An Analysis of the Great Commission in Light of Historical Context and Jesus’ Own Teachings

Suleiman | Posted on November 10, 2024 |

Introduction

The Great Commission, as presented in the Gospels, particularly in Matthew 28:16-20, is one of the foundational passages in Christian doctrine. It has been interpreted by Christians as the moment when Jesus instructed his followers to go into all the world and make disciples of all nations. However, a critical examination of this passage, taking into account the historical context, the language Jesus spoke, and the facts of his mission, raises important questions about whether this message aligns with the historical reality of Jesus’ teachings.

Jesus lived in a time when Christianity did not exist, and the teachings attributed to him were deeply rooted in Judaism, the religion of his upbringing and practice. This analysis will approach the Great Commission with a critical eye, based on the historical facts surrounding Jesus’ mission and words, especially the fact that Jesus never claimed to be sent to all the world. Drawing solely from the four Gospels, we will explore the context in which these teachings were recorded, the biases that might have influenced their content, and whether the Great Commission truly reflects Jesus’ authentic mission as a Jew sent only to the lost sheep of Israel.

1. Jesus’ Mission Was Focused on Israel

From the outset, it is essential to recognize that Jesus’ mission was specific and limited according to the Gospels. The first and most important point is that Jesus was a Jew and his message was delivered primarily to the Jewish people. He consistently taught within the framework of Judaism and adhered to the laws of Moses. His mission was clear: to guide the people of Israel back to the true worship of God, to call them to repentance, and to fulfill the prophecies of the Hebrew Scriptures.

Matthew 15:24: Jesus explicitly states: “I was sent only to the lost sheep of Israel.” This statement is clear and direct: Jesus’ mission was not to the Gentiles, but to the Jewish people. His ministry was geographically confined to Israel, and his interactions with Gentiles were limited.
Matthew 10:5-6: When sending out his disciples, Jesus instructs them: “Do not go among the Gentiles or enter a town of the Samaritans. Go rather to the lost sheep of Israel.” Again, this reinforces the notion that Jesus’ mission was to Israel alone, further limiting any outreach to the Gentiles.

2. Jesus Did Not Contradict God’s Command

The Gospels present Jesus as a figure who is entirely obedient to God. His words and actions were meant to fulfill the will of the Father. Jesus was not a figure who would act in contradiction to the directives he had been given. The notion that Jesus would instruct his disciples to go to all nations, including the Gentiles, conflicts with the direct statement he made that he was only sent to the people of Israel.

John 12:49-50: Jesus says: “For I did not speak on my own, but the Father who sent me commanded me to say all that I have spoken. I know that his command leads to eternal life. So whatever I say is just what the Father has told me to say.” This statement underlines the fact that Jesus would never speak or act outside of what God had commanded him to do.
John 5:19: Jesus says: “Very truly I tell you, the Son can do nothing by himself; he can do only what he sees his Father doing, because whatever the Father does the Son also does.” If Jesus was sent by God specifically for Israel, then it follows that any commission to go beyond Israel would be in conflict with his divine mission.

3. Jesus’ Interaction with Gentiles and His Limited Mission

While there are several stories in the Gospels where Jesus interacts with Gentiles, these moments often underscore his limited engagement with the non-Jewish world. In some cases, his encounters with Gentiles are framed as exceptions, and Jesus explicitly states that his primary mission was to the people of Israel.

Matthew 15:21-28: The story of the Canaanite woman is telling. She seeks healing for her daughter, but Jesus initially rebuffs her, saying: “I was sent only to the lost sheep of Israel.” It is only after her persistence that he grants her request, but the narrative emphasizes the idea that Jesus was focused on Israel. He does not break this focus lightly.
Mark 7:24-30: The same story is recounted in Mark with a similar emphasis on Jesus’ mission to the Jews. Jesus acknowledges the woman’s faith, but his initial response is clear: he is sent only to Israel.

