Not long ago, fellow blogger John Zande wrote an excellent post titled “Jesus Christ: Just Not Worth a Sheet of Paper.” It’s actually not as derogatory as the title suggests. Some apologists have suggested that the reason we have no contemporary accounts of Jesus’ life is that paper was so expensive. That’s the argument John deals with in his post.
His post is great — you should read it. But what I actually want to write about is one of the comments that someone left on it. Diana of NarrowWayApologetics.com left a lengthy comment that I decided to include here in its entirety. I identified with it a bit. It reminded me of some of the thoughts I used to have as a Christian:
One of the main reasons people believed Paul was because he explained the reason for Jesus coming into the world. His teachings were amazing. They explained how Jesus “fulfilled the law and the prophets.” I wrote this comment in response to John Zande’s comment on my blog last night. Forgive me for posting it here. Just ignore if you don’t want to read it.
“This passage about Jesus fulfilling the law and the prophets (Matthew 5:17-20) is one of the main reasons I believe the Gospel message. The incredible ways that Jesus did this are beyond human ability to create. I don’t think any mystery writer could have weaved together the incredible ways Jesus fulfilled the law and the prophets.
I know this post is long, so if you want to skip the parts between the dotted lines, I understand. I just wrote it for anyone who might be interested.
———
First of all, there are many ways Jesus fulfilled the law. In fact, believers are constantly astounded by how intricately Jesus fulfilled the law.One way he fulfilled the law was by fulfilling the Sabbath. The Sabbath was the seventh day of rest that the Jews were commanded to obey. Jesus fulfilled the law of the Sabbath by becoming our rest for us. (Hebrews 4:9-11) He said his burden was light and his yoke was easy. Christians no longer practice the Sabbath. They worship on Sunday, rather than Saturday. They enter into his rest and no longer do religious works for salvation. (They are saved by grace through faith.)
Jesus fulfilled the law when he became the Lamb of God who takes away the sins of the world. His death on the cross was similar to the Exodus story, which described the lamb, whose blood would be placed on the doorposts of the home, causing the death angel to pass over that home. (Hebrews 9)
Jesus fulfilled the law when he became the unleavened bread of the Exodus story. Leaven is a symbol of sin and false teaching (1 Cor. 5:6-8, Matt. 16:12). Jesus fulfilled this feast by being sinless and being the TRUTH.
Another way that Jesus fulfilled the law was by becoming a tithe (firstfruits) for us. (Leviticus 23:10) He fulfilled the tithe by becoming the firstfruits from the dead when he was resurrected. (1 Cor. 15:20) Christians are no longer bound by a tithe, instead we are told to be cheerful givers. We are also promised that there will be a resurrection for us because of what Christ did for us.
Jesus fulfilled the law when he became a light to the Gentiles. In the law of Moses, the people were commanded to leave behind the gleanings (or leftovers) of the harvest for the poor and aliens. (Lev. 23:22) This would be fulfilled at Pentecost when the Holy Spirit came down and the gospel was preached in all languages, offering salvation to all, not just the Jews. (Acts 10:34-35)
These fulfillments of the law were actually the first 4 feasts that would be celebrated every year by the Jews. They would be celebrated according to the seasons. The feasts celebrated during the early rains were the fulfilled at the time of the early church. Three more feasts are waiting to be fulfilled at the end of the age (or at the time of the latter rains). These three feasts are the feast of trumpets (representing the return of Jesus), the feast day of atonement (representing the salvation of the Jews), and the feast of tabernacles (representing the time when we will all be with the Lord).
There are so many other ways in which Jesus fulfilled the law and the prophets. And none of it has to do with Jesus expecting or commanding Christians to obey the law to perfection. It has to do with how it’s impossible for anyone to keep the law. That is why Jesus came. How could any human conceive of a way to have even a made-up, fictional character fulfill all these things? And I’ve barely scratched the surface of the way Jesus accomplished these things.
The greatest concern I feel burdened about is how to convey the magnificence of what I’m trying to explain. He was the manna from heaven. He was the living water. He was the high priest in the order of Melchizedek. He is the “I AM.” He is the Word become flesh. He became a slave for us. (Philippians 2:7) He became a curse for us. He became sin for us, so we could become righteous before God. He offers us mercy because his blood was sprinkled on the mercy seat. All of this is explained in the scriptures.
