Wikipedia, One of the Main Sources of Information today, even though authenticity is questionable because it is not a team of scholars, rather if you don't like your BIO you can re write and they will print it in the fashion you desire, sort of like making someone's point of view authentic when infact it is uneducated and politically manipulated into its present forms. Take a look at this article and please correspond about your feelings that this type of explanation is what is 'taught to our kids', Thanks so much, All My Followers and More and in My Prayers ! God Bless You One and All in Jesus' Name.
_______Part_2_______
Well All My Friends in Jesus, it looks like if I put a note in here
and move it down
it will work? It worked Praise the Lord Jesus Christ !
Part 2 Starts Here:
Final week: betrayal, arrest, trial, and death
The description of the last week of the life of Jesus (often called the Passion week) occupies about one third of the narrative in the canonical gospels.[122] The narrative for that week starts by a description of the final entry into Jerusalem, and ends with his crucifixion.[135][214]
The last week in Jerusalem is the conclusion of the journey which Jesus had started in Galilee through Perea and Judea.[214] Just before the account of the final entry of Jesus into Jerusalem, the Gospel of John includes the Raising of Lazarus episode, which builds the tension between Jesus and the authorities. At the beginning of the week as Jesus enters Jerusalem, he is greeted by the cheering crowds, adding to that tension.[214]
During the week of his "final ministry in Jerusalem", Jesus visits the Temple, and has a conflict with the money changers about their use of the Temple for commercial purposes. This is followed by a debate with the priests and the elder in which his authority is questioned. One of his disciples, Judas Iscariot, decides to betray Jesus for thirty pieces of silver.[248]
Towards the end of the week, Jesus has the Last Supper with his disciples, during which he institutes the Eucharist, and prepares them for his departure in the Farewell Discourse. After the supper, Jesus is betrayed with a kiss while he is in agony in the garden, and is arrested. After his arrest, Jesus is abandoned by most of his disciples, and Peter denies him three times, as Jesus had predicted during the Last Supper.[249][250]
Jesus is first questioned by the Sanhedrin, and is then tried by Pontius Pilate, the Roman governor of Judea. During these trials Jesus says very little, and is mostly silent. After the scourging of Jesus, and his mocking as the King of the Jews Pilate orders the crucifixion.[251][252]
Thus the final week that begins with his entry into Jerusalem, concludes with his crucifixion and burial on that Friday, as described in the next 5 sub-sections. The New Testament accounts then describe the resurrection of Jesus three days later, on the Sunday following his death.
Final entry into Jerusalem
In the four canonical gospels, Jesus' Triumphal entry into Jerusalem takes place at the beginning of the last week of his life, a few days before the Last Supper, marking the beginning of the Passion narrative.[253][256][257][258][259] While at Bethany Jesus sent two disciples to retrieve a donkey that had been tied up but never ridden and rode it into Jerusalem, with Mark and John stating Sunday, Matthew Monday, and Luke not specifying the day.[253][256][257] As Jesus rode into Jerusalem the people there lay down their cloaks in front of him, and also lay down small branches of trees and sang part of Psalm 118: 25-26.[253][255][256][257]
In the three synoptic gospels, entry into Jerusalem is followed by the Cleansing of the Templeepisode, in which Jesus expels the money changers from the Temple, accusing them of turning the Temple to a den of thieves through their commercial activities. This is the only account of Jesus using physical force in any of the gospels.[218][260][261] John 2:13-16 includes a similar narrative much earlier, and scholars debate if these refer to the same episode.[218][260][261] The synoptics include a number of well known parables and sermons such as the Widow's mite and the Second Coming Prophecy during the week that follows.[256][257]
In that week, the synoptics also narrate conflicts between Jesus and the elders of the Jews, in episodes such as the Authority of Jesus Questioned and the Woes of the Pharisees in which Jesus criticizes their hypocrisy.[256][257] Judas Iscariot, one of the twelve apostles approaches the Jewish elders and performs the "Bargain of Judas" in which he accepts to betray Jesus and hand him over to the elders.[262][248][263] Matthew specifies the price as thirty silver coins.[248]
Last Supper
Main article: Last Supper
In the New Testament, the Last Supper is the final meal that Jesus shares with his twelve apostles in Jerusalem before his crucifixion. The Last Supper is mentioned in all four canonical gospels, and Paul's First Epistle to the Corinthians (11:23-26), which was likely written before the gospels, also refers to it.[111][112][264][265]
In all four gospels, during the meal, Jesus predicts that one of his Apostles will betray him.[249] Jesus is described as reiterating, despite each Apostle's assertion that he would not betray Jesus, that the betrayer would be one of those who were present. In Matthew 26:23-25 and John 13:26-27 Judas is specifically singled out as the traitor.[111][112][249]
In Matthew 26:26-29, Mark 14:22-25, Luke 22:19-20 Jesus takes bread, breaks it and gives it to the disciples, saying: "This is my body which is given for you". In 1 Corinthians 11:23-26 Apostle Paul provides the theological underpinnings for the use of the Eucharist, stating: "This cup is the new covenant in my blood; do this, whenever you drink it, in remembrance of me."[111][266] Although the Gospel of John does not include a description of the bread and wine ritual during the Last Supper, most scholars agree that John 6:58-59 (the Bread of Life Discourse) has a Eucharistic nature and resonates with the "words of institution" used in the synoptic gospels and the Pauline writings on the Last Supper.[267]
In all four gospels Jesus predicts that Peter will deny knowledge of him, stating that Peter will disown him three times before the rooster crows the next morning. The synoptics mention that after the arrest of Jesus Peter denied knowing him three times, but after the third denial, heard the rooster crow and recalled the prediction as Jesus turned to look at him. Peter then began to cry bitterly.[268][269]
The Gospel of John provides the only account of Jesus washing his disciples' feet before the meal.[270] John's Gospel also includes a long sermon by Jesus, preparing his disciples (now without Judas) for his departure. Chapters 14-17 of the Gospel of John are known as theFarewell discourse given by Jesus, and are a rich source of Christological content.[220][271]
Agony in the Garden, betrayal and arrest
See also: Holy Hour
In Matthew 26:36-46, Mark 14:32-42, Luke 22:39-46 and John 18:1, immediately after the Last Supper, Jesus takes a walk to pray, Matthew and Mark identifying this place of prayer as Garden of Gethsemane.[272][273]
Jesus is accompanied by Peter, John and James the Greater, whom he asks to "remain here and keep watch with me." He moves "a stone's throw away" from them, where he feels overwhelming sadness and says "My Father, if it is possible, let this cup pass me by. Nevertheless, let it be as you, not I, would have it."[273] Only the Gospel of Luke mentions the details of the sweat of blood of Jesus and the visitation of the angel who comforts Jesus as he accepts the will of the Father. Returning to the disciples after prayer, he finds them asleep and in Matthew 26:40 he asks Peter: "So, could you men not keep watch with me for an hour?"[273]
While in the Garden, Judas appears, accompanied by a crowd that includes the Jewish priests and elders and people with weapons. Judasgives Jesus a kiss to identify him to the crowd who then arrests Jesus.[273][274] One of Jesus' disciples tries to stop them and uses a sword to cut off the ear of one of the men in the crowd.[273][274] Luke states that Jesus miraculously healed the wound and John and Matthew state that Jesus criticized the violent act, insisting that his disciples should not resist his arrest. In Matthew 26:52 Jesus makes the well known statement: all who live by the sword, shall die by the sword.[273][274]
Prior to the arrest, in Matthew 26:31 Jesus tells the disciples: "All ye shall be offended in me this night" and in 32 that: "But after I am raised up, I will go before you into Galilee." After his arrest, Jesus' disciples go into hiding.[273]
Trials by the Sanhedrin, Herod and Pilate
Main articles: Sanhedrin trial of Jesus, Pilate's Court, Jesus at Herod's Court, and Crown of Thorns
See also: Jesus, King of the Jews and What is truth?
