The Scholastic Myth Makers

by 2 Comments

Academic scholars researching the New Testament documents have created an intriguing mythology of their own, to assist them in the popular quest of turning Christianity into a mere human movement. This is not to say that all academics are atheists or that none of them has a living faith in Jesus Christ, but that the body of scholarly work is undergirded by a supposition that the New Testament events were not the supernatural happenings which Christianity celebrates.

Need For Invention

People who are antagonistic to Christianity and to the clear claims of Jesus Christ and His followers as provided to us in the canon of New Testament books, need to build a case for their doubts. The books of the New Testament have been put under intense scrutiny for centuries and keep rebounding as dynamic and living expressions of powerful truth that is able to impact the hearers far beyond any other works in human history.

The sheer potency and significance of the New Testament, including its historical track record and glowing endorsements, supported by the millions who live by its truths in each generation, boldly challenge all who would oppose those twenty-seven books.

Such a challenge does not deter the most determined, and one option open to them is “invention”. If something supportive of an antagonistic position could be created from what has passed to us from that time, then much might be made from it.

Spurious Documents

There is no shortage of doubtful material in New Testament times. Various, spurious claims were made in the first few centuries, and have passed to us in various documents. However, those documents were recognised as spurious from their own time. They are not reliable historically and lack sufficient authority to challenge the overwhelming body of evidence in support of the approved New Testament books.

That has not stopped people who are antagonistic to Christianity from pushing those documents and their spurious ideas into the headlines from time to time. But no on-going credibility has been attained, despite the most vigorous efforts of some.

The Invention Summarised

The breakthrough which antagonists sought ultimately required invention. In simplified form, what was lit upon was the idea that evidence could be ‘created’ to accuse early (nascent) Christianity of having ‘evolved’ into a religious belief system.

The key was to create the impression that at least two different streams of Christ-consciousness existed. The initial stream would be based on Jesus as a rabbi, who presented ‘wisdom teaching’ and gained a following. Later streams would deify Jesus, after his death, by interposing into his biography such things as miracles, a virgin birth and Christ’s resurrection from the dead.

If such a construct could be invented, even just hinted at with sufficient force, then Christianity would be reduced from the reverberations of a divine visitation, to a delusional man-made religion, based on fraudulent deification of a humble Galilean teacher.

Imagining and Inventing

Since the Gospels provide a compelling and cogent account of the life, teachings, death and resurrection of Jesus Christ, it was necessary for detractors to devalue those writings. Initially it was suggested that the Gospels were created quite late in the picture and did not include eye-witness accounts, but fanciful inventions of supernatural events.

However, continued research has proven the opposite. The texts are remarkably reliable, strong in eye-witness elements and dated very close to the events they describe.

To overcome this obstacle, scholars came up with the notion that these Gospels were created late in the picture, but based on earlier eye-witness material. By careful review of what was included and excluded from the various historical records of Christ’s life (gospels), guesses were made about what a common source document would contain. The hope was that such an imagined source document would be devoid of supernatural elements.

Two source documents have been proposed, the Passion Narrative and The Lost Sayings Gospel Q.

The Q Document

The imagined Q Document suggests a text which brought together much of the wisdom teaching of Jesus. The value of that notion is that it suggests Jesus was really only a teacher, not a miracle worker, nor Son of God who rose from the dead.

Once the hypothesis of a Q Document was developed, it could then be hypothesised that the document was used by an early branch of Christianity, those who followed Jesus because of the wisdom teachings.

CM Tuckett, author of ‘The Anchor Bible Dictionary’ communicates something of these implications when he said that, “Q may also alert us to the great variety within primitive Christianity. It shows us a version of the Christian faith which is perhaps less cross centered than, say, Paul or Mark”. (emphasis added)

The Imagined Evolution

The invention of a Q document prompts the hypothesis of a community based on “wisdom” sentiment, living to celebrate divine insights, brought to them by their teacher, Jesus. This is then contrasted with the Pauline emphasis on the death and resurrection of Jesus, and “Bingo”, they have constructed an evolutionary continuum in which the man, Jesus, is deified after his death, and a mythology about his resurrection is added. Other enhancements to the life story of Jesus, such as the miracles, are thought to have been invented by the promoters of the new religion, to give their leader special significance and sell their package ahead of the competition.

