|
As the documents we have are from sources written many decades
after the events, are copies of copies,and probably not by the
apparent authors, who were supposedly contemporary, and do not
agree, many differing scenarios could be the truth of what really
happened.
In these documents scriptures from what we call the Old Testament
have been misquoted and misapplied.
Why do two gospels ignore his origin and birth story and the other
two do not agree on the details of the birth story – shepherds
in one and magi and going to Egypt, and Herod’s massacre of
the babies in the other? It is significant that Josephus (who does
not cover up Herod’s evil ways) does not mention the massacre
of the babies!.
Why in the gospels is Nazareth given as the place of Jesus’ upbringing,
and the name being significant in prophecies allegedly about him,
when it is not mentioned in the Hebrew scriptures and probably
did not exist until later? Josephus does not mention it among the
cities of Galilee, but says he fortified Jafnia nearby – a
town so close that it has been swallowed up by modern Nazareth.
For people not familiar with Hebrew there is confusion over "notzri" "of
a shoot" and a messianic symbol (from the Hebrew "netzer").
There had been a movement called the "Notzrim" for more
than a hundred years before Jesus is supposed to have lived.
The Hebrew for Jesus would be "Yeshua ha notzri" – indicating
his being a part of this messianic group. In the Greek this became
Jesus the Nazarene. But in Hebrew a person from Nazareth would
be a "Natzarati". So he may have had nothing to do with
that town – it come from a confusion of words later in going
from one language to another. In the Aramaic gospels translations
in comes to light that "nussrat" means "victorious" -
is this the origin of the name we have for him? He would then be
Jesus (yeshua - saviour) of Nazareth(victorious) =" the victorious
saviour."
He was said to be born in Bethlehem to satisfy a desire for a
Davidic messiah among those of Judah and for a king to rid them
of their enemies and restore the kingdom to its former glory. Hence
the genealogy in Matthew. But Luke’s genealogy is quite different
and reflects the desire of those of the northern tribes for a messiah
from Joseph to lead them out of slavery. The Notzrim were popular
in the north.
With all the stories there are that Jesus might have been illegitimate
it seemed that a pagan mythology story of a virgin who gives birth
because of a god and so remains a virgin was the best alternative,
making Joseph his adoptive, or stepfather.
But which Mary was it? And what were really the circumstances
of the child’s birth? Was she a virgin who was given the child
of a prostitute to bring up whilst she is betrothed to Joseph?
Was she really a prostitute who married an older man whilst pregnant
and he brought up the child as his own? Was it the child of a Roman
soldier, or another man? Or was Joseph himself really the father?
The Syriac church (which goes back to very early days) has a tradition
that Jesus had a twin brother - ? Thomas Didymus.
How can we know when the stories do not agree and the genealogies
so strange- e.g. anyone descended from Jeconiah was banned from
being a king of Israel! Yet his descendants appear in both lists – which
would disqualify Jesus from being a Davidic messiah. Also there
is the point that both lists have Zerubabbel and his relatives,
so would seem to be of the same persons genealogy, yet come from
different sons of David! Some have tried to explain this with leverate
marriages - where brothers marry their dead brothers' wives and
the first male child is counted as that of the deceased to carry
one his name. But there would have to be an extraordinary number
to resolve the difficulties.
So much in pagan mythology – virgin births from gods, wicked
kings who fear and try to kill a child, who is tempted by the devil,
dies and rises again to life, plus the idea that eating and drinking
the body and blood of a god enables you to partake of the divinity
and eternal life of that god resembles the gospel accounts that
is seems they were written to be another mystery cult (which is
certainly what Paul made Christianity to be) One only needs to
examine the beliefs in Mithraism to see the striking similarities.
Others were crucified for practising their beliefs and others
were resurrected from the dead in both the old and new testaments – does
this make the child resurrected by Elijah, or Lazarus into messiahs
or saviours? The Old Testament prophets also performed miracles.
What about the "coincidence" of Barabbas!! ("son
of the father" in Aramaic) Who was this man? He was accused
of the same crime of insurrection, a trouble maker, likely to lead
a riot, yet released a the great feast of Passover when the great
crowds were already excited. Could this really have been Jesus?
Pilate was caught between two pressures – his wife and his
job to keep order in the province. How was he to appease both?
Could it be he released Jesus under the pretence it was another?
Or else it is possible he saw to it that Jesus was removed from
the cross before he died and placed in a cool, secure, tomb to
recover with the help of a rich man, Joseph, and the women who
could attend to him without becoming ritually unclean and unable
celebrate Passover . Jesus then appeared only to those who were
his followers and would not give the game away. Why did he not
appear to all of Israel?
He then conveniently disappeared into hiding. All this is a possible
scenario of reality which later was embroidered with the supernatural.
If the events were so momentous why were they not recorded for
posterity at the time by those who knew within a very short time?
Was it not done because the events were only relevant for the
people at that time- he did say he had come only to the lost sheep
of Israel, an d never said he was Messiah who would restore the
kingdom and rid them of their enemies OR that he was a substitute
sacrifice to save his people from their sin. These were what others
wanted him to be. Look at the "prophecies" of Mary, Zechariah
and Simeon in Luke. (ch. 1 v 32&33,53-56 and 68-71.
But he failed these expectations.
Perhaps much of it never happened, but a few myths and stories,
possibly about different individuals were collected into a sequence
to rival the pagan cults of the time?
We have it recorded that he said many outrageous things –"He
who has seen me has seen the Father". " I have authority
to forgive sins". " Moses wrote concerning me" _
(Where?) " A greater is here than the temple. A greater is
here than Jonah. A greater is here than Solomon" "WHATEVER
you ask in my name will be done," "You will do greater
things than I."
He seemed to believe he had a mission, and so did others. What,
apart from the desperate desire for a saviour and messiah to save
them from their enemies and their poverty, gave them the idea it
was him?
John the Baptist was expecting someone – yet Josephus does
not connect him with Jesus - only saying that John was killed by
Herod for the same reason Jesus was killed – that he was afraid
he would lead an insurrection. Yet some try to say Josephus was
a believer and an Ebionite - if he was surely he would say John
was the herald for the ministry of Jesus?
next section : Was Jesus the Messiah?
|
