essays on jesus

• Games & Quizzes
• History & Society
• Science & Tech
• Biographies
• Animals & Nature
• Geography & Travel
• Arts & Culture
• On This Day
• One Good Fact
• New Articles
• Lifestyles & Social Issues
• Philosophy & Religion
• Politics, Law & Government
• World History
• Health & Medicine
• Browse Biographies
• Birds, Reptiles & Other Vertebrates
• Bugs, Mollusks & Other Invertebrates
• Environment
• Fossils & Geologic Time
• Entertainment & Pop Culture
• Sports & Recreation
• Visual Arts
• Demystified
• Image Galleries
• Infographics
• Top Questions
• Britannica Kids
• Saving Earth
• Space Next 50
• Student Center
• Introduction

Name and title

Summary of jesus’ life.

• The political situation
• Relations between Jewish areas and nearby Gentile areas
• Economic conditions
• The Jewish religion in the 1st century
• Sources for the life of Jesus
• The context of Jesus’ career
• The kingdom of God
• Inclusion in the kingdom
• The relation of Jesus’ teaching to the Jewish law
• Crowds and autonomy
• Scribes and Pharisees
• Jesus’ last week
• The Resurrection
• Jesus Christ
• God’s only Son
• Conceived by the Holy Spirit, born of the Virgin Mary
• Suffered under Pontius Pilate, was crucified, died, and was buried
• He descended into hell
• The third day he rose again from the dead
• He ascended into heaven, and sits at the right hand of God the Father almighty
• From thence he shall come to judge the living and the dead
• Early heresies
• Constantinople
• The parties
• The settlement at Chalcedon
• The medieval development
• The Reformation and classical Protestantism
• Origins of the debate
• The 19th century
• The 20th century and beyond

• Who was St. Peter?
• How did St. Peter die?
• What is St. Peter the patron saint of?

Our editors will review what you’ve submitted and determine whether to revise the article.

• McClintock and Strong Biblical Cyclopedia - Jesus Christ
• LiveScience - Who was Jesus Christ?
• JewishEncyclopedia.com - Jesus of Nazareth
• Jewish Virtual Library - Jesus
• Ancient Origins - Tammuz and Jesus: More Than a Distant Connection?
• World History Encyclopedia - Jesus Christ
• Royal Society of Chemistry - Nickel
• Jesus Christ - Children's Encyclopedia (Ages 8-11)
• Jesus Christ - Student Encyclopedia (Ages 11 and up)
• Table Of Contents

Recent News

Jesus (born c. 6–4 bce , Bethlehem—died c. 30 ce , Jerusalem) was a religious leader revered in Christianity , one of the world’s major religions . He is regarded by most Christians as the Incarnation of God. The history of Christian reflection on the teachings and nature of Jesus is examined in the article Christology .

Ancient Jews usually had only one name, and, when greater specificity was needed, it was customary to add the father’s name or the place of origin. Thus, in his lifetime Jesus was called Jesus son of Joseph (Luke 4:22; John 1:45, 6:42), Jesus of Nazareth (Acts 10:38), or Jesus the Nazarene (Mark 1:24; Luke 24:19). After his death he came to be called Jesus Christ. Christ was not originally a name but a title derived from the Greek word christos , which translates the Hebrew term meshiah ( Messiah ), meaning “the anointed one.” This title indicates that Jesus’ followers believed him to be the anointed son of King David , whom some Jews expected to restore the fortunes of Israel . Passages such as Acts of the Apostles 2:36 show that some early Christian writers knew that the Christ was properly a title, but in many passages of the New Testament , including those in the letters of the Apostle Paul , the name and title are combined and used together as Jesus’ name: Jesus Christ or Christ Jesus ( Romans 1:1; 3:24). Paul sometimes simply used Christ as Jesus’ name (e.g., Romans 5:6).

Although born in Bethlehem , according to Matthew and Luke , Jesus was a Galilean from Nazareth , a village near Sepphoris, one of the two major cities of Galilee ( Tiberias was the other). He was born to Joseph and Mary sometime between 6 bce and shortly before the death of Herod the Great (Matthew 2; Luke 1:5) in 4 bce . According to Matthew and Luke, however, Joseph was only legally his father. They report that Mary was a virgin when Jesus was conceived and that she “was found to be with child from the Holy Spirit ” (Matthew 1:18; cf. Luke 1:35). Joseph is said to have been a carpenter (Matthew 13:55)—that is, a craftsman who worked with his hands—and, according to Mark 6:3, Jesus also became a carpenter.

Luke (2:41–52) states that Jesus as a youth was precociously learned, but there is no other evidence of his childhood or early life. As a young adult, he went to be baptized by the prophet John the Baptist and shortly thereafter became an itinerant preacher and healer (Mark 1:2–28). In his mid-30s Jesus had a short public career, lasting perhaps less than one year, during which he attracted considerable attention. Sometime between 29 and 33 ce —possibly 30 ce —he went to observe Passover in Jerusalem , where his entrance, according to the Gospels , was triumphant and infused with eschatological significance. While there he was arrested, tried, and executed. His disciples became convinced that he rose from the dead and appeared to them. They converted others to belief in him, which eventually led to a new religion , Christianity.

• Christian Books & Bibles
• Bible Study & Reference

Sorry, there was a problem.

Download the free Kindle app and start reading Kindle books instantly on your smartphone, tablet, or computer - no Kindle device required .

Read instantly on your browser with Kindle for Web.

Using your mobile phone camera - scan the code below and download the Kindle app.

Image Unavailable

• To view this video download Flash Player

Follow the author

Interpreting Jesus: Essays on the Gospels (Collected Essays of N. T. Wright) Hardcover – July 14, 2020

Draws together the most important articles on Jesus and the gospels by distinguished scholar and author N. T. Wright.

Interpreting Jesus puts into one volume the development of Wright's thought on this subject over the last three decades. It collects the essays—written for a wide variety of publications—that led up to his groundbreaking book Jesus and the Victory of God , and it includes such wide-ranging themes as:

• The Biblical Roots of Trinitarian Theology
• The History, Eschatology, and New Creation in John's Gospel
• The Evangelists' Use of the Old Testament as an Implicit Overarching Narrative
• And The Public Meaning of the Gospels

Interpreting Jesus displays Wright's engaging prose, his courage to go where few have gone, and his joy to bridge the work of the academy and the church.

Here is a rich feast for any serious student of the Bible, especially of the New Testament. Detailed, incisive, and exquisitely nuanced exegesis, this collection will reward you with a clearer, deeper, and more informed appreciation of the recent advances in Jesus studies, and their significance for theology today.

Many of the included studies have never been published or were made available only in hard-to-find larger volumes and journals.

• Book 2 of 3 Collected Essays of N. T. Wright
• Print length 368 pages
• Language English
• Publisher Zondervan Academic
• Publication date July 14, 2020
• Dimensions 6.25 x 1.1 x 9.25 inches
• ISBN-10 0310098645
• ISBN-13 978-0310098645
• See all details

From the brand

Scroll right for more.

Shop Zondervan Academic

Visit the Store

New Releases

Zondervan Academic serves the needs of Christian scholars, pastors, and students. Since 1931, we have been privileged to partner with the scholarly community to develop Christ-honoring resources in service of the academy and the church worldwide.

Together we produce works in various areas of biblical-theological studies that exhibit faithfulness to historic Christian faith, cultural relevance, excellence, and innovation.

From the Publisher

Praise for the Collected Essays of N.T. Wright

“Just when I wondered what N. T. Wright might write next we get a 3 volume circus of revolving themes and perspectives and worldviews that illustrate why Wright is the most influential biblical scholar in the English-speaking world: Wright is one of the few who shapes conversations in both Gospels studies and Pauline studies. These essays bring to the front Wright's engaging prose, his undeniable courage to go where few have gone, and his joy to bridge the work of the academy and the church. Another treasure trove of studies.”

—Rev. Canon Dr. Scot McKnight, Professor of New Testament, Northern Seminary

“N. T. Wright’s collection of essays on Jesus, Paul, and Scripture are a brilliant trilogy of Wright’s miscellaneous works. It is not only convenient to have them all together in one literary deposit, but they deserve reading as Wright waxes eloquently and with wisdom about who is Jesus, why is Paul so controversial, the atonement, the church, and how the Bible is authoritative today. An important part of the Wrightonian corpus for present and future generations or for anyone who wrestles with Jesus, Paul, God, and Scripture."

—Rev. Dr. Michael F. Bird, Academic Dean and Lecturer in Theology, Ridley College, Melbourne, Australia

“Few, if any, modern biblical scholars have written with the depth and breadth of N. T. Wright. These essays, from a wide variety of settings and publications, are full of treasures, old and new—even some modifications of earlier positions. They will delight Wright enthusiasts, challenge his critics, and educate all readers. No biblical scholar, theologian, or theological student should be ignorant of the most recent Wright perspectives on so many aspects of Scripture, Jesus, and Paul.”

—Michael J. Gorman, Raymond E. Brown Chair in Biblical Studies and Theology, St. Mary’s Seminary & University, Baltimore

“A trilogy of N. T. Wright’s seminal essays on Scripture and hermeneutics, Jesus and the Gospels, and Paul and his Letters with a number of brand-new contributions thrown in for good measure? Count me in! For roughly three decades now, Wright’s voice has been among the most valuable and valued by both the church and the academy. Rightly so! This three-volume collection—which will prove to be a treasure trove for serious students as well as for scholars of Bible, history, and theology—reveals why time and again.”

— Todd D. Still, Charles J. and Eleanor McLerran DeLancey Dean & William M. Hinson Professor of Christian Scriptures, Baylor University, Truett Seminary

All essays are preceded by brief reflections written by N. T. Wright; these reflections serve to contextualize the writing of each essay and to highlight their place and significance within Wright’s voluminous corpus.

Get the Complete Set:

• Interpreting Scripture
• Interpreting Paul
• Interpreting Jesus

COLLECTED ESSAYS OF N.T. WRIGHT

N. T. WRIGHT has been called the most prolific biblical scholar in a generation, perhaps the most important apologist for the Christian faith since C. S. Lewis. Interpreting Jesus brings together his most important articles on Jesus and the Gospels over the last three decades. Many of the included studies have never been published or are only available in hard-to-find larger volumes and journals.

Each essay will amply reward those looking for:

• Detailed, incisive, and exquisitely nuanced exegesis
• A clearer and deeper understanding of Scripture
• A more informed appreciation of Scripture's application to Christian life and thought

You may also enjoy these books by N.T. Wright:

Editorial Reviews

About the author.

