• Starting today August 7th, 2024, in order to post in the Married Couples, Courting Couples, or Singles forums, you will not be allowed to post if you have your Marital status designated as private. Announcements will be made in the respective forums as well but please note that if yours is currently listed as Private, you will need to submit a ticket in the Support Area to have yours changed.

The Four Gospels

Sif

.
Nov 11, 2015
2,465
2,654
Rocky Mountain Region
✟371,228.00
Country
United States
Gender
Female
Faith
Other Religion
Marital Status
Private
Hello,

I do hope everyone is having a good Holy Week.

My question is in regards to the four Gospels. Who were the original intended audiences for each of the Gospels?

I am currently reading the section of the Gospels about Christ's Passion and death (I will move into the sections about His Resurrection soon). I noticed differences in each and I am curious as to the original intended audiences so I can better understand them.

That you in advance.

I hope you all have a good Easter Season.
 

1watchman

Overseer
Site Supporter
Oct 9, 2010
6,040
1,227
Washington State
✟358,388.00
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
Good issue! The Gospels do all speak of the Good News found in Jesus, the Christ of God; however, each has presented the Lord in different light. The Gospels are not a biography of Jesus, for not all things are revealed in each, though basic truths are presented.

1) We learn from Matthew of His legitimacy by lineage, and the SON OF DAVID, etc., and rightful heir and the prophetic Redeemer and the Messiah of Israel; also, we see the Kingdom of Heaven introduced ---which is both rule of the Heavens, profession of Christ, and hope for the world;

2) In Mark, Luke, and John we learn more of the Kingdom of God which speaks of the individual's new life in the Christ through His sacrifice on the Cross. It has been described as a circle within a circle; that is, the K. of God as the inner sanctum within the K. of Heaven ---also, possession (new birth) within profession (acknowledgment and allowance);

3) Mark presents Jesus more as the SERVANT OF GOD --His Godly works, etc.

4) Luke emphasizes Jesus as the SON OF MAN --the holy God-man, etc.

5) John speaks mostly of Jesus as the SON OF GOD --God come down, showing deity.

The good Gospel message is found in all, but these emphases give us a full picture to more appreciate who He was and is. This is an interesting study if one seeks to pursue it by Bible scholars. I have some understanding further if one wishes to write me to talk more.

I hope this can be a blessing to you, Sif!
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: BeStill&Know
Upvote 0

Quid est Veritas?

In Memoriam to CS Lewis
Feb 27, 2016
7,319
9,223
South Africa
✟324,143.00
Gender
Male
Faith
Protestant
Marital Status
Married
Mark is the oldest of the Gospels, probably written about 66-70 AD according to modern critics.

The work is anonymous itself, but Papias ascribed it to Mark the Evangelist and this is the traditional view. Mark was a companion of Peter and probably his greek interpreter.
As to the Gospel, it was written for a Greek speaking audience, probably of gentile stock as it explains traditional Jewish practices and translates Aramaic terms. If it was written for Aramaic speakers or Jews, this would not have been the case. The author was clearly aware of Greek biography and the Homeric Epics as they are mimicked in style in certain passages, but the text shows Aramaicisms and quotes exclusively from the Septuagint, so the author was likely a Jew and second language Greek speaker. Based on its historical provenance and dialect, it was likely written either in Antioch or Rome, which fits it being ascribed to Mark.

Matthew was written about 75AD according to modern textual criticism in Antioch, Syria. It was written for Greek speaking Jewish Christians as the author never explains Jewish customs and only traces Jesus' lineage back to Abraham. It also stresses Jesus as a legitamate Jewish king, a son of David.
Papias said that the Apostle Matthew wrote two gospels, one in Aramaic and one in Greek. Traditionally this is said to be the Greek one that he wrote, but there is some doubt as the word Papias used was Logia which usually only means sayings, not a full story.

Luke is said to be authored by the companion of Paul by this name. On textual grounds, a date of between 80-90 AD is suggested by modern scholars.
The Author is definately a first language Greek and bases his style on Dionysius of Halicarnassus, a famous historian of the period. It is written to mirror standard greek histories of the period. It was written for Greeks without a doubt as it assumes an educated Greek audience in its referencing, although it only adresses Christian concerns. It was likely written in Ionia (Modern Turkey) in one of the Greek cities there.
The writer is also responsible for Acts as they are clearly the work of the same man.

