Loading...To this point in the thread I have been talking about Paul’s “religion” – specifically, what he thought was important in a person’s relationship with God. He expressed his views in a variety of ways – I have talked about his judicial and his participationist understandings of salvation, and have made brief comments on yet other “models” that he used to express his view about the act of salvation that God had achieved through Christ. In all of these models, it was the death and resurrection of Jesus that was of paramount importance. It was that, nothing else, that brought about salvation.
And what did Jesus himself think?
This is arguably the most important point to consider about early Christianity. Did the best known apostle of Christ proclaim the same, or very similar message, to Jesus himself? Or not? In my New Testament class every semester I have my students debate, in class, a resolution dealing with the issue: “Resolved: Paul and Jesus represented fundamentally different religions.”
Students are surprised by the topic. Until they do their research.
I will not devote a large series of posts to the question of what Jesus taught. For anyone who wants a fairly brief exposition, with evidence cited, there is my chapter “Did Jesus Think He Was God” in the recent How Jesus Became God. If you want a fuller scoop, see my earlier book Jesus: Apocalyptic Prophet of the New Millennium. For here, I will simply give the outline, without giving the details or the evidence.
FOR THE REST OF THIS POST, log in as a Member. Click here for membership options. If you don’t belong yet, JOIN ALREADY!!!
Great series, Dr Ehrman!
Hi Bart,
I’m not trying to be disrespectful here but this is a dilemma that I have been wondering about for some time now.
I have read many of your books and I really appreciate what you are doing. I think the world would really benefit if more people would take a serious look at what you have written.
Now, on to my dilemma, regarding what Jesus actually thought and spoke, isn’t this really all just speculation?
As I understand it:
1) we don’t know who wrote any of the 4 gospels, “Q” or the Acts of Luke.
2) we believe that most of these documents were written some time after Jesus was crucified.
3) we believe that during this intervening time period there was an, “Oral Tradition” where, what Jesus said and did
was passed on “orally” between people.
4) during this “oral tradition” time period what Jesus said and did may well have been embellished upon.
5) we don’t really know for certain what words by Jesus and what stories about Jesus were embellished upon.
Given all of this, it seems to me that there is no way we can know for certain what Jesus actually said or did during his lifetime?
As an example, as you mentioned in your latest book, several of the Gospels say that Jesus was buried in a tomb after the crucifixion. Was he really buried in a tomb or was this something that was developed and embellished upon during the oral tradition and the reason it ended up in these Gospels is that the gospel writers who wrote about this had all heard about and believed this same embellished stories?
To me, it seems to difficult to know for sure what Jesus actually said and did during his lifetime; unlike Paul, where we actually have several documents written by him about what he said and did during his life.
John
Yes, this is a very serious historical problem — and one, of course, that scholars have been well aware of for over 300 years! If you’re really interested in pursuing the matter, you might look at my book Jesus: Apocalyptic Prophet of the New Millennium. If you want even a fuller discussion, go to John Meier, A Marginal Jew, vol. 1.
Hi Bart,
Thank you for your response.
I own and have already read your books, “Jesus Interrupted”, “Jesus: Apocalyptic Prophet of the New Millennium” and “How Jesus Became God”. All 3 are awesome.
I’ll look into the John Meier book.
John
This is a very good clear statement of Jesus’ mission and message. Thank you for posting it.
Great summation. One question, re: “in the kingdom there would be no disease or demons, so Jesus’ followers should heal the sick and cast out demons now.” Does this presuppose Jesus was performing miracles, and planning to empower his followers to do likewise? Could he have been teaching merely that they should *care for* the sick, and *defy* any “demons” they thought they encountered?
I find myself still wondering about Jesus’s “trials,” before the (priest-dominated?) Sanhedrin and before Pilate.
Is it possible the priests/Sanhedrin considered him guilty of blasphemy because witnesses had told them he’d threatened to destroy the Temple, the “dwelling place of God”? He might have insisted, truthfully, that he’d merely *predicted* the destruction (not “threatened” it), and that he expected it to take place *after God had left the Temple* – a destruction *by* God, or on His orders. But they wouldn’t have believed him.
When they sent him on to Pilate, hoping a political charge would result in the execution they couldn’t order, they themselves would have thought the “Temple threat” at least implied an insurrection. And might there have been some degree of *language barrier* between Jesus and his Roman interrogators? If he spoke only Aramaic, might interpreters have failed to understand references he made to a coming “Kingdom” that would somehow replace Roman rule of Palestine? Might they have thought he was claiming to be a future “King of the Jews,” when in fact he wasn’t?
