Jesus Of Nazareth Research Paper
Throughout the course of human history, people all over the world have sought answers as to where they have come from and where they are headed. Out of this comes organized religion, and almost always an accompanying figurehead. For the Jews, this figurehead might be Moses, or even Abraham; for Muslims, it is Allah; and for the approximately one third of the global population that practices some form of Christianity, that person is Jesus of Nazareth. The life of Jesus transformed an innumerable amount of people over the last two thousand years. As mentioned above, those who believe Jesus had the divine spirit within number in the billions. Interestingly, all of these people know of Jesus only through the writings of the New Testament which
…show more content…
is comprised of Gospels that chronicle his life. Unfortunately, since those writing the Gospels were writing close to seventy years after the death of Jesus, it is absolutely impossible to verify that all of what is written is undeniably factual. Perhaps this is where the notion of faith comes into play. Regardless, historians must use only what is presented in front of them to make an educated determination as to the what went on during the days of Jesus. The information presented herein comes from the New Testament in The New Jerusalem Bible published by Doubleday. With so much uncertainty as to what went on during the life of Jesus, our most accurate, (yet still shrouded with ambiguity), source is that of the four canonical Gospels in the New Testament.
The three Gospels written by Matthew, Mark, and Luke are collectively known as the Synoptic Gospels. The fourth Gospel, which was written by John, bears some stark distinction between itself and the Synoptic Gospels. It is important to understand that the Gospels, which were written around 70 A.D., are not biographies or eyewitness accounts of Jesus. Instead, they are sermons about the meaning of Jesus' life. Moreover, the Gospels are two generations removed from the actual life of Jesus. The first generation would be considered the life of Jesus himself from approximately 4 B.C. through 30 A.D.. Had Matthew, Mark, Luke, and John actually been close to Jesus during his life, perhaps the Gospels would likely be different from what they are today. The second generation is made up of earlier accounts written by numerous sources between the death of Jesus at roughly 70 A.D.. As a result of this forty-year gap between the actual life of Jesus and what we know of today as the Gospels, it can be assumed that what is written in the Gospels are in no way a detailed account of Jesus' …show more content…
life. Interestingly, what we read in the Gospels as the words and actions of Jesus does hold a certain amount of truth.
However, while writing the Gospels, certain speeches and other appearances might have been moved around to promote a certain agenda that each of the authors wanted to promote. For example, it is clear that Matthew makes several comparisons between Jesus and Moses in hopes of bolstering Jesus' status as a leader of the people of Israel. On page 1152 of The New Jerusalem Bible, Matthew tells the story of the Sermon on the Mountain. "Seeing the crowds, he went onto the mountain. And when he was seated his disciples came to him. Then he began to speak." (Bible, 1152. 5:1). In this Gospel, Jesus goes up a mountain, much the way Moses did when he received the Ten Commandments. However, in Luke's Gospel, Jesus delivers the same sermon in a different fashion. "He then came down with them and stopped at a piece of level ground where there was a large gathering of his disciples." (1214, 6:17). In a direct contradiction to Matthew's Gospel, Luke tells a story of Jesus coming down onto level ground, as opposed to going up a mountain. This can be seen as a comparison to King Samuel, an important figure in the Old Testament that led Israel for a number of years, as a king would come down to speak with his people on their level. It is important to recognize that neither version of these Gospels provides the reader with when or where the Sermon on the Mount was delivered. This
