Produced by Marilynda Fraser-Cunliffe, Stephen Blundell
and the Online Distributed Proofreading Team at
http://www.pgdp.net









            THE MISTAKES
              OF JESUS



                 BY

            WILLIAM FLOYD

   _Author of "Social Progress,"
     "People vs. Wall Street,"
        "Our Gods on Trial,"
         "War Resistance."_



             _New York_
 THE FREETHOUGHT PRESS ASSOCIATION.




 Copyright 1932 By
 THE FREETHOUGHT PRESS ASSN., INC.




 TO DEVOTEES
 OF TRUTH




Transcriber's Note:

    Minor typographical errors have been corrected without note. Archaic
    spellings have been retained. Paragraph spacing has been normalised.

    A table of contents, though not present in the original publication,
    has been provided below:

      FOREWORD
        Face the Facts. The True Jesus. Scriptures Unauthentic. Faith in
        Jesus. Documentary Evidence. Retain the Good. Christianity Must
        Go.

      ANTIQUATED THEOLOGY
        The Virgin Birth. The Jewish Messiah. Eternal Damnation. The
        Atonement. Angels and Devils.

      FALSE IMPRESSIONS
        Jonah and the Whale. End of the World. Miracles. Eternal Life.
        Raising Lazarus. God's Protection. Belief in Prayer.

      OBSCURE TEACHINGS
        Witnesses and Judge. Cannibalism. Religion Only for Children.
        Difficult or Easy? Charity. The Scriptures Upheld. Illogical.
        Parables Deceptive.

      DEFICIENT INSTRUCTIONS
        Labor. Usury. Economics. Punishment for Debts. Healing. Peace.
        Marriage. Celibacy. Adultery. Divorce. Faulty Judgment.
        Unconvincing. Prohibition. Lack of Experience.

      AN INFERIOR PROTOTYPE
        Cursing Nature. Forgiveness. Vituperation. Destruction of
        Property. Egotism. Lack of Courtesy. Unethical Advice. Sermon on
        the Mount. Inconsistency. Fear. Failure.

      CONCLUSION
        Jesus a Myth. Judged by His Works. Ethical Evolution. Gains, not
        Losses.

      CODE OF LIVING




FOREWORD


The tradition regarding Jesus is so glamorous that it is difficult to
review his life and character with an unbiased mind. While
Fundamentalists and Modernists differ regarding the divinity of Christ,
all Christians and many non-Christians still cling to preconceived
notions of the perfection of Jesus. He alone among men is revered as
all-loving, omniscient, faultless--an unparalleled model for mankind.

This convention of the impeccability of Jesus is so firmly established
that any insinuation of error on his part is deemed a blasphemy.
Doubting Jesus is more impious than mocking God Almighty. Jehovah may be
exposed to some extent with impunity; a God who destroyed 70,000 of his
chosen people because their king took a census[1] is too illogical for
any but theologians to worship. But the Son of God, or Son of man, is
sacrosanct. Jesus is reverenced as the one man who has lived unspotted
by the world, free from human foibles, able to redeem mankind by his
example.

Respect for the principles of Jesus is so inbred in American people of
all faiths that an attempt to disparage his worth is denounced as bad
taste. The detractor is suspected of being an immoral person, no matter
how convincing may be the proof which he presents. A conspiracy of
silence is directed against any system of ethics advanced as superior to
the Sermon on the Mount. In popular opinion Jesus never made a mistake;
all his teachings were infallible; no other view is tolerated.


_Face the Facts_

This unwillingness to acknowledge the shortcomings of Jesus is partially
due to fear of sustaining a great loss. The familiar answer to heretical
arguments is that faith should not be destroyed unless something can be
put in its place--ignoring the fact that something always may be
substituted for beliefs destroyed. That substitute is faith in the world
as it really is. And our modern world, with all its shortcomings, is
infinitely preferable to the earth, or even the heaven, of the first
century. We now know that man can do more to eradicate sorrow than Jesus
ever thought of. We can have greater confidence in the world as revealed
today than in the doubtful traditions of Biblical times.

But suppose there were nothing to substitute for the myth destroyed,
should that deter the Truthseeker from continuing his investigation?
Scientists do not hesitate in their research because the result of a new
discovery may be disastrous. They seek the facts regardless of
consequences; they want to know the Truth about the physical world.
Ethicists should have a similar desire concerning the metaphysical
world. They should have confidence that the Supreme Intelligence (as
Edison called it) will lead on to better things.


_The True Jesus_

If Jesus was what his followers believe, no arguments will destroy their
faith in him; but if Jesus was not perfect, according to modern
standards, it is important that his status as God, or man, should be
revised. Loss of confidence in an erring idol is not loss of a true
ideal.

When an iconoclast asserts that Jesus lacked supreme intelligence, the
natural question is, "How do you know that you are right in your
appraisal, 'lest haply ye be found even to fight against God'?" The
answer is that we do not claim omniscience, but merely request everyone
to use his or her own judgment, with intellectual honesty, examining
each act or saying of Jesus without regard to presupposed ideas or
tradition.


_Scriptures Unauthentic_

The consensus of scholarship has rejected the creation of the universe
in six days in 4004 B.C., science having proved the existence of the
world for millions of years. Higher Critics refuse to credit the book of
Genesis, according to the first chapter of which the trees, beasts and
fowls were created before man, but according to the second chapter after
man. It is not assuming too much for the humblest writer to say that
Moses was mistaken concerning many things he described in the
Pentateuch. It follows that if one important portion of the Bible is
untrustworthy, other parts of that same book may not be the infallible
Word of God. The New Testament, as well as the Old, may be examined
critically, and if the gospels contain numerous contradictions, the
statements of the authors on any point, including the life of Jesus, are
open to question. A conscientious person should reach conclusions based
upon the best knowledge obtainable from all sources.

If anyone is convinced that Jesus made mistakes, he is not necessarily
compelled to become an atheist. All other Gods that have been worshipped
by men have been found imperfect. The oft exposed errors of Jehovah do
not prevent Christians and Jews from professing belief in God. Those who
require support from outside themselves cling to the symbol of deity
though not thoroughly crediting any personality ever described in any
sacred scriptures. Except Jesus.

An Evolutionist passes beyond the negative denial of God to the
construction of a new philosophy in which Truth is his guide, Truth
being the nearest approximation to reality obtainable with our present
knowledge. Belief in the world as it is now, and as it is going to be,
is a sufficient creed.


_Faith in Jesus_

With Jesus entrenched in popular opinion, there is small probability
that faith in him will be shaken unless there is a preponderance of
evidence against his divinity. No one need abandon faith in Jesus until
convinced that something better has been found. No one should even
expose himself to heretical arguments unless he is a devotee of Truth.
Then only can he rejoice at a revelation of error in confidence that the
more nearly the universe is understood the better can man adjust himself
to his surroundings. A worshipper of Truth fears no destruction of false
gods, nor any facts that may cause him to throw over treasured
superstitions. He is willing to prove all things and hold fast to that
which is true. He rejoices when his idol is shattered, knowing that he
is approaching nearer to the true way of living, a way that Jesus did
not adequately explain.

Any attempt to censure the character of Jesus will meet with the
ridicule it deserves unless substantiated by documentary evidence. The
mere improbability of events contrary to natural laws does not destroy
the ethical value of the teachings of the Nazarene. Anything might have
happened in the eerie days of old; the critic must do more than deny the
historicity of Jesus and the inspiration of the Bible. To be convincing
he must derive from the scriptures in which Christians believe whatever
proof can be deduced to unveil the superstition of a redeeming Savior.


_Documentary Evidence_

The documents most generally accepted by Christians are those collected
in the King James Version of the Bible. The Apocrypha and other early
manuscripts are unreliable. None of the thirty or more writers who
described events around Jerusalem in Jesus' time gives any account of
his teachings. The only life of Jesus is found in the four gospels; the
numerous biographers of Christ have had no other reliable source of
information. It is deceptive for the publishers of revised editions of
the Bible to claim that "original manuscripts" have been consulted. Not
one of the original manuscripts is in existence, the earliest extant
dating from the fourth century A.D., while the most ancient portion of
the New Testament in any museum was transcribed in the sixth century.

Accepting, therefore, the King James Version of the New Testament as the
most reliable source of information, the question arises as to what
portion of the chapters therein may be considered authentic. Scholars
have rejected the entire gospel of John as less reliable than the
synoptic gospels; and the sixteenth chapter of Mark as an addition after
the original papyrus had broken off. Modernists, being confronted, in
spite of these deletions, with inconsistencies in the gospels of
Matthew, Mark and Luke, have assumed the further privilege of rejecting
any verses which appear at variance with their beliefs. Liberals of this
class contend that the supernatural side of Jesus may be disregarded and
yet that Jesus will remain Our Lord. They reject certain evangelistic
passages that conflict with modern thought, but accept other statements
by the same authors as authoritative.

As the Christian churches have not accepted any abbreviation of the
Bible as a substitute for the King James Version, it seems proper for
the critic to have recourse to that translation as the most authentic
description of the life and teachings of Jesus. He is justified,
moreover, in considering every word in the supposedly inspired gospels
as equally reliable. His only concern should be to interpret each verse
as nearly as possible as the original writers intended their words to be
understood, allowing for Eastern hyperbole and the custom of the times.


_Retain the Good_

In preparing a critical analysis of the character of Jesus, it is freely
admitted that many of the thoughts attributed to the son of Mary are
superlatively fine. They will live forever whether the personality of
Jesus be rejected as a divinity or not. That these beautiful preachments
are ignored here is not due to any desire to belittle admirable
sentiments or to disparage right living. The loving side of Jesus has
been emphasized again and again and will be borne in mind by the reader
when other less admirable traits are criticized. The intent of this
criticism is not to destroy idealism but to assist the spirit of true
progress.


_Christianity Must Go_

The significance of this investigation lies in the changes that would
have to be made in religious thought if it should be found that Jesus
was not perfect. If Jesus was in error concerning conditions of his own
time and exhibited no knowledge of our modern problems, his authority
will be lessened. Searchers after the true way of life will not continue
to worship a person whose conception of the physical and spiritual world
was erroneous. If Jesus made mistakes, he is neither the Son of God nor
an infallible man.

So long as people feel compelled to worship what has been proved
imperfect, or to evade important doctrines of their creeds for fear of
losing faith in old traditions, their minds will not be receptive to
changes in social conditions that require abandonment of established
customs. Christians are imbued with a psychology derived from a
completed revelation. The firmer their belief in Jesus, the greater
their resistance to new ideas. Catholics are more reluctant to join
progressive movements than Modernists and Modernists than Evolutionists.
Religious people are apt to be afraid of the new world; they doubt the
possibility of eliminating war, poverty and injustice--customs as deeply
rooted in the social world as belief in Jesus is in the religious world.
If the chief reactionary bulwark of the past is abandoned, there will be
greater possibility of accepting new revelations.

