- If you're one of the world's
2.2 billion Christians
wow, that's a lot of people.
You probably think that around 2,000 years ago
here in the Nazareth mountains,
in the Galilee region of modern Israel,
a man known as Jesus Christ was born.
You probably think of Him as the Messiah,
the son of Yahweh, the God of the Jews.
But, if you're one of the other
5 billion people on the planet,
you probably just think of Jesus
as some kind of wise man
who had a religious cult
built up around him after his death.
Or maybe you're one of those people
who believe he never even really existed
he's just some kind of literary myth,
like a Hercules or King Arthur.
But whichever camp you're in,
I think we can all agree
that Jesus is one of the most influential
and intriguing figures in all of world history.
About 40 years ago,
when I was a good little Catholic boy
going to Sunday school,
I was taught the story of Jesus.
It went something like this.
About 2,000 years ago,
a young married woman, still a virgin,
was made pregnant by the God of the Jews.
She gave birth to a baby in a barn.
And three wise men found Him by following a star
so they could worship Him
and give some gold and scented oils.
When He grew up, Jesus walked around Judea,
telling thousands of people He was God
and performing miracles,
such as magically making fish and bread appear,
turning water into wine,
and raising people from the dead.
One night, He told his friends to eat some bread,
which was His flesh
and drink some wine, which was His blood.
Then, the Jewish authorities who were angry with him,
turned him over to the Romans
who actually wanted to let Him go.
But the Jews convinced them to crucify Him.
But then a few days later,
He rose from the dead
and told His friends
that dying was secretly the plan all along
because His death wiped out the sins of the world.
His friends wrote down what happened
in a book and started a new religion.
But then, the Romans started persecuting them
until one day, the Romans changed their minds
and decided to become Christians instead.
At the end of the world,
Jesus will return to judge the living and the dead.
- To be honest when I was a little kid,
the story didn't make a lot of sense to me.
I remember thinking,
so this dude has magical powers, and he's invisible,
and watching me when I sleep at night?
It all seemed a little bit creepy.
But as an adult, I started learning more
about the history of early Christianity.
As I read the Bible more carefully,
and read the works of modern New Testament scholars
and ancient historians,
I started to realize
that the Sunday school version of the Jesus story,
was vastly different to the story
as it appears in the Bible.
The actual story is far more complicated,
and far more interesting.
So I thought I'd go out
and interview a range of world-renowned biblical scholars,
and historians and academics.
And ask them to help me tell the story,
of how Christianity
went from being some sort of fringe Jewish personality cult,
from the backwaters of the Roman empire,
to a point where it was the state religion of that empire,
wielding enormous power over the emperors themselves.
So let's get back to the Sunday school version of the story.
What do scholars think about how accurate that version is.
- Research that was happening
at the beginning of the 20th century.
A German scholar Walter Bauer,
came to the conclusion
that in fact, that picture is a very manufactured one.
- And it's not like Jesus was walking around Palestine
saying, "Hi, I'm God.
"I'm gonna die for your sins soon.
"But until then, how about I tell you
"a few good cracking Sunday school stories,
"and then afterwards you can get down with worshiping me."
That may be the basic view,
but that's not quite what happened.
So how did it happen?
How did that version become the story
most of my Christian friends seem to believe?
- A lot of Christians don't actually read the Bible.
And if they do read the Bible,
they don't read it historically.
They don't read it thinking about,
what the story is telling you
about the origins of Christianity.
- They look at this uplifting passage
or that uplifting passage.
They don't compare the Gospels to one another.
They don't look at the really weird stuff.
So they feel like they know the Bible,
but it's a very selective knowledge.
It's a sort of greatest hits
or the most uplifting,
most seemingly relevant stuff to the 21st century.
- They're looking for a single verse
that will inspire them for their journey that day.
And that's perfectly fine,
there's no criticism of that.
But the problem with that approach,
is that you're not actually reading the Bible
as it's intended to be read.
- Christians read bits,
but do they read it systematically?
Well, systematically but not necessarily
for historical reasons.
Systematically to clarify their beliefs.
- And they just sort of don't get to see,
all the really strange stuff,
all the contradictions, all the discrepancies.
- How do you go from being a religion,
that celebrates somebody who has died on a Roman cross,
to a religion that celebrates that cross
and takes that cross forward into battle?
That's the story of Christianity within 300 years.
Going from a superstition to being the state religion,
that's absolutely extraordinary.
And that is what the early Roman historians called it,
they called it a superstition.
- But before we get into the story of Jesus,
I think we need to wind the clock back a little bit,
and talk about the world
into which Christianity was born.
A long time ago,
there was a man known as Lord, Liberator, Redeemer, Savior,
simultaneously, fully human and fully divine.
The son of God and God.
The bringer of peace and salvation,
sent into the world in the form of a man
to forgive the sins of the people.
♪ Hallelujah. ♪
That's Augustus Caesar.
If you ask most people living in the Roman empire,
right about the time Jesus was born,
who the Son of God was,
most of them would have told you it was this guy.
Augustus was the adopted son
of the original JC, Julius Caesar.
The great Roman general
who was stabbed to death in 44 BCE.
After he was assassinated,
the Roman Senate declared
that he ascended into the heavens to become a god.
And Augustus as his adopted son
was therefore called?
- Divi Filius, the son of the deified.
It was new to Rome,
because it was Augustus himself,
who saw what he thought was the soul of,
or a part of Caesars' going up to the heavens.
