A:  It has become culturally fashionable to make the claim that “Jesus never said he was God.”

Lots of folks would like to claim Jesus as their own but his divinity gets in the way. The Muslims claim Jesus was a great prophet to the Jews but far less than even their prophet Muhammad. Some Jewish folks would like to acknowledge him as an ancient Jewish rabbi teacher if they could leave out the God thing and ignore the terrible treatment many Jews have received from some of his misguided followers over the centuries.

Even Hindu and eastern gurus like to make the claim that Jesus traveled to India and learned everything from them. Then there is the strange case of Richard Dawkins who wants to claim that Jesus Would Be An Atheist Today.

The real problem is that the Bible gets in the way and supports the divinity of Jesus. Not only that, but Jesus clearly indicated on a number of different occasions that he was the “I am” God of the Old testament. The response of those who heard him at the time confirms it.      <<Read the rest on my Apologetica page>>               *Top

Q:  Why the long lag between Jesus’ life and the first writings about him?

A:  Long lag? I don’t think so. After all Jimmy Carter recently came out with a book about his White House years and he was President 30-34 years ago. I was married 35 years ago and yet I can recall the events of that day like it was yesterday. Plus what I don’t remember my wife does.

There is a popular myth that the earliest writings about Jesus came a generation or two after his death and therefore can’t be all that accurate. This is simply not true.

The earliest writings that reference Jesus and early Christianity are those of Paul written between 48-60 AD/CE -beginning roughly 15 years after the death of Jesus. In I Corinthians he writes about the Last Supper and the Crucifixion and Resurrection of Jesus. In Chapter 15 he names Peter, James the brother of Jesus, and the Apostles, plus himself and 500 others as those who had seen Jesus after his resurrection. In Galatians he claims that he received the Gospel directly from the resurrected Jesus.

The Synoptic Gospels: Matthew, Mark, and Luke-Acts were written before 70 AD/CE. Probably between 55-66 (22-32 years afterwards). Internal references and evidence pretty much precludes a later date considering the Jewish War (66-70) and the changes following. Most scholars contend that the 3 Gospels contained earlier common and diverse source material that may have circulated orally.

In the first century, memorization and oral recall of large amounts of material was quite common. Most Judean families maintained a lengthy genealogy in memorized oral form. Also, Rabbis were required to accurately memorize the entire Torah and the more respected were also able to substantially recite the Prophets and the Writings –that is the entire Tanakh (Old Testament).

As long as most of the Apostles and early Christian leaders were all together in Jerusalem and neighboring areas there was little perceived need for a written Gospel. After the movement began to spread to Asia Minor (45) and then on to Greece and Rome (48-60) the need became obvious and more permanent written records of the oral traditions were made.

The Gospel of John did come much later and was written around 90 AD/CE by John the Beloved Apostle who lived a long life and ministered into the 2nd and third generation of Christians. Nevertheless he was a first-hand witness to the life and ministry of Jesus.

He looks at the facts concerning the resurrection of Jesus–a timely pursuit for the Easter season. This is the best and most concise article that I have found on this issue.            *Top

“The Bible says that the Messiah would be of the tribe of Judah and a descendant of David. According to Christians, Jesus was born of a virgin. However, tribal affiliation is conferred through the birth father only (Numbers 34:14, Numbers 1:18-44, Leviticus 24:10). The mother’s tribal affiliation was considered irrelevant to what her children’s tribal affiliation was and tribal affiliation/genealogy could not be inherited though a stepfather; only property could be inherited. Because Christians believe that Jesus had no human father, he would have had no tribal affiliation and would be eliminated from messianic consideration.”

A: The Jewish arguments seem to be rather compelling. However there are several facts that they do not address:

1. When Joseph completed his marriage to Mary who was pregnant at the time rather than breaking it off he was in essence accepting the coming child as his own. On the eighth day after Jesus was born he was circumcised and later Joseph along with Mary took him to the Temple to be registered and consecrated as his ‘first-born’ son (LK 2:22-24). Therefore Joseph officially recognized Jesus as his son and first-born heir (not by adoption) in the line of David and the tribe of Judah.   Game, Set, & Match!

