Dear Theophilus, 

In your last letter you respond to some of my points in my letter by saying that I have not said much about the historicity of Christianity, about why Christianity is unique in comparison to other faiths. Maybe in this letter, I can touch on some points that may answer you in this area.

Sometimes, the significance of events in history becomes apparent only after the passage of a considerable amount of time. Then we see that what we thought were weaknesses or failures are not really that. Thus, on the question of the conversion of Jews we can see now that if all the Jews had converted, then all the documents that we have about Christianity would have been suspect because they would have come from suspect sources. If the Jewish people had been annihilated, we would have no documents, no historical roots. All other religious leaders, when compared to Christ, were isolated figures. They sprang up in history without any basis being laid for their coming. No religious tradition prefigured their coming. This is not so with Christ. Just to give you one example, and many are possible, consider the prophetic statement made in the 49th. chapter of the book of Genesis. Jacob is dying and calls his twelve sons to him and foretells what awaits each. In the tenth verse, he speaks about Judah: "The scepter shall not depart from Judah, nor the ruler's staff from between his feet, until he comes to whom it belongs; and to him shall be the obedience of the peoples." What Jacob is saying here is that the Messiah will come when Jewish rule (scepter) leaves their hands. Herod the Great was the last king of Judah ending his reign before Christ's crucifixion. After Herod, it was Roman governors who ruled Judea and it is not surprising that the Jews tell Pilate: we have no king but Caeser. Something was foretold to happen in that period of time and it did.

There was a noticeable change that took place in Judaism during Christ's life. By the first century AD, the Jewish canon had been fixed. There were no more major religious figures such as the prophets. Jewish missionary work abated. All this points to the fact that with the coming of Jesus, Judaism experienced a watershed.

One of the crucial arguments raised against Christianity is the question of Christ's divinity. Here again, it is fortuitous that the historical setting of Christ's coming occurs in an environment which was totally set against the divinisation of a human being. No Jewish Messianic contender placed himself on a par with Yahweh. Some have argued that Jesus did not claim divinity but it was his disciples who in their ardour and fanaticism divinized him. But why would they do this? Were they not brought up in the Jewish faith, as was Jesus, which abhorred even the idea of man becoming equal to God? Others say that the disciples divinized Jesus for the miracles that he performed. But, why weren't other miracle workers, and there were others, divinized but only this one man? Something does not make sense here if we try to describe a scenario different from the one in the Gospels.

Some have tried to get out of this dilemma by saying that with time, mythic elements were expanded and Jesus became seen as some divine figure. With the passage of time, figures become larger than life and this is what happened with Jesus. But there are problems with this approach, as well.

Normally, it takes a considerable amount of time for mythic ideas to become attached to a given personality. In this respect we have some interesting historical documents. The Epistle to the Thessalonians was written in the year 52 AD and it contains what is called the kerygma. The word kerygma means a spoken proclamation which outlines the basic statements of the Christian faith dealing with the life, death, resurrection and Second Coming of Christ. But this written account is based on oral reports which existed around the middle thirties of the first century. This would indicate that the basic Christian teachings were in place almost immediately after the crucifixion and resurrection, not giving time for legendary embellishments to enter. Moreover, in 1935, a fragment of a papyrus was discovered in Egypt, consisting of 114 Greek characters. This piece of papyrus was dated as being no later than 125 AD and it represents a portion of the Gospel of St. John. There is evidence to indicate that this papyrus was a copy of an original written in Ephesus around the turn of the first century AD. All this evidence shows that there was no time to develop embellishments around the person of Christ and so therefore, claims that the Gospels are merely myths or fables are not supported by objective evidence.

