Matt, Mark, Luke Rebutt John 3:16

The first three Gospels – Matthew, Mark and Luke have a different Jesus and a different Salvation theology than the Gospel of John does.  This logically indicates that the Salvation concept we have today, central to Christianity, evolved long after Jesus  time on earth.

The first three Gospels Matthew, Mark and Luke are termed the Synoptic Gospels and are regarded by Biblical scholars, both Christian and secular, to be older than John. The exact dating of the Gospels is not known, and estimates vary among scholars, with Christian scholars posing earlier estimates than secular scholars, not surprisingly. Secular scholars tend to place the dating of the Gospels after 70 AD though.  See Dating of the Synoptics)  Mark is regarded as the oldest, followed by Matthew and Luke, then by John.

John Is The Source of Salvation Theology

The central theology doctrine of Christianity today teaches a salvation by faith through grace, by believing that Jesus died on the cross for your sins and rose from the grave.  This doctrine is central and fundamental to the Christian Gospel.  However, this form of salvation is NOT taught in Matthew, Mark and Luke, which are the oldest of the Gospels!  The basis for the Christian Gospel of salvation by faith and the atonement comes from the book of John, which is the newest of the Gospels!

Matthew Has No Concept of Salvation

Matthew’s main purpose is to prove to his Jewish readers that Jesus is their Messiah. He does this primarily by showing how Jesus in his life and ministry fulfilled the OT Scriptures. Although all the Gospel writers quote the OT, Matthew includes nine proof texts unique to his Gospel (1:22-23; 2:15; 2:17-18; 2:23; 4:14-16; 8:17; 12:17-21; 13:35; 27:9-10) to drive home his basic theme: Jesus is the fulfillment of the OT predictions of the Messiah

In the Gospel of Matthew, there is NOT ONE WORD about having to believe on Jesus in order to go to heaven.  In fact, there is not one word about having to “believe” in anything at all to get to heaven!  There is no mention of the atonement or of salvation by faith.  In fact, Jesus says that all you have to do for God to forgive your sins is this:

 “For if ye forgive men their trespasses, your heavenly Father will also forgive you:” (Matthew 6:14)

 Later in that Gospel, when someone asked Jesus directly what he had to do to be saved and have eternal life, Matthew clearly records a salvation by works:

(Matt. 19:16-21) “And, behold, one came and said unto him, Good Master, what good thing shall I do, that I may have eternal life? And he said unto him, Why callest thou me good? there is none good but one, that is, God: but if thou wilt enter into life, keep the commandments. He saith unto him, Which? Jesus said, Thou shalt do no murder, Thou shalt not commit adultery, Thou shalt not steal, Thou shalt not bear false witness, Honour thy father and thy mother: and, Thou shalt love thy neighbour as thyself. The young man saith unto him, All these things have I kept from my youth up: what lack I yet? Jesus said unto him, If thou wilt be perfect, go and sell that thou hast, and give to the poor, and thou shalt have treasure in heaven: and come and follow me.”

Jesus in this account never said here that you have to believe that he would  die on the cross for your sins for God to forgive you!  In the same Gospel of Matthew, Jesus also preached the famous beatitudes which emphasize that those with good hearts, attitudes and character will inherit the kingdom of God, which is another way of saying that they will go to heaven!

Matthew 5:3 Blessed are the poor in spirit: for theirs is the kingdom of heaven.
Matthew 5:4 Blessed are they that mourn: for they shall be comforted.
Matthew 5:5 Blessed are the meek: for they shall inherit the earth.
Matthew 5:6 Blessed are they which do hunger and thirst after righteousness: for they shall be filled.
Matthew 5:7 Blessed are the merciful: for they shall obtain mercy.
Matthew 5:8 Blessed are the pure in heart: for they shall see God.
Matthew 5:9 Blessed are the peacemakers: for they shall be called the children of God.

He didn’t say that you had to believe that he would for your sins in order for you to be forgiven!  The verses that say that are in the book of John, which came about 50 years after Matthew!

Mark Has No Concept of Salvation

Now take a look at the book of Mark.  He doesn’t mention that you have to believe in Jesus to be saved either, except for a verse in the last chapter of Mark:  “He that believeth and is baptized shall be saved; but he that believeth not shall be damned.” (Mark 16:16).  No secular  scholar believes that that verse to be from Mark’s hand. It is identified as interpolation, or a forgery. Many of the earliest manuscripts of the Gospel of Mark do not contain that verse, and it does not fit into Mark since none of the rest of  Mark says a word about salvation by faith.  Therefore, Mark never wrote anything about having to believe that Jesus died for you, in a salvation by faith, or the atonement concept.

Luke Has No Concept of Salvation

Likewise, the Gospel of Luke, like Matthew and Mark , has no mention of atonement or salvation by faith.


Given that the gospels that preceded John never ever even mention the concept of salvation by faith in the resurrection, it is likely that Jesus, never preached such a doctrine.

John, The Source of the Salvation Doctrine

Next comes the Gospel of John, and we have verses such as:

John 3:16 “For God so loved the world, that he gave his only begotten Son, that whosoever believeth in him should not perish, but have everlasting life.”