And that's why he can then claim
that he is the son, the adopted son
not the natural son, clearly,
the son of a divinity.
Another title bestowed upon Augustus was savior,
because he ended a 100 years of civil war.
- He brought peace, he brought peace to Rome.
He brought peace to the empire.
- And then, according to tradition
somewhere around the middle of the reign of Augustus,
Jesus was born.
So several decades before Jesus even appears on the scene,
Romans are pretty familiar with the idea
that somebody can die and become a god,
or be the son of a god
and the savior of mankind.
So who exactly was Jesus?
Well, it kind of depends on who you ask.
Some scholars believe he was an apocalyptic preacher
or a political troublemaker.
Others think he was more of a wise sage,
or a hippie pacifist who preached love and brotherhood.
It's a little bit strange
that after 2,000 years,
scholars still can't agree on exactly who Jesus was.
One thing they all do agree on though,
Jesus was a Jew.
If you look at pictures of Jesus in most churches today,
you'll see a white guy with long brown hair,
neatly trimmed beard, blue eyes.
But Christianity started out as a Jewish personality cult,
Jesus was a Jew.
So he probably would have looked more like,
I don't know, DJ Khaled than Jared Leto.
He would have been a dark-skinned,
brown-eyed Palestinian.
Let's put it this way,
if Jesus returned and tried to board a plane
in the United States today
he'd probably get taken
into a little room and randomly screened
And when I say Jesus was a Jew,
I don't just mean ethnically a Jew,
I mean a religious Jew.
In fact, he was a very religious Jew,
and so were most of the early members of his sect.
- Jesus is Torah observant,
Peter is Torah observant,
James is Torah observant,
and Paul is Torah observant.
The Torah is the first five books
of the Hebrew Bible.
What Christians call, the Old Testament.
- Jesus and the guys who ran his group after he died,
Peter, the guy he left in charge,
and James, who according to tradition
was one of Jesus' brothers,
were Jews, not Christians.
And they weren't trying to start a new religion.
They weren't trying to reject Judaism,
they were just trying to fix it.
- Jesus was not only Torah observant,
he actually made the law stricter rather than looser.
The law says, "Don't commit adultery,"
Jesus says, "Don't think about it," that's harder.
The laws says, "Don't murder,"
Jesus says, "Don't be angry."
- Jesus was a first century AD Galilean Jewish prophet.
He was a prophet who believed
that God was about to intervene
decisively in human history.
- And being a religious Jew in the first century,
must have been pretty depressing.
For hundreds of years,
Jewish prophets had promised that their God, Yahweh,
really thought they were pretty, pretty special.
They were his favorite tribe.
He had their back,
and he was gonna make sure they ruled the world.
But for some reason, Yahweh hadn't delivered.
Century after century,
the Jews had been invaded and conquered.
In fact, just a few years after Jesus was born,
his homeland had finally become an official Roman province.
- Jewish people could see
that things were not going particularly well,
things were not flourishing.
They were subject to external powers,
whether they'd be the great kings, the solicit kings,
or whether it be the Romans later on.
- Instead of coming to the conclusion,
that their prophets were wrong,
or that Yahweh had lied to them,
the Jews just decided they must have disappointed Him
and He was ignoring them or not answering their prayers.
So anyway, the Jews decided they had to be better,
and make Yahweh happy with them again, but how?
- The most important thing to know,
is that there was no agreed standard,
of what being a good Jew was in the first century.
- Just like there are hundreds
of different versions of Christianity today,
and they all think that they are the right one.
We know that in the first century,
there were lots of different versions of Judaism as well.
And they were all trying to figure out
the magic trick to get them back,
into Yahweh's good book.
- This is a situation
that is eventually going to be rectified by God.
Destroy the Roman oppressors,
think end of "Raiders of the Lost Ark" for instance,
where the fire comes down and burns up all the Nazis.
That's probably the view
that a decent number of Jews had.
- Now, some Jews living in the first century,
believe that God was going to send someone to save them.
They called that person, the Messiah.
- So how do you know who's a Messiah?
Different people will give you different answers,
and there were different messianic candidates to follow.
- Oh, I'm just looking for the official guide
to knowing who the chosen one is.
I'm sure it's gotta be in here somewhere
- There's no messianic checklist in Judaism,
as if, you make sure your mother is a virgin
when you're conceived,
walk on water, raise the dead,
die a sacrificial death
come back after three days, and ascend.
Some Jews were expecting a shepherd,
others were expecting the Angel Michael,
still others were expecting a priest,
and still others, a warrior.
Some people thought John the Baptist was the Messiah,
and he doesn't fit any of those categories
- When you use the term Messiah,
Messiah is fine, it means anointed,
it means that God has anointed this person with oil.
But when you're talking about Messiah,
you're really talking about somebody
who is a king, in the line of
the greatest of all the Jewish kings, King David.
And lots of Jews believed that,
a King David-like figure,
would establish himself in Jerusalem,
and he would transform Israel.
- Restore the kingdom politically was part of that.
Bring the people back from exile,
set up the homeland again,
restore their independence, drive out the foreign invader.
Some Jews thought the Messiah
was gonna be a great warrior
to lead them to a military victory.
Others thought he might be a charismatic preacher,
who would convince the entire world
to believe in Yahweh.
Others, they didn't think about the Messiah much at all.
- Not all Jews wanted a Messiah.
Because normally if someone's going around
calling themselves a Messiah,
it's gonna lead to war,
war means death, famine, bloodshed, that type of thing.
So not everyone wanted a Messiah,
not everyone even believed in one.