Mythology versus Myth

It is amusing to note that those who insist that Christianity is based on a Christ myth are forced to create a mythology of their own.

Those who receive the New Testament writings as accurate and divinely overseen records of supernatural events full of moral potency and divine significance, have no problem with the New Testament. We do not need to invent anything. Our very own, personal encounter with the living Jesus Christ of the New Testament, and the living truths unpacked by Paul and the others, confirms to us that there is no myth involved or needed.

Reality triumphs over the myth-makers.

New Testament Writings

by 1 Comment

There are two general bodies of thought toward the writings which have remained from the New Testament, Apostolic times.

The standard Christian understanding is that certain writings were inspired by the Holy Spirit and should be respected as such, given place in the collection (canon) of texts which are regarded as Scripture. Other works, which are not canonised, are either helpful but not inspired, or are spurious, and to be ignored.

The standard secular understanding is that the writings of the New Testament era are simply human texts, reflecting the development of a religious belief system which is based on real people and real events, but which is ultimately an evolved human construct.

Scholarly Thought

As is the case in scientific circles today, scholarly, academic endeavour is meant to be devoid of faith elements which might bias the researcher. However, what prevails is a strong bias against the faith elements reflected in the scientific and scholarly work. God cannot be allowed in science, so the empty theory of evolution is promoted, with religious zeal, as if scientific. Such a state is foolish and contrary to true science, yet it is defended with evangelistic fervour by those who reject religious interpretation.

Similarly, scholars who investigate ancient Christian texts are bound to assume that they are nothing more than human writings. There is no place in the study for recognition of inspiration, revelation or divine qualities in the text or the writers.

Due to this blinkered approach the scholars are inclined to base their thinking on doubt and scepticism and to come up with conclusions which feed both as well. Hence the scholarly trail is decorated with constructs out of the imagination of the researcher – suggesting multiple authors, lost sources, deliberate embellishments, corrupted texts, evolving thought, suspect motives and so on. Further scholarship often mocks the scholarly constructs, but that does not heal the condition.

Expressions of Doubt

Scholarly discussion injects into the picture a range of thoughts which are counter to acceptance of the texts as divinely created resources for us.

One suggestion is that Jewish sources, which are now non-existent, were picked up by the early Christians and adopted for guiding their gatherings. These documents were then edited and ‘Christianised’ with insertions of references to Christ or quotes from Christ, to give the content a distinctly Christians flavour. This suggestion clearly exists around a notional “Two Way” document which is believed to have influenced such writings as the Epistle of Barnabas.

Non-canonical texts, with their various weaknesses and flaws, give scholars cause to smear the canonical writings with suspicion and to discredit the content as simply a refinement of poorer documents.

Terminology used by the scholars clearly expresses their academic contempt for the spiritual principles presented in the New Testament writings. Consider the implications of such terms as “the Christ myth”, “epic-apocalyptic mythology”, “narrative material that could easily be turned into a more eventful depiction of Jesus’ public appearance” (ie: fabricated additional content), “old Jesus-traditions” (meaning different notions of Jesus which were brought together to create the current religious myth we call Christianity), and “redaction” (the process by which various notions about Jesus were cooked together to create a cogent religious story.

Imaginary Texts

Further evidence of the inclination by scholars to doubt the canonical documents is their creation of imaginary texts. Lists of documents from the Apostolic age, also known as Apocryphal texts from the New Testament era, will most likely include such documents as the Passion Narrative and the Lost Sayings Gospel Q. These texts have never been referred to in the ancient literature and are purely imaginary.

Scholars, seeking to identify New Testament books such as the four Gospels as concocted works drawing on earlier material and editing it to suit their purposes, have suggested the existence of earlier texts from which the Gospel writers have drawn.

The purpose of these imagined documents is simply to suit scholastic scepticism about the divinity of Jesus, the miracles, supernatural phenomena and man’s moral accountability to a holy God, among other things.

