The Cradle, the Cross, and the Crown (202 page)

²⁸¹
Beale,
Book of Revelation,
190; Osborne,
Revelation,
62; Swete,
Apocalypse of St. John,
35; Ford,
Revelation,
374; Mounce,
Book of Revelation,
70. The best study of “witness” terminology in Revelation is A. A. Trites, “
Μάρτυς
and Martyrdom in the Apocalypse: A Semantic Study,”
NovT
15 (1973): 72-80. Cf. id., "
Μάρτυς, μαρτυρέω
"
NTDNTT 3:
1038-50; H. Strathmann, "
Μάρτυς, μαρτυρέω
"
TDNT
4:474-514; Mazzaferri,
Genre,
306-10; id.,
“Martyria Iēsou
Revisited,” 114—22; B. Dehandschutter, “The Meaning of Witness in the Apocalypse,” in
L'Apocalypse johannique,
283—88; P. Ellingworth, “The
Martyria
Debate,”
BT
41 (1990): 138-39.

²⁸²
It most frequently occurs in the phrase “the word of God and the testimony of Jesus” (1:2,9;
6:9;
20:4 NIV) and once with “the commandments of God” (12:17; see 14:12). In 11:7; 17:6; 19:10, it clearly refers to the testimony maintained by believers. This is related to their vocal proclamation of faithfulness to Christ resulting in their execution or oppression (1:9; 6:9; 11:7; 12:11,17; 17:6; 20:4).

²⁸³
See A. J. Köstenberger, “The Contribution of the General Epistles and Revelation to a Biblical Theology of Religions,” in
Christianity and the Religions: A Biblical Theology of World Religions,
ed. E. Rommen and H. Netland, EMS Series 2 (Pasadena: William Carey Library, 1995), 133—35, with reference to Bauckham,
Climax of Prophecy,
238—337.

²⁸⁴
See Osborne, “Theodicy,” 63—77; A. Y. Collins, “Persecution and Vengeance in the Book of Revelation,” in
Apocalypticism in the Mediterranean World and the Near East,
729—30.

²⁸⁵
See Köstenberger, “The Contribution of the General Epistles and Revelation,” 133—35.

²⁸⁶
J. M. Ford, “The Christological Function of the Hymns in the Apocalypse of John,’
AUSS
36 (1998): 207.

²⁸⁷
See deSilva, “The ‘Image of the Beast’ and the Christians in Asia Minor,” 197—201.

²⁸⁸
Dio Cassius,
Hist.
59.24.4; Philo,
Leg.
116; Aune,
Revelation 6-16,
741.

²⁸⁹
Bauckham
(Theology of the Book of Revelation,
120) noted the parallel with Moses’ encounter with Pharaoh and his magicians and Elijah's conflict with Jezebel and the prophets of Baal.

²⁹⁰
B. R. Rossing,
The Choice Between Two Cities: Whore, Bride, and Empire in the Apocalypse,
HTS (Philadelphia: Trinity Press International, 1999), 14-15.

Part Five

T
HE PREVIOUS SECTIONS in this volume have treated foundational matters related to the NT canon and NT backgrounds (Part One) and provided discussions of the Gospels (Part Two), the book of Acts and Paul's letters (Part Three), and the General Epistles and Revelation (Part Four). Thus this comprehensive introduction to and survey of the NT is almost complete. It remains to discuss the relationships among the various component parts of the NT canon. Thus chapter 21 deals with unity and diversity in the NT.

CHAPTER 21

CORE KNOWLEDGE

Basic Knowledge:
Students should know the major issues involved in discussing the unity and diversity of the NT. They should have a grasp of the basic relationship among the Gospels, Acts, the Letters, and Revelation and be able to identify major points of integration in NT theology.

Intermediate Knowledge:
In addition to mastery of the core content identified in Basic Knowledge above, students should be able to compare and contrast the relationship between the Synoptics and John; Jesus and Paul; and the characterization of Paul in Acts and the Pauline Letters. They should also be able to provide a thorough discussion of points of integration in NT theology.

Advanced Knowledge:
In addition to mastery of the core content identified in Basic Knowledge above and beyond the Intermediate Knowledge noted above, students should be able to discuss alleged developments in Paul's thought. They also ought to be able to discuss the relationship among the theologies of Paul, Peter, James, and other NT voices.

