The tradition regarding Jesus is so
glamorous that it is difficult to review his life
and character with an unbiased mind. While Fundamentalists
and Modernists differ regarding the divinity of Christ,
all Christians and many non-Christians still cling
to preconceived notions of the perfection of Jesus.
He alone among men is revered as all-loving, omniscient,
faultless an unparalleled model for mankind.
This convention of the impeccability
of Jesus is so firmly established that any insinuation
of error on his part is deemed a blasphemy. Doubting
Jesus is more impious than mocking God Almighty.
Jéhovah may be exposed to some extent with impunity;
a God who destroyed 70,000 of his chosen people because
their king took a census is too illogical for any
but theologians to worship. But the Son of God,
or Son of man, is sacrosanct. Jesus is reverenced
as the one man who has lived unspotted by the world,
free from human foibles, able to redeem mankind by
his example.
Respect for the principles of Jesus
is so inbred in American people of all faiths that
an attempt to disparage his worth is denounced as bad
taste. The detractor is suspected of being an
immoral person, no matter how convincing may be the
proof which he presents. A conspiracy of silence
is directed against any system of ethics advanced as
superior to the Sermon on the Mount. In popular
opinion Jesus never made a mistake; all his teachings
were infallible; no other view is tolerated.
Face the Facts
This unwillingness to acknowledge
the shortcomings of Jesus is partially due to fear
of sustaining a great loss. The familiar answer
to heretical arguments is that faith should not be
destroyed unless something can be put in its place ignoring
the fact that something always may be substituted
for beliefs destroyed. That substitute is faith
in the world as it really is. And our modern
world, with all its shortcomings, is infinitely preferable
to the earth, or even the heaven, of the first century.
We now know that man can do more to eradicate sorrow
than Jesus ever thought of. We can have greater
confidence in the world as revealed today than in
the doubtful traditions of Biblical times.
But suppose there were nothing to
substitute for the myth destroyed, should that deter
the Truthseeker from continuing his investigation?
Scientists do not hesitate in their research because
the result of a new discovery may be disastrous.
They seek the facts regardless of consequences; they
want to know the Truth about the physical world.
Ethicists should have a similar desire concerning the
metaphysical world. They should have confidence
that the Supreme Intelligence (as Edison called it)
will lead on to better things.
The True Jesus
If Jesus was what his followers believe,
no arguments will destroy their faith in him; but
if Jesus was not perfect, according to modern standards,
it is important that his status as God, or man, should
be revised. Loss of confidence in an erring idol
is not loss of a true ideal.
When an iconoclast asserts that Jesus
lacked supreme intelligence, the natural question
is, “How do you know that you are right in your
appraisal, ’lest haply ye be found even to fight
against God’?” The answer is that we do
not claim omniscience, but merely request everyone
to use his or her own judgment, with intellectual honesty,
examining each act or saying of Jesus without regard
to presupposed ideas or tradition.
Scriptures Unauthentic
The consensus of scholarship has rejected
the creation of the universe in six days in 4004 B.C.,
science having proved the existence of the world for
millions of years. Higher Critics refuse to credit
the book of Genesis, according to the first chapter
of which the trees, beasts and fowls were created
before man, but according to the second chapter after
man. It is not assuming too much for the humblest
writer to say that Moses was mistaken concerning many
things he described in the Pentateuch. It follows
that if one important portion of the Bible is untrustworthy,
other parts of that same book may not be the infallible
Word of God. The New Testament, as well as the
Old, may be examined critically, and if the gospels
contain numerous contradictions, the statements of
the authors on any point, including the life of Jesus,
are open to question. A conscientious person
should reach conclusions based upon the best knowledge
obtainable from all sources.
If anyone is convinced that Jesus
made mistakes, he is not necessarily compelled to
become an atheist. All other Gods that have been
worshipped by men have been found imperfect.
The oft exposed errors of Jéhovah do not prevent Christians
and Jews from professing belief in God. Those
who require support from outside themselves cling
to the symbol of deity though not thoroughly crediting
any personality ever described in any sacred scriptures.
Except Jesus.
An Evolutionist passes beyond the
negative denial of God to the construction of a new
philosophy in which Truth is his guide, Truth being
the nearest approximation to reality obtainable with
our present knowledge. Belief in the world as
it is now, and as it is going to be, is a sufficient
creed.
Faith in Jesus
With Jesus entrenched in popular opinion,
there is small probability that faith in him will
be shaken unless there is a preponderance of evidence
against his divinity. No one need abandon faith
in Jesus until convinced that something better has
been found. No one should even expose himself
to heretical arguments unless he is a devotee of Truth.
Then only can he rejoice at a revelation of error in
confidence that the more nearly the universe is understood
the better can man adjust himself to his surroundings.
A worshipper of Truth fears no destruction of false
gods, nor any facts that may cause him to throw over
treasured superstitions. He is willing to prove
all things and hold fast to that which is true.
He rejoices when his idol is shattered, knowing that
he is approaching nearer to the true way of living,
a way that Jesus did not adequately explain.
Any attempt to censure the character
of Jesus will meet with the ridicule it deserves unless
substantiated by documentary evidence. The mere
improbability of events contrary to natural laws does
not destroy the ethical value of the teachings of
the Nazarene. Anything might have happened in
the eerie days of old; the critic must do more than
deny the historicity of Jesus and the inspiration
of the Bible. To be convincing he must derive
from the scriptures in which Christians believe whatever
proof can be deduced to unveil the superstition of
a redeeming Savior.