- So there's a variety of expectations.
Certainly the dominant one,
is this political military figure.
- So why is this important?
Well, when Jesus is dragged
before the Roman Governor of Judea, Pontius Pilate,
the charges laid against him,
are that he's claiming to be the Christos, the Christ.
Which is just the Greek word for Messiah.
In other words, he's claiming to be the King of the Jews.
Mark 15:2, "Pilate asked Jesus,
"Are you the King of the Jews?"
- Judea at the time was ruled by Rome.
They didn't have a king of their own.
They had a governor who reported
to the Roman Emperor, Tiberius Caesar.
Claiming to be the Messiah,
was an act of political rebellion against Rome.
A modern equivalent would be,
declaring you're the rightful King of the United States.
Now the important thing to understand
about the Jewish concept of a Messiah,
was that he wasn't supposed to be divine,
and he wasn't gonna have magical powers,
he was just gonna be a regular man.
- They did sometimes talk about the Messiah
as the son of God,
but not in the later Christian sense.
They meant son of God,
in the sense of good Israelite,
because all Israelites are sons of God
in the adopted sense.
- Anointed by God, special to God,
but like their kings David, Solomon,
and the other good kings, yeah, fully human.
- Somebody that God has placed on the throne,
to rule in his stead.
But it doesn't really mean,
somebody who has,
from all time been sitting
at the right hand of God, the Father.
It's a different concept from that,
it's much more Jewish,
and it's much more grounded than that.
- The Son of God,
would only have been used,
I think in a metaphorical sense,
not in the way that we come to expect
with Christian doctrine.
- The early Christians took that and ran with it further.
- It really does remind me
of how Augustus Caesar,
was anointed to be the adopted son
of his father, Julius Caesar,
and therefore became the son of god.
Here's an interesting thing about Jesus' name.
In Hebrew, his name was Yeshua,
which basically translates as God saves or savior.
And as we've already seen, Christ means Messiah,
and the Messiah was supposed to be the Savior.
So Jesus, the Christ,
translates as Savior, the Savior.
According to the Jewish historian Josephus,
there were actually quite a few guys
who people thought might be the Messiah,
walking around Judea,
roughly around about the same time as Jesus.
None of them succeeded, they all failed.
They were all killed,
and can you really be the Messiah
if you don't achieve anything?
- Which is why the vast majority of Jews
in the middle of the first century don't follow Jesus.
- Because a Messiah was not supposed to die on a cross,
executed by the Romans,
because this is somebody
who's supposed to lead a successful military victory.
If you just get executed as a revolutionary,
in the eyes of most Jews that rules you out.
Can't possibly be the Messiah.
- Can't be the Messiah in that precise understanding.
So what they, they re-interpret,
they re-invent the meaning of the word.
- A crucified Messiah was kind of like fried ice cream.
It's an oxymoron, it's a paradox,
and the Messiah doesn't get crucified.
He rises up, defeats the Romans,
and establishes a new divided kingdom.
- What is this?
So you wanna be a Messiah?
- Well, the Messiah actually. - Okay.
Did you kick the Romans out of Judea?
- Well, no, not yet, but I tried.
- Have you converted the world to Judaism?
- No, I'm planning on it, but you know it's a...
- Did you bring about world peace in your lifetime?
- Well, not yet, no but...
Boy bye, you really don't have
the qualifications to be the Messiah, now do you?
Maybe you should try carpentry.
I see you have some experience in that area, next.
- So someone came up with the idea,
to pitch the concept of the Messiah to the Gentiles.
- Wait, I've got an idea.
What if we market it to Gentiles?
- So what you see in early Christian writings,
is a sort of re-definition of a Messiah.
- Which is a pretty wacky idea when you think about it,
because the whole point of the Messiah,
was he was supposed to save the Jews from the Gentiles,
not save the Gentiles.
A Gentile is someone who isn't Jewish.
- But of course, the Gentiles didn't know that.
They didn't know that the Messiah
was supposed to come and defeat them.
And they had already been indoctrinated,
over the last 100 years,
with the idea that a man could die
and become a god,
so why not this Jesus guy?
The Greeks and Romans already accepted
a whole pantheon of gods.
So there was no big deal about adding one more,
especially if this one is promising,
that the end of the world is coming soon
and that people who pray to him, as a God,
will get the reward of eternal paradise.
Something the older gods didn't promise.
And who was the number one salesman
for this new kind of Messiah?
- The earliest references to Jesus
come from the letters of the Apostle Paul.
The New Testament contains 14 letters,
supposedly written by Paul.
But, many scholars only believe
seven of those are authentic.
Despite his letters being stuffed down
the back of the New Testament.
Paul is actually the first person,
who ever wrote anything about Jesus,
at least as far as we know.
But Paul was a bit like that friend you have,
who just started watching "Breaking Bad".
He was a bit late to the party.
- Paul never met Jesus,
but he knew people who knew him.
- One of the things that really surprised me,
when I started studying Christianity,
was that the earliest and most prolific writer about Jesus,
never even knew him.
Never even saw him, for that matter.
Now Paul says that he knew people
who said they knew Jesus,
but did he really know them?
We've only got his word for it.
And before he joined the Jesus bus,
Paul was a hater.
- Paul actually had letters from the High Priest,
that enabled him to go and persecute earlier Christians.
The High Priest was a member
of the Sadducee sect of Judaism.
They controlled the sacrifices in the temple
and didn't believe in the afterlife,
or the resurrection of the dead.
