Who Do You Say That I Am?
Faith and Philosophy
| January 31, 2003
| Tim
Yesterday on St. Louis FM talk radio, I heard an interview with a man who wrote a recent book asserting that Jesus' ministry was a Roman plot to subdue Jewish nationalism. I believe his basic contention was that the Romans worked with Jesus to fake his death, and then later had him appear to his disciples as resurrected.
He seemed sincere, and did not reject the possibility the historical account could in fact be correct, but said that his main motivation was to try to find a non-supernatural explanation for the death of Jesus.
I wanted to commend the guy for trying to think about the whole matter for himself, for looking for the truth where-ever it might be found.
On the other hand I see some problems with his theory:
(1) Jesus's ministry was strongly supernatural. Without the miracles ("The lame walk, the blind see!") you have a guy standing around saying strange things like: "The kingdom of heaven is like a mustard seed..." You can't discount miracles on one hand and accept them on the other.
(2) Where did the disciples stand in all of this? For example, was their testimony about various miracles (Jesus walking on water, Peter catching a fish with money the temple tax in its mouth) true as they saw it? Then how to fake such miracles to them? Did the Romans have special water-walking technology? And how would they have failed to notice Jesus's Roman connection?
If instead they were co-conspirators, then how to explain their later-attested moral character and martyrdom holding to the veracity of their testimony?
(3) Of course, there's the usual mention that the Romans, skilled at crucifixion, wouldn't have mistaken a swoon for a death. (They pierced his side and water came out with blood -- a sign he was quite dead.) But this theory works to co-opt the Romans in this deception. I'm not sure how he would have proposed it was done in this case, but he puts the right motives in.
(4) Who would devise this kind of plot for subduing Jewish nationalism? I can hear it in the Roman Senate now:
Theodoric: But what to do with troublesome Palestine? We already are assured of Herod's loyalty, but what of the those stubborn Jews?
Claudius, standing up: Most excellent Theodoric, I have a plan, if you'll permit me to speak of it before this august body...
Theodoric: Tell us this plan of yours, honorable Claudius!
Claudius: These Jews, unlike us, are given to superstitions and belief in the supernatural. Let us create a folk-leader from among them, a commoner; let us help him, with our speech-writers and magicians, to gain the attention of the Jewish populace, and then incite rebellion against the priestly authorities!
Marcus, interjecting: Excellent! Excellent! Then they shall rise up and slay the priests and cause civil war!
Claudius: No, my plan is even better! At the height of his ministry and popularity, we will arrest and have him killed under Roman authority!
(Silence. Senators begin to wonder if Claudius has forgotten his medication.)
Theodoric: Uh, Claudius, wouldn't that just destroy the movement? Or perhaps, incite further rebellion against Rome, unifying them again with their religious leaders?
Claudius: Ah, but here's the brilliant part of my plan: We'll just pretend to have him killed. Later, he'll visit his friends again. And they'll become a massive monotheistic movement which competes with our own pagan beliefs!
(Again, a period of silence. Several Senators shake their heads, slowly.)
Theodoric: Right. Now, onto questions about whether we should research Caspian's suggestion that lead in our pottery might be damaging our mental capacity. Caspian?
(4) While some accounts of Jesus appearing to disciples after his death are mundane (walking along the road), some are decidely not. In one case, he appears suddenly before them in an upper room (second-floor). In another case, he appears in stunning power to Saul, a zealot who is on his way to arrest and have some of Jesus's followers killed. Saul is so affected he temporarily loses his sight, changes his name to Paul, becoming one of the foremost proponents of Jesus's resurrection.
Again, if you must reject the resurrection because of its supernatural aspect, and don't implicate all twelve disciples (and many more) as either liars or very mentally feeble persons, then you must adequately explain these sorts of events.
(5) Who's gonna sign up to play the role of Jesus? I mean, who wants to get up at dawn, live in the middle of no-where for three years sleeping in fields, then, what, get mostly-crucified? That's a lot of trust. And then appear resurrected for a short time? Me, I'd think that after I'd been done with the role, would have outlived my usefulness, my life would be in jeopardy.
After the author left, the host talked about his own story, from faith, to skepticism, and back, saying that one problem he had with the author's position is that he said "Jesus was a good guy" while claiming he'd knowingly perpetrated a massive fraud.
Tim, very interesting post/analysis. There is one flaw, however, in your hypothetical senatorial discussion. Jews were NOT given to belief in the supernatural, actually. For all the play this has gotten in movies like the 10 commandments and Raiders of the Lost Ark, the Jews of that time period were quite pragmatic in their views. Their "laws" were just that, laws. They believed that following them would lead to better life right here on earth, and any belief in a Messiah was quite literal--that such a person would "save" them from the Romans, or any other tyranny that oppressed them. The Romans, on the other hand, who prayed to farm animals, the sun, statues of dead ancestors, etc...had a strong belief in the supernatural, and while I think this could be a reason they might think of such a plot, unless they knew nothing about the Jews, they couldn't have believed it would go over with them. In fact, one of the reasons that more Jews didn't follow Jesus's teachings or believe he was the messiah was that their lives didn't vastly improve right here on Earth after he came. His death had no special meaning for the majority of them, only for his disciples who later went on to write vastly different accounts of his life, and even of the miracles in question. As those who struck out to "covert" the non-Jews were mostly working in polytheistic cultures that DID believe in "miracles," it's likely that they, uh, shall we say "embellished" his achievements in this area.
Even the astrologers (the three "wise men") weren't Jews and we know that because of their belief in astrology. Jews (or the people of Judea) were adamantly opposed to such beliefs, but the Persians (where the wise men likely came from) were not.
