The Real Jesus of the Four Gospels Part 12

[15] There may be urged, against this view of Jesus' conception of His mission, certain pa.s.sages occurring in the different accounts of the resurrection.

Matthew relates that, on the appearance of Jesus on a mountain in _Galilee_ to the eleven apostles, where "some doubted" whether it were He or not, Jesus said, "Go ye, therefore, and teach all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost" (Matt. XXVIII:19).

Mark relates that, on Jesus' appearance in _Jerusalem_ "unto the eleven as they sat at meat," He said: "Go ye into all the world, and preach the Gospel to every creature. He that believeth and is baptized, shall be saved; but he that believeth not shall be d.a.m.ned" (Mark XVI:14, 15, 16).

Luke relates that, when Jesus appeared in Jerusalem to the eleven, He told them that Christ was to suffer and rise the third day "that repentance and remission of sins should be preached in His name among all nations, beginning at Jerusalem" (Luke XXIV:47).

According to John, who is by many regarded the most reliable authority on the events of Pa.s.sion Week, and who describes the appearances of Jesus both at Jerusalem and on the sea-sh.o.r.e in Galilee, Jesus said nothing indicating any change in His views about preaching to the Gentiles or the importance of baptism. On the contrary, He three times says to Peter, "Feed my lambs" or "Feed my sheep" (John XXI:15, 16, 17).

But His "sheep" were "the lost sheep of the house of Israel," with whom alone His mission lay (Matt. XV:24).

The glaring contradictions on this point between Matthew, Mark and Luke make their evidence of little weight as against the clear and explicit utterances of Jesus, which these same evangelists have recorded in the earlier part of their Gospels. No two of them agree as to just what was said, or when it was said. The use by Matthew of the later formula of baptism--"in the name of the Father, the Son and the Holy Ghost"--which apparently was never used by John the Baptist or Jesus' disciples, marks his pa.s.sage with the strongest suspicion.

The account of John is the only one consistent with the previous history of Jesus, and it is more than probable that these pa.s.sages from Matthew, Mark and Luke were interpolated through the influence of Paul and his followers.

[16] These solitary "retreats" for fasting, prayer and meditation to a desert, wilderness or mountain are common occurrences in the lives of religious teachers, prophets, saints, etc., of the Orient. They seem, however, somewhat foreign to the character of Jesus (Luke VII:33, 34; Matt. IX:14). This is the only formal fasting by Jesus mentioned in the four Gospels. Several times it is related that He went up into a mount, but He either did not go alone, or He spent only a short time,--a day or a night.

In its location--a mountain--and its duration--forty days--this fast follows the Old Testament precedents of Moses, on Mount Sinai (Exod.

x.x.xIV:28), and the prophet Elijah on Mount h.o.r.eb (I Kings XIX:8).

The rather theatrical adjunct of the devil and his temptations may fall in the same category, as Matthew's ma.s.sacre of the innocents and the flight to Egypt. It gives opportunity, however, to bring in several quotations from the Old Testament.

It must be remembered that, as Jesus preached only to the Jews, so the Gospels (except possibly John), were written with the purpose of convincing the Jews of the truth of Jesus' claims to be their Messiah.

The more their authors could connect Him with the sayings and predictions of the Old Testament, the stronger their case. Hence, with nearly every incident of Jesus' life, they cite some appropriate text of the Old Testament, usually with the addition, "that it might be fulfilled" or "as it was spoken by the prophet." In their zeal, it is possible that, in some cases, an incident was found to fit a text, rather than a text to fit an incident.

[17] Apparently, after Jesus left Nazareth, He became domiciled at Capernaum (Mark II:1,15; Matt. IX:1).

[18] The four Gospels use the term "disciples" without much distinction, as meaning either the apostles or the immediate, personal adherents of Jesus for the time being.

[19] According to Mark this "feast" was in Jesus' house (Mark II:15; see Matt. IX:10).