It only presupposes that people *thought* he was doing miracles. On the trial: most anything is *possible*, since we have no witnesses to tell us. But my view is that there probably was no official trial at all, let alone an official charge of blasphemy. I don’t think there’s much doubt that Jesus was killed for calling himself King of the Jews, and there’s very good evidence that that’s exactly what he did think about himself….
How do you picture the transmission of Jesus message from the diciples/followers until the Gospel of Mark?
As *very* problematic!
Hi Bart,
I am here thinking about Jesus and John the Baptist. They were both regarded as prophets, both proclaimed an apocalyptic message, both had followers. John baptized Jesus. In addition, both were killed by the authorities. But the aftermath of their deaths was so different… Divine or not, Jesus must have been a fascinating being… Perhaps more fascinating than his own message.
The kingdom never arrived and all the early Christians had left was Jesus.
I’m still happily reading your book!
Here’s the dilemma – that which is missing:
Jesus Predicts His Death and Resurrection
31 And He began to teach them that the Son of Man must suffer many things, and be rejected by the elders and chief priests and scribes, and be killed, and after three days rise again. 32 He spoke this word openly. Then Peter took Him aside and began to rebuke Him. 33 But when He had turned around and looked at His disciples, He rebuked Peter, saying, “Get behind Me, Satan! For you are not mindful of the things of God, but the things of men.” ( Mark 8)
Jesus predicts his death and resurrection
30 Then they departed from there and passed through Galilee, and He did not want anyone to know it. 31 For He taught His disciples and said to them, “The Son of Man is being betrayed into the hands of men, and they will kill Him. And after He is killed, He will rise the third day.” 32 But they did not understand this saying, and were afraid to ask Him.” (Mark 9)
Jesus predicts his death and resurrection
17 Now Jesus, going up to Jerusalem, took the twelve disciples aside on the road and said to them, 18 “Behold, we are going up to Jerusalem, and the Son of Man will be betrayed to the chief priests and to the scribes; and they will condemn Him to death, 19 and deliver Him to the Gentiles to mock and to scourge and to crucify. And the third day He will rise again.” (Mathew 20)
Jesus Predicts His Death and Resurrection
21 “From that time Jesus began to show to His disciples that He must go to Jerusalem, and suffer many things from the elders and chief priests and scribes, and be killed, and be raised the third day.”
22 “Then Peter took Him aside and began to rebuke Him, saying, “Far be it from You, Lord; this shall not happen to You!” 23 But He turned and said to Peter, “Get behind Me, Satan! You are an offense to Me, for you are not mindful of the things of God, but the things of men.” (Mathew 16)
Jesus predicts his death and resurrection
43 And they were all amazed at the majesty of God. But while everyone marveled at all the things which Jesus did, He said to His disciples, 44 “Let these words sink down into your ears, for the Son of Man is about to be betrayed into the hands of men.” 45 But they did not understand this saying, and it was hidden from them so that they did not perceive it; and they were afraid to ask Him about this saying.” (Luke 9)
Can you guess what’s missing from these words of Jesus? Not Paul. Not John. Not Luke, nor Mathew; but Jesus.
Right! See today’s post, as well.
Dear Mr. Ehrman,
after the congratulations on your work (to which you must be accustomed), I would like to ask you for some suggestions about books on the originality of Jesus’s teachings, especially of his “love your enemies”.
Would you care to express your opinion about the following book (found through a Google search of mine):
http://books.google.it/books?id=AY_3AAAAQBAJ&dq=per+bilde+originality&hl=it&source=gbs_navlinks_s
and about the following German Wikipedia article:
http://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Feindesliebe ?
Do you think that Jesus has said anything completely new?
Thank you very much for any reply.
The book looks really interesting, and it is a highly reputable publisher, so I’d go for it. I’ve only had time to scan the German article quickly, but it looks good, even though most of it is about the love command in thinkers *after* Jesus instead of before him.
I would also ask if this message of Jesus is really the message of the Torah and the Old Testament with all of its divine killing, divine-ordered killing, and even divine-ordered genocide????
Yes, it’s problematic. On the other hand, Jesus probably thought that God was going to wipe out most people when the Son of Man arrived too….
Interesting. I had not really added that idea to my thinking. Thanks.