The matter is not about the precision of what the disciples wrote about Jesus Christ. At no way can this be possible. We need to remember that during the biblical era, there were no technological devices that people could use in order to precisely record word-to-word when someone spoke, nor to record motion pictures when an incident or action was performed. Thus, the probability that the disciples precisely quoted exactly what Jesus spoke, word-to-word, is a very big flat zero!
A very good example to illustrate this point goes like this:
A fast running car hits a tree near a robot and the driver dies at the spot. A number of people obviously have seen the incident. Few minutes later, the paramedic team and the traffic police arrive. If the police ask three eyewitnesses to each write an account of the incident about the accident, it is evident that the three accounts will not be orthographically similar, i.e., the written statements made by these eyewitnesses will not be the same word-to-word. However, the sense and context of their accounts will be the same, that “the car was coming with a very high speed and hit the tree”.
Back to our Gospel-writing debate, the above example apply. All the disciples were present when Jesus was preaching; they were all there when Jesus was performing miracles; they were all there when Jesus was debating with the teachers of the law; in fact, they were all there in every step of Jesus’ ministry. What the Gospel writers penned is what Jesus said and did, regardless the “exact words” that came from his mouth.
Another example is this: a mother calls her son from the bedroom, “Dan, please phone your dad and ask him to bring me some Panado on his way from work, my head is aching very bad. If he does not get Panado he can bring Disprin but I prefer Panado.” The little Dan goes back to the sitting room, picks up the phone and rings his father. “Hallo Daddy… Mummy is suffering from headache, she said you should bring her some Panado, or if you fail, get some Disprin.”
The little Dan really passed the message to his father as his mother asked him, but he did not speak word-to-word as his mother said. Does this matter? Not at all. What matters is the “deliverance” of the “message”, and this message contains three(3) main points:
- that Dan’s mother is suffering from headache;
- that Dan’s mother needs some Panado; and
- that Dan’s father may bring Disprin if he cannot find Panado.
However Dan might formulate his message to his father, it must contain the above three points.
This is what the Gospel writers did. The context of Luke’s preface shows that the compilation of the Gospels was done with a great caution. In his preface or introduction, Luke penned in verse 2 of his first chapter: **“It seemed good to me also, having followed all things closely, to write an orderly account to you, most excellent Theophilus,…” **Note that Luke followed **all things closely **in order to compile his account. Luke must have taken his time, with great caution to make up this great job. Not only Luke, but other Gospel writers as well. Luke clearly indicated that he received what he wrote from
those who from the beginning were eyewitnesses and ministers of the word.
This is a job that Jesus manifested himself, and what Jesus requires from us is not to argue or debate about his word, but to accept and believe it. Anyone who accepts and believes in Jesus’ word believes in Jesus himself, and anyone who believes in Jesus also believes in the one Who sent him. If we doubt what the disciples wrote, we are simply denoting that the disciples probably are liars, hence making void the statement of Jesus that he would send the Holy Spirit to inspire the Gospel. This is a chain of system that leads to God’s acceptance, because God cannot accept you if you do not accept Jesus, and Jesus cannot accept you if you do not accept his word. Consequently, you cannot claim to accept the word of Jesus if you do not accept the Gospel writings. So accepting the Gospels means accepting that the Gospel writers wrote the truth. Simple.
The whole idea of this phenomenon leads to the concept of True Faith, because faith is centered on wholly believing in something that one has never seen. We believe that there is God but we have not seen Him. This is faith, and Christianity is pivoted and backboned by faith that 1) Jesus is God’s ONLY begotten Son (who is God incarnate), and he is the ONLY way to reach to God; 2) Jesus died on the cross to redeem the sins of all the people in this world, regardless of race, colour and gender; and 3) Jesus bodily rose from the dead on the third day, and he lived and ate with his disciples for forty days before he ascended to heaven.
“Blessed are those who have not seen and yet have believed” John 20:29b
Some “Christians” deny the bodily resurrection of Jesus Christ, claiming that Jesus resurrected with a spiritual body, yet Jesus himself made it clear when he appeared to his disciples: **“Behold my hands and my feet, that it is I myself. Handle me and see, for a spirit does not have flesh and bones as you see I have.” **Luke 24:39
I would feel very embarrassed if I made such claims, whereas Jesus himself denied not being a
spirit. How can a spirit ask for food? **“But while they still did not believe for joy, and marveled, he said to them, ‘Have you any food here?’ So they gave him a piece of a broiled fish and some honeycomb. And he took it and ate it in their presence.” **Luke 24:41-43
These false Christians who call themselves “True Christians” make direct statements of Jesus, figurative, and take figurative statements literally. How can the fact that Jesus ate food be figurative?
Only after we ask for understanding in Jesus’ name, shall we understand.
Gondai Moyana
