THE PERSON OF JESUS

The Jesus of the Gospels is hardly the character that Christians like to present, e.g. he used violence - John 2:15 (and apparently encouraged it; before his arrest he told his disciples to buy a sword; this was used immediately afterwards - Luke 22:36,49-50). His purpose was to break up families - Matt 10:34-35, Luke 12:51- 53. He taught the gospel was not available for certain races - Matt 10:5-8, 15:24. He was ignorant of the Scriptures he quoted - Mark 2:26 (In fact the priest was Ahimelech, not Abiathar - see 1 Samuel 21:1,6). He was cruel to animals - Matt 8:1-4 ('the offering' Jesus commanded was a bird being sacrificed - Leviticus 14:2-5), 8:28-34. He treated his mother with contempt - John 2:4. He suffered fits of temper, not justified by the situation - Matt 21:18- 19, 23:13-33 (In the John 7 outburst, in John 7:37, the Greek is 'to screech like a raven'). He was hypocritical - Matt 5:22 (Compare his action in Matt 23:17), Matt 6:14 (Compare Matt 10:14- 15), Matt 7:1 (Compare John 5:30, 8:26). He lacked sympathy for other people's suffering - Matt 8:21-22. He rejected his own family - Matt 12:46-50, Mark 3:32-35. He had contempt for other religions and the adherents - Matt 12:30, 23:2-33, John 8:44,55. He deliberately taught in a way so people would not understand him (and therefore be saved from going to eternal hellfire)- Mark 4:9-12, and he encouraged people to desert their families - Matt 19:29, Mark 10:29.
He also taught people to hate* their families - Luke 14:26 (*The Greek here means 'active ill-will' or 'persecuting spirit'). He taught that suffering was to show God's glory - John 9:1-3. He ignored a woman pleading for his help: only after she asked him three times did he condescend to help - Matt 15:22-28. He taught that ill-health and human suffering was the result of sin, or for the purpose of glorifying God - Mark 2:5,11,12, John 5:8-14.
And furthermore, he clearly seemed to have thought that his second coming/the end of the world, i.e. the final judgement (etc., etc.) was only a short time away, e.g. he told the high priest that he would see his return - Mark 14:61-62, he told three disciples that they would see his return - Matt 16;28, and he advised the disciples he would return before they had preached throughout Palestine - Matt 10:23.
Furthermore, when Jesus told his disciples about the end of the world (Mark 13:3-27), he told them that the generation living at that time (ca. 30 CE) would still be alive when "all these things", (i.e. the Second Coming, the Final Judgement, the end of the world, etc., etc.) took place (Mark 13:30). Despite saying all this, he then told the disciples that no one - including himself - knew when the end would come (13:32).
Also, he foretold that he would be buried for 3 days and 3 nights in Matt 12:40. But Friday evening (Mark 15:42-46) to before Sunday daybreak (John 20:1-2) is not 3 days and 3 nights. (NB. Mark 15:42 states he was buried after sundown on the Friday, i.e. the sabbath (this is Saturday in Jewish reckoning - something quite impossible to have happened).
With regard to the end of the world etc, Jesus stated that there would be an "abominating sacrilege" (Matt 24:15, Mark 13:14) which would cause a tribulation (Matt 24:16-28, Mark 13:15-23) and IMMEDIATELY after this (Matt 24:29), he would return to usher in the Final Judgement (Matt 24:29-31). Now Luke has in the parallel passage, the "abominating sacrilege" as the Fall of Jerusalem (Luke 21:20; as can be seen by Luke 21:21-23, the author of Luke does equate "the abominating sacrilege" with Jerusalem's destruction). However, Jerusalem's destruction (particularly as described in Luke) occurred in 70 CE.

THE ACCURACY OF THE NEW TESTAMENT
There are actually numerous fictional stories in the Gospels, (i.e. stories of occurrences which defy historical possibility), e.g. the Jews going to Pilate on their sabbath day (Matt 27:62) - something quite impossible. Note how Matt (26:17-19), Mark (14:12-16) and Luke (23:8-13) say that it was the Passover (eaten on the evening of 14 Nisan) that Jesus ate at the last supper. However in John, after the meal, after the arrest, after the trial before the Sanhedrin, the Passover had still not started (John 18:28) and even after his appearance before Pilate the next day, the Passover had still had not been eaten - John 19:14. John's author apparently included this variation to have Jesus executed at the same time that the Passover lambs were slaughtered (the day before the Passover) to agree with John 1:29,36 that Jesus was the sacrificial lamb (In fact lambs were NOT offered up as sacrifices for sin; only rams and goats were).
If the Gospel writers could manipulate the data with so much ease, how can their accounts be reliable ? Each Gospel either contains details known to be incorrect (e.g. that Herod was a king in Mark in Mark 6:14 when in fact he was only a petty tetrach - this is corrected in the other two Synoptic Gospels), or they contradict one another.
The Synoptics have Jesus clearing the Temple at the end of his ministry (Mark 11:15-17 and par.), but John has this at the very beginning (2:13-16). John has Jesus travelling back and forth between Galilee and Jerusalem, but the synoptics have him in Galilee and making the one journey south to Jerusalem ending in his execution. It is impossible to view the four canonical gospels as historical records.

Email: bibleanalysis@yahoo.co.uk

Forward to Page 2 Home