What image of Jesus do you get from reading the Gospels?

[John Evens]

Who is this Jesus we encounter in the Gospels? Is he the beloved Son of God? Is he the awaited Messiah? Is he an effective rabbi? Is Jesus the Savior of the world? Is he the true vine, the image of the invisible God, the bread of life?

Yes, Jesus is all of these and more. No title, no image, no simile or metaphor can adequately depict Jesus in his essence, or who he is for each of us.

I'm doing A study on this and would like some second opinions on this.

I have noticed that a lot preachers have written about the various views we have about Jesus that we encounter in the four Gospels of our Bibles. It's to seems to me that many evangelist drew the image of Jesus looking back at his life and ministry from a slightly different angle.

In the Gospel according to Mark, the question, “Who is Jesus?” is answered in the opening verse where we read about the beginning of the Gospel of “Jesus Christ, the Son of God.” What that means unfolds as the we also focuses on what it means to follow him: “Whoever wishes to come after me must deny himself, take up his cross, and follow me”. 9:35

Jesus, in Mark’s writings, is not a triumphal king who rules from on high. Rather, he is the anointed Christ, the Messiah, the Son of God who must suffer. Mark focuses on the full humanity of Jesus and invites us to do the same. The suffering of his followers can be meaningful insofar as it is connected with carrying the cross as Jesus himself did through the streets of Jerusalem.

In what some would say is a stark contrast, the Gospel according to John introduces us to the divine Jesus, the Word of God made flesh (1:14). In this account, Jesus appears fully in charge of the events that surround him, and fully capable of assuming the identity of the great I AM revealed at Sinai. John uses what have become some of the most familiar images to identify Jesus and places them on his own lips. Jesus says, “I am …” the light of the world, the lamb of God, the way and the truth and the life, the bread of life, and the good shepherd.

In the Gospel according to Matthew, Jesus is portrayed as the fulfillment of the Jewish Scriptures, the long-awaited Messiah who stands at the intersection of salvation history. As a respected rabbi, he is shown to teach with authority and creativity. This account from Matthew contains five large teaching discourses: the Sermon on the Mount, the instructions for mission, the great sermon in parables, the instructions for living as church , and a final discourse on the end times.

Perhaps most pointedly, in Matthew, Jesus is Emmanuel (God with us). This title is introduced at the birth of Jesus, and reinforced at the close of the Gospel where the risen Jesus commissions his followers and promises, “I am with you always, until the end of the age” (28:20).

Jesus the forgiving Savior, the one whose mercy and compassion reaches out to all on the margins, is the focus of the Gospel according to Luke. In this account, the emphasis falls on the inclusiveness of Jesus, his appeal both to men and women, rich and poor, Jews and Gentiles. Jesus is the faithful companion who exudes and inspires compassion, a man whose touch is as powerful as his words.

Clearly, these portraits overlap and what emerges is an experience of Jesus that is more than the sum of its parts. In our own prayerful reading of the Gospels we may be drawn at some times to particular aspects of Jesus. At other times we may need the challenge of an image that stretches us to a deeper relationship with the Lord and a new direction as disciples.

 

[JoshebB]

Who is this Jesus we encounter in the Gospels? Is he the beloved Son of God? Is he the awaited Messiah? Is he an effective rabbi? Is Jesus the Savior of the world? Is he the true vine, the image of the invisible God, the bread of life?

Yes, Jesus is all of these and more. No title, no image, no simile or metaphor can adequately depict Jesus in his essence, or who he is for each of us.

I'm doing A study on this and would like some second opinions on this.

I have noticed that a lot preachers have written about the various views we have about Jesus that we encounter in the four Gospels of our Bibles. It's to seems to me that many evangelist drew the image of Jesus looking back at his life and ministry from a slightly different angle.

