|
comparative religion >>
general articles >> an affair on golgotha >>
an affair on golgotha
THE PLACE OF THE SKULL
We are now at that moment in time that propels Christianity and the 'church' into eternity. In this instant man began his petulant climb toward salvation through the blood of a human sacrifice. Or was it a journey through twenty centuries of attempting to cover the blood that the 'church' had spilled in an effort to hide the truth?
There were those who would not yield to the tradition of the cross. There were those good Catholic men and women who defied the 'church' and its earthly doctrine, a doctrine that demanded a 'human sacrifice' and death on the cross. Let us examine a society of men and women who no longer exist on this earth.
West of Marseilles, on the Gulf du Lion lies the province of Languedoc. In 1208 those who lived there were accused by Pope Innocent III of unchristian behavior. In 1209, the pope sent his army of thirty thousand under the command of Simon de Montfort. They had been sent to wipe out the Cathars, the Pure Ones as they were sometimes known.
King Philippe II of France had denounced them as heretics. It took thirty-five years and tens of thousands of lives, but the act was finally accomplished. It ended with the genocidal massacre of Montsegur. Two hundred hostages were burned alive at that seminary. (Bloodline Of The Holy Grail: Laurence Gardner: Barnes and Noble Books: Page 268; The Holy Blood And The Holy Grail, Leigh and Lincoln: Chapter 2: Pages 19-34)
This the Cathars vanished from the face of the earth as a living community, and Europe began to flow with blood. It is highly likely that the massacre was the one major event that precipitated the dreaded Inquisition. According to history, the ecclesiastic bloodshed began formally in 1233.
The Cathars were Catholic though they held some views that might have been considered Gnostic. They were, however, spiritually minded and believed that the Spirit is pure and that physical matter, our material existence, is defiled. This should have troubled no one since it is the very essence of Jesus' teachings. Matthew 26:41; Mark 14:38; Luke 24:39; John 6:63; John 8:15)
"Do not lay up for yourselves treasures on earth, where moth and rust consume and where thieves break in and steal, but lay up for yourselves treasure in heaven, where neither moth nor rust consumes and where thieves do not break in and steal." (Matthew 6:19-20 RSV)
Though somewhat unorthodox in their views, there was no great schism between the Cathars and the Church in Rome. Yet the Pope feared them. This was not because of their beliefs, but the rumor that they held a treasure associated with ancient knowledge. And that 'knowledge' was damning to the 'church' and Christianity.
The Languedoc region had been formed out of the 8th century Jewish kingdom of Septimania. This area was steeped in the early traditions of Lazarus (Simon Zelotes) and Mary Magdelene. The inhabitants regarded Mary as the true mother of western Christianity. This can now be evidenced by the discovery in, The Dead Sea Scrolls, of, The Gospel of Philip. (The Nag Hammadi Library: James M Robinson, General Editor: The Gospel Of Philip; Wesley W. Isenberg: 1978)
Tolerant of the Jewish and Moslem communities in the area, they also believed in equality of the sexes to the point of allowing women to share in the proceeds of their businesses, and to read the Gospel message during the mass. This might have drawn a reprimand from Rome, since the Church in the middle ages was absolute on the topic of women's subjugation. They fell victim to the Inquisition by a church that held women to be evil and the cause of man's downfall.
All the witnesses who were called to testify indicated that the Cathars adhered to Jesus' ministry with unyielding devotion. They believed in God and the Holy Spirit, and recited the Lord's Prayer. They had a superlative society with its own welfare system based on charity, they sustained their own schools and hospitals, and shared with their non-Christian neighbors.
St Bernard said, "No sermons are more Christian than theirs, and their morals are pure."
But as Laurence Gardner states in his work, Bloodline Of The Holy Grail, "…the Cathars were not heretics; they were simply non-conformists…" (Page 269)
They were exterminated by the Papacy along with those who supported them, men, women, and children. But the ancient knowledge they were supposed to hold terrified Rome and its ambitious use of tradition. The Cathars were reported to have written documents of great authority that led them to declare Rome's interpretation of the crucifixion, a fraud.
In common with The Knights Templar, they refused to support the claim that Jesus died on the cross. Let it suffice to say that it was well established that the Knights Templar did not hold to the orthodox view of the crucifixion, and they were so adamant on this point that they would not bear the Latin cross upright.
These fellowships were presumed to hold enough information of substance to invalidate the fundamental concept of the Roman Church, and the premise for today's Pauline Christian Church. Evidently Rome believed it, for they perceived of only one solution to the problem; kill everyone associated with the Cathars. But the 'treasure' was never found and only rumor and cult legend names those who were given those writings so they could be hidden.
Eventually, the King of France and the Pope also assaulted the Knights Templar. They only narrowly escaped total destruction when a small number fled to Scotland. The character of this society is well established, but the Cathars, also known as the, Albigenses, are also held in high respect by most historians.
"Their ideas jarred so little with the essentials of Christianity that they believed themselves to be devout Christians. As a body, they lived lives of conspicuous virtue and purity in a violent, undisciplined and vicious age. But they questioned the doctrinal soundness of Rome and the orthodox interpretation of the Bible. (The Outline Of History: H.G. Wells; Doubleday & Company, Inc. Page 545)
Unsuspecting and innocent, they were set upon by the Church's genocidal policy and wiped out by the Papal army.
"Closely associated with the Albigenses were the Waldenses, the followers of a man called Waldo, who seems to have been quite soundly Catholic in his theology, but equally offensive to the Church…" (The Outline Of History: H.G. Wells; Doubleday & Company, Inc. Page 545)
"There seems to have been little difference between the teaching and the spirit of St. Francis and that of Waldo in the twelfth century, the founder of the murdered Waldenses." (The Outline Of History: H.G. Wells; Doubleday & Company, Inc. Page 547)
No mention is made of the specific charges against these people, only that they were indiscreet at the wrong time in history, and now they are extinct. But ideas and writings that hold to the truth cannot be hidden away forever. Jesus' prophecy that all things done in the darkness shall be brought into the light now seems a part of reality.
A small segment of the Knights Templar is said to exist in Scotland. If they are a remnant of the original, one must wonder if their number still hides evidence of a belief that extends itself to over one billion Moslems. And even more stirring to those sects of Christianity that hold to a creed contrary to the Church's basic doctrine.
The tradition concerning Jesus' death by crucifixion was not accepted by a number of early Christian sects, which included the Basilideans, the Docetions, the Waldenses, the Cathars and the Knights Templar. We might note here that in the primitive Church as the Disciples originated it; there was no sacrament or activity that celebrated Jesus' death on the cross. As we shall see, doctrine and tradition do not stand up to examination on this point for the language of the Gospels contradicts them.
The Holy Qur'an is quite pointed as to this event in Jesus' life.