I haven’t even begun to explain the way Jesus fulfilled the prophets.
——–
The story of Jewish history and the giving of the law is actually a way to PROVE the reality of God’s plan for the salvation of humanity through Jesus Christ. One random fact doesn’t prove anything, but the cumulative effect of ALL the fulfillments makes the Bible a miraculous book. This is why some of the brightest and best minds in the history of the world have loved and received Jesus. It isn’t a decision based on emotion alone, but a decision based on knowledge. And the more I learn, the more I am in awe of what God did and how he accomplished it.”
To say that the story of Jesus was just created by pasting together myths, fictional narratives, sayings, and borrowed phrases (as Ken Humphreys does) is a ridiculous claim because only a Christ could have conceived of a Christ. Who could have created the amazing Jesus portrayed in the Gospels and explained further by Paul?
Of course, I now see that there are several problems with this line of thinking. In 2015, Star Wars Episode 7 is supposed to hit theaters. Will it shock anyone if the movie syncs up perfectly with the previous 6? The thing is, when there is already an established back story, it’s not impossible to construct a narrative that builds upon it. The fact that we as readers see the parallels between the stories of Jesus and events in the Old Testament is not an accident. The authors intended for us to see those parallels, and there’s no reason why they couldn’t have invented them — even if Jesus was a real person.
Matthew is one of the best books to look to for evidence of this. Matthew is the only book that tells of Jesus’ family fleeing to Egypt to escape Herod’s infanticide. Both events, fleeing to Egypt and the infanticide, seem to be inspired by Matthew’s reading of the Old Testament. Hosea 11:1 says, “out of Egypt, I called my son.” Matthew says that this prophecy was fulfilled when Jesus’ family returned after fleeing to Egypt. But when you read the entire chapter of Hosea 11, it’s very evident that the passage has nothing to do with the Messiah, but is simply talking about Israel’s period of captivity in Egypt.
Matthew also claims that Herod’s slaughter of infants in Bethlehem was to fulfill this prophecy:
A voice is heard in Ramah,
lamentation and bitter weeping.
Rachel is weeping for her children;
she refuses to be comforted for her children,
because they are no more.
But once again, when we read all of Jeremiah 31, this was no prophecy at all. The chapter is talking about Israel’s captivity in Assyria. Nothing else.
The author of Matthew took these passages and used them to add parallels to the story about Jesus’ birth. It didn’t require magic or divine inspiration to do that — it only took knowledge of these passages. Just like the people working on Star Wars 7 don’t need divine intervention to let them know about Darth Vader.
Diana ends her comment by asking who could have created such a compelling story. Who could have created Christ? But why couldn’t we ask this about anyone? Who could have created Darth Vader? He’s quite a compelling character himself. Who could have created someone as magnificent as Santa Claus? Or Paul Bunyan? Or Achilles? Or King Arthur? Just asking this question doesn’t really mean anything. If Jesus never existed, then someone did just create his story. Or if he was a real person, but not divine, then his story was embellished. We have to draw our conclusions about Jesus based on the evidence, including the fact that Matthew seemed to feel the need to create “prophecies” to give Jesus credibility.
Finding Truth 
RE: “In the end, the only evidence that really matters is an actual, living, breathing, resurrected messiah. Can anyone present such a being?”
Well, not exactly, but some people said they saw him and waited 40 years to write about it (couldn’t find a pencil), does that count?
LikeLike
someone once said that there had been 500 witnesses… how could anyone deny such eyewitness testimony?
LikeLike
I am sure posting on this topic is a waste of time, and obviously none of you believe in the scriptures anyway but…. I just want to say that there is as much proof of the Aramaic text as there is for the Greek, and to say otherwise is ignorant.
LikeLike
@Laurie
A simple citation would be considered in order here, especially if you have even a modicum of respect for the blog host.
LikeLike
RE: “I am sure posting on this topic is a waste of time, and obviously none of you believe in the scriptures anyway.”
