Monday, June 26, 2017
   
Text Size

Site Search powered by The Clarion

Thoughts from the Bible 05-31-17

A review of the corrective curriculum of the real Jesus

In an article entitled “The Real Jesus,” U. S. News and World Report, March 8, 2004, page 38, co-authors began an attempt to totally assassinate the Christ of the Scriptures, painting rather the picture of what they consider to be “The Real Jesus.” They had a problem with the four Gospel accounts of the crucifixion narrative. These authors believed that the portrayal of Jesus crucified at the hands of angry Jews made the world hate Jews, and was the cause for much mistreatment of Jews throughout the centuries.

The authors claim to have discovered from “scholars” a “corrective curriculum,” (p.42) which tries to make the Biblical narrative out to be a lie. They have convinced themselves that since Pontius Pilate was such a mad-man he would not have sided with the “innocence” of Christ but rather would have seen him as a threat to Caesar and would have been the first to eradicate him as such a threat. Ah, but The Scripture affirms that Jesus was no threat to Caesar’s throne, and Pilate was convinced of it. The “corrective curriculum” fails to take into account that four historians in the first century (Matthew, Mark, Luke and John) wrote an account of these matters during the very time and space in which people were alive who could have discounted such a “fairy tale” if it had been a “fairy tale.” A true believer in the Christ of the Scriptures cannot sit quietly while “scholars” purport to give us the corrective “curriculum” which makes the crucifixion a fabricated story.

These real historians, Matthew, Mark, Luke and John, certified it was as it was written. It took centuries for this so-called “corrective curriculum” to be developed as an attempt to explain away the deity of Christ. Such advocates infer that a doctrine of blood atonement wasn’t true, but was developed more as a matter of convenience to spread a movement. They illustrate by telling us that the concept of the Crucifixion of Christ atoning for our sins which was written about in the 11th century by a bishop, St. Anselm, had political motivation. They claim that St. Anselm was a friend of Pope Urban II, who called for the First Crusade. Crusaders were promised a life in heaven if they died on the Crusades. En-route to liberate the Holy Land, the soldiers stopped in Rhineland where they left up to a third of northern Europe’s Jews dead.” How interesting! The strategy: confuse Christians by telling them that later generations fabricated a “theology of crucifixion of Christ by Jews” to justify actions such as the Crusades! Blame this “distorted” view of the crucifixion of Christ for all the hate of the Jewish people in the world.

Well, such is the hate that the world has for the concept of blood atonement for the sins of mankind, and the contempt they hold for the Biblical narrative. It’s intriguing that Jesus never claimed to come to destroy the Law of Moses (the Jewish Law) but to fulfill it’s very purpose of being. He was a devoted follower of the Law and claimed that not one jot or tittle of it was to pass away until all was fulfilled. (See Matthew 5:17-19). The First Century eyewitnesses to the teachings and crucifixion of Christ were willing to go to their deaths at the mouths of lions, and on Roman crosses, rather than to renounce their confidence in that “which we have heard, which we have seen with our eyes, which we have looked upon, and our hands have handled, of the Word of life” (I John 1:1). They certified that He died for the sins of the whole world, including His beloved Jewish ancestry, and “as many as received him, to them gave he the power to become the sons of God, even to them that believe on his name” (John 1:12). This is not “made up” history or “theology” to explain one’s hate for Jews. In fact, Christians don’t hate Jews. Christ died for the sins of the whole world.

 

 


Comfort Gallery

© 2014 The Clarion
Designed and maintained by Aldrich Publishing, LLC