Last John. It was likely written 100-110 AD. There is debate in early Christian writers who the John who wrote it was, but in the end it was decided in was the Apostle John or a close follower in his name.
Again it was written in Greek, likely in Asia Minor. The Author references Greek mystery practices, so is aware of Greek religious thought. He knows of Hellenistic Philosophy as well. He also knows some Samaritan practices. However, he mostly quotes the Tanakh and the Greek translations of the old testament, but seems familiar with it.
Therefore, the writer was probably a Greek speaking Hellenistic Jew, likely somewhat educated (although not as much as Luke), and wrote for Hellenistic Jewish Christians.

As an aside, the dates I gave above are based on modern criticism, which decided that as Jesus mentioned the fall of Jerusalem in prophecy, they had to have been written after this (therefore the earliest dates would be 66-70 AD). If we ignore that and assume that the Prophecy preceded the siege of Jerusalem than dates of 50-90 AD becomes more probable on stylistic grounds.
 
  • Like
Reactions: food4thought
Upvote 0

food4thought

Loving truth
Site Supporter
Jul 9, 2002
2,929
725
51
Watervliet, MI
✟406,829.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Single
Mark appears to be written to the Roman mind, focused on action and service.

Matthew appears to be written to the Jewish mind, focusing on Jesus as the rightful king of Israel, and their Messiah (Christ)

Luke is definitely pointed towards the Greek mind, focusing on Jesus as the perfect man, and the Son of God

John is written for a general audience, I think, focusing on Jesus as the eternal Son of God
 
  • Like
Reactions: Sif
Upvote 0

ViaCrucis

Confessional Lutheran
Oct 2, 2011
39,569
29,110
Pacific Northwest
✟814,352.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
Lutheran
Marital Status
In Relationship
Politics
US-Others
Hello,

I do hope everyone is having a good Holy Week.

My question is in regards to the four Gospels. Who were the original intended audiences for each of the Gospels?

I am currently reading the section of the Gospels about Christ's Passion and death (I will move into the sections about His Resurrection soon). I noticed differences in each and I am curious as to the original intended audiences so I can better understand them.

That you in advance.

I hope you all have a good Easter Season.

With the exception of Luke it's largely a work of conjecture.

Luke's intended audience is made explicit in the text itself, as it is addressed to a person by the name of Theophilus, an individual who was likely also someone of some importance seeing as the address is to "the most excellent Theophilus". Who this Theophilus was, however, is unknown.

Matthew is generally believed to have had a Jewish audience in mind, the internal clues to this include the fact that Matthew quotes from the Jewish Scriptures more than any of the other Evangelists. When quoting Jesus' statements concerning God's kingdom uses the phrase "kingdom of heaven" rather than "kingdom of God" where "heaven" would have been understood as a reverent euphemism for God. Matthew seems to emphasize Jesus' Messianic status the most, see for example Matthew ch. 16 concerning the "Who do people say that I am?" episode.

Mark's audience is harder to guess at, I have heard some argue that Mark's audience may have been Roman, where the abruptness of Mark's style indicates a kind of "just the facts". Mark is also traditionally believed to have been based on Peter's preaching, and Peter's place within the Church in Rome is of venerable memory.

John's is the most interesting in that it's completely unlike the Synoptics. The focus in John's Gospel is far more theologically dense, that Jesus is the Incarnate Logos. John's audience may have been those who were being tempted by early Gnostics or proto-Gnostics of the Docetic and/or Cerinthian variety; the intent seems to have been to affirm the belief about Jesus against heterodox/heretical views which were encroaching in the late first/early second century.

-CryptoLutheran
 
Upvote 0

Quid est Veritas?

In Memoriam to CS Lewis
Feb 27, 2016
7,319
9,223
South Africa
✟324,143.00
Gender
Male
Faith
Protestant
Marital Status
Married
With the exception of Luke it's largely a work of conjecture.

Luke's intended audience is made explicit in the text itself, as it is addressed to a person by the name of Theophilus, an individual who was likely also someone of some importance seeing as the address is to "the most excellent Theophilus". Who this Theophilus was, however, is unknown.

