Step by Step with the Bible

To present the objective figure of Jesus is not that easy. Anybody might think that writing about Jesus is an easy task, but really it is not. To let the feelings and imagination go, is easy; but that wouldn't present a real and objective picture of Jesus. We should endeavor that the figure of Jesus be as faithful and objective as possible. That is what we'll try to do in these Steps about Jesus of Nazareth.

Where the difficulty lies. The difficulty is that almost all the information that we have about Jesus is what we find in the gospels; and, although the gospels are historical books to some extent, they are not books that can withstand completely contemporary historical criticism. There are few words and deeds from the life of Jesus of Nazareth that would endure that historical criticism; there are not sufficiently strong proofs.

Historical facts. The contemporary historical criticism recognizes as historical facts only those which are supported by impartial and trustworthy proofs and documents; these could be called undeniable facts, as is, for example, the existence of Jesus Christ and His death on the cross. But not all the facts that we know about Jesus have the same degree of credibility.

The historical Jesus and the Christ of faith. The picture of Jesus that can be drawn from scientific documents gives a description of what we could call the historical Jesus. This picture of Jesus contrasts, but does not contradict, the other one which is called the Christ of faith, the picture that we Christians have about Jesus, and which is the one drawn from the gospels.

Difference of eras. There is not the least comparison between the means that we have today to preserve history, and those at the time of Jesus. We all know that there were not scribes and amanuensis taking notes of Jesus' words and deeds, not at His birth, neither when He was preaching or doing wonders through Galilee and Juda, much less at the moment of His resurrection. If there were a video of His resurrection, faith wouldn't be necessary to believe in Jesus and the whole world would be Christian. But there is none.

The Christ of faith. The Christ of the gospels is not the historical Christ but the Christ of faith, the Christ of the resurrection. It is in this Christ of faith in whom all Christian generations have believed, beginning with the apostles. There should have been, in fact, a very extraordinary event for the incredulous apostles who had abandoned Jesus during His passion, for them to so bravely believe; this event is the resurrection. Only an event like this could change Paul, from persecutor of Christians, into an apostle and Christ's messenger. Only an event such as this, the resurrection, made it possible that multitudes of Jews, who early had shouted for Jesus' death, would convert and be baptized. Christ is alive, and death will not have dominion over Him, ever! Fraud or deceipt will never explain the Christian fact.

Modern books about Jesus. Most of the books that deal about Jesus are settled, either at a historical level or at a theological level, that of faith. In Step by Step we deal basically about the Christ of faith; but, as it would be absurd to think about some kind of faith in contradiction with science, we have thought that a short study of the historical Jesus was necessary. There have been experiences in the past, as those of Copernicus and Galileo, from which we must learn to be humble, and to accept also that science is another means through which God talks and reveals Himself to mankind.

Historical and theological part of "Step by Step". Most of the historical questions about Jesus are addressed in the first chapters of this volume; the first chapter is used as the basis and introduction to the life of Jesus. We make reference there to what the scholars of the last two hundred years have said about the historical Jesus. The rest of the book is devoted to the Jesus of the gospels, to His doctrine and His redemptive act; the content therefore of this volume is theological. Throughout the whole treatise we will make references about what the modern critics say, and in some occasions we will refer to other subjects, intimately related to the matter we are dealing with, for the benefit and illustration of the readers.

We shouldn't be afraid of science. Some statements of the historians contrast with the Christ of faith and even in some occasions they can hurt the religious feelings of the believers. But we shouldn't be afraid of this; faith is above science and rises to a point where science can't reach. Faith has a basis, the resurrection, and is not founded on details or events that do not affect its solidity. It doesn't matter, then, what the scientists might "discover" or declare; Christian faith will always stay firm, since it is founded upon the resurrection.

Faithfulness to the Scripture. The constant norm of the volumes of Step by Step has been to follow to the letter the word of the Scripture, the gospels in particular, without forcing its interpretation. In this volume there are not truly personal interpretations; at least this has been the intention of the author. All its content is the presentation of the biblical text, as it is. Divisions in the Church have come forth when they wanted to force a meaning of a text, other than what it says. In some few instances we have criticized this attitude.

The gospels are the basic theme. This volume is built upon the gospels; they are, as we already said, the primary source to know Jesus and His doctrine. From time to time we make references to other texts of the Scripture, in particular the New Testament, to clarify or support some doctrinal points. This volume, of course, does not cover all the doctrine of the New Testament; for other subjects you must consult the other volumes of the collection Step by Step with the Bible.