further proves that the Gospels are in n o way an exact account of the life of Jesus. Another key difference between these two particular Gospels is in the focal point of what Jesus preached. Throughout the whole of Matthew's Gospel, Jesus speaks of the Kingdom of Heaven. "Blessed are those who are persecuted in the cause of uprightness: the kingdom of Heaven is theirs." (1152, 5:10). Luke's Gospel, however, speaks of a Kingdom of God. "How blessed are you who are poor: the kingdom of God is yours." (1214, 6:20). Discrepancies in the length of the various Gospels is another issue that historians must address as they try to tell the most accurate story of Jesus that they can. An explanation for such discrepancies would be that both Matthew and Luke had access to what is known as the "Q" source. In all likelihood, this source provided the general framework for the Sermon on the Mount. Historians now this because Mark, who did not have the "Q" source available to him, did not mention the Sermon at all. Other mentionable differences between the Gospels include the number of trips to Jerusalem that Jesus had made. In the Gospel of John, Jesus made five distinct trips to the city. Whereas the Synoptic Gospels of Mark, Matthew, and Luke predominately take place in Galilee, telling only of one trip to Jerusalem at the end of Jesus' life. The three Synoptic Gospels also have Jesus speaking in parables about everyday life John's Gospel, however, has Jesus making long, poetic speeches. There are also no demons made mention of in John's Gospel, where in the other three, Jesus is casting demons and other evil spirits out of people on a fairly regular basis. Despite all of these differences, perhaps the most important contradiction between the Gospels is what Jesus is preaching in each one. In the Gospels of Mark and Luke, Jesus preaches about a Kingdom of God. Matthew tells us that Jesus spoke of a Kingdom of Heaven, while John speaks about Everlasting Life. There is more to the life of Jesus, however, than what he said. Throughout the Gospels, Jesus is said to have cured numerous people, along with performing other miracles, not withstanding is own birth. Matthew organizes Jesus' cures and wonders in one section of his Gospel. Mark and Luke mention the same miracles, but in a different order, while John makes no mention of any evil sprits being forced out of people by Jesus. One of the most notable miracles performed by Jesus was the curing of blindness in two men. "Then he touched their eyes saying, According to your faith, let it be done to you.' And their sight returned." (1157, 9:29). In Mark's Gospel, Jesus is said to have cured only one blind man, and in this instance, Jesus had to do a little more than touch the person. "Then, putting spittle on his eyes and laying his hands on him, he asked, Can you see anything?' The man, who was beginning to see, replied, I can see people; they look like trees as they walk around." (1193, 8:23). Jesus had to reapply his "spittle" in order to completely heal the man, and it was at this point that the miracle was complete. The biblical explanation for this method of healing is that Jesus is filled with the divine spirit which will leave Jesus in order to push an evil spirit out of someone who is suffering. Earlier in Mark's Gospel, Jesus concedes that he does feel something leave his body when he performs these miracles. It is during this passage when Jesus brings the daughter of Jairus back to life. (1189, 5:35-40). Ultimately, this little girl was asleep, however, the point that Mark is trying to make is that Jesus is not unlike some of the important figures of the Old Testament. In this particular instance, Jesus is being compared to Elijah. In the Old Testament, Elijah breathes into the body of a dead boy, and miraculously, the boy is reanimated. Elijah is regarded by many, both today and during the time of Jesus, as a prophet who has the God's spirit within. Mark further draws from the Old Testament when he tells us that Jesus' family is concerned for him. "When his relations heard of this, they set out to take charge of him; they said, He is out of his mind.'" (1186, 3:21). This is not unlike what happened to Saul when he was King of Israel. Everyone thought he was possessed with a spirit, which is what caused his eccentric behavior. In order to understand how Jesus is the vessel for the divine spirit, historians must look back to the Gospel of Matthew. At chapter twelve, verse twenty-two, it is said that Jesus has this great ability to cast demons out of those who contain them because he had made a prior arrangement with Beelzebul, a descendant of Baal believed to be the devil. Jesus is able to contest this claim earlier in the Gospel when the story of his baptism is told. When Jesus was baptized by none other than John the Baptist, the heavens opened up and the God descended. It was at this point where the God declared Jesus is his son and entered his body. It is from this point on that he is considered the "Son of God." (1151, 3:13). Just like Mark, Matthew also wanted to draw parallels from the Old Testament. Intentionally placed right after the story of his baptism, Mark tells the story of Jesus wandering in the desert for forty days and forty nights. During this "testing" of sorts, Jesus was tempted by the Devil to join him and his cause. Like we would all expect, Jesus declined, but the similarities between this and what happened to his earliest ancestors is incredible. When the Jews wandered