In the narrative of the four canonical gospels after the betrayal and arrest of Jesus, he is taken to the Sanhedrin, a Jewish judicial body.[275]Jesus is tried by the Sanhedrin, mocked and beaten and is condemned for making claims of being the Son of God.[274][276][277] He is then taken to Pontius Pilate and the Jewish elders ask Pilate to judge and condemn Jesus—accusing him of claiming to be the King of the Jews.[277] After questioning, with few replies provided by Jesus, Pilate publicly declares that he finds Jesus innocent, but the crowd insists on punishment. Pilate then orders Jesus' crucifixion.[274][276][277][278] Although the gospel accounts vary with respect to various details, they agree on the general character and overall structure of the trials of Jesus.[278]
In, Matthew 26:57, Mark 14:53 and Luke 22:54 Jesus was taken to the high priest's house where he was mocked and beaten that night. The next day, early in the morning, the chief priests and scribes gathered together and lead Jesus away into their council.[274][276][277][280] In John 18:12-14, however, Jesus is first taken to Annas, the father-in-law of Caiaphas, and then to Caiaphas.[274][276][277] In all four gospel accounts the trial of Jesus is interleaved with the Denial of Peter narrative, where Peter who has followed Jesus denies knowing him three times, at which point the rooster crows as predicted by Jesus during the Last Supper.[276][281]
In the gospel accounts Jesus speaks very little, mounts no defense and gives very infrequent and indirect answers to the questions of the priests, prompting an officer to slap him. In Matthew 26:62the lack of response from Jesus prompts the high priest to ask him: "Answerest thou nothing?"[274][276][277][282] Mark 14:55-59 states that the chief priests had arranged false witness against Jesus, but the witnesses did not agree together. In Mark 14:61 the high priest then asked Jesus: "Are you the Christ, the Son of the Blessed?" And Jesus said, "I am" — at which point the high priest tore his own robe in anger and accused Jesus of blasphemy. In Luke 22:70 when asked: "Are you then the Son of God?" Jesus answers: "You say that I am" affirming the title Son of God.[283] At that point the priests say: "What further need have we of witness? for we ourselves have heard from his own mouth" and decide to condemn Jesus.[274][276][277] In Matthew 27:3-5Judas, who has watched the trial from a distance, is distraught by his betrayal of Jesus, and attempts to return the thirty pieces of silver he had received for betraying Jesus. The priests tell him that his guilt is of his own account. Judas throws the money into the temple, and then leaves and hangs himself.[273][274]
Taking Jesus to Pilate's Court, the Jewish elders ask Pontius Pilate to judge and condemn Jesus—accusing him of claiming to be the King of the Jews.[277] In Luke 23:7-15 (the only gospel account of this episode), Pilate realizes that Jesus is a Galilean, and is thus under the jurisdiction of Herod Antipas.[284][285][286][287][288] Pilate sends Jesus to Herod to be tried.[289] However, Jesus says almost nothing in response to Herod's questions, or the continuing accusations of the chief priests and the scribes. Herod and his soldiers mock Jesus, put a gorgeous robe on him, as the King of the Jews, and sent him back to Pilate.[284] Pilate then calls together the Jewish elders, and says that he has "found no fault in this man."[289]
The use of the term king is central in the discussion between Jesus and Pilate. In John 18:36 Jesus states: "My kingdom is not of this world", but does not directly deny being the King of the Jews.[290][291] And when in John 19:12 Pilate seeks to release Jesus, the priests object and say: "Every one that makes himself a king speaks against Caesar . . . We have no king but Caesar."[292] Pilate then writes "Jesus of Nazareth, King of the Jews" as a sign (abbreviated as INRI in depictions) to be affixed to the cross of Jesus.[293]
In Matthew 27:19 Pilate's wife, tormented by a dream, urges Pilate not to have anything to do with Jesus, and Pilate publicly washes his hands of responsibility, yet orders the crucifixion in response to the demands of the crowd. The trial by Pilate is followed by the flagellationepisode, the soldiers mock Jesus as the King of Jews by putting a purple robe (that signifies royal status) on him, place a Crown of Thornson his head, and beat and mistreat him in Matthew 27:29-30, Mark 15:17-19 and John 19:2-3.[252] Jesus is then sent to Calvary for crucifixion.[274][276][277]
Crucifixion and burial
Main article: Crucifixion of Jesus
Jesus' crucifixion is described in all four canonical gospels, and is attested to by other sources of that age (e.g. Josephus and Tacitus), and is regarded as an historical event.[294][295][296]
After the trials, Jesus made his way to Calvary (the path is traditionally called via Dolorosa) and the three synoptic gospels indicate that he was assisted by Simon of Cyrene, the Romans compelling him to do so.[297][298] In Luke 23:27-28 Jesus tells the women in multitude of people following him not to cry for him but for themselves and their children.[297] Once at Calvary (Golgotha), Jesus was offered wine mixed with gall to drink — usually offered as a form of painkiller. Matthew's and Mark's gospels state that he refused this.[297][298]
The soldiers then crucified Jesus and cast lots for his clothes. Above Jesus' head on the cross was the inscription King of the Jews, and the soldiers and those passing by mocked him about the title. Jesus was crucified between two convicted thieves, one of whom rebuked Jesus, while the other defended him.[297][299] Each gospel has its own account of Jesus' last words, comprising the seven last sayings on the cross.[300][301][302] In John 19:26-27 Jesus entrusts his mother to the disciple he loved and in Luke 23:34 he states: "Father, forgive them; for they know not what they do", usually interpreted as his forgiveness of the Roman soldiers and the others involved.[300][303][304][305]
In the three synoptic gospels, various supernatural events accompany the crucifixion, including darkness of the sky, an earthquake, and (in Matthew) the resurrection of saints.[298] The tearing of the temple veil, upon the death of Jesus, is referenced in the synoptic.[298] The Roman soldiers did not break Jesus' legs, as they did to the other two men crucified (breaking the legs hastened the crucifixion process), as Jesus was dead already. One of the soldiers pierced the side of Jesus with a lance and water flowed out.[299] In Mark 13:59, impressed by the events the Roman centurion calls Jesus the Son of God.[297][298][306][307]
Following Jesus' death on Friday, Joseph of Arimathea asked the permission of Pilate to remove the body. The body was removed from the cross, was wrapped in a clean cloth and buried in a new rock-hewn tomb, with the assistance of Nicodemus.[297] In Matthew 27:62-66 the Jews go to Pilate the day after the crucifixion and ask for guards for the tomb and also seal the tomb with a stone as well as the guard, to be sure the body remains there.[297][308][309]
Resurrection and ascension
See also: Empty tomb, Great Commission, Second Coming, Resurrection of Jesus in Christian art, and Ascension of Jesus in Christian art
The New Testament accounts of the resurrection and ascension of Jesus, state that the first day of the week after the crucifixion (typically interpreted as a Sunday), his followers encounter him risen from the dead, after his tomb is discovered to be empty.[115][116][310][311] The resurrected Jesus appears to them that day and a number of times thereafter, delivers sermons and commissions them, before ascending to Heaven. Two of the canonical gospels (Luke and Mark) include a brief mention of the Ascension, but the main references to it are elsewhere in the New Testament.[115][116][311]
In the four canonical gospels, when the tomb of Jesus is discovered empty, in Matthew 28:5, Mark 16:5,Luke 24:4 and John 20:12 his resurrection is announced and explained to the followers who arrive there early in the morning by either one or two beings (either men or angels) dressed in bright robes who appear in or near the tomb.[115][116][311] The gospel accounts vary as to who arrived at the tomb first, but they are women and are instructed by the risen Jesus to inform the other disciples. All four accounts include Mary Magdalene and three include Mary the mother of Jesus. The accounts of Mark 16:9, John 20:15 indicate that Jesus appeared to the Magdalene first, and Luke 16:9 states that she was among the Myrrhbearerswho informed the disciples about the resurrection.[115][116][311] In Matthew 28:11-15, to explain the empty tomb, the Jewish elders bribe the soldiers who had guarded the tomb to spread the rumor that Jesus' disciples took his body.[116]
