Easter Myth #7: The Gospels’ accounts of Easter Day are accurate and consistent

Ten Easter Myths

Most leading historians, archaeologists and linguists don’t believe that the four official Christian Gospels can be relied upon as accurate records of historical fact. Indeed, the Easter stories are highly dubious as factual accounts, and they are the very basis of the religion.

Christians believe these stories because the gospels say they happened, or so they think. But most Christians aren’t aware of the inconsistencies in the scriptures. The gospels are riddled with factual errors, contradictions and unsupported statements that challenge the very basis of the religion.

This series presents ten myths about the Easter stories drawing on gospel sources and historical records from the period.

Myth #7: The Gospels’ accounts of Easter Day are accurate and consistent

Between them the gospels report dozens of sightings of the risen Yeshua, but their stories differ. Most began and ended mysteriously. Usually he ‘drew near’ then ‘disappeared from sight’.

  • The First Gospel ended with the body missing and an angel telling the disciples to return to Galilee where they would see him. They were clearly not expecting this, and fled in terror.[1]

Decades later, twelve extra verses were added in which the Christ figure ‘appeared’ to them several times. He spoke to them and was immediately whisked away to heaven. The NRSV New Testament says in the footnotes that some authorities mark these verses ‘doubtful’. Nowhere does either the original author or the later contributor claim that Yeshua had risen in bodily form.

  • In the Second Gospel, Mary Magdalene and another Mary encountered Yeshua by the empty tomb, but they didn’t recognize him. Clearly he wasn’t the man they remembered from just a few days earlier. He told them to tell the disciples to return to Galilee where they would see him. Several sightings are reported.

The writer adds an interesting postscript: the Jewish leaders, petrified of what would happen if the word got out that Yeshua had come back to life, paid the soldiers guarding the tomb to spread the story that the disciples came by night and stole the body while they were asleep. ‘This story is still told among the Jews to this day,’ he wrote fifty years later.[2]

  • The Third Gospel added several more appearances in which Yeshua ‘came near’ and ‘stood among them’, showed them his wounds, ate fish, then vanished (there are no such claims in ‘Mark’ or ‘Matthew’). Later, he ‘withdrew from them and was carried up to heaven.’[3] All of this happened on Easter Sunday. None of these stories concurred with the other gospels. Moreover, far from fleeing to Galilee, the disciples stayed in Jerusalem and ‘were continually in the temple.’
  • In the Fourth Gospel, Mary Magdalene discovered the empty tomb and went to fetch Cephas and ‘the disciple who Yeshua loved.’[4] They ran back to the tomb, then the two disciples ‘returned to their homes.’ (It’s not clear where these ‘homes’ were. It’s implausible that they had homes in Jerusalem). Mary then encountered two angels by the tomb who told her Yeshua had risen. She turned round and he was standing behind her, but she did not recognise him. He told her not to touch him because he had not yet ‘ascended to the Father.’[5] She then reported back to the disciples.

Later, says the author, he ‘stood among’ the disciples and invited ‘doubting’ Thomas to touch his wounds.[6] He also he appeared to the disciples on various occasions, once while they ate bread and fish for breakfast and one in which he appeared on a beach and gave the disciples some advice on fishing.[7]

  • Acts of the Apostles, written by the same author as the Third Gospel, merely says he ‘presented himself alive’ to the disciples over a forty day period before the momentous events of Pentecost.

Once again we find ourselves wondering which, if any, of these accounts is correct, since they can’t all be right!

There seems little doubt that some of Yeshua’s followers felt the presence of their Master after his death and others thought they saw visions. We must not be too sceptical – it’s not unusual for bereaved people to ‘see’ a departed loved one or imagine they are around them. Their experiences, whatever they were, may have felt very real, because many of them later suffered and died for their faith.

But surely if a body had come back to life in a physical sense it would have been reported in the historical records of the day!

The only things the four gospels agree on is that the tomb was empty on the third day and Mary Magdalene was one of those who discovered it. None explains how Yeshua was encountered in the garden fully clothed, considering the burial clothes were left in situ.