4. The Influence of Christian Theology and Paul’s Narrative

While the historical Jesus’ focus was clearly on the Jewish people, the Christian Gospel narratives, particularly the one in Matthew 28:16-20, reflect a theological shift that was not present during Jesus’ lifetime. The Gospels, written decades after Jesus’ death, reflect the growing influence of Pauline theology and the formation of Christianity as a separate religion from Judaism.

The Gospel of Matthew, in particular, includes the Great Commission with Jesus telling his disciples: “Go and make disciples of all nations…” (Matthew 28:19). This statement stands in stark contrast to Jesus’ earlier teaching that he was sent only to the lost sheep of Israel.

However, it is important to consider that the Gospels were written decades after the events they describe, and their content was influenced by the theological developments within the early Christian church. The Great Commission as recorded in Matthew is consistent with the Christian mission to evangelize the Gentiles, which was strongly promoted by Paul and later became central to the Christian identity. The inclusion of this universal mission in the Gospels reflects the theological development of Christianity, rather than an accurate representation of Jesus’ original teachings.

Paul’s Influence: Paul’s teachings emphasize that Jesus came for all people, both Jew and Gentile, and his writings encouraged the spread of the gospel to non-Jews. His interpretation of the message of Jesus extended far beyond the Jewish context of Jesus’ ministry. The Gospel writers, influenced by Paul’s vision of a universal mission, may have adapted the Great Commission to reflect this broader perspective.

5. The Gospels as Translations of Translations

It is also crucial to understand that the Gospels we have today were not written by eyewitnesses to the events they describe. The oral tradition surrounding Jesus’ life and teachings was passed down in Aramaic, but it was later translated and written down in Greek—a language not spoken by Jesus. Furthermore, these texts were written decades after Jesus’ death and underwent numerous translations, edits, and corrections. Over time, Christian theology shaped the narrative to fit the emerging understanding of Jesus as a universal Savior rather than as a teacher sent only to Israel.

The Gospels were not written as direct records of Jesus’ words but were shaped by the early church’s theological agenda. Therefore, when we read the Great Commission, we must question whether this passage reflects Jesus’ true mission or whether it was influenced by later Christian thought.

6. The Quran’s Account of Jesus’ Mission

The Quran, which offers an alternative and authentic account of Jesus’ life and mission, aligns more closely with the idea that Jesus was sent only to the children of Israel. In Quran 3:49, Jesus himself speaks of his mission:

“I have come to you with a sign from your Lord. I will create for you from clay the form of a bird, then I will breathe into it, and it will be a bird by God’s will…”

This passage and others make it clear that Jesus’ mission was specifically to the people of Israel. The Quran emphasizes that Jesus’ role was to guide the Jews and fulfill the prophecies of the Hebrew Scriptures. Unlike the later Christian interpretations, the Quran does not depict Jesus as having a universal commission to all nations but rather as a prophet sent to confirm the law of Moses and to prepare the way for the coming of the Prophet Muhammad.

Because the Quran preserves a more authentic and direct account of Jesus’ mission, we must take its portrayal seriously as an alternative to the later Christian narrative that developed after Jesus’ death.

Conclusion

In conclusion, the Great Commission as presented in the Gospels, particularly in Matthew 28, reflects the theological shift that took place within the early Christian community rather than the historical reality of Jesus’ mission. Jesus, as a Jew, was sent only to the lost sheep of Israel, and his teachings were primarily intended for the Jewish people. The notion that Jesus instructed his disciples to go to all nations contradicts his own words and mission as described in the Gospels.

The Great Commission, therefore, is likely a later theological addition that reflects the Christian vision of a universal faith rather than a true representation of Jesus’ original message. The influence of Pauline theology, the church’s evolving agenda, and the translation issues all suggest that this passage was adapted over time to fit the emerging Christian narrative, rather than being a faithful record of Jesus’ own words and mission.

The more authentic portrayal of Jesus’ mission is found in the Quran, which preserves the view that Jesus was sent to guide the people of Israel and that his mission was not universal in nature. Therefore, from a historical and logical perspective, the Great Commission, as it appears in the Gospels, should be viewed with caution and considered in light of the broader context of Jesus’ life and teachings.