Most of what we know about Jesus comes from Christian
writings. The Christian authors being not historians carry no authenticity. Scholars have been investigating historical Jesus since the late 1700s.
At the turn of the 19th century some of them took the extreme position that
Jesus did not live. It is now usually discredited and although the historicity
of Jesus is not well-established the probability is that such a person lived around 2000 years back.
Renowned scholars of recent times feel it is impossible to construct the historical Jesus as the preachers who wrote about him distorted and blurred even the sharp outlines. Robert Henry Lightfoot (1883 –1953), an Anglican priest and theologian says: “For all the inestimable value of the gospels, they yield us little more than the whisper of his ways.” According to Rudolf Karl Bultmann, (1884-1976) the German Lutheran theologian, we can, strictly speaking, know nothing of the personality of Jesus from the gospels. The effect of the capture of Jerusalem by the Romans in AD 70 and the contact with the mystery cults, all deposited layer after layer in what was orally transferred regarding Christ. Many stories and miracles were added to his life. The gospel writers tried to set events to suite some of the prophecies regarding the coming of the Messiah too.
Renowned scholars of recent times feel it is impossible to construct the historical Jesus as the preachers who wrote about him distorted and blurred even the sharp outlines. Robert Henry Lightfoot (1883 –1953), an Anglican priest and theologian says: “For all the inestimable value of the gospels, they yield us little more than the whisper of his ways.” According to Rudolf Karl Bultmann, (1884-1976) the German Lutheran theologian, we can, strictly speaking, know nothing of the personality of Jesus from the gospels. The effect of the capture of Jerusalem by the Romans in AD 70 and the contact with the mystery cults, all deposited layer after layer in what was orally transferred regarding Christ. Many stories and miracles were added to his life. The gospel writers tried to set events to suite some of the prophecies regarding the coming of the Messiah too.
The Jewish and pagan historians of the first
century are almost silent regarding Jesus. Flavius Josephus who died
abut 100AD published "The Jewish war" in 77/78
and "The antiquities of the Jews" in 94/95. In the
earlier Greek versions there is no mention of Jesus as such. But
in some other editions there are references to Jesus (which must have had been
added later.) All leading scholars agree that the phrase “if it is lawful to
call him a man’ found twice in later editions is simply a later addition. Cornelius Tacitus in about 116 AD mentioned in his
manual: “ Nero was fiercely persecuting Christians on account of their crimes.
Almost scornfully he adds: the founder of this sect named Christ was executed
by the procurator, Pontius Pilate during the reign of Tiberius. Although the
pernicious superstition was momentarily subdued, it again broke out not only in
Judea but also in the city of Rome.” Tranquilus Suetonius who lived in the 2nd
century alludes to Christians who adhere to a new and pernicious superstition
in two passages in “The Live of the Caesars.”
Around 112 CE, Pliny the Younger wrote to Emperor Trojan,
detailing how he was conducting the trials of those accused of being
Christians. A few years later, another
historian, Suetonius, wrote that Emperor Claudius had expelled Jews from Rome
because of the disturbances instigated by Chrestus (probably Christ).
If Jesus were the guy described in the Bible--calming the
seas, walking over water, curing lepers, making the blind see, the deaf hear,
raising the dead, he would have been quite famous and the historians of the
period would have written extensively on
him. But there is hardly any reference about him. Was the infinite Lord, the Son of the Almighty, known
only to handful of ignorant fishermen and a few ignorant followers?
No early Christian knew when Christ was born. The
Encyclopedia Britannica says: "Christians count one hundred and
thirty-three contrary opinions of different authorities concerning the year the
Messiah appeared on earth." Nobody knew when the Almighty god was born here!
As Antonmaria Lupi, a learned Jesuit, has mentioned, the nativity of Christ has
been assigned to every month in the year, at one time or another.