N. T. Wright is the former bishop of Durham and senior research fellow at Wycliffe Hall, Oxford University. He is one of the world’s leading New Testament scholars and the award-winning author of many books, including? After You Believe ,? Surprised by Hope ,? Simply Christian ,? Interpreting Paul , and? The New Testament in Its World , as well as the Christian Origins and the Question of God series.

Product details

• Publisher ‏ : ‎ Zondervan Academic (July 14, 2020)
• Language ‏ : ‎ English
• Hardcover ‏ : ‎ 368 pages
• ISBN-10 ‏ : ‎ 0310098645
• ISBN-13 ‏ : ‎ 978-0310098645
• Item Weight ‏ : ‎ 1.4 pounds
• Dimensions ‏ : ‎ 6.25 x 1.1 x 9.25 inches
• #2,486 in New Testament Criticism & Interpretation
• #6,412 in History of Christianity (Books)
• #8,082 in Christian Church History (Books)

About the author

N. t. wright.

N.T. WRIGHT is the former Bishop of Durham in the Church of England and one of the world’s leading Bible scholars. He is now serving as the Chair of New Testament and Early Christianity at the School of Divinity at the University of St. Andrews. For twenty years he taught New Testament studies at Cambridge, McGill and Oxford Universities. As being both one of the world’s leading Bible scholars and a popular author, he has been featured on ABC News, Dateline, The Colbert Report, and Fresh Air. His award-winning books include The Case for the Psalms, How God Became King, Simply Jesus, After You Believe, Surprised by Hope, Simply Christian, Scripture and the Authority of God, The Meaning of Jesus (co-authored with Marcus Borg), as well as being the translator for The Kingdom New Testament. He also wrote the impressive Christian Origins and the Question of God series, including The New Testament and the People of God, Jesus and the Victory of God, The Resurrection of the Son of God and most recently, Paul and the Faithfulness of God.

Customer reviews

Our goal is to make sure every review is trustworthy and useful. That's why we use both technology and human investigators to block fake reviews before customers ever see them.  Learn more

We block Amazon accounts that violate our community guidelines. We also block sellers who buy reviews and take legal actions against parties who provide these reviews.  Learn how to report

No customer reviews

• About Amazon
• Investor Relations
• Amazon Devices
• Amazon Science
• Sell products on Amazon
• Sell on Amazon Business
• Sell apps on Amazon
• Become an Affiliate
• Advertise Your Products
• Self-Publish with Us
• Host an Amazon Hub
• › See More Make Money with Us
• Amazon Business Card
• Shop with Points
• Reload Your Balance
• Amazon Currency Converter
• Amazon and COVID-19
• Your Account
• Your Orders
• Shipping Rates & Policies
• Returns & Replacements
• Manage Your Content and Devices

• Conditions of Use
• Privacy Notice
• Consumer Health Data Privacy Disclosure
• Your Ads Privacy Choices

Photo by Larry Towell/Magnum

There was no Jesus

How could a cult leader draw crowds, inspire devotion and die by crucifixion, yet leave no mark in contemporary records.

by Gavin Evans   + BIO

Most New Testament scholars agree that some 2,000 years ago a peripatetic Jewish preacher from Galilee was executed by the Romans, after a year or more of telling his followers about this world and the world to come. Most scholars – though not all.

But let’s stick with the mainstream for now: the Bible historians who harbour no doubt that the sandals of Yeshua ben Yosef really did leave imprints between Nazareth and Jerusalem early in the common era. They divide loosely into three groups, the largest of which includes Christian theologians who conflate the Jesus of faith with the historical figure, which usually means they accept the virgin birth, the miracles and the resurrection; although a few, such as Simon Gathercole, a professor at the University of Cambridge and a conservative evangelical, grapple seriously with the historical evidence.

Next are the liberal Christians who separate faith from history, and are prepared to go wherever the evidence leads, even if it contradicts traditional belief. Their most vocal representative is John Barton, an Anglican clergyman and Oxford scholar, who accepts that most Bible books were written by multiple authors, often over centuries, and that they diverge from history.

A third group, with views not far from Barton’s, are secular scholars who dismiss the miracle-rich parts of the New Testament while accepting that Jesus was, nonetheless, a figure rooted in history: the gospels, they contend, offer evidence of the main thrusts of his preaching life. A number of this group, including their most prolific member, Bart Ehrman, a Biblical historian at the University of North Carolina, are atheists who emerged from evangelical Christianity. In the spirit of full declaration, I should add that my own vantage point is similar to Ehrman’s: I was raised in an evangelical Christian family, the son of a ‘born-again’, tongues-talking, Jewish-born, Anglican bishop; but, from the age of 17, I came to doubt all that I once believed. Though I remained fascinated by the Abrahamic religions, my interest in them was not enough to prevent my drifting, via agnosticism, into atheism.

There is also a smaller, fourth group who threaten the largely peaceable disagreements between atheists, deists and more orthodox Christians by insisting that evidence for a historical Jesus is so flimsy as to cast doubt on his earthly existence altogether. This group – which includes its share of lapsed Christians – suggests that Jesus may have been a mythological figure who, like Romulus, of Roman legend, was later historicised.

But what is the evidence for Jesus’ existence? And how robust is it by the standards historians might deploy – which is to say: how much of the gospel story can be relied upon as truth? The answers have enormous implications, not just for the Catholic Church and for faith-obsessed countries like the United States, but for billions of individuals who grew up with the comforting picture of a loving Jesus in their hearts. Even for people like me, who dispensed with the God-soul-heaven-hell bits, the idea that this figure of childhood devotion might not have existed or, if he did, that we might know very little indeed about him, takes some swallowing. It involves a traumatic loss – which perhaps explains why the debate is so fraught, even among secular scholars.

Secondo Pia’s photograph of the Shroud of Turin (May 1898), digital print from the Musée de l’Élysée, Lausanne. Courtesy Wikipedia

When I’ve discussed this essay with people raised as atheists or in other faiths, the question invariably asked goes something like this: why is it so important for Christians that Jesus lived on earth? What is at stake here is the unique aspect of their faith – the thing that sets it apart. For more than 1,900 years, Christianity has maintained the conviction that God sent his son to earth to suffer a hideous crucifixion to save us from our sins and give us everlasting life. Jesus’ earthbound birth, life and particularly his death, which ushered in redemption, are the very foundation of their faith. These views are so deeply entrenched that, even for those who have loosened the grip of belief, the idea that he might not have been ‘real’ is hard to stomach.

Y ou’d think that a cult leader who drew crowds, inspired devoted followers and was executed on the order of a Roman governor would leave some indentation in contemporary records. The emperors Vespasian and Titus and the historians Seneca the Elder and the Younger wrote a good deal about 1st-century Judea without ever mentioning Jesus. That could mean simply that he was less significant an actor than the Bible would have us think. But, despite the volume of records that survive from that time, there is also no death reference (as there was, say, for the 6,000 slaves loyal to Spartacus who were crucified along the Appian Way in 71 BCE), and no mention in any surviving official report, private letter, poetry or play.

Compare this with Socrates, for example. Though none of the thoughts attributed to him survive in written form, still we know that he lived (470- 399 BCE) because several of his pupils and contemporary critics wrote books and plays about him. But with Jesus there is silence from those who might have seen him in the flesh – which is awkward for historicists like Ehrman; ‘odd as it may seem,’ he wrote in 1999, ‘[i]n none of this vast array of surviving writings is Jesus’ name ever so much as mentioned.’ In fact, there are just three sources of putative proof of life – all of them posthumous: the gospels, the letters of Paul, and historical evidence from beyond the Bible.

Christian historians base their claims for a historical Jesus on the thinnest mentions of early Christians by the Roman politicians Pliny the Younger and Tacitus (who write of Christians they interviewed early in the 2nd century – in Pliny’s case, a tortured female deacon – all followers of ‘The Way’ who talked about Jesus) and by Flavius Josephus, a Romanised Jewish historian. Josephus’s 20-volume Antiquities of the Jews , written around 94 CE, during the reign of Domitian, contains two references to Jesus, including one claiming that he was the Messiah crucified by Pontius Pilate. This would carry some weight if Josephus actually wrote it; but the experts, including evangelicals like Gathercole, agree this reference was likely forged by the 4th-century Christian polemicist Eusebius. The other reference is to ‘the brother of Jesus, who was called Christ, whose name was James’. Some scholars say the ‘called Christ’ bit was a later addition, but it hardly matters when Josephus was drawing from stories told by Christians more than six decades after Jesus’ assumed crucifixion.

If the crucifixion was prophesied, then how can it have been embarrassing?

The earliest evidence testifying to a historical figure comes not from contemporary records, but from the letters of Paul, which date broadly from 50 to 58 CE (of the 14 letters originally attributed to Paul, only half are now thought to be mainly his writing, with the rest thought to be written sometime in the 2nd century) . The problem with Paul for proof-seekers is how little he says about Jesus. If Jesus lived and died in Paul’s lifetime, you might expect he’d refer to Jesus’ ministry on earth – to his parables, sermons and prayers – and that his readers would want this crucial life story. But Paul offers nothing on the living Jesus, such as the stories or sayings that later appear in the gospels, and he provides no information from human sources, referring only to visionary communication with Jesus and to messianic Old Testament quotes.

Which brings us to the gospels, written later, and not by those whose names they bear (these were added in the 2nd and 3rd centuries). The gospel of Mark, which borrows from Paul, came first and set the template for the gospels that followed (Matthew draws from 600 of Mark’s 661 verses, while 65 per cent of Luke is drawn from Mark and Matthew . ) The first version of Mark is dated between 53 CE and around 70 CE, when the Second Temple was destroyed, an event it mentions. The last gospel, John, which has a different theology and stories that contradict those of the three ‘synoptic’ gospels, is dated at around 100 CE. All four gospels include sections written in the 2nd century (among them, two different virgin birth narratives in Matthew and Luke), and some scholars place the final 12 verses of Mark in the 3rd century. Several historians assume that Matthew and Luke had an earlier source they call Q. However, Q has never been found and there are no references to it elsewhere. Barton suggests that a belief in Q may serve a ‘conservative religious agenda’ because to say these gospels drew from an earlier source ‘is an implicit denial that they made any of it up themselves’.

