The first thing a Christian will demand to a skeptic like me is to believe in Jesus or face the consequences of going to hell. Well, the Christian bible is clear on that issue: 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 3:16)… 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 3:18)
Why the big fuzz on “believing” and “not believing” this Jesus?
Anyway, here are my reasons why I doubt this Christian Jesus:
1. The gospels are unreliable
2. Paul is unreliable
3. The silence of historians
The Gospels
The first so-called evidence for Jesus a Christian will use is the four “gospels” in the New Testaments. There are a lot of speculations but it has been traditionally accepted that the Gospels were written after Paul’s letters, which would put them after 58AD. Also, most mainstream scholars tend to place the earliest, Mark’s Gospel, in the mid 70’s, sometime just after the Jewish-Roman War (66 – 70AD). This is because Mark contains unmistakable allusions to various events of the revolt, including the destruction of the temple in the year 70AD. Matthew, Luke and John were written within 95AD.
Who Wrote What?
So, how reliable are these “good news?”
Not much. In the first place, the church never used the gospels as proof till the 2nd century AD. Furthermore, these are anonymous documents. The headings ˜According to Matthew,” “According to Mark,” “According to John,” etc., are not part of the text of the gospels in the early 2nd century. Let us blame Bishop Irenaeus (bishop of Lyons about 180AD) for naming all four as they are now named, and as the first to do so.
History That Never Happened
The Gospels have problems concerning history - they report historical events that can be shown not to have happened. Good examples are (1.) the universal census under Augustus Caesar (Luke 2:1-4) - the one and only census conducted while Quirinius was legate in Syria affected only Judaea, not Galilee, and took place in A.D. 6-7, a good ten years after the death of Herod the Great. (2.) Herod’s slaughter of the innocent male children that supposed to happened in 6AD even if Herod’s reign ended in 4BC. (3.) The existence of city of Nazareth in the “supposed to be time” that Jesus existed (Matthew 2:23). The first reference to the city of Nazareth does not occur until the ninth century AD.
What to expect? The gospels are not written as a biography or a history book – it’s a gospel for crying out loud! The word ‘gospel” means Good News – It’s more of a propaganda material used for preaching not an honest to goodness factual report.
Each of the four canonical Gospels is a religious proclamation in the form of a largely fictional narrative. The gospel stories are largely allegorical and propagandistic. What’s more, the gospels are full of insertions, interpolations, errors and manipulations from later scribes – and we don’t even have the copies of the originals.
Paul of Tarsus
Before the gospels, there were the letters of Paul. So, are they reliable?
One thing that you will notice on Paul’s writing about Jesus was that he have skipped the good parts – the virgin birth, the fantastic miracles, the appearances, earthquakes, legions of beloved Jewish saints coming back from the dead and publicly appearing in Jerusalem, supernatural darkness that covered the entire world, etc. In fact, Paul didn’t even connected Jesus in any historical facts that happened in his times. Paul never took into accounts any activities of Jesus on earth. Paul’s epistles didn’t mention that Jesus performed miracles - there were no mention of the healing miracles, water to wine, feeding of the multitude, walking on water and raising the dead. He didn’t even mention actual teachings that came from Jesus.
Much worst, when Paul says he have seen the “Lord,” this was only on a vision, not an actual contact.
So who or what is Jesus according to Paul? Well… a spiritual channel to God and one who has performed a redemptive act (the "atonement by his blood") in a mythical setting. Paul believed that Jesus is a divine presence who whispers teachings directly in his ear. In fact, Paul’s Jesus doesn’t even go to Earth. Did Paul even know there was supposed to be a real person named Jesus? If you look for evidence of the late Jesus of Nazareth from Paul and his letters you are out of luck – Paul has nothing to say about Jesus the Historical Human Being.
On the next installment, we’re going to talk about the so-called “historical evidence” of Jesus outside the New Testament.
Until next time.
No comments:
Post a Comment