2. Officially even today a child is recognized as Jewish if the mother is Jewish. So it is rather disingenuous to say that the family of the woman does not count in any way. Whether or not Luke genealogy is Mary’s cannot be proven but it is an early traditional understanding and it does make sense. Mary had to be a descendent of David or the Biblical requirement that the Messiah be his descendent would not have been fulfilled in the case of Jesus.

3. Jesus therefore was a descendent of David through his mother but received his tribal affiliation from Joseph who recognized him as his first-born heir. While we can’t prove today that the genealogy in Luke was Mary’s this whole scenario is supported by the fact that over 50,000 Jews in Jerusalem alone did end up believing that Jesus was the Messiah prior to 70 AD (CE) while the temple records were still available and the genealogies could still be confirmed. This included a large number of well educated Pharisees who became members of the early Jewish-Christian community.

4. If the Jewish folk want to keep looking for another to fulfill the Biblical requirements for a Messiah then they now have a huge problem. There are no current official records to confirm one’s Davidic lineage though some families have maintained their own records, particularly some of the priestly families.

Keep in mind however, that the prophet Jeremiah condemned the entire kingly line following Jeconiah. The line remains condemned for all time and this prophesy clearly states that no one from that line would ever sit on David’s throne nor even prosper:

Jer 22:30- “for no more shall a man of his seed prosper, sitting upon the throne of David, and ruling in Judah.”

The Matthew genealogy identifies Joseph as heir of the kingly line through Jeconiah. Therefore if Jesus had been his natural son he would have been subject to the curse. However, as the recognized first-born son and heir he received the inheritance of the kingly line without the curse. Jesus was not from the literal seed of Jeconiah (Coniah) yet was the heir. The presumed Davidic genealogy of Mary in Luke does not go through Jeconiah.

If Jesus is not the Messiah it is hard to see how anyone else would ever qualify. Of course this is the perspective of the Christian faith.

The Jewish objections have considerable merit but I believe that they are defeated by the very actions and life of Joseph plus the 100,000 or so Jews that did accept him as Messiah early on including 50,000 or more in Jerusalem alone prior to the destruction of the Temple.

Besides, the Christian faith does not depend on having a ‘good’ argument, the same Jesus and Holy Spirit can be experienced today as it was by the Apostles and disciples in the first century. Ours is a living faith that continues in the life of the believers today as it has for nearly 2,000 years.

What i really want to know is whether these Biblical prophets and their prophecies exist in any Jewish books and if they are, why are Christians not using the Jewish books such as the Torah but use the Bible instead.  Thanks  Mudy

A:  Thanks for your Question Mudy.  Actually the entire ‘Christian’ Bible is Jewish, all 66 books.  The first five books of the Bible–Genesis, Exodus, Leviticus, numbers, and Deuteronomy–is the Jewish Torah. The ‘Old Testament’ in the Christian Bible is the Jewish ‘Tanakh’–the Jewish Scriptures–which include the Torah, the Prophets, and the Writings.

Even the Christian ‘New Testament’ books–the Gospels, the Acts, the letters, and Revelation were written by early Christians who were all Jews–that even includes Dr. Luke who wrote Luke & Acts who was a Greek with a Jewish mother. The entire Bible was written by Jews, except maybe Job which may have been written even before the Torah.

The prophets and prophesies you refer to–Jeremiah,Isaiah, and others who did prophesy of coming of Jesus, are found in the Old testament of the Bible–The Tanakh of the Jewish religion.

Also the stories of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob are found in the first book of the Bible–Genesis, and the story of Moses is found in the following books of Exodus, Leviticus, numbers and Deuteronomy—the first five books of the Christian Bible and also the Jewish Torah.

