Reality Tales

When theologians try and understand the Old Testament (or the Tanakh, as it is called in Judaism) they have to interpret it through the many literary traditions employed. For example, the story of Jonah is a kind of Hebrew satire, and certainly a parable, of the same kind Jesus told (but longer, obviously.) It is a brilliant work meant to point out to nationalists that God might actually have regard for other peoples, such as the Ninevites. So we don't have to wonder at how a man could live inside a whale - we're not meant to hear the story that way.

But the New Testament is another story. There is no reason to believe anything other than that much of it is literally true. There are a lot of people who have tried to play the minimizing game with the New Testament - from pop authors like Dan Brown to scholars like Dominic Crossan who seem determined to doubt the veracity of anything written in the New Testament.

I've never understood this. Look at any other writings from that time period that record events - Flavius Josephus wrote "Antiquities" near the end of the first century, and wrote about the history of Judaea from the time of Herod the Great to the Judeo-Roman war in 70 AD. Historians trust "Antiquities" implicitly, relying on it with complete trust when they describe the ancient Palestinian world. And yet Josephus was a century removed from Herod's era!

Similarly, the Roman historian Tacitus described the first centuries BC and AD from the vantage-point of the second century. Incidentally, both Josephus and Tacitus mention Jesus (briefly - the former while describing the execution of Jesus' brother James, the latter while describing Nero's persecution of Christians.)

And yet incredibly, there are even people who have speculated that Jesus did not exist! Well, of course he existed - St. Peter's house in Capernaum is known, and St. Paul (whom nobody disputes) describes interacting with Jesus' family and principle disciples in Galatians 2. What silliness!

The dates of three of the gospels can now definitively be given an early date - Mark may date to the 60s (fragments of text of that gospel may be found from that time.) Matthew dates no later than the seventies, as a passage of an ancient version of the Talmud attributed to Gamaliel makes fun of the Sermon on the Mount. And a partial parchment of John from far afield is known from the early second century, meaning that the original had to have been composed significantly earlier in the first.

The implication of this is that Jesus' followers recorded his doings far closer in time to the events themselves than did Tacitus or Josephus. They were only thirty to fifty years on. Now some figures are mythologically built up when the writings that describe them are only the result of apocryphal tales passed on for hundreds of years. But at the time of these writings, there continued to be people alive who had seen him (Paul asserts this in 1 Corinthians 15:6)

Interestingly, all the gospels agree on certain things that seem odd - for instance in all gospel accounts, Mary Magdalene (sometimes accompanied) learns first about the resurrection. A movement based on an apocryphal tale would not have done this - the first appearance would have been more triumphantly made before, say, Peter, or all twelve apostles. But none of the gospel narratives attempt this - instead Jesus appears before Mary of the seven demons - a thing that might have seemed a little underwhelming to male chauvinists of the era.

No - the stories of the gospel ring true, and it is because they ring true that some have worked so hard to make mythology of them, strip them of their meaning (like Dominic Crossan, who incredibly reads into the tale that Jesus' resurrection means he was eaten by dogs.) The gospel story has such an incredible message - God came to Earth because he took pity on us, and bore the burden of our ill-doings himself. I can imagine how uncomfortable a lot of people would be if they believed the gospel to be true. They'd have to give up a lot of control over their lives.

Better to say it all a lie, than to recognize the simple, generous truth. Like the disciples of Emmaus, Jesus has walked with us, and revealed himself to us.

Will we choose to recognize him?