The church likes to sweep aside the differences as if they don’t matter, but they do. They cast doubt on the accuracy of all four versions bearing in mind that none of the authors were eye-witnesses and at least forty years had passed before their accounts were written.

 

©David Lawrence Preston, 11.2.2017

Follow me on Facebook and Twitter @David_L_Preston

 

Balboa Press 2015

[1] Mark 16: 5-8

[2] Matthew 28:15

[3] Luke 24:50-51

[4] John 20:2

[5] John 20:17

[6] John 20:19-20

[7] John 21:4-6

Easter Myth #6: Yeshua’s disciples expected him to resurrect

Ten Easter Myths

Most leading historians, archaeologists and linguists don’t believe that the four official Christian Gospels can be relied upon as accurate records of historical fact. The Christmas stories, for instance, are known to be complete fabrications based on stories passed down from other traditions, edited to make them appear consistent with ancient Hebrew prophecies. The Easter stories too are highly dubious as fact.

Easter is unquestionably the most important day of the Christian calendar. On Easter Day Christians believe their saviour came back to life and was seen in corporeal form for several weeks before ascending on a cloud to ‘heaven’. This is the very basis of their religion.

They believe it because the gospels say it happened, or so they think. But most Christians aren’t aware that the Gospels are riddled with factual errors, contradictions and unsupported statements that challenge the very basis of the religion.

This series presents ten myths about the Easter stories drawing on Gospel sources and historical records from the period.

Myth #6: Yeshua’s disciples expected him to resurrect because he had told them so

According to the gospels, Yeshua repeatedly told his disciples that he would be killed and then resurrected on the third day[1] and this was his destiny as foretold in the Hebrew Scriptures. And yet according to these same sources, nobody – not even his closest disciples – expected him to rise again.

When the post-Easter Christ figure/apparition ‘appeared’ to them, all the witnesses were surprised, so much so that most did not recognise him. How could this be? If he had told them he would return and they believed in him why did it come as such a surprise?

Or were the sightings of the risen prophet inventions of the gospel authors? The writers of the Second, Third and Fourth Gospels went to some lengths to insist that the risen Yeshua was not a ghost, nor was he a badly injured man hobbling around. Even though he could appear and disappear at will, he ate, drank and could be touched.

However, not one of these authors could have been present at the events they describe. All were writing at least fifty years later using hearsay as their source material. There’s not a single piece of evidence, not even a sentence in any of the contemporary non-gospel records of the time. If his closest disciples were sceptical, why shouldn’t we?

 

©David Lawrence Preston, 11.2.2017

Follow me on Facebook and Twitter @David_L_Preston

Balboa Press 2015

 

[1] E.g. Mark 9:31 and 10:34; Matthew 16:21 and 17:23; Luke 9:22 and 24:7; John 20:19

Easter Myth #5: Disciples witnessed the ‘resurrection’

Ten Easter Myths

Most leading historians, archaeologists and linguists don’t believe that the four official Christian Gospels can be relied upon as accurate records of historical fact. The Christmas stories, for instance, are known to be complete fabrications based on stories passed down from other traditions, edited to make them appear consistent with ancient Hebrew prophecies. The Easter stories too are highly dubious as factual accounts.

Easter is unquestionably the most important day of the Christian calendar. On Easter Day Christians believe their saviour Yeshua came back to life and was seen in corporeal form for several weeks before ascending on a cloud to ‘heaven’. This is the very basis of their religion.

They believe it because the gospels say it happened, or so they think. But most Christians aren’t aware of the inconsistencies in the scriptures. The Gospels are riddled with factual errors, contradictions and unsupported statements that challenge the very basis of the religion.

This series presents ten myths about the Easter stories drawing on Gospel sources and historical records from the period.

Myth #5: Several of Yeshua’s disciples witnessed the ‘resurrection’

The fact is, according to the gospels themselves, nobody saw him walk out of the tomb. Even Paul of Tarsus – his main apostle and for many the actual founder of the Christian religion – believed that Yeshua returned in changed form, not as a resuscitated corpse

The earliest reference to a resurrection appears in Paul’s First Letter to the Corinthians, written around a quarter of a century after the crucifixion. But Paul never claimed a physical resurrection; he believed that Yeshua had reappeared in changed form, transformed into a spiritual body. Perhaps that’s why he was not easily recognized in the Easter stories.