"…and their saying: We did kill the Messiah, Jesus son of Mary, the messenger of Allah; whereas they slew him not, nor did they compass his death upon the cross, but he was made to appear to them like one crucified to death; and those who have differed in the matter of his having been taken down alive from the cross are certainly in a state of doubt concerning it, but only follow a conjecture; they certainly did not compass his death in the manner they allege…" (The Holy Qur'an: Olive Branch Press; Muhammad Zafrulla Khan: Surah 4:156)
All of Islam becomes the voice of the dead. They speak for the Cathars and all those whom the Church saw fit to murder, and even more speak to us from this earthly veil. How can anyone with knowledge of these matters hope to support those institutions without placing their own souls in jeopardy?
The Second Treatise Of The Great Seth, The Gospel of Philip, and The Gospel According To Thomas, are ancient manuscripts, which the Church has declared heretical, but these text are of valid authorship. They only tell us things that the 'orthodox' do not want us to hear.
It might appear to some observers that those who refuse to consider newly discovered evidence on this subject are those who will support man's doctrines regardless of the facts. They are those individuals who proceed in a blind and fanatical manner.
But aside from the various works we have mentioned, including The Dead Sea Scrolls, is there any evidence within Christianity itself that will testify to the truth? The very scriptures speak for themselves, and it is time to examine the Gospels and the writings of the most respected theologians available. To this end, the Holy Qur'an offers us some wise advice.
"Call to mind also when you claimed to have brought about the death of a personage and then differed among yourselves concerning it, and Allah would bring to light that which you concealed. So we said: Test the crucial question by putting together other incidents relating to the affair and you will arrive at the truth." (The Holy Qur'an: Olive Branch Press; Muhammad Zafrulla Khan: Surah 2:73)
According to a general understanding of the crucifixion story, Jesus was put on the cross around the third hour.
"And it was the third hour, when they crucified him." Mark 15:25 RSV)
This early hour was nine in the morning. (The Interpreter's Bible: Volume 7; Page 903)
None of the other Gospels give us this time reference, and those involved in the compilation of, The Interpreter's Bible, suggest that it was much later. Consider the activity that took place as reported by the signal authority, The New Testament.
Jesus is led from Caiaphas' home to Pilate. After a private hearing in which the Procurator learns that Jesus is a Galilean, he is taken to Herod for judgment. Herod's actual conversation is not known, but the result of that Meeting is Herod's refusal to judge Jesus, and he sends him back to Pilate.
At this point, we are told that the trial has become a public hearing. Pilate argues with the crowd on behalf of Jesus, and at least three times is known to plead for his freedom. Failing to change the crowds mind, Pilate scourges Jesus and frees Jesus bar Abbas. Then he turns the accused over to the Italian Cohort to be humiliated and to be crucified.
All of these events could not possibly have taken place within the time period noted in Mark. And if one considers John's Gospel, after the first part of the public trial Jesus is given to the soldiers to be flogged without first being condemned, then returned to Pilate to finish the proceedings during which Jesus speaks quite coherently despite the 'traditional', beating. Pilate continues to defend Jesus, but giving in to the 'crowd' at last, he declares his final judgment.
Then Jesus is taken back to the Praetorium where the Roman soldiers humiliate him and take him out to be crucified. It is here that biblical history has Jesus carry his own cross all the way up to, Golgotha.
There is absolutely no way in which these activities could have been accomplished within the time span noted, especially when we understand that in going from place to place, Jesus and those who accompanied him had to walk. (The Interpreter's Bible: Volume 8; Page 398)
What the other Gospels do agree on, is the hour of Jesus' apparent death, or could it have originally been the hour he was placed on the cross? One fact that we are about to discover is that there was very little time between Jesus going up on the cross and the moment when he appeared to die. The sixth hour would be about noon, and the ninth hour about 3 PM.
"And when the sixth hour had come, there was darkness over the whole land until the ninth hour. And at the ninth hour Jesus cried out…" (Mark 15:33 RSV)
"Now from the sixth hour there was darkness over all the land until the ninth hour. And about the ninth hour Jesus cried out…" (Matthew 27:45-46 RSV)
"It was about the sixth hour, and there was darkness over the whole land until the ninth hour, while the sun's light failed; and the curtain of the Temple was torn in two. Then Jesus, crying out…" (Luke 23:44-46 RSV)
If Mark's version implied an eclipse of the sun, Luke makes it explicit. However, an eclipse would have been astronomically impossible during the Passover full moon. (The Interpreter's Bible: Volume 8; Page 412)
The Gospel of John now looms up as if to verify the late hour in which Jesus was actually crucified.
"Now it was the day of the Preparation of the Passover; it was about the sixth hour. He said to the Jews, "Behold your King!" They cried out, "Away with him, away with him, crucify him!… Then he handed him over to them to be crucified." (John 19:14-16 RSV)
It was about the sixth hour, and Jesus is still with Pilate far from, Golgotha.
One may say that the other Gospels are speaking of Jesus already being on the cross at that hour, but the Gospel of John contradicts them. The Interpreter's Bible, speaks of the late hour. John agrees!
"It was the eve of the Passover, and it was about noon. And he said to the Jews, 'Here is your King.' They shouted, 'Away with him! Away with him! Crucify him!…" (John 19:14-15 The New English Bible)
"It was preparation day for Passover, and it was about noon. And he said to the Jews, "Behold your King!" They cried out, "Take him away! Take him away! Crucify him!"…" (John 19:14-15 The New American Bible; St. Joseph Edition)
And even if the third hour is evidenced when the crowds finally have their way, Jesus till had to be taken before the Italian Cohort. There, after being mocked, derided, and humiliated, he had to make his way to the place of execution carrying his cross.
And if this is true, as it is in agreement with Matthew and Luke, Jesus was only on the cross for a very short period of time. Could the darkness involved in the synoptic Gospels be due to the late hour? Was there a storm? The sixth hour would have been at noon, the ninth hour about three in the afternoon. Was it allegorical, symbolic of the event that was taking place?
Mark 15:25 has Jesus crucified "at the third hour", which means either nine a.m. or the period from nine to twelve. Noon, the time when, according to John, Jesus was sentenced to death, was the hour at which the priests began to slaughter Passover lambs in the Temple. (See: John 1:29)
The lateness of the hour in which all of this took place is alluded to by more than one incident. They must be taken into careful consideration in this study. The hour of preparation had arrived, the lambs were being slaughtered; the festival had already begun!
Due to the length of time it normally took for one to die on the cross, and the hour being very late, an action is taken that is not normal at these executions, especially when handled by the Romans. One was given all the time needed to suffer and die, the Romans not necessarily being kind hearted. Pilate, once again acts out of character in granting a petition to the priesthood.
"The Jews therefore, because it was the preparation, that the bodies should not remain upon the cross on the Sabbath day, (for the Sabbath day was a high day), besought Pilate that their legs might be broken, and that they be taken away." (John 19:31 KJV)
Taken away still alive? The Gospels do not say!
"So the soldiers came and broke the legs of the first, and of the other who had been crucified with him; but when they came to Jesus they saw that he was already dead…" (John 19:32-33 RSV)
If the hour were not late, if the preparations had not already begun, if evening were not upon them,, the Jews would never have been in such haste to have their victims brutally punished and then released from their crosses, dead or alive!
On the request of the priests, Pilate permits the request. One may also allude to the fact at this point, The Interpreter's Bible, becomes extremely defensive. We will comment further on this tendency as even honorable theologians can begin to press an issue when a question of tradition is threatened under the weight of Gospel truth.
