Episode Transcript
[00:00:01] The Death and Afterlife of a historical reconstruction part 1 by Mark Reichert Platinum Member Winner Read by Ken Teutch as you know, the Platinum members of the blog are invited to submit their own posts to be considered for publication on the blog.
[00:00:23] After we've published four of these posts, Platinum Members are asked to vote for one to be published to the entire blog.
[00:00:31] Today we have a post for you from Platinum Blog member Mark Reichert. He offers the first part of a compelling two part reflection on one of the most well known and debated stories in history.
[00:00:44] It's part historical reconstruction, part personal inquiry, and entirely worth the read According to the Gospel of Mark, the Jewish preacher, Jesus was crucified by Roman Governor Pontius Pilate in Jerusalem the day before the Sabbath Friday during the holiday period of Passover.
[00:01:06] After about nine hours on the cross, Jesus gave up the ghost.
[00:01:10] The Roman centurion in charge of the crucifixion said, truly this man was the Son of God.
[00:01:17] A supporter and onlooker, Joseph of Arimathea asked Pilate for the body of Jesus.
[00:01:24] After consulting with the centurion, Pilate relented and Jesus was removed from the cross.
[00:01:29] Joseph then took the body, wrapped it in linen and placed it in a tomb carved out of rock and blocked with a stone.
[00:01:37] Early in the morning following the Sabbath, Mary Magdalene and two other women came to anoint his body. They found the stone removed and the body of Jesus gone. A young man in the tomb told the women that Jesus of Nazareth had risen and to tell his disciples.
[00:01:55] The women said nothing to any man, for they were afraid.
[00:01:58] Jesus was then seen alive by these women and his disciples soon after he was received up into heaven.
[00:02:07] This is probably the most famous story of death and resurrection in human history, written originally in Greek by an unidentified author.
[00:02:16] John Mark, a companion of the disciple Simon Peter, is believed to be the author. Although actual authorship remains unknown, it is unlikely the author, whoever he may be, witnessed events in the life of Jesus himself.
[00:02:31] Rather, the author appears to be a Greek educated writer compiling stories of Jesus circulating 30 or 40 years after they occurred into a multi chapter narrative.
[00:02:43] Of course, Mark is not the only source recounting the life and death of Jesus. The Gospels of Matthew and Luke tell pretty much the same stories as Mark, in fact, so much alike some passages word for word that it appears Matthew and Luke use Mark as a source, copying parts of their narratives from Mark. Matthew and Luke make corrections and or add embellishments while adding quite a few stories and sayings not in Mark.
[00:03:12] They also use narrative organization and wording different from Mark.
[00:03:16] Overall, these three Matthew, Mark and Luke are considered synoptic gospels. The fourth Gospel, John, tells stories of Jesus not copied from Mark. Other manuscripts tell similar stories of Jesus, particularly the story of his resurrection.
[00:03:34] Multiple attestations add to the possibility that the basic facts surrounding the crucifixion of Jesus are historically accurate. That Jesus was crucified under Pontius Pilate, pronounced dead and taken down from the cross and buried in a tomb, then found to be missing from the tomb on the third day, about a day and a half after being buried.
[00:03:56] Accounts then describe Jesus as interacting with his disciples and other people before being received up into heaven.
[00:04:05] Details of the story vary, but these basic events are pretty consistent for Christians. The death and resurrection of Jesus are taken as gospel believed to be entirely true. Though the actual history is not known for certain.
[00:04:21] I believe there are several possibilities worth exploring.
[00:04:25] There is some speculation that the historical Jesus did not exist, or if he did exist, that he had nothing to do with the founding of Christianity.
[00:04:35] This line of thinking concludes that Jesus is a fictional or mythological character.
[00:04:40] I consider this a ridiculous notion, equivalent to saying that Abraham Lincoln did not exist. On the other hand, believing that Jesus is a real historical figure does not mean that every action, word or story about him should be believed as historical fact.
[00:04:57] Most of what has been written about Abraham Lincoln is probably true historical fact. Although it is pure fiction that Lincoln hunted vampires in his younger days as depicted in a certain movie.
[00:05:11] There is some speculation, particularly in Islam, that Jesus was not crucified. Someone else, possibly Judas Iscariot, was crucified in his place. I have not seen any evidence that supports this theory.
[00:05:24] Most likely Jesus is an historical figure. He actually existed who was crucified under Roman governor Pontius Pilate. Another historical figure when he ruled Judea from about 26 to 36 CE.
[00:05:39] The crucifixion of Jesus occurred about 30 CE, give or take several years.
[00:05:44] Roman rulers in general, Pilate in particular, are known as ruthless guardians of Roman power. It is certainly possible for Pilate to be in Jerusalem, the spiritual center of the Jewish people during the Passover when Jesus made a pilgrimage to Jerusalem. If a Jewish preacher proclaimed himself or was proclaimed by others to be king of the Jews, a sentence of death by crucifixion would be a likely result.
[00:06:12] Details of what happened the day of crucifixion are more problematic.
[00:06:17] Once Jesus gave up, the ghost, Joseph of Arimathea supposedly pleaded with Pilate to let him have the body of Jesus, and Pilate relented.