"But Saul began to destroy the church.
"Going from house to house,
"he dragged off both men and women,
"and put them in prison."
- In his own words, Paul says he was beating up
and arresting Christians because.
- Paul says, that to him as a Jew,
the idea of a crucified Messiah,
the Messiah going and getting crucified, was nonsense.
- A few years after Jesus dies,
Paul goes from beating them up
to becoming their number one salesperson.
Why the change of heart?
Well, according to his own letters,
written in the late 40s CE,
about 15 to 20 years after Jesus died.
The ghost of Jesus appeared to Paul
and told him to go preach to the Gentiles.
But how do you convince a bunch of Greeks and Romans
to worship a dead Jew?
Well, Paul came up with four fantastic marketing ideas,
that continue to resonate with billions of people
around the world to this very day.
"For what I received,
"I passed onto you, as a first importance.
"That Christ died for our sins according to the scriptures."
- For Paul, the Messiah is not really a warrior king,
or a charismatic preacher,
he's more of a human sacrifice to Yahweh.
See Paul seems to think that Jesus had to die,
so Yahweh would forgive the human race,
for Adam having eaten the magical piece of fruits.
Oh, merci madame.
Now most Romans and in fact,
most people on the planet,
had never even heard of Yahweh,
let alone Adam's act of grand theft fruito.
So it seems a little bit harsh
to sentence them to an eternity of damnation.
Now, listen, I know most Christians
don't like thinking of Jesus
as a human sacrifice to an angry God,
but, let's be honest
at least on paper,
that's exactly what it looks like.
According to the Encyclopedia Britannica,
human sacrifice is the offering
of the life of a human being to a deity.
Centuries before Paul,
both the Jews and the Romans,
had replaced human sacrifices with animal sacrifices.
But he's bringing it back baby,
with the greatest sacrifice of them all.
- Not just a human, but a son of a God.
The best sacrifice you can possibly have,
is this superhuman sacrifice.
And because it was given,
that blood can save everybody.
- And Paul doesn't stop there,
he's resurrecting more old ideas.
- It comes then down
to the fundamental thing for Christianity,
is Jesus is raised from the dead.
That becomes the one thing
that makes everything else pile into insignificance.
Okay, he hasn't driven the Romans out of Jerusalem,
but God raised him from the dead.
No matter what else happens,
whatever failure he was in his life,
he is approved by God.
- Like human sacrifice,
the idea of a resurrected God wasn't original
to Paul or Christianity.
Now like every great marketer,
Paul knows how to take a negative,
the fact that Jesus didn't really kick the Romans
out of Judea before he died,
and spin it into a positive.
He says, "Wait, wait, wait, wait you don't understand.
"He's gonna come back,
"and then he's gonna destroy every authority and power."
He's like the Terminator, "I will be back."
You know what's cooler than a warrior king Messiah?
A warrior king Messiah with super powers.
But, not many Jews
bought into the whole super powered Messiah idea.
They tended to call BS on all of that,
so Paul decides he needs to find a new audience.
Paul's the guy that takes it to the Gentiles.
- No, the original sect
just wasn't hitting the right market, essentially.
And Paul figured this out, consciously or unconsciously,
and re-told it to be a successful in that market.
And that's why it exploded.
Which I think led to the doom of the original sect,
because Paul had a much bigger market to tap,
so way more Gentiles than Jews.
Way more Gentiles who are excited by this idea
than Jews would be.
And so you had,
the church has explode in size with Gentiles.
- Now of course, in order to market Judaism to the Gentiles,
Paul needed to make some pretty fundamental changes.
As far as all of the other early Jesus
worshipers were concerned,
in order to join their little club,
you had to either be or become a Jew.
But of course, probably the biggest hurdle
for most Gentiles in becoming a Jew,
was that you had to get circumcised,
whether you were a child or an adult.
But Pauly Walnut says, "Oh, forgot about it."
- Just the marketing genius it took
to get rid of that one restriction,
"Oh, we don't have to do that?
"Sure, sure, I'll become a Jew, yeah, that's fine.
"I'll take on this new religion,
"we don't have to chop our penis up anymore."
- Can I interest you in a new form of Judaism?
- No, thanks, heard it all before.
- What if I told you
that you don't have to chop off the end of your knob?
Go on.
- Paul's type of preaching was ideal for them.
Oh, we can be in that Jewish trajectory,
but without all the stuff we don't like, sign me up.
- But what do the original disciples
think about all of this?
Well, as they were Torah-observing Jews,
we can only imagine.
- So, Paul, we've been hearing rumors
that you've been making up
some fakakta stories about Jesus.
What exactly are you telling people?
- Just the usual stuff, James.
Jesus was a real mensch who died for our sins.
He's coming back any day now with superpowers,
yada yada yada.
Oh, and Gentiles don't need to become Jews anymore.
- Whoa! Are you crazy?
This is a Jews-only club, bubala.
Anyone who wants to get in,
needs to lose the end of his schwantz.
Non-negotiable, you schmuck.
- Peter, bubbee, the Gentiles really like their foreskin.
Let them keep it.
Oh,
Listen up, buds, you know bupkis.
We were his best friends.
James is his brother.
If he wanted to let the goyim in,
he would have told us.
- Listen, I'll tell you what.
You do your thing and I'll do my thing,
and we'll just see who wins, mazel tov.
- I think a lot of Jesus' original disciples
were very suspicious of Paul.
He wasn't part of the original band,
he didn't know Jesus
and even worse than that,
the young Paul had persecuted the church.