[20] This first discourse of Jesus stands unequaled in religious writings for its clearness, simplicity and freedom from dogmatic theology. To appreciate this, it is only necessary to cite some pa.s.sages from John's Gospel, which in comparison seem mystic, turgid and ambiguous (John I:1-14; III:11-23; IV:50-59). There is scarcely a sentence in the Sermon on the Mount susceptible of a double meaning, or which a man of ordinary education cannot understand without the aid of a learned exegesis. Yet how hard it is for the poor human followers of Jesus to rise to its grand simplicity. Take, for instance, the subject of fasting. It seems almost impossible for the Christian, of ancient or modern times, to escape from the idea that, in mortifying the flesh, he is doing something pleasing to G.o.d. John the Baptist both fasted and enjoined fasting on his disciples. But Jesus neither fasted Himself, nor enjoined fasting on His disciples (Matt. IX:14; Mark II:18; Luke V:33; Matt. III:4; Luke VII:33-34). With His sane view of life, free of all fanaticism, He here, as always, inculcated temperance, condemning the excess of asceticism, as much as the excess of overindulgence in eating and drinking. While He does not prohibit fasting, He, in very plain language checks the enthusiasm of His disciples to make the public practice of fasting a mark of holiness.

"Moreover, when ye fast, be not as the hypocrites of a sad countenance, for they disfigure their faces that they may appear to fast."

"But thou, when thou fastest, anoint thine head and wash thy face. That thou appear not unto men to fast, but unto thy Father which is in secret" (Matt. VI:16, 17, 18).

This seems so clear that he who runs may read, and how the Roman Catholic and Protestant Episcopal Churches make it square with their public celebration of the Lenten fast, for instance, is hard to understand. The "Fast Day" of New England would seem to come directly under Jesus' condemnation.

[21] The Sermon on the Mount is probably composed of a number of utterances at different times and places, which have been compiled and put together in one discourse by the author of this Gospel.

[22] The promulgation of the Lord's Prayer is one of the most significant events of Jesus' prophetic career. It ill.u.s.trates both His conception of G.o.d, and, as a consequence, His dislike of all ceremonial wors.h.i.+p.

The persistent weakness of every religion is to gradually forget, or ignore, the spiritual unity of its supreme divinity with his human followers. Whatever may have been the conception of the Deity by the first great teacher, he soon comes to be regarded as a Being apart, like the deified monarchs of ancient times, and as one who can be pleased, or his wrath averted, by offerings and sacrifices. Practically all religions having their beginning from barbarous races are founded on sacrifices of animals, and usually of human beings. Even fairly well civilized nations are not offended by legends describing human sacrifices as being welcome to G.o.d. Examples of this are Abraham and Isaac among the Jews, Iphigenia at Aulis among the Greeks, and Curtius among the Romans. The ceremonies attending the rendition of these offerings and sacrifices form often the most important part of the religion, as is ill.u.s.trated by the innumerable minute regulations contained in the Mosaic books of the Old Testament.

But Jesus' conception of the Heavenly Father was essentially unique in ever realizing the spiritual unity existing between the Father in heaven and His Son Jesus and His other children on earth. Mark the difference between Moses and Jesus in the matter of divine communications. Moses'

messages to the Jews are the results of direct and separate interviews with the Almighty. He sees Him in the bush, or in the fire, and hears Him from the clouds. But all this is unnecessary with Jesus. He and the Father are one, and when He speaks, the Father speaks through Him. In the beautiful words of Renan:

"Jesus had no visions; G.o.d did not speak to Him as to one outside of Himself; G.o.d was in Him; He felt Himself with G.o.d, and He drew from His heart all He said of His Father. He lived in the bosom of G.o.d by constant communication with Him; he saw Him not, but he understood Him, without need of the thunder and the burning bush of Moses, of the revealing tempests of Job, of the oracle of the old Greek sages, of the familiar genius of Socrates, or of the angel Gabriel of Mahomet. The imagination and the hallucination of a St. Theresa, for example, are useless here. The intoxication of the Soufi, proclaiming himself identical with G.o.d, is also quite another thing. Jesus never once gave utterance to the sacrilegious idea that He was G.o.d. He believed Himself to be in direct communication with G.o.d; He believed Himself to be the Son of G.o.d. The highest consciousness of G.o.d which has existed in the bosom of humanity was that of Jesus."

With this conception of G.o.d, the idea of offerings or sacrifices to please or placate Him becomes unthinkable. All He asks of His earthly children is that they lead a G.o.d-like life.

Human nature, however, seems too weak to free itself from this superst.i.tion of a Supreme Being to be pleased and His wrath averted.