He looks at the facts concerning the resurrection of Jesus–a timely pursuit for the Easter season:

"To answer the question of Jesus’ resurrection from a historical standpoint, we must first determine what facts concerning the fate of Jesus of Nazareth can be credibly established on the basis of the evidence and second consider what the best explanation of those facts is. At least four facts about the fate of the historical Jesus are widely accepted by New Testament historians today."

<Read the Whole Article>            *Top

A:  Mary named her son Y’shua (Joshua or Yehshua)–meaning: ‘Yahweh is Salvation’.  ‘Jesus’ is the English transliteration of the Greek form of the name.  Why did Mary name her son Jesus? Because the angel Gabriel told her too on orders from God himself (remember, angels only say and do what God specifically tells them too). Who better to know if the scriptures were fulfilled or not than God himself?

Many times, ancient Hebrews were given names that reflected and defined their character or purpose in life. Isaiah 7:14 seems to tell us that the Messiah would be called–Immanuel–meaning: ‘God with Us’. However, the same Prophet in Isaiah 9:6 tells us that his name shall be called: ‘Wonderful Counselor’, Mighty God’, ‘Everlasting Father’, and ‘Prince of Peace’.

Also, don’t forget that Jeremiah and Zechariah referred to the Messiah as: ‘The Branch’ and ‘The Root’ (Jer. 23:5, 33:15, Zech. 3:8). Then there are references to: ‘Lion of Judah’, ‘The Truth’, ‘The Word’, ‘I am", ‘Horn of Salvation’, ‘Alpha and Omega’, ‘The Good Shepherd’, ‘The Way’, ‘The Bread of Life’, ‘Chief Cornerstone’, ‘Light of the World’. ‘The Lamb of God’, ‘The Life’, ‘The Morning Star’, ‘The Sun of Righteousness’, ‘The Resurrection and the Life’, ‘The lord of All’, and many more.

Which is the right name? All of the above fulfill some scripture or another. They are functional nicknames for the Messiah. However, the correct proper name is the one that Mary used–the one that God chose and instructed his angel to give her—Jesus.            *Top

“But now if you have a purse, take it, and also a bag, and if you don’t have a sword, sell your cloak and buy one.”

Seems to contradict his other teaching about turning the cheek?

A: Is Jesus really a man of peace? Wait till he comes back! –he fights the Anti-christ and conquers the whole world. Also, he wasn’t so peaceful when he cleared the Temple that one day. Nevertheless, it is true when he was on the earth that he taught his disciples to ‘turn the cheek’. He never lead an army or even resisted his own arrest–but went willingly to his death. Yes, Jesus truly was ‘a man of peace’.

The statement of Jesus in Luke 22:36 has to be considered along with, and in contrast to, Luke 10:4-7, particularly verse 4:

“Do not take a purse or bag or sandals;…”

Now (LK 22:35-36) the situation has changed–take a purse, take a bag, not only take sandals, but also a sword! That is really the point that Jesus is making–the whole situation was changing.The disciples missed the point: “We have two, is that enough?” I can hear Jesus saying “oi vey” at that response, or in our current vernacular: “Yeah right, what ever!”–with a tone of resignation. Jesus many times used symbols, hyperbole, and ironic statements in his teaching. The disciples rarely seemed to understand, we even have difficulty with some of his statements today and this is surely one!

Later in the same chapter, when Jesus was arrested (LK 22:49-51), he stopped his disciples from using the swords and even heals the one who was struck. This really does confirm that the disciples mistook what Jesus was saying. By his own words and deeds, we see here that he was not advocating violence. In fact, he chastises the chief priests for coming after him in a violent manner–with swords and clubs like he was some common criminal. Yes, Jesus truly was a ‘man of peace’. What he was really saying in Luke 22:36–’the times they are a-changing!’ *Top

A: The Crucifixion lasted for at least 6 hours–from the third hour till the ninth. Do the Gospels represent all the events and everything that happened and was said by everyone there? –of coarse not!