Another vital point that is brought up by the lateness of the hour is the amazement on the part of the soldiers and Pilate as to how quickly Jesus appears to die. It would be even more surprising to them if Jesus was not beaten senseless and was in complete control of his physical body, his thought, and speech.. Both Luke and John point out these facts.
But now we are at the crux of the matter!
Jewish custom allowed for wine to be given to a condemned man, sometimes containing an opiate to ease the pain of crucifixion. Mark 15:23 tells us it was myrrhed wine, Matthew says gall. In some cases it could cause unconsciousness. (The Interpreter's Bible: Volume 7; Page 602-603)
"…they offered him wine to drink, mingled with gall…" (Mtthw 27:34 RSV)
"And they gave him to drink wine mingled with myrrh.." (Mark 15:23 KJV)
It is extremely important to keep in mind that the drink is offered by the soldiers. In usual cases it was given to deaden the pain of execution. (See: B. Sanhedrin 43A; The Interpreter's Bible: Volume 7; Page 902)
Crucifixion killed by exposure, thirst, the cutting off of circulation, and suffocation. The condemned normally died within 1-3 days. (The Interpreter's Bible: Volume 7; Page 900 & Volume 7; Page 600-601)
It is essential that the cause of death be remembered, and that the soldiers gave him the drought. We are about to investigate the crucifixion in a manner that no major critic has done and then presented it to the public. We are going to conduct a medical examination of the drugs that were given to Jesus as well as his medical condition when he was taken down from the cross. The Gospels testify to both, as well as to what medical aid was given to him after the fact.
"And they offered him wine mingled with myrrh; but he did not take it. And they crucified him." (Mark 15:23-24RSV)
"They gave him vinegar to drink mingled with gall; and when he tasted thereof, he would not drink." (Matthew 27:34 KJV)
It is only fair to note that this verse has been changed in the RSV by substituting 'wine', rather than 'vinegar'.. The New English Bible, also says, 'a draught of wine mixed with gall…'.
John does not include the offer or refusal of the drink before Jesus is placed on the cross. John does, however, offer exacting documentation after Jesus is crucified. That evidence will be discussed in its proper order. At this point it is appropriate to discuss Luke.
Here the scene is centered on Jesus' speech. There is no gall, no vinegar, no myrrhed wine, no drink of any kind. There is no scourging, there is no cross bearing by anyone. Whatever source Luke draws his information from, it is sadly lacking in the details that are provided by the other three Gospels.
One must seriously wonder why a doctor, a physician, should be silent on this most important of all issues. Might it be for fear of condemning himself as a heretic before Paul and the church by telling the truth?
"And one ran and filled a sponge full of vinegar, and put it on a reed, and gave him to drink, saying; Let alone; Let us see whether Elias will come to take him down. And Jesus cried out with a loud voice, and gave up the ghost." (Mark 15:36-37 KJV)
The RSV indicates the exact wording of the KJV, with the exception of changing the last statement.
"And Jesus uttered a loud cry, and breathed his last." (Mark 15:37 RSV)
The New English Bible, takes even greater liberties with the translation of the Greek text in order to preserve a false tradition.
"…Jesus gave a loud cry and died."
The Greek text does not say either! This student will show that 'breathed his last', and 'died', are improper translations of the original.
"And one of them at once ran, and took a sponge, filled it with vinegar, and put it on a reed, and gave him to drink. The rest said, Let be, let us see whether Elias will come to save him. Jesus, when he had cried out again with a loud voice, yielded up the ghost." Matthew 27:48-50 KJV)
The RSV; Matthew 27:50, states:
"And Jesus cried out again with a loud voice and yielded up the spirit." The New English Bible, in Matthew 27:50 does not say, 'died', in this instance, but translates the Greek as, '…breathed his last'.
"Now there was a vessel full of vinegar; and they filled the sponge with vinegar, and put it upon hyssop, and put it to his mouth. When Jesus therefore had received the vinegar, he said, "It is finished'; and he bowed his head, and gave up the ghost." (John 19:29-30 KJV)
Here again, in John 19:30, The Revised Standard Version, states, "…and he bowed his head and gave up his spirit." In this case, The New English Bible, renders the translation exactly the same as the RSV's, 'gave up his spirit', which in this case is correct.
Point, Jesus refused the drink offered to him before he went up on the cross. The drink was given to him while he was on the cross, a soaked sponge put into his mouth by an unknown party. When we get to the proper point, the Gospels will tell us that it was a Roman soldier who administered the potion. Now it is time to begin a proper examination following information given to us by the Gospels. Let us begin with John 19:29-30.
"…and put it upon hyssop, and put it to his mouth."
Hyssop does not have a long stalk like a reed, as the other Gospel stories tell us was used to lift the sponge up to Jesus' raised figure on the cross. John's information makes no sense. How do we know this?
Hyssop, (ussopos) is a plant indigenous to western Asia and northern Africa. It is a 'bushy' type of plant without a long stalk. The plant was used to sprinkle the blood of the paschal lamb upon the lintels of the doors (i.e., Passover).
Hyssop is an herb that needs to be broken down chemically so we can understand its properties. But first we can consider another clerical mistake in copying this text. The word, Hyssos, could have been in the original text, as The Interpreter's Bible, believes it should have been. It is the Greek word for a Roman pilum, a soldier's javelin, certainly long enough and strong enough to lift a sponge up to Jesus. It would offer proof that a soldier administered the drink.
The Interpreter's Bible, also points out that in an eleventh century manuscript, this word for a javelin, is used. Theologians make the statement that this would have preserved the original reading, "…which has otherwise been lost in the entire MS tradition." (The Interpreter's Bible: Volume 8; Pages 783-784)
This is one way of correcting an obviously erroneous text. But John may also have been indicating that hyssop was given to Jesus as part of the drink. This would prove exceedingly interesting if it is the case.
Hyssop is also a fragrant mint that has highly aromatic and pungent leaves. Its leaves or stems are cooked for use as greens; it is also used as a mint to season food, or to make more tasteful, the bitterness of gall and wine.
"The leaves were once used as a medicinal herb tea for pulmonary and catarrhal disorders." (Encarta Encyclopedia: MSN; Encarta Learning Zone)
"Catarrh: Inflammation of a mucous membrane; esp; one chronically affecting the human nose and air passages." (Webster's Collegiate Dictionary: G&C. Merriam Company)
"Pulmonary: of the heart and circulatory system." (Webster's Collegiate Dictionary: G&C. Merriam Company)
Recall the statement made concerning the causes of death due to crucifixion; thirst, exposure, the cutting off of circulation, and suffocation. (The Interpreter's Bible: Volume 7; Pages 600-601)
A medicinal herb used to stimulate the heart and to open up swollen or blocked air passages, in liquid form that could be lifted up to the afflicted in a sponge. Why would a mendicant of this nature be used unless the intent was to save the condemned? Other factors have to come into play, and according to the Gospels, they most certainly do.