But, as a nation becomes more civilized and spiritualized, the manifestation of this superst.i.tion takes on different forms. The smoking altars with their living victims disappear, and, in a measure, the material offerings of s.h.i.+elds and other weapons, chariots, gold and silver vessels, jewels, etc. But their place is taken by rites and ceremonies, of which prayer is always foremost. The pilgrimages, votive offerings, ma.s.ses, adoration of holy places, long prayers (especially for victory over our enemies), elaborate church ceremonials, public fastings, erection of expensive churches "to the glory of G.o.d," legacies to "pious uses," etc., of the present day are the legitimate successors of the "fat thighs" of the Greeks, and the Shew-bread of the Jews--offerings to win the favor of a possibly offended or indifferent Deity. We laugh at the "prayer-mill" of the Hindus, but the idea is the same as procuring better treatment for your departed soul by purchasing the performance of long "ma.s.ses," if you have sufficient wealth.

At the time of Jesus the Jewish religion, as moulded by the Pharisees, was dominated by the spirit of formalism. Attendance at the synagogue, public prayers and fasting, observance of minute Sabbatical and other regulations, were made of more importance than visiting the sick, helping the poor, succoring the widow and orphan, etc. But the essence of Jesus' religion was the living of an every-day G.o.dlike life, not the adherence to certain creeds or dogmas, or the performance of rites and ceremonies. In this formalism He recognized His most dangerous enemy. It was a deep-rooted evil and hard to eradicate. One of its inherent dangers is the easy cloak it lends to hypocrisy, and, like the poor, the Pecksniffs we will always have with us.

Consequently we find Jesus early and late inveighing against the "long prayers" of the Pharisees and heathen, and the bitterest term He can apply to the Pharisees is "ye hypocrites." When He comes to instruct His disciples on the subject of prayer, it is quite probable that He would have interdicted it altogether, except for that sane temperance which was so fundamental an element of His character. He recognized the essential uselessness of prayer addressed to an all-good and all-wise Father, since He knows what is best for each person without being instructed, and from His great goodness will do what is best for each person without being asked.

"For your Father knoweth what things ye have need of before ye ask Him"

(Matt. VI:8).

Jesus therefore carefully enjoins on His disciples that they shall not pray in the synagogue, but "when thou prayest, enter into thy closet, and when thou hast shut thy door, pray to the Father which is in secret"

(Matt. VI:5, 6). He also cautions them against long prayers--"use not vain repet.i.tions as the heathen do" (Matt. VI:7).

He then gives them a short, simple prayer, as a model for their efforts.

On this point of prayer Jesus makes Himself clear beyond any possibility of misunderstanding, as in the case of fasting, and with apparently as little effect on the modern Christian. The very term "prayer-meeting"

would be anathema to Jesus, and, if He were enticed into one of these "meetings," He would a.s.suredly think He was in the midst of His old enemies, the Pharisees.

[23] The "Gadarene swine" were the subject of a once famous controversy between Huxley and Gladstone (Huxley. Some Controverted Questions.

Chaps. XIV, XV). In the course of the wordy battle there occurs a delicious bit of humor which is worth preserving. Huxley starts out by saying that, for himself, he does not believe the miracle ever occurred, and then adds that he should consider that "the wanton destruction of other people's property is a misdemeanor of evil example." Gladstone comments on this that, after eighteen centuries of wors.h.i.+p of Jesus, "it has been reserved to a scientific inquirer to discover that He was not better than a law-breaker and an evil-doer." Huxley objects to this accusation, because, as he expressly said he did not believe Jesus ever sent any devils into any swine, he can hardly be guilty of charging Jesus with this evil-doing. In his following article Gladstone states Huxley's position, does not withdraw his accusation, but, in a manner of apology, says: "The difference, _from his point of view_, is probably material, and I therefore regret that I overlooked it."

[24] This miracle occurs in Luke before the healing of Jairus' daughter (Luke VIII:41).

[25] The account of Luke's miracle is so vague as to be very unsatisfactory. The dead man is unnamed and unknown, neither his dwelling nor any of his relatives are identified, no one solicits Jesus to perform the miracle, but the bier is met casually on the street or country road, and none of the witnesses are named, as in the case of Jairus' daughter. The narrator of such an unprecedented event, as the raising of one from the dead, ought at least to furnish some means of identifying the resurrected person. It is small wonder that Matthew, Mark and John know nothing of this miracle.