He was trying to bring down the church,
so why should they trust this guy?
- Paul doesn't really seem to care
what Peter and James think anyway.
He says that when he did meet them,
they didn't tell him anything
that he didn't already know.
- He is very clear,
repeatedly in his letters
that he learned this,
his Gospel from no man,
no human source whatsoever.
"I want you to know, brothers and sisters,
"that the Gospel I preached is not of human origin.
"I did not receive it from any man nor was I taught it.
"Rather, I received it by revelation from Jesus Christ."
- When he does mention his sources,
it's the divine, it's the Lord, it's God,
and it's the scriptures also.
- Because he feels, well,
I've got every bit as much of a right
to be called an apostle as you all have.
But they said, "Yeah, but you didn't meet Jesus."
So, his big answer to that is to say,
"I did meet Jesus.
"I met him on the road to Damascus.
"I met the resurrected Jesus."
- Paul says that the ghost of Jesus
told him he could throw out
a thousand years of Jewish law and tradition.
But they don't seem to believe him
anyone can claim to have a revelation,
and he doesn't really have a great reputation either.
It was only just a few years ago
that he was having their friends arrested and beaten up.
So they all seemed to butt heads.
- There's one story where Paul and Peter
have a stand up row.
A stand up row in Antioch in front of everybody,
because they disagree on the implications
of the movement that they're part of.
- According to Paul's own account,
he started calling Peter a fraud to his face,
in front of everybody.
"When Peter came to Antioch,
"I opposed him to his face,
"because he was clearly in the wrong."
- Now, Peter was the first disciple that Jesus ever had.
Can you imagine what must have been going through his mind
when this Paul guy,
who never even knew Jesus,
started getting up in his face in front of people?
Unfortunately we only have Paul's side of the story.
- When Paul is in a bad mood,
and he's in a really bad mood
in the Epistle to the Galatians.
He wants to say, "They didn't add anything to me,
"there's nothing that they told me
"that added anything to the Gospel, which I got from God."
But we know that this isn't true.
As you imagine him pacing
up and down a room, yelling,
while someones taking it all down,
it's the, that's the best way to imagine Paul
creating Galatians, a Letter to the Galatians.
And it's trying to talk about
a lot of affection,
and love, and care as well.
So maybe he was bipolar, I don't know.
- And it's not just Peter and James
that Paul's having a problem with at this stage.
You see, even at this early phase of the Jesus movement,
there seem to be a number of different factions emerging.
And just like today,
they all claim to be the one true movement.
- So we have an example of,
in First Corinthians,
Paul is trying to respond to a letter
that the Corinthians wrote to him saying,
hey, this other Apostle, Apollos,
came by and taught us all this other new weird stuff,
what's, it seems to contradict yours.
What's what are we supposed to make of this?
But you'd immediately ask me who's this Apollos guy?
He's not on any lists of disciples.
- Paul calls these other missionaries false apostles,
even though he's the guy that never even knew Jesus.
Oh, the cahoneys on this guy.
We know that in the first century
there were a whole range of divergent Jewish sects.
So it seems entirely possible
that there were a range of savior cults running around
at the same time as Paul,
using similar terminology.
Let's just keep in mind
that both Jesus and Messiah both mean Savior.
- What's the name of your Savior?
- We just call him the Savior.
- So Jesus. - Yeah, yeah, Jesus.
- What's the name of your Savior?
- We just call him the Savior.
- So Jesus. - Yeah, yeah, Jesus.
- Each cult probably would have had
their favorite Messiah stories,
their favorite miracles and their favorite teachings.
Each of course would have had
their own missionaries as well.
- There were manifest signs in the New Testament,
about a big differences.
And when you look at other stuff
that didn't get into the New Testament,
it becomes real obvious.
- At one point, Paul gets so angry
about these competing missionaries,
that he writes in his letters,
he wishes they would cut their own genitals off.
"As for those agitators,
"I wish they would go the whole way
"and emasculate themselves," Galatians 5:12.
- Emasculate means removal of the penis
and the testicles,
not just castration, but the whole package.
So much for turning the other cheek.
And remember, this is the same guy
that was beating up and arresting Christians
just 20 years earlier.
Forget about what the disciples
would have thought about him for a second.
What would Jesus have thought about Paul.
As a Torah observant Jew,
I suspect that he may have found
some of Paul's rhetoric a little bit heretical.
- I think that if Jesus had said,
nobody has to follow the Jewish law anymore,
then why would Paul have had such a hard time
convincing Jesus' apostles of this.
- The Gospels record,
certain missionary instructions
that Jesus gave his followers.
But they're not detailed toward going to the Gentiles.
- Which if you ask me is a little bit
of an oversight on Jesus's behalf.
- All versions of Christianity today
are basically descendants of Paul's version of Christianity.
And that was just one sect.
- Now Paul's not going after the well educated,
the Gentiles or the rich and the famous,
Paul's gonna take it down market.
- It becomes a religion for the poor and the downtrodden
and the oppressed and the underprivileged,
who can all find in this, a sense of a better tomorrow.
- The Greco-Roman religions didn't really offer much
in the way of an afterlife,
unless you were some sort of great hero or King,
and heaven doesn't actually turn up in Judaism
much either, barely gets a mention in the Old Testament.
But Paul is saying, you can get eternity
in paradise and he's offering it to everyone.
And who doesn't wanna spend eternity in paradise.
Hell, I'd be happy with a weekend in paradise.
So Paul talks a lot
about what Jesus is gonna do when he comes back.
