Twelve days - calling birds

 

When I was a small child, I always wondered what "calling birds" were . . . that's what most people think comes next. Researchers tell us that the original words were "colly birds."

Well, that's not really helpful. What's a colly bird? (Grin)

Actually, the researchers have an answer for that, as well. Colly is Old English slang for coal, or black-as-coal. So, colly birds are blackbirds!

Now, in our song The Twelve Days of Christmas, the four colly birds are the four gospels: Matthew, Mark, Luke, and John.

Down through the years, skeptics have frustrated Christians by pointing out what they feel are contradictions and errors in the Bible. Chief among these points of contention are the differences we read in the four gospels. It's my opinion that there are differences . . . not contradictions or discrepancies. 

Let me explain.

In the business that puts food on the table for hubby and me, we are rewarded for our ability to "market" the services of manufacturing companies. Let's say that this week we are focused on Company A. The first thing we do, before we ever contact a customer who may need Company A's manufacturing capabilities, is to tailor our words to the specific customer we hope to reach. One customer may be in dire straits because they need product made FAST. For them, we would highlight Company A's ability to push finished product out the door quickly. Another customer may be in hot water because their current supplier is providing poor quality. For them, we would focus on Company A's superior quality process and reliability.

In other words, we craft our message in ways that resonate with each customer we talk to!

The four Gospel writers were no different - they each had a story to tell, a message to share -- but they also each had a certain audience for whom the message was intended.

Matthew is the "most Jewish" of the four Gospels. It was written to tell the story of Jesus Christ to a distinctively Jewish audience.  His purpose in writing was to convince devoted Hebrews that Jesus was the promised Messiah, sent from God.

Mark wrote a motivational call to action - it was full of action and not concerned so much with details. Mark focused on the personal choice to act; his Gospel was a dramatic, powerful story that challenged his readers and asked what they will do with what they know about Jesus.

Luke's Gospel was intended to appeal to educated Greeks; his account of the life of Jesus was for people who were a generation removed from the life and ministry of Christ. Luke wrote a conclusive argument for the logic-loving Greeks who wanted to hear support for the validity of Jesus as the Christ.

Lastly, John's Gospel is totally different; it's not presented to convert people to Christianity from other religious traditions, but is written to devoted, committed believers in the church that John led. These Christians were struggling to understand the challenges of faith and fidelity in a world that was hostile to their beliefs (sound familiar?). John wrote to encourage the Christians in the validity of their decision to believe in Jesus Christ.

Each of the Gospels presents a slightly different view of Jesus: Matthew introduced his readers to the promised Messiah, Who called people to a "new" law and a new covenant with God. Mark presented Jesus as a healer, miracle worker, and teacher who was misunderstood by most of the people around Him. Luke showed Jesus as a merciful, compassionate, prayerful teacher Whose special concerns were for women, the poor, and non-Jews (Gentiles). John's Jesus was noble, powerful, and divine, fully in control of His own destiny.

The folks who want to try to poke holes in Christians' faith point out what they see as discrepancies in timing, location, and even words said by Jesus Christ and His disciples. I believe they are simple differences in style. 
For example, Mark tells his readers about Peter's denial in chapter fourteen, but it's in two sections. Wedged in between these two parts is the story of Jesus' trial. 

Luke? He completes the entire account of Peter's denial before saying much about Jesus' trial. These are just two distinctly different ways of telling the same stories. Mark was prone to use the stylistic technique of "sandwiching" the trial between the two halves of the story of Peter's betrayal. Luke treats the two stories completely separately.

As each gospel writer tells the story of Jesus' life, they use different approaches and many times this helps us to clarify and understand things. When seen in this light, "discrepancies" are seen as "differences," and I believe that is the truth! 

Each gospel writer "marketed" God's good news about His Son as necessary in order to convey the message effectively. Far from contradicting each other, their gospels show a distinctiveness that is nothing more than God reaching out to very diverse people with His message of unconditional love.