After the discovery of the empty tomb, the gospels indicate that Jesus made a series of appearances to the disciples.[115][116] These include the well known Doubting Thomas episode, where Thomas did not believe the resurrection until he was invited to put his finger into the holes made by the wounds in Jesus' hands and side; and the Road to Emmaus appearance where Jesus meets two disciples. The catch of 153 fish appearance includes a miracle at the Sea of Galilee, and thereafter Jesus encourages Peter to serve his followers.[115][116][311]
The final post-resurrection appearance in the gospel accounts is when Jesus ascends to Heaven where he remains with God the Father and the Holy Spirit.[115][116] The canonical gospels include only brief mentions of the Ascension of Jesus, Luke 24:51 states that Jesus "was carried up into heaven". The ascension account is further elaborated in Acts 1:1-11 and mentioned 1 Timothy 3:16. In Acts 1:1-9, forty days after the resurrection, as the disciples look on, "he was taken up; and a cloud received him out of their sight." 1 Peter 3:22 describes Jesus as being on "the right hand of God, having gone into heaven".[115][116]
The Acts of the Apostles also contain "post-ascension" appearances by Jesus. These include the vision by Stephen just before his death inActs 7:55,[312] and the road to Damascus episode in which Apostle Paul is converted to Christianity.[313][314] The instruction given toAnanias in Damascus in Acts 9:10-18 to heal Paul is the last reported conversation with Jesus in the Bible until the Book of Revelation was written.[313][314]
Title attributions
Main article: Names and titles of Jesus in the New Testament
The New Testament attributes a wide range of titles to Jesus by the authors of the gospels, by Jesus himself, a voice from Heaven (often assumed to be God) during the Baptism and Transfiguration, as well as various groups of people such as the disciples, and even demonsthroughout the narrative.[252][315] The emphasis on the titles used in each of the four canonical gospels gives a different emphasis to the portrayal of Jesus in that gospel.[132][316][317]
Two of the key titles used for Jesus in the New Testament are Christ and Son of God.[51][318] The opening words in Mark 1:1 attribute both Christ and Son of God as titles, reaffirming the second title again in Mark 1:11.[319] The Gospel of Matthew also begins in 1:1 with the Christ title and reaffirms it in Matthew 1:16.[319] Beyond the declarations by the Gospel writers, titles are attributed in the narrative. The statement by Peter in Matthew 16:16 ("you are the Christ, the Son of the living God") is a key turning point in the Gospel narrative, where Jesus is proclaimed as both Christ and Son of God by his followers and he accepts both titles.[236] The immediate declaration by Jesus that the titles were revealed to Peter by "my Father who is in Heaven" not only endorses both titles as divine revelation but includes a separate assertion of sonship by Jesus within the same statement.[238]
In the Gospel of John, Jesus refers to himself as the Son of God far more frequently than in the synoptic gospels.[320] In a number of other episodes Jesus claims sonship by referring to the Father, e.g. in Luke 2:49 when he is found in the temple a young Jesus calls the temple "my Father's house", just as he does later in John 2:16 in the Cleansing of the Temple episode.[218] However, scholars still debate if Jesus was making a claim to divinity in these statements.[321][322][323] In John 11:27 Martha tells Jesus "you are the Christ, the Son of God", signifying that both titles were later used (yet considered distinct) in the narrative.[324] While the Gospel of John frequently uses the Son of God title, the Gospel of Luke emphasizes Jesus as a prophet.[325]
One of the most frequent titles for Jesus in the New Testament is the Greek word Kyrios (κύριος) which can mean God, Lord or master and is used to refers to him over 700 times.[326][327] In everyday Aramaic, Mari was a very respectful form of polite address, well above "Teacher" and similar to Rabbi. In Greek this has at times been translated as Kyrios.[328] The Rabbi title is used in several New Testament episodes to refer to Jesus, but more often in the Gospel of John than elsewhere and does not appear in the Gospel of Luke at all.[329] Although Jesus accepts this title in the narrative, in Matthew 23:1-8 he rejected the title of Rabbi for his disciples, saying: "But be not ye called Rabbi".[329][330][331]
Some New Testament scholars argue that Jesus claimed to be God through his frequent use of "I am" (Ego eimi in Greek and Qui est in Latin). This term is used by Jesus in the Gospel of John on several occasions to refer to himself, seven times with specific titles.[332][333] It is used in the Gospel of John both with or without a predicate.[333] The seven uses with a predicate that have resulted in titles for Jesus are:Bread of Life, Light of the World, the Door, the Good Shepherd, the Resurrection of Life, the Way, the Truth and the Life, the Vine.[332] It is also used without a predicate, which is very unusual in Greek and Christologists usually interpret it as God's own self-declaration.[333] In John 8:24 Jesus states: "unless you believe that I am you will die in your sins" and in John 8:59 the crowd attempts to stone Jesus in response to his statement that "Before Abraham was, I am".[333] However, many modern scholars believe that Jesus never made a claim to divinity.[334][335] John Hick says that this "is a point of broad agreement among New Testament scholars".[336]
The Gospel of John opens by identifying Jesus as the divine Logos in John 1:1-18. The Greek term Logos (λόγος) is often translated as "the Word" in English.[337] The identification of Jesus as the Logos which became Incarnate appears only at the beginning of the Gospel of John and the term Logos is used only in two other Johannine passages: 1 John 1:1 and Revelation 19:13.[338][339][340][341] John's Logos statements build on each other: the statement that the Logos existed "at the beginning" asserts that as Logos Jesus was an eternal being like God; that the Logos was "with God" asserts the distinction of Jesus from God; and Logos "was God" states the unity of Jesus with God.[270][339][342][343]
Some authors have suggested that other titles applied to Jesus in the New Testament had meanings in the 1st century quite different from those meanings ascribed today, e.g. "messiah" and “Son of David” is found elsewhere in the Hebrew Bible and other Jewish texts to refer to the heir to the throne; "son of God" to refer to a righteous person; and "son of man" to signify the third person in the subjective case and a polite way to refer to one's self.[344]
Historical views
Existence
Main articles: Historicity of Jesus and Chronology of Jesus
See also: Josephus on Jesus and Tacitus on Jesus
The Christian gospels were written primarily as theological documents rather than historical chronicles.[121][122] However, the question of the existence of Jesus as a historical figure should be distinguished from discussions about the historicity of specific episodes in the gospels, the chronology they present, or theological issues regarding his divinity.[347] A number of historical non-Christian documents, such as Jewish and Greco-Roman sources, have been used in historical analyses of the existence of Jesus.[345] Most critical historians agree that Jesus existed and regard events such as his baptism and his crucifixion as historical.[348][349][350][351]
Robert E. Van Voorst states that the idea of the non-historicity of the existence of Jesus has always been controversial, and has consistently failed to convince scholars of many disciplines, and that classical historians, as well as biblical scholars now regard it as effectively refuted.[56] Walter P. Weaver, among others, states that the denial of Jesus’ existence has never convinced any large number of people, in or out of technical circles.[350][351][352]
Separate non-Christian sources used to establish the historical existence of Jesus include the works of 1st century Roman historians Josephus and Tacitus.[345][353] Josephus scholar Louis H. Feldman has stated that few have doubted the genuineness of Josephus' reference.[346][354] Bart D. Ehrman states that the existence of Jesus and his crucifixion by the Romans is attested to by a wide range of sources, including Josephus and Tacitus.[355]