Matthew says he was born in Bethlehem (to fulfill a prophecy
in the Book of Micah). But Micah had prophesied the coming of a military
leader, not a divine teacher. Luke too says his birth occurred at Bethlehem, where
his mother had gone with her husband, to make the enrollment called for by
Augustus Caesar. Of the general census mentioned by Luke, nothing is known in
Roman history. In any census, the Roman custom wanted every man to report at
his place of residence. The head of the family alone made a report. Wife or any
dependent was not required to do so. Still Luke says that Joseph left his home
in Nazareth and crossed two provinces and went to Bethlehem with his pregnant
wife, Mary on the very eve of her becoming a mother. Can this be true? The
Messiah had to be born in Bethlehem, the city of David. And hence, as Ernest
Renan, famous for Bible critic, says his birth was made to take place there.
The stories of the shepherds and wise men that recognized
the child as the son of god are preserved in Mathew and Luke. Remember David
himself was a shepherd in the fields of Bethlehem. The said narration could
have been inserted to show the coming of the Messianic Shepherd from David’s line. Mathew describes the attempt of
Herod to destroy the child and hence Joseph and Mary took flight to Egypt and
returned back to Nazareth where they settled down. If Jesus was recognized as
the promised King by the shepherds and if Herod accepted this fact and took
measures to kill the babe, why did he emerge as a stranger from Nazareth to
begin his ministry? Why were the gospel writers totally silent on the thirty years
of his life? Why didn’t any one recognize him during his public life? An
attempt is made in the 4th gospel (A much later production) where Jesus is
accepted by John the Baptist and the first disciples. The other three gospel
writers make him Christ only by making Peter confess at Caesarea Philippi.
The story of the Immaculate Conception and connected legends
and the miracles were invented to picture him as a god. Remember many of the
mythological (Greek/Egyptian) and pagan gods of those times had Immaculate
Conception and did many miracles. Present day scholars find the genealogy given
in the gospels totally wrong , obviously added to show that
Jesus is the heir of the promise made to Abraham. But if he was born of a
virgin and what is the use of giving the genealogy extending to Joseph?
Mary and Joseph were poor people. The family grew up to be a
large one (4 brothers and some sisters are mentioned in Mark 6:3) Joseph was a
carpenter and Jesus evidently got apprenticed tot his trade. He grew up as a Jewish
boy among the Jews. He studied the Jewish scriptures first at home and then in
the school attached to the synagogue. This enabled him to quote extensively
form the religious books in his public life.
Gospels try to show that Nazareth
of Galilee was his home town. Was there a city of Nazareth in the first
century? The Encyclopedia Biblica, a work written by theologians, the greatest
biblical reference work in the English language, says: "We cannot perhaps
venture to assert positively that there was a city of Nazareth in Jesus'
time." If there was no city of Nazareth in the first century, whatever the
gospels writers say must be fictitious and imaginary.
After his birth, nothing is known of the life of the
Almighty God until he reached the age of thirty years. Yes, Luke mentions Jesus
discussing with the doctors in the Temple in Jerusalem when he was twelve. The
description of this incident is mythical; there were stories of other gods who
had scholarly discussions with the learned at a very young age. The other Gospels do not even mention it.
Otherwise, the four gospels are simply silent with regard to the thirty years
of his life. If the writers of the
Gospels knew about the life of Christ, why are they silent? Even his birth was
witnessed by the appearance of a divine star and learned men came to visit him.
A ruler had tried to kill the child. But then there is darkness for thirty
years and the whole gospels are about his ministry which lasted just one year
according to the synoptic gospels and more than two according to John.
His Public Life
According to the gospels Jesus came forth Nazareth, received
baptism from John in the river Jordan Then he withdrew into the wilderness where he was tempted of Satan and was with wild beasts and
angels brought him food-much as the Old Testament had related of Elijah the
prophet. Luke and Mathew even say he fasted for 40 days
and 40 nights as Moses did on Mount
Sinai(Mathew 4:1-12, Mark 1:12 , Luke 4:1-14). As the gospels were written
during different periods of time, we find different narrations in the different gospels. The events associated with the lives of the
great Jewish prophets got incorporated into the life of Jesus too.
