The Gospel According to Scholars

“WHO are the crowds saying that I am?” (Luke 9:18) Jesus asked this of his disciples almost two millenniums ago. The question was controversial then. It seems to be even more so now, especially around the Christmas season, which is supposed to center on Jesus. Many believe that Jesus was sent from heaven to redeem mankind. Is that what you think?

Some scholars propose another view. “The image of Jesus as one who taught that he was the Son of God who was to die for the sins of the world is not historically true,” claims Marcus J. Borg, professor of religion and culture.

Other scholars claim that the real Jesus was different from the one we read about in the Bible. Some hold that all the Gospels were penned four decades or more after Jesus’ death and that by then Jesus’ true identity had been embellished. The problem was not with the Gospel writers’ recall, assert the scholars, but with their interpretation. After Jesus’ death the disciples came to view him differently—as the Son of God, Savior, and Messiah. Some boldly claim that Jesus was no more than a wandering sage, a social revolutionary. Such, say the scholars, is the gospel truth.

The “Scholarly” View of Jesus

To defend their “scholarly” view, critics seem eager to dismiss anything about Jesus that seems supernatural. For example, some say that the virgin birth was a cover-up for Jesus’ illegitimacy. Others reject Jesus’ prophecies regarding Jerusalem’s destruction, insisting that these were inserted into the Gospels after their “fulfillment.” Some even say that Jesus’ healings were purely psychosomatic—mind over matter. Do you find such positions sound or preposterous?

Certain scholars even claim that Jesus’ disciples fabricated the resurrection to keep their movement from collapsing. After all, the scholars reason, Jesus’ followers were powerless without him, so they wrote their Master back into the story. In effect, it was Christianity, not Christ, that was resurrected. If that seems like scholarly flailing about, what of theologian Barbara Thiering’s proposal that Jesus was not executed at all? She believes that Jesus survived his impalement and went on to marry twice and father three children.

All these assertions bring Jesus down to the only level upon which many scholars will accept him: that of a wise man, marginal Jew, social reformer—anything but the Son of God, who came “to give his soul a ransom in exchange for many.”—Matthew 20:28.

Perhaps around this time of the year, you have read parts of the Gospels, such as the part about Jesus’ birth in a manger. Or you may have heard such in church. Did you accept the Gospel accounts as valuable and believable? Then take note of this shocking situation. In a so-called Jesus Seminar, a group of scholars has met twice a year since 1985 to determine the authenticity of Jesus’ words. Did Jesus really say what the Bible attributes to him? Members of the seminar voted on each saying with colored beads. A red bead meant that a statement was surely spoken by Jesus; a pink bead meant that Jesus probably said it; a gray bead signified doubt; and a black bead denoted falsification.

You might be disturbed to learn that the Jesus Seminar has declared that 82 percent of the words attributed to Jesus were probably not uttered by him. Only one quote from Mark’s Gospel was deemed trustworthy. Luke’s Gospel was said to be so full of propaganda as to be “beyond recovery.” All but three lines of John’s Gospel got the black bead vote, denoting falsification, and the bit that remained was accorded the gray bead of doubt.

More Than Academics

Do you agree with the scholars? Are they presenting us with a more accurate portrayal of Jesus than that found in the Bible? These questions are more than a matter for scholarly debate. At this time of the year, you may be reminded that, according to the Bible, God sent Jesus “in order that everyone exercising faith in him might not be destroyed but have everlasting life.”—John 3:16.

If Jesus was no more than a wandering sage about whom we may know little, it would be pointless to ‘exercise faith’ in him. On the other hand, if the Bible’s portrayal of Jesus is truthful, our eternal salvation is involved. Therefore, we need to know—does the Bible contain the truth about Jesus?

The Truth About Jesus

THERE seems to be no end of theories and speculations as to who Jesus was and what he accomplished. But what of the Bible itself? What does it tell us about Jesus Christ?

What the Bible Says

Carefully reading the Bible, you will note these key facts:

◻ Jesus is the only-begotten Son of God, the firstborn of all creation.—John 3:16; Colossians 1:15.

◻ Some two millenniums ago, God transferred Jesus’ life to the womb of a Jewish virgin to be born as a human.—Matthew 1:18; John 1:14.

◻ Jesus was more than just a good man. He was in every respect a faithful reflection of the beautiful personality of his Father, Jehovah God.—John 14:9, 10; Hebrews 1:3.