In antiquity, the existence of Jesus was never denied, even by those who opposed Christianity.[120]Although a very small number of modern scholars argue that Jesus never existed, that view is a distinct minority and most scholars consider theories that Jesus' existence was a Christian invention as implausible.[347][356][357]
Language, race and appearance
See also: Aramaic of Jesus, Race and appearance of Jesus, and Cultural and historical background of Jesus
Jesus grew up in Galilee and much of his ministry took place there.[358] The languages spoken in Galilee and Judea during the 1st century AD/CE include the Semitic Aramaic and Hebrew languages as well as Greek, with Aramaic being the predominant language.[359][360] Most scholars agree that during the early part of 1st century AD/CE Aramaic was the mother tongue of virtually all women in Galilee and Judae.[361] Most scholars support the theory that Jesus spoke Aramaic and that he may have also spoken Hebrew and Greek.[359][360][362][363]
The New Testament includes no description of the physical appearance of Jesus before his death and its narrative is generally indifferent to racial appearances and does not refer to the features of the people it discusses.[366][367][368] The synoptic gospels include the account of the Transfiguration of Jesus during which he was glorified with "his face shining as the sun" but do not provide details of his everyday appearance.[187][206] The Book of Revelation describes the features of a glorified Jesus in a vision (1:13-16), but the vision refers to Jesus in heavenly form, after his death.[369][370] Old Testament references about the coming Messiah have been projected forward to form conjectures about the appearance of Jesus on theological, rather than historical grounds; e.g. Isaiah 53:2 which refers to the coming Messiah as "no beauty that we should desire him" and Psalm 45:2-3 which describes him as "fairer than the children of men", often interpreted as a description of his physical appearance.[371][372][373][374]
Despite the lack of direct biblical or historical references, from the 2nd century, various theories about the race of Jesus were advanced, e.g. by Justin Martyr based on arguments on the genealogy of Jesus.[375]These arguments have been subject to debate for centuries among modern scholars.[375] Another suggestion by anti-Christian pagan author Celsus (who was likely aware of the gospel texts, and mocked them) that Jesus' father was a Roman soldier named Pantera drew responses from Origen who considered it a fabricated story, and scholars continue to view it as having no historical basis.[376][377][378][379][380][381]
By the Middle Ages a number of documents, generally of unknown origin, were circulating with details of the appearance of Jesus, e.g. a forged letter by Publius Lentulus, the Governor of Judea, to the Roman Senate, which according to most scholars dates to around the year 1300 and was composed to compensate for the lack of any physical description of Jesus in the Bible.[367]Other spurious references include the Archko Volume and the letter of Pontius Pilate to Tiberius Caesar, the descriptions in which were most likely composed in the Middle Ages.[382][383][384]
By the 19th century theories that Jesus was of Aryan descent, in particular European, were developed and later appealed to those who wanted nothing Jewish about Jesus, e.g. Nazi theologians.[368][385] These theories usually also include the reasoning that Jesus was Aryan because Galilee was an Aryan region, but have not gained scholarly acceptance.[368][386] By the 20th century, theories had also been proposed that Jesus was of black African descent, e.g. based on the argument that Mary his mother was a descendant of black Jews.[387]By the 21st century the race of Jesus was being addressed on television, e.g. a 2001 BBC program that suggested specific physical characteristics for him.[388][389] In the 21st century, the race of Jesus also had a cultural component in cinematic portrayals, e.g. actorJames Caviezel was made-up to look semitic as he portrayed Jesus.[390][391]
Depictions
Main article: Depictions of Jesus
Despite the lack of biblical references or historical records, for two millennia a wide range of depictions of Jesus have appeared, often influenced by cultural settings, political circumstances and theological contexts.[364][365][367] As in other Christian art, the earliest depictions date to the late 2nd or early 3rd century, and survivors are primarily found in the Catacombs of Rome.[392] In these early depictions, which use popular rather than elite Greco-Roman styles, Jesus is usually shown as a youthful figure without a beard and with curly hair, often with different features from the other men in the scenes, such as his disciples or the Romans.[366]
Although some images exist at the synagogue at Dura-Europos, Judaism forbade images, and there is no record of its influence on the depictions of Jesus.[364] Christian depictions of the 3rd and 4th centuries typically focused on New Testament scenes of healings and other miracles.[392] Following the conversion of Constantine in the 4th century, Christian art found many wealthy donors and flourished.[392] In this period Jesus began to have more mature features, and was shown with a beard.[366] A new development at this time was the depiction of Jesus without a narrative context, but just as a figure by himself.[366]
By the 5th century depictions of the Passion began to appear, perhaps reflecting a change in the theological focus of the early Church.[392] The 6th century Rabbula Gospels includes some of the earliest surviving images of the crucifixion and resurrection.[392] By the 6th century the bearded depiction of Jesus had become standard in the East, though the West, especially in northern Europe, continued to mix bearded and unbearded depictions for several centuries. The depiction with a longish face, long straight brown hair parted in the middle, and almond shaped eyes shows consistency from the 6th century to the present. Various legends developed which were believed to authenticate the historical accuracy of the standard depiction, such as the image of Edessa and later the Veil of Veronica.[366] Partly to aid recognition of the scenes, narrative depictions of the Life of Christ focused increasingly on the events celebrated in the major feasts of the church calendar, and the events of the Passion, neglecting the miracles and other events of Jesus's public ministry, except for the raising of Lazarus, where the mummy-like wrapped body was shown standing upright, giving an unmistakable visual signature.[citation needed] A cruciform halo was worn only by Jesus (and the other persons of the Trinity), while plain halos distinguished Mary, the Apostles and other saints, helping the viewer to read increasingly populated scenes.[citation needed]
The Byzantine Iconoclasm acted as a barrier to developments in the East, but by the 9th century art was permitted again.[364] TheTransfiguration of Jesus was a major theme in the East and every Eastern Orthodox monk who had trained in icon painting had to prove his craft by painting an icon of the Transfiguration.[393] However, while Western depictions aim for proportion, in the Eastern icons the abolition of perspective and alterations in the size and proportion of an image aim to reaches beyond man's earthly dwellings.[394]
The 13th century witnessed a turning point in the portrayal of the powerful Kyrios image of Jesus as a wonder worker in the West, as theFranciscans began to emphasize the humility of Jesus both at his birth and his death via the nativity scene as well as the crucifixion.[395][396][397] The Franciscans approached both ends of this spectrum of emotions and as the joys of the Nativity of were added to the agony of crucifixion a whole new range of emotions were ushered in, with wide ranging cultural impact on the image of Jesus for centuries thereafter.[395][397][398][399]
The Renaissance brought forth a number of artists who focused on the depictions of Jesus and after Giotto, Fra Angelico and others systematically developed uncluttered images that focused on the depiction of Jesus with an ideal human beauty.[364] Leonardo da Vinci'sLast Supper which is considered the first work of High Renaissance art due to its high level of harmony became well known for depicting Jesus surrounded by varying emotions of the individual apostles at the announcement of the betrayal.[400][401] Meanwhile, the Protestant Reformation, especially in its first decades, violently objected to almost all public religious images as idolaterous, and vast numbers were destroyed.