What would happen if Christians should discover that their leader was
not an incomparable guide? Absolutely nothing at first. Those accustomed
to lead a moral life would continue to do so. Members of Christian
churches are the very people who most wish to do what is right. They
will not lose their character because Jesus has lost his fictitious
divinity. On the contrary, they will search for the most elevating
principles to substitute for the personality that has been found
deficient. It is difficult for people to be superior to their gods.
These same church-going individuals, when freed from the fetters of
antiquated supernaturalism, will gradually learn to serve mankind with
the same devotion they now render to a misunderstood God. They will no
longer be limited by the defects of their paragon in their efforts to
make the most of life. They will seek to solve modern problems in a
rational way instead of deciding such matters as birth control, divorce,
war and prohibition by reference to the scriptures, as they do now. For
the first time they will make their decisions according to the best
knowledge obtainable today.

Jesus was in advance of his time. He declared that such revengeful
theories as an eye for an eye must be supplanted by forgiveness. But as
the world has evolved, Jesus has stood still. His teachings, superior as
they were to those of the ancient Israelites, are now found to be
inferior to the best ethics culled from the wisdom of the ages, brought
down to date. It is heartening to feel that we can appropriate the
superlative principles of all time instead of worshipping a deified
personality who was limited to the best that men of his own generation
could conceive.

This examination of the life and character of Jesus will be based upon
the accounts in the New Testament. Each passage will be construed as
appears to the writer to have been originally intended. The reader may
substitute his own interpretation, but should in no instance pass
lightly over a situation as immaterial. Every word or action of Jesus is
an important link in the chain of his divinity, or of his exalted
position as a moral guide. Each argument should be met by acceptance or
rejection, never with indifference. No reader of the following pages
should ever say, "What difference does it make?" Everything concerning
Jesus is of vast consequence in determining whether he is or is not a
divine Savior, or a perfect guide.


FOOTNOTES:

[1] Chron. xxi.




ANTIQUATED THEOLOGY


The first event in the life of Jesus, the gospel story of his birth, is
now considered unauthentic by many scholars and some theologians. The
birth of a virgin, the visitation of an angel, the star in the East are
phenomena contrary to natural laws and rest on insufficient authority
for acceptance as credible. The probabilities are against exceptions in
the laws of the universe.


_The Virgin Birth_

The original evidence for the virgin birth is found only in the gospels
of Matthew and Luke, two unknown historians, and both these evangelists
implicitly deny their own tale when they trace the descent of Jesus from
David through Joseph.[1] The slaughter of the children by Herod, in fear
of Jesus as a rival, probably never took place. Mark, Luke and John do
not mention it; Josephus, who dwelt on the crimes of Herod, knew nothing
of this massacre. According to Luke, Mary and Joseph took Jesus to
Jerusalem openly soon after the supposed decree.[2]

There is dispute as to whether Jesus was born in Bethlehem or Nazareth,
and the date of his birth has been placed anywhere from 4 B.C. to 7 A.D.
Matthew says that Jesus was born "in the days of Herod", while Luke says
it was "When Cyrenius was governor of Syria." Herod died in 4 B.C.,
while Cyrenius did not become governor of Syria until 7 A.D.

The romantic story of the Christ-child is not corroborated by the
historians of the time and is in opposition to the theory of evolution
by natural processes. And yet it is still one of the main sources of
Jesus' fame, being repeated at Christmas-tide in the churches, thus
connecting Jesus with God in a superhuman manner.

The consensus of scholarship is in practical agreement that the theory
of the virgin birth as a link between Jesus and God is a mistake; but
whose mistake was it? Jesus never referred to his miraculous birth. If
he was merely a man and never heard of the rumor about his conception,
he was not to blame for the spread of this misleading story throughout
Christendom.

While Jesus did not refer to his divine paternity in a physical sense,
he did endeavor to convince his hearers that he was more directly
connected with God than other men. "I and my Father are one."[3] "No
man knoweth the Son but the Father; neither knoweth any man the Father,
save the Son, and he to whomsoever the Son will reveal him."[4]

Jesus thus proclaimed himself identical with the Lord God of the Old
Testament who called himself Jehovah. This is entirely in keeping with
the whole Christian theory, for the _raison d'être_ of Jesus derived
from the act of God soon after the creation. Adam and Eve ate of the
fruit of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil which God had
commanded them not to touch, and for this disobedience, this fall of man
from grace, God cursed mankind. Jesus came to earth to save man from the
wrath of Almighty God.

But this claim of Jesus to oneness with God renders him liable to
censure for the acts of Jehovah which represented a standard of ethics
inferior to that preached by the Son of God. According to the
scriptures, which anyone may freely search, God advised or countenanced
deception[5]; stealing[6], selfishness[7], conquest by force[8],
indiscriminate slaughter[9], murder[10], cannibalism[11], killing of
witches[12], slavery[13], capital punishment for rebellious sons or for
seeking false gods[14], sacrifices of animals[15] and other acts
representing the concepts of primitive men.[16]

While Jesus could read[17] and was familiar with the scriptures, it is
possible that he was not acquainted with the system of dictatorship
formerly employed by his Father. Occasionally Jesus denounced the ethics
of "them of old time", but he always referred to his Father as perfect.

The dilemma is that Jesus must be condemned either for claiming identity
with Jehovah (to whom he was really superior), or for accepting with
only slight improvements the tyranny of God as described in the Bible,
the Word of God. Of course if the Bible is not the Word of God, the
whole system of Christian theology falls to the ground.


_The Jewish Messiah_

Jesus claimed to be the Messiah expected by the Jews. "And the high
priest answered and said unto him, I adjure thee by the living God, that
thou tell us whether thou be the Christ, the Son of God. Jesus saith
unto him, Thou hast said."[18] "Again the high priest asked him, and
said unto him, Art thou the Christ, the Son of the Blessed? And Jesus
said, I am."[19] "Then said they all, Art thou then the Son of God? And
he said unto them, Ye say that I am."[20] "The woman saith unto him, I
know that Messias cometh, which is called Christ: when he is come he
will tell us all things. Jesus saith unto her, I that speak unto thee am
he."[21]

These acknowledgments by Jesus that he was the Messiah are important,
for if he claimed divinity when he was merely mortal, either under false
pretences or being self-deceived, he made a mistake of the most serious
character. His claim was not recognized by his own people, and many of
his followers today deny that he was the Jewish Messiah. Jesus said that
he came from God to save the Jews. Either he was truly the predicted
Messiah or he made an inexcusable error. In this as in other instances
to be cited, Fundamentalists will not admit any mistake, for they
believe in the supernatural events connected with the Son of God. But
Modernists, who reject the anointed Christ while clinging to the human
Jesus, may be at a loss to reconcile Jesus' claim to Messiahship with
their rejection of his divinity.

Jesus stressed his mission to save the world, saying "For God so loved
the world, that he gave his only begotten Son, that whosoever believeth
in him should not perish, but have everlasting life."[22]


_Eternal Damnation_

Whether Jesus was mistaken or not in his estimate of his close
relationship with God is for each person to decide; but his theory of
the disasters that would follow unbelief in his divinity leads to
serious difficulties if accepted literally. For not only was Jesus in
error when he insisted that salvation depended upon belief, he was also
reconciled to eternal suffering for unbelievers. Note some of his
expressions:

"If ye believe not that I am he, ye shall die in your sins."[23] "Depart
from me, ye cursed, into everlasting fire, prepared for the devil and
his angels ... And these shall go away into everlasting punishment: but
the righteous into life eternal."[24]

"Whosoever shall blaspheme against the Holy Ghost hath never
forgiveness, but is in danger of eternal damnation."[25]

"Except ye repent ye shall perish."[26]

"If thy hand offend thee, cut it off: it is better for thee to enter
into life maimed, than having two hands to go into hell, into the fire
that never shall be quenched."[27]

"How can ye escape the damnation of hell?"[28]

"He that believeth and is baptized shall be saved, but he that believeth
not shall be damned."[29]

It is evident from these quotations that Jesus not only preached belief
in his divinity as essential to salvation, but endeavored to terrify
people into belief by threats of eternal torment. Jesus was responsible
for the theological conception of a fiery hell. If he was mistaken, if
there never was a place of torment for the wicked after death, is it not
an act of constructive criticism to expose the person most responsible
for the false doctrine that has caused so much fear and mental
suffering? Must we not deplore this mistake of Jesus and recast our
entire opinion of him as a religious teacher?

Are we not justified in stating positively that Jesus made a mistake
when he taught a physical hell and condemned people to spend eternity in
torment for the doubtful sin of disbelief?


_The Atonement_

The doctrine of the Atonement was taught by Jesus. "For this is my blood
of the new testament, which is shed for many for the remission of
sins."[30]

Whether this sacrifice of the innocent Jesus to save sinful man was
ordered by God or was voluntary on the part of Jesus, it represents a
theory of reprieve from punishment long since abandoned as unethical. If
sin must be punished, there is no justice in relieving the sinner and
placing the burden upon the righteous.

Moreover, the Atonement appears to have been ineffective, for in spite
of the sacrifice that Jesus made, few were to be saved under his scheme
of salvation. "Many are called but few are chosen."[31] "Strait is the
gate, and narrow is the way, which leadeth unto life, and few there be
that find it."[32] "Strive to enter in at the strait gate: for many, I
say unto you, will seek to enter in, and shall not be able."[33]

If the theory of Atonement for sin by the sacrifice of the innocent was
not ethical and if Jesus taught that doctrine, he was in error, was he
not?

The sacrifice of Jesus was not so great as often made by men. Jesus was
sustained with the thought that he was saving the world; his physical
suffering was not long continued; on the night of his crucifixion he was
in paradise.[34] He endured a few hours of pain compared to weeks of
suffering by wounded soldiers, or years spent in prison by the
proponents of an ideal.

Jesus not only claimed the power to remit sins but also said to his
disciples: "Whosoever sins ye remit, they are remitted unto them; and
whosoever sins ye retain, they are retained."[35]

Is that true? Surely it is proper to ask that blunt question. Here is a
definite statement concerning the power of certain men to remit sins. If
those men did not have the power deputed to them, must we not doubt the
accuracy of Jesus?

Jesus made a distinction between himself and the Comforter: "It is
expedient for you that I go away: for if I go not away, the Comforter
will not come unto you; but if I depart I will send him unto you ... And
I will pray the Father, and he shall give you another Comforter, that he
may abide with you forever."[36]

It must surprise some Christians that the Comforter could not be present
at the same time with Jesus.