Three of the gospel writers did not agree. They went to some lengths to insist that the risen Yeshua was not a ghost, nor was he a mutilated man hobbling around. In their versions he could appear and disappear at will, ate, drank and could be touched.

Why make it up? When Yeshua died, his disciples were scared and confused. Their hopes that he was the one to liberate his people were shattered. Then, as the decades rolled by, successive generations of Christians began to see him as the personification of G_d. But how could G_d die? How could they execute G_d as a common criminal? Why didn’t he try to escape so he could continue his ministry? They had a lot of explaining to do, and the startling explanation they came up with was resurrection.

©David Lawrence Preston, 10.2.2017

Follow me on Facebook and Twitter @David_L_Preston

Balboa Press, 2015

 

 

Easter Myth #4: Yeshua was given a decent burial

Ten Easter Myths

Most leading historians, archaeologists and linguists don’t believe that the four official Christian Gospels can be relied upon as accurate records of historical fact. The Christmas stories, for instance, are known to be complete fabrications based on stories passed down from other traditions, edited to make them appear consistent with ancient Hebrew prophecies. The Easter stories too are highly dubious as factual accounts.

Easter is unquestionably the most important day of the Christian calendar. On Easter Day Christians believe their saviour Yeshua came back to life and was seen in corporeal form for several weeks before ascending on a cloud to ‘heaven’. This is the very basis of their religion.

They believe it because the gospels say it happened, or so they think. But most Christians aren’t aware of the inconsistencies in the scriptures. The Gospels are riddled with factual errors, contradictions and unsupported statements that challenge the very basis of the religion.

This series presents ten myths about the Easter stories drawing on Gospel sources and historical records from the period.

Myth #4: Yeshua was given a decent burial

While Yeshua’s crucifixion is referred to in other sources, the circumstances of his burial are vigorously contested.

It was unheard of for a crucified person to receive a decent burial; this was part of the punishment. It was normal practice to leave crucified bodies on the crosses until the vultures had torn off the flesh, then remove the bones and take them to the sulphur pits outside Jerusalem which were used as a crematorium. Alternatively the naked body would be left on the cross so that vultures could attack, which was considered an excellent deterrent to other would-be insurrectionists. Any remains would then be placed in a shallow grave or eaten by dogs.

To say this, of course, would not have suited the gospel writers. Instead they wrote that Pilate gave permission for Yeshua’s body to be taken by an influential admirer, Joseph of Arimithea, and placed in a tomb that he had constructed for himself. With Mary Magdalene and another Mary looking on, a large stone was rolled across the entrance and an armed guard positioned close by.

Quite why Pilate would have given permission for the body of this particular troublemaker to be given this special treatment is unclear, except it set the scene for what followed next.

©David Lawrence Preston, 10.2.2017

Follow me on Facebook and Twitter @David_L_Preston

Balboa Press, 2015

Easter Myth #3: The gospels accurately recorded Yeshua’s last words

Ten Easter Myths

Most leading historians, archaeologists and linguists don’t believe that the four official Christian Gospels can be relied upon as accurate records of historical fact. The Christmas stories, for instance, are known to be complete fabrications based on stories passed down from other traditions, edited to make them appear consistent with ancient Hebrew prophecies. The Easter stories too are highly dubious as factual accounts.

Easter is unquestionably the most important day of the Christian calendar. On Easter Day Christians believe their saviour Yeshua came back to life and was seen in corporeal form for several weeks before ascending on a cloud to ‘heaven’. This is the very basis of their religion.

They believe it because the gospels say it happened, or so they think. But most Christians aren’t aware of the inconsistencies in the scriptures. The Gospels are riddled with factual errors, contradictions and unsupported statements that challenge the very basis of the religion.

This series presents ten myths about the Easter stories drawing on Gospel sources and historical records.

Myth #3:  The gospels accurately recorded Yeshua’s last words

It was normal for victims of crucifixion to suffer for many hours in the heat of the day, then slip into a coma before being pronounced dead. Usually it took over twenty-four hours but the gospels say Yeshua died relatively quickly. But what were his last words?