But how much does he have to say about the life
and teachings of Jesus
during his actual time on earth?
- Paul wrote a lot.
He wrote a massive chunk of the New Testament
and we don't even get incidental mentions,
not even once about miracles that Jesus did,
healings, it's absurd.
- Now one of the explanations for this might be
that Paul's letters really dealing with disputes
in his communities about how to be good Christians.
But isn't that the perfect time
to be quoting the founder of the firm?
- When it comes to disputes about that,
he could have easily,
he could have easily said,
Jesus said this,
when Jesus was in Jerusalem, he said that.
No, what we get is Paul speaking
from his own authority.
He gets his information directly from the Lord above.
From his celestial Christ
and also from the earliest scriptures.
- Paul briefly mentions that Jesus was born,
died and resurrected in some form.
But that's pretty much it
when it comes to talking about the life
and teachings of Jesus.
There are a few passages where he says
he got something from the Lord,
but as he claims no human told him anything,
he might just be referring to the ghost of Jesus.
"To the married, I give this command.
"Not I, but the Lord.
"A wife must not separate from her husband.
"First Corinthians 7:10."
- But Paul has zero to say
about the miracles that Jesus did in his lifetime.
There's no turning water into wine,
no multiplying, loaves and fishes.
There's no walking on water,
there's no healing the sick with his spit.
There's no exorcisms,
there's no bringing people back from the dead.
Which is kind of strange
if you think about it.
If you knew somebody who could do all of those things,
you'd never stop talking about it.
- Whether that's really strange
or whether that's because for example,
he takes for granted
that they know that already, is hard to be sure.
- Maybe Paul assume that they already knew the stories.
But we have to remember
that Paul's writing his letters,
20 to thirty years before the Gospels were written.
Maybe he'd never heard the stories.
Maybe he had heard them,
but didn't believe them.
Maybe they were invented later
or maybe Paul had heard the stories,
but just didn't think they were very important.
Maybe he thought they were completely irrelevant.
- Look at what Christian preachers do today.
When they wanna say what you should be doing,
what you should be thinking,
what you should be behaving.
What do they say?
They say, Jesus says this,
Jesus says this.
Jesus just did this, Jesus taught that.
So why doesn't Paul?
Why does Paul never say, what would Jesus do?
- What did matter to Paul
was converting as many people as possible,
as quickly as possible,
because he's absolutely convinced
that time is running out.
- Paul believes that the end of the world
is dawning any minute.
Everyday he gets up in the morning
he thinks it could be today.
"Then we who are alive, who are left,
"shall be caught up together
"with them in the clouds,
"to meet the Lord in the air."
First Thessalonians 4:17.
- But then time goes on
and the end still hasn't arrived yet.
So Paul, like every doomsday prophet starts
to hedge his bets a little.
- Suddenly now we've got Christians dying
and that's not supposed to happen.
Jesus is meant to return.
This kingdom of God
is meant to be ushered in and it's not happening.
So there needs to be a rethink.
- Well, he says oh jeez, right.
About the resurrection.
You see, yeah, some are gonna die,
but Christ will come back
and the dead in Christ will rise first.
We'll have the, we'll be second in line.
We'll be transformed.
- Paul was clearly wrong, the end didn't come.
Paul eventually realizes
that he's more likely than not
going to die before Jesus returns.
- Paul claims the ghost of Jesus
told him the end of the world
would come within his lifetime.
You'd think if God told you,
the end of the world was happening soon,
you'd be pretty careful about getting confirmation.
- Blessed are the meek,
turn the other cheek.
The world will end in your lifetime,
let him who hath not sinned.
Excuse me there the Lord,
could you just repeat that last bit
I'm not sure I heard you correctly.
The world's gonna end in my lifetime.
Yeah, yeah, in your lifetime.
- Are you sure?
- I find your lack of faith disturbing.
- Oh, hey, okay.
Chill, big guy.
I just hate to get something like that wrong.
Wouldn't want that on my conscience.
- So as far as I can tell,
one of five things must have happened.
Either one, Jesus made a mistake.
Two, Jesus lied.
Three, Jesus changed his mind
and just forgot to tell Paul.
Four, Paul misunderstood Jesus,
or five, Paul just made it all up.
- This is a debate among historical Jesus scholars
about whether Jesus believed,
that the end of the world would
happen in his lifetime or not.
The vast, vast majority of scholars
who say, "Nah looks pretty clear from,
"Jesus' teachings as preserved in the Gospels
"that he really does expect the end to come
in his lifetime."
So he seems to have been
like many people before him,
and pretty much everybody after him.
Everybody who's predicted
that the world was going to end in their lifetime
thus far has been wrong.
And Jesus would seem to have been one of those.
- Now, if you don't like to think of Jesus
as getting something that important wrong,
let's go with Paul made it all up.
And if he did.
- Maybe he's lying about
all this other stuff we're using him for.
- Did he really meet Peter and James?
We only have his word for it.
Did the ghost of Jesus
really appear to him
and tell him to preach to the Gentiles.
So if Paul is throwing out
all of this Jewish law and tradition,
telling people that the end is nigh
and having public arguments with the original apostles,
why did they tolerate him?
Well from how it appears in the Bible
it seems that James and Paul
agreed to some kind of payment.
- There's a lot of references in letters
to him collecting money from his churches.
It's clear that some of these churches are challenging him,
are like, what are you doing with this money?
And he has to like, justify that,
you know, no, no, don't worry
I'm not running off with it.