_Angels and Devils_

Jesus believed in angels and devils, often referring to these imaginary
supernatural beings as if they existed. "Thinkest thou that I cannot now
pray to my Father and he shall presently give me more than twelve
legions of angels?"[37] "So shall it be at the end of the world: the
angels shall come forth."[38]

The devils were among the first to recognize Christ's divinity: "What
have we to do with thee, Jesus, thou Son of God?"[39] "Let us alone,
thou Jesus of Nazareth; art thou come to destroy us? I know thee, who
thou art, the Holy One of God."[40] "And unclean spirits when they saw
him, fell down before him, and cried, saying, Thou art the Son of
God."[41]

Jesus believed in demoniacal possession, casting out devils on several
occasions.

Jesus frequently referred to heaven as a place above the earth: "And
then shall they see the Son of man coming in the clouds with great power
and glory."[42] "And ye shall see the Son of man sitting on the right
hand of power, and coming in the clouds of heaven."[43] "Verily, verily,
I say unto you, hereafter ye shall see heaven open, and the angels of
God ascending and descending on the Son of man."[44]

When Jesus was transfigured and talked with Moses and Elias, he charged
his disciples, saying, "Tell the vision to no man, until the Son of man
be risen again from the dead."[45]

According to the creeds based upon the Bible, Jesus rose from the dead,
descended into hell, and ascended bodily into heaven. According to the
gospels he stilled the storm, walked on the water and told Peter to do
so and to find money in a fish's mouth and catch a large draught of
fishes. These and other miracles connected Jesus with God and were part
of his theology.

Every fair-minded person should re-read the gospels and refresh his
memory regarding the theology of Jesus. Then a decision must be reached
as to the correctness of the views expressed. Either conditions on earth
were different in the first century from those of the twentieth, or
Jesus was mistaken in his conception of God, heaven, hell, angels,
devils and himself.


FOOTNOTES:

[1] Matt. i; Luke iii.

[2] Luke ii, 22.

[3] John x, 30.

[4] Matt. xi, 27.

[5] Ezek. xiv, 9; Num. xiv, 30-34.

[6] Ex. iii, 21-22.

[7] Deut. xiv, 21.

[8] Num. xxxi et al.

[9] Ex. xxxii, 27.

[10] Deut. vii, 16 et al.

[11] Jer. xix, 9 et al.

[12] Ex. xxii, 18.

[13] Lev. xxv, 44-46.

[14] Deut. xxi, 18-21; xiii, 6-9.

[15] Lev. i, 14-15.

[16] See the Old Testament.

[17] Luke iv, 16.

[18] Matt. xxvi, 63-64.

[19] Mark xv, 61-62.

[20] Luke xxii, 70.

[21] John iv, 25-26.

[22] John iii, 16.

[23] John viii, 24.

[24] Matt. xxv, 31-46.

[25] Mark iii, 29.

[26] Luke xiii, 3.

[27] Mark ix, 43.

[28] Matt. xxiii, 33.

[29] Mark xvi, 16.

[30] Matt. xxvi, 28.

[31] Matt. xxii, 14.

[32] Matt. vii, 14.

[33] Luke xiii, 24.

[34] Luke xxiii, 43.

[35] John xx, 23.

[36] John xiv, 16.

[37] Matt. xxvi, 53.

[38] Matt. xiii, 49.

[39] Matt. viii, 29.

[40] Luke iv, 34.

[41] Mark iii, 11.

[42] Mark xiii, 26.

[43] Mark xiv, 62.

[44] John i, 51.

[45] Matt. xvii, 9.




FALSE IMPRESSIONS


Jesus not only held mistaken ideas about theology, as anyone but a
Fundamentalist must admit, but he often gave impressions about earthly
affairs that were unreliable to say the least. Occasionally his
statements were actual misrepresentations of fact.


_Jonah and the Whale_

"For as Jonas was three days and three nights in the whale's belly; so
shall the Son of man be three days and three nights in the heart of the
earth."[1]

Evidently Jesus believed the story of Jonah and the whale, as well as
the tale of Noah's ark[2] both of which are now generally discredited.
Moreover, his prophecy regarding his entombment was inaccurate, for he
was only two nights and one day in the heart of the earth, from Friday
night to Sunday morning.


_End of the World_

Jesus was decidedly mistaken in his theory of the approaching end of the
world.

"Repent: for the kingdom of heaven is at hand."[3] "Ye shall not have
gone over the cities of Israel, till the Son of man be come."[4] "There
be some standing here which shall not taste of death, till they see the
Son of man coming in his kingdom."[5] "And this gospel of the kingdom
shall be preached in all the world for a witness unto all nations; and
then shall the end come ... Verily I say unto you, This generation shall
not pass, till all these things be fulfilled."[6] "The time is
fulfilled, and the kingdom of God is at hand."[7] "So ye in like manner,
when ye shall see these things come to pass, know that it is nigh, even
at the doors. Verily I say unto you, that this generation shall not
pass, till all these things be done."[8] "The hour is coming, in the
which all that are in the graves shall hear his voice, and shall come
forth; they that have done good, unto the resurrection of life; and they
that have done evil, unto the resurrection of damnation."[9]

Jesus was confident that the day of judgment was coming in the first
century, but it has not come yet, nineteen hundred years later. This
erroneous belief in the imminent end of the world had an important
bearing upon his entire philosophy; for if the end of the world was so
near it was far more important to prepare for life hereafter than to be
concerned over mundane affairs. May we not view with doubt any of Jesus'
teachings that depended upon his mistaken conception of the duration of
the world?


_Miracles_

Jesus is reported to have fed 5,000 people with five loaves and two
fishes, and again 4,000 with seven loaves and a few small fishes. He
walked on the water, calmed the seas, raised three persons from the dead
and performed other miracles contrary to natural laws. These wondrous
acts were depended upon by him to convince the people that he was the
expected Messiah: "Go and shew John again those things which ye do hear
and see: the blind receive their sight, and the lame walk, the lepers
are cleansed, and the deaf hear, the dead are raised up, and the poor
have the gospel preached to them."[10]

Jesus assured his disciples that they too would be able to perform
miracles: "And these signs shall follow them that believe; In my name
shall they cast out devils; they shall speak with new tongues; they
shall take up serpents; and if they drink any deadly thing, it shall not
hurt them; they shall lay hands on the sick and they shall recover."[11]
"He that believeth on me, the works that I do shall he do also; and
greater works than these shall he do."[12]

Jesus set great store by these marvels that only magicians attempt
nowadays. Ministers of the apostolic succession cannot cast out devils
or take up serpents, and they are affected by deadly drinks the same as
others. Jesus had a primitive idea of the value of such magic. Either he
sought to deceive the gullible, or, as is more likely, was himself
overcredulous. It is important to remember that Jesus stressed the value
of enchantment and advised his successors to conjure in his name.

If the miraculous had not been connected with the name of Jesus, it is
probable that he never would have been heard of. His ethical teachings
alone would not have won for him the exalted position that has come from
the stories of his miraculous birth, life and ascension. In other words,
his fame rests upon the supernatural side of his life that is now
discredited by many of his followers.


_Eternal Life_

The remarks of Jesus on the subject of death were not accurate. "If a
man keep my saying, he shall never see death."[13] "Whosoever liveth and
believeth in me shall never die."[14]

Apparently Jesus referred to natural death, in which case he was
utterly mistaken; but if he meant that believers in him should live
forever in heaven, even so he gave a false impression; for there is no
evidence that life after death is assured to Christians more than to
others. Unbelievers were also to have eternal life, though in torment.


_Raising Lazarus_

Jesus took advantage of opportunities, even of death, to create dramatic
effects. The eleventh chapter of John shows that when Lazarus was
reported ill, Jesus said, "This sickness is not unto death, but for the
glory of God, that the Son of God might be glorified thereby." So Jesus
let Lazarus, one of the believers whom he loved, die[15] in order that
he might have the triumph of raising him from the dead. "Then said Jesus
unto them plainly, Lazarus is dead. And I am glad for your sakes that I
was not there, to the intent ye may believe."

The confusion between earthly death and loss of eternal life was shown
in the remark of Jesus to Martha: "I am the resurrection and the life:
he that believeth in me, though he were dead, yet shall he live." This
might be construed to mean that believers should have eternal life
hereafter, but Jesus evidently had reference to life on earth for he
proceeded to raise Lazarus from the dead and cause him to live again on
earth with his sisters.

When Martha reminded Jesus that Lazarus had been dead four days, Jesus
replied, "Said I not unto thee, that, if thou wouldest believe, thou
shouldest see the glory of God?" But Jesus himself had doubts of his
ability to bring back Lazarus to life, as shown by his spontaneous
prayer of thanks: "Father, I thank thee that thou hast heard me." Then
he revealed again his desire to dramatize the occasion, saying, "And I
knew that thou hearest me always: but because of the people which stand
by I said it, that they may believe that thou hast sent me."

"Then many of the Jews which came to Mary, and had seen the things which
Jesus did, believed on him." Do the followers of Jesus, who claim that
he made no mistakes, believe on him? If so, they must believe that he
raised Lazarus from the dead as he claimed to have done. Do they believe
that they can also raise people from the dead? Jesus so assured them
when he promised that believers could do greater works than he
performed. No, Jesus gave a false impression of his power.


_God's Protection_

Jesus continued his deception of the world by promising protection that
has never been accorded. "Are not two sparrows sold for a farthing? And
one of them shall not fall on the ground without your Father. But the
very hairs of your head are all numbered. Fear ye not therefore, ye are
of more value than many sparrows."[16]

These sayings may properly be taken as symbolical or allegorical; but
the evident intention was to assure his followers that God would protect
them in their daily life. Safety was promised for believers, a safety
that has been lacking for everyone. There is no evidence that God does
protect believers any more than unbelievers. When the Titanic went down,
those who perished were not solely the wicked persons; there was no
distinction in the terrible disaster between believers and unbelievers.

Jesus created in the minds of his hearers and his followers the idea
that God was watching each individual to save him from danger, but this,
unfortunately, is not a fact. It sounds comforting; it makes people feel
nearer to God; but experience proves that no such close relationship
exists. Jesus gave a false impression of God's loving care for men.


_Belief in Prayer_

Modern religious people may still consistently believe in prayer as a
form of inward aspiration, but it is difficult to take literally the
assurance given by Jesus of practical accomplishments by means of prayer
in his name.

Jesus did not confine himself to promising spiritual results from
prayer, but distinctly gave it to be understood that the physical world
would respond to petitions to Jehovah. "Again I say unto you, That if
two of you shall agree on earth as touching any thing that they shall
ask, it shall be done for them of my Father which is in heaven."[17] "If
ye have faith, and doubt not, ye shall not only do this which is done to
the fig tree, but also if ye shall say unto this mountain, Be thou
removed, and be thou cast into the sea; it shall be done. And all things
whatsoever ye shall ask in prayer, believing, ye shall receive."[18]
"What things soever ye desire, when ye pray, believe that ye receive
them, and ye shall have them."[19] "If ye have faith as a grain of
mustard seed, ye shall say unto this mountain, Remove hence to yonder
place; and it shall remove: and nothing shall be impossible unto
you."[20]

These promises have not been fulfilled. Bishops, priests and deacons
with strong faith have been unable to obtain, by means of the most
sincere prayer, results similar to those indicated. They have followed
Jesus in vain. No man living dare put his faith to the test by a public
demonstration of prayer for physical changes. Christian prayers for rain
are conventional, not being offered with confidence that rain will
follow.

