Part II

Jesus and the Gospels (How do we know they are authentic? What do they say about Jesus?)

This is by no means exhaustive. There is probably no other book that has been so scrutinized and attacked than the Bible. Today, more than ever, there are numerous opinions about the Biblical gospels, the New Testament, and Jesus. This will be a very simplistic overview.

1) The letters that Paul wrote are the easiest Christian writings to date and authenticate. Few scholars would disagree that Paul was the author of those works and that he wrote them between 51AD and 64AD, when he was martyred.

2) In his letter to the church at Galatia he mentions his meeting with Peter and James, the brother of Jesus, three years after his conversion. He stayed with Peter for 15 days. (Gal.1: 18-19) Fourteen years later, he returned to meet with Peter, John, and James (the brother of Jesus who seems to be the leader of the church in Jerusalem) to submit to them the Gospel he was preaching. Paul writes that these men were recognized as pillars. (Gal. 2:2,7-9) This agrees with Luke's account in Acts. Thomas, who is set forth in the Gospel of Thomas as the leader of the disciples and the closest to Jesus, is not mentioned by Paul, nor is he mentioned in the other gospels as having that kind of leading role.

3) Paul mentions places and people giving context and time events for his letters. This is unlike the Gnostic writings, which have no context.

4) Paul mentions Luke, the doctor, several times - his friend and companion. It is this Luke (not one of the apostles) who sets out to write an orderly account of the ministry of Jesus called - the Gospel of Luke. He also wrote the account of the early Christians called Acts. In Acts he records that he had already written the account of the life and ministry of Jesus. His account of Acts ends before Paul is killed in Rome. Some scholars therefore date it before 64AD; others place it later (between 70-80AD) - often because of the prophecies in the Gospel. Some do not believe Jesus could have known the future, so the prophecies must have been written after those events took place, namely the destruction of Jerusalem, in 70AD. If you believe Jesus was the Son of God, an earlier date is possible.

5) Luke says that his gospel account was compiled from earlier accounts handed down by eyewitnesses (Luke 1:1,2) Many of Luke's verses are direct quotes from either Mark or Matthew - dating them earlier.

6) The early church leaders from the 2nd century said that the Gospel of Matthew was originally written in Hebrew and later translated into Greek. They said this Gospel was the earliest. Some scholars will date the actual writing of this gospel as early as 60AD. Others say it was orally communicated and later written, perhaps in 80AD, but no later than 100AD.

7) Paul and Luke, in their writings, also mention Mark (John Mark) who travels with Paul and Barnabas. In fact he is the reason a big disagreement comes up between them and they stop traveling together. This Mark later works as a translator for Peter. It is Peter's preaching and speaking of the Gospel that Mark (not an apostle) records. Mark possibly uses Matthew's account as well. Some scholars, however, believe that Matthew's gospel was based on Mark's account. Some say it was not completely compiled until 70AD or at the latest 100AD. Either way these two accounts are usually regarded as the earliest.

8) The Gospel of John. This gospel is considered by many to be the last to have been written. It is believed to have been written sometime between 60AD and 95AD. Some however say it was written in part by John and in part by his disciples. Most scholars want to date the completed work between 90-95AD. A fragment of the gospel of John was 'recently' discovered that dates to 125AD. Again, Paul wrote that John, Peter, and James were the pillars. (See also Acts 15:6-19) It seems the Gospel of John was the last to be accepted with the same ranking as the other three Gospels. So when is the latest date that it was joined to the others in broad acceptance? Most scholars say that in considering the writings of Irenaeus, the bishop of Lyon (born 135AD?/ became bishop of Lyon around 178AD) it can be determined that by the time Irenaeus was bishop, all four Gospels were considered Holy Scripture. It also seems this had been no recent decision.
For a period of time the teachings and actions of Jesus were passed down orally by the Apostles. Eventually it was realized that these things needed to be recorded, so the Gospels were written. As it became evident that a clear definition of Christian teaching was needed Matthew, Mark, & Luke were linked together as the undisputed accounts of the testimony of Jesus. Later the Gospel of John joined them as the fourth. This occurred sometime before 178 AD. These gospels are filled with historical people and events thus making it possible to consider them in an historical context.

9) Josephus was an historian who published his account of the holy lands in 92AD testifying to much of the events found in the gospels, especially those found in the writings of Luke. As he looked back on the events in 'recent history', for instance, he wrote about Jesus, the killing of James (John's brother) and the jailing of Peter (found in Acts 12:1-5).