John 3:18 “He that believeth on him is not condemned: but he that believeth not is condemned already, because he hath not believed in the name of the only begotten Son of God.”

John 3:36 “He that believeth on the Son hath everlasting life: and he that believeth not the Son shall not see life; but the wrath of God abideth on him.”

John 8:24 “I said therefore unto you, that ye shall die in your sins: for if ye believe not that I am he, ye shall die in your sins.”

John 11:25 “Jesus said unto her, I am the resurrection, and the life: he that believeth in me, though he were dead, yet shall he live:”

The KEY POINT here is that IF Jesus actually said that you had to believe that he died for you in order for you to be saved, THEN Matthew, Mark and Luke would have at least mentioned SOMETHING about that SOMEWHERE!


Look at John 3:16 again:

 “For God so loved the world, that he gave his only begotten Son, that whosoever believeth in him should not perish, but have everlasting life.”

The antecedent of “he” and “him” is God, not Jesus!

That this astounding new revelation is true is proven to be true by Jesus’ own words found a little later in John.

Verily, verily, I say unto you, He that heareth my word, and believeth on him that sent me, hath everlasting life, and shall not come into condemnation; but is passed from death unto life. John 5:24

“Believeth on him that sent me”, again, “believeth on him that sent me”; again “believeth on him that sent me  hath everlasting life”. Doesn’t that put new meaning into what “him” means?  Yes it does. Jesus does not say, believeth in me, he says believeth on him that sent me.

The whole Christian world view is based on a grammatical error; “Him” in John 3:16 does not mean Jesus, it means God. Jesus himself confirms this in John 5:24.

Jesus NEVER Taught Resurrection By Faith In Himself

IF it was central to Jesus’ teachings that you have to have salvation by faith, then why wasn’t it even mentioned in the first three Gospels?  The logical reason is that they never heard of nor supported that idea, because it didn’t evolve until later when the early Christians decided to add that doctrine in, thus the Gospel of John.  So if Matthew, Mark and Luke were with Jesus when he was on earth (assuming they are even eyewitnesses which isn’t even claimed), then Christ probably never said anything about faith, belief, or the atonement either!

From Jesus To Christ

Since the atonement and salvation by faith concept isn’t taught until the Gospel of John, it is logical to conclude the following.

About 20-50 years after the first three Gospels, the Church decided that a Gospel based on simple good works and kindness was not enough.  They needed more power over people.  And they needed a way for people to feel totally powerless in their own works so that they could be completely dependent on the church and its salvation sacraments.  And they needed the belief from their followers that they alone were the only way and religion.  So they added the salvation by atonement doctrine to Christianity, in order to justify the church’s sacraments that were required for the salvation of souls, which in turn gave them power over people.

That’s why the newest Gospel, John came into play.  The Gospel of John was a result of the developing theology of the Church at that time.  That book is where the verses about salvation by faith, being “born again”, the atonement, and having to believe that Jesus died for your sins came from.  On many pages in it, you will find Jesus saying something about having to believe in him.  When Christians cite Gospel verses about being saved, they always refer to John. (No wonder many Christians say the book of John is their favorite book.)  Just take a look at a Christian pamphlet or tract, and you’ll see that the verses they mention about faith and believing on Jesus are from the book of John, such as John 3:16 and John 14:6.  When they quote Jesus, they usually refer to this book.  Yet this book did not come for at least 20-50 years after the first three Gospels.  Therefore, logically whatever Jesus actually said would have been recorded more accurately in the earlier Gospels, which emphasize good works and charity instead.

From this it is apparent as to how the Salvation theology evolved in the Church while the New Testament books and letters were still being written.  Another fact that indicates this as well is that according to Mark, Christ was a man.  But according to Matthew and Luke, he was a demigod, while John insists that he was God himself.  That also shows an evolution of the concept of Jesus from a man gradually to a deity status.  This is common with religious founders throughout history, because no matter what they claim themselves, their followers eventually try to deify them and make them into a God to worship.

Of course, Christians also quote verses to support their Salvation by atonement theology from the epistles of Paul too.  However, man Paul never even met Jesus Christ (at least not physically)!  He never wrote anything about what Jesus did either.  And since he was not with the historical Christ, he obviously doesn’t know nor is he qualified to tell us what the historical Christ had taught when he was on earth.

Nothing Paul says should be given any credence. See Paul Is So Wrong About So Much for evidence that supports the previous sentence. In fact, there are many discrepancies between Paul’s idea of Salvation and John’s Jesus.  For examples and details of this, see Paul vs. Jesus by David D. Danizier.

