How does the Gospel of John Differ from the Synoptic Gospels?

            You may find yourself questioning what exactly a gospel is, and how do we, as readers, decipher the truth between them. A gospel is known as a record of Jesus’ life, death, and teachings. A gospel is not to be confused with a biography of Jesus’ life for it can be thought of as the sharing of the “good word.” The unique encounters with the impeccable Jesus Christ are all recorded in the first four books of The New Testament. Those four gospels, in order, are: Matthew, Mark, Luke, and John. Three out of those four make up the synoptic gospels. Synoptic, simply meaning sharing a similar view or interpretation. Matthew, Mark, and Luke describe the sights and encounters of Jesus during his ministry in Gailee. Although the three share a lot of similarities within their recording of events, they differentiate in a number of ways. One of the most known differences being their target audiences. It is most likely that Mark was used as the primary source for both Matthew and Luke’s gospel. John on the other hand, chose to write his completely independent and without a source. He wrote with a different style than the others and his chronological order of events were not parallel. Although they all vary, they share a common objective to convey their interpretation of Jesus’ purpose.

            The author of the gospels direct their messages to four different audiences. Matthew writes to a Jewish audience, Mark for a Roman audience, Luke to a gentile audience, and John, in Ephesus at the time, wrote to churches in that region. The Synoptic gospels record Jesus’ birth as the first major event, whereas John begin with the creation of the universe. John states that Jesus became the son of God the moment that God created the world. The synoptic gospels oppose that belief, and they all state that Jesus became the son of God at the time of his birth. John completely leave out any mentioning of Jesus’ baptism. According to the synoptic gospels, Jesus’s baptism was considered the ultimate sacrifice to the fulfillment of righteousness. The primary focus of the synoptic gospels was on Jesus’ morality and humanity, while John focuses more on Jesus’ position as the Supreme Being and his deity. In John we often see Jesus use the phrases “I am” when he refer to himself. Jesus strays away from referencing himself in the synoptic gospels. He does not necessarily discredit himself, he just shares the good in a sense. Both the synoptic gospels and in the book of John we are taught that salvation must be earned and not given. The requirements to receive salvation are not the exact same but they both entail the follower of Christ to perform an act. In the synoptic gospels it states that one can receive salvation through performing good deeds for neighbors, that includes giving assistance to the sick, the poor, and/or those in need. Jesus made it a priority to take care of those suffering financially or from sickliness in the synoptic gospels. In contrast, John states that the only necessary act needed in order to receive salvation is to, without a doubt, believe that Jesus Christ is the beloved Son of God.

Being that Jesus was the Son of God, he was given a magnitude of power and strength. He was truly incomparable in all aspects, from his notable physical acts to his teachings.  We learn in the synoptic gospels that his teaching methods didn’t always come easy. Along the way, he faced scribes that went against his messages as they focused more on the law. As documented in John, we can grasp that the overall theme focuses on Jesus Christ. John intended for his audience to become more knowledgeable about the truths of Jesus. He wanted to make them aware that they were the brothers and sisters of Christ, and children of the mighty father. The synoptic gospels, slightly implying the same thing, focused more on the kingdom of God. The forewarned their audiences on what was coming during the end times and how to properly apply themselves. The exact accounts leading up to the crucifixion of Christ fluctuate among the gospels. As Matthew, Mark, Luke, and John recall the last supper we begin to see variations in the date and the royal event itself. John 13 describes the event as a foot washing that takes place the night before Passover eve. In the synoptic gospels, the trio all agree that Jesus partakes in a public style supper on Passover eve. Not the day before. Passover is a Jewish festival celebrating the exodus from Egypt and the Israelites’ freedom from slavery to the Egyptians; usually celebrated with a feast. On the journey to the sight of Jesus’ crucifixion we are told that Jesus carried his own cross, John 19:17 states "They took Jesus therefore, and He went out, bearing His own cross, to the place called the Place of a Skull, which is called in Hebrew, Golgotha." In contrast, in the synoptic gospels we are told that Christ was too weakened to carry his own crossbar, in Matthew 27:31-32 "And after they had mocked Him, they took His robe off and put His garments on Him, and led Him away to crucify Him. And as they were coming out, they found a man of Cyrene named Simon, whom they pressed into service to bear His cross." After the brutal death of God’s only begotten son, he is resurrected days later. That is a consistent similarity shared between all four authors. We know that Jesus was resurrected, but where did he actually return to his disciples? John tells us that Jesus came and made his first appearance back in Jerusalem, whereas the synoptic gospels mutually agree that this took place in Galilee.