◻ During his earthly ministry, Jesus lovingly attended to the needs of the oppressed. He miraculously healed the sick and even raised the dead.—Matthew 11:4-6; John 11:5-45.

◻ Jesus proclaimed God’s Kingdom as the only hope for distressed humanity, and he trained his disciples to continue this preaching work.—Matthew 4:17; 10:5-7; 28:19, 20.

◻ On Nisan 14 (about April 1), 33 C.E., Jesus was arrested, tried, sentenced, and executed on the false charge of sedition.—Matthew 26:18-20, Mt 26:48–27:50.

◻ Jesus’ death serves as a ransom, releasing believing mankind from their sinful state and thus opening the way to eternal life for all who exercise faith in him.—Romans 3:23, 24; 1 John 2:2.

◻ On Nisan 16, Jesus was resurrected, and shortly thereafter he ascended back to heaven to pay over to his Father the ransom value of his perfect human life.—Mark 16:1-8; Luke 24:50-53; Acts 1:6-9.

◻ As Jehovah’s appointed King, the resurrected Jesus has full authority to carry out God’s original purpose for man.—Isaiah 9:6, 7; Luke 1:32, 33.

Thus, the Bible presents Jesus as the key figure in the outworking of God’s purposes. But how can you be sure that this is the real Jesus—the Jesus of history, who was born in Bethlehem and walked on this earth some 2,000 years ago?

Basis for Confidence

Many doubts can be allayed simply by reading the Christian Greek Scriptures with an unprejudiced mind. In doing so, you will find that the Bible account is not a vague narrative of events, which is the case with mythology. Rather, names, specific times, and exact places are stated. (For example, see Luke 3:1, 2.) Furthermore, Jesus’ disciples are portrayed with remarkable honesty, with a candor that instills confidence in the reader. The writers whitewashed no one—not even themselves—in the interests of making a faithful record. Yes, you will see that the Bible has the ring of truth.—Matthew 14:28-31; 16:21-23; 26:56, 69-75; Mark 9:33, 34; Galatians 2:11-14; 2 Peter 1:16.

Yet there is more. Archaeological discoveries have repeatedly borne out the Bible record. For example, if you visit the Israel Museum in Jerusalem, you can see a stone that has an inscription that names Pontius Pilate. Other archaeological discoveries confirm Lysanias and Sergius Paulus, whom the Bible mentions, as real persons rather than fictitious creations of the early Christians. Events reported in the Christian Greek Scriptures (New Testament) find abundant confirmation in references by ancient writers, including Juvenal, Tacitus, Seneca, Suetonius, Pliny the Younger, Lucian, Celsus, and the Jewish historian Josephus.a

The accounts presented in the Christian Greek Scriptures were accepted without question by thousands living in the first century. Even the enemies of Christianity did not deny the truthfulness of what Jesus was reported to have said and done. As to the possibility that Jesus’ character was embellished by his disciples after his death, Professor F. F. Bruce comments: “It can have been by no means so easy as some writers seem to think to invent words and deeds of Jesus in those early years, when so many of His disciples were about, who could remember what had and had not happened. . . . The disciples could not afford to risk inaccuracies (not to speak of willful manipulation of the facts), which would at once be exposed by those who would be only too glad to do so.”

Why They Do Not Believe

Nevertheless, some scholars remain skeptical. While they assume that the Biblical record is fictitious, they eagerly scour apocryphal writings and accept these as credible! Why? Obviously, the Bible record contains things that many modern intellectuals do not want to believe.

In his Union Bible Companion, published in 1871, S. Austin Allibone presented a challenge to skeptics. He wrote: “Ask any one who professes to doubt the truth of the Gospel history what reason he has for believing that Cæsar died in the Capitol, or that the Emperor Charlemagne was crowned Emperor of the West by Pope Leo III. in 800? . . . We believe all the assertions . . . made respecting these men; and that because we have historical evidence of their truth. . . . If, on the production of such proof as this, any still refuse to believe, we abandon them as stupidly perverse or hopelessly ignorant. What shall we say, then, of those who, notwithstanding the abundant evidence now produced of the authenticity of the Holy Scriptures, profess themselves unconvinced? . . . They do not wish to believe that which humbles their pride, and will force them to lead different lives.”

