The One Singular Gospel of Jesus Christ

The best biblical distinction is this: four canonical Gospel books contain one Gospel message—the good news of salvation through the death, burial, and resurrection of Jesus Christ. The claim that there are “five gospels” usually refers to treating the Gospel of Thomas alongside Matthew, Mark, Luke, and John, but Thomas is not part of the canonical New Testament and does not present the apostolic Gospel in the same way.

1. Scripture explicitly says there is one Gospel

Paul does not present several competing messages. He gives the Gospel in a concise summary: “Christ died for our sins in accordance with the Scriptures, that he was buried, that he was raised on the third day in accordance with the Scriptures.”
—1 Corinthians 15:3–4

He then adds that Christ appeared to Peter, the Twelve, and other witnesses (1 Corinthians 15:5–8). This is the central Gospel: Christ’s atoning death and bodily resurrection for sinners.

Paul also warns against accepting another gospel: “Not that there is another one, but there are some who trouble you and want to distort the gospel of Christ.”
—Galatians 1:7

And he states: “Even if we or an angel from heaven should preach to you a gospel contrary to the one we preached to you, let him be accursed.”
—Galatians 1:8

That language makes sense only if the apostles recognized one authoritative Gospel, not five equally valid gospels.

2. The four books are four witnesses to one Gospel

Matthew, Mark, Luke, and John are called “the four Gospels” because they are four written accounts of the one Gospel concerning Jesus Christ. They differ in emphasis, arrangement, and selection of events, but they proclaim the same fundamental person and saving work:

• Jesus is the promised Messiah and Son of God.
• He lived a sinless life.
• He died by crucifixion.
• His death has saving significance.
• He rose bodily from the dead.
• He is Lord and the judge of humanity.
• Salvation requires repentance and faith in him.

Thus, “four Gospels” can be a shorthand for four Gospel accounts, but it should not be confused with four different plans of salvation.

3. The New Testament calls the message singular

Jesus commanded his disciples to preach “the gospel” to all nations: “Go into all the world and proclaim the gospel to the whole creation.” —Mark 16:15

The apostolic preaching in Acts likewise has a consistent center. Peter proclaims that Jesus was crucified, raised by God, exalted as Lord and Christ, and that people must repent (Acts 2:22–24, 32–36, 38). Paul preaches the same Christ crucified and risen (Acts 13:26–39; 17:2–3).

The message is not five separate revelations. It is one proclamation delivered through different apostolic witnesses.

4. Why the Gospel of Thomas is not a fifth canonical Gospel

The Gospel of Thomas is a collection of sayings attributed to Jesus, but it is not one of the four canonical Gospels. It lacks the central narrative of Jesus’ crucifixion, burial, resurrection, and appearances—the very events Paul identifies as “of first importance” in 1 Corinthians 15:1–8.

Its theology also differs significantly from the apostolic writings. Instead of presenting salvation through Christ’s death and resurrection, it emphasizes discovering hidden sayings or secret knowledge. That makes it historically important for studying early religious movements, but it does not make it a fifth Gospel in the canonical or apostolic sense.

Early Christian writers such as Irenaeus recognized Matthew, Mark, Luke, and John as the Church’s authoritative four Gospel accounts, while other writings were treated as noncanonical. Historical sources also distinguish the four first-century canonical Gospels from later extracanonical works such as Thomas, Peter, and Judas.

There is only one Gospel Message. 

“There is one Gospel, not five, six or seven: Jesus Christ died for our sins, was buried, rose again, and is Lord. Matthew, Mark, Luke, and John are four canonical accounts of that one Gospel. The so-called Gospel of Thomas is a later noncanonical collection of sayings and does not proclaim the apostolic Gospel of Christ’s atoning death and resurrection. Paul says there is only one true Gospel and warns against any different one in Galatians 1:6–9.”

The careful wording is therefore:

• One Gospel message.
• Four canonical Gospel accounts.
• Other noncanonical writings called “gospels,” but not additional authoritative Gospels.

How were Matthew, Mark, Luke, and John chosen for the canon?

Matthew, Mark, Luke, and John were not selected by a single church council that suddenly decided which books belonged in the Bible. Their authority was recognized gradually because churches across the Christian world already received them as faithful, apostolic witnesses to Jesus.

No single church council selected Matthew, Mark, Luke, and John and suddenly decided which books belonged in the Bible. Their authority was recognized gradually because churches across the Christian world already received them as faithful, apostolic witnesses to Jesus.

The Main Criteria

Early Christians especially considered three related questions:

1. Apostolic connection
   Was the writing written by an apostle or by someone closely associated with an apostle?
   • Matthew was traditionally linked to Matthew, one of the Twelve.
   • Mark was associated with Peter’s preaching.
   • Luke was a companion of Paul and author of Acts.
   • John was identified with the apostle John and the apostolic witness.
2. Agreement with the apostolic faith
   Did the book agree with the teaching already received from the apostles—particularly concerning Jesus’ identity, death, resurrection, and salvation?
3. Widespread and continuous use
   Was it read publicly and accepted by churches in different regions—not merely promoted by one isolated group?