the desert for forty years, many believe that this was the act of the God testing the solidarity of the "chosen people." And while there is no mention of any devil tempting the Jews during their forty-year ordeal, it is safe to assume that there was plenty of temptation, regardless. With a civilization on the move, it is quite easy to commit all sorts of crimes, both petty and severe. With these comparisons between the Old Testament and the life of Jesus, it is clear that the authors of the Gospels want to paint a very specific picture of the "Son of God." Another similarity between all four Gospels is what happens in Jesus' final trip to Jerusalem, or in the case of the synoptic Gospels, the only trip. It was at this point when Jesus cause a spectacle by throwing over tables, trying to incite serious thought in the people of Israel who were slowly becoming people of Rome. Keeping up with the Roman tradition of arresting anyone who came across as a threat to the Roman Empire, Jesus was promptly taken into custody and brought before the Roman government. (1179, 26:47-64). This is especially important because the Roman government had a history of Jewish uprisings and rebellions and were not exactly pleased to see the beginnings of another. While they were hard-pressed to find a reason to execute Jesus, the Roman government in Jerusalem, headed by Pontious Pilate, brought Jesus before those who turned him in and asked why he should be put to death. While it is not explicit in any particular Gospel, the Jewish leaders who had notable political power, feared Jesus as a result of the increasing number of followers he won. Feeling threatened by this, the crowd before Pilate chose to have Barabass, a murderer, set free, while Jesus was to be crucified. Although clearly reluctant to do so, the Romans ultimately agreed that they did not want any further rebellions against the Empire, and so, they executed Jesus. (1180, 27:11). It is difficult for historians to piece together an entirely accurate version of Jesus' life. While countless Christians throughout the world believe that if the Bible says it, it must be true, any educated being must understand what the Gospels are actually saying. While Jesus did say much of what is contained in the Gospels, his words were moved around and skewed in order to promote a certain idea of what Jesus meant to all of his followers. There is no reasonable human being that can actually say Jesus cured blindness by spitting in someone's eye. It is also difficult to accept that Jesus was able to walk atop water, and to rise from the dead. There is no doubt that Jesus was a noteworthy part of human existence, but two thousand years since his death, billions of Christians should understand that what is said in the Bible is far from fact, but rather stories to provoke intelligent thought.
is comprised of Gospels that chronicle his life. Unfortunately, since those writing the Gospels were writing close to seventy years after the death of Jesus, it is absolutely impossible to verify that all of what is written is undeniably factual. Perhaps this is where the notion of faith comes into play. Regardless, historians must use only what is presented in front of them to make an educated determination as to the what went on during the days of Jesus. The information presented herein comes from the New Testament in The New Jerusalem Bible published by Doubleday. With so much uncertainty as to what went on during the life of Jesus, our most accurate, (yet still shrouded with ambiguity), source is that of the four canonical Gospels in the New Testament.
The three Gospels written by Matthew, Mark, and Luke are collectively known as the Synoptic Gospels. The fourth Gospel, which was written by John, bears some stark distinction between itself and the Synoptic Gospels. It is important to understand that the Gospels, which were written around 70 A.D., are not biographies or eyewitness accounts of Jesus. Instead, they are sermons about the meaning of Jesus' life. Moreover, the Gospels are two generations removed from the actual life of Jesus. The first generation would be considered the life of Jesus himself from approximately 4 B.C. through 30 A.D.. Had Matthew, Mark, Luke, and John actually been close to Jesus during his life, perhaps the Gospels would likely be different from what they are today. The second generation is made up of earlier accounts written by numerous sources between the death of Jesus at roughly 70 A.D.. As a result of this forty-year gap between the actual life of Jesus and what we know of today as the Gospels, it can be assumed that what is written in the Gospels are in no way a detailed account of Jesus' …show more content…
life. Interestingly, what we read in the Gospels as the words and actions of Jesus does hold a certain amount of truth.
