10/17/24
In a fairly Christianized society many people are aware that the Bible has four different portions called "gospels" and that they tell about the life and work of Jesus, but from slightly different perspectives. Someone from a culture with little exposure to Christianity may find this surprising.
The Bible is divided into two main parts; the Old Testament and the New Testament. The New Testament begins with writing from four different contemporaries of Jesus. We call them "gospels" and normally give their names as the four people who have historically been credited with the writings: Matthew, Mark, Luke, and John.
All four of the gospels are focused on "good news," which is essentially what "gospel" means. This good news can be summarized briefly as the message that Jesus, who is God the Son, took on humanity, lived a sinless life, brought teaching about the kingdom of God, and brought healing to people in need. He was arrested and executed, then rose from the dead, demonstrating that he can raise his people from the dead as well.
In a very real way, then, these are not "different gospels" but rather different accounts of the same gospel. The accounts emphasize different features and events in Jesus' life and work, and complement one another. At the end of John's gospel we read that Jesus did many things which are not written down. This should seem fairly obvious, since Jesus was actively involved in his work for about three years, yet the accounts each take an hour and a half, more or less, to read.
Matthew, Mark, and Luke are thought to be written a little earlier than John. They take a similar perspective and work with similar events. John is a little later and more philosophical in outlook.
How do we deal with the differences? Are they mistakes? If you consider the way different people describe the same events, you will realize that the differences in accounts are not necessarily mistakes. They all focus on the same essential aspects and bring a complete and nuanced understanding of what they report.