In the Gospel according to Mark, the question, “Who is Jesus?” is answered in the opening verse where we read about the beginning of the Gospel of “Jesus Christ, the Son of God.” What that means unfolds as the we also focuses on what it means to follow him: “Whoever wishes to come after me must deny himself, take up his cross, and follow me”. 9:35

Jesus, in Mark’s writings, is not a triumphal king who rules from on high. Rather, he is the anointed Christ, the Messiah, the Son of God who must suffer. Mark focuses on the full humanity of Jesus and invites us to do the same. The suffering of his followers can be meaningful insofar as it is connected with carrying the cross as Jesus himself did through the streets of Jerusalem.

In what some would say is a stark contrast, the Gospel according to John introduces us to the divine Jesus, the Word of God made flesh (1:14). In this account, Jesus appears fully in charge of the events that surround him, and fully capable of assuming the identity of the great I AM revealed at Sinai. John uses what have become some of the most familiar images to identify Jesus and places them on his own lips. Jesus says, “I am …” the light of the world, the lamb of God, the way and the truth and the life, the bread of life, and the good shepherd.

In the Gospel according to Matthew, Jesus is portrayed as the fulfillment of the Jewish Scriptures, the long-awaited Messiah who stands at the intersection of salvation history. As a respected rabbi, he is shown to teach with authority and creativity. This account from Matthew contains five large teaching discourses: the Sermon on the Mount, the instructions for mission, the great sermon in parables, the instructions for living as church , and a final discourse on the end times.

Perhaps most pointedly, in Matthew, Jesus is Emmanuel (God with us). This title is introduced at the birth of Jesus, and reinforced at the close of the Gospel where the risen Jesus commissions his followers and promises, “I am with you always, until the end of the age” (28:20).

Jesus the forgiving Savior, the one whose mercy and compassion reaches out to all on the margins, is the focus of the Gospel according to Luke. In this account, the emphasis falls on the inclusiveness of Jesus, his appeal both to men and women, rich and poor, Jews and Gentiles. Jesus is the faithful companion who exudes and inspires compassion, a man whose touch is as powerful as his words.

Clearly, these portraits overlap and what emerges is an experience of Jesus that is more than the sum of its parts. In our own prayerful reading of the Gospels we may be drawn at some times to particular aspects of Jesus. At other times we may need the challenge of an image that stretches us to a deeper relationship with the Lord and a new direction as disciples.

If all a person read were the four canonical gospels then s/he would likely end up with a grossly incorrect "image" of Jesus. The reason for this is because 1) the entire Old Testament informs who and what is Jesus and 2) the newer revelation contained in the epistolary further explains what is found in the gospels.

 

[civic]

If all a person read were the four canonical gospels then s/he would likely end up with a grossly incorrect "image" of Jesus. The reason for this is because 1) the entire Old Testament informs who and what is Jesus and 2) the newer revelation contained in the epistolary further explains what is found in the gospels.

I disagree as we can affirm the OP alone with the Gospel of John. There we see He is both God and man, the son of man and the Son of God, the Creator, the Great I Am who existed together with the Father before the world existed. The Savior, Redeemer, Messiah and Jesus clearly lays out the gospel in the book of John. And the above is just the tip of the iceberg. The book is filled with His claims of being God which is an essential Christian belief/doctrine outlined in the gospel by Jesus.

 

[JoshebB]

I disagree as we can affirm the OP alone with the Gospel of John.

John is the most Hebraic of the gospel writers and his gospel contains hundreds of Old Testament references. If those references are not known then they cannot be understood. If not understood then the resulting image will be wanting.

There we see He is both God and man, the son of man

The "son of man" is an Old Testament reference.

and the Son of God,

The "Son of God" is an Old Testament reference.

the Creator,

The "Creator" is an Old Testament reference.

the Great I Am

The "I Am" is an Old Testament reference.

who existed together with the Father before the world existed.

The beginning is an Old Testament reference.

The Savior,

The "savior" is an Old Testament reference.

Redeemer,

The "redeemer" is an Old Testament reference.

Messiah

The "Messiah" is an Old Testament reference.

and Jesus clearly lays out the gospel in the book of John.