Matthew is generally believed to have had a Jewish audience in mind, the internal clues to this include the fact that Matthew quotes from the Jewish Scriptures more than any of the other Evangelists. When quoting Jesus' statements concerning God's kingdom uses the phrase "kingdom of heaven" rather than "kingdom of God" where "heaven" would have been understood as a reverent euphemism for God. Matthew seems to emphasize Jesus' Messianic status the most, see for example Matthew ch. 16 concerning the "Who do people say that I am?" episode.

Mark's audience is harder to guess at, I have heard some argue that Mark's audience may have been Roman, where the abruptness of Mark's style indicates a kind of "just the facts". Mark is also traditionally believed to have been based on Peter's preaching, and Peter's place within the Church in Rome is of venerable memory.

John's is the most interesting in that it's completely unlike the Synoptics. The focus in John's Gospel is far more theologically dense, that Jesus is the Incarnate Logos. John's audience may have been those who were being tempted by early Gnostics or proto-Gnostics of the Docetic and/or Cerinthian variety; the intent seems to have been to affirm the belief about Jesus against heterodox/heretical views which were encroaching in the late first/early second century.

-CryptoLutheran

Theophilus means "Lover of God". There was likely no such person. It was common practice to adress the reader in hellenistic writings in this manner. For instance if you wrote a book on agriculture you would adress it to Farmer or Lover of Crops or somesuch.
 
Upvote 0

ViaCrucis

Confessional Lutheran
Oct 2, 2011
39,569
29,110
Pacific Northwest
✟814,352.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
Lutheran
Marital Status
In Relationship
Politics
US-Others
Theophilus means "Lover of God". There was likely no such person. It was common practice to adress the reader in hellenistic writings in this manner. For instance if you wrote a book on agriculture you would adress it to Farmer or Lover of Crops or somesuch.

I've heard that theory as well. I'm not disagreeing, I just don't know that there is sufficient evidence to say one way or the other with any kind of certainty. That it could be a generic address doesn't mean it definitely is. As such, I think the question of who Theophilus is remains open ended.

-CryptoLutheran
 
Upvote 0

JackRT

Well-Known Member
Site Supporter
Oct 17, 2015
15,722
16,445
82
small town Ontario, Canada
✟767,445.00
Country
Canada
Gender
Male
Faith
Unorthodox
Marital Status
Married
My question is in regards to the four Gospels. Who were the original intended audiences for each of the Gospels?

Most of us are aware that many Christian churches today follow the lectionary. That is, the scripture readings, Sunday by Sunday, are determined in advance for the entire year. This was also the case in first century Judaism. The entire Torah had to be read in the course of one year. The great holy days of the Jewish year fell on those days on which the corresponding passages of the Torah were read. This two thousand year old lectionary has now been reconstructed with a high degree of certainty. A typical synagogue service at the time would have consisted of the required Torah reading plus optional readings from the Prophets. The sophar or rabbi would also preach a sermon usually based on the Torah reading. Part of that sermon would frequently have consisted of pointing out and explaining the midrashic connections found in the readings. The service would also have been interspersed with various prayers and hymns. Remember that the psalms were simply hymns in the Hebrew language. Such a service would probably feel very familiar to us. We are following the same basic pattern right now in most Christian churches.

For almost 60 years after the death of Jesus, Christians and Jews worshipped together. In most synagogues Christians were in a minority position and the tradition developed that the Christians would worship with their fellow Jews on Shabat and on the following day they would meet together for their own service. This is the origin of the Christian practice of services on the first day of the week rather than the last. In at least some synagogues, Christians constituted the majority of the congregation and would quite naturally have wished to have Christian scripture readings to complement the Torah readings from the Jewish lectionary.

It is only recently becoming apparent that this is exactly the need that the gospel writers were attempting to meet. One of the earliest manuscripts of the Bible is known as the Codex Alexandrinus. Unlike our modern Bible translations, which are organized by chapter and verse, this manuscript has the gospels organized into lections. Mark, in particular, is organized into 49 lections. Incidentally the chapter-verse organization did not come into use until the mid 16th century. These 49 lections of Mark correspond exactly, Shabat by Shabat, to the Jewish lectionary. It would seem that we have found the organizing principle behind Mark's gospel.