Yes, some skeptics have ulterior motives in rejecting the Christian Greek Scriptures. The problem they have is not with its credibility but with its standards. For example, Jesus said of his followers: “They are no part of the world, just as I am no part of the world.” (John 17:14) However, many professed Christians are deeply involved in the political affairs of this world, even being involved in bloody wars. Rather than conform to Bible standards, many people would wish the Bible to conform to their own standards.

Consider, too, the matter of morals. Jesus gave strong counsel to the congregation at Thyatira for tolerating the practice of fornication. “I am he who searches the kidneys and hearts,” he told them, “and I will give to you individually according to your deeds.”b (Revelation 2:18-23) Yet, is it not true that many professing to be Christian throw moral standards by the wayside? They would rather reject what Jesus said than reject their immoral course of conduct.

Inclined not to accept the Jesus of the Bible, scholars have created a Jesus of their own making. They become guilty of the mythmaking of which they falsely accuse the Gospel writers. They hold onto the parts of Jesus’ life that they want to accept, reject the rest, and add a few details of their own. In reality, their wandering sage or social revolutionary is not the Jesus of history that they claim to be searching for; rather, he is simply a figment of proud scholarly imaginations.

Finding the Real Jesus

Jesus endeavored to awaken the hearts of those sincerely hungering for truth and righteousness. (Matthew 5:3, 6; 13:10-15) Such ones respond to Jesus’ invitation: “Come to me, all you who are toiling and loaded down, and I will refresh you. Take my yoke upon you and learn from me, for I am mild-tempered and lowly in heart, and you will find refreshment for your souls. For my yoke is kindly and my load is light.”—Matthew 11:28-30.

The real Jesus is not to be uncovered in the books written by modern scholars; nor is he to be found in the churches of Christendom, which have become a breeding ground of man-made tradition. You can find the historical Jesus in your copy of the Bible. Would you like to learn more about him? Jehovah’s Witnesses would be happy to help you do so.

[Footnotes]

[Box on page 6]

CENTURIES OF CRITICISM

Criticism of the Christian Greek Scriptures took root more than 200 years ago, when German philosopher Hermann Samuel Reimarus (1694-1768) asserted: “We are justified in drawing an absolute distinction between the teaching of the Apostles in their writings and what Jesus Himself in His own lifetime proclaimed and taught.” Since Reimarus, many scholars have been taught to feel similarly.

The book The Real Jesus notes that many critics of the past did not consider themselves to be apostates. Rather, “they perceived themselves as the more genuinely Christian for having broken free from the shackles of dogma and superstition.” Higher criticism, they felt, was a “purified form of Christianity.”

The sad fact is that Christendom has become a breeding ground for man-made tradition. The doctrines of the immortal soul, the Trinity, and a fiery hell are just some of the teachings that are contrary to the Bible. But the writers of the Christian Greek Scriptures were not responsible for this corruption of truth. On the contrary, they fought the first traces of false teachings in the middle of the first century, when Paul wrote that an apostasy among professed Christians was “already at work.” (2 Thessalonians 2:3, 7) We can be confident that what is contained in the Christian Greek Scriptures is a record of historical and doctrinal truth.

[Box on page 7]

WHEN WERE THE GOSPELS WRITTEN?

Many New Testament critics insist that the Gospels were written long after the events they describe and are therefore almost certain to contain inaccuracies.

However, evidence suggests an early date for the writing of Matthew, Mark, and Luke. Subscripts in some manuscript copies of Matthew indicate that the original writing took place as early as 41 C.E. Luke was probably written between 56 and 58 C.E., for the book of Acts (likely completed by 61 C.E.) indicates that the writer, Luke, had already composed his “first account,” the Gospel. (Acts 1:1) Mark’s Gospel is considered to have been composed in Rome during either the first or the second imprisonment of the apostle Paul—probably between 60 and 65 C.E.

Professor Craig L. Blomberg agrees with an earlier dating of those Gospels. He notes that even when we add John’s Gospel, which was composed at the end of the first century, “we are still far closer to the original events than with many ancient biographies. The two earliest biographers of Alexander the Great, for example, Arrian and Plutarch, wrote more than four hundred years after Alexander’s death in 323 B.C., yet historians generally consider them to be trustworthy. Fabulous legends about the life of Alexander did develop over time, but for the most part only during the several centuries after these two writers.” The historical parts of the Christian Greek Scriptures certainly are worthy of at least as much credence as secular histories.