  • According to ‘Matthew’ he let out a cry, ‘My G_d, my G_d, why have you forsaken me?’[1] – hardly the cry of a man who had participated willingly in his fate.
  • In ‘Luke’, he cried more nobly, ‘Father, into your hands I commend my spirit.’[2]
  • In ‘Mark’, he merely breathed his last.[3] ‘Mark’ claimed that Pilate was surprised that Yeshua died so soon.[4]
  • In ‘John’ he said nothing profound, but took the opportunity to ask ‘the disciple who he loved’[5] to take care of his mother.

Interestingly members of the public were not allowed to get close to the crucifixion scene. Only the Roman guards would have heard words spoken by the condemned – certainly not the gospel authors!

©David Lawrence Preston, 10.2.2017

Follow me on Facebook and Twitter @David_L_Preston

Balboa Press, 2015

[1] Matthew 27:46. This is a quote from Psalms 22.1.

[2] Luke 23, 46

[3] Mark 15:37

[4] Mark 15:44

[5] There are several references to ‘the disciple who Yeshua loved’ in the Fourth Gospel. Those who think it was the author himself are mistaken because the gospel was written many decades after the events they purport to describe. It is clearly a fabrication.

Easter Myth #2: Pilate was a kindly ditherer, open to persuasion

Ten Easter Myths

Most leading historians, archaeologists and linguists don’t believe that the four official Christian Gospels can be relied upon as accurate records of historical fact. The Christmas stories, for instance, are known to be complete fabrications based on stories passed down from other traditions, edited to make them appear consistent with ancient Hebrew prophecies. The Easter stories too are highly dubious as factual accounts.

Easter is unquestionably the most important day of the Christian calendar. On Easter Day Christians believe their saviour Yeshua came back to life and was seen in corporeal form for several weeks before ascending on a cloud to ‘heaven’. This is the very basis of their religion.

They believe it because the gospels say it happened, or so they think. But most Christians aren’t aware of the inconsistencies in the scriptures. The Gospels are riddled with factual errors, contradictions and unsupported statements that challenge the very basis of the religion.

This series presents ten myths about the Easter stories drawing on Gospel sources and historical records from the period.

Myth #2:  Pilate was a kindly ditherer, open to persuasion

The Pontius Pilate of history was a ruthless tyrant, far from the weak and wavering man portrayed in the gospels. If Yeshua was believed to pose a threat to law and order his fate would have been quickly sealed.

Few scholars regard the gospel reports of Yeshua’s ‘trial’ as credible. The gospels say Yeshua had broken no law in Roman eyes and only when the chief priests convinced Pilate that he was a danger to public order was his fate sealed. But this is extremely unlikely. Roman Prefects could treat members of the subject nation as they wished. Pilate had a history of putting usurpers to death without trial without hesitation. It is doubtful that Pilate would have lost any sleep over it.

The author of ‘Matthew’ was so keen to absolve the Romans of their responsibility that he had Pilate’s wife advising him in to ‘have nothing to do with this innocent man for today I have suffered a great deal because of a dream about him.’[1]

But outside the gospel stories there is no record of Pilate ever showing mercy, and it would have been completely out of character to let Yeshua off the hook. Indeed, he was later recalled to Rome to face charges of misrule and committed suicide in disgrace!

Pilate’s reluctance in the gospels to crucify this noisy Jewish dissident contrasts so much with what is known about him from other sources that it seems certain that later editors ‘doctored’ the gospels to deflect blame away from Rome. Why would they do such a thing? Simple: the Christian leaders of the First and Second Centuries did not want to make enemies of the Romans.

In the decades that followed, the Romans took charge of the religion and put the finishing touches to the early Christian Scriptures. It would have been embarrassing to say the least that a senior Roman official had condemned the Saviour to death!

It was convenient to deflect the blame for his death to the Jews. The repercussions for Christian-Jewish relations were severe and lasted for nearly two thousand years, until Pope John Paul the Second made a wholesome apology to the Jewish people in 2000.[2]

©David Lawrence Preston, 10.2.2017

Follow me on Facebook and Twitter @David_L_Preston

Balboa Press, 2015

[1] Matthew 27:19. There is no mention of this in the other gospels.