What does this mean to our modern day interpretation to the life of Jesus? It would appear that Mark selected stories from the life of Jesus and wrote them into his gospel in those places where they would best suit the existing Jewish lectionary. This means that we cannot read Mark with the preconceived notion that we are reading about the life of Jesus in any kind of a sequential order. However, we are still able to infer some information as to order. We can be reasonably sure that the baptism of Jesus by John was an early event and that the cleansing of the Temple was a late event.

Let me illustrate this situation with just one of many possible examples. The feast of Hanukkah occurs between the third and fourth Shabats of the month of Kislev. It is also called the Feast of the Dedication and is sometimes also called the Festival of Light. It celebrates the 164 BC victory of the Maccabees over the Syrians and the rededication of the Temple. The return of the light of God to the Temple became the primary theme, but in typical midrashic style the Jews wove into the festival other similar themes from their scriptures where the light of God had manifested itself. In Mark's gospel, the Christian story chosen to correspond to this celebration is the Feast of the Transfiguration. In this story the themes are preserved. The Temple is on a mountaintop, so is the Transfiguration. Jesus appears with Moses who was also transfigured by the light of God on a mountaintop in Sinai. Jesus is the new Temple being dedicated by the light of God to replace the old Temple. Both Moses and Elijah appeared with Jesus and, in Jewish tradition, neither of them experienced death. Jesus did experience death but defeated it. The midrashic idea of presenting the new in the light of the old is preserved by serving up the Feast of the Transfiguration in conjunction with Hanukkah.
 
Upvote 0

Hawkins

Member
Site Supporter
Apr 27, 2005
2,685
416
Canada
✟306,478.00
Country
Canada
Gender
Male
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
My question is in regards to the four Gospels. Who were the original intended audiences for each of the Gospels?

The Bible is the God-breathed Word for all mankind.

In terms of historicity. Matthew may have been used to draw the attention of the Jews. That's why it is written in a form of story telling about what was already spreading among the Jews, such as the virgin Mary story and baby Jesus and Magi story.

Mark is more written from what was provided by Peter. It is written in Rome and in a shorter form possibly due to that it's expensive to get things published in Rome.

Luke is more like a formal investigation done by Luke under the request of a Roman official.

John, as the last disciple left, may write something critical and summarizing. The audience may be the Greek, Romans and other Europeans as by the time when John was the only one left, it is the time the Gospel tends to spread in Europe rather than in Palestine.
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0

Radagast

comes and goes
Site Supporter
Dec 10, 2003
23,896
9,864
✟344,531.00
Country
Australia
Gender
Male
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Single
Hello,

I do hope everyone is having a good Holy Week.

My question is in regards to the four Gospels. Who were the original intended audiences for each of the Gospels?

I am currently reading the section of the Gospels about Christ's Passion and death (I will move into the sections about His Resurrection soon). I noticed differences in each and I am curious as to the original intended audiences so I can better understand them.

Basically, the intended audience of all four was: Christians in general.

The Gospel of Matthew seems to have Christians of Jewish origin as a particular focus.

The Gospel of Luke seems to be associated with Paul's missionary journeys, and hence may be aimed particularly at the cities visited by Paul.
 
Upvote 0

brentlake

Member
May 13, 2016
6
1
54
USA
✟22,631.00
Gender
Male
Faith
United Ch. of Christ
Marital Status
Married
everyone...so they can know how to become a christian....and how to be a better christian
Yes this is a good answer, as I understand it, the goal with the Gospels was to extend the reach of the faith outside of the original small audience of believers and apostles, to make ti something truly universal. In practice of course, I suppose one could say the first immediate audience was simply the population of mainly merchants (what we would today call the burghers or middle class) who were dissatisfied and searching for spiritual as well as intellectual meaning in the ancient near East, mostly in the Greek-speaking areas. But this evangelism was a stepping stone, I suppose you could say.
 
Upvote 0

Radagast

comes and goes
Site Supporter
Dec 10, 2003
23,896
9,864
✟344,531.00
Country
Australia
Gender
Male
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Single
In practice of course, I suppose one could say the first immediate audience was simply the population of mainly merchants

More correctly: urban people in general. Many early Christians were slaves.
 
Upvote 0