| Reproducible Electronic Publishing can defeat censorship.
From Bill Restemeyer and the Internet Infidels for The Freethought Web. |
|
Did Jesus Christ Really Live? |
by Marshall J. Gauvin |
Page 8
| According to Matthew, Mark and Luke, the public life
of Christ lasted about a year. If John's Gospel is to be believed, his ministry covered
about three years. The Synoptics teach that Christ's public work was confined almost
entirely to Galilee, and that he went to Jerusalem only once, not long before his death.
John maintains that most of the public life of Christ was spent in Judea, and that
Christ was many times in Jerusalem.
The chronological framework of the Gospels is worthless; they are contradictory and untrustworthy. Did Matthew, Mark, Luke and John write not what they knew, but what they imagined?
Jesus must have been one of the best known men in Jerusalem. Why, then, was it necessary for the priests to bribe one of his disciples to betray him? Only an obscure man, whose identity was uncertain, or a man who was in hiding, would need to be betrayed. |
The Gospels
know nothing of thirty years of Christ's life. What do they know of
the last years of that life? How long did the ministry, the public career of Christ,
continue? According to Matthew, Mark and Luke, the public life of Christ lasted about a
year. If John's Gospel is to be believed, his ministry covered about three years. The
Synoptics teach that Christ's public work was confined almost entirely to Galilee, and
that he went to Jerusalem only once, not long before his death. John is in hopeless
disagreement with the other Evangelists as to the scene of Christ's labors. He maintains
that most of the public life of Christ was spent in Judea, and that Christ was many times
in Jerusalem. Now, between Galilee and Judea there was the province of Samaria. If all but
the last few weeks of Christ's ministry was carried on in his native province of Galilee,
it is certain that the greater part of that ministry was not spent in Judea, two provinces
away. John tells us that the driving of the money-changers from the Temple occurred at the beginning of Christ's ministry; and nothing is said of any serious consequences following it. But Matthew, Mark and Luke declare that the purification of the Temple took place at the close of his career, and that this act brought upon him the wrath of the priests, who sought to destroy him. Because of these facts, the Encyclopedia Biblica assures us that the order of events in the life of Christ, as given by the Evangelists, is contradictory and untrustworthy; that the chronological framework of the Gospels is worthless; and that the facts "show only too clearly with what lack of concern for historical precision the Evangelists write." In other words, Matthew, Mark, Luke and John wrote, not what they knew, but what they imagined. Christ is said to have been many times in Jerusalem. It is said that he preached daily in the Temple. He was followed by his twelve disciples, and by multitudes of enthusiastic men and women. On the one hand, the people shouted hosannas in his honor, and on the other, priests engaged him in discussion and sought to take his life. All this shows that he must have been well known to the authorities. Indeed, he must have been one of the best known men in Jerusalem. Why, then, was it necessary for the priests to bribe one of his disciples to betray him? Only an obscure man, whose identity was uncertain, or a man who was in hiding, would need to be betrayed. A man who appeared daily in the streets, who preached daily in the Temple, a man who was continually before the public eye, could have been arrested at any moment. The priests would not have bribed a man to betray a teacher whom everybody knew. If the accounts of Christ's betrayal are true, all the declarations about his public appearances in Jerusalem must be false.
|