However, while writing the Gospels, certain speeches and other appearances might have been moved around to promote a certain agenda that each of the authors wanted to promote. For example, it is clear that Matthew makes several comparisons between Jesus and Moses in hopes of bolstering Jesus' status as a leader of the people of Israel. On page 1152 of The New Jerusalem Bible, Matthew tells the story of the Sermon on the Mountain. "Seeing the crowds, he went onto the mountain. And when he was seated his disciples came to him. Then he began to speak." (Bible, 1152. 5:1). In this Gospel, Jesus goes up a mountain, much the way Moses did when he received the Ten Commandments. However, in Luke's Gospel, Jesus delivers the same sermon in a different fashion. "He then came down with them and stopped at a piece of level ground where there was a large gathering of his disciples." (1214, 6:17). In a direct contradiction to Matthew's Gospel, Luke tells a story of Jesus coming down onto level ground, as opposed to going up a mountain. This can be seen as a comparison to King Samuel, an important figure in the Old Testament that led Israel for a number of years, as a king would come down to speak with his people on their level. It is important to recognize that neither version of these Gospels provides the reader with when or where the Sermon on the Mount was delivered. This
further proves that the Gospels are in n o way an exact account of the life of Jesus. Another key difference between these two particular Gospels is in the focal point of what Jesus preached. Throughout the whole of Matthew's Gospel, Jesus speaks of the Kingdom of Heaven. "Blessed are those who are persecuted in the cause of uprightness: the kingdom of Heaven is theirs." (1152, 5:10). Luke's Gospel, however, speaks of a Kingdom of God. "How blessed are you who are poor: the kingdom of God is yours." (1214, 6:20). Discrepancies in the length of the various Gospels is another issue that historians must address as they try to tell the most accurate story of Jesus that they can. An explanation for such discrepancies would be that both Matthew and Luke had access to what is known as the "Q" source. In all likelihood, this source provided the general framework for the Sermon on the Mount. Historians now this because Mark, who did not have the "Q" source available to him, did not mention the Sermon at all. Other mentionable differences between the Gospels include the number of trips to Jerusalem that Jesus had made. In the Gospel of John, Jesus made five distinct trips to the city. Whereas the Synoptic Gospels of Mark, Matthew, and Luke predominately take place in Galilee, telling only of one trip to Jerusalem at the end of Jesus' life. The three Synoptic Gospels also have Jesus speaking in parables about everyday life John's Gospel, however, has Jesus making long, poetic speeches. There are also no demons made mention of in John's Gospel, where in the other three, Jesus is casting demons and other evil spirits out of people on a fairly regular basis. Despite all of these differences, perhaps the most important contradiction between the Gospels is what Jesus is preaching in each one. In the Gospels of Mark and Luke, Jesus preaches about a Kingdom of God. Matthew tells us that Jesus spoke of a Kingdom of Heaven, while John speaks about Everlasting Life. There is more to the life of Jesus, however, than what he said. Throughout the Gospels, Jesus is said to have cured numerous people, along with performing other miracles, not withstanding is own birth. Matthew organizes Jesus' cures and wonders in one section of his Gospel. Mark and Luke mention the same miracles, but in a different order, while John makes no mention of any evil sprits being forced out of people by Jesus. One of the most notable miracles performed by Jesus was the curing of blindness in two men. "Then he touched their eyes saying, According to your faith, let it be done to you.' And their sight returned." (1157, 9:29). In Mark's Gospel, Jesus is said to have cured only one blind man, and in this instance, Jesus had to do a little more than touch the person. "Then, putting spittle on his eyes and laying his hands on him, he asked, Can you see anything?' The man, who was beginning to see, replied, I can see people; they look like trees as they walk around." (1193, 8:23). Jesus had to reapply his "spittle" in order to completely heal the man, and it was at this point that the miracle was complete. The biblical explanation for this method of healing is that Jesus is filled with the divine spirit which will leave Jesus in order to push an evil spirit out of someone who is suffering. Earlier in Mark's Gospel, Jesus concedes that he does feel something leave his body when he performs these miracles. It is during this passage when Jesus brings the daughter of Jairus back to life. (1189, 