​“Then Jesus, calling out with a loud voice, said, "Father, into your hands I commit my spirit!" And having said this he breathed his last” (Luke 23:46 ESV).

“When Jesus had received the sour wine, he said, "It is finished," and he bowed his head and gave up his spirit” (John 19:30 ESV).

On the surface, the accounts of Luke and John certainly might seem to be at variance with each other regarding the last words of Jesus, but when we look more closely we find little reason to see any contradiction.

First, we should notice that while Luke specifically says “…having said this he breathed his last,” the wording of John’s Gospel “… and he bowed his head and gave up his spirit” does not necessarily preclude intervening words – it could simply mean that moments or minutes after receiving the wine, Jesus died. 

Note that while Luke focuses specifically on Jesus’ last words – and calls them exactly that – John seems to focus on the sour wine event and its resultant “It is finished” as the final prophecies fulfilled by Christ. This is typical of Luke’s frequent focus on the humanity of Jesus and his actual words, as opposed to John’s focus on Jesus’ fulfillment of prophecies relating to the Messiah and details regarding the message of salvation.

But there is no real reason to think that both accounts were not true.  Jesus’ last words may have been a combination of what John and Luke record: “It is finished. Father, into your hands I commit my spirit.”   If these were the actual and full last words of Jesus, then the two Gospel writers simply recorded that part of the expression which was of most importance to their own accounts.

It is also sometimes said that both Luke and John are contradicted by Matthew and Mark, whose Gospels both record Jesus’ expression “My God, my God, why have you forsaken me?” as his last words.  But both Matthew and Mark write that, soon after this, Jesus gave a loud cry: “And when Jesus had cried out again in a loud voice, he gave up his spirit” (Matthew 27:50); “With a loud cry, Jesus breathed his last” (Mark 15:37).

But these accounts do not say whether the “loud cry” or “loud voice” contained words or not. If the cry contained words, it was doubtless those recorded by Luke and John.  The reason that the other two Gospels say a “voice” or “cry” was probably because they are based on the account of a witness of the crucifixion who was close enough to hear the cry, but not close enough to make out the exact words.  (Both Matthew and Mark agree that many of the witnesses stood “at a distance” from the cross – Matthew 27:55, Mark 15:40).

When we keep both factors in mind: that Luke and John compiled their Gospels stressing different themes, and that Matthew and Mark may well have drawn their information from different witnesses, there is no need to presume any contradiction between the four Gospels as to the last words of Jesus.

​​We all know the apostle Peter’s admonition that we “grow in grace and knowledge” (2 Peter 3:18), and most of us try to strike a balance in seeking both in our lives. Yet we often tend to gravitate toward one or the other –  focusing on the development of our Christian walk or our biblical understanding.

Some Christians spend a great deal of time in study of the word and may even fall into the ditch of seeking knowledge at the expense of growing in grace*. Those who make this mistake may become involved in some of the more obscure aspects of the Scriptures such as prophecy, and this becomes their main focus.  On the other hand, there are other Christians who move toward the opposite extreme of neglecting the responsibility of study of God’s word when they fall into the ditch of believing that “all you need is love.” 

Clearly, as Peter tells us, we need both grace and knowledge, and this is a principle we find often in the Scriptures. The apostle Paul elaborated on it when he wrote that our goal should be: “… that you may live a life worthy of the Lord and please him in every way: bearing fruit in every good work, growing in the knowledge of God” (Colossians 1:10). But what we may fail to understand if we tend to gravitate in one direction or the other is how the two areas of spiritual growth interact. Growing in grace can actually increase our spiritual knowledge, and growing in knowledge can increase the fruit of grace in our lives. If that sounds counterintuitive, consider the following scriptures.

“Paul, a servant of God and an apostle of Jesus Christ to further the faith of God’s elect and their knowledge of the truth that leads to godliness” (Titus 1:1, emphasis added).  Here, in the very opening of his letter to Titus, Paul stresses that furthering knowledge of the truth leads to godliness.  This concept is simple enough – we cannot please God without knowing what it is that pleases him –  but it is a concept that we should always keep in mind if we are to be truly growth oriented. 
 
Yet knowledge is only half of the equation for spiritual growth. Notice what Paul states in his letter to the Colossians regarding those he taught:

“My goal is that they may be encouraged in heart and united in love, so that they may have the full riches of complete understanding, in order that they may know the mystery of God, namely, Christ, in whom are hidden all the treasures of wisdom and knowledge” (Colossians 2:2-3, emphases added).  In this profound scripture Paul shows the opposite truth to that he stressed to Titus. Here, we see that being united in love forms the basis of knowledge and understanding of Christ.
  
The fact that we can only have true knowledge of God  if we live in love is also repeatedly stressed by the apostle John (1 John 1:10-11, etc.). Notice one example of this teaching: “This is how we know what love is: Jesus Christ laid down his life for us” (1 John 3:16). It is through knowledge of Christ’s sacrifice that we come to understand and to be able to emulate true love in our lives.  John reiterates the connection between love and knowledge a few verses later: “Whoever does not love does not know God, because God is love” (1 John 4:8). 