Jesus has misled us.


FOOTNOTES:

[1] Matt. xii, 40.

[2] Luke xvii, 27; Matt. xxv, 38.

[3] Matt. iv, 17.

[4] Matt. x, 23.

[5] Matt. xvi, 28; Mark ix, 1.

[6] Matt. xxiv, 14-34; Luke xxi, 32.

[7] Mark i, 15.

[8] Mark xiii, 29-30.

[9] John v, 28-29.

[10] Matt. xi, 4-5.

[11] Mark xvi, 17-18.

[12] John xiv, 12.

[13] John viii, 51.

[14] John xi, 26.

[15] John xi, 6.

[16] Matt. x, 29-31.

[17] Matt. xviii, 19.

[18] Matt. xxi, 21-22.

[19] Mark xi, 24.

[20] Matt. xvii, 20.




OBSCURE TEACHINGS


Many of the sayings of Jesus lacked clarity. Various interpretations
have been put upon them by scholars of distinction. No one is sure what
was meant.

According to the gospels, Jesus was descended from David, but Jesus
mystified his hearers on this descent, saying: "If David then call him
Lord, how is he his son?"[1]


_Witnesses and Judge_

On the subject of witnesses there is great confusion. "If I bear witness
of myself, my witness is not true."[2] "Though I bear record of myself,
yet my record is true."[3] "It is also written in your law, that the
testimony of two men is true. I am one that bear witness of myself, and
the Father that sent me beareth witness of me."[4] "I and my Father are
one."[5] "My Father is greater than I."[6]

This and the following instruction regarding judicial procedure are far
from clear. Jesus acknowledged the principle of law requiring more than
one witness but said that in his case the only other witness necessary
was his Father, although he and his Father were one.

Jesus is supposed to be the judge of the world, but his statement of the
case leaves the issue ambiguous. "For the Father judgeth no man, but
hath committed all judgment unto the Son."[7] "I judge no man. And yet
if I judge, my judgment is true."[8] "And if any man hear my words, and
believe not, I judge him not: for I came not to judge the world, but to
save the world."[9] "For judgment I am come into this world, that they
which see not might see; and that they which see might be made
blind."[10]

The quality of reasoning employed in these instances has naturally led
to theological quibbling. If Jesus can argue in that fashion, so can his
followers, at the expense of intellectual honesty.


_Cannibalism_

The Jews could not understand what Jesus meant when he said: "Except ye
eat the flesh of the Son of man, and drink his blood, ye have no life in
you. Whoso eateth my flesh, and drinketh my blood, hath eternal
life."[11]


_Religion Only for Children_

Nor are these sayings clear: "I thank thee, O Father, Lord of heaven and
earth, because thou hast hid these things from the wise and prudent, and
hast revealed them unto babes."[12] "Whosoever shall not receive the
kingdom of God as a little child, he shall not enter therein."[13]

This train of thought implies that education is of no importance where
belief is concerned.


_Difficult or Easy?_

After enumerating the many hardships that must be endured by his
followers, Jesus contradicted himself by saying, "For my yoke is easy,
and my burden is light."[14]


_Charity_

There are apparent contradictions in his instructions regarding charity:
"Let your light so shine before men, that they may see your good works,
and glorify your Father which is in heaven."[15] "Take heed that ye do
not your alms before men, to be seen of them: otherwise ye have no
reward of your Father which is in heaven."[16]



_The Scriptures Upheld_

Jesus reverenced the Hebrew Old Testament.

"Think not that I am come to destroy the law, or the prophets: I am not
come to destroy, but to fulfil. For verily I say unto you, Till heaven
and earth pass, one jot or one tittle shall in no wise pass from the
law, till all be fulfilled."[17]

And yet Jesus was the reformer, overthrowing ancient customs, renouncing
the old principle of a tooth for a tooth, improving upon the Mosaic law.
He was inconsistent.


_Illogical_

The logic of Jesus is often difficult to follow.

"And when he is come, he will reprove the world of sin, and of
righteousness, and of judgment: of sin because they believe not on me;
of righteousness, because I go to my Father, and ye see me no more; of
judgment, because the prince of this world is judged."[18]

Jesus admitted his obscurity: "These things have I spoken unto you in
proverbs: but the time cometh, when I shall no more speak unto you in
proverbs, but I shall shew you plainly of the Father."[19]

That time has never come.


_Parables Deceptive_

Jesus explained his obscurity in this way: "Unto you it is given to know
the mysteries of the kingdom of God: but to others in parables; that
seeing they might not see, and hearing they might not understand."[20]
"But unto them that are without, all these things are done in parables:
that seeing they may see, and not perceive; and hearing they may hear,
and not understand; lest at any time they should be converted, and their
sins should be forgiven them."[21]

In other words, Jesus, who said he came to save the world, concealed his
meaning for fear some of his hearers should be converted and their sins
be forgiven--which is exactly what he sought to bring about.

Obscurity in a teacher is a great defect, especially when he glories in
his ambiguity. If any Christians wish that Jesus had been more clear,
then Jesus does not appear perfect to them, and they should admit his
imperfections.


FOOTNOTES:

[1] Matt. xxii, 41-45.

[2] John v, 31.

[3] John viii, 14.

[4] John viii, 17-18.

[5] John x, 30.

[6] John xiv, 28.

[7] John v, 22.

[8] John viii, 16.

[9] John xii, 47.

[10] John x, 39.

[11] John vi, 53-58.

[12] Matt. xi, 25.

[13] Mark x, 15.

[14] Matt. xi, 30.

[15] Matt. v, 16.

[16] Matt. vi, 1.

[17] Matt. v, 17-18.

[18] John xvi, 8-11.

[19] John xvi, 25.

[20] Luke viii, 10.

[21] Mark iv, 11-12.




DEFICIENT INSTRUCTIONS


In a number of instances the teachings of Jesus are so incomplete, or so
inappropriate, as to render no assistance in meeting similar situations
in modern life. Either his meaning is not clear, or his instructions are
too primitive to be applicable to our civilization.


_Labor_

The relation between employer and employee is one that requires
practical guidance. Let us see what information Jesus gave on this
important subject.

The parable of the laborers[1] relates that an employer hired men to
work in his vineyard for twelve hours for a penny, and that he paid the
same wage to other workers who toiled only nine, six, three and one
hour. When those who had worked longest resented this treatment, as
modern strikers would, the employer answered, apparently with Jesus'
approval: "Friend, I do thee no wrong: didst not thou agree with me for
a penny? Take that thine is, and go thy way: I will give unto this
last, even as unto thee. Is it not lawful for me to do what I will with
mine own? Is thine eye evil, because I am good? So the last shall be
first, and the first last."

This parable may be a comfort to autocratic employers, sustaining them
in their determination to dominate labor, but the principles enunciated
are lacking in social vision. Equal pay for unequal work is approved,
and the employer is vindicated in regulating wages and hours as he sees
fit without regard for justice or the needs of the workers. In the
manner of modern employers, the "goodman" calls his worker "Friend" but
treats him with contempt. Jesus taught that the workers were wrong in
demanding justice, that the employer was justified in acting
erratically, as the money paid was his. He presented the issues between
capital and labor and sided with capital. He stated the fact that the
first shall be last, but said nothing to remedy that unfortunate
situation. He did not explain how workers could obtain proper
compensation for their labor.

Jesus assumed a fair attitude when he said, "The labourer is worthy of
his hire", and, "It is enough for the disciple to be as his master, and
the servant as his lord", but he continued with doubtful logic: "If they
have called the master of the house Beelzebub, how much more shall they
call them of his household", implying that if an employer is
worldly-minded his servants will be even worse.

Little respect is shown for employees in the remark, "The hireling
fleeth, because he is an hireling, and careth not for the sheep."[2]
Probably in those days as now many an employee stuck to his post nobly
to do his duty.

The meaning is obscure in his other comment upon an employer who told
his tired servant to serve his master first, ending with the enigma, "We
are unprofitable servants: we have done that which was our duty to
do."[3]


_Usury_

In the parable of the talents the servant who did not put his money out
at usury to make profits was condemned: "And cast ye the unprofitable
servant into outer darkness: there shall be weeping and gnashing of
teeth."[4] Punishment was to be severe in Jesus' program; the
disobedient servant "shall be beaten with many stripes." Jesus did not
advise leniency in such instances except that "he that knew not, and did
commit things worthy of stripes, shall be beaten with few stripes."[5]
In his estimation the servant was a slave to be punished corporeally by
his master, even if ignorant of his wrong-doing.

A Dr. Taylor, former Yale College theologian, is reported to have said:
"I have no doubt that if Jesus Christ were now on earth he would, under
certain circumstances, become a slaveholder." A Southern divine in 1860
could well maintain that slavery was approved in both Old and New
Testaments, but no Christian would now impute slaveholding to Jesus. The
standard of human relationships has improved since slaveholding days in
America. The modern attitude toward servants, though by no means
perfect, is superior to the relationships between master and servants
accepted by Jesus. Slavery was the custom of the times and Jesus did not
rise above it.

In the parable of the unmerciful servant[6] Jesus taught the duty of
forgiveness. He rightly rebuked the servant who oppressed his
subordinates after being well treated by his lord. But the punishment
suggested by Jesus for the abominable conduct was extremely harsh: "And
his lord was wroth and delivered him to the tormentors, till he should
pay all that was due unto him." Torture for criminals was thus taught by
Jesus.

Jesus, apprenticed to his father in his youth, never did any practical
work so far as we know. He lived on the charity of others, setting an
example that would bring trouble to anyone who followed in his train. If
anything, he was an agitator, a peripatetic propagandist, teaching what
he believed right but not working to support himself and therefore not
being a good example for the workaday world today.


_Economics_

Nothing in the teachings of Jesus was more definite than his
denunciation of riches.

"Lay not up for yourselves treasures upon earth ... A rich man shall
hardly enter into the kingdom of heaven ... It is easier for a camel to
go through the eye of a needle, than for a rich man to enter into the
kingdom of God ... The rich man also died, and was buried; and in hell
he lifted up his eyes, being in torments ... Woe unto you that are
rich."

These strictures upon the rich appear somewhat severe, and Jesus went
much farther, condemning even ordinary thrift and precaution.[7]

According to Acts ii, 44-45 and iv, 32, "All that believed were together
and had all things common; and sold their possessions and goods, and
parted them to all men, as every man had need ... Neither said any of
them that aught of the things which he possessed was his own; but they
had all things common."