Documentary Evidence
The documents most generally accepted
by Christians are those collected in the King James
Version of the Bible. The Apocrypha and other
early manuscripts are unreliable. None of the
thirty or more writers who described events around
Jerusalem in Jesus’ time gives any account of
his teachings. The only life of Jesus is found
in the four gospels; the numerous biographers of Christ
have had no other reliable source of information.
It is deceptive for the publishers of revised editions
of the Bible to claim that “original manuscripts”
have been consulted. Not one of the original
manuscripts is in existence, the earliest extant dating
from the fourth century A.D., while the most ancient
portion of the New Testament in any museum was transcribed
in the sixth century.
Accepting, therefore, the King James
Version of the New Testament as the most reliable
source of information, the question arises as to what
portion of the chapters therein may be considered authentic.
Scholars have rejected the entire gospel of John as
less reliable than the synoptic gospels; and the sixteenth
chapter of Mark as an addition after the original
papyrus had broken off. Modernists, being confronted,
in spite of these deletions, with inconsistencies
in the gospels of Matthew, Mark and Luke, have assumed
the further privilege of rejecting any verses which
appear at variance with their beliefs. Liberals
of this class contend that the supernatural side of
Jesus may be disregarded and yet that Jesus will remain
Our Lord. They reject certain evangelistic passages
that conflict with modern thought, but accept other
statements by the same authors as authoritative.
As the Christian churches have not
accepted any abbreviation of the Bible as a substitute
for the King James Version, it seems proper for the
critic to have recourse to that translation as the
most authentic description of the life and teachings
of Jesus. He is justified, moreover, in considering
every word in the supposedly inspired gospels as equally
reliable. His only concern should be to interpret
each verse as nearly as possible as the original writers
intended their words to be understood, allowing for
Eastern hyperbole and the custom of the times.
Retain the Good
In preparing a critical analysis of
the character of Jesus, it is freely admitted that
many of the thoughts attributed to the son of Mary
are superlatively fine. They will live forever
whether the personality of Jesus be rejected as a
divinity or not. That these beautiful preachments
are ignored here is not due to any desire to belittle
admirable sentiments or to disparage right living.
The loving side of Jesus has been emphasized again
and again and will be borne in mind by the reader
when other less admirable traits are criticized.
The intent of this criticism is not to destroy idealism
but to assist the spirit of true progress.
Christianity Must Go
The significance of this investigation
lies in the changes that would have to be made in
religious thought if it should be found that Jesus
was not perfect. If Jesus was in error concerning
conditions of his own time and exhibited no knowledge
of our modern problems, his authority will be lessened.
Searchers after the true way of life will not continue
to worship a person whose conception of the physical
and spiritual world was erroneous. If Jesus made
mistakes, he is neither the Son of God nor an infallible
man.
So long as people feel compelled to
worship what has been proved imperfect, or to evade
important doctrines of their creeds for fear of losing
faith in old traditions, their minds will not be receptive
to changes in social conditions that require abandonment
of established customs. Christians are imbued
with a psychology derived from a completed revelation.
The firmer their belief in Jesus, the greater their
resistance to new ideas. Catholics are more reluctant
to join progressive movements than Modernists and
Modernists than Evolutionists. Religious people
are apt to be afraid of the new world; they doubt the
possibility of eliminating war, poverty and injustice customs
as deeply rooted in the social world as belief in
Jesus is in the religious world. If the chief
reactionary bulwark of the past is abandoned, there
will be greater possibility of accepting new revelations.
What would happen if Christians should
discover that their leader was not an incomparable
guide? Absolutely nothing at first. Those
accustomed to lead a moral life would continue to
do so. Members of Christian churches are the
very people who most wish to do what is right.
They will not lose their character because Jesus has
lost his fictitious divinity. On the contrary,
they will search for the most elevating principles
to substitute for the personality that has been found
deficient. It is difficult for people to be superior
to their gods. These same church-going individuals,
when freed from the fetters of antiquated supernaturalism,
will gradually learn to serve mankind with the same
devotion they now render to a misunderstood God.
They will no longer be limited by the defects of their
paragon in their efforts to make the most of life.
They will seek to solve modern problems in a rational
way instead of deciding such matters as birth control,
divorce, war and prohibition by reference to the scriptures,
as they do now. For the first time they will
make their decisions according to the best knowledge
obtainable today.
Jesus was in advance of his time.
He declared that such revengeful theories as an eye
for an eye must be supplanted by forgiveness.
But as the world has evolved, Jesus has stood still.
His teachings, superior as they were to those of the
ancient Israelites, are now found to be inferior to
the best ethics culled from the wisdom of the ages,
brought down to date. It is heartening to feel
that we can appropriate the superlative principles
of all time instead of worshipping a deified personality
who was limited to the best that men of his own generation
could conceive.
This examination of the life and character
of Jesus will be based upon the accounts in the New
Testament. Each passage will be construed as
appears to the writer to have been originally intended.
The reader may substitute his own interpretation,
but should in no instance pass lightly over a situation
as immaterial. Every word or action of Jesus is
an important link in the chain of his divinity, or
of his exalted position as a moral guide. Each
argument should be met by acceptance or rejection,
never with indifference. No reader of the following
pages should ever say, “What difference does
it make?” Everything concerning Jesus is of
vast consequence in determining whether he is or is
not a divine Savior, or a perfect guide.