[2] In 2000, Pope John Paul also apologised for the crusades, the massacre of French Protestants and the trial of Galileo.

Easter Myth #1: The gospel accounts of Yeshua’s trial are broadly in agreement

Ten Easter Myths

Most leading historians, archaeologists and linguists don’t believe that the four official Christian Gospels can be relied upon as accurate records of historical fact. The Christmas stories, for instance, are known to be complete fabrications based on stories passed down from other traditions, edited to make them appear consistent with ancient Hebrew prophecies. The Easter stories too are highly dubious as factual accounts.

Easter is unquestionably the most important day of the Christian calendar. On Easter Day Christians believe their saviour Yeshua came back to life and was seen in corporeal form for several weeks before ascending on a cloud to ‘heaven’. This is the very basis of their religion.

They believe it because the gospels say it happened, or so they think. But most Christians haven’t studied the scripture in detail and aren’t aware of their inconsistencies. The Gospels are riddled with factual errors, contradictions and unsupported statements that challenge the very basis of the religion.

This series presents ten myths about the Easter stories drawing on Gospel sources and historical records from the period.

Myth #1:  The gospel accounts of Yeshua’s trial are broadly consistent with each other

No they’re not! The gospels differ significantly over the events surrounding Yeshua’s trial.

  • In the First Gospel, Mark, they took him to Caiaphas, the high priest’s, house where the Sanhedrin, the Jewish governing council , had assembled. The Jewish leaders gave false and conflicting testimony; Yeshua remained silent. Then Caiaphas asked him if he was the Messiah. Previously he had refused to claim the title, but this time he answered, ‘I am.’ ‘Blasphemy!’ exclaimed the Jewish leaders, ‘The punishment is death.’ [1] But the Jewish authorities had no power to execute a prisoner, only the Romans could do that, so Yeshua was sent to the Roman Prefect, Pontius Pilate.

Pilate is said to be unconvinced; blasphemy was not his concern. The Jewish leaders then accused Yeshua of claiming to be a king; this could be seen as sedition, a capital offence under Roman law. He half-heartedly caved in, had him flogged and then sent for crucifixion – normally reserved for bandits, slaves and non-Romans guilty of disloyalty to the Emperor.

  • In ‘Luke’s’ Gospel, and only ‘Luke’s’, he was also sent to Herod Antipas, the puppet ruler of Galilee, who questioned him but took no action. Herod returned him to Pilate.
  • ‘Matthew’s Gospel added a further dramatic gesture – Pilate washed his hands to signify that he was innocent of Yeshua’s blood.
  • And typically the Fourth Gospel, John, added several lengthy passages of dialogue at all stages of the proceedings.

Moreover, the gospels claim that Pilate was in the habit of releasing one prisoner every Passover festival and appealed to the crowd to nominate Yeshua. But they would not, preferring to plead for a common thief, Barabbas, instead. As for Yeshua, they screamed at Pilate to crucify him.

This is also curious. There is no reference to this custom outside the gospels so we must conclude there was none. And a Roman Governor had absolute discretion. The Pilate of history had a fearsome reputation and would never have allowed the crowd to choose.

So why do the authors of the Second and Fourth Gospels portray ‘the Jews’ as pleading for Yeshua’s death?

After the Roman Empire adopted Christianity as its official religion they had every reason to absolve Pilate of his responsibilities. ‘Matthew’s’ Gospel even has the Jewish crowd yelling in unison, ‘His blood be on us and on our children!’[2] which has often been cited as one of the causes of centuries of antisemitism.

Incidentally, to condemn Yeshua for sedition would have been a major miscarriage of justice since there is no evidence in any of the gospels that Yeshua had political or military aspirations, only religious ones.

©David Lawrence Preston, 1.3.2017

Follow me on Facebook and Twitter @David_L_Preston

Balboa Press, 2015

[1] Mark 14:53 – 15:15

[2] Matthew 27:25

Surprise, surprise! Adam and Eve never existed!

Surprise, surprise, Adam and Eve never existed! Who says so? No less than the leader of the world’s 1.1 billion Roman Catholics, ‘G-d’s representative on Earth’ – the Pope.

