use this setting to have Jesus deliver what is known today as the Sermon on the Plain\u2014a discourse featuring several of the most famous ethical teachings of Jesus from any gospel, including all of the following:<\/p>\n\n\n\n

\"\"<\/a>
Artist depiction of Jesus delivering the Sermon on the Plain<\/figcaption><\/figure>\n\n\n\n