Tell Me the Real Story of Jesus
Lately, I've tore through article after article, book after book trying to understand all the hype associated with The Da Vinci Code, The Gospel of Judas, et. al. I try to stay on top of this type of news. Anything undermining the claims of the traditional understanding of Jesus gets my attention.
I've discovered it helps to remember the following few points when considering the Da Vinci hype, Gnosticism or any other ancient text reported to debunk the claims of Jesus of Nazareth or supply a fresh spin on him.
The Gnostic texts like those in the Nag Hammadi Library, along with The Gospel of Judas, date later than the four gospels. In other words, they weren’t original teachings on par with the now canonical gospels, they came later--they represent offshoots of Christianity not origins. Jesus' followers embraced his divinity long before many of the Gnostic sects downplayed it (cf. Philippians 2:5-11).
Also, the Gnostic texts give little attention to the 1st century Jewish social context in which Jesus ministered. This seems odd if they are earlier than the four, which do. The "alternative" Christian texts offer up a type of platonic format of isolated sayings and disconnected teachings as opposed to the narrative style of the four canonical gospels. Just read them, you'll see the difference.
Not only are they later, they greatly contradict many of the teachings found in the earlier sources. They flip the script on the good news of Jesus (found in the four canonical gospels) and promote a kind of good advice offered up by a good, moral man. In fact, if these new discoveries represent origins of Christianity, one has to wonder what made Christianity such a fuss.
And, what stirred up Rome so much in the first and second centuries? Did Caesar feel the threat of a unique teacher offering some spiritual advice? Or, was it the message of a risen King to whom the world owed allegiance, a Jew who embodied divine nature? History details the brutal persecutions some Roman emperors unleashed on disciples of Jesus. Now, which story of Jesus do you think got under their skin?
I've discovered it helps to remember the following few points when considering the Da Vinci hype, Gnosticism or any other ancient text reported to debunk the claims of Jesus of Nazareth or supply a fresh spin on him.
The Gnostic texts like those in the Nag Hammadi Library, along with The Gospel of Judas, date later than the four gospels. In other words, they weren’t original teachings on par with the now canonical gospels, they came later--they represent offshoots of Christianity not origins. Jesus' followers embraced his divinity long before many of the Gnostic sects downplayed it (cf. Philippians 2:5-11).
Also, the Gnostic texts give little attention to the 1st century Jewish social context in which Jesus ministered. This seems odd if they are earlier than the four, which do. The "alternative" Christian texts offer up a type of platonic format of isolated sayings and disconnected teachings as opposed to the narrative style of the four canonical gospels. Just read them, you'll see the difference.
Not only are they later, they greatly contradict many of the teachings found in the earlier sources. They flip the script on the good news of Jesus (found in the four canonical gospels) and promote a kind of good advice offered up by a good, moral man. In fact, if these new discoveries represent origins of Christianity, one has to wonder what made Christianity such a fuss.
And, what stirred up Rome so much in the first and second centuries? Did Caesar feel the threat of a unique teacher offering some spiritual advice? Or, was it the message of a risen King to whom the world owed allegiance, a Jew who embodied divine nature? History details the brutal persecutions some Roman emperors unleashed on disciples of Jesus. Now, which story of Jesus do you think got under their skin?
posted by Josh Linton at
10:49 AM
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home