Scholars have known for over 200 years that most of the Bible stories are myths, that even the accounts of historical events were written hundreds of years later and contain many inaccuracies. Even the official Gospels, on which the Christian faith depends, have no contemporary written or archaeological evidence (outside the New Testament) to verify them. Surely a man who attracted huge crowds, performed miracles and rose from the dead would have attracted some comment from the Greek, Roman and Jewish authors of the time?

Evenso, for centuries the mainstream churches have doggedly stuck to their guns in the face of the increasing evidence that the very basis of their religion is deeply flawed. In a nutshell, they believe Yeshua came to save humanity from the effects of sin, and G-d’s reaction to sin could be traced right back through the Hebrew Scriptures to the very first humans, Adam and Eve, who wickedly ate fruit from the tree of knowledge in the Garden of Eden. This seemingly innocent action led to them being expelled from the Garden.

If there were no Adam and Eve, there was also no ‘fall of man’, and no need for the ‘son of G-d’ to come to Earth!

 

OLYMPUS DIGITAL CAMERA

Now enter the debate Pope Francis l, Time Magazine’s Man of the Year 2013. In a speech in December 2013, ‘His Holiness’ claims that ‘Through humility, soul searching, and prayerful contemplation we have gained a new understanding of certain dogmas. The church no longer believes in a literal hell where people suffer. This doctrine is incompatible with the infinite love of God. God is not a judge but a friend and a lover of humanity. God seeks not to condemn but only to embrace.’

The Pope continued: ‘Like the fable (my italics) of Adam and Eve, we see hell as a literary device. Hell is merely a metaphor for the isolated soul, which like all souls ultimately will be united in love with God.’

As welcome as this is, there are many more fables in both the New and Old Testaments that could be similarly refined – the first creation story in Genesis (which the Adam and Eve story blatantly contradicts), Noah’s flood, Abraham’s almost-sacrifice of his son Isaac, the Hebrews’ enslavement in and eventual escape from Egypt (there is no historical or archaeological evidence for either) led by Moses (he probably didn’t exist either), the fall of Jericho (likewise), Jonah and the whale, Job, Daniel in the lions’ den, Yeshua’s fictitious birth in Bethlehem, his 40 day temptation in the wilderness, burial and resurrection, and Acts’ version of Paul of Tarsus’ vision on the road to Damascus – and these are just for starters.

For the truth is, most of the Bible has no more basis in fact than the stories of Robin Hood, King Arthur, Sherlock Holmes or James Bond!

Soon after his election, Pope Francis inaugurated a series of discussions of long-held Catholic doctrines and dogmas, aimed at redefining Catholicism as a ‘modern and reasonable religion, which has undergone evolutionary changes… We must recognize that religious truth evolves and changes. Truth is not absolute or set in stone.’

Then he dropped a few more bombshells: ‘The Bible is a beautiful holy book, but like all great and ancient works, some passages are outdated. Some even call for intolerance or judgement. The time has come to see these verses as later interpolations, contrary to the message of love and truth, which otherwise radiates through scripture.’

Needless to say, Pope Francis’ latest declarations don’t carry the support of everyone in the Catholic Church. Some cardinals are said to be against them, and this is doubtless the case lower down the hierarchy too. One wonders what his predecessor makes of them.

But the most hysterical condemnations have come from that bastion of free speech, the internet. Some critics have suggested he’s off his rocker (he’s off his rocker?!!!) and others that he’s the antichrist forecast in the Book of Revelations, sent as a precursor to the end of time and judgement day.

The Catholic Church has always been behind the times, suspicious of new knowledge and anything which contradicts ancient or existing doctrine, so the Pope’s utterances should be universally welcomed. The fact that they haven’t been by evangelicals, apocalysts and other religious nutters should only strengthen our resolve to bring the truth out into the open.

©David Lawrence Preston, 13.1.18

Facebook and Twitter

Follow me on Facebook and Twitter, David_L_Preston

Front cover 201 things

Hay House/Balboa Press

Merry Christmas Everybody

VirginJPG

It’s not unusual for religious people to believe that their prophet or guru came into the world in a miraculous way, and Christians are no exception. In Yeshua’s case, tradition has it that he was born in Bethlehem, but this was an invention of the authors of Matthew and Luke’s gospels, keen to tie him into an ancient biblical prophecy. Let’s examine the evidence.

