The first event in the life of Jesus, the gospel story of his birth, is
now considered unauthentic by many scholars and some theologians. The
birth of a virgin, the visitation of an angel, the star in the East are
phenomena contrary to natural laws and rest on insufficient authority
for acceptance as credible. The probabilities are against exceptions in
the laws of the universe.
_The Virgin Birth_
The original evidence for the virgin birth is found only in the gospels
of Matthew and Luke, two unknown historians, and both these evangelists
implicitly deny their own tale when they trace the descent of Jesus from
David through Joseph.[1] The slaughter of the children by Herod, in fear
of Jesus as a rival, probably never took place. Mark, Luke and John do
not mention it; Josephus, who dwelt on the crimes of Herod, knew nothing
of this massacre. According to Luke, Mary and Joseph took Jesus to
Jerusalem openly soon after the supposed decree.[2]
There is dispute as to whether Jesus was born in Bethlehem or Nazareth,
and the date of his birth has been placed anywhere from 4 B.C. to 7 A.D.
Matthew says that Jesus was born "in the days of Herod", while Luke says
it was "When Cyrenius was governor of Syria." Herod died in 4 B.C.,
while Cyrenius did not become governor of Syria until 7 A.D.
The romantic story of the Christ-child is not corroborated by the
historians of the time and is in opposition to the theory of evolution
by natural processes. And yet it is still one of the main sources of
Jesus' fame, being repeated at Christmas-tide in the churches, thus
connecting Jesus with God in a superhuman manner.
The consensus of scholarship is in practical agreement that the theory
of the virgin birth as a link between Jesus and God is a mistake; but
whose mistake was it? Jesus never referred to his miraculous birth. If
he was merely a man and never heard of the rumor about his conception,
he was not to blame for the spread of this misleading story throughout
Christendom.
While Jesus did not refer to his divine paternity in a physical sense,
he did endeavor to convince his hearers that he was more directly
connected with God than other men. "I and my Father are one."[3] "No
man knoweth the Son but the Father; neither knoweth any man the Father,
save the Son, and he to whomsoever the Son will reveal him."[4]
Jesus thus proclaimed himself identical with the Lord God of the Old
Testament who called himself Jehovah. This is entirely in keeping with
the whole Christian theory, for the _raison d'etre_ of Jesus derived
from the act of God soon after the creation. Adam and Eve ate of the
fruit of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil which God had
commanded them not to touch, and for this disobedience, this fall of man
from grace, God cursed mankind. Jesus came to earth to save man from the
wrath of Almighty God.
But this claim of Jesus to oneness with God renders him liable to
censure for the acts of Jehovah which represented a standard of ethics
inferior to that preached by the Son of God. According to the
scriptures, which anyone may freely search, God advised or countenanced
deception[5]; stealing[6], selfishness[7], conquest by force[8],
indiscriminate slaughter[9], murder[10], cannibalism[11], killing of
witches[12], slavery[13], capital punishment for rebellious sons or for
seeking false gods[14], sacrifices of animals[15] and other acts
representing the concepts of primitive men.[16]
While Jesus could read[17] and was familiar with the scriptures, it is
possible that he was not acquainted with the system of dictatorship
formerly employed by his Father. Occasionally Jesus denounced the ethics
of "them of old time", but he always referred to his Father as perfect.
The dilemma is that Jesus must be condemned either for claiming identity
with Jehovah (to whom he was really superior), or for accepting with
only slight improvements the tyranny of God as described in the Bible,
the Word of God. Of course if the Bible is not the Word of God, the
whole system of Christian theology falls to the ground.
_The Jewish Messiah_
Jesus claimed to be the Messiah expected by the Jews. "And the high
priest answered and said unto him, I adjure thee by the living God, that
thou tell us whether thou be the Christ, the Son of God. Jesus saith
unto him, Thou hast said."[18] "Again the high priest asked him, and
said unto him, Art thou the Christ, the Son of the Blessed? And Jesus
said, I am."[19] "Then said they all, Art thou then the Son of God? And
he said unto them, Ye say that I am."[20] "The woman saith unto him, I
know that Messias cometh, which is called Christ: when he is come he
will tell us all things. Jesus saith unto her, I that speak unto thee am
he."[21]
These acknowledgments by Jesus that he was the Messiah are important,
for if he claimed divinity when he was merely mortal, either under false
pretences or being self-deceived, he made a mistake of the most serious
character. His claim was not recognized by his own people, and many of
his followers today deny that he was the Jewish Messiah. Jesus said that
he came from God to save the Jews. Either he was truly the predicted
Messiah or he made an inexcusable error. In this as in other instances
to be cited, Fundamentalists will not admit any mistake, for they
believe in the supernatural events connected with the Son of God. But
Modernists, who reject the anointed Christ while clinging to the human
Jesus, may be at a loss to reconcile Jesus' claim to Messiahship with
their rejection of his divinity.