Study about the being of God. There is a short study about the being of God (Steps 27 to 30), in which the doctrine of the Nicene, Constantinople and Chalcedon councils is explained and compared with the teachings of the Scripture. We have included this subject in our study about Jesus, because it is intimately connected with it and with the doctrine of Jesus in the gospels.

The "Steps by Steps" is for Christians of all denominations. This collection of Step by Step with the Bible does not belong to any particular denomination or church. It is Scripture, it is Gospel, it is for all Christians, from all churches and denominations; it has been written with the purpose of introducing them to, and making them familiar with, the message of the Scripture.

This collection is not for scholars. This collection has not been written for sages and learned persons, for scholars and experts, but for the ordinary Christians who want to know the Bible; for those who want to know Jesus Christ and His gospel. We have made short and clear references to academic themes, for the benefit of readers that are looking for information about them.

Text of the Scripture. We have used The New King James Version, translated from the original languages. We feel that this version is more faithful to the Greek originals and therefore expresses better the thought of these originals.

The gender. In the collection Step by Step we use, ordinarily, the word men, to refer to the whole mankind, not to the male gender. This has been the custom for centuries in the English language, and is the way that the Scripture is written. We hope that women are not offended or feel excluded by this fact.

The most difficult volume. Of the four volumes of the Step by Step, this has been the most difficult to write, as we said at the beginning. We tried to consult the most extensive bibliography in order to be up to date, as far as possible, about the opinions of the masters in biblical studies.

Eagerness and prayer. I pray that Jesus, who called me to His ministry, and Whose name I wanted to exalt in these pages, bless this modest work and make it to bear fruits for His glory and His reign.

Jairo Mejia
Redemption year, 1996

Go to the Steps directory.

CHAPTER I - Introduction to the life of Jesus of Nazareth

Christian faith is faith. Although this seems redundant, we must affirm that Christian faith is faith, that is, that Christian faith is not based on, nor is it the conclusion of an argument or historical, philosophical or scientific demonstration, but it is a present or gift from God: faith is the voluntary assent of facts and truths that we can not know except by revelation of God. Faith is the substance of things hoped for, the evidence of things not seen (Hebrews 11:1).

Why do we believe? We believe because of that which was said by Paul at the Areopagus: He (God) has given assurance of this to all by raising Him from the dead (Acts 17:31). We believe for the same reason that Paul believed: because he saw Jesus alive and risen. Paul —who was going the way of Damascus with the mission of exterminating those who believed and followed Jesus,— didn't have an other alternative than to declare himself defeated, before the fact of seeing that Jesus was alive in spite of having been dead, and that it was useless to try to annihilate this one Who was mightier than he was.

Peter's testimony. It is enough to read the second chapter of Acts to realize what was the basis of Peter's call to the Jews to repent and accept Jesus Christ as Lord and Messiah: the resurrection. And his testimony has more value, since he had cowardly denied Him during His passion. Now he is preaching boldly the name of Jesus.

The godship of Jesus. For us, Christians, Jesus was more than a simple man and much more than a prophet. He was exalted to be the Christ, the Son of God and Lord. Those who just accept the moral teachings of Jesus, but do not believe in His godship, could be admirers of Jesus but not Christians. Christian is one who believes that Jesus is the Son of God made man, and follows His teachings. Jesus of Nazareth can not be known and really understood as He really is, except through an experience of faith. Christian is one who can say with Peter to Jesus: We have come to believe and know that You are the Christ, the Son of the living God (John 6:69).

Criticism of some scholars. There are some modern critics who are trying to "prove" that Jesus was not any more than a humble and ignorant peasant who made Himself a prophet; that he didn't do true miracles, because those narrated in the gospels as such, were only fantasies created by the piety of the Christians; that He received the punishment given to those who rebel against the order; and that He was not even buried, but that His corpse was devoured by wild beasts, and that that was the end of everything. If this would have been the fact, then that would have been the end of the history of Jesus, forgotten, as had happened to many other thousands which, according to the same scholars, were hanged on crosses in just one day.

The risen Jesus is a present reality. What a different reality we see today! Millions of Christians believe in Jesus, not just for what they have read or learned, but because they have experienced that Jesus is alive and has transformed their lives. A dead man can not give life as Jesus gives to those who believe in Him.

Christianity was born from the resurrection. From what has been said we can understand that Christianity is born from faith in the resurrection. We know, historically, that after Jesus' death a movement arose which kept His memory alive, believed in His promises and followed His teachings. If we wonder which was the real motive for the Christian fact to be brought up, and for the disciples' unbelief to be changed into faith, the answer is: the resurrection. Peter affirms this when he says: He has begotten us again to living hope through the resurrection of Jesus Christ from the dead (1 Peter 1:3).

