I am reading through the New Testament
in my personal quiet time, and was arrested by the first sentence of
Mark—which then made me think of the first sentence of Matthew, and
then of the rest of the Gospels. More on this in a moment.
Now as I understand it, it is the
content of the canon—not necessarily the arrangement of it—that
is inspired. Such things as the chapter and verse divisions are not
inspired, having been added well after the canon was complete as an
aid to study. Nonetheless, the arrangement and items like the chapter
and verse divisions often provide interesting observations (though
not authoritative in the sense that the content is authoritative).
For instance, the number of books in
the English version of the canon is sixty-six. Don’t get too
carried away with this, because the Jews considered Samuel to be one
book, not two (because it is a long book, it had to be divided into
two scrolls, hence “First” and “Second” Samuel). Same with
Kings and Chronicles. So the number sixty-six is an artifact of the
Christian version of the canon. But even as such, there are some
interesting bits of trivia to think about—like the arrangement of
Isaiah, for instance.
The English version of the canon has
sixty-six books, thirty-nine Old Testament books, twenty-seven New
Testament books. Isaiah has sixty-six chapters. Contrast the major
emphasis of the first thirty-nine chapters with that of the last
twenty-seven. Check out how chapter forty (the first chapter of the
final twenty-seven) begins—compare it with Matthew 3. Think about
what the last twenty-seven chapters of Isaiah focuses upon. Neat,
huh. [I would love to give credit—or blame!!—where credit is due,
but I don’t remember how I happened upon this. Someone probably
mentioned it in seminary, but I don’t remember.]
So back to the first lines of the
Gospels. There’s a trajectory there that is interesting to me.
Matthew 1:1 begins by identifying Jesus as the son of David and the
son of Abraham—which means He is the heir of the promises to David
and Abraham. Then Mark 1:1 identifies Jesus as the Son of God, which
more explicitly links Jesus to the promise in 2 Samuel 7:14. But the
statement is not necessarily radical, because there’s evidence that
the Old Testament Israelites considered their kings to be sons of
God—not in the divine sense, mind you—but in the sense that they
were the theocratic representatives of the God of Israel.
But the first sentence of Luke is as
though the reader is tracking with the trajectory and is getting a
sense for where it is going, and is not quite ready for it. The reader steps
back and asks the incredulous question, “Wait a minute! Did this
stuff really happen in history? Is it for real?” which Luke then proceeds to
answer in the affirmative.
And finally, the first sentence of John
hits the target to which the other first-sentences were leading. It
identifies Jesus as God. “In the beginning was the
Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God.”
Anyway, it’s not profound, but it is
an interesting trajectory.
