Jesus' Rejection at Nazareth

In order to gain a clear vision as to what the Gospels of the New Testament mean in today’s changing world, we must see them from a historical and critical perspective. We must take into account the Gospel author’s genre, purpose, themes and occasion. In doing so, we find many similarities between each Gospel and yet we also find vast differences that define each author’s individual agenda. We can acknowledge these similarities and differences by comparing one Gospel’s account of a particular event to another Gospel’s account of the same story.

For argument’s sake, we can compare Mark’s account of Jesus’ rejection at Nazareth ( Mk. 6:1-6) to Matthew’s version of the same story( Matt. 13:53-58). Because it is widely believed that Mark’s Gospel was written first, we will compare Matthew to Mark. To the naked eye, both accounts seem very much the same. Both describe Jesus preaching in the synagogue at Nazareth and being rejected by his townspeople. It also addresses the idea that he didn’t or couldn’t perform many works because of issues with their belief. However, when examined closely, we see that just the slightest change in wording leads to very different undertones.

The first major difference we find is in Matthew Chapter 13 vs. 54. Like Mark’s account in Mark Chapter 6 vs. 2, Matthew describes Jesus teaching at the synagogue. However, Matthew edits Mark’s version by omitting Mark’s description of this happening on the Sabbath. This is a clue as to the different audience that each author is addressing. Mark’s audience consisted of ex-pagan gentile Christians. Therefore, the significance of the Sabbath carried much less weight that it did for Matthew’s audience, which consisted of Jewish Christians.

Second, in Matthew Chapter 13 vs. 55 the people refer to Jesus as the carpenter’s son, and then mention Mary as his mother. This is subtly different from Mark’s version in Chapter 6 vs. 3. In Mark the people refer to Jesus as the carpenter, son of Mary. There may have been a two-fold agenda here. First, Matthew is leaving no room for Jesus illegitimacy. Since one of Matthew’s purposes was to prove that Jesus fulfilled Jewish prophecy, as the Messiah, he also may have been using this acknowledgement of who Jesus father was, in order to make the clear connection to the House of David. Mark was again speaking to gentiles and therefore this lineage wasn’t as relevant. Finally in Matthew’s version (Chapter 13 vs. 58) Jesus did not do many miracles because of their unbelief as opposed to Mark’s version. In Mark Chapter 6 vs. 5-6, Jesus couldn’t do miracles except for the laying on of hands of a few sick people. This clearly follows Matthew’s depiction of Jesus as “higher”, as opposed to Mark’s more “human” description. Matthew’s Jesus chose not to do many miracles where Mark’s Jesus couldn’t because the people didn’t believe.

By analyzing the same short story from different Gospels we gain a great understanding of each author’s specific audience, purpose, and occasion. By grasping the context in which these scriptures where written 2000 years ago, we have a greater perspective as to what these scriptures mean to our culture today.