10 comments on “Matt, Mark, Luke Rebutt John 3:16

  1. David Ross says:

    Jesus was to restore the Jews back to God under the Jewish religion law of Moses. Jesus was also a prophet and he would prophesy the New Testament but he never taught it. But when Jesus went to the cross he said it is finished. He fulfilled his works under the law Moses and opened the door to the gentiles by the gospel of the death burial and resurrection. From the death of Christ to the preaching of Peter in Acts chapter 2 there was no salvation. Matthew chapter 28, Mark chapter 16, Luke chapter 24, John 20:21 was the 40 days for only the eleven apostles until Acts chapter 2. We must rightly divide between old and New Testament. Before the cross was the Jewish religion. After the cross is the New Testament

  2. Lam Yat Fai says:

    See Ezekiel 36, without the Holy Spirit making a new heart and change our old wicked heart, we will not get into heaven. Although Matthew Mark and Luke does not explicitly say so, the message is still the same. Matt 1:21 ‘And she shall bring forth a son, and thou shalt call his name Jesus: for he shall save his people from their sins.’ Mark 2:5 ‘When Jesus saw their faith, he said unto the sick of the palsy, Son, thy sins be forgiven thee.’ Luke 7:50 And he said to the woman, Thy faith hath saved thee; go in peace. All Matthew Mark and Luke is saying the same as John, believe in Jesus to be saved. Why you still think otherwise?

    • Mzzm says:

      Yes believe in him to be sent with authority from God and to listen to him .. not to believe that he is God and will die for your sins, Jesus was asked a few times how to be saved, he said follow a Gods commandments, he would have been more specific if it included what Christianity now asserts.. Jesus prayed his cup to be taken from him, if he knew his intended purpose, he would have said believe I’m God and when I die a rise again, you’ll be saved. He was even forgiving sins before he even died

  3. wing says:

    When you have the archbishop of Canterbury claiming that he speaks in tongues daily, and that John 3:16 was his first inspiration for this, then you realise that they know what game they are playing, and have always played.

  4. MelC says:

    The four Gospels are at the heart of Christianity, describing the life, death and all important resurrection of Jesus. True believers contend that the Gospels (and the entire Bible) are the inerrant “word of God”. Referring them to the lectures of Dr. Bart Ehrman is far more effective and shocking than duelling with lay “non-believers”.

    I recommend this, and other, Ehrman lectures to everyone interested in truth and rational thinking.

  5. Bob Weigel says:

    1) Unless ‘scholars’ is qualified by some logical evidence, then it’s purely an ‘appeal to authority’ argument which is a logical fallacy. Worthless. So the opening point is worthless since there is no bibliography linking to some logical argument to support the claim.

    2) If a teaching isn’t supported by the historical Christ, then there is no reasonable call to associate it with ‘Christianity’. CERTAINLY governments etc. have tried to HIJACK the good name of Jesus Christ and affiliate it with man made doctrines. But the books of the bible were well established during a time of persecution before any of this obviously. Nero ‘sealed the deal’ on the fact that people were responding to Jesus’ teaching in mass only shortly after he lived and the gospel accounts began to be written by those who needed to seal that testimony before they were persecuted out of existence.

    GOD SAW TO IT that the testimonies varied in ways that virtually prove that they are not ‘copy cat’ works for future skeptics. Yet every variation can be explained in some logical way. eg. one might only perceive one angel if they were affronted by an angel while another might see two. That is only reasonable. And there is an established variation known from other writings that two cultures had in referring to the days of the feast; one of the initially more confusing ‘seeming contradictions’ in the gospels.

    With that combined with the fact that there are so many alignments, we see that these are faithful testimonies by all reasonable odds. It’s impossible for independent fabricators to agree on that many things. Simply impossible.

    3) HOW ABSURD to claim that Matthew has no ‘concept of salvation’??? Matthew INCLUDES the parable of the sower for instance which clearly lays out that the seeds of truth are sown yet most of them fall where the ground is unfit to produce a plant that will produce fruit and an analogy of the condemnation to the abyss is given. But the good ground produces good fruit. THEN he talks to the disciples and explains to them that he speaks in parables so that those who aren’t getting it will remain confused but to those who are more will be given in understanding the things of the kingdom of heaven. THEN IN THE NEXT related parable of the tares he speaks about the HARVEST which is either unto damnation or salvation obviously; as Jesus speaks of rewards and curses related to good fruit and bad.

    Anyway he lays this ‘fabric’ of understanding through them plainly says in Matthew 23 that these people who he had shown the sins of and who all had acknowledge their need to repent in John’s baptism WERE BEING PROMISED THRONES OF JUDGEMENT WITH HIM.

    What do you mean no concept of salvation? THe person who wrote this must be illiterate like Muhammad. I’m doing. Can’t read any further. It’s all just silliness.

  6. ayub shaikh says:

    god is only one according to issiah 45:5 and46:9 god is one ..john 3:16 is interpolation ,fabrication and concotion …jesus (pbuh) is messenger not son the son of god..

    • Lam Yat Fai says:

      Without Jesus dying on the cross with blood shed for our sins, how are sins going to be paid and forgiven?

      • Robert B Whitmore says:

        Jesus died for our sins. “It is finished.” he proclaimed from the cross (John 19:30). And with that, humanity was forgiven. In that act, our salvation is complete.

      • Mzzm says:

        God never required blood for sins, constantly in the Old Testament God says I don’t require your sacrifices, I didn’t order them, he insists I require you to act and do right. To say that God or his son God needed to die is crazy, God cannot die, God can forgive all who ask for forgiveness and do right.

New Evidence? Comments?

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s