[00:06:26] This Seems highly unlikely. Pontius Pilate is not known as a humanitarian willing to release the body of a crucified prisoner due to urgings of a Jewish dignitary. The whole point of crucifixion is to humiliate and intimidate subject people. Much more likely the body of Jesus would have stayed on the cross until ravaged by birds and other scavengers.
[00:06:49] There are other parts of stories about the crucifixion of Jesus that are also problematic.
[00:06:54] According to the Gospel of John, Jesus is pierced in his side with a spear before being removed from the cross. This spear piercing story is not in the synoptic gospels Matthew, Mark and Luke. Did it really happen?
[00:07:09] To answer this question, it is worth exploring some aspects of the Gospel of John.
[00:07:14] The author of John is unknown since the author does not identify himself.
[00:07:19] Passages in John mentioning the disciples that Jesus loved apparently refer to the author. This leads many people to assume that the author is John, brother of James, one of the original disciples of Jesus. But the John as author conclusion is contrary to statements in the New Testament describing John as illiterate. The Gospel of John is written in very highly educated Greek, not likely written by an illiterate disciple of Jesus who would have spoken Aramaic, not Greek. Also, would a writer refer to himself in the third person in such an obscure way?
[00:07:56] Seems unlikely.
[00:07:58] I have an alternate explanation for the authorship of John. Suppose a Gentile highly educated in Greek converts to Christianity in the late first century. The Gospel of John is dated at around 95 cells.
[00:08:12] He meets a former disciple of Jesus, perhaps John, and discusses events from 60 plus years ago. This disciple tells stories as remembered faulty memory and all. The very talented author with his own theological ideas writes down stories he hears along with a lot of theological speculation into the Gospel we call John. This would explain why John's stories are often different from the Synoptic Gospels in both events and theology.
[00:08:41] The spear stabbing incident is most likely the result of an aged witness recalling events from long ago and conflating memories of other crucifixions he had witnessed with the crucifixion of Jesus.
[00:08:53] Is it possible Jesus was taken down from the cross on the day of his crucifixion? This is contrary to our understanding of Roman practice, but is not unprecedented. Jewish historian Josephus recounts how Roman general Titus commanded three of Josephus acquaintances be crucified, but later commanded them to be taken down cared for. Two of those crucified acquaintances died anyway, though the third recovered the assumption that Romans always leave crucifixion victims on Their crosses until picked apart by scavengers is not valid. There is no code of military conduct as a guidebook for Roman legions, with a chapter devoted to how to perform crucifixions, specifically stating proper procedures. Roman legions, like most armies, did what seemed proper at any given time based on tradition and the personal preferences of commanders and individual soldiers. If the story in John regarding breaking the legs and piercing the side of crucifixion victims actually occurred apart from the crucifixion of Jesus, this would be another case of Romans not following normal practices.
[00:10:01] I believe that quite a few victims of Roman crucifixion, maybe not a huge number, but certainly more than zero, had been taken down from their crosses after a relatively short period of time.
[00:10:12] I cannot imagine Roman soldiers guarding crucifixion victims 24 hours a day for weeks at a time. Instead, if they did not want crucified bodies taken down, they would rely on fear of retribution as an incentive to not remove crucified victims. Certainly some crucified victims were taken down before being picked apart by scavengers, some by Roman consent and others by surreptitious actions.
[00:10:38] Some may have even survived, although with a very strong incentive to not let anyone know they were still alive. The fact that there are very few stories about Roman crucifixion victims surviving.
[00:10:50] Jesus and the friends of Josephus are the only ones I know about is not surprising.
[00:10:57] So assuming Jesus was removed from the cross on the day of his crucifixion, the next part of the story is totally plausible. Mary Magdalene and other women could have come to the tomb absent the body of Jesus, but with a young man present.
[00:11:10] A simple explanation of this occurrence is that Joseph of Arimathea or some other person had the body of Jesus moved to another location. The young man in the tomb, described in other accounts as an angel or two angels would likely be an associate of whoever moved the body of Jesus.
[00:11:29] Then there are the reports of Jesus being seen alive after the empty tomb incident. These witness stories could be entirely fiction, hallucinations or wishful thinking, but I don't think so. Though the stories are inconsistent, there are too many instances of people reporting to see Jesus after his crucifixion for me to believe that none of the stories are true. The most common explanation for the empty tomb situation is that Jesus was resurrected, came back to life in a new glorified body that could live forever.
[00:12:02] This is an extraordinary claim given that besides Jesus, the only documentation of resurrection occurs in mythology and science fiction. Such an extraordinary claim requires extraordinary proof.
[00:12:15] Evidence that Jesus came back into a new glorified body is pretty scant. He is described with visible wounds and reluctant to be touched, signs of recovery from trauma rather than resurrection. And he apparently didn't stick around very long. In Mark, the description is so then, after the Lord had spoken unto them, Jesus interacted with his disciples. He was received up into heaven and sat on the right hand of God.
[00:12:42] What exactly does received up into heaven mean?
[00:12:46] Most people take it to mean Jesus in his heavily damaged body ascended into heaven, the sky floating upward contrary to the laws of gravity.
[00:12:56] This is using one extraordinary claim floating upwards to back another extraordinary claim being resurrected. I see received up into heaven as a euphemism, a way of saying he died again, but in a much nicer way.
[00:13:12] The extraordinary proof required to establish an unprecedented event resurrection of a dead body is not met.