I'm doing what I said I was gonna do with it.
Which is, he says,
taking it back to the saints in Jerusalem,
you know, the Holy ones in Jerusalem.
And we're not entirely sure what that means,
but you can be sure
it certainly meant
that the Jerusalem church,
these heads are getting a cut.
- Whether we wanna call that a bribe
in terms of, let's collect this money
so that the Jerusalem Christians
don't send missionaries,
to make our lives more difficult.
It's hard to say.
And Paul's not even sure that.
In Romans, he's not even sure
that they're going to accept this collection.
He says, he expresses anxiety
about taking this back to Jerusalem
because he thinks, well, maybe they'll reject it.
So that sounds a bit like a bribe.
And in fact, he probably gets arrested.
- Yeah, yeah, yeah.
If we follow the book of acts at that point,
what seems to be going on
when he is in Jerusalem and is arrested,
is that, that's when he was gonna take the collection back
and put it at the feet of the apostles in Jerusalem.
That doesn't seem to have worked out.
Paul went to Rome and was under house arrest there.
So presumably Paul got executed by the Romans.
- Acts of the Apostles written many decades later,
vaguely blames Paul's arrest in Jerusalem,
on some Jews who complained
that Paul was leading people, astray.
"Fellow Israelites help us.
"This is the man who teaches
"everyone everywhere against
"our people and our law and this place."
- Of course, the people he's taking the money to
in Jerusalem also fit that description.
They are Jews, who think that Paul is leading people astray
with his idolatrous teachings
about abandoning the law.
Really in many ways,
I think we can say that Paul's the guy
that invented Christianity as we know it today.
If it wasn't for Paul,
I think most Christians today
would probably be Jews.
Somewhere between the years of 60 and 70 CE
it's assumed that Peter, Paul and James all died.
We don't really know much about where
or when or how it happened.
One thing we do know happened
during this period though,
is some Jewish zealots
decided to rise up against Roman occupation.
And it led to a devastating war.
We don't know who started it,
could have been the Judean people's front,
could have been the people's front of Judea.
- No, no. - We know
it lasted for four years
and the Jews got completely destroyed.
As it turns out,
Yahweh didn't send a Messiah to save them.
As punishment for the rebellion
the Romans completely destroyed the temple in Jerusalem.
Something else happened
just after the destruction of the temple.
The first Christian Gospel was written.
- The earliest of the Gospels
is probably the Gospel of Mark.
Which seems to be written about 70 AD
maybe a few years before,
maybe a few years after.
- Ironically, the first thing I run into
again and again as I traveled North America
and talked to people,
who either were Christians or are Christians
and they often tell me, the first is like,
they were shocked to find out
that Mark was written before Matthew.
They were shocked to find out
that the letters of Paul
were written before the Gospels.
- Here's something that might shock some Christians.
Most scholars don't think Mark was written
by an eye witness
or even somebody who knew an eye witness.
- The tradition in the second century
is that Mark was written
by a disciple of the apostle Peter.
And that he was sort of Peter's secretary
who followed him around
and took Peter's sermon notes
and arranged them into sort of a narrative about Jesus.
Is that who Mark really was?
It's hard to say.
- If Mark had been Peter's scribe,
Mark would say, I am Peter's scribe.
That's how ancient historiography was written.
- And despite it being called,
the Gospel, according to Mark,
the document doesn't actually state who the author was.
- The difficulty with Mark's Gospel
is it's like the other Gospels, it's anonymous.
We don't really know where it comes from.
Most people now think that it's unlikely
that Mark is kind of taking down Peter's dictation
or anything like that.
- But for the sake of simplicity
let's refer to him as Mark,
otherwise, we're gonna end up in Prince territory,
you know, the author formerly known as Mark.
And how's Mark's Gospel connected to the Jewish Roman war.
- Mark is kind of obsessed with the temple,
as if something recent and traumatic has happened.
So it makes a lot of sense
to say that Mark was written,
after the fall of the temple in AD 70.
- The Romans had just come in
and destroyed the temple
and just ended the cult, basically braised the city.
The city of God destroyed God's temple.
So this is a big existential issue.
If you're a sect that stems from the Jews
and the Jewish God just let heathens come in
and destroy his own house,
this is a problem.
This is a marketing problem, right.
It's a PR problem, so how do you explain that?
- For Mark, a lot of Mark is structured
to answer that and say like,
well, here's the answer.
- They've got to reinvent themselves.
According to the Jewish historian Josephus,
who actually fought in the war
over a million Jews died.
- This is a profoundly traumatic time for Judaism.
They've lost the land,
they've lost the temple.
They've lost the sense of God's blessing
on their everyday lives.
So this is really a very difficult time indeed for Jews.
- And of course the original Jesus gang
the disciples, were Jews living in Jerusalem.
So they probably got swept up in all of the death
and destruction too.
What happened to them?
We don't really know,
there's no historical record.
In fact, we have nothing at all
written down by Peter or James
or any other eyewitness of Jesus,
nothing, zero, nada, zip, bupkis.
Oh yeah, sure there were letters
in the new Testament
that claim to be written by them.
But do scholars believe those letters are actually legit?
- I don't think we actually have any extent writings
from Peter or from James.
We have documents that claim to be by them.
There probably other people writing in their honor,
in their name pretending to be these figures.
So we are actually a little bit weak
on knowing what Peter and James actually thought.
We have to reconstruct what they thought.
- Like half of the letters attributed to Paul,
that found their way into the New Testament,
many scholars believe the letters
from Peter and James are fake.