I can’t speak for anyone else, but that is certainly true of me. On another site on which I post, a couple of members were discussing what it would take to create some kind of something – they really didn’t even have a word for it – that would teach people empathy, to care for each other, to feel for each other, to treat each other fairly and equitably. As I watched the discussion build, I imagined that this must have been very much like how it was, thousands of years ago, when the Christian religion started, and possibly the Judeo one as well. Make up any kind of story it takes, to make people get along with each other. The motivation is noble, admittedly.
Personally, if I were to consider doing that, I would start “The Church of Jerry Springer” – he always closed his show with a single commandment, that as far as I can see, is enough to accomplish the purpose for all of us, if we’d but follow it. He says, “Be good to yourselves, and each other.” What more do we need?
LikeLike
I apologize for my lack of ability here, but I am on a cell phone, and without a computer right now, which is why I have not made a significant contribution to this post. Not sure how to copy a link, but if you want, it is an easy Google away.
LikeLike
Hi Nate, yeah, it is hard to keep up sometimes, isn’t it?
“Jesus could only have meant a long period if he knew how big the earth was. I don’t think he was aware of that. “
Yes, I too don’t think Jesus knew the world was 40,000 kms in circumference, and I don’t think he knew Australia existed and was inhabited. But I don’t think that makes any difference. He surely knew it was at least as big as all the way to Rome, with more outside, and that is enough.
“I’d also add that verse 34 clearly says “all these things””
But what was he referring to there? Do you know, or just assuming? Consider:
1. This likely wasn’t one long discourse, but a collection of sayings, as is clear from the structure of Matthew.
2. You are approaching this as a scientific 21st century western person, but Jesus didn’t speak in that way. He was a first century Jew; he used figures of speech like metaphor, hyperbole and paradox; he generally spoke cryptically to make people think and keep some things hidden (apparently). One of the biggest mistakes we can make historically is to think anachronistically.
3. This passage is notoriously difficult, for us at least. It is a brave, and I think foolish, person who makes such confident statements about it.
4. The immediately preceding verses describe things that generally happened within a lifetime, but also some that appear to be longer term – or are they?
So where does that leave us? We have a bunch of predictions, more likely warnings, which were in places clear enough that the early christians could take notice of them, but not fully clear, especially to us at this remove. But they seem to apply to various times, places and situations, without always being clear. If you expect them to be detailed prophecies, you’ll find this frustrating – and if you’re an unbeliever you’ll make mileage out of this.
But if you accept it as warnings which will paint a general picture and become clearer when relevant, there isn’t such a problem. I find these matters part of the reality and fascination of following Jesus, not a reason to doubt. (And this isn’t said for the benefit of this discussion, that has been my view for several decades at least.) Best wishes.
LikeLike
Hi Uncle E,
I think this is one of the clear places where I part ways with your kind of conclusions. The passage in Matthew that you are discussing is similar to Mark 13, Luke 21:5-36, Mark 8:34-9:1, Matthew 16:24-28, and Luke 9:23-27. I believe it is definitely fair for a person who researches Christianity to have doubts about it’s veracity given passages such as these.
I don’t know if you are familiar with Thom Stark, but he is a Christian with an interesting twist on how Christians should interpret the bible. He believes that they should be honest about the difficulties in the bible. In his book “The Human Faces of God” Stark does an extremely thorough analysis of all of these passages. It’s been a while since I’ve read it, but here is some of what he writes about these passages:
Now I know fully well that Thom Stark and James Dunn are just as human as anyone else and could very well be wrong or could be “overspeaking” or using too much hyperbole in what they say above, but this really isn’t the point.
The main point for me is that a lot of Christians (and you sometimes do this, although not always) seem to portray agnostics and atheists as being dishonest or unfair in the conclusions they draw about the Christian message. We are portrayed as coming to our conclusions because for some reason it is in our best interest. But that is not why we don’t believe – It is passages like the above as well as many others that Nate and I and others have tried to share that simply make it hard for us to believe that Christianity is truth. My first year after I converted to Christianity I was so sure it was true. After that, as I began to see that the original problems I had before I converted were not being resolved (I had been so sure they would be) and as more and more bible difficulties kept mounting I simply came to the point that I could no longer believe it. I fought so hard for 4 years to try and resolve these things praying “Lord I believe, heal my unbelief” over and over. There were so many things I loved about my Christian experience and I wanted very badly to hold on to it, but my brain just gave out to the many problems that it ran into. I believe this is the case for many nonbelievers. Don’t get me wrong, there are some who wouldn’t believe no matter what just because they don’t want to… but again for many I do not believe this is the case.