In conclusion, the four gospels do a great job of describing the great works in the life of Jesus Christ. All four gospels inform the readers on the life, death, and the resurrection, just a tad bit contrarily. We learn of Jesus’ capability to transform his followers through a variety of messages and teachings. The synoptic gospels made up of Matthew, Mark, and Luke all share common views on what actually took place from the birth to the resurrection of Christ. Most scholars believe that Matthew and Luke referred to Mark’s writing and other similar sources as they began to write. John documented his perception of the life of Christ strictly from his own knowledge. Matthew’s gospel was an announcement of Jesus as the promised messiah of Kingdom of God. Mark presented Jesus as savior of the world, he displayed him as mighty in deed and word. Luke shows representation of Christ as the “savior of sinners.” John presents Christ as the Son of God in whom deity and humanity become one. Although the theme within each gospel varied, the aim to make people more knowledge about God was accomplished.

The Shack: Holy Trinity.. Who Art Thou?

                Prior to watching the film, The Shack, I was a little unsure on what to expect. I was initially hesitant because I was not sure of the direction or the approach of the movie, and I did not want to steer my beliefs. I must say, although I do not agree with the movie in its totality, it was completely worth the nine bucks! The movie displays a father, Mackenzie “Mack” Phillips, which is suffering great pain due to the loss of his young daughter. Fighting a mental war, he his greeted by the Holy trinity. Parallel to Christian beliefs, that trinity includes: The Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit. For the remainder of the movie, we, the audience, received a clear visual of conversations, encounters, and lessons between Mack and the Holy trinity. After reading and comprehending the scripture, then watching and taking notes on the film, there were obvious similarities and there were a great number of differences. The members of the trinity were the same, but the physical characteristics were completely opposite from what is described to us within our text. The power of authority did not seem to exist in the film, yet in our text we are taught the levels of hierarchy. We watched as human-like features were given to all the members of the trinity. Although this film is stirring up great controversy, I thought the reference to biblical work was relatively intriguing.

                It is not uncommon to see films created with the objective to bring a visual to a descriptive text. Although, the film may not be an exact replica of the book, it usually embodies majority of the text precisely, adding or removing a few details. In the movie The Shack, dependent upon a person’s foreknowledge of Christianity beliefs, there were several similarities and dissimilarities. In both the text and in the film the representation of the Holy trinity is made up of a dynamic trio: The Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit. Due to knowledge of our text, we envision the trinity all as male figures. During the film, the trinity is displayed as three unique characters appearing to have come from all different racial backgrounds. What is known to us as the Father is “PaPa” in the film. PaPa is an older African-American female that cooks and take care of the house, yet she shares the same powers and capabilities as the God we know. Jesus, the Son, is presented as a laborer with physical features of male from the Middle East. Lastly, according to our text, the Holy Spirit is a powerful force of energy that was created after the crucifixion of Jesus Christ. In the film, the Holy Spirit is human. Not only is it a human being, but it is an Asian female by the name of Sarayu. These characters in the film primarily share the same role as the divine trinity that Christians serve, but in different forms. Near the end of the film, you see PaPa being transformed into an older Asian male figure. This gives the audience the misinterpretation that God will alter himself in order to please us. As seen in 1 Corinthians 13:12, God will make the necessary adjustments within his followers so that they are able to have a clear understanding of his powers and capabilities.

