(2 of 9)
The notion of history and how to record it was, of course, rather different in the 1st century A.D. Like other ancient authors, the Gospel writers did not set out to produce records that meet modern standards of precision. Furthermore, they were clearly saturated with faith in Christ and were not necessarily objective transmitters of his story. Says Anthony Harvey, canon of Westminster Abbey and a New Testament scholar: "The writer of a Gospel is not just an editor but a creative theological intelligence, telling the story in a particular way to make a particular point."
In the view of numerous academicians, the anonymous authors of the four Gospels (later conventionally labeled Matthew, Mark, Luke and John) were working from second- and thirdhand materials, passed along by word of mouth for some decades before being written down. Consequently, the Gospels cannot be taken as gospel; that is, they cannot in every instance be considered as describing actual events. "The New Testament is the testimony of believing people," says the liberal Catholic Theologian Edward Schillebeeckx of the Netherlands. "What they are saying is not history but expressions of their belief in Jesus as Christ."
The attempt by modern scholars to ferret out the real, historical Nazarene from the supposedly embellished accounts in the Bible -- a process known as the historical-critical method, or "higher criticism" -- has resulted in some rather unorthodox notions. A current sampling:
-- Jesus did not claim to be the Messiah. Such assertions represent the church's later belief, which Gospel writers inserted into the life of Christ.
-- When Jesus said he was the "Son of God," he did not mean to be taken literally. New Testament language of this kind, as in referring to Jesus as the "Lamb" or "Word" of God, is metaphorical.
-- Some portions of the Gospel of Thomas, a text that church authorities have always considered spurious, are earlier and more authentic than the four New Testament Gospels.
-- Jesus never uttered any of the numerous denunciations of the Pharisees found in the New Testament. These sentiments were put in Jesus' mouth by 1st century church writers who considered the Pharisees their competition.
-- Jesus may have been crucified by mistake. History suggests that the Romans regularly rounded up dissidents and executed them without trial. Jesus may "accidentally" have been caught in one of these periodic sweeps, suggests the Rev. Burton Mack, a Presbyterian at the School of Theology at Claremont, Calif. "Maybe he was trying out one of his kingdom of God ideas in the company of some boisterous Galileans -- a bad idea at that time."
Throughout most of Christianity's history, such views would have been condemned as heresies. The Bible was seen as divinely inspired and thus unassailably accurate. "None can doubt that what is written took place," proclaimed St. Jerome, who translated the Gospels into Latin in the 4th century. Multitudes today still regard the Scriptures in that fashion, not least among them estimable scholars and intellectuals.