And let's not forget who made Jesus a deity in the first place--it was the Emperor Constantine who actually "decided" (for lack of a better term) that it would be better to deify Jesus than to call him merely a great political leader--all the better to whip the population (now forcibly converted to Christianity because of his adoption of it, mostly for political reasons, much like Saddam's recent interest in Islam) into a frenzy of mindless devotion.
Anyway, I just thought I'd mention it. I'm Jewish, so I have a little bit of insight into this subject, plus I've studied it quite a bit. This may all sound like blasphemy to a Christian, but see here's the catch...I believe (although I am Jewish) that the proof of Jesus's power and greatness is in the desire his disciples had to deify him! What a man he must have been! Also, I think the miracle of his birth was that his mother was allowed--unwed and pregnant by who knows whom--to survive and not be stoned (as was the custom in those days). This in itself is amazing--what a woman she must have been!
Just a belated follow-up to Deb's comment:
(1) Yes, the Romans were indeed superstitious. But I assume, as most people do, that they would mock the beliefs of the Jews while seeing their own as enlightened. Perhaps I did this poorly.
(2) As far as we can see, many Jews did indeed believe in miracles at the time. While the Sadducees seem to have eschewed supernatural beliefs, the Pharassee believed in miracles and the resurrection of the dead.
(3) The contention Constantine made Jesus a deity is wholy against the data we have. There are numerous passages in most of the books of the New Testament (including all four gospels) identifying Jesus as God. We have copies of most of these books going back hundreds of years before Constantine, and some as early as 60AD. If more documentation is need, I will gladly produce it.
(4) Did the disciples write "vastly different" accounts of his life? Three are so similar and consistent most people level the opposite charge the are "Too consistent!" If they're similar, it's proof they're a fake; if they're different, it's a proof they're a fake. Really?
In reality, John's gospel is the most "different", but it differs only by covering different events. But many of the miracles recorded by John are also present in the other gospel: the accounts are consistent with each other.
It looks like Deb contradicted herself in her post. (I know I'm several years late.)
First she said: "And let's not forget who made Jesus a deity in the first place--it was the Emperor Constantine who actually "decided" (for lack of a better term) that it would be better to deify Jesus than to call him merely a great political leader--all the better to whip the population (now forcibly converted to Christianity because of his adoption of it, mostly for political reasons, much like Saddam's recent interest in Islam) into a frenzy of mindless devotion."
Then she said: "I believe (although I am Jewish) that the proof of Jesus's power and greatness is in the desire his disciples had to deify him!"
So was it Constantine or the disciples?
Why can't people just accept that the earliest followers of Jesus believe He was more than just a man? It's there all over the New Testament. You don't have to agree with them, but there it is.
Also, I'm not sure I would call a woman who got pregnant by who-knows-whom, especially during that time, "amazing". Some might use other words, some words not so nice. There's nothing amazing about having premarital sex. And the Bible records that she wasn't stoned because Joseph didn't expose her, not because she was so amazing. By the way, just to make it clear, I believe in the virgin birth.
The comment rules will apply. Please post only once.
« Iraq: What Would Jesus Do? |
Front Page |
Page Two
| The Loss of the Columbia »
|
Tim, very interesting post/analysis. There is one flaw, however, in your hypothetical senatorial discussion. Jews were NOT given to belief in the supernatural, actually. For all the play this has gotten in movies like the 10 commandments and Raiders of the Lost Ark, the Jews of that time period were quite pragmatic in their views. Their "laws" were just that, laws. They believed that following them would lead to better life right here on earth, and any belief in a Messiah was quite literal--that such a person would "save" them from the Romans, or any other tyranny that oppressed them. The Romans, on the other hand, who prayed to farm animals, the sun, statues of dead ancestors, etc...had a strong belief in the supernatural, and while I think this could be a reason they might think of such a plot, unless they knew nothing about the Jews, they couldn't have believed it would go over with them. In fact, one of the reasons that more Jews didn't follow Jesus's teachings or believe he was the messiah was that their lives didn't vastly improve right here on Earth after he came. His death had no special meaning for the majority of them, only for his disciples who later went on to write vastly different accounts of his life, and even of the miracles in question. As those who struck out to "covert" the non-Jews were mostly working in polytheistic cultures that DID believe in "miracles," it's likely that they, uh, shall we say "embellished" his achievements in this area.
Even the astrologers (the three "wise men") weren't Jews and we know that because of their belief in astrology. Jews (or the people of Judea) were adamantly opposed to such beliefs, but the Persians (where the wise men likely came from) were not.
And let's not forget who made Jesus a deity in the first place--it was the Emperor Constantine who actually "decided" (for lack of a better term) that it would be better to deify Jesus than to call him merely a great political leader--all the better to whip the population (now forcibly converted to Christianity because of his adoption of it, mostly for political reasons, much like Saddam's recent interest in Islam) into a frenzy of mindless devotion.
Anyway, I just thought I'd mention it. I'm Jewish, so I have a little bit of insight into this subject, plus I've studied it quite a bit. This may all sound like blasphemy to a Christian, but see here's the catch...I believe (although I am Jewish) that the proof of Jesus's power and greatness is in the desire his disciples had to deify him! What a man he must have been! Also, I think the miracle of his birth was that his mother was allowed--unwed and pregnant by who knows whom--to survive and not be stoned (as was the custom in those days). This in itself is amazing--what a woman she must have been!
Posted by: Deb on February 1, 2003 12:01 AM