Another comparison between the film and the text was the absence and the demonstration of authoritative abilities. The film showed unity between the three and we didn’t see much of any submission to one particular member of the trinity. They were all given an equal amount of authority and they shared an equal level of obedience. In contrast, Christians are taught that the Jesus was created to submit to the Father. It is read in John 12:49 of our text, “For I did not speak on my own, but the Father who sent me commanded me to say all that I have spoken.” There is no one above or equal to God, for he is the highest power. Throughout the film, the trinity is shown imitating exactly what we read in our text, such as Jesus walking on water. The movie also implements features within the trio that oppose Christian beliefs. Mack receives a mysterious letter in his mailbox. There is no trace to the date of the letter and there is no evidence as to how it got to him. He is only left in confusion because the letter is signed “PaPa.” We later find out that God is responsible for writing the letter. Initially and emotionally distraught, I thought it was a way of stating that God is aware of everything that you are going through and will arrive at the right moments. After thinking back on that scene specifically, I think the biggest wait-a-minute moment was God’s ability to write and send physical messages. Granted, I do believe that Christians have the ability to communicate back and forth with the highest powers that they serve. However, I believe that ability to communicate with a higher being is strictly oral. Lastly, but certainly not least, there was a scene where Mack was questioning PaPa about the consequences of sins. PaPa responds to Mack’s beliefs and states that sins carry their own punishments. She informs him that it is not her duty to apply punishment, but to cure it. On the other hand, Christians are taught that “there is no condemnation for those who are in Christ Jesus.” Sinful acts are followed by a sincere repent through God. If a sinner choses to continue to live without asking for forgiveness then they may suffer discipline from God. God teaches Christians obedience through necessary discipline for sinful acts.

Overall, the film did a phenomenal job at incorporating biblical theologies into an emotional drama. The life of a strong father was changed drastically in a matter of minutes. On his journey back to sanity, he broken down to the core and built back up by the divine holy trinity. The film and the text slightly clash in certain areas where the trio is given qualities and capabilities that do not necessarily match those of Christian beliefs. The film gives more of fictional characteristics to the characters. The genders and the race of the characters are the biggest oppositions to the text. Christians know both God and Jesus Christ as male figures. The Holy Spirit is known to be the spirit belonging to Jesus. After watching the film to its entirety, I do not think the film was created strictly to reenact the bible. I believe it was a film created to bring a message or a lesson on forgiveness and focusing on God.

What is Predestination? Is Predestination Biblical?

Romans 8:29-30 tells us, “For those God foreknew he also predestined to be conformed to the likeness of his Son, that he might be the firstborn among many brothers. And those he predestined, he also called; those he called, he also justified; those he justified, he also glorified.” The term predestination, as referenced to in the bible, originated from the Greek word proorizo. It means to have foreknowledge on a situation or a person’s life. One of today’s biggest controversies is determining whether or not God selectively chose those that he wanted to save, or did God offer salvation to everyone and people made their own individual decisions. One theory is known as Calvinism. It is the belief that God selects individuals to salvation entirely to his will without any consideration of that person. The theory in contrast is known as Arminianism. It’s beliefs are that God selects individuals to salvation based on his foreknowledge of that person. After examining both theories, most scholars found that there are valid points within both sides. There is usually only one determining factor that differentiate the two.

The theory of Calvinism originates from the beliefs of John Calvin, a French theologian. “God preordained, for his own glory and the display of His attributes of mercy and justice, a part of the human race, without any merit of their own, to eternal salvation, and another part, in just punishment of their sin, to eternal damnation.”  This belief states that Christ died only for selected Christians rather than for everyone. A natural man is continually committing evil acts that go against God. This process includes three people in order to be successful. It is thought that God first selects those that he know will sin and make mistakes. He is aware that they cannot please him. Secondly he, sends his Son, Jesus Christ, to seek them and to make them more aware of salvation for their sins. Lastly, the individual is completely powerless when it comes to the choice of salvation. God selected those who would receive his glory before he created the world.