Taken together, what can the gospels tell us about the historical Jesus? Secular scholars agree that much of their content is fictional, and note, as Ehrman puts it, that ‘these voices are often at odds with one another, contradicting one another in minute details and in major issues’. And yet Ehrman is convinced that Jesus existed; he contends that the gospel writers heard reports about Jesus and ‘decided to write their own versions’. A few basic facts, like the dates of Jesus’ birth and death (gleaned from their mention of various rulers), are widely accepted, and several of Jesus’ sayings are said to be close to his real words. To separate the factual wheat from the fictional chaff, they employ ‘criteria of authenticity’ – stories and words that ring true. The three main criteria are: embarrassment (are those details out of step with 1st-century Judaism and, if so, why would the gospel writers invent things that would cause problems?); multiple attestation (the more sources, the better); and coherence (are details consistent with what we know?)

However, there is good reason to interrogate this approach. With regard to the criteria of multiple attestation and coherence, we know the gospel writers borrowed from each other, so we’d expect them to include the same stuff. The gospel of Luke, for instance, borrowed Matthew’s ‘consider the lilies of the field’ speech, but if Matthew’s tale is fabricated, Luke’s repetition hardly adds credibility. In addition, the ‘embarrassment criterion’ relies on our knowing what went against the grain. But the Church was diverse when the gospels were written and we can’t be sure what might have embarrassed their authors . It’s often argued, for example, that the gospel writers went to such great lengths to show that the crucifixion was predicted in the Hebrew scriptures in order to make it palatable to an audience convinced that no true messiah could be thus humiliated. But this argument can be turned on its head if we accept that the crucifixion tale was included because the gospel writers – pace Paul – believed it was required to fulfil prophesy. If the crucifixion was prophesied, then how can it have been embarrassing?

On the subject of the crucifixion, it’s worth noting that, while the four accepted gospels have Jesus sentenced to death by Pontius Pilate, in the non-canonical gospel of Peter it is Herod Antipas who does the deed. The gospel of Thomas, meanwhile, makes no mention of Jesus’ death, resurrection or divinity at all. According to the 4th-century theologian Epiphanius, the Torah-observant Nazorean Christians (thought to have descended from the first group of believers), held that Jesus lived and died during the reign of King Alexander Jannaeus (10- 76 BCE) – a century before Pontius Pilate. And the Babylonian Talmud agrees, claiming that Jesus was executed by stoning and ‘hanging’ in the town of Lydda (not Jerusalem) for ‘immorality, sorcery and worshipping idols’. So, even when the ‘criteria of authenticity’ are met, historical consensus is hard to establish.

T he most concerted effort to separate fact from fiction started in 1985 when a group of mainly secular scholars were drawn together by the lapsed Catholic theologian Bob Funk. Funk’s ‘Jesus Seminar’ met twice a year for 20 years to ‘search for the historical Jesus’. At its launch, Funk said the group would enquire ‘simply, rigorously after the voice of Jesus, after what he really said.’ These scholars (eventually numbering more than 200) used the ‘criteria of authenticity’ to assess the deeds and words of Jesus as reported in the gospels. Many seminars later, following much debate, they concluded that Jesus was an iconoclastic Hellenistic Jewish preacher who told stories in parables and spoke out against injustice; that he had two earthly parents; and that he did not perform miracles, die for people’s sins or rise from the dead. The veracity of his sayings and deeds was decided by a group vote. Scholars were invited to place plastic beads in a box: red (three points) if Jesus said it; pink (two points) if he probably said it; grey (one point) if he didn’t, but it reflected his ideas; black (zero) if invented. When tallied, there were black or grey beads for 82 per cent of Jesus’ Biblical sayings, and 84 per cent of his deeds.

Such methods are regarded as quaint, at best, by scholars researching non-Biblical historical figures. One of those I canvassed was Catharine Edwards, professor of classics and ancient history at Birkbeck, University of London, who said that some historians of the ancient world tend towards scepticism – ‘for example, we can’t really know anything about the earliest stage of Roman history beyond what is gleaned from archaeological evidence’ – while others tend towards ‘extreme credibility’. But, even among those, ‘criteria of authenticity’ are not a familiar tool. She added that the coloured-beads approach ‘sounds naive and on the credulous end of the spectrum where scholars make assumptions about the character of a particular ancient individual and on that basis decide what they think he (invariably) may or may not have said.’

Hugh Bowden, professor of ancient history at King’s College London, said that there was more evidence for the existence of Socrates and Pericles than for Jesus, but ‘much less hangs on it’. The focus on the historicity of Jesus has ‘no real equivalent in other fields, because it is rooted in confessional preconceptions (early Christianity matters because modern Christianity matters) even when scholars claim to be unaffected by personal religious views. Historians in other fields would not find the question very important.’

The sceptics believe that Jesus was a mythical figure who was subsequently historicised

If we remove those preconceptions, it seems commonsensical to apply caution to the historicity of the gospels and let doubt lead our interrogations. The first gospel, Mark, was begun nearly half a century after Jesus’ ministry (and its final verses much later). Jesus’ Aramaic-speaking followers were probably illiterate, and there were no reporters taking notes. The likelihood of Jesus’ words being accurately reproduced by writers who’d never met him, and were elaborating on increasingly fanciful tales passed down through the decades, seems remote.

One scholar who was part of the Jesus Seminar and yet harboured such doubts, is Robert Price, a respected New Testament professor with a PhD in ‘Systematic Theology’, and a former Baptist pastor turned atheist. Price came to query the methodology used to establish historicity, prompting him to doubt whether Jesus ever lived. ‘If there ever was a historical Jesus there isn’t one anymore,’ he said, later writing: ‘There may have been a real figure there, but there is simply no longer any way of being sure.’

Price became the heavyweight figure for a fringe group of ‘Christ myth’ sceptics – historians who propose that early Christians, including Paul, believed in a celestial messiah and that he was placed in history by the gospel writers in the next generation. So, while most of the 200 believe Jesus was a historical figure mythologised by the gospel writers, the sceptics believe the opposite: he was a mythical figure who was subsequently historicised.

Such ideas have been around for centuries. Thomas Paine was an early adopter but it was the 19th-century German philosopher Bruno Bauer who advanced the theory most assiduously. Bauer, an atheist, recognised the gospel themes as literary rather than historical, arguing that Christianity had pagan roots and that Jesus was a mythical creation.

I n recent decades, it has become widely accepted by secular scholars that the Hebrew Bible (Old Testament) is more myth than history. In particular, the Israeli archaeologist Israel Finkelstein and his American colleague Neil Asher Silberman have written in The Bible Unearthed (2002) that none of the patriarchs, from Moses and Joshua backwards, existed as historical figures; that there was no record of Jews having been enslaved in Egypt (instead, they descended from the Canaanites); that David and Solomon were warlords rather than kings; and that the first temple was built three centuries after Solomon. But the view that the Christian Bible is similarly lacking in veracity has, until recently, been drowned out by those arguing for a flesh-and-blood Jesus. One reason for the consensual chorus may relate to the fact that tenured positions in departments dealing with Bible history tend not to be offered to those who doubt that Jesus was real. So the revival of the ‘doubters’ camp’ owes much to the internet, as well as to the missionary zeal of its key proponents.

Momentum began to gather in the 1990s with a series of books by Earl Doherty, a Canadian writer who became interested in scripture while studying ancient history and classical languages. Doherty claimed that Paul and other early Christian writers did not believe in Jesus as an earthly figure, but instead as a celestial being crucified by demons in the lower realms of heaven and then resurrected by God. His views (ironically, on the face of it, the most ostensibly religious, in being so thoroughly spiritualised) were rejected by historical Jesus scholars who claimed that Doherty lacked the academic nous to understand ancient texts. But the next wave, which included Price, was more firmly rooted in academia.

Price believes that early Christianity was influenced by Middle Eastern myths about dying and rising deities that survived into the Greek and Roman periods. One was a Sumerian legend, ‘The Descent of Inanna’, which tells of the queen of heaven who attends an underworld funeral only to get killed by demons and hung from a hook like a piece of meat. Three days later, however, she’s rescued, rises from the dead, and returns to the land of the living.

For ‘Christ myth’ scholars, the Jesus story fits the outlines of the mythic hero archetype

Another is the Egyptian myth of the murdered god-king Osiris. His wife, Isis, finds his body, restores it to life and, via a flash of lightning in one version, conceives his son, Horus, who succeeds him. Osiris goes on to rule over the dead. In Plutarch’s Greek version, Osiris is tricked to lie in a coffin, which floats out to sea before washing up at the city of Byblos. There, Isis removes Osiris’ body from a tree and brings it back to life.

Several Jewish texts in circulation at the time reinforced the messianic aspects of these narratives. For instance, 1 Enoch (a book written mainly in the 2nd century BCE, and particularly revered within the Essene community, thought to be responsible for the Dead Sea Scrolls) refers to the ‘Son of Man’ (a phrase used for Jesus in the gospels) whose name and identity will be kept secret to prevent evildoers from knowing of him until the appointed time.

The favourite ‘Christ myth’ source is the Ascension of Isaiah , written in bits and pieces in the 1st and 2nd centuries. It includes a section dealing with a journey through the seven heavens by a non-human Jesus who is crucified in a lower heaven by Satan and his demonic ‘archons’ who are the rulers of that realm and yet do not know who he is. Again, the story ends with Jesus rising from the dead.

‘Christ myth’ scholars believe that ancient tales of death and resurrection influenced the gospel writers, who also borrowed from Homer, Euripides and the Hebrew Bible. For them, the Jesus story fits the outlines of the mythic hero archetype of the time – a spiritual saviour killed by ‘archons’ before rising triumphant. They contend that later Christians rewrote Jesus as a historical figure who suffered at the hands of earthly rulers.

The rock star of scepticism is Richard Carrier, a Bible scholar with a very modern aptitude for using social media (some of his lengthy YouTube videos have attracted more than a million viewers). He enters into fervent debates with rivals, lectures, and writes acerbic, clinical and fact-laden books . With his PhD in ancient history from the University of Columbia and his record of publishing in academic journals, his credentials are less easily dismissed than Doherty’s. Ehrman, for instance, acknowledges Carrier and Price are serious New Testament scholars.

At one time, Carrier accepted the historicity of Jesus but he became contemptuous of the mainstream position because of what he saw as the parlous state of scholarship supporting it. He and the Australian Bible historian Raphael Lataster use Bayes’ theorem, which considers historical probabilities based on reasonable expectations (weighing up the evidence and attaching mathematical odds to it), to conclude that it is ‘probable’ that Jesus never existed as a historical person, although it is ‘plausible’ that he did.

T he ‘Jesus myth’ advocates get plenty of airplay, but the fringe label has stuck, and not just because religious studies departments freeze them out. Their own methodology has been criticised, not least their use of Bayesian methods. Bizarrely, Carrier offered odds to his readers, concluding that the likelihood of a real-life Jesus was no better than 33 per cent (and perhaps as low as 0.0008 per cent) depending on the estimates used for the computation, which illustrates the wooliness of this use of Bayes’ theorem.