Several questions arise when the documents of the New Testament are looked at. There are inconsistencies between reports as given by the different evangelists. For example, Matthew says that the demoniacs were cured at Gadara whereas Mark and Luke report this incident as taking place near Gerasa. This argues against collusion and against fabrication of the documents. It argues for the possibility that the Church accepted these documents as they are because they came from reliable witnesses. There are other factors within the New Testament documents which argue against deliberate manipulation. In the list of Jesus' genealogy four women are included. For the Jewish tradition this would be nonsensical since women were ignored in these lists. Jesus does not descend from priestly stock, that is, from the tribe of Levi. If the documents were inventions, why not simply state that Jesus did come form the priestly tribe? There are many, many other questions that arise which argue against the position taken by some that the New Testament documents are fabricated legends. Before I go to the next paragraph, just consider the first miracle carried out by Jesus - conversion of water to wine for the worldly enjoyment of those present. Is this the substance of myth, of heroic miracles? Does this look like a text devised to inspire religious ardour? What a debut for a mythical religious hero!

Normally, a mythic figure is endowed with tremendous knowledge and powers. Yet Jesus admits his ignorance as to the time of the Second Coming. The sobriety and restraint of the Gospels becomes evident when we compare them to what are called the Apocryphal Gospels, those accounts which were deemed as legendary and not historical by the Church. Here Jesus is pictured as a magician carrying out all kinds of tricks and playing all kinds of pranks. One immediately senses an invented tale here.

In Matthew's Gospel we read that Pilate had his wife with him. This was challenged as inaccurate because the practice by Rome was not to allow wives to come along. However, recent evidence has come out that in the early part of the first century this rule was changed and Roman procurators were allowed to bring their wives with them. The author of Acts talks about Sergius Paulus, the proconsul in Cyprus. This was attacked as unhistorical since the rulers in Cyprus were referred to as propraetor. Not long ago an inscription was found in Paphos (the extreme west of Crete) naming Sergius Paulus, the very man, as proconsul, again validating the veracity of the New Testament report.

Another interesting example of the historicity of the Gospel accounts occurs in the Gospel of Matthew. In Chapter 22 Jesus asks for a coin and a denarius is given to him. He asks whose head is depicted on the coin and receives the reply, Caeser. The Jews were adamant against having any human representation on coins and it is therefore said that this account is historically inaccurate. However, history has the last word. Palestine was forbidden to strike any but copper coins. Those with more expensive metals such as the denarius for example, were minted directly in Rome and they did have Caeser's head on them.

It has sometimes been claimed that there is no mention of Jesus aside from Christian documents. This again proves to be untrue. Not too long ago, a document came to light, written in 73 AD, by a Syrian, Mara Bar Sarapion in which it is mentioned that the Jews killed their wise king and this was why Israel was now undergoing destruction. Tacitus, about 115 AD., and Suetonius (120 AD) refer to the phenomenon of Christianity. Flavius Josephus, writing in 93 AD mentions Jesus and the execution of Jesus 'brother' James. It should not be forgotten that there are many references, albeit hostile, in Jewish writings of the period. From all this we can see that the claims made by some that there is no historical basis supporting the existence of Jesus in the first century are groundless.

Recently, documents have been unearthed at Qumran describing a Jewish sect called the Essenes. Some recent writers have claimed that Jesus was a maverick Essene. Again, if we look at the evidence, we will see that this is merely false speculation. In their Manual of Justice, they write: "Let the brethren love all the sons of light and let them hate all the sons of darkness." Of course, those who were considered sons of darkness were all those outside the Essene circles. The manual goes on to say: "The stupid, the feeble-minded and the backward, the blind, maimed, lame, deaf and disabled - none of these can belong to the community." This is in such a sharp contrast to Jesus' teaching that it is ludicrous to even connect Jesus with this group.

In a literary work, the author is in control of his characters and what they say. In the Gospels, the disciples' puzzlement over some things that Jesus says is only too evident. For example, it seems doubtful if the authors of the Gospels really understood the phrase "Son of Man" but they faithfully passed it on, sometimes in passages in Greek where it hardly makes any sense. Again, we see that the writers are careful to report and not to editorialize, even if they are in the dark as to what is meant.

I hope that what I have said will give you some food for thought. You should remember that I have only scratched the surface of what can be written. Therefore, don't feel that there is no historical support for the truth of what you read in the Gospels.

I remain, as always, yours,

Bar-Abbas

Return to Index