Four accounts have been given us of the ministry on earth of the Lord Jesus Christ. The first three are commonly called the Synoptic Gospels because they are supposed to regard from the same general point of view the events narrated in them. This name is unfortunate because it is misleading and because it emphasizes the features common to the accounts which, nevertheless, important though they are, have for us less significance and instruction than those peculiar to each. Automatically we associate the first three together and overlook the very wide divergence which actually exists. Moreover, we are so accustomed to thinking of the four gospels as displaying four aspects of our Lord (as the King, the Servant, the Man and the Son of God) that we overlook other special features of them.
For instance, only one, Luke's Gospel, has a sequel. This, Acts of Apostles (there is no "the" in the Greek title), begins with a preface which speaks of "the first account." Clearly then, a primary object of Luke was to present an accurate history; and this is borne out by the preface to his gospel. As the Concordant Version note to Luke 1:1 admirably puts it, Luke's aim was to write an account which would be accurate and consecutive; but, more than that, we must expect to find that it is History in the widest sense, designed to link up with Israel's history in the past, world history (so far as it was relevant) at the time of writing, and future history of Israel as foretold in prophecy.*In this there is nothing inconsistent with the four aspects as usually understood. The King makes History, God's Son is above it, His Servant is not concerned with it; but as Man the Lord Jesus deliberately brings Himself within the framework of human history in bringing Himself within the limitations of time.
R. B. Withers