It is to be presumed that the disciples practiced this communism at the
instruction of Jesus. If Jesus approved of communism was he right or
wrong?

"Blessed be ye poor."[8]

Poverty is not a blessing but a curse. Jesus taught the theory that the
poor would be rich hereafter while the rich would be in hell.


_Punishment for Debts_

We have seen that Jesus expected an unjust servant to be tormented until
he paid in full. There are also other evidences that he approved of
imprisonment for debt. "Agree with thine adversary quickly, while thou
art in the way with him; lest at any time the adversary deliver thee to
the judge, and the judge deliver thee to the officer, and thou be cast
into prison. Verily I say unto thee, Thou shalt by no means come out
thence, till thou hast paid the uttermost farthing."[9]

A legislator who patterned his life after Jesus would be justified in
enacting laws imprisoning for debt and scourging for misdemeanors.

Some may say that the sentiments expressed by Jesus were not mistakes
but merely presented the customs of his day. Possibly he did not intend
to advise all that he seemed to approve; but if Jesus was a practical
and prophetic guide he should have made it clear that he did not
sanction the actions he apparently commended.

In the parable of the pounds the nobleman, seemingly with the approval
of Jesus, denounced the servant as wicked who did not put his lord's
money in the bank to draw interest.[10] And in the parable of the
talents the lord rewarded those who had made 100 per cent profit through
speculation.[11]

Another contradiction of his theory of the blessedness of poverty was
his promise that those who followed him "shall receive a hundredfold now
in this time, houses, and brethren, and sisters, and mothers, and
children, and lands, with persecutions; and in the world to come eternal
life."[12]

Finally, Jesus stated the unfortunate truth, "Whosoever hath, to him
shall be given, and he shall have more abundance: but whosoever hath
not, from him shall be taken even that he hath."[13] If Jesus did not
approve of that worldly method of distribution, he could have denounced
its injustice instead of leaving the comment as if it expressed his own
policy.


_Healing_

Many Christians value Jesus most for his healing powers, but Jesus
looked upon disease almost as he did upon demoniacal possession, as
something evil that could be cast out. "But that ye may know that the
Son of man hath power on earth to forgive sins (then saith he to the
sick of the palsy) Arise, take up thy bed, and go into thine house."[14]
There was confusion in his mind between sin and sickness.

Jesus healed leprosy and palsy by touching the sick person; he healed
the servant of the centurion by absent treatment, and restored sight by
spitting on the eyes[15] or anointing them with clay made with
spittle[16], or by requiring faith.[17] He healed a withered hand, cured
impediments in speech and deafness, all without medical applications,
even replacing an ear severed by a sword.[18]

Christian Scientists practice the same methods with confidence in
success, but medical and surgical treatment are the most reliable means
of effecting cures, disappointing as they are. If Jesus could cure
disease, it was remiss of him not to instruct men definitely in his
methods so that the suffering from illness that has afflicted the world
could have been averted.

Jesus did not isolate the germ of leprosy, or establish any practicable
method of preventing disease. He has been of less value to the world as
a healer than Pasteur, Lister, Koch, or Walter Reed.

Some Christians will say that Jesus did not tell us how to avoid illness
because man needs to be chastened by pain. If that is correct, if pain
and disease are sent by God and are consciously permitted by Jesus, sick
people should be allowed to suffer instead of trying to heal them.


_Peace_

Jesus has been called the Prince of Peace, but the weight of his
testimony is not on the side of absolute pacifism. With his view of
rendering unto Caesar the things that are Caesar's, it is possible that
he would have advised young men to obey the state and enlist, or accept
the draft, whenever their country called.

On November 12, 1931, Rev. Dr. T. Andrew Caraker said at a banquet of
the American Legion in Baltimore that if Jesus Christ had lived in 1917
He would have been the first to volunteer in the American army, the
first to wear a gas mask, shoulder a rifle and enter the trenches.

Other ministers derive from the same gospels the belief that Jesus would
not have stabbed Germans with a bayonet. Nor would Jesus have advised
others to fight if he had been unwilling to fight himself.

Most of the sayings of Jesus regarding violence or non-resistance were
intended to apply chiefly to personal relationships; he said little of
international strife. What he did say showed placid acceptance of the
war system:

"And ye shall hear of wars and rumours of wars: see that ye be not
troubled: for all these things must come to pass, but the end is not
yet. For nation shall rise against nation, and kingdom against
kingdom."[19]

"And when ye shall hear of wars and rumours of wars, be ye not troubled:
for such things must needs be; but the end shall not be yet. For nation
shall rise against nation, and kingdom against kingdom."[20]

"But when ye shall hear of wars and commotions, be not terrified: for
these things must first come to pass; but the end is not by and by. Then
said he unto them, Nation shall rise against nation, and kingdom against
kingdom."[21]

These verses have a more direct bearing on war as we now know it than
any of his other sayings. They show his belief in the inevitability of
war. Apparently he did not feel himself competent to counteract general
mass militarism. He offered no program for arbitration of international
disputes, no substitute for war between nations, no policy of war
resistance.

When Jesus advised non-resistance, saying to his follower, "Put up again
thy sword into his place: for all they that take the sword shall perish
with the sword,"[22] he was merely stating the danger of using violence,
not the immorality of employing force. In fact, he commanded his
disciples to take the very sword which he later told them to sheathe:
"He that hath no sword, let him sell his garment, and buy one ... And
they said, Lord, behold, here are two swords. And he said unto them, It
is enough."[23]

Thus Jesus, the supposed non-resistant, prepared his followers with
swords. These swords were for defense, and when the time came he
repudiated even that use of the weapons, but, nevertheless, he armed his
disciples instead of adhering to his principle of non-resistance. He did
not set a positive example of disarmament.

Jesus said: "Blessed are the peacemakers ... love your enemies ... Have
peace one with another ... On earth peace, good will toward men ...
Peace I leave with you, my peace I give unto you ... These things have I
spoken unto you that in me ye might have peace ... Resist not evil: but
whosoever shall smite thee on thy right cheek, turn to him the other
also."

Other remarks of Jesus favored violence: "Think not that I am come to
send peace on earth: I came not to send peace, but a sword."[24]
"Suppose ye that I am come to give peace on earth? I tell you, Nay; but
rather division."[25] "But those mine enemies, which would not that I
should reign over them, bring hither, and slay them before me."[26] "My
kingdom is not of this world: if my kingdom were of this world, then
would my servants fight, that I should not be delivered to the
Jews."[27] "When a strong man armed keepeth his palace, his goods are in
peace: but when a stronger than he shall come upon him, and overcome
him, he taketh from him all his armour wherein he trusted, and divideth
his spoils."[28] "And when he had made a scourge of small cords, he
drove them all out of the temple."[29]

In determining whether or not Jesus was a promoter of peace it is only
reasonable to review everything that he said or did relating to the use
of violence, giving equal weight to every verse. We cannot accept one
statement and reject the others. The conclusion reached must be that
Jesus was inconsistent in advocating both non-resistance and the use of
force. He took diametrically opposed positions, the use of swords and
scourges and non-resistance being mutually exclusive. Jesus preached
non-resistance and at the same time armed his retainers with two swords.
He advocated turning the other cheek but did not criticize war.
Therefore, pacifists and militarists, with their opposite philosophies,
should both admit that at times Jesus was mistaken.


_Marriage_

Jesus occasionally eulogized marriage: "For this cause shall a man leave
father and mother, and shall cleave to his wife: and they twain shall be
one flesh ... What therefore God hath joined together, let not man put
asunder."[30]


_Celibacy_

On other occasions he made remarks which indicated his preference for
celibacy as the higher state, the one he adopted for himself. "In the
resurrection they neither marry, nor are given in marriage, but are as
the angels of God in heaven."[31] "The children of this world marry, and
are given in marriage: but they which shall be accounted worthy to
obtain that world, and the resurrection from the dead, neither marry,
nor are given in marriage."[32] "I say unto you, That whosoever looketh
on a woman to lust after her hath committed adultery with her already in
his heart."[33] "There are some eunuchs which were so born from their
mother's womb: and there are some eunuchs, which were made eunuchs of
men: and there be eunuchs, which have made themselves eunuchs for the
kingdom of heaven's sake. He that is able to receive it, let him receive
it."[34] "There is no man that hath left ... wife, or children for the
kingdom of God's sake, who shall not receive manifold more in this
present time, and in the world to come life everlasting."[35]

Jesus referred to the absence of marriage in heaven, the ideal realm.
Paul's testimony adds to the evidence that Jesus considered celibacy
preferable to any form of sex expression, even marriage.


_Adultery_

On the other hand, Jesus was tolerant of sex offenses. He chatted in a
friendly manner with the woman of Samaria, saying: "Thou hast had five
husbands; and he whom thou now hast is not thy husband."[36] And about
the woman taken in adultery he said: "He that is without sin among you,
let him first cast a stone at her ... Neither do I condemn thee: go and
sin no more."[37] "The harlots go into the kingdom of God before
you."[38]


_Divorce_

Jesus sanctioned divorce. His followers are so annoyed at this fact that
they frequently quote the verse on the subject with the offensive clause
omitted. The text reads: "It hath been said, Whosoever shall put away
his wife, let him give her a writing of divorcement: But I say unto you,
That whosoever shall put away his wife, saving for the cause of
fornication, causeth her to commit adultery: and whosoever shall marry
her that is divorced committeth adultery."[39] Again in Matthew xix, 9,
he makes the same exception. It is evident, therefore, that Jesus
permitted divorce for one cause. If the wife was unfaithful the husband
could divorce her, but otherwise no matter how unhappy the couple might
be, they must remain married.

The admirable leniency of Jesus toward sex offenders, and his permission
to divorce, must seem like mistakes to churchmen who consider
extramarital sex relations the unforgivable sin. And everyone must see
the danger of having our judges adopt as a principle of justice the
dismissal of offenders on the ground that the prosecutors have also
sinned.

A Christian girl of today would not be encouraged by the most zealous
religious parents to marry a man exactly like Jesus.


_Faulty Judgment_

Jesus selected Judas to be the treasurer of the apostles' joint funds,
but later admitted his error, saying: "Have I not chosen you twelve, and
one of you is a devil? He spake of Judas Iscariot the son of Simon: for
it was he that should betray him, being one of the twelve."[40]

Jesus erroneously supposed that "salvation is of the Jews."[41] "Go not
into the way of the Gentiles, and into any city of the Samaritans enter
ye not: but go rather to the lost sheep of the house of Israel."[42] A
nationalistic and partial spirit is expressed in these sentences, a
spirit that has been followed to the extent that Jesus would not be
permitted to enter America if he applied for a visa.