INTRODUCTION

A
T THE END of this introduction to the NT, it is appropriate to reflect briefly on the relationship of the NT books to one another as part of the NT canon. We have discussed the development of the canon and have provided information on introductory matters for every NT book. The purpose of this concluding chapter is to deal with issues arising from the unity and diversity in the NT, that is, ways in which these various books cohere and yet reveal a certain amount of diversity.

THE RELATIONSHIP AMONG THE GOSPELS, THE BOOK OF
ACTS, THE LETTERS, AND THE BOOK OF REVELATION

On a canonical level, it may be helpful to start this chapter with a brief exploration of the relationship among the Gospels, the book of Acts, the Letters, and Revelation, respectively. First, a word on the Gospels is in order. There is no evidence that any Gospel other than the four canonical Gospels was ever part of the church's recognized canon (including the Gnostic Gospels). Conversely, there is early and reliable evidence that Matthew, Mark, Luke, and John were considered apostolic and authoritative virtually from the start.

The canonical order of the Gospels—Matthew, Mark, Luke, John—most likely does not reflect the early church's conviction that these books were written in this order chronologically but rather are due to various topical considerations. Matthew apparently was chosen first because this Gospel begins with the genealogy of Jesus Christ and thus provides a fitting transition from the end point of OT revelation and a proper entry point into the story of the NT, particularly the coming of Jesus.

At the same time, a chronological consideration seems to have been in play with regard to the placement of John last among the four Gospels on the basis of the conviction that his Gospel was written at the end of the apostolic era subsequent to the Synoptic Gospels (see Irenaeus,
Against Heresies
3.1.1). Nevertheless, due to its gospel genre, John is interposed between Luke's Gospel and the book of Acts even though Luke wrote both, wherein he documented the story of Jesus and the early church in a two-volume format (see Acts 1:1).

Moreover, to be precise, while there are four Gospels in the NT, they all bear witness to one and the same gospel.
¹
These Gospels—better, “this Gospel” opens the NT canon even though, chronologically speaking, several of the NT letters were almost certainly written prior to at least some of the Gospels (and in some cases prior to any of the them). For the Gospels (and the teaching of Jesus they contain) constitute the foundation of NT theology.

The book of Acts follows the Gospels in the canon and narrates the history of “what Jesus continued to do” in the days of the early church (Acts 1:1, author's translation; notice also the overlap between the end of Luke's Gospel and the beginning of Acts). The
important implication of this is that there is no biblical and canonical basis for a radical disjunction between the “Jesus of history” and the “Christ of faith,” that is, between Jesus as he was born, lived, died, and rose, and Christ as the object of the faith of his first followers subsequent to the resurrection.

To the contrary, the resurrected Jesus became the central focus of the early apostolic proclamation according to the book of Acts. As Peter preached at Pentecost, “God has resurrected
this Jesus.
We are all witnesses of this….Therefore let all the house of Israel know with certainty that God has made
this Jesus
, whom you crucified, both Lord and Messiah!” (Acts 2:32,36; emphasis added). The very one whom people crucified has now become, by virtue of his resurrection, the vindicated and exalted Lord who is rightly the object of the church's worship.
²

With its geographical pattern tracing the expansion of Christianity from Jerusalem all the way to Rome, the empire's capital (Acts 1:8), the book of Acts lays the foundation for the next segment of the NT canon, namely the Letters, in that it provides the framework into which many of the Letters can be fitted. The establishment of churches in Galatia, Thessalonica, Corinth, and Ephesus, and the recruitment ofTimothy provide the essential backdrop for most of the Pauline Letters in the NT canon.

The Letters provide a glimpse into the specific issues dealt with in some of the major churches during the apostolic period. This includes serious doctrinal challenges: the gospel message, as in Galatia (cf. Gal 1:6; see Acts 15); a variety of congregational issues such as marriage, eating food sacrificed to idols, and the exercise of spiritual gifts in Corinth (cf. 1 Corinthians 7—16), the doctrine of the church (cf. the Prison Epistles), and church structure and qualifications for leadership (the Pastoral Epistles).