Once again we are presented with suspicious acts from those who are depicted by tradition has having beaten and then crucified Jesus. Not only does Pilate's reticence force us to reflect on his motives, but now we are faced with the possibility of a Roman plot to save Jesus.
Of translations, we must take great care. One letter can make a world of difference in the narrative, just as education and understanding can totally change the assumptions of the uneducated and the deceived.
Did Jesus die on the cross?
Tens of thousands have been martyred over this issue. In our own age many have been banished from the 'church proper' because of their belief on this point, and over a billion human souls have made it a definitive point in their religion. Let us refer to the Gospels in their original language, Koine Greek, and the meanings of the words as they were used two thousand years ago, and in our translation of them.
In each case, regardless of which Gospel we use, Jesus drinks from the sponge and immediately loses consciousness. He drinks, cries out, and 'gives up the spirit, or, ghost'.. Tradition says that he died, but the Gospels do not.
"…and gave up the ghost." (The Interlinear Greek-English New Testament: Authorized Version of King James: Mark 15:37)
The word, ghost, i.e., spirit, in the Greek text is, exepneusen. It means, expired. In kind, to expire, can mean, to die, or, to be asleep, unconscious, as in numbed, or rendered unfeeling, drugged into unconsciousness. The word used in, Young's Commentary, is, ekpneo, which simply means, to breath out.
The word for, ghost, i.e., spirit is, pneuma (Greek) or nephash (Hebrew). These words speak of the living spirit, awareness of life, in other words, consciousness.. Neither of these words is used in Mark concerning the crucifixion. But the word that is used does not mean to give up life, as we have indicated. It is a questionable translation that insists upon, exepneusen, meaning, to die.
To expire or die is, ekpshcho. It is not used here or in any other reference to the crucifixion in the Gospels. (Matthew 27:50; John 19:30; Mark 15:37; Luke 24:46. Only in Acts is the word, ekpshcho, used to indicate one who dies, and then it is not used of Jesus.
Matthew, Luke, and John all use the word for spirit, pneuma. "…yielded up the ghost." (The Interlinear Greek-English New Testament: Matthew 27:50)
The references for a proper translation are the same, and numerous. Young's Commentary, on, expired, to breath out, is more in line with, giving up the spirit, to breath out, since the spirit is often related to wind or breath. It also means, to lose consciousness.. And there is good reason to bring this out when relating to the crucifixion.
In ancient times when someone was rendered unconscious by any means, they were said to have given up the ghost (spirit). If consciousness was lost then the individual was in a condition of lifelessness, not aware, not rational or aware of life, i.e., the spirit. Now the reason for this overstated condition of unconsciousness.
"It was a pious Jewish custom to give a condemned man unmixed wine or wine with an opiate in it…" (The Interpreter's Bible: Volume 7; Page 602-603)
Vinegar is thought to refer to sour wine. Wine mixed with gall is an, opiate. All the accounts are bound into one momentary event, though expressed in different manners. Jesus drinks the 'potion' and is immediately rendered unconscious. Even in John, the opiate is given and Jesus cries out, losing consciousness at once. All the Gospel stories agree.
Here it is necessary to quote the Interpreter's Bible, once again, but not for scholarship's sake.
"The drink that is now offered on the sponge and reed is not the drugged wine of vs. 34 but vinegar. This is sometimes identified with, posca, a drink made of water, sour wine, and egg, which the Roman soldiers drank." (The Interpreter's Bible: Volume 7; Page 608)
It is a sad situation when honest theologians are caught in an effort to preserve a tradition rather than render an honest translation just because it goes against their beliefs. A search for truth must be conducted whether it justifies one's convictions or not, whether it agrees with, or completely invalidates, dogma.
In this case, posca, would not dull the pain and serve the purpose of the Jewish custom, or the words of the Gospels. The Roman brew has nothing to do with vinegar, as is obvious when one breaks the chemical nature of the liquid.
Vinegar, as prepared and used in the first century was, fermented, undiluted, grain alcohol. A mendicant-sour wine made up of pure alcohol (fermented. A sour liquid obtained by acetic fermentation of dilute alcoholic liquids. A sour tasting condiment and preservative prepared by two successive microbial processes, the first being an alcoholic fermentation effected by yeasts… (Encarta Encyclopedia; MSN Encarta Learning Center)
Vinegar: A sour liquid that is made by the fermentation of any numerous dilute alcoholic liquids into a liquid containing acetic acid… probably first made from wine (sour). (Encyclopaedia Britannica: www.britannica.com)
When used with, gall, it is a powerful opiate!
Gall, or bile, was used in ancient medicine and referred to as, wormwood. It was also alcoholic in nature, and when used as the derivative, absinthe, was eighty-six proof alcohol. Added to sour wine, it was a potent substance. But gall had another purpose when given to a wounded individual.
Gall, is a source of, tannin,, and when used in ancient medicine, tannin was a medical emultion used to draw tissue together, in other words, to stop bleeding and to assist in healing a wound.
Without going into unnecessary dissertations, this student would suggest that anyone who wishes to investigate this matter in an intelligent manner should consult a good medical dictionary, or an amply endowed set of encyclopedias. As is cautioned by modern medicine, any mixture of a powerful opiate with pure alcohol will induce a deeply drugged state, a stupor, or unconsciousness. We need only the actions described by the Gospels. Jesus was given the drugged potion, he cried out, and sagged unconscious on the cross.
"Pilate was surprised to hear that he was already dead; so he sent for the centurion and asked him whether it was long since he died. And when he heard the centurion's report, he gave Joseph leave to take the dead body." (Mark 15:44 The New English Bible)
The Revised Standard Version, has notates no surprise on the part of Pilate, nor does he ask the Centurion how long Jesus has been dead.
"Joseph of Arimathea… took courage and went to Pilate, and asked for the body of Jesus. And Pilate wondered if he were already dead…" Mark 15:43a & 44 RSV)
"And Pilate marveled if he were already dead." (Mark 15:44 KJV)
To marvel: thaumasen; to wonder, marvel, to be astonished…" (A Critical Lexicon And Concordance To The English And Greek New Testament)
And well might he have been amazed, for Jesus was on the cross less than three hours. Those who agree with this time element, however, contradict themselves in a continuing effort to stand approved with what is quickly becoming a highly suspect tradition.
"Jesus lived on the cross for only three hours… " This same source now tells us that twelve hours was the average time between crucifixion and death. (The Interpreter's Bible: Volume 7; Page 906) Earlier they said that the normal lifespan was one to three days. (See: The Interpreter's Bible: Volume 7; Page 900 & Volume 7; Page 600-601)
Contradiction abounds, but worse is yet to come from the professionals.
We have already pointed out the area in which this volume conjectured that Jesus was not crucified until after the sixth hour, and possibly later. (The Interpreter's Bible: Volume 8; Page 415; ["The Day of Preparation, i.e., Friday (see Mark 15:42) The Sabbath was dawning (RSV mg.): A Jewish idiom; in Palestine at the Passover season about 6 p.m."]) The Gospel of John attests to this fact.