_Unconvincing_

Jesus failed in his mission to save the world. He made the supreme
sacrifice in vain. His method of proving his divinity did not convince
his hearers: "But though he had done so many miracles before them, yet
they believed not on him."[43] "For neither did his brethren believe in
him."[44] After he had healed many, cast out unclean spirits and
appointed his twelve apostles to do likewise, his friends "went out to
lay hold on him: for they said, He is beside himself."[45]

Jesus admitted his impotence as a human being when he said, "I can of
mine own self do nothing."[46] Even with the assistance of his Father he
did not accomplish what he set out to do.


_Prohibition_

The miracle of turning water into wine, providing one hundred gallons of
wine after the people at the party had "well drunk", must appear to
prohibitionists like a mistake on the part of Jesus. Many Methodists
and Baptists would have preferred to have him turn the wine into water;
yet they will not admit that Jesus made a mistake.


_Lack of Experience_

So far as the gospels relate, Jesus never had any experience with three
of the chief difficulties of human life--sex, earning a living and
illness. He was therefore less able to explain those relationships than
one who has struggled through in the customary manner of mankind. To
take the inexperienced Jesus as our guide in practical living would be
like a traveller who was planning a trip over perilous mountains and
engaged as a guide a man who had never crossed the mountains.

As Jesus believed that the end of the world was approaching, and as he
revealed no information about the future, his teachings should be taken
as applying solely to his own time. A divinity living now would preach
far differently from the inadequate doctrines of Jesus.

       *       *       *       *       *

The abandonment of reliance upon a Jesus who has not changed in nineteen
hundred years, in favor of an Evolutionary philosophy that requires
constant change, leads to a new conception of the world and its
possibilities for man. A person who has thought himself out of
antiquated theology may be expected to have an open mind towards the
betterment of human customs.

Every improvement in human relationships originates secularly and is
adopted by the Church only after a bitter struggle. Faith in Jesus is a
reactionary force. The Christian opposes change in the creations of God;
the Evolutionist seeks to alter every unsatisfactory condition. The
Evolutionist is more responsive than the orthodox Christian to proposals
for promoting the happiness of the human race. Many liberals have
abandoned conservatism because they saw the hypocrisy in Christianity.


FOOTNOTES:

[1] Matt. xx, 1-16.

[2] John x, 13.

[3] Luke xvii, 10.

[4] Matt. xxv, 30.

[5] Luke xii, 47-48.

[6] Matt. xviii, 23-34.

[7] Matt. vi, 25-31, discussed under the Sermon on the Mount.

[8] Luke vi, 20.

[9] Matt. v, 25-26.

[10] Luke xix, 23.

[11] Matt. xxv, 20.

[12] Mark x, 30.

[13] Matt. xiii, 12.

[14] Matt. ix, 6.

[15] Mark viii, 23.

[16] John ix, 6.

[17] Mark x, 52.

[18] Luke xxii, 51.

[19] Matt. xxiv, 6-7.

[20] Mark xiii, 7-8.

[21] Luke xxi, 9-10.

[22] Matt. xxvi, 52.

[23] Luke xxii, 36-38.

[24] Matt. x, 34.

[25] Luke xii, 51.

[26] Luke xix, 27.

[27] John xviii, 36.

[28] Luke xi, 21-22.

[29] John ii, 15.

[30] Matt. xix, 5-6.

[31] Matt. xxii, 30.

[32] Luke xx, 34-35.

[33] Matt. v, 28.

[34] Matt. xix, 12.

[35] Luke xviii, 29-30.

[36] John iv, 18.

[37] John viii, 7-11.

[38] Matt. xxi, 31.

[39] Matt. v, 31-32.

[40] John vi, 70-71.

[41] John iv, 22.

[42] Matt. x, 5-6.

[43] John xii, 37.

[44] John vii, 5.

[45] Mark iii, 21.

[46] John v, 30.




AN INFERIOR PROTOTYPE


Orthodox Christians accept both Old and New Testaments as authority for
their actions, whereas Modernists are not much concerned with the
commands of Jehovah but maintain that Jesus is the pattern for their
lives. Religious liberals feel that the troubles of the world come
largely from failure to follow the teachings of the Nazarene. They look
upon him as the perfect example of what a man should be. In their
opinion, if everyone would act as Jesus did all would be well.

On December 7, 1931, Dr. Henry Van Dyke preached at the Brick
Presbyterian Church, New York City, that the way to end the financial
depression was to act as Jesus would: "We can judge only by what he did
and said in the first century, an age not so different from our own, an
age of unsettlement, violence, drunkenness and license. Christ would
tell us not to yield to panic.... Christ would not tell us to join any
political party or social group...."

Such a sermon sounds encouraging but, as a matter of fact, Jesus has not
shown any of his ministers how to end the depression. To trust him for
guidance in our modern world is to pin faith on an incompetent
instructor. We can learn how to end the depression by examining the
records of our own time and by correcting the errors that have been
made. It is not safe to rely upon a person who had no knowledge of
America's practical needs and whose acts and advice regarding worldly
affairs in Jerusalem fell short of the best ethical values.

In this treatise it has been shown that Jesus made mistakes. Every
instance cited may not appeal to all readers as worthy of criticism, but
there can be no doubt in the mind of any honest thinker that several at
least of Jesus' ideas were erroneous. His theology was filled with
superstitions, his cosmology was that of the pre-scientific era, he
expected the end of the world within a generation, his conception of sin
was theological rather than ethical, he failed to convince his hearers
by his oratory, he exaggerated the results from prayer and he related
parables that gave a false sense of values.

Now we shall turn to his personal character and teachings to see if he
was always the meek, gentle soul portrayed by the conventional Christ.


_Cursing Nature_

The act in Jesus' life that has been most difficult for theologians to
explain was the cursing of the fig tree. The tree was created to bear
fruit in the Summer, but when Jesus found it without fruit in the
Spring, he cursed it so that it withered away.

"Now in the morning, as he returned into the city, and when he saw a fig
tree in the way, he came to it, and found nothing thereon, but leaves
only, and said unto it, Let no fruit grow on thee henceforth for ever.
And presently the fig tree withered away."[1] "For the time of figs was
not yet."[2]

This episode involves several mistakes--ignorance of the seasons;
destruction of a profitable food-producing tree; exhibition of temper
when thwarted, and giving false information regarding man's power to
effect physical changes by a curse.[3]

If Jesus acted unwisely in this one instance and was right in all
others, he is neither an infallible God nor a perfect pattern for
mankind.


_Forgiveness_

The conventional Jesus is emblematic of supreme kindness and
forgiveness, but in reality he was far from lenient in many instances,
nor did he advocate forgiveness for certain offenses.

"Moreover if thy brother shall trespass against thee ... tell it unto
the church: but if he neglect to hear the church, let him be unto thee
as a heathen man and a publican."[4]

In the parable of Dives and Lazarus, Abraham was represented as
justified in not forgiving the rich man tortured in hell, or even in
saving the rich man's brothers as requested by the victim of Jesus'
policy of punishment.

Again Jesus said: "Whosoever shall deny me before men, him will I also
deny before my Father."[5] "Whosoever shall blaspheme against the Holy
Ghost hath never forgiveness."[6]

All the wicked were condemned by Jesus to eternal punishment with no
chance of forgiveness.


_Vituperation_

Jesus was often vehement in his language to an extent hardly compatible
with gentleness of character.

"O generation of vipers! how can ye, being evil, speak good things?"[7]

"Woe unto you, hypocrites, for ye compass sea and land to make one
proselyte, and when he is made, ye make him two-fold more the child of
hell than yourselves."[8]

"Ye serpents, ye generation of vipers, how can ye escape the damnation
of hell?"[9]

"If I should say I know him not, I shall be a liar like unto you."[10]

"All that ever came before me are thieves and robbers."[11]

"Ye fools and blind."[12]

This language may have been necessary, in Jesus' opinion, to convince
his hearers of their sins, but such vituperation does not become a
modern ethical teacher.


_Destruction of Property_

Two acts of Jesus, consistent with his disregard of worldly goods, were
destructive in character.

"And there was a good way off from them a herd of many swine feeding. So
the devils besought him, saying, If thou cast us out, suffer us to go
away into the herd of swine. And he said unto them, Go. And when they
were come out, they went into the herd of swine: and, behold, the whole
herd of swine ran violently down a steep place into the sea, and
perished in the waters."[13]

Jesus did what the devils requested, cruelly killing two thousand
inoffensive valuable animals that belonged to other people.

"Jesus went up to Jerusalem, and found in the temple those that sold
oxen and sheep and doves, and the changers of money sitting: and when he
had made a scourge of small cords, he drove them all out of the temple,
and the sheep and the oxen; and poured out the changers' money, and
overthrew the tables."

Jesus has been defended for other acts on the ground that he was living
in less civilized times than our own, but here he is seen offending both
ancient and modern sensibilities. The destruction of the swine and the
routing of the merchants were sensational and erratic exhibitions. If
reformers today should destroy herds of animals, except to protect
public health by due process of law, or overthrow banks, they would be
liable to arrest in any city of Christendom. Therefore the consensus of
opinion denies exoneration to Jesus for his spasmodic resort to direct
action.


_Egotism_

If Jesus was not God, but merely the ideal man, his estimate of himself
was excessive. In addition to his remarks already quoted there are many
other instances of an exaggerated ego.

"If any man come to me, and hate not his father, and mother, and wife,
and children, and brethren, and sisters, yea, and his own life also, he
cannot be my disciple."[14]

"Whosoever liveth and believeth in me shall never die."[15]

"If ye believe not that I am he, ye shall die in your sins."[16]

"I am the light of the world."[17]

"I am the Son of God."[18]

"I am the resurrection and the life."[19]

If Jesus was correct in claiming that he was the Messiah, if he could
control the elements and send people to heaven or hell, he was justified
in any extreme remarks; but not if he were merely a man. Every person is
entitled to have as good an opinion of himself as his character and
ability warrant, but expressions of his own worth are unseemly even if
true, and are inexcusable if exaggerated. As Jesus himself said (though
this authority is only for believers) testimony about oneself is
unreliable.

Jesus not only claimed to be more than a man, he threatened his hearers
with death if they did not agree with him. All of which might be
permissible if he were God, but was an egotistical illusion if he was
merely human.


_Lack of Courtesy_

Jesus did not always exhibit the courtesy one would expect of a
gentleman, or even of a nature's nobleman.

The first instance of lack of consideration was when he slipped away
from his parents, causing them unnecessary anxiety: "Son, why hast thou
thus dealt with us? behold thy father and I have sought thee
sorrowing."[20] He had remained behind to study Hebrew theology and did
not tell his parents, presumably because he thought they would not have
permitted the venture.