By the end of the 19th century, new reports of miraculous images of Jesus had appeared and continue to receive significant attention, e.g.Secondo Pia's 1898 photograph of the Shroud of Turin, one of the most controversial artifacts in history, which during its May 2010 exposition it was visited by over 2 million people.[402][403][404] Another 20th century depiction of Jesus, namely the Divine Mercy image based onFaustina Kowalska's reported vision has over 100 million followers.[405][406] The first cinematic portrayal of Jesus was in the 1897 film La Passion du Christ produced in Paris, which lasted 5 minutes.[407][408] Thereafter cinematic portrayals have continued to show Jesus with a beard in the standard western depiction that resembles traditional images.[409]
Analysis of the gospels
The historical-critical method (or higher criticism) is used to examine the Bible for clues about the historical Jesus, whereby sayings and events that are more likely to be genuine in the opinion of scholars are used to construct their portraits of Jesus. Standard historical methods are used to discern the authorship of each book, and its likely date of composition.[410]
The earliest extant texts which refer to Jesus are Paul's letters (mid-1st century), which affirm Jesus' crucifixion. Keulman and Gregory hold that the Gospel of Thomas, a collection of 114 sayings of Jesus, predates the four orthodox gospels, and believe it may have been composed around mid-1st century.[411][412]
Biblical scholars hold that the works describing Jesus were initially communicated by oral tradition, and were not committed to writing until several decades after Jesus' crucifixion. After the original oral stories were written down in Greek, they were transcribed, and later translated into other languages. The books of the New Testament had mostly been written by 100 AD/CE, making them, at least the synoptic gospels, historically relevant.[413] The Gospel tradition certainly preserves several fragments of Jesus' teaching.[414] The Markan priority hypothesis holds that the Gospel of Mark was written first c. 70 AD/CE.[415][416][417] Matthew is placed at being sometime after this date and Luke is thought to have been written between 70 and 100 AD/CE.[418][419] According to the Q source hypothesis supported by a majority of modern scholars, the gospels were written not by the four evangelists themselves but derived from other sources.[410] A minority of prominent scholars, such as J. A. T. Robinson, have maintained that the writers of the gospels of Matthew, Mark and John were either apostles and eyewitness to Jesus' ministry and death, or were close to those who had been.[420][421][422][422]
Critical scholars consider scriptural accounts more likely when they are attested in multiple texts, plausible in Jesus' historical environment, and potentially embarrassing to the author's Christian community. The "criterion of embarrassment" holds that stories about events with aspects embarrassing to Christians (such as the denial of Jesus by Peter, or the fleeing of Jesus' followers after his arrest) would likely not have been included if those accounts were fictional.[423] Sayings attributed to Jesus are deemed more likely to reflect his character when they are distinctive, vivid, paradoxical, surprising, and contrary to social and religious expectations, such as "Blessed are the poor".[424]Short, memorable parables and aphorisms capable of being transmitted orally are also thought more likely to be authentic.[424]
Scholars use textual criticism to determine which variants among manuscripts is original and how much they may have changed. Contemporary textual critic Bart D. Ehrman cites numerous places where he maintains that the gospels, and other New Testament books, were apparently altered by Christian scribes.[132] Craig Blomberg, F. F. Bruce and Gregory Boyd view the evidence as conclusive that very few alterations were made by Christian scribes, while none of them (three or four in total) were important.[420][421][422] According to Normal Geisler and William Nix, "The New Testament, then, has not only survived in more manuscripts than any other book from antiquity, but it has survived in a purer form than any other great book─a form that is 99.5% pure"[422]:p.367
Historical analysis
Main articles: Historical Jesus and Quest for the historical Jesus
The historical method is used to develop plausible reconstructions of Jesus' life.[425][426][427] The principal sources of information regarding Jesus’ life and teachings are the three synoptic gospels.[428] The Pauline epistles and the Acts of the Apostles have also been used to gain a better understanding of the historical Jesus.[429] Historians of Christianity generally describe Jesus as a healer who preached the restoration of God's kingdom.[430][431][432][433][434][435][436] Since the 19th century, these scholars have constructed a Jesus different in ways from the image found in the gospels.[437] Scholars of the “historical Jesus” distinguish their concept from the “Jesus Christ” of Christianity.[438][439] The English title of Albert Schweitzer’s 1906 book, The Quest of the Historical Jesus, is a label for the post-Enlightenment effort to describe Jesus using critical historical methods.[440]
Modern scholars consider the baptism of Jesus and his crucifixion to be the two historically certain facts about him, James Dunn stating that these "two facts in the life of Jesus command almost universal assent".[441] Dunn states that these two facts "rank so high on the 'almost impossible to doubt or deny' scale of historical facts" that they are often the starting points for the study of the historical Jesus.[441] Bart Ehrman states that the crucifixion of Jesus on the orders of Pontius Pilate is the most certain element about him.[442] John Dominic Crossan states that the crucifixion of Jesus is as certain as any historical fact can be.[443]
Craig Blomberg states that most scholars in the third quest for the historical Jesus consider the crucifixion indisputable.[444] Although scholars agree on the historicity of the crucifixion, they differ on the reason and context for it, e.g. both E.P. Sanders and Paula Fredriksensupport the historicity of the crucifixion, but contend that Jesus did not foretell of his own crucifixion, and that his prediction of the crucifixion is a Christian story.[445] Geza Vermes also views the crucifixion a historical event but provides his own explanation and background for it.[445]John P. Meier views the crucifixion of Jesus as historical fact and states that based on the criterion of embarrassment Christians would not have invented the painful death of their leader.[446] Meier states that a number of other criteria, e.g. the criterion of multiple attestation (i.e. confirmation by more than one source), the criterion of coherence (i.e. that it fits with other historical elements) and the criterion of rejection(i.e. that it is not disputed by ancient sources) help establish the crucifixion of Jesus as a historical event.[447]
The historical outlook on Jesus relies on critical analysis of the Bible, especially the gospels. Many Biblical scholars have sought to reconstruct Jesus’ life in terms of the political, cultural, and religious crises and movements in late 2nd Temple Judaism and in Roman-occupied Palestine, including differences between Galilee and Judaea, and between different sects such as the Pharisees, Sadducees,Essenes and Zealots,[448][449] and in terms of conflicts among Jews in the context of Roman occupation.