The Christmas story which is enacted around the world every December is based on just two gospels – Matthew’s and Luke’s. Combine the two and you get the familiar Christmas tale. An angel impregnated an elderly lady called Elizabeth, who gave birth to a son who became John the Baptist. Shortly after, the same happened to her cousin, a teenage virgin, Mary. Mary’s fiancée, Joseph, a descendant of King David, agreed to conceal the truth.

Meanwhile the Romans ordered a census and decreed that everyone should return to their ancestral home for counting. Joseph and the heavily pregnant Mary travelled from Nazareth to King David’s city, Bethlehem. Their son was born in a stable because there was no room at the inn. They were visited by shepherds and three wise men from the East who saw a bright star and followed it to Bethlehem. Joseph, Mary and the baby then had to escape to Egypt to avoid persecution from King Herod who felt threatened when the wise men told him a new king had been born. Eventually they returned to Nazareth and nothing more was heard of them for over a decade, when they suddenly discovered that the boy was a child genius.

Now apart from the sheer implausibility of such a tale, it is compounded by a number of ‘inconvenient’ facts based on what we know about the history and culture of Palestinian society at that time. Of course these are never pointed out in churches or church literature.

To start with, the above narrative is a combination of two incompatible sources. Both authors had an agenda, and they simply cannot be combined in any truthful way. The only thing they have in common is the alleged location, Bethlehem, and their wish to portray Yeshua’s birth as a profoundly important event. ‘Matthew’ was also concerned to link it in as many ways as possible to Yeshua’s Jewish heritage and the Hebrew prophecies.

There is no mention of this miraculous birth anywhere else in the New Testament: no mention in the first gospel to be written, Mark, and no mention in Paul’s letters, which pre-dated Mark. Paul had met with the disciples Peter and James – surely they would have discussed such a remarkable turn of events as a couple of fecund angels? Or is it simply that these stories hadn’t yet been invented when the earliest New Testament texts were written?

There’s no mention of the birth in the Fourth Gospel; no mention in the Acts of the Apostles; and no mention in the later letters. And nowhere in the gospels does Yeshua make any reference to his birth, and neither do his mother or brothers! Curious!

The young mother

Virgin birth stories were rife in that part of the world at that time, and had been for centuries. But this particular virgin birth story was based on a Greek misunderstanding of a Hebrew prophecy from Isaiah that a ‘young woman’ would give birth. Modern translations[1] read as follows: ‘Look, the young woman is with child and shall bear a son…..’[2]  Older translations including the King James Bible say, ‘Behold a virgin shall conceive…’ Regrettably, the flawed old version continues to be widely used, compounding the error.

A virgin birth would have appeared even more amazing in the First Century since they didn’t yet know that the mother produces eggs which are fertilised by the father. They thought the father’s sperm was merely nurtured inside the mother until the baby was born.

Bethlehem

It was especially important for the author of Matthew’s Gospel that Yeshua was seen to come from the town of Bethlehem, since the prophet Micah had foreseen a Messiah being born there[3]. Matthew stated it as a fact[4] but made no attempt to explain why this young Nazarene couple decided to journey through the hostile territory of Samaria to Bethlehem; that trumped-up story came from Luke. The vehicle he chose was a Roman Census which required every citizen to return to their ancestral home. Because Joseph was said to be a descendent of King David, this meant David’s city, Bethlehem.

Good story. The problem is, it simply isn’t true. Historians have searched in vain for an empire-wide census at the time of Yeshua’s birth, but there was none. There was one in 6 CE, but none between 10 BCE and year zero. In any case it would have been impossible for all the Jews, scattered around the Empire, to return to their home towns. And not even the Romans would have insisted that a heavily pregnant woman travel the eighty miles from Nazareth to Bethlehem on a donkey.

Mark’s gospel makes no reference to Bethlehem at all, while the Fourth Gospel reports an incident in which a crowd doubted that he was the Messiah precisely because he did not come from Bethlehem, but from Galilee[5].