Another instance was found in his daily life:

"A certain Pharisee besought him to dine with him: and he went in, and
sat down to meat. And when the Pharisee saw it, he marvelled that he had
not first washed before dinner. And the Lord said unto him, Now do ye
Pharisees make clean the outside of the cup and the platter; but your
inward part is full of ravening and wickedness. Ye fools ..."[21]

Jesus had not only failed to wash as was expected of a guest, but
defended his uncleanliness and abused his host.

At another time Jesus was discourteous to his mother:

"And when they wanted wine, the mother of Jesus saith unto him, They
have no wine. Jesus saith unto her, Woman, what have I to do with
thee?"[22]

Jesus was apparently annoyed at his mother's interference, though he
followed her suggestion. He did not set a good example for children in
addressing their mothers.

When the Syrophenician woman asked him to help her daughter, "Jesus
saith unto her, Let the children first be filled: for it is not meet to
take the children's bread, and to cast it unto the dogs. And she
answered and said unto him, Yes, Lord: yet the dogs under the table eat
of the children's crumbs. And he said unto her, For this saying go thy
way; the devil is gone out of thy daughter."[23]

Jesus practically admitted that he had made a mistake in speaking
unkindly to a Gentile. Her clever answer induced him to change his
decision. A physician who called a stranger's child a dog would now be
considered brutal even in a free hospital.

"And another of his disciples said unto him, Lord, suffer me first to go
and bury my father. But Jesus said unto him, Follow me; and let the dead
bury their dead."[24]

Jesus could have allowed the man to attend his father's funeral and
follow him later. Would not that have set a better precedent?

When Peter intervened to protect Jesus, the latter "turned, and said
unto Peter, Get thee behind me, Satan: thou art an offence unto me."[25]

Even though Jesus was determined to go on with the sacrifice, he could
have been more appreciative of his best friend's suggestion.


_Unethical Advice_

When the unjust steward cheated his employer, Jesus gave the following
remarkable advice:

"And the lord commended the unjust steward, because he had done wisely:
for the children of this world are in their generation wiser than the
children of light. And I say unto you, Make to yourselves friends of
the mammon of unrighteousness; that, when ye fail, they may receive you
into everlasting habitations."[26]

This passage should be read again before deciding whether Jesus advised
opportunism rather than morality. The words must be taken as they are;
no interpretation can be based upon the assumption that Jesus was always
right and therefore meant something different from what he said.


_Sermon on the Mount_

Many Christians say that they care nothing for theology; that the Sermon
on the Mount contains all that is necessary for a religious life, being
a perfect system of ethics.

The Sermon on the Mount does contain many admirable principles, but also
some that are inferior to present standards. Few of the people who
praise this Sermon would think it proper to abide by all the teachings
therein. Christian parents do not wish their children to follow either
the letter or the spirit of this famous preachment. It begins in the
fifth chapter of Matthew.

"Blessed are the poor in spirit." Is it better to be poor in spirit than
rich and eager in spirit? Being poor in spirit is to be faint of heart.
This is bad advice, is it not?

"Blessed are they that mourn, for they shall be comforted." This means
that those who mourn on earth will be comforted in heaven; but now that
life on earth has assumed greater importance, so far as our daily
conduct is concerned, than life in heaven, the philosophy of gloom is
unfortunate. Jesus preached acceptance of unhappiness as the common lot
of man; he should not therefore be credited with providing happiness on
earth. His urge to rejoice was usually in anticipation of good things to
come in the next world. He preached sorrow for all here rather than the
greater happiness for the greater number.

"There shall be famines, and pestilences, and earthquakes in divers
places. All these are the beginning of sorrows. Then shall they deliver
you up to be afflicted, and shall kill you: and ye shall be hated of all
nations for my name's sake ... and because iniquity shall abound, the
love of many shall wax cold. But he that shall endure unto the end, the
same shall be saved."[27]

"Blessed are ye that weep now: for ye shall laugh."[28]

The beatitude, "Blessed are the meek: for they shall inherit the earth"
is of doubtful accuracy or value.

The commands to pluck out an eye or cut off a hand may not have been
intended literally, although it does appear as if Jesus referred to the
physical body, and men have often so interpreted these doubtful
instructions.

Jesus said that "Whosoever shall marry her that is divorced committeth
adultery", which is no longer true. Those who permit remarriage after
divorce should admit an error on Jesus' part.

"But I say unto you, That ye resist not evil." This instruction should
be reversed, should it not? Evil should be resisted in every possible
way that does not involve evil in itself. What modern ethical teacher
will say that evil should not be resisted, or that this advice of Jesus
was perfection? If his instruction was intended to refer to physical
resistance, then no righteous person should fight in any war, no police
should be delegated to arrest criminals. If the phrase has merely a
spiritual meaning, it is certainly unsound advice, for evil should be
overcome by good.

A fanatical attitude towards the law was recommended when Jesus said:
"If any man will sue thee at the law, and take away thy coat, let him
have thy cloak also." Extreme generosity and non-resistance are taught,
but the illustration was not well thought out, for if the man had
already won his suit and taken the coat, it is evident that the owner of
the coat had put up a legal fight instead of giving away his coat and
cloak as Jesus implies he should. Yielding more than a legal opponent
wins in court is not compatible with defending the suit, nor is it a
principle that would meet the approval of most of Jesus' followers
today.

"Be ye therefore perfect, even as your Father which is in heaven is
perfect." If Jesus referred to Jehovah as his Father in heaven, the
standard of perfection advocated was very low, for Jehovah was, as
Thomas Jefferson put it, "cruel, vindictive, capricious and unjust."

The Lord's Prayer is not the simple, clear, devotional petition that is
usually supposed. Take it literally, as was undoubtedly intended, and
its irrelevance to actual life is at once apparent.

"Our Father which art in heaven, Hallowed be thy name. Thy kingdom come.
Thy will be done in earth, as it is in heaven." This is a proper
invocation only if there is a heaven in which God's will is done. None
such has been discovered.

"Give us this day our daily bread" indicates that God would not give our
daily sustenance without being asked, whereas there is no apparent
distinction in actual living between those who pray for bread and those
who do not.

"And forgive us our debts, as we forgive our debtors" intimates that
divine forgiveness is not to be superior to that of men.

"And lead us not into temptation"--as if God were anxious to lead us
there and would be deterred by our prayer.

It may seem like petty cavil to criticize the prayer that has been
acclaimed for many centuries as ideal, but, seriously, what valuable
principle for guidance through life does the Lord's Prayer contain? Do
its requests represent the best modern conception of prayer as an inward
aspiration rather than as petitionary? Is it not vain repetition to
recite it again and again?

The general idea of offering prayer in order to obtain various needs
presents the difficulty of reconciling the conception of an omnipotent,
all-foreseeing God with the contradictory theory of a Father who
requires prayer before caring for his children, an almighty God who will
be turned from his course by human petitions. Man can do wonders in the
way of conquering nature, but he has not been able to alter natural
laws, nor is there any evidence that such laws have been changed at any
time in answer to prayer.

If the Lord's Prayer is not essential for man's welfare in the world, we
may conclude that Jesus over-emphasized its importance.

One of the most important portions of the Sermon on the Mount is the
advice regarding worldly possessions. Nothing in the teaching of Jesus
is more definite than his instructions regarding wealth. He strikes an
admirable note when he says, "What is a man profited if he gain the
whole world and lose his own soul? ... A man's life consisteth not in
the abundance of the things which he possesseth." This general principle
is sadly needed in the modern money-seeking world, but the teachings of
Jesus on economics go much further, far beyond anything the best people
of today are willing to follow.

"Take no thought for your life, what ye shall eat, or what ye shall
drink; nor yet for your body, what ye shall put on ... Take therefore no
thought for the morrow."[29]

These commands, taken literally as Jesus intended, would lead to
infinite trouble. Men are obliged to take thought for the morrow; if
they do not they will fail to survive. In Jesus' plan provision for the
earthly future was of no importance because of the imminence of eternal
life, but now it is considered one's duty to provide for old age.

This mistake of Jesus cannot be explained away by saying that Jesus was
right and that man falls short of the counsel of perfection given by
the Master. No, there are few indeed who will say that it would be right
to shape their financial life as Jesus advised. If they do not believe
it right to follow his instructions, definite as they are on this
subject, they must admit that he was wrong. Either thrift is now
unrighteous, or Jesus is not a dependable guide for modern life.

The following instructions have little meaning now except for Roman
Catholics. "But thou, when thou fastest, anoint thy head, and wash thy
face, that thou appear not unto men to fast, but unto thy Father which
is in secret: and thy Father which seeth in secret shall reward thee
openly."

Another portion of the Sermon holds out false hopes that cannot be
substantiated: "For everyone that asketh receiveth; and he that seeketh
findeth." Is there any virtue in thus deceiving the people regarding the
possibilities of prayer?

"Therefore all things whatsoever ye would that men should do to you, do
ye even so to them." This is the famous Golden Rule that has been
heralded as one of the most original portions of Jesus' teachings. But
Jesus admitted that he did not first state this rule when he said, "for
this is the law and the prophets."[30]

Confucius, born in 551 B.C., several times announced the rule, "What you
do not like when done to yourself, do not to others." This negative
statement is less effective than the Jewish rule, but both are admirable
regardless of who first formulated them. The Golden Rule is as valuable
coming from the Hebrew fathers as if Jesus had originated it.

The Golden Rule, however, is not perfect. It is one of the best rules of
the ancients, showing the desirability of reciprocity, but it does not
demand that our desires be always just, nor does it insure that what we
want done to ourselves will always be what others most need. It would be
consistent with the Golden Rule for a convivial man to entertain his
prohibition friends at a speakeasy, or for a Catholic to take his
atheist guests to daily mass. Possibly an even better rule than judging
others by ourselves would be to do unto others what best pleases them.


_Inconsistency_

"The Son of man goeth as it is written of him: but woe unto that man by
whom the Son of man is betrayed! it had been good for that man if he had
not been born."[31]

Apparently the arrangement between Jehovah and Jesus was that Jesus
should not give himself up as a sacrifice voluntarily but should be
betrayed by someone else; and yet, although the betrayal was desired,
the man who assisted was to be condemned.

The sacrificial plan for salvation was continued to the end in order
that "the Scriptures of the prophets might be fulfilled."[32] The
scriptures were Jewish, so this is additional proof that Jesus, rejected
by the Jews, considered himself the predicted Jewish Messiah. While the
Jews expected a Messiah, there is no clear prediction of Jesus in the
Old Testament.