The resurrection is a fact of faith. The resurrection of Jesus, although it was a real fact, can not be catalogued as a historical, demonstrable fact. The resurrection of Jesus can not be proven by the fact of the resurrection itself, because nobody was witness of the resurrection, as far as we know. To believe in the living and resurrected Christ is an act of faith; it is the basis of the Christian faith.

Without resurrection there is no Christian faith. The only explanation for the Christian event that began twenty centuries ago was the resurrection of Jesus, as we have said. The early Christians believed that Jesus had been raised and that He will not die, ever. There is only one way to believe in the resurrection, and this is faith. And that is to be a Christian. This entire volume is an homage to the risen Jesus.

The Christian miracle. Ever since the beginning of Christianity the Fathers of the Church said: Christianity was propagated with miracles or without miracles; if it was propagated with miracles, Christianity is true; if it was propagated without miracles, this is the most spectacular miracle.

Go to the Steps directory.

Source of information about Jesus. The gospels, and the New Testament in general, are the main source of information about Jesus and, outside them, the information saved by the profane history related to Jesus is minimal. Most of the information that we know regarding Palestine, where Jesus was born and died, is due to the writings of Josephus, a Jewish historian who was born after the death of the Lord.

The history of Jesus based on the gospels. We can not know Jesus through a physical experience, as His contemporaries could; nor through His writings, because we don't know anything written by Him. There remains no other resource than the testimony of the early church in the gospels. One could think then that with the information that is found in the gospels, the history of Jesus could be reconstructed; nevertheless it is not so. The gospels are not simply historical books, but they are a unique literary genus, where history is mixed with theological statements and interpretations, and eventually with episodes and sayings created by the piety and imagination of the first Christians.

Observations of historical character. Several observations can be made regarding the historical character of the gospels and the problems raised by them. The main ones are the following:

1. The time the gospels were written. The gospels were written several decades after the death of Jesus (from 30 to 60 years later), and this jeopardizes the historical value. Not only had many years passed after the death of Jesus before the gospels were begun to be written, but their authors were persons who probably never knew Jesus.

2. The creation of myths and legends. There is reason to think that what ordinarily has happened with the personages of ancient history, happened also with Jesus: that the real events of their lives were mixed after their death with myths and legends; and, as we lack a proper documentation, there is no certain way to prove the veracity of the facts, and to separate what is history from what is legend or imagination.

3. Preconceived thought of the authors. An important aspect that must be considered when the gospels are used as historical source about Jesus is, that their authors had a preconceived thought and opinion regarding Jesus, that corresponded to the Christ of faith; this means, that the writers of the gospels were not impartial witnesses but Jesus' admirers, who wrote with the specific purpose of glorifying Him. The evangelists were more interested in presenting to the readers the Christ of their faith, than the Christ of history. They didn't write as historians, but as heralds of a message of salvation.

4. The testimony of adversaries is lacking. Another deficiency in the history of Jesus presented in the gospels, is that it lacks the written and direct testimony of His adversaries and detractors; we know them only through the testimony of the friends of Jesus. There is, therefore, a lack of balance in that whole history.

5. The scope of the gospels. Another element that affects the historicity of the gospels is that they were written with the purpose of convincing the Jews that Jesus was the Christ and Messiah, and that the promises made by God to Israel were accomplished in Him. Their message is that to accept Jesus means salvation, and that to follow Him is equivalent to reaching eternal life. As a matter of fact the gospels obtained their purpose, not just at their time, but through all the centuries of the Christian era. But a book like that has more the flavor of religion than history, at least as it is understood by today's critics.

6. Discrepancies among the gospels. There are some discrepancies among the gospels; this proves that the deeds and words of Jesus were not preserved intact, and that the sources used by the authors were not in accord and suffered alterations. This brings us to the conclusion that there is some degree of uncertainty regarding some of the facts of the life of Jesus narrated in the gospels, and regarding what He taught. There is a vacuum too in the life of Jesus: thirty years of hidden life. There are then many things that we ignore, and we are not completely certain regarding some of the facts and words of Jesus that are presented in the gospels.

7. The language of the gospels. We may add, also, that Jesus spoke Aramaic and all the gospels were written in Greek, which means that there is not even one literal quotation of what Jesus really said. We may conclude, then, that the gospels are wonderful books, but they are not a completely reliable source from the historical point of view.