Upon the imprisonment of John he set out to preach. Much of his teachings were based on the
rabbinical writings both ancient and contemporary. He introduced a new form of
homely metaphor and parable to his teachings. He always tried to explain and clarify
the Biblical teachings. Some scholars feel his words: ‘you
are the salt of the earth, but if the salt has lost its savor wherewith shall
one salt? You are the light of the world, your light shall shine forth before
men,’ are certainly addressed to the Jews and not to the disciples as is later
interpreted.
The gospels of Mathew and Luke contain a great condemnation of the Pharisees and the scribes and they are generally perceived to be against Judaism. It is addressed to the pagans who are already converted and who wish to get converted. The destruction of the temple of Jerusalem (AD 70) gave a valid argument for the rejection of the Jews. The temple was the dwelling place of Yahweh. If it was destroyed, God had passed judgment over the Jewish people who refused to believe. This rejection must have come from Jesus, the new messiah. He spoke against the Jews; he turned his back on them. How can Yahweh turn against his own people for whom He massacred millions and even beheaded the first born of Egyptians?
The gospels of Mathew and Luke contain a great condemnation of the Pharisees and the scribes and they are generally perceived to be against Judaism. It is addressed to the pagans who are already converted and who wish to get converted. The destruction of the temple of Jerusalem (AD 70) gave a valid argument for the rejection of the Jews. The temple was the dwelling place of Yahweh. If it was destroyed, God had passed judgment over the Jewish people who refused to believe. This rejection must have come from Jesus, the new messiah. He spoke against the Jews; he turned his back on them. How can Yahweh turn against his own people for whom He massacred millions and even beheaded the first born of Egyptians?
Dr.
Paul W. Schmiedel, Professor of New Testament Exegesis at Zurich, Switzerland,
one of the foremost theologians of Europe, tells us in the Encyclopedia
Biblica, that there are only nine passages in the Gospels that we can depend
upon as being the sayings of Jesus but there are other scholars like Professor
Arthur Drews, Germany's greatest exponent of the doctrine that Christ is a myth
who believe that even these passages are as unhistorical as the rest.
The story of Jesus was certainly fashioned after the
mythological gods like Osiris, Dionysus, Attis, and Mithras, Asclepius,
Apollonius of Tyana and others like Buddha and Krishna. Some of the narratives
of some of these gods existed hundreds of years before Jesus’ story emerged and
some others were almost contemporaries of Jesus. The preachers who wrote about
Jesus were familiar with them and they drew from them extensively or rather
they created a Jesus in their model. The stories of the virgin birth, the
shepherds and wise men, the miracle of turning water into wine in the marriage
party, walking on waters, making the blind see, deaf hear, curing the
paraplegics, raising Lazarus, having twelve disciples and last supper, the
Eucharistic ceremony, raising the dead, getting crucified and resurrecting on
the third day have all been adopted from earlier gods and projected into the
life of Jesus. Further, Matthew puts a special effort to see that the messianic
prophecies are fulfilled in Jesus. He studied the Jewish scriptures and models
his account of Jesus to suite the so-called prophesies. He was more a preacher
who wanted to establish Jesus was the Messiah, although the Jews, the chosen
tribe of Yahweh, rejected him and is still waiting for the coming of the
Messiah.
Jesus was a healer, preacher and reformer of the Jewish religion. As he was well versed in the scriptures he had debates and discourses with the Jewish scholars. He was annoyed at the strict observance of the Jewish laws. The Pharisees and the scribes were publicly criticized by him. He called the former ‘white washed tombs’ and the latter ‘sons of serpents.’ The offended Jewish elite plotted to kill him and forced Pontius Pilate to crucify the fiery man as a public nuisance.
Jesus was probably a preacher and a faith healer with a winning personality. His
eloquence and noble character attracted a few to him, and he was hailed as a
prophet after his death. The picture of a good man carrying a heavy cross to a hill to be crucified perhaps made Paul think that he died for the sins of others. Paul felt the innocent guy suffered not for himself but for others. This was the foundation for the doctrine of redemption, the basis of Christianity.
How can you go about Jesus when it has never been established that he even existed. One cannot infer the probability who Jesus was, without concrete evidence. You are ether contradicting yourself or you don't know when to end the discussion.
ReplyDelete