Matthew and Luke omit this part of Mark's dialogue. We do not know whom the writer of Mark got his information from. We may be assured, however, that it was not Peter, for he was nowhere near the cross. He, and the other disciples, had fled the scene in fear of being arrested for sedition and insurrection.
If there were more scientific data provided by the Gospels at this point, it would make no difference. Enough has been said to assure anyone that the chemical nature of the drugs given to Jesus had a profound effect upon his mind and body. The least of which would have been to deaden the pain. However, there is one additional medical fact remaining to prove this theory, and it comes from John.
"But one of the soldiers with a spear pierced his side, and forthwith came there out blood and water." (John 19:34 KJV)
"…but when they cane to Jesus, they found that he was already dead, so they did not break his legs. But one of the soldiers stabbed his side with a lance, and at once there was a flow of blood and water." (John 19:33-35 The New English Bible)
Jesus was not dead!
In order to remain honest it is important that this student note the Greek used in this verse. "Tethenkota: to have died, to be dead in the present sense." (A Critical Lexicon And Concordance To The English And Greek New Testament) When the soldiers examined Jesus they thought that he was dead, and to prove this, they stabbed him in the side with a spear. When he did not react to the pain, they assumed the worst. This was reported to Pilate.
Medical science relates another story. Upon death, the heart ceases to function. The flow of blood stops and immediately flows to the lowest level of the body. With Jesus erect on the cross it would move to his legs and feet. If Jesus had been dead, the wound in his side would not have bled. Rather than prove tradition correct, this verse proves it is wrong. Jesus' heart was still beating.
The professional theologians, having left the realm of investigative research, follow their own selfish motives. We are offered the weakest and most despicable of all explanations for disavowing expert evidence, that of the Gospel itself.
They claim that no matter what "medical" evidence is provided on this point, the 'witness' emphasizes the truth of this tradition, therefore it represents a 'symbolic truth to the evangelist.' (The Interpreter's Bible: Volume 8; Page 786)
What it represents is the fact that neither the 'witness', the 'evangelist', nor the soldier, were a medical expert. They had absolutely no knowledge of the reaction of normal bodily functions after death.
What we are being told is that, 'it is a miracle and therefore it cannot be questioned'.. No matter what evidence is provided, they will not change their minds. The laws of physics and medicine have nothing to do with religious tradition and cannot act upon it. And if God's Holy Spirit were to convict them of the truth, then they would say that it is not God's Spirit since God would never say such a thing.
Man is determined to have his own way, even to the point of doing murder to protect his self-made traditions.
Pilate releases the 'body' at once. Evening is already upon them and the Jews are frantic to get the bodies down before the holy hour of Passover.
"When even was come… He went to Pilate, and begged the body of Jesus." (Matthew 27:57-58 KJV)
People were buried on the day they died. An executed (dead) person was not allowed to remain exposed overnight. (Deut. 21:23) (The Interpreter's Bible: Volume 7; Page 612-613)
"And now when even was come, because it was the preparation, that is, the day before the Sabbath, Joseph of Arimathea… And when he knew it of the centurion, he gave the body to Joseph." (Mark 15:42-45 KJV)
"This man went unto Pilate, and begged the body of Jesus." (Luke 23:52 KJV)
The Romans would have left a dead body on the cross all night, but Jewish Law forbid it. (The Interpreter's Bible: Volume 8; Page 414)
John is more assertive as to why the Jews wanted all three taken down before the Sabbath.
Since it was the day of Preparation, in order to prevent the bodies from remaining on the cross on the Sabbath (for that Sabbath was a high day…)…" (John 19:31 RSV)
"And after this, Joseph of Arimathea… besought Pilate that he might take away the body of Jesus: and Pilate gave him leave…" (John 19:38 KJV)
Were the two thieves dead? Their legs were broken to keep them from lifting themselves up to aid both their breathing and circulation, thus to hasten their deaths. But there seems to have been little time even for this to result in death, for they were not left on the crosses but taken down almost at once. Jesus, on the other hand, had been drugged and given a mendicant that served far better to preserve his life.
In addition to this, the Gospels offer further proof, medical proof, of the efforts made to revive Jesus by Joseph and Nicodemus. It is as though there had been a marvelous conspiracy to protect the Christ.
"The women who had come with him from Galilee followed, and saw the tomb, and how his body was laid; then they returned and prepared spices and ointments." (Luke 23:55 RSV)
"Body: soma; the body as a whole, whether of man or animals, dead or alive…" (A Lexicon and Concordance To The English-Greek New Testament)
There is no specific reference made to a 'dead' body in the scriptures.
"And when the Sabbath was past, Mary Magdalene, and Mary, the mother of James, and Salome, bought spices, so they might go and anoint him." (Mark 16:1 RSV)
In the Gospels we have quoted, Jesus is not attended for two days, an amazing delay considering what has taken place just prior to his being taken down from the cross. But in John, unknown to the women, a flurry of activity takes place, activity that is absolutely necessary to the story.
Remember that they already had an ointment, tannin. As previously noted, it was an astringent used to stop bleeding and assist in the healing process of the wound in Jesus' side. If Jesus were dead, it would have been unnecessary to even mention the mendicant. All they needed now was a purgative to rid Jesus' system of the opiate that had rendered him unconscious.
"Nicodemus also, who had at first come to him by night, came bring a mixture of myrrh and aloes, about a hundred pounds' weight." (John 19:39 RSV)
"He was joi8ned by Nicodemus (the man who had first visited Jesus by night, who brought with him a mixture of myrrh and aloes, more than half a hundred weight." (John 19:39-40 The New English Bible)
Here we have it, and it is the gospel! Because of the medical nature of the substances used on Jesus' body, and the large quantity involved, we have exactly that which completes the picture.
"Myrrh: A yellowish brown to reddish brown aromatic gum resin with a bitter, slightly pungent taste obtained from a tree of East Africa and Arabia. A mixture of myrrh and labdanum. A soft, dark fragrant bitter oleoresin derived from various (genus Cistus) and used in making perfumes. A purgative: A purging medicine, cathartic (genus Cistus)."
Myrrh was highly valued in ancient times as an ingredient of perfume and incense and was also used as an ointment. The myrrh mentioned in the Bible (see: Psalms 45:8; Song 4:14) is believed to have been a mixture of myrrh and the oleoresin, labdanum… The gum resin was also used as a stimulant tonic…" (Encarta Encyclopedia: MSN Encarta Learning Center)
The aloes, from John 19:39, are the dried leaves of various aloes, used as a purgative and tonic.
The presence of such large amounts of purgatives can only indicate an effort to revive someone who is under the influence of narcotics, in this case, a powerful opiate mixed with grain alcohol. The mendicants used were of a potent nature, and in great quantity. Jesus was wrapped in linen with these medicinal herbs so that they were in contact with his entire body. (John 19:40: the New English Bible; "They took the body of Jesus and wrapped it, with spices, in strips of linen…") Some of this substance could have been introduced internally, but that is pure speculation.
From the medical evidence provided by the Gospels, we return to the language of the Gospels once again. What story do the words of the scriptures tell us? Are they verified by the conscience of the theological community?