In contrast, the theory of Arminianism originates from a guy by the name of Jacobus Arminius, a Dutch theologian. It is the belief that all individuals have the free will to obtain salvation through Jesus Christ. God gave his only begotten Son for the sins of everyone, but he has ordained and decided ahead of time who will accept Him as their Lord and Savior. According to this theory, God promises grace, but individuals must choose to receive it through faith and the acts of righteousness. Similar to Calvinism, a natural man will commit sins, speak lies, and engage in unlawful acts. The difference that separates the two, is in Arminianism, after a natural man commits an evil act, he or she has the sole opportunity to seek and receive salvation. In Calvinism, Jesus Christ is sent to seek after those that God has elected. God has predetermined who will receive righteousness since the beginning. The theory of Arminianism allows the individual to take complete control over their spiritual fate.

The term predestination is within two of Paul’s epistles a total of four times. In the book of Romans, Paul is writing a letter to the Jews and the Gentiles of Rome. He is explaining to them the wonderful works of God and his ability to free them from the laws of sin. He informs them that God is aware that they aren’t perfect, and God is aware that they need him desperately in order to become righteous. One must accept the Holy Spirit in its totality in order to receive both life and peace. Paul teaches that the Spirit controls our mind and our actions. It is the Spirit that speaks to God when we are in tears, or when we are crying tears of joy. God, already aware of all individual’s cries, is responsible for making men and women more holy. Paul continues to instill within the people of Rome, the purpose of predestination. He gives certainty that God intended to seek special people as recipients of salvation before he created the world. He gives the chosen people hope, that no power can separate them from God’s love.

Throughout the book of Romans, the well-educated citizen of Rome, Paul, is declaring the authority of God and his overall purpose for those that believe in him. As he composes his letter differentiating Jews and Gentiles, he explains to them that they are children of God whose life has been predetermined. Paul specifically uses the term predestination, God’s foreknowledge and creation of individual’s fate, salvation, and soul. A synonym for the term predestination is Calvinism. This is the theory that God sacrificed his Son, Jesus Christ, on behalf of selected individuals. God is responsible for sending the resurrected Christ to seek those that He has chosen to make them aware of forgiveness and salvation for their sins. Opposing Calvinism, there is a theory that states, that God surrendered his son Jesus Christ for the benefit of all individuals. Those individuals must choose to seek the faith in God for the gift of salvation. Paul states in Roman chapter eight, that God is aware of all of man’s trials and tribulations. In his letter, he informs them that God has already planned the day to free them from all of their troubles. Paul speaks with certainty that God has meticulously ordained their lives, making them righteous and more identical to Christ.

                                                                                                                    

What does it Mean to Speak in Tongues? Why Did Paul Refer to It As Being Angelic?

Tongues? What kind of language is that? Whether you’re in church, or you’re passing by an individual that is deeply devoted to their spiritual being, you may witness them worshipping. Worshipping is the act of giving praise or thanks to a being or an object. On several occasions, Apostles were recorded praying out loud. The demonstration by Apostles have continued all the way up to the twenty-first century. The common manner of “praying out loud” is known as speaking in tongues. Stated in 1 Corinthians 13:1, “If I speak in the tongues of men and of angels, but I have not love, I am a noisy gong or clanging cymbal.” You must have a connection with a spiritual being whom you are directing your message to. This method is the phenomenon of speaking in unintelligible utterances- often as part as religious practices. Initially, the sound can be confusing and unpleasing if the listener is not familiar. Dependent upon the listener, the verbal language of tongues will be recognized as one of three things: glossolalia, xenolalia, or as demonic language. Some would consider that ability as a “charismatic gift” or a completely psychotic trait.