A "doubting Thomas" might explain all three of these resurrection miracles on the hypothesis of unexpert diagnosis of death, a trance, a cataleptic fit, or other form of suspended animation. This would not be possible in the case of Lazarus, if he had been buried in the ground without the provision of some means of respiration. But he was laid in a cave covered only by a stone, so that ample means of respiration are not excluded.

But in the case of Lazarus, the most unexplainable matter is the silence of Matthew, Mark and Luke on the subject of this miracle. Lazarus and his two sisters were well known to Jesus and His disciples, and the sisters are mentioned by all three of the evangelists. Shortly after the miracle, Jesus comes to Bethany and "there they made Him a supper" (John XII:2), and Lazarus sat at the table and Martha served. "Then took Mary a pound of ointment of spikenard very costly and anointed the feet of Jesus and wiped His feet with her hair" (John XII:3). The disciples were apparently present, because Judas Iscariot objects to the waste of the ointment (John XII:4, 5, 6). Both Matthew and Mark relate this event as occurring in Bethany at the house of Simon the leper, except that the ointment is poured over Jesus' head, and neither the name of Mary or of Judas Iscariot is mentioned (Matt. XXVI:6-13; Mark XIV:3-9). Luke speaks of both Martha and Mary on the occasion when Jesus rebukes Martha for being "troubled about many things" (Luke X:38). The raising of Lazarus from the dead was not kept secret but was noised abroad, and was known to many of the Jews in Jerusalem and to the chief priests (John XI:45, 46; XII:9, 10, 11, 17, 18).

Considering the notoriety of this miracle, the intimacy existing between Lazarus' family and Jesus and His disciples, the relation by all the evangelists of other incidents in Jesus' life in which Martha and Mary appear, it is hard to understand why Matthew, Mark and Luke have not a word to say of this, the most marvelous of all of Jesus' deeds.

[26] Bethsaida is on the same (west) side of the sea of Galilee as Capernaum, and but a short distance from it, but this desert place was apparently across the sea, near the land of the Gergesenes (John VI:1, 17; Matt. XIV:22; Mark VI:32). Some claim that there was another Bethsaida on the east side of the sea of Galilee.

[27] It may seem strange that these numerous miracles had so little effect in winning permanent adherents to Jesus' cause. The Jews at this time were, from all accounts, in a state of religious fermentation, expecting the immediate coming of a Messiah, looking for the signs and portents of that coming, ready and willing to welcome any miraculous happenings as proof that their hopes were about to be realized. Yet John the Baptist, who did no miracles (John X:41), had apparently at the time of his death a stronger following than Jesus at the time of His death.

(Compare Matt. XIV:5; Mark XI:32; Luke XX:6, with Matt. XIII:57; XXVII:22; John VII:1; VIII:59; X:39; XI:53.)

The earlier miracles attracted large crowds, but the evidence is abundant that, later, the miracles lost their effect, and in some cases, even aroused animosity. Thus Matthew says that Jesus, in the beginning of His prophetic career, "went about all Galilee," teaching and preaching and "healing all manner of sickness and all manner of disease among the people." "And there followed Him great mult.i.tudes of people from Galilee and from Decapolis and from Jerusalem and from Judaea and from beyond Jordan" (Matt. IV:23, 24, 25. See Mark III:7, 8). But, in Chap. XIII:53-58, he relates how Jesus, coming "into His own country" at a later date and preaching there, the people "were offended in Him."

"But Jesus said unto them, A prophet is not without honor, save in his own country and in his own house. And He did not many mighty works there _because of their unbelief_." Mark says, "And He could there do no mighty work, save that He laid His hands upon a few sick folk and healed them. And He marvelled because of their unbelief" (Mark VI:5, 6).

Luke tells how, after He had preached in the synagogue in His home town of Nazareth, "all they in the synagogue, when they heard these things, were filled with wrath, and rose up and thrust Him out of the city, and led Him unto the brow of the hill, whereon their city was built, that they might cast Him down headlong (Luke IV:28, 29).

Immediately after Jesus had healed the man, or two men, in the country of the Gergesenes, Matthew, Mark and Luke agree that the "whole city,"

or the "whole mult.i.tude of the country of the Gadarenes round about,"

besought Him to depart out of their coasts (Matt. VIII:34; Mark V:17; Luke VIII:37).

After Jesus had preached in Jerusalem and performed at least one miracle there (John V:5-9), the people were so incensed against Him that "He would not walk in Jewry (Judaea), because the Jews sought to kill Him"

(John VII:1).