The Humanity of Jesus and His Role as a Savior in The Books of Matthew and John

The four canonical gospels of the Bible all intend to educate religious groups about the existence and purpose of Jesus Christ. However, the four gospels do not portray this teaching in the same manner. In fact, the Gospel of Matthew and the Gospel of John vary greatly in nature, particularly with respect to Christ’s humanity and the specific ways in which humans are advised to achieve salvation. Nonetheless, though the gospels often differ in character, both clearly assert the same instrument through which humans can attain deliverance.

Essentially, the gospels of Matthew and John both stress the idea that salvation can only be achieved through Jesus Christ. Matthew describes salvation as receiving the same reward that Jesus the prophet receives; as Jesus teaches: “Whoever welcomes you welcomes me, and whoever welcomes me welcomes the one who sent me. Whoever welcomes a prophet in the name of a prophet will receive a prophet’s reward; and whoever welcomes a righteous person in the name of a righteous person will receive the reward of the righteous” (New Oxford Annotated Bible Matt. 10.40-41). In this statement, Jesus implies that since God has sent him to earth, and God will reward him with salvation, then the only way for individuals to receive the same salvation is by welcoming and accepting Jesus and his teachings. Similarly, in John, acceptance of Christ leads to salvation, as it is professed: “just as Moses lifted up the serpent in the wilderness, so must the Son of Man be lifted up, that whoever believes in him may have eternal life” (John 3.14-15). Though the precise method in which Jesus provides salvation for his followers differs between the two gospels, both share the affirmation that eternal salvation may only be accomplished through the acceptance of Christ and his stated purpose on Earth.

A closer examination of the relationship between Christ and God provides critical insight into the apparent humanity of Christ’s persona. In Matthew, the relationship between Christ and God reflects the belief that the connection between God and Jesus is constituted by their having similar (but not identical) substance, a principle known as homoiousion. There is no indication that Jesus existed prior to his appearance on Earth - a belief common to Judaism, the established religion before Christ’s arrival. Instead, Jesus refers to God as “the one who sent [him],” implying that he was created by God to become a prophet on Earth (Matt. 10.40). Furthermore, Jesus purposely distinguishes himself from the Holy Spirit, as he teaches: “Whoever speaks a word against the Son of Man will be forgiven, but whoever speaks against the Holy Spirit will not be forgiven, either in this age or in the age to come” (Matt. 12.32). By calling himself “Son of Man,” Jesus is implying that he shares humanity with mankind, a concept that the idea of the Holy Trinity disavows. The belief that Christ’s nature is humanistic greatly influences how his teachings are portrayed, which in turn significantly impacts the foundations of any Biblical-based religion.

Christ’s relationship with the Jews and Gentiles supports his humanlike nature and consequent distinction from God. This most likely stems from the fact that the book of Matthew, unlike the book of John, is one of the synoptic gospels. The synoptic gospels (Matthew, Mark, and Luke) all seem to be written to appeal specifically to those of a Jewish background, most likely in the hopes of reaching a wider audience. Accordingly, many of the concepts intrinsic to the teachings correlate directly to Judaism. For instance, Jesus reminds his followers: “Do not think that I have come to abolish the law or the prophets; I have come not to abolish but to fulfill. For truly I tell you, until heaven and earth pass away, not one letter, not one stroke of a letter, will pass from the law until all is accomplished” (Matt. 5.17-18). Adherence to the mitzvoth (religious laws) and Old Testament prophesies are identifying characteristics of Judaism. The Jewish perspective greatly impacts the way in which the writer imparts Jesus’ precise purpose on Earth and the necessary actions of those who follow him. Thus, the gospel focuses more on the actual works of the followers than on their faith as the basis for their judgment from God. A proverb about the relationship between a slave and his master, for example, supports this idea because it is described that “blessed is the slave whom his master will find at work when he arrives” (Matt. 24.46). By portraying Jesus as supportive of the necessity of concrete laws, the writer appeals to the Jews by aligning Christianity with their own ideological concepts. More importantly, this depiction communicates to the reader once again that Christ has been cast in a very human position, as his role is directly connected to the fostering of specific human behavior rather than to the cultivation of a spiritual existence. Clearly, the humanity of Jesus has a crucial bearing upon the representation of Jesus’ teachings in the Book of Matthew.