Carrier and his comrades do a fine job poking holes in the methods of historicists but what they offer in exchange seems flimsy. In particular, they have found no clear evidence from the decades before the gospels to show that anyone believed Jesus was not human. Each reference in the epistles can be explained away as referring to a celestial saviour, but it all feels like a bit of a stretch. Paul frequently refers to the crucifixion and says Jesus was ‘born of a woman’ and ‘made from the sperm of David, according to the flesh’. He also refers to James, ‘the brother of Christ’. Using these examples, Ehrman says there’s ‘good evidence that Paul understood Jesus to be a historical figure’. Which was certainly the view of the writer/s of Mark, a gospel begun less than two decades after Paul’s letters were written.

Like the grain of sand that begat Robin Hood, the Jesus story developed fresh layers over time

If we accept this conclusion, but also accept that the gospels are unreliable biographies, then what we are left with is a dimly discernible historical husk. If Jesus did live at the time generally accepted (from 7- 3 BCE to 26- 30 CE) rather than a century earlier as some of the earliest Christians seemed to believe, then we might assume that he started life in Galilee, attracted a following as a preacher and was executed. Everything else is invention or uncertain. In other words, if Jesus did exist, we know next to nothing about him.

One way of looking at it is to think of a pearl, which starts as a grain of sand around which calcium carbonate layers form as an immune response to the irritant until the pearl no longer resembles the speck that started it. Many legends have developed in this way, from the tale of the blind bard Homer onwards.

The outlaw and thief Robert Hod was fined for failing to appear in court in York in 1225 and a year later he reappeared in the court record, still at large. This could be the grain of sand that begat Robin Hood, whom many people assumed to have been a historical figure whose legend grew over the centuries. Robin started as a forest yeoman but morphed into a nobleman. He was later inserted into 12th-century history with King Richard the Lionheart and Prince John (earlier versions had Edward I), along with his ever-expanding band of outlaws. By the 16th century, he and his Merry Men had mutated from lovable rascals to rebels with a cause who ‘tooke from rich to give the poor’.

The Jesus story likewise developed fresh layers over time. At the start of the common era, there may well have been several iconoclastic Jewish preachers, and one of them got up the noses of the Romans, who killed him. Soon his legend grew. New attributes and views were ascribed to him until, eventually, he became the heroic figure of the Messiah and son of God with his band of 12 not-so-merry men. The original grain of sand is less significant than most assume. The interesting bit is how it grew.

The disruption nexus

Moments of crisis, such as our own, are great opportunities for historic change, but only under highly specific conditions

Roman Krznaric

What is intelligent life?

Our human minds hold us back from truly understanding the many brilliant ways that other creatures solve their problems

Abigail Desmond & Michael Haslam

Pleasure and pain

Eulogy for silence

Tinnitus is like a constant scream inside my head, depriving me of what I formerly treasured: the moments of serene quiet

Diego Ramírez Martín del Campo

Beauty and aesthetics

All aquiver

The Decadent movement taught that you should live your life with the greatest intensity – a dangerous and thrilling challenge

Economic history

Economics 101

Why introductory economics courses continued to teach zombie ideas from before economics became an empirical discipline

Walter Frick

Sports and games

Performance-enhancing vices

Selfishness channels ambition, envy drives competition, pride aids the win. Does it take a bad person to be a good athlete?

Sabrina Little

Search Journey with Jesus Website

Translate journey with jesus website.

• Every Human Heart

Lectionary essay for the June 23, 2024 RCL

TITLE: Every Human Heart

Images and descriptions for the lectionary essay: (1) Alexander Solzhenitsyn (1918-2008) https://www.britannica.com/biography/Aleksandr-Solzhenitsyn   (2) Martin Niemöller (1892-1984)  https://www.die-tagespost.de/leben/aus-aller-welt/martin-niemoeller-bekennder-christ-und-hitler-gegner-art-248684  

Image for upper left module:  https://www.britannica.com/biography/Aleksandr-Solzhenitsyn

Poem for upper right module: The Place Where We Are Right ,  https://www.journeywithjesus.net/poemsandprayers/454-yehuda-amichai-the-place-where-we-are-right

Image for upper right module:  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Yehuda_Amichai#/media/File :עמיחי_קורא_בתמול.jpg

Teaser text for upper right module: Yehuda Amichai (1924-2000) is considered by many, both in Israel and internationally, to have been Israel's greatest modern poet. His work has been translated into 40 languages.

Weekly Prayer  at end of essay: The Peace Prayer of St. Francis ,  https://www.journeywithjesus.net/poemsandprayers/554-saint-francis-of-assisi

1 Samuel 17:1a, 4-11, 19-23, 32-49 Psalm 9:9-20 2 Corinthians 6:1-13 Mark 4:35-41

From Our Archives

Debie Thomas, Don't You Care? (2021);  Debie Thomas, Crossing to the Other Side (2018) ; and Debie Thomas, Listening for the Questions (2015).

For Sunday June 23, 2024

Lectionary Readings ( Revised Common Lectionary , Year B)

This Week's Essay

2 Corinthians 6: 11, "Our heart is opened wide."

It's been said that we want our heroes without blemishes and our villains without redemption. Consider, for example, the bitter rhetoric that justifies the Israeli-Palestinian violence. From such a perspective, there's a binary world of black and white, friends and enemies, the godless and the godly, the innocent and the guilty. In this worldview there is no room for gray. This is the sort of world that's described in two of the readings for this week.

Those of us who went to Sunday School remember flannel graph stories about David and Goliath in 1 Samuel 17. David was the youngest of Jesse's eight sons, relegated to errand boy status, while his older brothers battled the Philistines as manly warriors. Twice the writer describes David as "only a boy." He was "ruddy and handsome." When his brothers berated him, he responded plaintively, "Can't I even speak?" Saul's armor was so big on him that he couldn't move. Then there was his famous slingshot that he wielded — whap! — to slay the nine-foot Goliath who had "defied the armies of the living God." The moral of this Sunday School version was that God uses insignificant people and unlikely means to accomplish improbable feats.

But this sanitized version omits a horrifying detail. David "took hold of the Philistine's sword and drew it from the scabbard. After he killed him, he cut off his head with the sword" (17:51). David then displayed Goliath's head in Jerusalem, brandished it before King Saul, and kept his sword in his tent as a sort of totem. By decapitating Goliath, David wanted to "show the whole world that there is a God in Israel. All those gathered here will know that it is not by the sword or spear that the Lord saves; for the battle is the Lord's, and he will give all of you into our hands" (17:46–47).

David's God will have you beheaded. The purpose of decapitation is to humiliate, traumatize, and terrorize your enemy. It is also what Daniel Benjamin and Steven Simon call a "public sacrament," a "way of making the violence holy." It is "an act redolent with the sense of sacrifice and the literal execution of God's law, which to the jihadist means death for infidels and apostates." Decapitation epitomizes the black and white world with its bold line between good and evil, with God most certainly on your side of the line.

David the warrior is also David the poet of Psalm 9 for this week. The experts might quibble, but I would call Psalm 9 an imprecatory psalm. David calls down curses, judgment and calamity on his evil enemies. He hopes that they perish and are destroyed, and that God will "blot out their name forever and ever." He wishes them "endless ruin." He longs for their cities to be destroyed, and the very memory of them to vanish. He reminds his enemies that "he who avenges blood remembers." David concludes his psalm, "Strike them with terror, O Lord!

As I grappled with these two terrifying texts this week, I thought of the words of Jesus: "You have heard that it was said, 'Love your neighbor and hate your enemy.' But I tell you, love your enemies and pray for those who persecute you, that you may be children of your father in heaven." These ancient historical descriptions need not be read as contemporary moral prescriptions. I also thought of two inspirational stories that urge us to move beyond the black and white world of divine vengeance for my enemies.

If anyone might justify divine judgment for unjust persecution, the Soviet dissident and Nobel laureate Alexander Solzhenitsyn (1918–2008) would be a good candidate. In 1945 he was sentenced to ten years of imprisonment and internal exile for criticizing Stalin in a private letter. The publication of his Gulag Archipelago in 1973 outraged the Soviet government for its exposure of the Soviet penal system. With 30 million copies sold in 35 languages,  Time magazine called it the most important book of the 20th century. Solzhenitsyn was stripped of his citizenship, and banished to twenty years of exile in Europe and Vermont.

But imprisonment and exile didn't embitter Solzhenitsyn. He even says that he was thankful for prison, because it gave him a deep insight into human nature. Instead of a binary world of black and white, he famously described what he learned: "If only it were so simple! If only it were true that there exist evil people insidiously committing evil deeds, whom it is necessary simply to separate out and destroy… When I lay there on rotting prison straw... it was disclosed to me that the line separating good and evil passes not through states, nor between classes, nor between political parties either — but right through every human heart — and through all human hearts. This line shifts. Inside us, it oscillates with the years. And even within hearts overwhelmed by evil, one small bridgehead of good is retained. And even in the best of all hearts, there remains… an un-uprooted small corner of evil."

Then there is the German Lutheran pastor Martin Niemöller (1892–1984). Matthew Hockenos wrote what he calls a "revisionist" biography of Niemöller precisely to remind us that even our greatest heroes are imperfect. The title of his book, Then They Came for Me; Martin Niemöller, The Pastor Who Defied the Nazis  (2018), comes from Niemöller's famous poetic confession, the exact origins of which remain a mystery:

First they came for the Communists, and I did not speak out – Because I was not a Communist. Then they came for the Trade Unionists, and I did not speak out – Because I was not a Trade Unionist. Then they came for the Jews, and I did not speak out – Because I was not a Jew. Then they came for me – and there was no one left to speak for me.

As Hockenos shows, by his own admission, and for a long time, resistance is exactly what Niemöller did not do. Whereas Solzhenitsyn was given an insight about human nature, Niemöller was badly mistaken about God's nature. 

Martin Niemöller was both deeply Christian and fervently nationalist. For him there was a connection between throne and altar, patriotism and spirituality. Serving in the navy for nearly ten years as a submarine commander in World War I fulfilled a childhood dream. After Germany's humiliating defeat, he detested the liberal, democratic Weimar Republic. He voted for Hitler and the Nazi Party twice (1924, 1933). He longed for the good old days of the traditional monarchy. Even when he was imprisoned he volunteered to rejoin the German military in World War II. And even though he spent eight years in prison as Hitler's "personal prisoner," that was only because he objected to Hitler's interference in the Lutheran church; he had little to say about his treatment of Jews, or his economic, domestic, or foreign policies.