Yes, and he does so chronically quoting, citing, and referencing the Old Testament.

And the above is just the tip of the iceberg. The book is filled with His claims of being God which is an essential Christian belief/doctrine outlined in the gospel by Jesus.

And nearly all of them can be found in the Old Testament, without which the words of the gospels would have an entirely different meaning.

I disagree as we can affirm the OP alone with the Gospel of John.

You just proved Post #2 correct and Post #3 incorrect. It is completely irrational to argue the Old Testament is unnecessary to correctly understanding the gospels and then cite a list of Old Testament precedents. That's how cults get started.

 

[civic]

John is the most Hebraic of the gospel writers and his gospel contains hundreds of Old Testament references. If those references are not known then they cannot be understood. If not understood then the resulting image will be wanting.

The "son of man" is an Old Testament reference.

The "Son of God" is an Old Testament reference.

The "Creator" is an Old Testament reference.

The "I Am" is an Old Testament reference.

The beginning is an Old Testament reference.

The "savior" is an Old Testament reference.

The "redeemer" is an Old Testament reference.

The "Messiah" is an Old Testament reference.

Yes, and he does so chronically quoting, citing, and referencing the Old Testament.

And nearly all of them can be found in the Old Testament, without which the words of the gospels would have an entirely different meaning.

You just proved Post #2 correct and Post #3 incorrect. It is completely irrational to argue the Old Testament is unnecessary to correctly understanding the gospels and then cite a list of Old Testament precedents. That's how cults get started.

I must of missed the OT part. I had thought the claim was we coundn't understand with only one book and needed all the N.T. to understand who Jesus was. So yes the OT is necessary to understand His claims in their context.

 

[John Evens]

If all a person read were the four canonical gospels then s/he would likely end up with a grossly incorrect "image" of Jesus. The reason for this is because 1) the entire Old Testament informs who and what is Jesus and 2) the newer revelation contained in the epistolary further explains what is found in the gospels.

Fine and dandy, but what image of Jesus do you get from reading the Gospels?

 

[JoshebB]

I must of missed the OT part. I had thought the claim was we coundn't understand with only one book and needed all the N.T. to understand who Jesus was.

We do need the entire NT and I stated that fact (in affirmation of that particular op). Where did you find the opening posts reporting all the NT is needed?

So yes the OT is necessary to understand His claims in their context.

Yep. Therefore, the op is wanting and lacking something critically important to the image of Jesus we'd get from reading the gospels.

I disagree as we can affirm the OP alone with the Gospel of John.

Want to change that position?


If @John Evens wants to fully grasp the "image" of Jesus found from reading the gospels then he will, at a minimum, look up all the OT references..... and in order to do that he'll likely need an eBible that has those kinds of citations (rather than relying on extra-biblical sources).

 

[John Evens]

We do need the entire NT and I stated that fact (in affirmation of that particular op). Where did you find the opening posts reporting all the NT is needed?

Yep. Therefore, the op is wanting and lacking something critically important to the image of Jesus we'd get from reading the gospels.

Want to change that position?


If @John Evens wants to fully grasp the "image" of Jesus found from reading the gospels then he will, at a minimum, look up all the OT references..... and in order to do that he'll likely need an eBible that has those kinds of citations (rather than relying on extra-biblical sources).

I'm way ahead of you.

Thread 'Jesus in the Old Testament'

May 30, 2025

“What’s the Old Testament all about?” The Author, the divine Author behind the human authors, had already given the answer to similarly confused disciples about two thousand years ago. Jesus told them the Old Testament was all about Him.

Jesus told His disciples that His life and death matched exactly the predictions of the Old Testament prophets. They had believed some of the prophets’ writings—the parts that spoke of the Messiah’s glory. But they had not believed all that the prophets had spoken—especially the parts that spoke of the Messiah’s sufferings and death.

By some counts...

• John Evens
• Replies: 24
• Forum: Christology

• 
• 

 

[JoshebB]

Fine and dandy, but what image of Jesus do you get from reading the Gospels?