Most scholars hold that the movement Jesus led (and his eschatology) were apocalyptic, as were the preachings of John the Baptist, but some scholars makes a distinction between John's apocalyptic ministry and Jesus' ethical teachings.[450][451] Some historians argue that Jewish and Roman authorities in Jerusalem were wary of Galilean patriots, many of whom advocated violent resistance to Roman rule.[17]These arguments contend that as a charismatic leader Jesus was regarded as a potential troublemaker, and was hence executed on political charges.[17] Jesus' criticism of the Temple, the disturbance he caused there, and his refusal to renounce claims of kingship convinced the Jewish high priest to allow Jesus to be transferred into Roman custody.[452][453]
First century Jewish religious movements
Scholars refer to the religious background of the early 1st century to better reconstruct Jesus' life. Some scholars identify him with one or another group.
Pharisees were a powerful force in 1st-century Judaea. Early Christians shared several beliefs of the Pharisees, such as resurrection, retribution in the next world, angels, human freedom, and Divine Providence.[454] After the fall of the Temple, the Pharisaic outlook was established in Rabbinic Judaism. Some scholars speculate that Jesus was himself a Pharisee.[455] In Jesus' day, the two main schools of thought among the Pharisees were the House of Hillel, which had been founded by the eminent Tanna, Hillel the Elder, and the House of Shammai. Jesus' assertion of hypocrisy may have been directed against the stricter members of the House of Shammai, although he also agreed with their teachings on divorce.[Mk 10:1–12][456] Jesus also commented on the House of Hillel's teachings (Babylonian Talmud, Shabbat31a) concerning the greatest commandment[Mk 12:28–34] and the Golden Rule.[Mt 7:12] Historians do not know whether there were Pharisees in Galilee during Jesus' life, or what they would have been like.[457]
Sadducees were particularly powerful in Jerusalem. They accepted the written Law only, rejecting the traditional interpretations accepted by the Pharisees, such as belief in retribution in an afterlife, resurrection of the body, angels, and spirits. After Jesus caused a disturbance at the Temple, it was to have been the Sadducees who had him arrested and turned over to the Romans for execution. After the fall of Jerusalem, they disappeared from history.[458]
Essenes were apocalyptic ascetics, one of the three (or four) major Jewish schools of the time, though they were not mentioned in the New Testament.[459] Some scholars theorize that Jesus was an Essene, or close to them. Among these scholars is Pope Benedict XVI, who supposes in his book on Jesus that "it appears that not only John the Baptist, but possibly Jesus and his family as well, were close to the Qumran community."[460]
Zealots were a revolutionary party opposed to Roman rule, one of those parties that, according to Josephus inspired the fanatical stand in Jerusalem that led to its destruction in the year 70 AD/CE.[461] Luke identifies Simon, a disciple, as a "zealot", which might mean a member of the Zealot party (which would therefore have been already in existence in the lifetime of Jesus) or a zealous person.[461] The notion that Jesus himself was a Zealot does not do justice to the earliest Synoptic material describing him.[462]
Mythical view
Main article: Jesus myth theory
The term "Jesus myth theory" is an umbrella term that applies to a range of arguments that in one way or another question the authenticity of the existence of Jesus or the essential elements of his life as described in the Christian gospels.[463][464][465][466] One viewpoint is that there was no real historical figure Jesus and that he was invented by Christians. Another viewpoint is that there was a person called Jesus, but much of the teachings and miracles attributed to him were either invented or symbolic references. Yet another view holds that the Jesus portrayed in the gospels is a composite character constructed from multiple people over a period of time.[463][464][465][466]
Supporters of the various Jesus myth theories point to the lack of any known written references to Jesus during his lifetime and the relative scarcity of non-Christian references to him in the 1st century, and dispute the veracity of the existing accounts about him.[467]
Among the variants of the Jesus myth theory, the notion that Jesus never existed has little scholarly support, and although some modern scholars adhere to it, they remain a distinct minority; most scholars involved with historical Jesus research believe that his existence can be established using documentary and other evidence.[53][54][55][56][57][58]
In the context of historical theories, the hypothesis that Jesus never existed is a rather recent topic, and in antiquity his existence was never doubted, even by those who were critical of Christian teachings.[120] In the early 18th century, friction between the church establishment and some theologians, coupled with the growing emphasis on rationalism, resulted in discord between the English deists and the church, and John Toland,Anthony Collins and Thomas Woolston planted the seeds of discontent.[468][469]
The beginnings of the formal denial of the existence of Jesus can be traced to late 18th-century France, and the works of Constantin-Volney and Charles Dupuis.[470] The more methodical writings of David Friedrich Strauss caused an uproar in Europe in 1835, and Strauss became known as the founder of Jesus myth theory, his approach having been influenced by the epistemological views of Leibnitz and Spinoza.[468][471] Strauss did not deny the existence of Jesus, but believed that very few facts could be known about him and characterized the miraculous accounts in the gospels as "mythical".[472][471][473] At about the same time in Berlin, Bruno Bauer supported somewhat similar ideas.[470][474] Although both Strauss and Bauer drew on Hegel, their views did not coincide, and often conflicted.[475][476] Karl Marx, a student and at the time a close friend of Bauer, was significantly influenced by him, as well as Hegel and Strauss, setting the stage for the denial of Jesus within communism.[474][477][478]
By the beginning of the 20th century, Arthur Drews, William B. Smith and John M. Robertson became the most recognized proponents of the Jesus myth theory.[470][479] However, these authors were not performing purely atheist attacks on Christianity, e.g. Drew did not consider religion as outdated, but argued for a different form of religious consciousness.[470] W. B. Smith argued for a symbolic interpretation of gospel episodes and contended that in a parable such as Jesus and the rich young man the rich young man never existed and symbolically referred to the land of Israel.[480] Smith also argued that Jesus never healed anyone physically, but only spiritually cured them of their paganism.[480]J. M. Robertson on the other hand viewed the gospel accounts as a collection of myths gathered by a large number of anonymous authors, over time.[480]