Academic Study

Consideration of Biblical texts, therefore, either reflects a faith-based application of the texts as divine communication to us, or a scepticism-based academic analysis, intent on denigrating the text to expose human construction.

Many well-meaning Christians, intent on broadening their understanding of the Bible, try to take seriously the sceptical and antagonistic suggestions of the scholars, possibly to show that they are open minded and not blind believers. The two streams do not converge and confusion can result.

It is interesting, therefore, to take a look at the ground that is under question, and to approach the available source documents without feeling the need to cow-tow to academic constructions. This is my hope, and, given time, I am keen to rake over the ground and see what it yields.

Scorner in the Corner

by 1 Comment

I was contacted many years ago by a young male university student who had recently joined a skeptic group on campus. He phoned me to practice his powers of intellectual argument or something. The exchange didn’t go as he had planned.

The first thing I sensed as the stranger did a hasty introduction and then hit me with some challenging question about Christian faith, was that he was a rather insincere young man. He seemed to be trying something out that really didn’t fit him very well. I gave an off-the-cuff cursory answer to his question and he pressed his point. I can’t remember the issue that he raised.

He rather proudly announced that he was a skeptic. I think he found some solace in the idea that he was backed up by something like a body of supporters. I replied by sharing with him my thoughts about people who are sceptical.

I pointed out how it surprised me that people who chose to identify themselves as sceptics were principally only sceptical about faith in God. These supposedly enlightened minds, superior enough to see through other people’s folly, seemed remarkably gullible and ever ready to be uncritical in their embrace of things anti-Christian. They did not prove to be sceptical of their university professors, nor of the populist ideas of their group. They did not seem to be sceptical of their own scepticism.

I went on to explain that it seemed that the mainly male groups which identify themselves as skeptics are likely composed of people whose own moral compromises motivate them to become devoted to an anti-God posture, in fear of the alternative. Instead of getting on with life and engaging in the broad sweep of life experience, some of these self-proclaimed sceptics are caught in an eddy, which swirls them around in an endless pursuit of the perfect proof that God does not exist. In reality that are being tossed around by their own conscience, and that’s about as close to ‘science’ as many of them get.

I respect those who engage in open-minded analysis of facts and data and who can accept and accommodate competing beliefs and perspectives. Many who identify themselves as skeptics may be just like that. However, the genuinely thoughtful person in such groups is likely to have their integrity compromised by the passionate crusaders who see skeptic groups as a place to celebrate their religious devotion to an anti-God belief system. Those impassioned people are not sceptical at all.

Three thousand years ago King Solomon, in his wisdom, gave a name for people who choke on truth. He called them ‘scorners’. I fear that the young man who phoned me those years ago was trying his hardest to be a scorner. I pray he failed.

It is a sad thing to go through life motivated by fear of judgement for shameful actions. It is also a sad thing to go through life under the cloud of immorality and moral compromise. What a shame for many young men that their lusts bring them into a place of inner defeat that they cannot resolve. Rather than finding true release and personal freedom (Jesus Christ promised such freedom and history attests to its delivery ten thousand times over) these people compound their slavery by playing mind games and slipping into an intellectual backwater. They celebrate their advanced state – the sceptical mind – while they are actually taken captive by vain imaginations and empty beliefs.

If you know someone how is caught up in such a life of scorn, please pray for them. I sense that it is time for many of them to come to the real freedom they are crying out for on the inside. I sense that God is ready to rescue their minds and release them to use their intellectual capacities for good, in ways that will so thrill them and give them what their current delusions don’t deliver.

“Lord, only You can rescue the scorners. Solomon warned us against rebuking them, since they will only try to tarnish the reputation of all who do. So Lord, we pray for them. We pray that You reach out Your hand and apprehend these fine young men who have become enslaved in shame and delusion. Rescue them for Your kingdom and use them for Your glory. Cause the hearts of their ancestors to rejoice in having brought them into the world. Release them into divine destiny. We ask this in Jesus’ powerful and eternal name. Amen.”