"…you seek Jesus of Nazareth, who was crucified. He has risen, he is not here." (Mark 16:6 RSV)
The New English Bible's, translation brings us food for thought, or perhaps for greater confusion. It would appear to vindicate those who hold to the premise that Jesus was, in fact, saved from death.
"Fear nothing; you are looking for Jesus of Nazareth, who was crucified. He has been raised again." (Mark 16:6 RSV)
The word for, raised again, is not that of a resurrection from the dead, but to wake up from a sleep. It does not even imply, 'the sleep of death'.
Then word used in the translations above, and in the Bible texts we have noted, is; egerthe, to rise from sleep. The word used for the 'sleep of death' is not to be found in these verses. It is not used anywhere in reference to the resurrection.
Young's Analytical Concordance To The Bible (Robert Young LL.D William B. Eerdmans Publishing Co., 1975: Page 820) shows, egeiro being used in every situation other than being raised from the dead. It is seen as describing, 'nation shall rise against nation', 'Rise, let us be going', 'Rise up and stand forth in the midst of'.
The Greek, anistemi, is used in this manner. '…be killed, and in three days rise up…', '…and to rise from the dead…', but it is also used in the same context as, egeiro, but in the original Greek text, this variation is not used at all.
In Matthew, an angel of the Lord, who greets the women, replaces the young boy.
"Then go quickly and tell his disciples that he has risen from the dead…" (Matthew 28:7 RSV)
Why has Matthew changed Mark? Yet it uses the very same word for, risen; ergethe, when it obviously does not mean what the evangelist wants it to say? And it gets even more confusing as contradictions and embellishments abound.
"While they were perplexed about this, behold, two men stood by them in dazzling apparel… why do you seek the living among the dead?" (Luke 24:4-5 RSV)
It seems to fit later resurrection traditions nicely, but it also implies in the physical sense, exactly what it says, 'why do you seek the living among the dead?' In a graveyard?
But things have changed again. Now two men are at the tomb, not one boy dressed in white, or an angel. The same Greek word is used again for, raised, ergethe, to awake from a sleep. Here also, the Apostles are added to the scene, which directly contradicts this and the other Gospels, i.e. biblical history.
The Greek for risen: (egerthe) Bullinger's Greek English Text: (egeiro).
The meaning of the words is, to wake, arouse, rouse up (from sleep) or slumber, to awaken from sleep. 'Risen again', is not used in Bullinger's Greek text in Mark 16:6, the original text, as it is in The New English version. It seems that modern clerics feel they have the right to take freedoms that are unfounded at best.
In Mark 10:34 "…and the third day he shall rise again." (apoktenousin). The word that is used means, to cause to stand up, to rise up as in, to stand. The Greek for, to go up, or, to ascend (from a lower place to a higher) is not used in these passages concerning the resurrection, nor is it used in that reference any where in the Gospels. Its only use with that meaning is in, Revelation.
The Koine Greek does have a word that means to be, 'raised to life again; resurrected'. It is used in Hebrews 11:35, and nowhere else; agastaseus. Thayer uses the term in Mark as meaning, 'to arouse, to cause to awake, to rouse from sleep'.
Katheudon nekrous, actually means, to recall the dead to life; to arouse from the sleep of death. This term appears in John 5:21; Acts 26:8; II Corinthians 1:9. Nowhere is this term used in the Gospels in reference to Jesus or the resurrection.
In the interest of investigation we find evidence of additional tampering with the original text of the Gospel.
It is openly admitted by professional scholars that Matthew and Luke take Mark's story of the empty tomb, and revise it! (The Interpreter's Bible: Volume 8; Page 416)
The story that the Gospel, in its original form, tells us is the story of a saved Jesus. The original text of Mark has no resurrection scene, and the other expanded editions involve themselves in such controversy by the language they use that even good Christian theologians are at a loss to explain them adequately. The truth, as they admit, involves a tradition that even they cannot support. And this web thickens, leading us too more devious plots.
Paul was not familiar with any tradition that involved an empty tomb. He believed that the resurrected body was a spiritual body and not a physical body, therefore he would have found it extremely difficult to embrace the tradition as it stands today. (I Corinthians 15:35-55; II Corinthians 5:1-4). (The Interpreter's Bible: Volume 8; Page 416)
Even more damning is the evidence concerning Mark's Gospel and its addendum. It has been set upon by more individuals who felt themselves qualified to add whatever they pleased, than can be imagined. Christian theologians know and admit this, as does the hierarchy of the Church, yet the addendum remains a part of this work and the Church's tradition. In the original text of Mark we read:
"And he said to them, 'Do not be amazed; you seek Jesus of Nazareth, who was crucified. He has risen, he is not here; see the place where they laid him.' They went out and fled from the tomb; for…" Mark 16:6-8; The Original Jerusalem Gospel)
The mystery of Mark remains forever. Where is verse 9? The text does not come to an end, but is chopped off suddenly as though it had been beheaded. Was it lost from the beginning, or is it possible that it has been edited into our modern version because it created an insurmountable obstacle to the Church's growing doctrine?
If it ended in this manner, without reference to the resurrection or Jesus' appearances, it could be an indicator that those events many never have taken place. Dare we think such a thing?
Verse 7, like 14:28 must be an addendum into the story and it obviously pre-dates Matthew and Luke. (The Interpreter's Bible: Volume 7; Page 914)
The longer ending, which includes verses 9-20, is not found in the best or oldest manuscripts. It seems to have been created from material in the other Gospels, and possibly even Acts. It is believed that the second century presbyter Aristion (Ariston) added it to the scriptures. An Armenian manuscript written in 989 gives him credit for the addition. A shorter ending is found in some late manuscripts, possibly originating in fourth century Egypt. Neither of the endings is genuine. (The Interpreter's Bible: Page 915-916)
It is highly unlikely that either the writer of Matthew or Luke had a version of Mark that went beyond verse 16:8. (See¨ The Interpreter's Bible: Volume 7; Page 915)
"And they said nothing…" Why, out of fear? Because they were told to say nothing? The silence helps to explain the absence of any reference to an empty tomb in the earliest literature in the New Testament, in Paul, or any where in the Greek testaments save for the three of the Gospels. (The Interpreter's Bible: Volume 7; Page 915)
"Four endings of the Gospel according to Mark are current in manuscripts. The last twelve verses of the commonly received text of Mark are absent from the two oldest Greek manuscripts… From the old Latin codex Bobiensis (itk), the Sinaitic Syriac manuscript, about one hundred Armenian manuscripts, and the two oldest Georgian manuscripts (written a.d. 897 and a.d. 913). Clement of Alexandria and Origen show no knowledge of the existence of these verses; furthermore Eusebius and Jerome attest that the passage was absent from almost all Greek copies of Mark known to them. The original form of the Eusibian sections (drawn up by Ammonius) makes no provision for numbering sections of the text after 16:8. Not a few manuscripts which contain the passage have scribal notes stating that the older Greek copies lack it, and in other witnesses the passage is marked with asterisks or obeli, the conventional signs used by copyists to indicate a spurious addition to the document." (A Textual Commentary On The Greek New Testament; Bruce M. Metzger: United Bible Societies; Pages 122-123)
"It is obvious that the expanded form of the long ending (4) has no claim to be original. Not only is the external evidence extremely limited, but the expansion contains several non-Markan words and expressions…" (A Textual Commentary On The Greek New Testament; Bruce M. Metzger: United Bible Societies; Page 124)
Thus Mark is not only deluged with attacks throughout the centuries to force it to conform to popular 'tradition', but ends with the enigmatic phrase, "…for they were afraid."