We need both grace and knowledge, love and truth, or however we might categorize these two primary aspects of Christian growth. And we need to remember that not only are both vital, but also that growth in one often leads to growth in the other. 

Once we understand this principle we gain insights into many biblical stories. In the Old Testament, for example, we see Job, who evidently walked perfectly before God (Job 1:1, 8), yet who still had to learn lessons (Job 42:5).  In the New Testament we see many examples of the religious leaders of Jesus’ day who had knowledge but who needed to grow in love (Luke 11:42, etc.).
​
Our lives need to exhibit both grace and knowledge, but fullness of growth in one of these areas often involves continuing to grow in the other. 
 
* In this context, grace refers to our walk before God (as in John 1:14) rather than the grace he extends to us.

​
​On the surface, the Old Testament books of First and Second Kings and First and Second Chronicles seem very alike. In fact, after reading Kings, Chronicles may appear to be simply a retelling of much of the same material. 

​This feeling is heightened by fifteen statements in Kings that say  “Now the rest of the acts of [king X], and all that he did, are they not written in the book of the chronicles of the kings of Judah?” (1 Kings 14:29, etc.).   But this Chronicles of the Kings of Judah is not the biblical Book of Chronicles; it is a different account that was not preserved in the Bible and has not survived. There was another book, the Chronicles of the Kings of Israel, mentioned nineteen times in the Bible (1 Kings 14:19, etc.), that also has not survived.

But returning to the books we do have – the biblical books of First and Second Kings and First and Second Chronicles –  are these really just overlapping accounts with no significant  differences?  The answer is not at all!  In reality, Kings and Chronicles have entirely different underlying themes and often carry very different lessons –  as we can see by considering the following facts.

The material in the two books of Kings was composed relatively soon after the events they describe and completed soon after the beginning of Judah’s captivity in Babylon. The material in the two books of Chronicles was brought together later, a good many years after the events it describes, shortly after the return from captivity.  So it is clear that Chronicles was written when Kings was already in existence, and so it must have been felt that it gave additional valuable information or perspectives.

There are, in fact, a number of important differences in the types of material included in these works. At the broader level, Kings deals with the history of both Israel and Judah while Chronicles focuses on the history of the southern kingdom of Judah. In Chronicles, the northern kings of Israel are usually only mentioned when they had some effect on the kings of Judah.
 
While Kings provides an overview of all the royal lines, Chronicles focuses on the Davidic line.  So Kings does not include the reigns of Saul or David and begins with Solomon. Chronicles begins with Adam and includes the reigns of Saul and David.  The different focus is clear in the details each account gives. For example, while Kings gives a detailed description of Solomon building his palace (1 Kings 7:1-12), the construction of Solomon’s palace is only mentioned in passing in Chronicles (1 Chronicles 8:1). Kings details the shortcomings of Solomon at the end of his life, but Chronicles does not mention them.
 
Kings is concerned with Judah’s failure to maintain covenant relationship with God, whereas Chronicles is more concerned with its restoration.  For example, Kings gives a detailed account of King Josiah's purging of the land from idolatry (2 Kings 23:4-20). On the other hand, Chronicles gives a detailed treatment of Josiah's reinstitution of the Passover (2 Chronicles 35:1-9).

But the outlook of both books is also very different. Jewish tradition states that the prophet Jeremiah wrote Kings and that the priest Ezra wrote Chronicles, but in any event, the prophetic versus priestly perspectives of the two works is clear. Consider the fact that the careers of the great prophets Elijah and Elisha are detailed in Kings but not at all in Chronicles. In Kings the priestly Levites only appear twice, whereas they are mentioned about a hundred times in Chronicles.  More importantly, the different perspectives influence what stories are included in the two accounts. We see this, for example, in the fact that Hezekiah’s sickness and the prophet Isaiah’s prediction regarding it are mentioned only in Kings (1 Kings 19:14-34), whereas the same king’s purification of the temple and his actions regarding it are found only in Chronicles (1 Chronicles 29:1-36; 30:1-31:1; 31:2-21).

Because Kings  is written more from the perspective of the prophets who warned Israel and Judah of their sins, its message is primarily one of responsibility and judgment. Chronicles, on the other hand, is written from the perspective of the priests who reinstituted Judah’s religion after the captivity, and its message is one looking at reconciliation and hope –  man’s faithlessness on the one hand and God’s faithfulness on the other.   Kings may thus often seem a more negative account, and Chronicles a more positive one.  This is reflected in various ways. For example, in Kings the sins of many kings are often highlighted, whereas in Chronicles, the good traits of each king are usually given first (except for those kings who apparently had no good traits!).  Both books show the relationship between God and his people, but Kings stresses the political and prophetic aspects of that relationship while Chronicles looks more at the religious and priestly interactions.

So the differences between Kings and Chronicles  are similar to the differences we find among the Four Gospels (see our free e-book Inside the Four Gospels) in the New Testament. Although we may find several versions of the same story in Kings and Chronicles, the differences are important as each book gives different details and has its own unique viewpoint and lessons.   In fact, about half of the material in Chronicles is unique in the Bible – so resist the temptation to skip over that work if you have just read Kings. What at first may seem like a similar account has a great deal more to offer!