I believe that all of the Gospel narratives of the Passion of the Christ have something to

offer in our understanding of Jesus life today. Still, if I had to claim one gospel was most

significant to our modern understanding of Jesus, I would have to argue that the Gospel of Luke

would be the most relevant to modern day readers. I have primarily chosen the Gospel of Luke

because, out of all the Gospels, I believe it was written in the way that can best relate to modern

day readers.

One of the things I find interesting about the Gospel of Luke is its discussion of the Last

Supper. When Jesus was at the table with his disciples, he tells them that he eagerly desired to

eat the meal with them and that he would not eat the Passover meal again until the coming of

the Kingdom of God. He then asks them to share a loaf of bread and a cup of wine. Besides the

obvious connection of communion still practiced by many sects of Christianity, this practice of

eating and drinking during a religious ceremony mirrors how many modern day Christians react

to religious events. When a child is baptized, for instance, it is typical that the parents of that

child will respond to the baptism by throwing a party afterwards and will invite friends and

family to attend. Usually that party will also include eating a meal and drinking and this is not

the only example of a religious event which reflects this idea. During weddings, after the

religious ceremony it is almost always expected that there will be a party afterwards which will

involve drinking. Jesus discussion on returning to enjoy the feast again with the coming of the

Kingdom of God is especially interesting as many western countries celebrate Eastera holiday

that is meant to signify Jesus return to lifeby giving candy to their children. The notion of

eating in religious terms is therefore tied closely to the modern day spiritual events, however,

what makes Luke unique in his discussion of the Last Supper as a spiritual event which the other

is its connection to the Greek symposium. Something the other Gospels lack
 In Ancient Greece, symposiums would be a time when philosophers would come

together, have a meal, get drunk, and discuss philosophy. The famous philosopher Plato himself

wrote a text called Symposium in which various philosophers, including Aristotle, discuss their

views on issues such as love. One can see traces of these philosophical discussions when Jesus

talks to his disciples about the Kingdom of God, how he will be betrayed by Peter and Judas, and

how to act during a time of crisis. It is highly unlikely that these discussions are historically

accurate. Instead, Luke was simply trying to present the information in a way that the audience

he was writing for would be familiar with. This shows how when Luke was writing his Gospel,

he was doing so in a way that was intended to at the very least resonate with a Greek and Roman

audience. This connection to philosophers such as Plato and Aristotle further proves my point

that the Gospel of Luke works best with a modern audience. Greek philosophy continues to play

a major role in western philosophy and both are still widely taught. To write the gospels in the

same manner in which Plato might have delivered his message could therefore still be relevant to

many modern readers.

Plato and Aristotle are not the only Greek philosophers who effected the writing of the

Gospel of Luke, however, as the philosophy of the Sophists also plays a large role in it.

According to the Sophists, there is no inherent reason to be virtuous other than it will simply lead

to happiness. This mirrors Jesus own teachings on virtue as he does not necessarily provide a

philosophical reason to be a good Christian, it is simply assumed that the grace of God is a good

enough reason. The Sophists also believed that god and the universe were inseparable. This can

be found in the Gospel of Luke when Jesus dies and there is a solar eclipse which blocks out the

sun. The universe is literally reacting to the Son of God dying. While this provides further

evidence for the philosophical connection between the Gospel and the Romans and Greeks, there
is more evidence in the scripture to show that Luke was specifically trying to appease the

Romans in his writing.

Lukes attempts to appease the Romans may be found in his depiction of Pilate. Luke

portrays Pilate very sympathetically in his Gospel, as he tries to pardon Jesus several times. First

he sends Jesus to Herod, then he claims he will have Jesus flogged but set free, and finally he

offers Barabbas as an alternative man to be executed instead of Jesus. Luke clearly tries to show

that the blame for Jesus death should not be placed on the Romans so he is clearly trying to

appease them. His comments on Herod and Pilate becoming friends, though they had once been

enemies, could also illustrate this point as the early Christians may still have identified at least

somewhat with Judaism. The comment that Pilate and Herod had once been enemies but now

were friends could imply that though the Romans were hostile to the early Church, the Christians

now wanted to befriend them. Again, this telling of the death of Jesus is not entirely historically

accurate. For one thing, Pilate was very likely less sympathetic to Jesus than Luke portrays him

and likely ordered Jesus execution when he was presented as a political enemy to the Romans. It

also vilifies the Jewish authorities who were likely simply trying to prevent a riot by pushing for

Jesus execution.

While it may not be historically accurate, I would argue that the message of Jesus Christ

is more important to the Gospels than an accurate re-telling of his life. I would therefore make

the case that even if Pilate wanted to kill Jesus, it is better to portray Pilate as a bystander rather

than a murderer. In the former, the readers can possibly forgive the Romans for their

indiscretion, but in the latter, readers may be led to feel bitter and angry over Jesus death. Today

we have phrases such as never forget for incidents like the attack on the twin towers. While we
should remember the loss of innocent life, I would argue it is much more Christian and much

more in line with Jesus teachings to forgive our enemies and let the past go.