"But go and tell the disciples and Peter that he is going before you into Galilee; there you will see him, as he told you." (Mark 16:7; RSV)
One of the amazing facts about the Gospels, The Interpreter's Bible, and a number of independent theologians, is the conflict concerning where the first appearance of Jesus took place.
The Interpreter's Bible, suggests that it is not certain the first appearances took place in Galilee. They believe it is probable that it took place in Galilee. (The Interpreter's Bible: Volume 7; Page 914)
It is as though the women are discounted throughout, that they are non-beings and any appearance that occurred in their presence was invalid. The first appearance of Jesus after the crucifixion was in Jerusalem, to these same women. He did not appear in Galilee first nor did Jesus appear to the disciples first. It is obvious that even in the modern mind, women are second-rate citizens to whom no spiritual or religiously significant event can be attributed.
If Mark is as silent as the empty tomb and the women, the other Gospels are not. Through whatever witnesses, or tradition they used, their details are vivid about a living, physical Jesus. And if they were not aware of the 'saved Jesus' story the Gospels announce to us, then a miraculously 'risen Jesus' is the only other explanation available to them. In a world where such events were commonplace, especially through their most forceful religions, there would be nothing strange in adopting such an observance for the growing church.
"And as they went to tell his disciples, behold, Jesus met them, saying, All hail. And they came and held him by the feet, and worshipped him. Then said Jesus unto them, Be not afraid; go tell my brethren that they go into Galilee, and there shall they see me." (Matthew 28: 9-10, Authorized King James Version)
This is the first appearance of Jesus after the crucifixion, in Jerusalem, to the women. It is official. He is found to be whole and totally physical by the women who touched his living body. After that, he appears to his disciples in Galilee.
"Then the eleven disciples went away into Galilee, into a mountain where Jesus had appointed them. And when they saw him, they worshipped him: but some doubted." (Matthew 28: 16-17; Authorized King James Version)
More secrets! Obviously the Gospels lack a great deal of detail, for we are told that somewhere, at some time, Jesus has instructed the disciples where they are to meet, and when.
"Into a mountain where Jesus had appointed them." There are unmistakably more appearances than even the Gospels can testify to, and as the entrance into Jerusalem, secrets to which we are not privy. Very possibly the information was transmitted by the women!
At this point Jesus delivers his commission that the Apostles go into the world teaching the nations and baptizing in the power of the Father, the Son, and the Holy Ghost. It is unfortunate that it was not until centuries after the writing of the Synoptic Gospels that there was any concept of a Holy Trinity. Jesus obviously never spoke the words that stimulate today's Christian missionary fervor!
Some of Paul's doctrine connects Jesus with God and the Holy Spirit, as does the fourth Gospel, but these merely provided the groundwork for "the later doctrine" of the trinity. Matthew's use of the term merely indicates the later church's substitution for, 'in the name of the Lord Jesus', which was originally pronounced during the baptism. It is, in fact, a later addendum that does not reflect a genuine statement of Jesus. (The Interpreter's Bible: Volume 7; Page 622)
In Matthew, the women run to tell the Apostles, but they are not believed.
"Now it was Mary Magdalene and Joanna and Mary the mother of James and the other women with them who told this to the Apostles, but these words seemed to them an idle tale, and they did not believe them." (Luke 24:10-11)
Though much of Luke's writing about Jesus' appearance to the Apostles is attributed to later editions, most of them from John's Gospel, Jesus is shown as trying to impress the disciples withy the reality of his physical, living body. (Luke 24:40-41)
It is also additional proof that even the Gospels of Matthew and Luke have been added to by much later evangelists, using whatever expanded material they may have had to work from.
"Have you anything here to eat?" They gave him a piece of broiled fish, and he took it and ate before them." (Luke 24:41-42; RSV)
In John the investigator might well be prepared to find anything. It is in this late Gospel that the writer pronounces Jesus as God. In remarking about the great commission, we have the following expert commentary.
"It is appropriate to worship one who has all authority in heaven and on earth. This is the universal faith of the early Christians, and it differs only in terminology and emphasis from John's doctrine that Jesus is God (John 1:1; 10:30;20:28) (The Interpreter's Bible: Volume 7; Page 622)
We may be assured that by the time of John's writing, many of the church's doctrines had already begun to take on definite shape. John may also be considered a 'mystery writing', for spiritualism is at its height in that epistle. With its Greek mysticism it comes very close to being branded as, Gnostic.
In John, Jesus first appears to Mary Magdalene. But he appears to her in a manner in which she does not recognize him. "…but she did not know that it was Jesus."
"Jesus said to her, "Mary," she turned and said to him in Hebrew, "Rabboni!" (which means teacher). (John 20:16; RSV)
In Luke, Jesus also appears to two of his own disciples, and they do not recognize him.
"While they were talking and discussing together, Jesus himself drew near and went with them. But their eyes were kept from recognizing him." (Luke 24: 15-16;RSV)
Evangelists and theologians alike readily accept these metaphysical appearances, when they occurred after the resurrection. But Jesus was not restricted by their beliefs, for he does the very same thing after preaching in the synagogue.
"At these words the whole congregation were infuriated. They leapt up, threw him out of the town, and took him to the brow of the hill on which it was built, meaning to hurl him over the edge. But he walked straight through them all, and went away." (Luke 24:28-30; The New English Bible)(The Interpreter's Bible: Volume 8; Page 95)
It might be well to site two examples at this point, one of which we have already investigated. The first agrees with the 'hidden' story the Gospels tells us about the crucifixion. The words of the, Holy Qur'an, speak of the tradition we have been examining. To be open-minded it is best for us to use every available source we can discover.
"…whereas they slew him not, nor did they compass his death upon the cross, but he was made to appear to them like one crucified to death…" (The Holy Qur'an: Muhammad Zafrulla Khan: Chapter 4: 157-160)
Amongst the, Dead Sea Scrolls, there is a text entitled, The Second Treatise Of The Great Seth. It is part of the Nag Hammadi text and Joseph A. Gibbons and Roger A. Bullard comment upon its dialogue. The work is done as though from the viewpoint of Jesus himself, and is admitted to be both Christian and Gnostic in its concepts.
"I did not succumb to them as they had planned. But I was not afflicted at all. Those who were there punished me. And I did not die in reality, but in appearance, lest I be put to shame by them…" (The Second Treatise of the Great Seth: Nag Hammadi Library: Page 365; 56:15-20)
"Yes, they saw me; they punished me. It was another, their father", (is the writer referring to Alexander and Rufus, Simon's sons), "who drank the gall and the vinegar, it was not I. They struck me with the reed; it was another, Simon, who bore the cross on his shoulder… and I subjected all their powers. For as I came downward no one saw me. For I was altering my shapes, changing from form to form…" (The Second Treatise of the Great Seth: Nag Hammadi Library: Page 365; 56:21-26)
It can be readily understood how variant traditions take hold. Here, Jesus uses his power to vanish before men, just as the Gospels depict him. Thus an escape that several ancient orders accepted, possibly hinting that some of the text we think is newly discovered, may have been part of their written or oral doctrine.