I do not mean to cause offense....

I sincerely do not mean to cause offense.

I say that because I find the question itself foolish. First of all, the word "image" is abstract and can be defined multiple ways so it is incumbent upon you to first define your terms as you mean us to understand then and use them in the discussion of this op. Until that happens any discussion of his "image" will likely ensue with different posters using the word with differing meanings and everyone wrongly thinking they are discussing the same subject when they are not. It would be like a conservative Protestant Christian discussing the word "Jesus " with a JW and an LDS. Everyone is using the same word, but they are all using it with radically different and irreconcilable meanings. This creates the fallacies known as equivocation and false equivalence.

I trust that is NOT what you want in this discussion .

Another problem is that the image of Christ is enormous and diverse. All the questions asked at the beginning of the opening post can and should be answered in the affirmative and Jesus' "image" is not limited to those answers so more questions and more answers are necessary to grasp the full image as the gospels assert that image. Simply put, you've asked too big a question. It is great that you have embarked on a study for that purpose. To do a thorough job will take a lot of time (and work) so I assume you do not intend an internet forum discussion to be thorough or exhaustive. I also think the question is curious because the verse that explicitly mentions the image of Jesus is not found in the gospels.

Colossians 1:15-20
He is the image of the invisible God, the firstborn of all creation. For by Him all things were created, both in the heavens and on earth, visible and invisible, whether thrones or dominions or rulers or authorities—all things have been created through Him and for Him. He is before all things, and in Him all things hold together. He is also head of the body, the church; and He is the beginning, the firstborn from the dead, so that He Himself will come to have first place in everything. For it was the Father’s good pleasure for all the fullness to dwell in Him, and through Him to reconcile all things to Himself, having made peace through the blood of His cross; through Him, I say, whether things on earth or things in heaven.

That might never be grasped from reading only the gospels.

Yes, Jesus is all of these and more. No title, no image, no simile or metaphor can adequately depict Jesus in his essence, or who he is for each of us.

So why ask a simplistic question when Jesus is so many things? The shortest answer any of us could give is, "Jesus is God incarnate," or "Jesus is the logos of God who is God made flesh," but then that has to be explained.

I'm doing A study on this and would like some second opinions on this.

I commend the effort. You've got my opinion. If you're going to try to grasp the "image" of Jesus found (only) in the gospels, then you are necessarily going to have to know the OT references and have some grasp of the intersection.

I have noticed that a lot preachers have written about the various views....

I encourage and exhort you to limit your study to scripture's use of scripture before consulting outside sources.


Keep in mind outside sources cannot be avoided. Not only can outside sources be avoided, but some of the outside sources will not be Christian writings. For example, the preamble to John's gospel is taken from the Hellenist Jewish philosopher Philo. The average Christian does not have to know that tidbit to understand the basic point John is making, but if you are going to dive into the image of Jesus then you might want to look up the reference. In Hellenism "logos" was the gift of reason bestowed upon men by the gods. Some men were gifted much logos and some men not. Alexander was considered so well endowed with divine logos that he was considered the mediator between the gods and men. Philo actually made that claim. During the intertestamental period Hellenism grew in prominence and greatly influenced Judaism. John, within the space of a few sentences repudiated all of it. He tore down Hellenism, he tore down the premise a mere human could mediate between God and humanity, he repudiated both Hellenist and old-line Judaism, and he unabashedly declared Jesus the mediator and unequivocally stated Jesus was God.

John took a big stick and jammed it far in the eye of every Jewish leader of his day, and then he shook it around to scramble everything inside.

But that would not ordinarily be grasped without understanding the Philo reference.

I recommend you start with scripture rendering scripture, the OT informing the New and the New explaining all that preceded (the gospels explain the OT and the epistolary explains both).

 

[JoshebB]

I'm way ahead of you.

I did not know it was a competition.

 

[Ahar]

I did not know it was a competition.

You could have fooled me.