Jesus stressed his mission to save the world, saying "For God so loved
the world, that he gave his only begotten Son, that whosoever believeth
in him should not perish, but have everlasting life."[22]
_Eternal Damnation_
Whether Jesus was mistaken or not in his estimate of his close
relationship with God is for each person to decide; but his theory of
the disasters that would follow unbelief in his divinity leads to
serious difficulties if accepted literally. For not only was Jesus in
error when he insisted that salvation depended upon belief, he was also
reconciled to eternal suffering for unbelievers. Note some of his
expressions:
"If ye believe not that I am he, ye shall die in your sins."[23] "Depart
from me, ye cursed, into everlasting fire, prepared for the devil and
his angels ... And these shall go away into everlasting punishment: but
the righteous into life eternal."[24]
"Whosoever shall blaspheme against the Holy Ghost hath never
forgiveness, but is in danger of eternal damnation."[25]
"Except ye repent ye shall perish."[26]
"If thy hand offend thee, cut it off: it is better for thee to enter
into life maimed, than having two hands to go into hell, into the fire
that never shall be quenched."[27]
"How can ye escape the damnation of hell?"[28]
"He that believeth and is baptized shall be saved, but he that believeth
not shall be damned."[29]
It is evident from these quotations that Jesus not only preached belief
in his divinity as essential to salvation, but endeavored to terrify
people into belief by threats of eternal torment. Jesus was responsible
for the theological conception of a fiery hell. If he was mistaken, if
there never was a place of torment for the wicked after death, is it not
an act of constructive criticism to expose the person most responsible
for the false doctrine that has caused so much fear and mental
suffering? Must we not deplore this mistake of Jesus and recast our
entire opinion of him as a religious teacher?
Are we not justified in stating positively that Jesus made a mistake
when he taught a physical hell and condemned people to spend eternity in
torment for the doubtful sin of disbelief?
_The Atonement_
The doctrine of the Atonement was taught by Jesus. "For this is my blood
of the new testament, which is shed for many for the remission of
sins."[30]
Whether this sacrifice of the innocent Jesus to save sinful man was
ordered by God or was voluntary on the part of Jesus, it represents a
theory of reprieve from punishment long since abandoned as unethical. If
sin must be punished, there is no justice in relieving the sinner and
placing the burden upon the righteous.
Moreover, the Atonement appears to have been ineffective, for in spite
of the sacrifice that Jesus made, few were to be saved under his scheme
of salvation. "Many are called but few are chosen."[31] "Strait is the
gate, and narrow is the way, which leadeth unto life, and few there be
that find it."[32] "Strive to enter in at the strait gate: for many, I
say unto you, will seek to enter in, and shall not be able."[33]
If the theory of Atonement for sin by the sacrifice of the innocent was
not ethical and if Jesus taught that doctrine, he was in error, was he
not?
The sacrifice of Jesus was not so great as often made by men. Jesus was
sustained with the thought that he was saving the world; his physical
suffering was not long continued; on the night of his crucifixion he was
in paradise.[34] He endured a few hours of pain compared to weeks of
suffering by wounded soldiers, or years spent in prison by the
proponents of an ideal.
Jesus not only claimed the power to remit sins but also said to his
disciples: "Whosoever sins ye remit, they are remitted unto them; and
whosoever sins ye retain, they are retained."[35]
Is that true? Surely it is proper to ask that blunt question. Here is a
definite statement concerning the power of certain men to remit sins. If
those men did not have the power deputed to them, must we not doubt the
accuracy of Jesus?
Jesus made a distinction between himself and the Comforter: "It is
expedient for you that I go away: for if I go not away, the Comforter
will not come unto you; but if I depart I will send him unto you ... And
I will pray the Father, and he shall give you another Comforter, that he
may abide with you forever."[36]
It must surprise some Christians that the Comforter could not be present
at the same time with Jesus.
_Angels and Devils_
Jesus believed in angels and devils, often referring to these imaginary
supernatural beings as if they existed. "Thinkest thou that I cannot now
pray to my Father and he shall presently give me more than twelve
legions of angels?"[37] "So shall it be at the end of the world: the
angels shall come forth."[38]
The devils were among the first to recognize Christ's divinity: "What
have we to do with thee, Jesus, thou Son of God?"[39] "Let us alone,
thou Jesus of Nazareth; art thou come to destroy us? I know thee, who
thou art, the Holy One of God."[40] "And unclean spirits when they saw
him, fell down before him, and cried, saying, Thou art the Son of
God."[41]
Jesus believed in demoniacal possession, casting out devils on several
occasions.
Jesus frequently referred to heaven as a place above the earth: "And
then shall they see the Son of man coming in the clouds with great power
and glory."[42] "And ye shall see the Son of man sitting on the right
hand of power, and coming in the clouds of heaven."[43] "Verily, verily,
I say unto you, hereafter ye shall see heaven open, and the angels of
God ascending and descending on the Son of man."[44]
When Jesus was transfigured and talked with Moses and Elias, he charged
his disciples, saying, "Tell the vision to no man, until the Son of man
be risen again from the dead."[45]
According to the creeds based upon the Bible, Jesus rose from the dead,
descended into hell, and ascended bodily into heaven. According to the
gospels he stilled the storm, walked on the water and told Peter to do
so and to find money in a fish's mouth and catch a large draught of
fishes. These and other miracles connected Jesus with God and were part
of his theology.
Every fair-minded person should re-read the gospels and refresh his
memory regarding the theology of Jesus. Then a decision must be reached
as to the correctness of the views expressed. Either conditions on earth
were different in the first century from those of the twentieth, or
Jesus was mistaken in his conception of God, heaven, hell, angels,
devils and himself.