Questions that might arise. Have you wondered how some narrations of the gospel could be written? For instance, have you wondered sometimes how Luke could have gotten the words that Mary pronounced when visiting her cousin Elizabeth, sixty or seventy years after they were said? or, the words of Zacharias when his tongue was loosed? or, from where Luke obtained the information about the shepherds of Bethlehem, or Matthew the worship of the Baby Jesus by the Wise Men? And, what to say about the temptations of Jesus in the desert? Where and how was that information obtained? In one word, how were the text and narrations of the gospels originated? These, and many other questions that could be presented deserve an explanation.

Possible answer of a Christian. To all this a Christian could always exclaim: by revelation of God! All right, but once again, that is an act of faith but not a historical proof. And even if we would accept that a revelation happened, why didn't God reveal the same thing to all the writers, since there are contradictions among them? Everyone might have his or her own theory, but that does not mean that that theory is certain. The historians have also their own theories, based on historical proofs, that shouldn't be lightly disregarded. But, to be honest with everybody: many of the statements made by the experts are only their theories, and they are not completely certain either.

Go to the Steps directory.

There was no intent to deceive. After looking at the historical problems which are present in the gospels, we should look also at the factors in favor of their veracity. First of all, their authors were honest and they didn't intend to deceive; they said what they wrote, because they believed it was true.

Nobody contradicted the gospels. In support of the gospel as written is also the fact that there is no knowledge that the gospels have been accused of deceit or falsehood. When the gospels started being written, in particular Mark which was the first one and served as a basis for Matthew and Luke, there were still people alive who had known Jesus personally; it would have been very easy for them to contradict what the gospels say. Notwithstanding, there is no trace that this happened.

Verbal tradition was a normal means to keep history. There is another thing that could be stated in favor of the gospels, and it is the fact that every era has had its own means of preserving intact their history and tradition. Precisely because twenty centuries ago there were not the means that we have today to preserve history, they had their own means and talents to faithfully preserve the sayings and events of their ancestors: verbal tradition. Today that could seem unheard of because we have other means, but at Jesus' time verbal tradition was the normal means to preserve and transmit history.

Investigation is not to be dreaded. The believer should not be afraid of studying and investigating; the believer has the right of inquiring into and knowing the truth, without dread that his faith is in danger if he tries to know the truth. Nobody wants to hold as certain what is simply fiction. Study and knowledge contributes so that the picture that we have of Jesus is more real, more human; less extraordinary perhaps but undoubtedly a Jesus more like ourselves; and that is very positive.

Faith can not be staggered. Let us not think then that because of the historical problems that we mentioned before, our Christian faith is tottering. No, indeed! Christian faith stays firm and intact in spite of all doubts and uncertainties, because although there are many facts that can not be historically proven, for today's Christians as well as for Peter and Paul in their own time, the basis of Christian faith is not the miracles of Jesus, real or legendary as some scholars say, but the great event of His resurrection. Nor did the apostles believe in Jesus in spite of His miracles. Nobody is Christian for believing, for instance, in the virginal birth of Jesus, or because he changed the water into wine at the wedding of Cana; one is Christian because he believes in the resurrection. And we know that the resurrection has the support, not just of the gospels, but of the whole New Testament, with the testimony of Peter and Paul first off, followed by that of John, Phillip, Stephen and all the apostles, who for that reason were called witnesses of the resurrection (Acts 1:22).

Go to the Steps directory.

The biblical text was considered untouchable. For about eighteen centuries the text of the bible that we have today, the gospels included, was considered so sacred that it was untouchable; nobody dared to challenge the veracity or authenticity of the facts. This is yet the feeling, even today, of many Christians. What has each one of us done at least once? That, as we read the gospels, we visualize the events, we create our own images, probably different from another's, and then we take them for true without asking how it was possible for that to happen.

Historical and textual problems. In the last two hundred years the biblical scholars started seriously wondering about the text and the facts narrated in the gospels; and, as they found many inconsistencies and contradictions, they decided to inquire into the facts. Superficial answers had been given so far; they intended to go to the bottom of the facts, as far as possible.

Literal and historical criticism. They started what is called literal criticism, which refers to the scientific study of the text of the bible, of the gospel; and historical criticism, which is the study of the facts. It must be taken into account that with the modern discoveries and the progress of science, today scientists have accumulated more information about the first century, than the writers of the gospels had in their own time. They lacked also the technical resources for comparing sources and documents that we have presently. That is why today it is possible to do a more severe critique of the text of the gospel.

Historical conflicts and inconsistencies of the gospels. Following, we enumerate some of the historical conflicts and main inconsistencies that we find in the gospels.