Glossolalia is the uncontrollable speaking of tongues language. It derived from a combination of the Greek words glossa, which means tongue, and laleo, which means to speak. When a person is speaking glossolalia, they are not actually forming words, instead it is a string of sounds. Research shows that the individual’s native language will affect what those strings sound like all together. For example, if an English speaking worshipper were to speak in glossolalia, then there words would form almost identical to how we form sentences. If you listen closely, it may sound as if the individual is using words that you are familiar with. The speaker looks for repeated sequences when speaking. Glossolalia has been referred to as gibberish and a falsified language.  Technically, the language is only supposed to be understood by the individual speaker and the Holy Spirit. When in deep devotion, the ability to speak the language will come naturally at the drop of a hat. If you attend worship services or have attend one before, you may have witnessed the random outbreak of the acknowledgement of the Holy Spirit. If it is true that this is the direct communication from Earth to Heaven then everyone has the ability to speak this language. Most people choose to not speak the language because they feel strange or awkward. That alone causes controversy. It causes non-believers to question if it is either meaningful or beneficial. If this unknown language is automatically instilled into everyone who accepts Christ, then how can an individual select when and where they would like to speak? This language can has be associated with brain abnormalities by those who don’t quite understand it. In the November issue of Psychiatry Research: Neuroimaging, Dr. Newberg found that during the state of speaking glossolalia there was a major decrease in the function frontal lobe. “That part of the brain that normally makes them feel in control has been essentially shut down.”

Another spiritual connection with the language of tongues is Xenolalia. It is the blend of the Greek words xenos, which means foreign, and lalia, which means language. Xenolalia is also a like glossolalia, a form of unknown communication between a divine spirit in Heaven and the Earth. The only difference is that the language is an actual human language, just unknown to the speaker. This language is naturally understood no matter the speaker. It is considered to be another foreign language that everyone who accepts Christ has the ability to speak, but the individual hasn’t learned it yet.  According to Peter D. Neumann, in order for early Pentecostals to conduct mission and evangelisms they must have received the spiritual baptism. “That means that tongues, as xenolalia, would enable missionaries to minister effectively in foreign cultures without having to takethe time to learn new languages.” The gift to use your personal relationship with God and to influence those around you was considered angelic. Those that oppose glossolalia, oppose the subcategory xenolalia as well.

The final viewpoint of the action of speaking in tongues is as a demonic ability. If speaking in tongues is a supernatural ability then one be able to communicate to either Satan or God. Satan is capable of hearing and understanding human language just as God is. Instead of conducting a conversation is one’s native language, speaking in tongues allows a person to speak to Satan exclusively. The “made-up” sounds are spoken purposely so that outsiders will not understand. It is believed that this is how one will address the Evil Spirit, speaking the unknown language and at a high rate of speed. The demonic possession is considered a false gift from God. Demons have the aptitude to speak through humans.  One must be aware of spiritual manifestations, for the devil has his influences as well. 

 The ability to associate with a spiritual being in your own personal way has become so common that we often forget that it is a gift. It is a deep connection that allows an individual to speak naturally and fluently in the unknown language. The string of sounds merge together effortlessly, rather you are familiar with the sounds or not. When speaking in tongues, the language is either glossolalia or xenolalia. With glossolalia, the speaker is uttering unknown words and sounds that are similar to his or her native language. The speaker is using that accustomed vocabulary to communicate with a higher spiritual being. Xenolalia is extremely similar, but slightly different. The speaker of xenolalia speaks very effortlessly in a language that is foreign to him or her. The naturalness of the speech was utilized to conduct missionary work in various locations around the world. No matter the location, the language barrier was automatically broken. In contrast, some believe that communicating in tongues is not only limited to God. Satan has human-like qualities just as God do, and he is willing to have his voice heard. When worshipping in tongues, there is a spiritual connection made prior. The speaker must decipher whether that communication is angelic though the Holy Spirit or demonic the Evil Spirit.