Only around 1933 to 1934 did Niemöller begin to repudiate his ultranationalist and antisemitic views, and articulate his personal responsibility for not resisting more, along with the collective guilt of the entire nation for the Holocaust. And so two times in his biography Hockenos tells the story of how in 1945 Niemöller took his beloved wife Else back to Dachau to show her the cell where he had been imprisoned. Standing in front of the crematorium, they saw a simple plaque that read, "Here in the years 1933 to 1945, 238,756 people were cremated."

Niemöller later recalled that when he read the plaque, "a cold shudder ran down my spine." It wasn't just the number of people murdered that haunted him, it was the dates. Dachau opened in 1933. At that time Niemöller was a free man and a prominent pastor. "My alibi accounted for the years 1937 to 1945" [in prison], he said, "but God was not asking me where I had been from 1937 to 1945 but from 1933 to 1945… and for those [earlier years] I did not have an answer."

And yet Niemöller did change, even radically so, compared to his earlier self. In his later years the militant German nationalist became an ardent global pacifist. He traveled the world as an ecumenical ambassador. His message by that time was threefold: "the futility of war, the importance of church engagement in public affairs, and the need to build a worldwide Christian brotherhood."

"It look me a long time to learn," said Niemöller, "that God is not the enemy of my enemies. He's not even the enemy of his own enemies."

Weekly Prayer Saint Francis of Assisi (1182–1226) The Peace Prayer of Saint Francis Lord, make me an instrument of your peace. Where there is hatred, let me sow love; Where there is error, truth; Where there is injury, pardon; Where there is doubt, faith; Where there is despair, hope; Where there is darkness, light; And where there is sadness, joy. O Divine Master, grant that I may not so much seek To be consoled as to console; To be understood as to understand; To be loved as to love.  For it is in giving that we receive; It is in pardoning that we are pardoned; It is in self-forgetting that we find; And it is in dying to ourselves that we are born to eternal life. Amen. We do not know the author of this classic prayer, and it was not until the 1920s that it was even ascribed to Saint Francis.  By one account the prayer was found in 1915 in Normandy, written on the back of a card of Saint Francis.  But it certainly emulates his longing to be an instrument of peace, reconciliation and redemption in our fallen world.

Dan Clendenin: [email protected]

Image credits: (1)  Britannica  and (2)  Die Tagespost .

Support us on Patreon!

Student Essay On Jesus Prompts Legal Battle

• Share article

The U.S. Supreme Court has rejected an appeal by a Tennessee student who argued that her junior high school English teacher unfairly discriminated against her when the teacher refused to accept a research paper she had written about the life of Jesus.

The case of Brittney Settle, who was a 9th grader in Dickson, Tenn., when the dispute arose in 1991, has been widely cited in recent months by religious conservatives as evidence of the need to amend the U.S. Constitution to provide stronger protections for religious expression in public schools. (See box below.)

The dispute began when Dana Ramsey, Settle’s English teacher at Dickson County Junior High School, assigned students a research paper on any topic they chose. The teacher, however, rejected Settle’s proposed topic, telling her that a paper on Jesus was “not an appropriate thing to do in a public school.’'

Settle’s father met with the teacher and the school principal to protest, but Ramsey said she would not let the student write about Jesus because “that would be dealing specifically with her personal redeemer.’' The teacher later gave additional reasons why the topic was inappropriate. For example, she said Settle would not benefit from the research process by writing a paper on a topic with which she was already well-acquainted. Settle wrote about Jesus anyway and received a grade of zero.

The family sued but lost in federal district court and the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 6th Circuit. The 6th Circuit’s ruling last May affirmed the broad discretion of classroom teachers over student assignments. “It is the essence of the teacher’s responsibility in the classroom to draw lines and make distinctions--in a word to encourage speech germane to the topic at hand,’' the court said. On Nov. 27, the Supreme Court declined to hear Settle’s appeal of the 6th Circuit’s ruling.

Advocates of a religious-liberty amendment to the Constitution have cited the Settle case before Congress. Michael McConnell, a University of Chicago law professor and an expert in church-state law, told the Senate Judiciary Committee in September that Ramsey’s reasons for rejecting a paper on Jesus were “uninformed, bigoted, or selectively applied.’'

“When a research paper is otherwise appropriate, as this one was, the fact that it involves religion is not a legitimate basis for exclusion,’' McConnell stated.

In her Supreme Court appeal, Settle argued that lower courts and school officials were “divided and badly confused’’ about how to handle such situations. She argued that the 6th Circuit’s ruling runs counter to the guidelines on religious expression in public schools issued in August by Secretary of Education Richard Riley. One of those guidelines states: “Students may express their beliefs about religion in the form of homework, artwork, and other written and oral assignments free of discrimination based on the religious content of their submissions.’'

The Clinton administration declined to take a position on whether the high court should accept Settle’s appeal. Testifying before the Senate Judiciary Committee in September, Assistant U.S. Attorney Walter Dellinger said the case did not present a clear-cut example of religious discrimination. “The fact that a paper is on a religious topic,’' Dellinger said, “does not exempt it from other pedagogical rules.’'

--Mark Walsh

Amendment Sought

Two members of Congress have introduced competing proposals that would amend the U.S. Constitution to provide greater protection for public school prayer and other forms of religious expression.

In November, Rep. Ernest Jim Istook Jr., R-Okla., unveiled a proposal that would guarantee the right to “student-sponsored prayer’’ in public schools. “This does not seek to take us back to an era when teachers led students in a required prayer, but for students who desire to have prayer as a normal part of their school day, it removes the artificial barriers erected years ago by the [U.S. Supreme] Court,’' the Congressman said.

Istook’s amendment states: “To secure the people’s right to acknowledge God according to the dictates of conscience: Nothing in this Constitution shall prohibit acknowledgments of the religious heritage, beliefs, or traditions of the people, or prohibit student-sponsored prayer in public schools. Neither the United States nor any state shall compose any official prayer or compel joining in prayer, or discriminate against religious expression or belief.’'

Meanwhile, Rep. Henry Hyde, R-Ill., introduced another religious-liberty amendment, but his does not specifically mention student-sponsored prayer. His measure states: “Neither the United States nor any state shall deny benefits to or otherwise discriminate against any private person or group on account of religious expression, belief, or identity; nor shall the prohibition on laws respecting an establishment of religion be construed to require such discrimination.’'

Hyde’s proposal closely resembles language backed in recent months by several conservative constitutional scholars and organizations, such as the National Association of Evangelicals and the Rutherford Institute. “We are very pleased with the language of Rep. Hyde’s amendment,’' said Greg Baylor, assistant director of the Center for Law and Religious Freedom, an advocacy arm of the Annandale, Va.-based Christian Legal Society. “It just says that government cannot discriminate against religion.’'

But Rep. Istook said Hyde’s proposal “is inadequate to address the problems the public wants to address.’' He argued that a majority of Americans want to overturn court rulings that have barred prayers at public school graduations and voluntary group prayers by students in other school situations. Hyde’s measure “is a civil rights amendment,’' Istook said. “There is nothing in there that addresses school prayer.’'

After Republicans took control of Congress in January, Rep. Istook was assigned to draft a religious-liberty amendment by Speaker of the House Newt Gingrich, R-Ga., who himself has wavered on support for amending the Constitution. Rep. Hyde is the chairman of the House Judiciary Committee, which will consider the issue. Istook and a spokesman for Rep. Hyde said the chairman intends to allow the panel to debate both proposals, but Hyde’s spokesman also said only one measure would leave the committee.

In a series of congressional hearings last year, advocates of strict church-state separation argued against amending the Constitution. They have since denounced both proposed amendments. “It would be difficult to say either one was worse than the other,’' said Elliot Mincberg, legal director for the liberal advocacy group People for the American Way. “They are both destructive of religious liberty.’'

Douglas Laycock, a professor of constitutional law at the University of Texas at Austin, said the proposed amendments would still leave open to judicial review the question of whether the government was authorizing or engaging in religious expression in a particular case. “If what they want to do is end the litigation, it’s not going to do that,’' he said.

A version of this article appeared in the February 01, 1996 edition of Teacher Magazine as Student Essay On Jesus Prompts Legal Battle

Sign Up for EdWeek Update

Edweek top school jobs, sign up & sign in.

• BART’S BIOGRAPHY
• CURRICULUM VITAE

Who Was Josephus? (And What He Wrote About Jesus)

Written by Marko Marina, Ph.D.

Author |  Historian |  BE Contributor

Verified!  See our editorial guidelines

Disclaimer: The views and opinions expressed in this article belong to the author and do not necessarily match my own. - Dr. Bart D. Ehrman

The name Flavius Josephus always reminds me of my first encounter with him and his writings. In the first lecture of my graduate course on Early Christianity, a fierce debate emerged between my professor and one of the students about the importance of Josephus' testimony in establishing the historicity of Jesus.

The intensity of that discussion underscored the pivotal role Josephus plays in the study of Early Christianity and the broader field of ancient history.

Flavius Josephus , a name that stands at the crossroads of Judaism and early Christianity, offers a unique perspective on the tumultuous era that saw the rise of both these faiths against the backdrop of Roman dominion. Born into a priestly Jewish family in the first century C.E., Josephus found himself amid political upheaval, war, and cultural transformation.

This article aims to shed light on the life of Josephus , delving into his birth, upbringing, and the dramatic turn of events that led him to adopt Roman citizenship and a new name. 

We’ll touch upon his major works, including “The Judean War” and “Antiquities of the Jews”, with a particular focus on his references to Jesus and other figures from the New Testament.

Join us as we embark on this journey through the life and legacy of Flavius Josephus, whose writings continue to intrigue, inform, and inspire debate among historians and scholars across the world.

But, wait a minute! Before we begin, I must invite you to consider joining a captivating course “ Paul and Jesus: The Great Divide ” by a renowned scholar of early Christianity Bart D. Ehrman . In it, Dr. Ehrman explores the key theological differences between two pivotal figures of the world’s most popular religion! 

Josephus: Early Life Set in the Historical Context

Born Yosef ben Matityahu in Jerusalem, in 37 C.E., Josephus lived through one of the most tumultuous periods in Jewish history. His life spanned the Roman occupation of Judea and the First Jewish–Roman War , events that shaped the socio-political landscape of his time. 

The backdrop of Josephus' early years was marked by increasing tensions between the Jewish population and the Roman authorities, tensions that would eventually lead to the catastrophic Jewish Revolt and the destruction of the Temple in 70 C.E.