Though both gospels state that Christ is the only vehicle through which to achieve salvation, the exact way that Christ leads followers to deliverance differs greatly. In Matthew, salvation is reached through the enlightenment which Jesus brings. Thus, on Judgment Day, Jesus may verify that the soul has followed his teachings. A good summation of this is found in Chapter 10: “Everyone therefore who acknowledges me before others, I also will acknowledge before my Father in heaven; but whoever denies me before others, I will also deny before my Father in heaven…those who lose their life for my sake will find it” (Matt. 10.32-33). Christ is presented by the writer as one who brings knowledge to mankind of how to live in accordance with God’s will. Because Jesus will effectively represent their good works, men can attain salvation through the following of Jesus’ teachings. This interpretation reinforces the humanistic characterization of Jesus which Matthew continually affirms.

Whereas the Gospel of Matthew seems to be written from a background of Judaism, the Gospel of John incorporates some elements of Gnosticism in its teachings, and accordingly presents Jesus in a much different manner. Gnosticism was the belief that each soul contains a broken-off piece of the same soul that God is comprised of, and that certain knowledge will teach one how to liberate the soul so that it may return to God. The opening of the gospel contains many Gnostic elements: “In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. He was in the beginning with God. All things came into being through him, and without him not one thing came into being” (John 1.1-3). Jesus, who is the Word, is united with God by a shared soul; he preexisted with God and was necessary for beings to exist - a relationship known as homoiousion. This view differs greatly from the perspective seen in Matthew, which is that of a humanistic prophet. Rather than existing only as a prophet, Jesus’ persona in John exists to connect the eternal soul of God with the sinful human souls on Earth. His apparent shared substance and existence with God casts him in a divine light, a stark contrast to the humanistic figure found in Matthew. In addition, it is interesting to note that whereas in Matthew, Jesus is usually referred to as the “Son of Man,” in John he is typically given more divine titles, such as this reference to “Son of God,” continuously reinforcing his divine nature (Matt. 12.32, John 20.31).

Some elements of Gnosticism are also glimpsed in the relationships between Jesus and his followers. For example, he teaches: “You have already been cleansed by the word that I have spoken to you. Abide in me as I abide in you…I am the vine, you are the branches. Those who abide in me and I in them bear much fruit, because apart from me you can do nothing” (John 15.3-5). If the text is interpreted literally, it seems to refer to the shared nature of Christ’s substance and the soul within each human body. Though it is more customary to view this relationship in a figurative sense, acknowledging the Gnosticism within it reminds the reader of the purely divine nature of Christ that has been presented in John. It makes sense that whereas Matthew focuses mainly on works as the basis for receiving God’s grace, John focuses on faith as the primary basis. This is evident in Christ’s instruction to “abide in [him],” or in other words, to willingly have faith in him and want to obey him. While the Gospel of John is not entirely Gnostic, and the relationship between God and the souls within humans is unclear, Gnosticism is helpful in interpreting the message of the gospel as a whole. It seems that as the writer of Matthew drew upon Judaism to elucidate his gospel, the writer of John may have drawn upon Gnosticism to explicate his. Once again, Christ’s nature significantly has impacted his teachings within the gospel.

As can be expected, the way Jesus delivers salvation to mankind is also portrayed quite differently in the Gospel of John. It is stated that the gospel has been written “so that [one] may come to believe that Jesus is the Messiah, the Son of God, and that through believing you may have life in his name” (John 20.31). This interpretation is far different from that found in Matthew. In this case, salvation is achieved through Jesus’ divine ability to purify and redeem believers who accept him. In the same way that Matthew’s presentation of Christ’s role is in line with his humanistic essence, John’s interpretation of his role agrees with the view of Christ as highly divine.

While the gospels of Matthew and John both seek to instruct readers about the essence and purpose of Jesus’ earthly existence, their methods of doing so differ greatly. In Matthew, Christ is viewed as humanistic and separate from God, and his teachings are in line with that view. In contrast, the Gospel of John characterizes Christ as purely divine and comprised of the same substance as God, and its teachings are thus quite different. However, the messages conveyed by both Gospels have ensured that they have remained invaluable texts, and will continued to be viewed as such by scholars and believers alike.

Works Cited

The New Oxford Annotated Bible, New Revised Standard Version. 3rd ed. Michael D. Coogan, Ed. New York: Oxford University Press, 2001.