LikeLike
Hi Howie, how are you going?
You will probably be surprised to know I appreciate what you have said, and disagree with very little of it. I have read some of Thom Stark’s stuff, and I think I would be more positive than negative about him. James Dunn ditto. I don’t believe the Bible is inerrant, so I’m not committed to the gospel authors getting everything exactly correct in an inerrant sense, and certainly not that they put everything down in exactly correct order. And while I believe Jesus didn’t make any mistakes, I don’t believe (on his own admission) that he knew everything. So I think you and I can understand each other well on this issue, as we often do.
” a lot of Christians (and you sometimes do this, although not always) seem to portray agnostics and atheists as being dishonest or unfair in the conclusions they draw about the Christian message”
If I have done this, I apologise, because I don’t mean to, and I don’t think that way. I cannot know other people’s motivations, and I try not to infer what I cannot know. I am happy to leave such judgments to God.
But I think it is I who has been misunderstood, not just by you, but by archaeopteryx1 and others. When I dispute a statement someone makes as if fact, it is because I think they have made a mistake, not because I have a hidden agenda to dispute some larger matter. I think that if a statement is worth making, it is worth getting right. And the resultant discussion is an interesting test.
On the matter of Matthew 24, I never made the claim that every statement in there was inerrant and verifiable, or anything like it. I simply suggested that some statements made about it were not presenting all the facts. I am aware of the scholarly consensus on the passage, but having studied both OT & NT prophecy, and come to a slightly different understanding of it as a result, I personally think the chapter is consistent, though difficult.
I therefore appreciate the tone of your comment. I am sorry your “christian experience” wasn’t positive or convincing, and can hope that one day you may see things differently. As I guess you might hope for me! 🙂 Best wishes.
LikeLike
I agree with some of your points also Howie. Although I would not call myself a christian, I do believe in the “old testament” and Yeshua as the Messiah. I, like unklee understand this text differently, in light of my study of the scriptures. It truly is amazing how each individual can glean something different from the same passage.
There are several keys (imo) to understanding this text, and the many like it. First off, the apostles never understood what Yeshua was teaching. Why? Because he spoke in parables, seeing they would not see and hearing they would not hear. It might not be so easy to understand. Secondly, when you look at this passage the apostles asked more than one question.
When will these things be
What is the sign of your coming
And the end of this world
They assumed that this was all one event. Next thing that you will see if you study Messiah is that any time he said, “verily verily I say to you” the text was not what it seemed (I can give examples if needed). So when he said “this generation shall not pass” the topic came in the next verse. “heaven and earth will pass away, but my words will never pass”. My words. The topic is his words, his testimony. The generation that witnessed his life passes on his testimony every time we open our bibles.
Next point, he said nobody knows the day or hour right after. It will be like the days of Noah, unexpected. Read the list of things he said, and it seems clear that this was not going to take place in a short amount of time. Last point. What happened just before the end? The gospel was preached to the whole world. What gospel was that? Was it the gospel of grace? There are two gospels preached in the new testament, the gospel of the kingdom, and Paul’s new gospel of grace. Christianity had preached the gospel of grace to the whole world, but that is not the gospel Yeshua preached.
LikeLike
Hey Laurie, we are in a lot of agreement! One of the clearest things about the ministry of Jesus is that he rarely gave a straight answer. I too have always noted that they asked several questions, and probably thought they were the same one, but his answer suggests he didn’t. But somehow, not everyone sees this.
LikeLike
“This is what I’m seeing unk, and I’ve run into this tactic before, I made the statement that there is no verifiable evidence that the New Testament character, Yesua, ever actually existed. You have no evidence to support your belief that he did, so the best you can do is nit-pick my statements, in order to find SOMEthing about which to make me wrong, which I see as a deflection tactic.”