10) The Gospel of Thomas and other Gnostic writings have no historic material in them. They are merely sayings, much of which are the teachings of Jesus found in the Biblical Gospels, but turned in a new direction or made mysterious. They often begin with "these are the secret teachings or sayings of Jesus." There is little context for the teaching and no characters mentioned outside of Jesus, his disciples, and a few women, including Mary of Magdala. It is therefore difficult to date these works. One further problem is that the fragments of the earliest Gnostic writings DO NOT match the later versions. For instance - the gospel of Thomas is believed to be the earliest of the Gnostic or non-canonical gospels. (Actually these other 'gospels' are not considered to be true Gospels because they lack narrative. Rather, they are collections of sayings.) It contains141 verses. Some say that a few of the ideas in this 'gospel' were around as early as 100AD in oral teachings. The earliest written fragments, dated at 200AD, however, differ greatly from the complete manuscript dating 340AD. The complete manuscript was greatly altered. This is because the Gnostics believed in ongoing revelation. To them it was not a problem to change these writings, in fact, it was necessary. The Gnostics believed that secret revelations were constantly being revealed. The written revelation, therefore, had to be changed, constantly. With the Biblical Gospels there are also a few differences between earlier manuscripts and later ones, but they are small and in no way do they change the meaning of the entire writing. Rather than any verses being changed, there are places where a verse has been added to the chapter. Today in most Bibles these few verses are included in brackets with a reference noting something like, "earlier manuscripts do not include this." There is no cover up here. Unlike the non-canonical gospels, the earlier fragments of the Biblical Gospels match the later manuscripts.

11) The cup of Christ. Let us note that the last supper is mentioned in the Gospels and in the letters of Paul dating prior to 64AD (1 Corinthians 11:23-25). Paul wrote of the cup (not the holy grail): Jesus took the cup and said, "this is the new covenant in My blood - do this in remembrance of Me." There is no mention of sex or Mary or His seed in her body as the DaVinci Code and its references declare. The holy grail is a concept that was created much later (around 900-1100), most likely during the time of the crusades when finding or creating relics was a very important endeavor. At that time it was believed important to create stories that would inspire the uneducated masses to flock to the Holy Lands, saving it from the hands of the Muslims. This concept of a holy grail is myth and not a part of scripture, ancient church history, or sound doctrine. It is found in the stories about King Arthur and books like The DaVinci Code. The cup that Jesus took, poured wine into, and served to His disciples is, however, in the Bible. It was a simple cup that He used to serve real wine to His disciples, thus beginning a new covenant. This wine representing the sacrifice He was about to offer: the spilling of His blood. Isn't it interesting that many critics of the Bible say that only uneducated people would believe what it says? To prove their point they use wild stories that were created during the crusades persuading masses of uneducated people to rush to the holy land. Don't fall into the trap of believing such nonsense. And what about the Knights Templar? Even IF they really did communicate these stories is no proof that they were true. Another story told during that time was that the Apostle John was still alive and ruling as a king ... "and he needs your help!"

12) The Christ. Some critics say that Jesus was never considered The Son of God by the 1st and 2nd century Church. They say that it was not until the Bible council in 320 declared Him to be God did this become a Christian doctrine. They say it was then "that the conspiracy began!" These same critics say the Gospel of John is the only Gospel that says Jesus is God, so they attack that Gospel as false. However, all four of the Gospels have Jesus declaring that He is the Son of God/Son of man - who will come with His angels in glory and sit at the right hand of God. It was for this very reason that He was crucified. He was believed to be a blasphemer because He considered Himself able to forgive sins, which only God could do, and proclaimed Himself to be the Son of God. The teachings regarding Jesus as the Son of God, grace, faith in Jesus, baptism, and resurrection from the dead are also found in the early writings of Paul (see: 1Corinthians15:12-17&20 / Galatians 1:6-12 / 2:1-2,16-20) and in the gospels. In fact, even the OT says of the Messiah that "He will be named ... Mighty God, Eternal Father, Prince of Peace. And He will reign...forever." (Isaiah 9:6,7)

Don't take on a view of life, Jesus, or the Bible simply because you heard it at work, read it in a book, or picked it up from the Internet. If you really want to know what the Bible says, READ the Book. Find out what IT says. If you need help buy a study book to help you figure out the historical and cultural context of events. Don't get lost in the details, read the Bible with an eye to the overview. The Pharisees got lost in the details and didn't recognize the overall picture - so they missed the One who reflected it perfectly.

This has been a very simple article. There are some good articles that have been published on the Internet, and some good books that have been written about these things. There are also some untruthful, unhelpful things that have been written as well. There are many things being written today that simply aren't true. If you don't know the Bible or even how to read a statement by a so-called scholar, it can be easy to be swayed. Keep your eyes open - read and think. Don't take someone's word, for instance, that the letters of Paul only spoke about a prophet and not the Son of God. These things are simply not so. And don't be taken in by stories created during the time of the crusades. There are simply too many of them. It makes wonderful and strange fiction, but even Dan Brown won't include every part of these stories - they are a bit too strange for believable fiction.

In the end, do not let fear rule in your heart. If your faith is based on superficial concepts easily tossed by any bold contradictory statement, then you need a more solid foundation. However, if you are willing to accept any undocumented concept about Jesus 'because your faith is strong enough', I would challenge you to consider on what you are basing your faith ... a feeling or the Bible? Christianity is based on faith, but that faith is based on the teachings about God, His Christ, and His kingdom that have been passed down to us. If you call yourself a Christian be careful to read, study, and know what the Bible really says.