Here is the best explanation:

1. Both criminals joined in with the others mocking Jesus in the beginning (as Matt. and Mark records).

2. Then much later as death was immanent, one of the thieves changed his mind about Jesus and repented (as Luke records).

It is not difficult to imagine that one could change their mind after watching and hearing what Jesus said for nearly 6 hours from the cross. After all, Jesus was a remarkable person and more than that, the very Son of God.

How did Jesus respond to all the insults? He asked his Father to forgive everyone there, including the two thieves. Even a hardened criminal could well have been affected by such a statement of forgiveness, especially from one who was also facing death. *Top

A: Jesus asked his disciples this question: “Who do you say I am?” Peter responded: “You are the Christ, the Son of the living God” (Matt. 16:15). Jesus continues today to ask all of us the same question. How one answers may determine where one spends all eternity.

Many believe that he was a ‘good teacher’–but on what basis? Many secularists and even Jewish folk call him such and yet reject what he taught. Some refer to him as a prophet, or a special servant of God, but reject any references to his divinity–picking and choosing what they wish to believe or accept.

Muslims call him a ‘prophet’, yet reject most of his teaching and definitely his ‘Jewish’ heritage and progenitors, and the very book that contains his teaching and testifies of him. Jehovah Witnesses look on him as ‘the greatest’ in all creation–’a god’ compared to the rest of us, but somewhat less than ‘The God’. Mormons teach that he is ‘one’ of the three major Gods of this creation–part of ‘The Godhead’. The Gnostics believed that Jesus was Divine but rejected his humanity. Other folks question whether he even ever existed in history, or if he did, whether the Gospels are really a reliable record of what he did and said.

However, all major Christian denominations—Roman Catholic, Anglican, Protestant (including all main-line & Evangelical churches), and Orthodox churches (Greek, Russian, & etc.) believe in and teach the same doctrine about Jesus. It is one of the major doctrines that all Christians can agree on. It is also a teaching that separates all Christianity from other religions and from those church organizations who call themselves Christian but really aren’t. The question is–who do you say he is?

Look at the whole passage in Matt. 16, verses 13-20. Notice that Jesus commended Peter’s response and called it inspired. Notice also what Peter did not say. He did not say that Jesus was merely a ‘good’ teacher, or a prophet, or even the greatest servant of God who ever lived. Peter said: “You are the Christ, the Son of the living God“. A Divine designation. Who do you say he is?

Was Jesus a servant of God? Yes he was, but he was also a lot more. Colossians 2:9 testifies: “For in Christ all the fullness of the Deity lives in bodily form.” So Jesus was Divine according to this passage. However, in some passages Jesus seems to be more of a servant to God. How can this be understood? In Philipians 2:5-11, Jesus is portrayed as both God and servant, human and Divine:

5 Your attitude should be the same as that of Christ Jesus: 6 Who, being in very nature God, did not consider equality with God something to be grasped, 7 but made himself nothing, taking the very nature of a servant, being made in human likeness.

8 And being found in appearance as a man, he humbled himself and became obedient to death- even death on a cross!

Notice that in verses 6 & 7 Jesus is said to have two natures–one Divine and one human nature that he took when he came into the world as a baby. This squares with the Christological teaching of all Christian churches:

1. Jesus Christ was fully God and fully man.

2. Jesus was one person with two natures–one human and one Divine.

When Jesus was conceived, the Holy Spirit implanted the Divine nature–a nature that Jesus shares with the Spirit and with God the Father, and he also received a human nature from his mother Mary. Now, who do you say he is?

A good reference for further study on this subject: “Systematic Theology: An Introduction to Biblical Doctrine”, by Wayne Grudem (Grand Rapids, Michigan: Inter-Varsity Press, 1994, 1264 pages) See: Chapter 26: The Person of Christ, pgs. 529-567. Very readable and accessible and a far better explanation than I could ever tender.

*Top