Messianic Judaism Quest

This is a post contributed by a friend.

The Jesus presented in the Gospels of Luke and Matthew and to a lesser extent Mark reflects a very different image than the portrait painted by the Gospel of John. Luke and Matthew present Jesus as a legitimate claimant to the throne of King David by genealogy and by his fulfillment of a series of prophecies they deem messianic. Despite opposition from Pharisaic and Sadduccean sources to Jesus, Luke and Matthew present a view of Jesus that stands in relationship to the context of the land of Israel, the Jewish people, and a general understanding and affirmation of Jewish life as defined by the Torah, albeit as understood by the communities of that authored the synoptic gospels. John presents a Jesus that is more universalistic in nature, and despite the inescapable Judean/Jewish context of the story, is much less concerned with either the nature of Judaism or a mission specifically focused on Israel. More importantly, John also shifts the conflict between Jesus and the Pharisees and the priesthood to a more general and broader conflict with Jews, in general.

While the three synoptic gospels begin their story with different events, the importance of Jesus as messianic figure completely related to Israel’s history, sacred texts, and religious experiences is immediately established. Matthew begins his gospel by presenting a genealogy of Jesus linking him to Abraham and most importantly to King David. As far as Matthew is concerned, the genealogical legitimacy of Jesus as a claimant to the David throne is paramount. This highlights Matthew’s view of Jesus as the Messianic King of Israel. The numbering of generations leading to and from the Babylonian exile may further highlight Matthew’s view that Jesus’ mission was intended to restore the kingship to Israel. The Gospel of Luke, while initially avoiding a genealogy, instead focuses on establishing the background story of John the Baptist. His story and that of his parents, Zechariah and Elizabeth are particularly noteworthy for several reasons. Firstly, a very positive tone regarding Jewish law is established when Luke states, “Both of them (Zechariah and Elizabeth) were upright in G-d’s sight and lived blamelessly according to all the commandments and requirements of the L-rd…”   The description of Zechariah as a faithful priest in the Temple and the prophetic instructions given regarding the birth of his son John are also noteworthy. John is to be reared as a Nazarite, the mark of a very religious Jew.  

The orientation of Luke towards a positive view of Jewish identity is perhaps most strikingly seen is Zechariah’s prophetic utterance at the birth of his son, John. The exclamation begins with “Blessed be the L-rd, the G-d of Israel” and continues with a variety of statements that emphasize the house of David, the covenant with Abraham, deliverance from Israel’s enemies and an expectation of Israel’s spiritual and physical redemption. For Luke, the background story of Jesus is inextricably rooted in a Jewish world and focused on a Jewish mission. Mark is much more condensed but also begins its narrative with the subject of John as the precursor of Jesus’ mission as the fulfillment of biblical prophecy.

While Matthew does not opt for lengthy prophetic statements in the birth of Jesus, Matthew portrays various events in Jesus’ life as a fulfillment, or perhaps reflective of Israel’s own pattern of history and events. This is particularly true in the case of Joseph’s decision to take Mary and Jesus and escape to Egypt in light of Herod’s onslaught. The return of Joseph and his family is portrayed as the fulfillment of the text “I have called my son out of Egypt” which reflects Matthew’s desire to portray Jesus as the personification of Israel’s own exodus from Egypt.

While it is clear that Jesus uses the opportunity to present his message and teach, his regular synagogue attendance is presented by three synoptic the gospels as nothing more than a normal event. Jesus is doing what any other religious Jew would do.

 Matthew and Luke present Jesus as faithful to the Torah albeit in conflict with varying interpretations present in his day. The Jesus of Matthew declares “Do not suppose that I came to destroy the Law or the prophets. I did not come to destroy, but to fulfill” and instructs his followers to attain a level of righteousness surpassing that of the Pharisees and Scribes. Matthew and Luke both present an affirmation of the Temple cult. In Matthew, Jesus notes that if an individual harbors something against his brother, he should rectify this before presenting an “offering” which is likely a sacrifice at the altar. Luke’s affirmation of the Torah is even more pronounced as the birth of Jesus, his circumcision, Mary’s ritual purification, and even his Pidyon Haben is noted as a reflection of his parent’s piety. The Jesus of the synoptic Gospels then is at home with the Temple and its religious practices and obligations. The Jesus of Matthew affirms basic Jewish observances such as fasting, charity, and prayer, but despises what he perceives as hypocritical behavior by the established religious leadership.

The synoptic gospels also emphasize the miracles of Jesus and his teaching style. The Jesus of the synoptic gospels focuses on exorcisms and healing the sick. This is particularly true for Mark which focuses heavily on the exorcisms of Jesus as a recurring event. His teaching style consists largely of parables and proverb like statements. For the synoptic gospels, the focus of Jesus is Israel’s repentance reflected in pious acts.

While the gospel of Mark bypasses the virgin birth and mentions John the Baptist only briefly, the Gospel of John departs the furthest in its presentation of Jesus’ origin. John presents a  more esoteric portrait of Jesus’ origins. Here he is not the son of David, nor a claimant to the throne of David, but is instead presented as the Word, pre-existent before creation. This appears to be something reflective of the Greek concept of the Logos. In John, Jesus is a participant or agent in creation, and is either divine like or fully G-d . The focus of Jesus’ mission is universal in nature. John does not mention Israel once in his opening comments, nor does he mention David or Abraham. There is no appeal to biblical passages nor is there an effort to portray Jesus as fulfilling a specific prophecy. He does mention Moses and the Torah only in reflection of the love that Jesus is stated to give.

Despite the lack of Jewish details associated with Luke or Matthew, it is only John that portrays Jesus as Rabbi, though the term is mostly certainly anachronistic or simply reflective of a revered teacher. While the synoptic gospels focus on a simple piety (e.g. helping the poor, healing the sick, confronting hypocrisy), the conversations and dialogs of Jesus are much lengthier and of a tone that depict the struggle with sin as a more spiritual struggle reflective of the conflict with the Divine light. “For everyone who practices wickedness hates the light, and does not come near the light for fear his deeds will be exposed. But he who acts in truth comes into the light, so that it may be shown that his deeds are done in G-d.”  

John also presents a break with the Jewish community not found in the synoptic gospels. The conflict between Jesus and the Pharisees or Sadducees is certainly present, but the synoptic gospels arguably portray these conflicts as an inter-group issue. In John, Jews and the Torah are disconnected from Jesus. In a certain dialogue with the Pharisees, Jesus states “…Why in your Law, it is stated that testimony given by two witnesses is verified.” The most striking aspect differentiating John and the Synoptic gospels is the tone of the conflict between Jesus and those who oppose him. The conflict between Jesus and the Pharisees is no doubt pronounced and even intense with Jesus lodging verbal assault on the Pharisees. The conflict (e.g. showmanship in synagogues, ostentations in charity, etc.) is “understandable” or at least provides a backdrop. But John’s depiction of Jesus as depicting Jews who rejected his messianic claims as “children of the devil” is without question a marked break with the synoptic gospels general tendency to portray Jesus as a faithful Jew, whatever messianic claims are attributed to him.

Share This