Within this volatile environment, Josephus' family background offered him a unique vantage point from which to observe and later narrate the complexities of Judean society.

Discussing Josephus' lineage in his autobiography, Vita, Frederick Raphael notes, "Since childhood was never a topic in ancient literature, Josephus’ Vita doesn’t describe his early years. He merely lays claim, through a remote ancestor of his mother’s, to ' royal ' blood (that of the 'Hasmonaeans,' as the Maccabees were formally known)... Although Josephus doesn’t give any details of his father’s wealth or property, he takes pride in belonging to a leading, certainly conservative, family. "

Josephus’ Education & Mastery of Greek

This assertion of noble and priestly heritage underscores Josephus' standing within the Judean society—a position that afforded him both privilege and perspective.

As a member of a priestly and noble family, Josephus would have had access to a traditional Jewish education , which included learning Hebrew scriptures and possibly some aspects of Jewish law and traditions. 

In his Vita (2.7.), Josephus, for instance, describes how he, at the age of 16, undertook a journey to learn about the various sects within Judaism . These included the Pharisees, Sadducees, and Essenes, as well as a fourth group, led by a man named Banus, who lived in the desert and practiced a lifestyle of purification and asceticism. 

Furthermore, through his writings, he demonstrated a considerable knowledge of the Greek language and literature. However, Josephus himself notes that he didn’t learn Greek until he went to Rome (Against Apion 1.50.) and, sometimes, he used the help of his literary assistants to polish his Greek.

Nevertheless, Josephus possessed significant composition and language skills. But how widespread was this level of education? Should we just assume that Josephus was one of the many educated Jews living in 1st-century Palestine? 

Referring to the customs of Jews, he notes: “We take pride in raising children and make keeping the laws and preserving the traditional piety that accords with them the most essential task of our whole life (Against Apion 1.12.60.).”

In another instance, Josephus mentions that the Jewish children were instructed in reading so that they knew the laws and knew about their forebears and the virtues they stood behind (Against Apion 2.25.204.). 

However, critical scholars acknowledge that Josephus here presents an ideal , formulated from the perspective of well-educated upper-class Jews. In other words, he projects his elite status to all of the Jews.

In reality, literacy rates were extremely low and the majority of people were either illiterate or literary only at the very simplest level. The elite to which Josephus surely belonged, however, had access to both Jewish and Greco-Roman education. 

Josephus’ Significance

Who was Josephus? He wasn’t merely a historian but also a man deeply entrenched in the religious and political fabric of his time. His writings, from this standpoint, do not merely chronicle historical events but also offer a window into the identity, beliefs, and struggles of the Jewish people under Roman rule. 

Josephus' works, therefore, serve as a valuable source for the Jewish world of the Second Temple period , offering insights into the historical context (e.g. Pharisees) of early Christianity and the Judaic traditions from which it emerged.

But his works also provide us with a notable glimpse into the broader currents of the Roman Empire . That brings us to the biggest change in Josephus’ life. How did a Jewish military leader and historian become one of the emperor’s closest associates? Let’s take a look! 

The Turn of the Lifetime: Josephus and the Roman Rule

You might think that Jews were the ones diligently copying Josephus' writings through the ages, but you would be quite off the mark. Despite Josephus' significant contributions to historical writing and our understanding of the Judeo-Roman world, his standing among his fellow Jews in late antiquity and beyond was, to put it mildly, less than stellar. 

Josephus, once a dedicated Jewish priest and a leader in the Jewish revolt against Rome, became "persona non grata" (an unwelcome person) among his people for reasons that are as complex as they are intriguing.

Josephus' journey from a Jewish rebel to a Roman historian is a tale of survival, adaptation, and transformation. During the First Jewish-Roman War (66-70 C.E.), Josephus served as the commander of the Jewish forces in Galilee. However, after the Roman forces besieged and captured Jotapata, Josephus and his companions were taken prisoner.

It was here, in captivity, that Josephus' life took a dramatic turn. According to his account, he provided the Romans with intelligence and, after a prophecy that Vespasian would become Emperor, ingratiated himself with the Roman leaders.

Per Bilde describes the event that unfolded right after Josephus surrendered: “On the way, the Romans gathered around him to get a glimpse of the Jewish general, and many Roman officers, among whom was Titus (Vespasian’s son) took pity on him. Therefore, Titus appealed for Josephus, and this is the main reason why his life was spared.”

Vespasian, upon becoming Emperor, granted Josephus his freedom, after which Josephus assumed the Flavian family name, becoming Flavius Josephus.

This act of survival, however pragmatic, was seen by many Jews as an outright betrayal. Josephus' transition from a Jewish commander to a historian under the patronage of the Flavian dynasty (the very rulers who crushed the Jewish revolt and destroyed the Second Temple) solidified his reputation as a traitor among his people. 

As a Roman citizen and a client of the Flavian emperors , Josephus wrote extensively about Jewish history, the Jewish War, and other topics from a perspective that many contemporaries and later Jewish readers found uncomfortably reconciled with Roman viewpoints.

Navigating the delicate line between historical record and personal allegiance, Josephus’ life story sets the stage for a deeper exploration of his literary legacy.

As we transition from the controversies of his journey to the contributions of his pen, it’s clear that Josephus' writings, born out of a unique blend of Jewish heritage and Roman patronage, offer a rich tapestry of insights into the ancient world. 

Josephus’ Books: A Brief Overview

Josephus' books provide a comprehensive look into the Jewish world under Roman rule, offering insights that have been pivotal to both historians and theologians. Here, we briefly explore his most significant works, each a cornerstone of ancient historiography and apologetics.

#1 The Judean Wars

This work chronicles the Jewish revolt against Rome from 66 to 70 C.E. , beginning with the events leading up to the conflict and concluding with the fall of Masada in 73 CE. Josephus provides a detailed account of the war, blending historical narration with his eyewitness testimony.

As Steve Mason remarks, "The Judean War deserves its place among the most influential ancient Western texts... Josephus manages the extraordinary feat of meshing his native traditions with Greek political, rhetorical, and historiographical discourses, while yet distancing himself from 'the Greeks' to cement the bond with his host society."

#2 Antiquities of the Jews

Completed in 93 CE, this extensive work traces the history of the Jewish people from the creation of the world as described in the Hebrew Bible to the outbreak of the Jewish revolt in 66 CE. Through 20 volumes, Josephus aims to present the Jewish people and their history in a favorable light to a Greco-Roman audience.

By contextualizing Jewish customs, laws, and beliefs within the broader tapestry of ancient history, Josephus not only seeks to explain Judaism to non-Jews but also to elevate the stature of Jewish history within the annals of the ancient world.

#3 The Life of Flavius Josephus (Vita)

This autobiography defends Josephus' actions during the Jewish revolt and his conduct as a commander in Galilee. It was written as a response to criticisms levied against him, particularly by Justus of Tiberias .

Through "Vita", Josephus presents his genealogy, education, and the philosophical and moral stances that guided his actions, offering readers a glimpse into the personal and intellectual journey that shaped his other works.

#4 Against Apion

This apologetic text is a defense of Judaism as a religion and the Jewish people as a cultural and historical entity, written against the backdrop of Greco-Roman prejudice and misunderstanding. 

Josephus counters the accusations and misrepresentations of the Jewish people made by Apion and other critics, using a blend of historical argumentation, philosophical discourse, and literary analysis. 

John M. G. Barclay’s assessment captures the essence of Josephus' approach: “In this work, we encounter Josephus at his rhetorical best: he displays an impressive cultural range in the knowledge of Greek history, historiography, and philosophy, and his interlocking arguments in defense of Judeans are spiced with acute literary analysis and clever polemics.”

“Against Apion” is thus a testament to Josephus’ skill in navigating and challenging the cultural and intellectual currents of his time.

Each of these works, in its way, contributes to our understanding of the ancient world, offering perspectives that are as enriching as they are essential for grasping the complexities of Jewish history and its interactions with the Greco-Roman world.

Now… Do you recall that spirited debate over Josephus' role in pinning down the historical Jesus I mentioned in the introduction?

It turns out there's more to that classroom clash than meets the eye. As we turn the page from Josephus' vast historical landscape to a particularly contentious patch of textual terrain, let's dive into the heart of that argument.

Josephus’ Description of Jesus: Testimonium Flavianum

Within the extensive writings of Flavius Josephus, a brief passage in "Antiquities of the Jews" has ignited centuries of scholarly debate. Known as the Testimonium Flavianum , this testimony presents a concise account of Jesus, stating: 

Now there was about this time Jesus, a wise man, if it be lawful to call him a man , for he was a doer of wonderful works, a teacher of such men as receive the truth with pleasure. He drew over to him both many of the Jews and many of the Gentiles. He was the Christ ; and when Pilate, at th e suggestion of the principal men amongst us, had condemned him to the cross, those that loved him at the first did not forsake him, for he appeared to them alive again the third day, as the divine prophets had foretold these and ten thousand other wonderful things concerning him ; and the tribe of Christians, so named from him, are not extinct to this day

This passage has long been a cornerstone for those arguing for a non-Christian corroboration of Jesus' historical existence and his early followers. However, the enthusiastic depiction of Jesus has led many scholars to question its authenticity , suggesting that the highlighted parts above are likely later interpolations by Christian scribes . 

In other words, Josephus wasn’t a Christian which makes certain parts of his testimony questionable.

Bart D. Ehrman elucidates this skepticism by highlighting the transmission history of Josephus' works: "It was Christians who copied Josephus' writings through the ages... This reference to Jesus was beefed up a bit by a Christian scribe who wanted to make Josephus appear more appreciative of the 'true faith'.”

Further solidifying this skepticism, John P. Meier offers a critical analysis of the text's flow and tone, noting, "In short, the first impression of what is Christian interpolation may well be the correct impression. A second glance confirms this first impression. Precisely these three Christian passages are the clauses that interrupt the flow of what is otherwise a concise text carefully written in a fairly neutral or even purposely ambiguous tone."

In conclusion, while Josephus' mention of Jesus in “Antiquities of the Jews” continues to be a subject of intense scholarly interest, the consensus leans towards a cautious approach.

The majority of scholars agree that while Josephus likely mentioned Jesus , the more explicit references to his divinity and resurrection are the product of later Christian interpolations , aimed at enhancing the narrative to align with Christian doctrine.

Josephus and Other New Testament Figures

The importance of Josephus is also seen in the fact that he mentions other figures in the New Testament , further bridging the gap between Jewish and early Christian histories.

