The Missionary Manifesto

ANY one reading these passages of Scripture for the first time would certainly be quite as much impressed by their disparities as by their similarities.

It is the custom of the Christian Church to speak of the commission of Jesus, as though there were but one, which the four evangelists record in different words. This conception is the result of superficial observation, and the measure in which it dominates our thinking is the measure in which we fail to recognize the spaciousness and inclusiveness of the missionary commission, and fail therefore to understand the real responsibility of the Church.

On the other hand, there are those who, recognizing the differences between the records of the evangelists, affirm that they contradict each other.

In order to avoid these two mistakes — that on the one hand of imagining that we have four reports of one commission in different words; and 11 that on the other hand of imagining that the four contradict each other — it is important that we should recognize the true nature of these Gospel narratives. I am growingly convinced that the measure in which we recognize the humanity of them, is the measure in which we shall be driven to the conclusion that they are infinitely more than human. To come to a study of them with a foregone and mechanical conception of inspiration is to miss the music of their harmony, and to fail to discover the ultimate meaning of their

These Gospels are the narratives of four men, of different temperament, and consequently of different outlook. They are the natural, simple, and truthful accounts of things which they either saw and heard themselves, or learned from eye-witnesses. In these stories, then, we gather the impressions which were made upon these different men by the Person of Christ, and by His teaching.

This is equally true of the records of the happenings after the resurrection, as of the account of events in the life and ministry of Jesus, which culminated in the Cross. All the evangelists tell the story of the death and resurrection of Jesus.

Morever, they all give some account of the events happening subsequently to resurrection. Neither of them gives a detailed account of all that’ Jesus did or said in the forty days that passedbetween His resurrection’and ascension. They rather describe with perfect naturalness those doings of Jesus, or record with simple accuracy those of His words, which impressed them. They looked upon Him, and listened to Him in the upper room in Jerusalem, on the highways where they walked with Him, on the slopes of Olivet, or on the shores of the lake; or they heard the account of these things from those who did so look and listen to Him. Each man was impressed by things which Jesus did and said according to his natural temperament.

This is perfectly natural, and is illustrated by the fact that it is always true that having listened to the address of a teacher, or the sermon of a preacher, any company of men, gathering together afterwards to discuss the message, would find that different parts of the address would have impressed each man, largely according to his temperament or need.

Recognizing this fact, we begin to understand these Gospel narratives. The harmony of result proves the Divine overruling and choice of instruments. The choosing of each of the evangelists for the writing of the story was the choosing of the Spirit j and the principle of choice was the necessity for recording and retaining, for the coming centuries, the very things which each man would naturally write.

Thus to begin on the human level is to be driven to the conclusion of the Divinity of these narratives. When we understand that these are perfectly simple and artless stories, written by men who had no conception that they were inspired; and when we review the whole, and discover how part fits to part, and how each revelation complements the others, until the four merge into the perfect presentation of a perfect Person, then we see that these men; who wrote truthfully, simply, and artlessly, on human levels; were guided, directed, inspired, by one Master-mind for the revelation to all time of great and sufficient truth.

If that be true of the whole Book, it is certainly true of the commission of Jesus. The complete manifesto of missionary enterprise is not contained in any one Gospel. If we would know what the missionary responsibility of the

Church really is, it is not enough to read what Matthew has written. We must also read what Mark records, what Luke reports, and what John reveals. We must gather the whole manifesto from the harmony of these Gospel revelations.

In this introductory chapter I propose in barest outline to consider the whole commission. In succeeding chapters I shall take the separate parts thereof, as reported in the four Gospels, and consider each carefully; finally dealing with the resources and consequent responsibilities thus revealed.

Before the harmony of the Missionary Commission can be appreciated, the harmony of the Gospels in their presentation of the Person of the Christ must be recognized. We have all at some time either purchased a harmony of the Gospels, or attempted to arrange these stories in chronological order. The result of our purchase, or our labour, has been unsatisfactory. In such labour I personally discovered the impossibility of the task. It is well to remember, moreover, that when a chronological harmony of the Gospels is attempted, the one so attempting is in grave peril of destroying the spiritual harmony. This spiritual harmony consists in the presentation of the Person of the Christ in a fourfold aspect.

In the Gospel according to Matthew the Kingship of Jesus is revealed. It is impossible to escape from that impression. It is the Gospel of His authority: authority by all rights — the rights of inherent royalty as revealed in His character j the right of perfect legislation, aa indicated in His manifesto; the right of victorious administration, which includes conflict, and issues in victory as accomplished through His Cross and Resurrection. Matthew closes his Gospel with a picture of this King, standing in the power of resurrection, and saying with quiet dignity, All authority hath been given unto Me.^’ Matthew s Gospel is supremely that of the royalty of Jesus.

The Gospel according to Mark is the Gospel of the service of Jesus. He is seen therein perpetually stripped of royal apparel, and girded with the slave’s apron’’ j forevermore at work in remarkable and victorious power. As we watch Him at His work, we see the aims of His activity — the destruction of the destroyer, the casting out of demons, the cancelling of disease. But His work is constructive also: He makes again those who had been destroyed; He flings oat death and gives back life; He cures disease, and thus restores men to ability. Through all these processes He is seen restoring groaning creation; destroying things that destroy, in order that those destroyed might be restored; in order that man, and all beneath Him, might be healed and helped. It is the Gospel of the Servant of God, mighty in power, working without cessation even to the point of weariness, until He crowns service in actual and absolute sacrifice. Mark presents the Servant, and closes his Gospel with the statement that the Lord works with those who go into Creation with His evangel of renewal.

Keep reading