The church's tradition may well have begun with Paul, for we are given the first example of Christian doctrine in his letters.
"And that he was buried, and that he rose again the third day according to the scriptures. And that he was seen of Cephas, then of the twelve…" (I Corinthians 15:4-6: RSV)
The Interpreter's Bible, notes that the earliest evidence we have is Paul's, I Corinthians 15:3-8) (See: Volume 7; Page 911)
Well, the 'earliest evidence' lacks validity on several points. It leaves out the women who were the first to see Jesus, it indicates a burial, which was actually an entombment, and Paul's Greek text does not speak of a 'rising from the dead'.
At any case, in John and the other Gospels, the appearance of Jesus may well be explained by his never having died on the cross. He goes to every length possible to prove that he is a living, breathing human being.
After appearing to Mary, Jesus later appears to his disciples.
"Late that Sunday evening, when the disciples were together behind locked doors, for fear of the Jews, Jesus came and stood among them. 'Peace be with you!' he said, and then showed him his hands and side." (John 20:19-20 The New English Bible)
John creates a problem here, for the Gospel insists that the disciples were behind locked doors, for fear of the Jews. This is out of place since Luke and Acts indicate that they taught and practiced their religion openly in the synagogue in Jerusalem every day.
Another problem with this is why Jesus would show them in his hands. We will discuss this later as additional shadows are cast upon man's doctrine.
Thomas is not at the meeting, and doubts the report of the disciples.
"A week later his disciples were again in the room, and Thomas was with them. Although the doors were locked, Jesus came and stood among them, saying, "Peace be with you," Then he said to Thomas, "Reach your finger here; see my hands. Reach your hand here and put it into my side. Be unbelieving no longer, but believe." (John 20:26-27; The New English Bible)
John is going to insist that the doors and windows were locked, despite what history and the scriptures tell us. Jesus does everything possible to convince the disciples that he is physically alive, that he is no apparition, no spirit.
"But they were startled and frightened, and supposed that they saw a spirit. And he said to them, 'Why are you troubled, and why do questionings rise in your hearts? See my hands and my feet, that it is I myself; handle me, and see; for a spirit has not flesh and bones as you see that I have." (Luke 24:37-40 RSV)
One point may be made here concerning the fashion common in Jesus' day. He says, "See my hands and my feet…" With long robes that started at the neck and went all the way down to ones feet, there was nothing else that could be seen. It does not necessarily mean that Jesus was showing them any kind of wound or mark. In fact, the statement is perfectly natural.
We may also take note in that which Jesus does not say. He never mentions that he has been raised from the dead; he never even suggests this miraculous event. Nor were the disciples made privy to the act that kept him alive, that saved him from death. He did not advise them of the secret arrangements he had made for entering Jerusalem, and he had not allowed them to have knowledge of preparations for the upper room. This might also indicate that on many occasions Jesus acted without the disciples' knowledge.
However, there is one more proof text that lends itself directly to the subject of the resurrection. With the advent of, The Dead Sea Scrolls, information comes to us that helps enlighten our understanding of the historical, and biblical, Jesus. Those in power in the earthly church immediately condemned these writings as spurious, or heretical. Most of the time those officials had no idea what was in the text, but in some instances they were aware that these were the very records that the Church had fought so desperately to destroy through the centuries.
In the minds of many, The Gospel According To Thomas, is as valid as any of the synoptic Gospels, and certainly as legitimate as John. At one point those who translated this work had planned to extend their first effort into a far more thorough and extensive volume.
"What follows is nothing more than a fragment of a work which is much more extensive and complete: a critical, scholarly edition of The Gospel According To Thomas, which will include a long introduction devoted to the various problems… This volume will be published in the near future." (The Gospel According To Thomas: Preliminary Remarks: Page V; Harper and Row: 1959)
That work has never come into existence. Why? The possibilities are that Thomas evidences a tradition so divergent from the 'Church's' doctrine that the authors would not dare to publish the work, or to make that knowledge common among the adherents of Christianity.
"His disciples said: Show us the place where Thou art, for it is necessary for us to seek it." (The Gospel According To Thomas: Pl. 86: Log 24:4-5)
This is a post-resurrection statement, but the tense is far different than John 14:5. The disciples appear to be asking Jesus where he is so they can go there, physically. Jesus answers with a statement that usually preceded a 'mystery' statement, an answer or parable that was intended only for his own disciples.
"He said to them: Whoever has ears to hear, let him hear."
"Thomas said to him: "Lord, we do not know where you are going; how can we know the way?" (John 14:5 RSV)
The response that follows is introduced in this place, but does not fit the question. In Thomas, wherever Jesus was going, he is already there, and the disciples are desirous of following him.
It is very possible that the 'church' demanded a physical resurrection in order to waylay the truth of the matter. We cannot have a 'saved' Jesus and retain the doctrine of the hierarchy of Christianity. We cannot have a 'living' Jesus and still maintain that a human sacrifice, a blood offering, is the only means to man's salvation. In truth one cannot get more pagan than to continue a doctrine of blood offerings and human sacrifices which the Lord God has condemned.
In the section we have just studied John demands that Jesus' appearances be miraculous. For the entire beginning of, The Acts of The Apostles, the speeches of Peter are made in public. People join their ranks daily. At one point, and this is after the Day of Pentecost, a host come forward to join the Apostles and the community of believers.
"Then those who accepted his word were baptized, and some three thousand were added to their number that day." (Acts 2:41 The New English Bible)
It would have been difficult to administer the word, and impossible to baptize three thousand from behind locked doors. And if we insist that Jesus walked through closed doors, it would have been no more difficult for him to do so in the flesh, than it was to walk through a mob of people who were trying to kill him or to be seen by the women and his own disciples without being recognized. However, one must accept that which is laid on their hearts by God's spirit, even if it is to believe that in the Kingdom we shall have physical, flesh and bone, bodies.
The evidence has been offered and can be attested to by the authorities and the works named.
If one knows the history of the Jerusalem Church, the Apostles were Jews to the end, and were not under any threat from the Temple or the synagogue. But the newly arrived Hellenists were. It was that small group who proclaimed that Judaism was ended, and that its natural extension was, Christianity.
When Stephen was killed, it was that group of Christians who fled from Jerusalem. The Judaizers were not forced to run for their lives. In fact, just the opposite was true. The disciples continued to practice their religion with the addition of preaching that Jesus was Messiah. The communal meal was offered, and the Teacher's words were taught to the newly formed congregation.
Nothing else changed for them, they continued their lives as Jews within that community, unaware that a dark and threatening future lay ahead. One had come into the world who would destroy everything that Jesus had laid down.
|
JESUS AND HELL