These were not mechanical tests, but they explain why the four Gospels were accepted while many later writings were not.[rsc.byu][rsc.byu]

Recognition happened early

By the late second century, the four Gospels were already being treated as a settled collection.

The Muratorian Fragment, generally dated around the late second century, refers to the four-Gospel collection. Although the fragment’s beginning is missing, it identifies Luke as the third Gospel and John as the fourth, implying Matthew and Mark preceded them. It also distinguishes accepted writings from disputed or rejected ones.[rsc.byu][academic.oup]

Around AD 180, Irenaeus of Lyons explicitly spoke of the “fourfold Gospel” and named Matthew, Mark, Luke, and John. He did not present them as newly chosen books; he defended the four against groups that either rejected some apostolic writings or promoted additional texts.[academic.oup][academic.oup]

By the time of Eusebius, writing in the early fourth century, the four Gospels were listed among the universally acknowledged Christian writings. Later, Athanasius’s Thirty-Ninth Festal Letter in AD 367 gave the same twenty-seven-book New Testament canon used by most Christians today.[rsc.byu]

Why not other “gospels”?

Other writings called “gospels” appeared, especially in the second century and afterward. Examples include the Gospel of Thomas, Gospel of Peter, and Gospel of Judas. They were rejected not simply because they had unusual names. They generally lacked one or more of the factors that supported Matthew, Mark, Luke, and John:

• They were too late to come from the apostolic generation.
• They lacked recognized apostolic authorship or connection.
• They were not used broadly across the churches.
• Their teaching often conflicted with the apostolic Gospel.
• They were not consistently received as Scripture in the earliest Christian communities.

For example, the canonical Gospels contain the coherent apostolic proclamation of Jesus’ ministry, crucifixion, resurrection, and commissioned witnesses. By contrast, the Gospel of Thomas is primarily a sayings collection and does not narrate Jesus’ atoning death and resurrection as the central saving events.

A necessary qualification: The traditional authorship claims should be stated carefully. The four books themselves are formally anonymous—their titles, “according to Matthew,” “according to Mark,” and so forth, identify the Gospel tradition associated with each author. The historical question is therefore not merely, “Does the book sign its author’s name?” but, “How early and consistently did churches identify it with an apostolic witness?”

Also, the church did not make these books authoritative by voting them into existence. From a traditional Christian perspective, the church recognized books that already possessed divine and apostolic authority. Historically, that recognition occurred through reading, teaching, copying, debate, and broad ecclesial use over time.

A concise explanation

“Matthew, Mark, Luke, and John were recognized because they were connected to the apostles, agreed with the apostolic teaching, and were widely and continuously used by the churches. They were already accepted as the fourfold Gospel by the late second century, as shown by the Muratorian Fragment and Irenaeus. Later councils and lists confirmed an existing consensus; they did not invent the four Gospels.”

                     ┌─────────────────────────────────────────┐
                     │          JESUS CHRIST THE KING          │
                     │    (Absolute Sovereign over Creation)   │
                     └────────────────────┬────────────────────┘
                                          │
                  ┌───────────────────────┴───────────────────────┐
                  ▼                                               ▼
     ┌──────────────────────────┐                   ┌──────────────────────────┐
     │   CHURCH AS INSTITUTE    │                   │   CHURCH AS ORGANISM     │
     │  Word, Sacraments, Elders│                   │ Believers in All Spheres │
     └────────────┬─────────────┘                   └─────────────┬────────────┘
                  │                                               │
                  ▼                                               ▼
     (Gathers and equips saints)                     (Deploys into Public Life)
                                                                  │
                                            ┌─────────────────────┼─────────────────────┐
                                            ▼                     ▼                     ▼
                                     ┌─────────────┐       ┌─────────────┐       ┌─────────────┐
                                     │ Civil State │       │   Family    │       │  Business   │
                                     └─────────────┘       └─────────────┘       └─────────────┘

SOURCES for this study: I have referred to Abraham Kuyper a great deal in this study. My wife and I picked up his great masterpiece while browsing at Baker Books in Grand Rapids, Michigan: “The Work of the Holy Spirit”, which we continue to read for our devotions with our Logos devotional programs.

“The purpose in a man’s heart is like deep water, but a man of understanding will draw it out” (Proverbs 20:5)

The ESV and NASB bible versions replaced the word “plan” with “purpose” in this text. When you are writing a personal or business plan in accord with your life’s primary mission, or if you want to know this deepest part of your calling, it is important to draw it out. The text indicates that to distill the essence of a good plan, to articulate the driving motive — name the purpose of the first creation coming into realization in your mind that you can concur with, with great clarity and revelation — it must derive from your inmost rational being. 