The stable scene

nativity

Christians everywhere are familiar with the nativity scene set in a stable with the ‘holy family’ surrounded by farm animals, shepherds, angels and the three wise men bearing gifts of gold, frankincense and myrrh, all paying tribute to the new ‘king’. But how credible is this? According to Luke’s gospel, the shepherds went to the stable immediately, but surely it must have taken weeks for the wise men to arrive from wherever they came? And what happened to the gold, frankincense and myrrh? If Mary and Joseph had had these things they could have sold them and lived the rest of their lives in comfort.

In November 2012 the Pope remarked that nativity scenes should not show cows, donkeys or a choir of angels because they aren’t mentioned in the Bible, conveniently skirting round the issue of whether the birth story had any validity at all!

The flight into Egypt

According to Luke[6], Yeshua soon returned to Nazareth. But Matthew’s gospel says that Mary, Joseph and the baby fled to Egypt to avoid an order from King Herod that all new born Jewish boys be killed. But there’s no record of any such decree, and no record of a slaughter of Jewish babies at that time. It is merely a way of linking Yeshua’s birth to the passage in the scriptures in which Yahweh says, ‘Out of Egypt I called my son.’[7]

Literary inventions

When Bishop David Jenkins said he did not believe in the gospel birth stories in the early 1980s he was widely chastised in Christian circles, but he was merely articulating a view that had existed among Bible scholars for centuries. For example, Dr Albert Schweitzer wrote in The Quest of the Historical Jesus, ‘The histories of Yeshua’s birth are not literary versions of a tradition, but literary inventions,’ concocted specially for the purpose of glorifying Yeshua.

Historical evidence – and two of the gospels – strongly suggest that Yeshua was born and raised in Nazareth. There was no reason for his parents to be in Bethlehem for his birth, and no reason to seek refuge in Egypt.

So were ‘Matthew’ and ‘Luke’ liars? Yes and no. Like many writers, they saw no harm in using a little artistic licence. They probably borrowed a few ideas from other cultures too. They simply wanted to encourage people to join their new community because they believed in its message.

In the longer term they helped to bring Yeshua’s his life and teachings to wider prominence, but, along the Apostle Paul’s teachings, turned people’s attention away from what he taught to who he was. And this is perhaps their greatest legacy.

©David Lawrence Preston, 30.11.2016

Facebook and Twitter

Follow me on Facebook and Twitter, @David_L_Preston

Read my book, published by Balboa Press

Front cover 201 things

 

[1] New Revised Standard Version, 1989, Oxford University Press

[2] Isaiah 7:14

[3] Micah 5:2

[4] Matthew 2:1

[5] John 7:40-42

[6] Luke 2:39

[7] Hosea 11:1

 

 

Explain this to a 6 year-old!

Professor Albert Einstein said that if you can’t explain something to a six year-old, you don’t understand it yourself. So here are six things you can ask your Christian friends and colleagues:

  1. How does the execution of a Jewish prophet and healer nearly two thousand years ago save me or you from the consequences of our sins?
  2. How is it possible for a son to have been created at the same time as his father (as the doctrine of the Holy Trinity and Nicaean Creed insist)?
  3. If there really is an all-powerful, all-seeing, all-loving G_d, how come so many of the beings supposedly created in its image experience such abject poverty, ill-health and suffering?
  4. Is it possible not to believe in a virgin birth and bodily resurrection and still be a good Christian?
  5. Since the gospels make it perfectly clear that Yeshua (‘Jesus’) promised his followers that the kingdom of G_d would arrive within a generation, how come it still isn’t here?
  6. How can we trust the gospels as factually accurate when there are no contemporary sources corroborating the implausible events they describe, and only four known contemporary references to Yeshua outside the New Testament? Are they not works merely of wishful thinking and supposition?

Good questions indeed! AND I HAVE YET TO HEAR CONVINCING ANSWERS!

©David Lawrence Preston, 29.8.2016

Facebook and Twitter

Follow me on Facebook and Twitter @David_L_Preston

Front cover 201 things

201 facts for discussion and debate.  Balboa Press, 2015