#synopticgospels

My Savior and friend lives. Because He lives, He can come sit beside me as I paint & come with me every day of my life. (Me, trying to figure out what/if I should paint anything for Easter...So I decided to just paint up the moment...even if it’s not Easter anymore, Jesus is an “all the time” topic❤️) . . . #digitalart #painting #visdev #sundaypainting #synopticgospels #jesusoursavior #easter #becausehelives #helives #bekind #designs #digitalinking #design #painting #digitalpainting #byuanimation #artistoninstagram #procreate #jenikadraws #girlsinanimation https://www.instagram.com/p/B-8kWZUD7LU/?igshid=14w1qsrluksca

When I read the Synoptic gospels (Matthew through Luke), I'm struck with how different they are from the gospel of John. More conservative Christians would say that they present varying emphases, but the same essential message. I used to say that, too, until intellectual honesty caught up with me. The message of John, I now maintain, is so different than the preceding gospels that it barely seems like the same religion. In John, everything comes down to believing in Jesus. "Whoever believes in him is not condemned, but whoever does not believe stands condemned already because he has not believed in the name of God's one and only Son" (John 3:18). That text has many equivalents in John – none in the Synoptics (as far as I can tell).  In the Synoptics, Jesus never seems to offer simple faith in himself (plus nothing) as the deciding factor in the struggle between darkness and light. Rather, inward purity, love and good works determine who is with God and who isn't. In Matthew, love for our enemies makes us God's children (5:44-45); we receive forgiveness by forgiving others (6:14-15); our righteousness must exceed that of the Scribes and Pharisees (5:20); the Judgment turns upon how we have responded to the needy (25:31-46). There seems to be no call for a distinct "born again" experience in the first three gospels that involves a primal act of saving faith in "Jesus as Savior." Yes, people repent and go on to live renewed lives. But the evangelical idea of turning from one's own righteousness to receive a free, perfect righteous from Jesus is an concept alien to those writings. Also, the Synoptics speak far less about "eternal life" than about the Kingdom of God, a reality that was ready to break in upon that generation. That kingdom was a realm that one entered via radical righteousness – not by one act of justifying faith. "Not everyone who says to me, 'Lord, Lord,' will enter the kingdom of heaven, but only he who does the will of my Father who is in heaven" (Matt. 7:21). The dogmatic Christians with whom I've discussed these matters tell me I'm dead wrong. The New Testament paints a perfectly unified portrait of salvation and righteousness, they insist. In the Synoptic gospels, Jesus is simply enjoining upon us the logical aftereffects of the conversion experience (by faith alone). I can't help but wonder what they would admit as a negation of their claims. Had Jesus said, "black is black," in Matthew and, "black is white," in John, I'm confident that my disputants would have a ready argument to dispense with the difficulty. Theological necessity will always find a way. What is the upshot of all this? Must we choose between the Synoptics and John? Or should we accept a religion that amounts to a synthesis of both? I have come to the conclusion that the first three gospels probably contain a more accurate account of what Jesus said and did than John's gospel. Accordingly, the Synoptics hold a more prominent place in my Christian faith and life. Let everyone be persuaded in his or her own mind. If John is your doorway into a life of love and exalted goodness (as it is for many), I certainly won't lodge a protest.

“Heal the sick, raise the dead, cure those with leprosy, and cast out demons. Give as freely as you have received! “Don’t take any money in your money belts—no gold, silver, or even copper coins.” Matthew 10:8-9 NLT What's funny is when God led me to these verses tonight, the part that stuck out to me was not the usual aspect of casting out demons, raising the dead, and curing those with leprosy, but the aspect of not taking anything with you. I don't know about you, but when I'm planning on going somewhere I usually take a lot of stuff, at least what I need, or at least what I think I need. I think it's pretty profound that God told them not to take anything, and they didn't seem to respond with the least bit of suspicion or skepticism, they seemed to take this commission at its word and do what He told them. Me on the other hand, when God tells me to do something, I tend to want to make sure that everything is right and in order or that I'm prepared, or as of late i find myself trying to improve myself or become knowledge in some aspect or subject, but honestly, the profundity of this statement is that God is going to take care of it, just go and do it. I don't know about you, but that speaks pretty loudly to my life right now, stop worrying, know that God is going to take care of you and what he's planned for you, and that you do not need to be prepared because God has already prepared you or He's going to, and at the very least, He's got it all under control. We forget that sometimes, God is in control, not us, but Him, and He's going to do things how He wants and when He wants, and sometimes that's painful for us, but it's always the best for us. Just remember that the next time that God calls you to go somewhere, "Give as freely as you have received!" For we have often been given much, whether we realize it or not, and don't forget to "“Heal the sick, raise the dead, cure those with leprosy, and cast out demons." Amen.