Beyond the debated testimony about Jesus, Josephus provides accounts of John the Baptist and James, the brother of Jesus , offering invaluable external attestations to their historical existence and roles within the broader narrative of Judea under Roman rule. 

These references, found within the broader tapestry of Josephus' work, lend a small layer of historical credibility to the New Testament accounts, situating these figures within the tumultuous socio-political context of first-century Judea.

For instance, Josephus' portrayal of John the Baptist underscores his significant influence as a religious figure , echoing the New Testament's depiction of him as a prophet and a forerunner to Jesus.

Similarly, Josephus' mention of James' martyrdom not only corroborates the New Testament's depiction of James as a key figure in the early Christian community but also reflects the complexities of religious leadership in a time of political upheaval.

These accounts, while brief, are critical for historians and scholars, providing a “secular” corroboration of certain elements within New Testament narratives.

Through these references, Josephus unwittingly becomes a vital link in the historical chain connecting Jewish history with the emergent Christian tradition, illustrating the intertwined destinies of these communities within the Roman Empire. 

In retracing the life and legacy of Flavius Josephus, we journey through the intersections of Jewish and early Christian histories, witnessing the complexities of a world under Roman rule through the eyes of a singular figure.

Josephus, through his detailed historical accounts, serves not only as a crucial source for understanding the First Jewish–Roman War and the socio-political dynamics of Judea but also as a bridge connecting the Jewish traditions of the Second Temple period with the nascent Christian movement. 

Josephus’ portrayals of key biblical figures and events provide a rare external perspective that enriches our understanding of the historical contexts in which these figures lived and the movements they inspired. 

While his writings have been scrutinized for their accuracy and biases—particularly his references to Jesus, John the Baptist, and James—they remain indispensable for historians and theologians alike, offering insights that transcend the boundaries of religion and scholarship.

And how did that spirited debate that I mentioned at the beginning end? Well, the professor won. Isn't that always the case? 

Marko Marina

About the author

Marko Marina is a historian with a Ph.D. in ancient history from the University of Zagreb (Croatia). He is the author of dozens of articles about early Christianity's history. He works as a post-doctoral fellow at the University of Zagreb where he teaches courses on the history of Christianity and the Roman Empire. In his free time, he enjoys playing basketball and spending quality time with his family and friends.

• Featured Essay The Love of God An essay by Sam Storms Read Now
• Faithfulness of God
• Saving Grace
• Adoption by God

Most Popular

• Gender Identity
• Trusting God
• The Holiness of God
• See All Essays

• Best Commentaries
• Featured Essay Resurrection of Jesus An essay by Benjamin Shaw Read Now
• Death of Christ
• Resurrection of Jesus
• Church and State
• Sovereignty of God
• Faith and Works
• The Carson Center
• The Keller Center
• New City Catechism
• Publications
• Read the Bible
• TGC Pastors

U.S. Edition

• Arts & Culture
• Bible & Theology
• Christian Living
• Current Events
• Faith & Work
• As In Heaven
• Gospelbound
• Post-Christianity?
• The Carson Center Podcast
• TGC Podcast
• You're Not Crazy
• Churches Planting Churches
• Help Me Teach The Bible
• Word Of The Week
• Upcoming Events
• Past Conference Media
• Foundation Documents
• Regional Chapters
• Church Directory
• Global Resourcing
• Donate to TGC

To All The World

The world is a confusing place right now. We believe that faithful proclamation of the gospel is what our hostile and disoriented world needs. Do you believe that too? Help TGC bring biblical wisdom to the confusing issues across the world by making a gift to our international work.

The Resurrection

Other essays.

Resurrection refers to the raising of the dead, although not just in terms of mere bodily reanimation. Biblically it may refer to either spiritual or physical transformation, the former concurrent with regeneration and the latter with re-embodiment on the last day.

This essay explores the biblical hope of resurrection: how it is foreshadowed in the Old Testament (esp. Dan 12), and further anticipated or proclaimed in the New Testament. The theological significance of the relationship between Jesus’ physical resurrection and the resurrection experience(s) of believers, as well as the nature of the resurrection body is then examined, particularly in relation to the concept of an immediate resurrection at death.

As the closing words of the Apostle’s Creed remind us, orthodox Christianity has always affirmed “the resurrection of the body and the life everlasting.” Indeed, these are two crucial and related facets of Christian hope or eschatology. In biblical thought, death is not a welcome friend that ushers us into the “wide blue yonder.” Rather, death is the last enemy which, though already conquered by Jesus, awaits its final defeat on the coming day when God destroy “the covering [or shroud] that is cast over all peoples … [and] swallow up death forever” (Isa 25:7–8a; cf. 1Cor 15:54–57). What Christians ultimately hope for, therefore, is not a disembodied existence in an extraterrestrial place called heaven, but resurrection life in a new (i.e. renewed) creation, where “God himself will be with them as their God” (Rev 21:3). And this prospect of eternal life (life of the age to come) has been secured “through the resurrection of Jesus Christ from the dead” (1Pet 1:3). Indeed, as the Apostle Paul underlines, the resurrection of Jesus and the resurrection of believers are inextricably linked (1Cor 15:12–28).

The Hope of Resurrection Foreshadowed

The Old Testament has relatively little to say about the hope of resurrection, but God is clearly presented as sovereign over both life and death. The latter is attested in the song of Moses, where God claims to both “kill and … make alive” (Deut 32: 39), and in a similar vein in the song of Hannah, who acknowledges that “the LORD kills and brings to life; he brings down to Sheol and raises up.” (1Sam 2:6). Both the sequence (kill[s] … make/brings alive) and parallelism (kills/brings down to Sheol … brings to life/raises up) suggest that God’s power to raise the dead is on view here, rather than simply an ability to rescue wounded or sick people from a premature death. Neither Moses nor Hannah is claiming that God has raised the dead or will do so; only that such is within his sovereign power, should it be deemed desirable or necessary (cf. Gen 22:5; Heb 11:19). While neither speaker had personal experience of such power to raise the dead, this was subsequently demonstrated through both Elijah and Elisha (cf. 1Kgs 17:17–24; 2Kgs 4:18–37; 13:20–21). Thus at least the germ of resurrection hope is arguably reflected in early Israelite theology and experience.

Much more explicit resurrection language is expressed in subsequent OT books, such as Isaiah, Ezekiel and Daniel. While Isaiah 25:7–9 may be employing the idea of death’s abolition metaphorically, the imagery seems to suggest more than national restoration in 26:19; given the marked contrast with the fate of the wicked in 26:14, individual resurrection is arguably on view. However, this is plainly not the case in Ezekiel 37, where the resurrection of the dry bones portrays Israel’s physical restoration from metaphorical death in exile. Even so, the rhetorical force of Ezekiel’s reassurance here is largely dependent on the plausibility of the idea: resurrection would be an inappropriate and unpersuasive metaphor if it were considered utterly impossible. But however the concept is employed by Isaiah and Ezekiel, there is little doubt over its significance in Daniel 12. Here those “awakened” are physically dead (“sleep in the dust of the earth”), resurrection has eternal consequences (“some awake to everlasting life, others to shame and everlasting contempt”), and the faithful (“wise/those who turn many to righteousness”) are gloriously transformed (“shine … like stars”). While arguably falling short of the universal eschatological prospect envisaged in subsequent Jewish and Christian thought, this text unquestionably reflects the most developed Old Testament support for “the resurrection of the body and the life everlasting.”

The Prospect of Resurrection Anticipated  

During the intertestamental period belief in a future resurrection of the dead became more widely embraced within Judaism. Clearly there were some, like the Sadducees, who resisted the idea (Mark 12:18–27; Acts 23:8; cf. Sirach 38:21), not only because they considered it absurd but because they found no support for such teaching in the Law of Moses (i.e. the Pentateuch). However, other evidence from the Hellenistic era (e.g., the Greek translation of the relevant Old Testament texts; explicit mention in 2 Maccabees; implicit attestation in the Wisdom of Solomon, 1 Enoch and other Jewish texts) and the New Testament (e.g., Luke 14:14; John 11:24; Acts 23:6–9) suggests that the idea of a physical resurrection as an eschatological event had become a fairly standard Jewish belief by the first century. Accordingly, for many if not most Jews, Jesus’ teaching on resurrection would have been radical or unintelligible only insofar as it anticipated such an event prior to the last day (e.g., Mark 9:9–10; Luke 24:45–46; John 2:19–20; 5:24–26; 20:9).

However, as well as anticipating a spiritual resurrection for his followers (John 5:25) and an imminent physical resurrection for himself (Luke 9:21–22), Jesus clearly endorsed the more traditional concept as well: an eschatological resurrection of the dead (Luke 11:31–32; 20:34–38; John 5:28–29; 6:39–58; cf. John 12:48). Indeed, such an event is prefigured in some of his miracles, most notably the raising of Jairus’ daughter (Mark 5:35–43), the widow of Nain’s son (Luke 7:11–17), and his friend Lazarus (John 11:1–44). While none of these constitutes resurrection in the fullest biblical sense (i.e., being raised to immortal life), like their Old Testament counterparts they foreshadow this eschatological reality. As such, it is arguably problematic to construe the latter as being anything less than a reanimation of the dead involving significant continuity between their natural (mortal) and their spiritual (immortal) bodies. Such a conclusion is further suggested by Paul’s anticipation of “the redemption of our bodies” (Rom 8:23), as well as the resurrection body of Jesus himself (John 20:27).

The Fact of Resurrection Proclaimed

For New Testament authors, Jesus’ resurrection is not only archetypal, but guarantees the future resurrection of believers (Acts 26:23; 1Cor 6:14; 15:20, 23; 2Cor 4:14; Col 1:18; Rev 1:5), who are united to him both in his death and resurrection (Rom 5:9–11; 6:3–5, 8–11; 8:11; Col 2:12; 3:1; cf. Rev 20:4–6). While in some measure Christians experience the future now (i.e., the life of the coming age), the complete and untarnished reality awaits the last day, when “the dead will be raised imperishable, and we shall be changed” (1Cor 15:52). This and other New Testament passages (e.g., Acts 24:14–15; 1Thess 4:16–17; Phil 3:20–21; Rev 20:11–15) plainly associate the future resurrection of the dead with the Lord’s return and the final judgment. The idea of an immediate post-mortem resurrection experience is difficult to correlate with this. Advocates of an instantaneous “resurrection” must therefore look elsewhere to defend such a concept (principally, 2Cor 5:1–10), and conclude that over time the apostle Paul must have changed his mind. The main difficulty with this, however, is that Paul’s teaching on this matter is consistent across all his letters—including those written after 2 Corinthians, such as Romans and Philippians. Moreover, 2 Corinthians 5 is not indisputably suggesting that believers receive their resurrected bodies the moment they die. The loss of our earthly tent (mortal body) and the acquisition of our eternal house (resurrection body) are not necessarily simultaneous, especially if “being at home with the Lord” (2Cor 5:8) equates with “being away from the body” (2Cor 5:6) or being “unclothed” (2Cor 5:4). Thus understood, Paul has two post-mortem scenarios in mind in this passage: our final, resurrected state (2Cor 5:1–5), and our interim, disembodied state prior to this (2Cor 5:6–9). While the nature of the latter (being with the Lord) allows Paul somewhat reluctantly to welcome death, his ultimate Christian hope is to be clothed with his heavenly dwelling (the immortal clothing of his resurrection body). Paul provides his most detailed discussion of the latter in his earlier letter.