_Fear_

Jesus said, "Be not afraid of them that kill the body"; but when
threatened with bodily injury himself, he was afraid. "Then took they up
stones to cast at him: but Jesus hid himself."[33] "Then the Pharisees
went out, and held a council against him, how they might destroy him.
But when Jesus knew it, he withdrew himself from thence."[34]

This avoidance of physical injury may have been due to a desire to
postpone his end until the proper time, as indicated by "Mine hour is
not yet come", but when the time did come, Jesus did not bear his
approaching death bravely, as Socrates did when about to drink the cup
of hemlock. Jesus was much afraid, "and prayed, saying, Father, if thou
be willing, remove this cup from me: nevertheless, not my will but thine
be done."[35]

He was resolved to go through with the painful experience at any cost
but was much more frightened than many a mortal man, though he had a
greater cause to sustain him than martyrs who have suffered
uncomplainingly; for he believed that his sacrifice would save the
world: "and there appeared an angel unto him from heaven, strengthening
him. And being in an agony he prayed more earnestly: and his sweat was
as it were great drops of blood falling down to the ground."[36]

After saying, "The hour is come, that the Son of man should be glorified
... He that loveth his life shall lose it", he again showed terror: "Now
is my soul troubled; and what shall I say? Father, save me from this
hour, but for this cause came I unto this hour."[37]

It is to be noted that God did not answer the prayer of Jesus, though
Jesus had said that God would always answer prayers in his name. Jesus
recognized his failure to obtain the answer, saying on the cross, "My
God, my God, why hast thou forsaken me?"[38]


_Failure_

Many a good man is a failure from a worldly point of view, but failure
is not what one would wish to copy. Jesus sought to save the world.
Surely no one looking at the world today can say that he succeeded. His
plan of salvation was a failure; it did not work out as Jehovah and
Jesus intended. An ideal teacher is needed now almost as much as two
thousand years ago. If the world is gradually improving, as seems
probable, it is in spite of the superstitions of the past, not because
of them.

At one time Jesus denied his own perfection, saying: "Why callest thou
me good? there is none good but one, that is, God."[39]

Christian parents who hold Jesus up to their children as a paragon would
not wish their sons to grow up to be just like Jesus. He is not an
acceptable prototype.

Jesus did not provide the knowledge so much needed by man to enable him
to shape his course through life. No one knows how to live correctly,
how best to meet each situation, what action is suited to the occasion.
Jesus did not tell us what to do. His sayings are interpreted in many
different ways. He failed to predict the needs of the future.

Jesus did not explain relations between man and wife, nor between
employer and employee, nor how to educate children, nor how to preserve
health, nor how to make a living, nor how to prevent war, poverty and
suffering. Jesus gave little practical information, and his spiritual
advice was not clearly enough expressed to enable man to apply it to
modern conditions. Jesus neglected to instruct people how to live. His
knowledge of the world was less than that of the average American
citizen.


FOOTNOTES:

[1] Matt. xxi, 18-19.

[2] Mark xi, 13.

[3] Mark xi, 20-23.

[4] Matt. xviii, 15-17.

[5] Matt. x, 33.

[6] Mark iii, 29.

[7] Matt. xii, 34.

[8] Matt. xxiii, 15.

[9] Matt. xxiii, 33.

[10] John viii, 55.

[11] John x, 8.

[12] Matt. xxiii, 17.

[13] Matt. viii, 28-34; Mark v, 13; Luke viii, 26-34.

[14] Luke xiv, 26.

[15] John xi, 26.

[16] John viii, 24.

[17] John viii, 12.

[18] John x, 36.

[19] John xi, 25.

[20] Luke ii, 48.

[21] Luke xi, 37-40.

[22] John ii, 4.

[23] Mark vii, 25-29.

[24] Matt. viii, 21-22.

[25] Matt. xvi, 23.

[26] Luke xvi, 1-9.

[27] Matt. xxiv, 7-13.

[28] Luke vi, 21.

[29] Matt. vi, 25-34.

[30] Matt. vii, 12.

[31] Matt. xxvi, 24.

[32] Matt. xxvi, 56.

[33] John viii, 59.

[34] Matt. xii, 14-15.

[35] Luke xxii, 42.

[36] Luke xxii, 44.

[37] John xii, 23-27.

[38] Mark xv, 34.

[39] Matt. xix, 17.




CONCLUSION


The historicity of Jesus has been discussed in many books and pamphlets.
Whether Jesus lived or not depends upon what is meant by that phrase. If
one is satisfied that there was a peripatetic philosopher named Jesus
who was the son of a woman named Mary and who lived and taught around
Jerusalem, uttering some, but not all, of the words attributed to him,
then Jesus may be said to have lived. There can be no serious objection
to the acceptance of that Jesus as an actual personage even though he
was ignored by secular historians and though the time and place of his
birth and death are in doubt.

On the other hand, if there never was such a person as the Jesus
described in the New Testament--a man born of a virgin, superior to
natural laws, able to walk on the water, and change the course of
nature, performing miracles, casting out devils, a man who never erred,
who was crucified, rose from the dead and ascended bodily into heaven
where he now sits to judge the world--if there was no such man-God as
the Jesus of the gospels, some may hesitate to say that Jesus ever
lived.


_Jesus a Myth_

Sincere Evolutionists who discredit miracles, must needs consider the
gospel Jesus as a myth. This does not mean that Jesus had no reality,
but that the original facts have been so enlarged upon that the
principal features of his life are more fanciful than real. If you
eliminate from the life of Jesus as unhistorical his birth, his
miracles, his theological teachings, his resurrection, ascension and
messianic mission, the Christ no longer exists. Jesus would have
attracted no attention were it not for the very circumstances which
Modernists admit were mythical.


_Judged by His Works_

Whether Jesus was God, or man, or myth, he can be judged by his works,
as he himself recommended. If he is found to be perfect in word and
deed, it makes little difference whether he lived or not. As a symbol he
can be revered and copied. But if Jesus is now seen to be the product of
his times, representing the virtues and defects of his biographers, with
no vision beyond their ken, his authority is gone.

Not only will the divinity of Jesus be discredited if he was found to
have been occasionally in error, but his value as a guide to life will
be impaired. What will be the result of this radical change? None of the
beautiful ideals or sound ethical principles attributed to Jesus will
be lost. Not one saying or counsel of valuable advice need go. Not one
evil thought need take the place of that which was good. In fact, the
finest qualities of existence will be more vital in our lives when their
realization becomes of primary importance instead of being subordinate
to worship of the supernatural. Principles are superior to persons. A
dead personality remains unchanged; live ethical principles can be
developed by more complete knowledge of evolutionary processes.


_Ethical Evolution_

Evolution has been progressing along ethical as well as physical lines.
To the teachings of Jesus, once considered perfection, have been added
many newly discovered principles of value, for knowledge is cumulative.
All the best thoughts of the ages are ours forever, no matter who first
originated or expressed them.

Whatever the plan of the universe may be, it is more nearly comprehended
now than in Jesus' time. Twentieth century events are more dependable in
forming our philosophy of life than those of the first century. The
failure to grasp this fact is the death knell of orthodox religion.
Every existing religious sect has founded its spirituality upon events
supposed to have occurred in the past. Christianity depends upon the
direct creation, fall of man and life of an atoning Savior, all physical
in character. Our new metaphysics will be based upon conditions existing
today and that will be revealed by science in the future. The
geologists, embryologists, biologists and astronomers of 1932 have more
information about nature than Jesus had. On that knowledge can be
founded a system of living superior to the Sermon on the Mount.

Our own time is the most dependable era of revelation. We can safely
accept whatever stands accredited after thorough examination, including
all teachings of Jesus that are admirable. A modern person with
religious zeal has confidence that the world is ordered along consistent
lines and will respond favorably to man's best efforts to solve the true
way of living. The scientific mind and the religious spirit are
complementary. Religion, instead of being a system of handed-down
sanctity, may become an inspired revelation to each individual--a
religion of the spirit of the modern world.

As the spirit derived from Truth is superior to that based upon
credulity, the new doctrines that supplant the old may be expected to
excel any that have preceded them. Anyone may be as spiritual as the
proved facts permit.

If the world has been improving physically and ethically, we can have
confidence that whatever knowledge is necessary for our salvation is
available to each of us now. No living God has died; no great principle
has been lost. Instead of depending upon Jesus in an unthinking manner,
we must seek the Truth wherever it is found and follow wherever it may
lead regardless of consequences. This requires more courage than
professing Jesus, whose teachings can be construed to mean whatever the
reader desires. While the majority regard Jesus as an ascetic, a
reformer, opposed to business and joviality, Bruce Barton has convinced
thousands that Jesus was the great business man, rotarian and
advertiser.


_Gains, not Losses_

Among the compensations that may supplant the loss of Jesus as an ideal
are the thrill at being a pioneer in striving for the welfare of the
human race rather than for individual salvation; the satisfaction at
having a consistent creed that can be maintained against all criticism
without hypocrisy or evasion; emancipation from inhibitions required by
a supposedly divine teacher. Every pleasure is not a sin, but rejection
of theology does not imply indifference to evil. Science warns against
excess as strongly as any ancient command. The fear of natural or
man-decreed punishment in this world is as potent as the dread of
eternal torment threatened by Jesus.

If Jesus really was the sort of personage described in the Bible; if he
really was born of a virgin, controlled the elements and had power to
condemn unbelievers to eternal damnation, all people should obey his
every word. He should be followed literally; we should sell all our
possessions and take no thought for the morrow. But if Jesus was not
that sort of a person; if he was neither a supernatural God nor an
infallible man, he should not be worshipped as a redeeming Savior nor be
followed as a true guide for human conduct.

Our faith shifts with careful examination of the scriptures from belief
in Jesus to confidence that the world is a far pleasanter abode than
Jesus imagined. Without reliance upon the authority of Jesus we can
adopt a code which will prove comparatively effective in leading towards
a wholesome life.




CODE OF LIVING


1. Keep the body strong that the most efficient work may be done, the
greatest happiness obtained during life and a wholesome inheritance
passed on to future generations.

2. Cultivate the mind, learning as many important facts as possible,
striving to become expert in some particular field of endeavor.

3. Develop a scientific spirit, the essential characteristic of which is
a search for Truth in the light of evidence and reason. Do not deceive
yourself or others.

4. Base your spiritual concepts on the latest developments of Evolution.
Be prepared to change your philosophy to conform to the consensus of
scientific opinion.

5. Conduct all human relationships in a spirit of tolerance and love,
having proper consideration for others, not presuming to control their
lives.

6. Treat the opposite sex honorably, respecting their complementary
qualities, with due regard for succeeding generations.

7. Endeavor to embody in the laws of the community the spirit of equity
and progress.

8. Strive for an economic system under which each individual shall be
rewarded according to his or her value to society.

9. Avoid the use of physical force for personal revenge or national
aggrandizement, having learned from experience that reason triumphs
while brutality degrades.

10. Hold yourself in readiness to accept new revelations.

       *       *       *       *       *

Luther Burbank wrote concerning the above code on November 11, 1925:

    "_I am greatly pleased with your code of living ... The false
    ancient theology has past or is rapidly passing with intelligent
    people at the present time. It is not applicable to our conditions
    and is of no more value than a worn-out suit of clothes._"