If this is the case it follows that this understanding must reside within your mind at some deep level in alignment with reality. To perceive it intellectually, I must allow my mind to find calm, without noise, without fleeting imagery, without a single drawing away from the search, no distraction.

Proverbs 20:24 shines light on the search, presenting a figure/ground relation in the mind that marks such soul-searching determination as needing the quietude of holy ground. “A man’s steps are from the Lord; how then can man understand his way?” If the procedural laws of a reasoning mind, prior to the mechanics of action, are of the Lord, as He moves us in our stage play providentially, it follows that a man who is to understand his life purpose is to listen, to perceive at a much deeper level in this rational process of seeking his purpose and his concomitant plans. He must articulate his plan as a unified coordinate derivative with the Lord’s mind, to co-create. 

This follows that man’s mind, submitted to the Lord, will be infused with the Spirit as articulator to his spirit, animated by the gift of discernment to see and hear and know distinct differences between distracting noise, erroneous information, versus the Lord’s will. It follows that a man is left with the prime naked need to seek and to know the Lord’s will in his life, as a compass so that he uses the right map and ends up in and stays in the right jungle (to use a metaphor).

Is it any wonder that man has difficulty sorting out his life purpose if he or she has not learned to listen to the Lord and use his reasoning faculties with integrity to obey relative to a true need as presented among his fellow man? 

Without integrity and the virtue of truth, men operate from irrational minds and erroneous concomitant actions. When we look out into the world, many seem to have it all together: a man becomes a doctor yet prescribes medicine but not exercise, a lawyer who advocates divorce but not marital reconciliation as being one in Christ, a pastor who preaches the law of attraction but discounts the Spirit of the Lord as the truest Guide — yet many may feel that they have found their one niche purpose, followed “the right plan”.

And bear in mind there are many false prophets even within the church. They may speak in tongues, dance on the stage, utter words over your life, advise you to leave your spouse, etc. — yet stand in opposition to the Spirit of Christ. Isaiah 8:20 states: “To the law and to the testimony: if they speak not according to [God’s word], it is because there is no light in them.”

When Isaiah sought the Lord, he heard a still, small voice speaking to him: “Then I heard the voice of the Lord saying, “Whom shall I send? And who will go for us?” And I said, “Here am I. Send me!” (Isaiah 6:8) The directive of the Lord to His wayward people, who were not following His word or His plans and purposes, was to be heralded by Isaiah — yet knowing that many would remain unfaithful, following their own counsel: “He said, “Go and tell this people:

“‘Be ever hearing, but never understanding;  be ever seeing, but never perceiving.’ Make the heart of this people calloused; make their ears dull and close their eyes. Otherwise they might see with their eyes, hear with their ears,understand with their hearts, and turn and be healed.” (vss 9-10)

To find understanding, one must enter the narrow way of the conduit of Mind-to-mind transference of divine command to discern the Spirit’s will articulated in our own individual spirit. The Israelites had become distracted by all the ways of the world, to the degree that they could not perceive God’s will, plans and purposes for their lives. The many voices of our information-based world—the media and entertainment pipelines that curry favour through a potpourri of compromised truths—distract us, and we are “ever hearing, but never understanding” and “ever seeing, but never perceiving”. Similarly, we can see moral compromise at the highest levels of civil law. 

We must work out our understanding of God’s will as our will within our purposes, plans, and philosophy of life.

View God’s will as a function of your identity in Him

“And when you believed in Christ, he identified you as his own by giving you the Holy Spirit, whom he promised long ago. The Spirit is God’s guarantee that he will give us the inheritance he promised and that he has purchased us to be his own people. He did this so we would praise and glorify him” (Ephesians 1:13b-14 NLT)

This viewpoint fits well with Jeremiah, who was also called to tell the Israelites of their apostasy from the narrow way of the Lord: “For I know the plans I have for you,” says the Lord. “They are plans for good and not for disaster, to give you a future and a hope” (Jeremiah 29:11-14 NLT) 

What can we learn about understanding life purpose from the prophets we looked at in this lesson? The first two questions posed below are about them. The third question is about others they serve as our life purpose is about service.

1. Who were they? Chosen and identified as select, called Israelite prophets willing to speak and do God’s entire will.
2. What were they supremely qualified to do? Both Isaiah and Jeremiah were supremely qualified to hear God’s will through their ability to listen and discern His directives for themselves and for his irrational people, Israel.
3. Who did they do it for? God and His other chosen people, to guide them rationally back to His way, through His Spirit and His Word.
4. What do others want or need that they would come to you for? God wanted a warning message to go to His people. They needed healing and restoration from apostasy and dull perception.
5. How do others change/transform as a result of what they gave them? Some listened and reformed to the Lord; some referred to their writing as Daniel did; whereas most continued in rebellion and were killed or sent off to Babylon. God responded by telling Jeremiah that He alone had a plan and a purpose for Him, as was evident to Isaiah, his contemporary prophet, as well.