Hi archaeopteryx1,
Bingo! you’ve got it wrong again, but don’t worry, everyone gets a prize! 🙂 In fact you probably couldn’t be wronger – even my grammar couldn’t be wronger!
If you asked anyone here, you’d find that the Jesus never existed idea is one of the topics I most post on. I’m definitely not running from that one! In fact, the others won’t thank you for raising the topic and getting me started! 🙂
If you want to check out why I think that idea has no legs, you can read Was Jesus a real person? and Is there really a consensus of scholars on historical facts about Jesus?. But if you want to stay comfortable in your illusions, don’t bother.
Fact is, I was simply interested in the small matter I picked up on. Sorry to spoil your psychologising!
But since you mention diversionary tactics, maybe now we could get back to the small matter of the number of sources, which you said was 3, but is actually at least 6. Sorry, but I remembered despite everything, but if you delay another 2 years until I turn 70, I’ll probably forget. 🙂
But don’t worry, I’ll give up on that now, and fade gently into the night. This has been a small test on being evidence-based, and the examiner tells me you will have to sit it again. Best wishes with that. I’m sorry it turned out this way, it could have been friendly chat, but as Mick Jagger said, you can’t always get what you want. Your genial unkle E.
LikeLike
@Unklee
@Unklee
The fact that you believe the ”statement” ( Nicene Creed) that Jesus was divine and the Creator of the universe I consider a pile of horse manure.
However, in the interests of an interesting ‘test’ maybe you would like to qualify the Nicene Creed?
This would at least demonstrate to your fellow bloggers your credentials regarding your stance re: interpretation of the passages in Matthew currently under discussion.
Fair’s fair, right?
LikeLike
Thanks for your replies Uncle E and Laurie.
Uncle E – I wouldn’t doubt you are misunderstood as well.. I think it is all too common for everyone to be questioned wrongly in tough discussions like religion and politics. Doesn’t make it easy – sorry if I’ve misunderstood you as well.
Obviously your responses are possibilities as any interpretation is a possibility, but to me when I just read these passages and take them as they read then it looks to me like the writers of the New Testament believed that the end of the world was coming in their generation and that is what they wrote down. This seems to be confirmed when we read Paul’s writings – there are several places where he speaks as if some of the people he is speaking to will be people alive when “the end” comes. Of course for Laurie this is confirmation that Paul is a ravenous wolf. 😉 In some NT writings people are comforted that his return will come even though some have died. And then later documents like 2 Peter try to figure out how to resolve the difficulty of him not returning with the day being a thousand years thing.
And Uncle E, I also know that you don’t believe the bible to be inerrant. I have also toyed with the idea that parts of the bible could be correct. Obviously a possibility as well.
The understanding I have of these verses I believe i the plain reading of the text, and Stark also claimes that there are a lot of scholars who agree with this view…. again this doesn’t guarantee their conclusions, but for me I just see it as yet another thing that tips the scales in weighing all the evidence. Unfortunately this kind of stuff is not like math and logic – it’s all open to subjective interpretations.
I know I and other nonbelievers on this blog say this all too frequently, but for me it is worth repeating: opening up the bible to interpretations which seem to go against the plain reading, and also allowing for some of it to be wrong brings up some problems along with it. First when I hear Christians declare other faiths to be wrong I hear them use very similar arguments like the ones that I and others use against Christianity. I believe they are being fair in their declarations of other religions just as I am trying my best to be fair in my own conclusions. Second, when we allow interpretations or declaring parts wrong then we are relying on our own abilities to decipher what is in and what isn’t or what can get special interpretations and what doesn’t and then we can simply create the religion that we want to see. I see this as happening throughout time as the culture of the day has shaped what Christians believe. And further, given these allowances (interpretations and scripture being wrong in places) I don’t understand why Universalists are given such a hard time by a lot of Christians when they say that all religions somehow create different pathways to the same peak of the mountain where God is. While I have a hard time believing in conscious beings who don’t have physical brains, I can at least see how Universalism would make sense in the light of the way more moderate Christians allow for the kind of hermeneutics they espouse. Many scriptures of many religions can be declared truth with the same exact kind of allowances.