When atheism became part of the state ideals in communist Russia in 1922, the theories of Arthur Drew gained prominence there.[481] The communist state not only supported the Jesus myth theory but embellished it with scientific colloquialisms, and school textbooks began to teach that Jesus never existed, making Russia a bastion of Jesus denial.[481][482][483] These ideas were rebuffed in Russia by Sergei Bulgakov and Alexander Men, copies of whose book began to circulate underground via typewriters in the 1970s to reintroduce Christianity to Russia.[481][484]
In the 20th century, scholars such as G. A. Wells, Alvar Ellegård, and Robert M. Price produced a number of arguments to support the Jesus myth theory. Non-scholarly works on the Jesus myth theory have since been published by mass-media authors such as Doherty, Freke andGandy. In parallel, a number of historians and biblical scholars such as Paula Fredriksen, Geza Vermes, E.P. Sanders and others involved in the quest for the historical Jesus performed detailed analyses of historical and biblical documents. Almost all of these scholars accept the existence of Jesus, but differ on the accuracy of the details of his life within the biblical narratives.[485] Robert Van Voorst stated that among "New Testament scholars and historians the theory of the non-existence of Jesus remains effectively dead as a scholarly question".[486][487]
The Jesus myth theory is still being debated in the 21st century, with Graham Stanton stating in 2002 that the most thorough analysis of the theory had been by G. A. Wells.[488] But Wells' book Did Jesus Exist? was criticized by James D.G. Dunn in his book The Evidence for Jesus.[489] And the debates continue, e.g. Wells changed his views over time and while he used to argue that there was no historical evidence supporting the existence of Jesus, he later modified his position, and in his later book The Jesus Myth accepted the possible existence of Jesus based on historical sources, although still disputing the gospel portrayals of his life.[486][490][487][491]
Religious perspectives
Main article: Religious perspectives on Jesus
By and large, the Jews of Jesus' day rejected his claim to be the Messiah, as do Jews today. For their part, Christian Church Fathers, Ecumenical Councils, Reformers, and others have written extensively about Jesus over the centuries. Christian sects and schisms have often been defined or characterized by competing descriptions of Jesus. Meanwhile, Gnostics, Mandaeans, Manichaeans, Muslims, Baha'is, and others have found prominent places for Jesus in their own religious accounts.[citation needed]
Christian views
Main articles: Jesus in Christianity and Christology
| [show]
Part of a series on
 |
|---|
Although Christian views of Jesus vary, it is possible to summarize key elements of the shared beliefs among major denominations such as Catholics, the Eastern Orthodox, and mostProtestant groups, based on their catechetical or confessional texts.[492][493][494]
Almost all Christian groups regard Jesus as the "Savior and Redeemer", as the Messiah (Greek:Christos; English: Christ) prophesied in the Old Testament,[495] who, through his life, death, and resurrection, restored humanity's communion with God in the blood of the New Covenant. His death on a cross is understood as the redemptive sacrifice: the source of humanity's salvation and the atonement for sin,[496] which had entered human history through the sin of Adam.[497]Christians profess that Jesus suffered death by crucifixion,[498] and rose bodily from the dead in the definitive miracle that foreshadows the resurrection of humanity at the end of time,[499] when Christ will come again to judge the living and the dead,[500] resulting in either entrance into heaven or damnation.[501]
Christians profess Jesus to be the only Son of God, the Lord,[502] and the eternal Word (a translation of the Greek word Logos),[503] who became man in the incarnation,[504] so that those who believe in him might have eternal life.[505] They further hold that he was born of the Virgin Mary by the power of the Holy Spirit in an event described as the miraculous virgin birth or incarnation.[506] Christians believe that Christ is the true head of the one holy universal and apostolic church.
Most Christian denominations believe in some form of the doctrine of the Trinity, i.e. that Jesus, as the second person of the Trinity, is fully God. As the 6th-century Athanasian Creed says, the Trinity is "one God" and "three persons... and yet they are not three Gods, but one God." This belief is not shared by non-Trinitarian denominations.
Christians consider the Gospel and other New Testament accounts of Jesus to be divinely inspired. Christian writers, such as Benedict XVI, proclaim the Jesus of the Gospels, discounting the historical reconstruction of Jesus as entirely inadequate.[507]
Jewish views
Main article: Judaism's view of Jesus
See also: Jesus in the Talmud
Classic texts of Rabbinic Judaism reject any notion of an anthropomorphic God. Tractate Ta'anit of the Jerusalem Talmud states explicitly that “if a man claims to be God, he is a liar.”[508] Furthermore Exodus Rabba 29 says, "'I am the first and I am the last, and beside Me there is no God' I am the first, I have no father; I am the last, I have no brother. Beside Me there is no God; I have no son."[509]
Judaism rejects the idea of Jesus being God, or a person of a Trinity, or a mediator to God. Judaism also holds that Jesus is not theMessiah, arguing that he had not fulfilled the Messianic prophecies in the Tanakh nor embodied the personal qualifications of the Messiah. According to Jewish tradition, there were no prophets after Malachi, who delivered his prophesies about 420 BC/BCE.[510]
The Talmud includes stories which some consider accounts of Jesus in the Talmud, although there is a spectrum[511] from scholars, such asMaier (1978), who considers that only the accounts with the name Yeshu יֵשׁוּ refer to the Christian Jesus, and that these are late redactions, to scholars such as Klausner (1925), who suggested that accounts related to Jesus in the Talmud may contain traces of the historical Jesus. However the majority of contemporary historians disregard this material as providing information on the historical Jesus.[438] Many contemporary Talmud scholars view these as comments on the relationship between Judaism and Christians or other sectarians, rather than comments on the historical Jesus.[512][513]
The Mishneh Torah, an authoritative work of Jewish law, provides the last established consensus view of the Jewish community, in Hilkhot Melakhim 11:10–12 that Jesus is a "stumbling block" who makes "the majority of the world err to serve a divinity besides God".