Revelation provides closure in that it depicts Jesus' glorious return (the Second Coming), his subsequent judgment of the world, and the gathering of his elect (his covenant community) to be with him forever in heaven. Creation and the fall at the beginning of the canon of Scripture find their complement in the new restored creation and the reversal of the effects of the fall in the final chapters of Revelation.
³

ISSUES RELATED TO THE NEW TESTAMENT'S
UNITY AND DIVERSITY

The Synoptics and John

At least since the end of the eighteenth century, critics have alleged that the Synoptic Gospels and John stand in irreconcilable conflict.
⁴
The solution, adopted by the vast majority
of commentators, has been that the Synoptic writers were more interested in history while John was primarily interested in theology. After all, did not Clement of Alexandria call John's a “spiritual Gospel”?
⁵
After initial doubts arose in the 1790s, it was particularly K. G. Bretschneider and later D. F. Strauss, both of whom discredited John's historical reliability and proposed that his Gospel deals with “myth,” not historical narrative.
⁶

In recent years, however, the historical reliability of John's Gospel has witnessed a remarkable rehabilitation.
⁷
It is now widely recognized that the above-sketched appraisal of the relationship between the Synoptics and John is not only unduly simplistic but in fact inaccurate. There are several reasons for this. First, there are a notable number of what some have called “interlocking connections” between John and the Synoptics, that is, instances where John's Gospel fills in a detail or a connection in the Synoptic Gospels.
⁸
This includes, in particular, instances where it seems that John presupposed his readers' familiarity with the Synoptic tradition and very possibly one or more of the written Gospels (e.g., John 1:40; 3:24;
4:44;
6:67,71; 11:1-2).
⁹
This suggests that the Synoptics and John are not in conflict but sustain a complementary relationship.

Second, it has been shown that many historical, geographical and topographical details in John's Gospel are in fact historically accurate, that is, they can be corroborated by archaeology and extant extrabiblical sources.
¹⁰
Archaeological discoveries such as artifacts related to Caiaphas and the high priestly family or the location of the pool of Siloam are cases in point.
¹¹
No less a historian than M. Hengel considered John's Gospel to be an important source for first-century Judaism, crediting its author with an excellent knowledge of Palestinian topography and the Jewish calendar.
¹²
Hengel also points out that several pieces of information occur in John's Gospel for the first time, such as the Samaritan village named Sychar (4:5), the name
ta enkainia
as a designation for the Feast of Tabernacles (10:22),
and the characterization of Annas as Caiaphas's father-in-law (18:13).
¹³
And John's portrayal of Annas and Caiaphas earned Hengel's highest praise.
¹⁴

In cases where John's Gospel overlaps with the Synoptics, John frequently supplies additional information.
¹⁵
He mentioned a boy with five barley loaves and two small fish as well as Jesus' interchange with Philip and Andrew at the feeding of the multitude (6:5—9); he referred to the fragrance of the perfume and identified Judas as the one who objected to Mary of Bethany's anointing of Jesus' feet prior to the crucifixion (12:3—8; Matthew globally referred to “the disciples” in 26:8, and Mark to “some of those present” in 14:4 NIV); and he specified Malchus as the name of the servant whose ear Peter cut off at Gethsemane (John 18:10).

Perhaps the most commonly noted difficulty in reconciling John's Gospel with the Synoptic Gospels is related to the dating of Jesus' final Passover with his disciples.
¹⁶
Some claim that the reference to “the preparation day for the Passover” (John 19:14) places the Last Supper on Wednesday night with the crucifixion taking place on Thursday afternoon when the Passover lambs would have been slaughtered in preparation for Passover later that evening. However, a closer look reveals that both John and the Synoptics present Jesus as having eaten a final meal with his disciples, a Passover meal, on Thursday night, with the crucifixion having taken place on Friday, afternoon.

The resolution is found in 19:13, where we are told that Jesus' crucifixion took place on “the day of Preparation” (v. 14 NIV) with the very next day being a “special Sabbath,” that is, the Sabbath of Passover week. Thus, even in John the crucifixion takes place on Friday with “the day of Preparation” in John, as in Mark and Luke, referring not to the day of preparation for the Passover but for the Sabbath (Mark 15:42; Luke 23:54; see Josephus,
Ant.
16.163—64). Moreover, since Passover lasted an entire week (in conjunction with the associated Feast of Unleavened Bread; see Luke 22:1), it was customary to speak of the day of preparation for the Sabbath as “the day of Preparation
of Passover week,”
though not of the Passover in a more narrow sense, as a better rendering of the phrase in John 19:14. Other apparent discrepancies between John and the Synoptics are likewise capable of resolution.
¹⁷