LikeLike
Howie, well put.
LikeLike
Howie,
The reason that I believe Paul is the false apostle of Revelations 2, is actually quite simple. In Acts 1 when Peter was electing the new 12th Apostle, there were three requirements to be part of the ministry.
1)you had to have walked with Messiah during his ministry
2)you had to have seen his baptism
3)you had to have witnessed his resurrection
Paul did not meet any of these requirements. Further more, Yeshua said there were false apostles claiming to be true apostles, and they were like balaam, teaching to eat meat sacrificed to idols. Paul allows eating meat sacrificed to idols in 1 corinthians 8. This is a very very brief explanation. If you read every thing that Yeshua said and compare it to Paul, it cannot be reconciled. Paul made countless errors, and lead people away from Torah, which is the Way the Truth and the Life
LikeLike
Do you see the thematic connection between Paul and Balaam. It is quite striking if you really think about it. There is also a connection to the lying prophet in 1 Kings 13.
LikeLike
This should be interesting, Ark, as the NT is loaded with references that imply the trinity conclusion reached at the Nicean Conference – a decision that was hotly contested, I might add – was a crock.
Throughout the Gospels, Yeshua continually states that he would have no power by himself, that all of his power comes from his daddy in heaven – who is he begging, in the Garden of Gethsemane, to, “let this cup pass from me”? Himself? And to whom was he speaking when he said, “My god, my god, why have you forsaken me?”
Let’s try that out and see how it plays: “Me! Me! Why have I forsaken me?!” Really doesn’t have quite the same ring to it —
LikeLike
I like that response, Howie, on SO many levels!
LikeLike
@Laurie – although a dyed-in-the-wool atheist, I too, have always felt that Paul hi-jacked the Christian religion. But somewhat in his defense, you DO know, don’t you, that 1st Timothy, as well as verses 14:34-35 of 1st Corinthians were forged, added to Paul’s letter after it had been written?
LikeLike
@Laurie – RE: “Do you see the thematic connection between Paul and Balaam.” – I hadn’t noticed that as much as I see a strong thematic connection between Balaam and Shrek, they both had talking donkeys!
LikeLike
And Peter didn’t write Peter. It makes no difference really. I could write thirty pages on why Paul is false, but most Christians will choose to follow him instead of Yeshua. I am not saying that to be malicious, as I believed he was the greatest apostle for most of my life. But I also believe that Satan has deceived the whole world even the very elect, through the church.
Just look at Matthew 7. Many will say to him, did we not …………..in your name, and he will say depart from me you whom commit anomia , which is usually translated as lawlessness, but is more accurately translated negation of the law. What’s important to see hear is that he is talking to Christians. Nobody else prophesies in HIS name, and it is through the authority of Paul that we teach the law has been nailed to the cross. The church is teaching the negation of the law, when that is contrary to what Yeshua taught. Yeshua said if you want eternal life keep the commandments. At least that is how it appears to me.
LikeLike
That is hilarious!;)
LikeLike
First of all, Laurie, I have never known you to be malicious – in fact, my Shrek joke was far more malicious than anything you’ve ever said – I agree with you about Paul, but for totally different reasons. You clearly believe in the validity of Satan and Jesus and the whole religious thing, whereas I just see a man, clearly in conflict with himself over his job of persecuting converts to what Hebrew authorities clearly saw as a heresy, with the end result being a three-day bout of hysterical blindness, which you can discuss with any psychologist.
Being a typical, superstitious, 1st Century Jew, he likely saw his affliction as being god-sent, rather than the result of his own, internal, psychological conflicts, and after deliberating on the problem for three days (during which he couldn’t do much else), he ended his cognitive dissonance by deciding that Yeshua was truly the long-awaited Messiah – voila! Conflict resolved, sight restored – it’s a miracle! Of conflict relolution.
Clearly he had some issues with the original 11’s approach, or felt he had a stronger conviction, or something – how can anyone know what went through the mind of a 1st Century mentally-deranged person? At any rate, he went off on his own, and prolific writer that he was, he wrote far more than the other 11 combined, in fact, after Paul began his crusade, the others pretty much dropped off the grid, comparatively speaking.
LikeLike