Even Jesus the Nazarene who imagined that he would be Messiah and was killed by the court, was already prophesied byDaniel. So that it was said, "And the members of the outlaws of your nation would be carried to make a (prophetic) vision stand. And they stumbled."[Dan. 11:14] Because, is there a greater stumbling-block than this one? So that all of the prophets spoke that the Messiah redeems Israel, and saves them, and gathers their banished ones, and strengthens their commandments. And this one caused (nations) to destroy Israel by sword, and to scatter their remnant, and to humiliate them, and to exchange the Torah, and to make the majority of the world err to serve a divinity besides God. However, the thoughts of the Creator of the world — there is no force in a human to attain them because our ways are not God's ways, and our thoughts not God's thoughts. And all these things of Jesus the Nazarene, and of (Muhammad) the Ishmaelite who stood after him — there is no (purpose) but to straighten out the way for the King Messiah, and to restore all the world to serve God together. So that it is said, "Because then I will turn toward the nations (giving them) a clear lip, to call all of them in the name of God and to serve God (shoulder to shoulder as) one shoulder."[Zeph. 3:9] Look how all the world already becomes full of the things of the Messiah, and the things of the Torah, and the things of the commandments! And these things spread among the far islands and among the many nations uncircumcised of heart.[514]
According to Conservative Judaism, Jews who believe Jesus is the Messiah have "crossed the line out of the Jewish community".[515] Reform Judaism, the modern progressive movement, states "For us in the Jewish community anyone who claims that Jesus is their savior is no longer a Jew and is an apostate".[516]
Islamic views
Main article: Jesus in Islam
In Islam, Jesus (Arabic: عيسى ʿĪsā) is considered to be a Messenger of God and the Masih(Messiah) who was sent to guide the Children of Israel (banī isrā'īl) with a new scripture, the Injīl orGospel.[517] The belief in Jesus (and all other messengers of God) is required in Islam, and a requirement of being a Muslim. The Qur'an mentions Jesus twenty-five times, more often, by name, than Muhammad.[518][519]
There is no mention of Joseph in the Quran, but it includes the annunciation to Mary (Arabic:Maryam) by an angel that she is to give birth to Jesus while remaining a virgin, a miraculous event which occurred by the will of God (Arabic: Allah).[11][10][520] The details of the Mary's conception are not discussed during the angelic visit, but elsewhere the Quran states (21:91 and 66:12) that God breathed "His Spirit" into Mary while she was chaste.[10][520][11][521] In Islam, Jesus is called the "Spirit of God" because he was born through the action of the spirit, but that belief does not include the doctrine of his pre-existence, as it does in Christianity.[11]
Numerous other titles are given to Jesus in Islamic literature, the most common being al-Masīḥ ("the messiah). Jesus is also, at times, called "Seal of the Israelite Prophets", because, in general Muslim belief, Jesus was the last prophet sent by God to guide the Children of Israel. Jesus is seen in Islam as a precursor to Muhammad, and is believed by Muslims to have foretold the latter's coming.[522][523] To aid in his ministry to the Jewish people, Jesus was given the ability to perform miracles, all by the permission of God rather than of his own power.
The Qur'an emphasizes that Jesus was a mortal human being who, like all other prophets, had been divinely chosen to spread God's message. Islamic texts forbid the association of partners with God (shirk), emphasizing a strict notion of monotheism (tawhīd). Like allprophets in Islam, Jesus is considered to have been a Muslim (i.e., one who submits to the will of God), as he preached that his followers should adopt the "straight path" as commanded by God.[524][522]
Islam rejects the Christian view that Jesus was God incarnate or the son of God, that he was ever crucified or resurrected, or that he everatoned for the sins of mankind. The Qur'an says that Jesus himself never claimed any of these things, and it furthermore indicates that Jesus will deny having ever claimed divinity at the Last Judgment, and God will vindicate him.[525] According to Muslim traditions, Jesus was not crucified but instead, he was raised up by God unto the heavens. This "raising" is understood to mean through bodily ascension. Muslims believe that Jesus will return to earth near the day of judgment to restore justice.[524][522]
Ahmadiyya views
Main article: Jesus in Ahmadiyya Islam
The Ahmadiyya Movement considers Jesus a mortal man who died a natural death. According to the early 20th century writings of Mirza Ghulam Ahmad (the founder of the Ahmadiyya movement),[526] Jesus survived his ordeal on the cross, and after his apparent death and resurrection, he fled Palestine and migrated eastwards to further teach the gospels. Jesus eventually died a natural death of old age inKashmir, India and is believed to be buried at Roza Bal.[527]
Although the view of Jesus having migrated to India has also been researched in the publications of independent historians with no affiliation to the movement,[528] the Ahmadiyya Movement are the only religious organization to adopt these views as a characteristic of their faith. The general notion of Jesus in India is older than the foundation of the movement,[529] and is discussed at length by Grönbold[530] and Klatt.[531]
The movement also interprets the second coming of Christ prophesied in various religious texts would be that of a person "similar to Jesus" (mathīl-i ʿIsā). Thus, Ahmadi's consider that the founder of the movement and his prophetical character and teachings were representative of Jesus and subsequently a fulfillment of this prophecy.[532]
Bahá'í views
The Bahá'í Faith, founded in 19th-century Persia, considers Jesus, along with Muhammad, the Buddha, Krishna, and Zoroaster, and other messengers of the great religions of the world to be Manifestations of God (or prophets), with both human and divine stations.[533] Bahá'ís refer to this concept as Progressive Revelation, which means that God's will is revealed to mankind progressively as mankind matures and is better able to comprehend the purpose of God in creating humanity. In this view, God's word is revealed through a series of messengers: Moses, Jesus, Mohammed, Bahá'u'lláh (the founder of the Bahá'í Faith) among them. In the Book of Certitude, Bahá'u'lláh claims that these messengers have two natures: divine and human. Examining their divine nature, they are more or less the same being. However, when examining their human nature, they are individual, with distinct personalities. For example, when Jesus says "I and my Father are one",[John 10:30] Bahá'ís take this quite literally, but specifically with respect to his nature as a Manifestation. When Jesus conversely stated "...And the Father himself, which hath sent me, hath borne witness of me",[John 5:36-37] Bahá'ís see this as a simple reference to the individuality of Jesus. This divine nature, according to Bahá'u'lláh, means that any Manifestation of God can be said to be the return of a previous Manifestation, though Bahá'ís also believe that some Manifestations with specific missions return with a "new name",[Rev 3:12] and a different, or expanded purpose. Bahá'ís believe that Bahá'u'lláh is, in both respects, the return of Jesus.
Other views
Buddhist views of Jesus differ. Some Buddhist views on Jesus including Tenzin Gyatso, the 14th Dalai Lama[534] regard Jesus as abodhisattva who dedicated his life to the welfare of human beings. It was recorded in 101 Zen Stories that the 14th century Zen master Gasan Jōseki, on hearing some of the sayings of Jesus in the Gospels, remarked that he was "an enlightened man", and "not far from Buddhahood".[535]
In a letter to his daughter Indira Gandhi, Jawaharlal Nehru wrote, "All over Central Asia, in Kashmir and Ladakh and Tibet and even farther north, there is a strong belief that Jesus or Isa travelled about there."[536]
Mandaeanism, a very small Mideastern, Gnostic sect that reveres John the Baptist as God's greatest prophet, regards Jesus as a false prophet of the false Jewish god of the Old Testament, Adonai,[537] and likewise rejects Abraham, Moses, and Muhammad.
The New Age movement entertains a wide variety of views on Jesus. The creators of A Course In Miracles claim to trance-channel his spirit. However, the New Age movement generally teaches that Christhood is something that all may attain. Theosophists, from whom many New Age teachings originated, refer to Jesus of Nazareth as the Master Jesus and believe the Christ, after various incarnations occupied the body of Jesus.[539]
U.S. President Thomas Jefferson, a deist, created the Jefferson Bible, an early (but not complete) gospel harmony that included only Jesus' ethical teachings because he did not believe in Jesus' divinity or any of the other supernatural aspects of the Bible.[540][541]
I read your whole article and it is clear that we have to Witness the Truth of Jesus as the Secular World is firmly planted against abiding in the Truth and Engaging in Salvation, willing to accept any explanation no matter how thin the excuses might be.
ReplyDelete