The Nature of the Resurrection Body and Life Everlasting

In response to the cynicism of resurrection skeptics in the Corinthian church, Paul reflects on the nature of the resurrection body in 1 Corinthians 15:35–57. While not denying some degree of continuity with the natural body, Paul’s emphasis here is clearly on the discontinuity between the mortal body inherited from the first Adam and the immortal body secured through the second Adam. He illustrates such by noting:

• The difference between the seed sown and the plant produced (vv. 37–38);
• The different types of ‘flesh’ and ‘bodies’ even in the natural realm (vv.39–41).

He then underlines the differences between the natural and the spiritual body in vv. 42–49 as follows:

• The body buried (“sown”) is perishable, but raised imperishable.
• The body is buried in dishonor, but is raised in glory.
• The body is sown (buried) in weakness, but is raised in power.

In short, the resurrection body will be like that of Christ (1Cor 15:49; cf. Phil 3:20–21).

Paul is not suggesting that resurrection or “spiritual” bodies will be non-physical, but rather that the natural body inherited from Adam is unsuitable for an eternal inheritance because it is subject to decay (1Cor 15:50). This is why everyone must undergo change—even those who have not experienced death before the last day must undergo the kind of transformation effected through resurrection to be suitably “attired” for their eternal inheritance (vv.51–53). While Paul is clearly thinking here only in terms of Christians, it is clear from elsewhere that he understood the eschatological resurrection and final judgment to encompass all humanity (Rom 2:5–16; Acts 17:31; 24:15). What kind of body the resurrected wicked will have is nowhere spelt out, but presumably it must likewise be suitable for their eternal fate, however this is understood.

Further Reading

In relation to Biblical Theology

• Anthony Hoekema
• Purchase: Amazon
• Reviews: MatGilbertBlog
• Richard Longenecker (ed.)
• Review: Consensus
• Paul R. Williamson
• Author interview: Books At a Glance
• Review: Themelios
• N. T. (Tom) Wright
• Review: JMHamilton

In relation to contemporary debates

• Murray J. Harris
• From Grave to Glory: Resurrection and Immortality in the New Testament
• Review: JETS
• Reviews: TGC , 9Marks

This essay is part of the Concise Theology series. All views expressed in this essay are those of the author. This essay is freely available under Creative Commons License with Attribution-ShareAlike, allowing users to share it in other mediums/formats and adapt/translate the content as long as an attribution link, indication of changes, and the same Creative Commons License applies to that material. If you are interested in translating our content or are interested in joining our community of translators,  please reach out to us .

ADVERTISEMENTS:

5 Paragraph Essay on Jesus Christ

Jesus or the Jesus of Nazareth is mostly known to all as:’ Jesus Christ ’ where Christ means “Anointed One”. He is regarded as the savior of the people, the Messiah. Not only in Christianity but in Islam as well he is called as important prophet. Jesus was born to a virgin, Mary. Mary was to be married to Joseph, a carpenter. She was visited by an angel Gabriel who told her that she was chosen to give birth to the Son of God. Jesus was born in a stable in Bethlehem and his childhood home is represented as Nazareth in Galilee. The actual birth date of Jesus is not known or determined and was calculated as somewhere between 7 and 5 B.C. After almost 500 years, 25 December was fixed as his date of birth.

Jesus was baptized by John, the son of Zechariah in his early 30s. After being baptized, a holy spirit descended upon him declaring that he was Gods Prophet. It is believed that Jesus withdrew into the desert to pray and fast and to prepare him for the prophetic task. Jesus began to spread the teachings to those who had the time and an open mind and will to learning a new way. He gave lessons to people through stories which had some symbolic meaning behind them. Amongst Jesus’ large number of followers and disciples, a group of twelve was chosen to spread his teachings to others.

Christ’s miraculous feats include turning water into wine, walking on water and raising the dead. Christ’s preaching was based on love and he asked his followers to love their enemies equally as you do those who love you. He was one of the social reformers and opposed many Jewish leaders. As he became famous amongst people, he had enemies also. Jesus performed several healing miracles and nature miracles and many crowds flocked to hear him. After preaching in Galilee and Jordan he proceeded to Jerusalem. Jesus and his followers created a disturbance while arriving in Jerusalem during the Passover. Pharisees and Sadducees got together and got him arrested on the charges of claiming to be the Messiah and thereby equal to God. Judas turned in Jesus for the price of a few pieces of silver. Jesus was accused of blasphemy and handed over to the Romans for punishment.

Image Source : orig02.deviantart.net

Jews not only punished him severely but ordered for him to be crucified. Jesus was nailed and crucified on the cross which later became a holy symbol for Christians. The method of execution restricted the airflow to his lungs, killing him in three hours. Jewish temple that he had planned to destroy was unfortunately ripped apart by an earthquake soon after his death. Jesus’ followers took his body to a tomb from where he apparently rose three days after his death, called as ‘Resurrection of Christ’. Authorities always feared Jesus’ power over the crowds and his ability to invoke a religious rebellion and this fear is what lead to his crucifixion.

A little background about Jesus’ burial shows that Jesus was wrapped in a linen cloth as is followed in Jewish custom. After he was placed in the solid, rock tomb, an extremely large stone was put in the opening. This stone nearly weighed about two tons which would have been rolled using some kind of lever. Perhaps Jesus’ death was a way to warn others of the circumstances of social disobedience, which was very tragic for those who believed in the ideas that Jesus Christ represented. There are huge stories around Jesus’ kind deeds and preaching which are still followed and heard with enthusiasm and respect by his believers and followers. It is also said that Jesus came to Kashmir in search of lost sheep of the house of Israel. A tomb exists at Mohalla Khanyar in Srinagar, Kashmir which marks the death of Jesus at an age of 120 years. Jesus’ key messages included the following:

1. God loves you and is with you 2. Love one another 3. Immense value of each person 4. Good news: kingdom of God has come to earth 5. Reality of judgment to heaven or hell 6. God forgives those who ask

Related Essays:

• 472 words sample essay on The Television (Free to read)
• 1240 Words Essay on World Trade Organisation (WTO)
• Essay on Legal Theory of Rights
• Essay on the Theories of John Locke

Privacy Overview

Jesus Christ the Saviour and His Mission to the World Essay

• To find inspiration for your paper and overcome writer’s block
• As a source of information (ensure proper referencing)
• As a template for you assignment

For many people, Jesus Christ is the Son of God, healing and guiding the world on the path of righteousness. He was a prophet, a prophecy, and a representative of God, coming to save humanity. However, what exactly did he come for, and how can he help us today?

According to the Bible, Jesus Christ is the Son of God, born on Earth to save us. He was a prophet sent by God to give people a choice: to accept or reject him. As it is written in the Bible: “But whoever received him, he gave power to become the children of God” (Hickey, 2021, p. 150). Jesus was a manifestation of humanity, reflecting the goodness of God.

The mission of Jesus Christ was, first and foremost, a saving and enlightening one. He wanted to show people the way to God, help them overcome their sins, and live in service. He spoke of the necessity of loving and merciful to others and the need to adhere to the laws of God. He said, “I came that they may have life and have it abundantly.” (Hickey, 2021, p. 110). Thus, Jesus Christ is an inspiration to people around the world.

In conclusion, Jesus Christ is a great prophet sent by God to change the world. His mission was to impart the truth and spiritual enlightenment to people. He called people to love and kindness and to follow God’s commandments. His teachings and examples should be applied and implemented by people to this day to make the world a more just and better place to live.

Hickey, M. (2021). Themes from the Gospel of John . Rowman & Littlefield.

Use these guidelines if the customer asks for appendices. The first paragraph of the appendix should be flush with the left margin. Additional paragraphs should be indented.

Begin each appendix on a new page with the word “Appendix” at the top center. Use an identifying capital letter (e.g., Appendix A, Appendix B, etc.) if you have more than one appendix. If you are referring to more than one appendix in your text, use the plural appendices (APA only).

Label tables and figures in the appendix as you would in the text of your manuscript, using the letter A before the number to clarify that the table or figure belongs to the appendix.

Demographic Information for Cummings et al. (2002)’s Review

If an appendix consists entirely of a table or figure, the title of the table or figure should serve as the title of the appendix.

• Revelation, Apocalyptic Literature, and Prophecy
• Prophecy in the Book of Daniel
• Divine Mercy and Compassion in the Old and New Testament
• Theology: Religion and Healthcare
• A Non-Traditional View of the Days of Genesis 1
• Perception and Understanding of Theology
• The "Dynamics of Faith" Book by Paul Tillich
• Image of Salvation: Everyday Theology
• Chicago (A-D)
• Chicago (N-B)

IvyPanda. (2024, February 17). Jesus Christ the Saviour and His Mission to the World. https://ivypanda.com/essays/jesus-christ-the-saviour-and-his-mission-to-the-world/

"Jesus Christ the Saviour and His Mission to the World." IvyPanda , 17 Feb. 2024, ivypanda.com/essays/jesus-christ-the-saviour-and-his-mission-to-the-world/.

IvyPanda . (2024) 'Jesus Christ the Saviour and His Mission to the World'. 17 February.

IvyPanda . 2024. "Jesus Christ the Saviour and His Mission to the World." February 17, 2024. https://ivypanda.com/essays/jesus-christ-the-saviour-and-his-mission-to-the-world/.

1. IvyPanda . "Jesus Christ the Saviour and His Mission to the World." February 17, 2024. https://ivypanda.com/essays/jesus-christ-the-saviour-and-his-mission-to-the-world/.

Bibliography

IvyPanda . "Jesus Christ the Saviour and His Mission to the World." February 17, 2024. https://ivypanda.com/essays/jesus-christ-the-saviour-and-his-mission-to-the-world/.