5:35-40). Ultimately, this little girl was asleep, however, the point that Mark is trying to make is that Jesus is not unlike some of the important figures of the Old Testament. In this particular instance, Jesus is being compared to Elijah. In the Old Testament, Elijah breathes into the body of a dead boy, and miraculously, the boy is reanimated. Elijah is regarded by many, both today and during the time of Jesus, as a prophet who has the God's spirit within. Mark further draws from the Old Testament when he tells us that Jesus' family is concerned for him. "When his relations heard of this, they set out to take charge of him; they said, He is out of his mind.'" (1186, 3:21). This is not unlike what happened to Saul when he was King of Israel. Everyone thought he was possessed with a spirit, which is what caused his eccentric behavior. In order to understand how Jesus is the vessel for the divine spirit, historians must look back to the Gospel of Matthew. At chapter twelve, verse twenty-two, it is said that Jesus has this great ability to cast demons out of those who contain them because he had made a prior arrangement with Beelzebul, a descendant of Baal believed to be the devil. Jesus is able to contest this claim earlier in the Gospel when the story of his baptism is told. When Jesus was baptized by none other than John the Baptist, the heavens opened up and the God descended. It was at this point where the God declared Jesus is his son and entered his body. It is from this point on that he is considered the "Son of God." (1151, 3:13). Just like Mark, Matthew also wanted to draw parallels from the Old Testament. Intentionally placed right after the story of his baptism, Mark tells the story of Jesus wandering in the desert for forty days and forty nights. During this "testing" of sorts, Jesus was tempted by the Devil to join him and his cause. Like we would all expect, Jesus declined, but the similarities between this and what happened to his earliest ancestors is incredible. When the Jews wandered the desert for forty years, many believe that this was the act of the God testing the solidarity of the "chosen people." And while there is no mention of any devil tempting the Jews during their forty-year ordeal, it is safe to assume that there was plenty of temptation, regardless. With a civilization on the move, it is quite easy to commit all sorts of crimes, both petty and severe. With these comparisons between the Old Testament and the life of Jesus, it is clear that the authors of the Gospels want to paint a very specific picture of the "Son of God." Another similarity between all four Gospels is what happens in Jesus' final trip to Jerusalem, or in the case of the synoptic Gospels, the only trip. It was at this point when Jesus cause a spectacle by throwing over tables, trying to incite serious thought in the people of Israel who were slowly becoming people of Rome. Keeping up with the Roman tradition of arresting anyone who came across as a threat to the Roman Empire, Jesus was promptly taken into custody and brought before the Roman government. (1179, 26:47-64). This is especially important because the Roman government had a history of Jewish uprisings and rebellions and were not exactly pleased to see the beginnings of another. While they were hard-pressed to find a reason to execute Jesus, the Roman government in Jerusalem, headed by Pontious Pilate, brought Jesus before those who turned him in and asked why he should be put to death. While it is not explicit in any particular Gospel, the Jewish leaders who had notable political power, feared Jesus as a result of the increasing number of followers he won. Feeling threatened by this, the crowd before Pilate chose to have Barabass, a murderer, set free, while Jesus was to be crucified. Although clearly reluctant to do so, the Romans ultimately agreed that they did not want any further rebellions against the Empire, and so, they executed Jesus. (1180, 27:11). It is difficult for historians to piece together an entirely accurate version of Jesus' life. While countless Christians throughout the world believe that if the Bible says it, it must be true, any educated being must understand what the Gospels are actually saying. While Jesus did say much of what is contained in the Gospels, his words were moved around and skewed in order to promote a certain idea of what Jesus meant to all of his followers. There is no reasonable human being that can actually say Jesus cured blindness by spitting in someone's eye. It is also difficult to accept that Jesus was able to walk atop water, and to rise from the dead. There is no doubt that Jesus was a noteworthy part of human existence, but two thousand years since his death, billions of Christians should understand that what is said in the Bible is far from fact, but rather stories to provoke intelligent thought.