That means we really don't have any clear idea
of what Jesus' immediate disciples
actually thought about him,
his teachings, his miracles,
what he told them in private
or what they thought about Paul.
They must have been writing letters too,
but apparently nobody bothered to keep copies of them.
- It's all erased.
That data had to have existed
it had to have been written down
somewhere in some form.
It's just all gone.
- Well how convenient for team Paul.
After the Jewish Roman war,
they're the only major Christian sect that's left.
These are the Gentiles,
the Greeks and Romans who aren't Jews.
Don't understand Judaism,
and quite frankly don't like the Jews
who kind of made fun of their version of the Messiah.
So the original disciples,
the people who actually knew Jesus
and their movement, is pretty much completely wiped out,
within 40 years of the death of Jesus Christ.
- And if we accept that most of the New Testament writing
occurs post 70,
when the Jews have been removed
as an influence.
Then the kind of Paul line crusade
from 20 years earlier is gonna win.
- So Mark's Gospel is written for a Gentile community
not Jews and probably in Rome sometime
just after the reign of the emperor Nero.
And it's a lot of strange stuff in Mark's Gospel.
One of them, is that Jesus is walking around
trying to tell his disciples to keep their mouth shut
about the miracles that he's doing.
Like it's supposed to be some kind of big secret.
- Mark starts out his Gospel,
with saying something that it just blows my mind.
And that's in Mark 4:11,
where he has Jesus gather all his disciples
and say, okay,
I'm teaching you all these things in secret, in parables.
That way, you'll know who I'm talking about,
but those outsiders, they won't be able to tell
what I'm talking about, otherwise,
and this is the kicker,
they would turn from their sins and repent and be saved.
"And he told them
"the mystery of the kingdom of God
"has been given to you,
"but to those on the outside,
"everything is expressed in parable
"so that they may be ever seeing,
"but never perceiving,
"and ever hearing but never understanding.
"Otherwise, they might turn and be forgiven," Mark 4:11.
- They can't handle the truth.
What kind of Messiah tells his disciples
to keep his work big secret?
What kind of Messiah
doesn't want his disciples to be forgiven?
According to Mark,
Jesus is telling secret teachings
only to his inner circle.
- And when you ask a biblical scholar today,
well what are those secret teachings that he was giving?
They don't know any more than we do.
- Those secret teachings are lost forever.
Like the truth about who killed JFK
and what happened to Michael Jackson's nose.
Maybe the whole secrecy business
is Mark's way of explaining
why most people in his time had never heard of Jesus.
- This is all made up by the Gospel,
the author of the Gospel of Mark
as sort of damage control and explanation,
for why people didn't widely accept him as the Messiah
because he didn't want them to.
So around Mark's time,
people were saying,
he did all these miracles
I never heard of any guy doing miracles.
He goes, well that's cause he told us not to tell anyone.
- Right, exactly. - Maybe this story
about parables is also a parable?
- You go through the Gospel story after story, after story
and they look like parables
that has, you know, additional meanings.
They might not be meant to be taken historically true.
And this is how mythology is written, right.
You tell a story about something
and it's the meaning of the story
rather than the literal truth of the story,
that's actually the important part of the story.
- For instance, let's take a look
at the story of the trial of Jesus.
- And Mark tells this story
where a Pontius Pilate wants to let Jesus go
but Mark says, this was the holiday,
and on the holiday, the Romans would traditionally
let go one prisoner.
And the crowd kept calling for Barabbas.
We want to release Barabbas,
who Mark says was a notorious rebel,
a rebel and murderer, right.
And Pilates like, no, no, let me let Jesus go.
And not this, this murderous rebel
and then it's no, release Barabbas, released Barabbas.
And so Pilate lets him go
and then Jesus is crucified and that's the story.
- When we look at the depiction
of Pilate in non-biblical sources.
Pilate is venal.
Pilate does not care at all about Jewish sensibilities.
Pilate goes out of his way to offend Jews.
Pilate is awful.
But when we look at the Gospels,
going from the earlier Gospel,
like Mark up to John
Pilate looks better and better and better.
I would date Pilate from the Gospels
because he seems like a perfectly decent guy
who's simply backed into the corner
by a bunch of evil Jewish leaders
who want him to do away with the Jesus.
- And there's no way this is historically true.
So what does Barabbas translate as?
- Son of Rabbas.
- The word Bar in Aramaic means son of,
and Abbas comes from Abba, which means father.
- And here's the best bit.
- And according to the Gospel of Matthew,
Barabbas' first name was Jesus.
- Jesus Barabbas, okay. - Jesus son of the father.
- Pilate says you can have Jesus Barabbas,
a murderer, an insurrectionist
or you can have Jesus of Nazareth,
the other Jesus, Son of the father.
- The Jews are given a choice
between two Jesus, two saviors.
One is the violent kind of savior
like the one who tried to overthrow
the Romans in the rebellion of 66 CE.
The other is a pacifist kind of Savior.
Who's never hurt anything,
which one will the Jews choose to punish?
- And what happens,
the innocent Jesus pays the penalty,
pays the ransom for the very guilty Barabbas
son of the Father.
In terms of Christian theology it's perfect,
in terms of history, it's ridiculous.
- Two identical saviors, one is gonna be set free.
One is gonna pay the penalty.
Now if you were a Jew living in the first century,
this story might sound a little familiar.
- Well, we know this story, this is in Leviticus.
This is the whole ritual of Yom Kippur,
which is the whole atonement ceremony.
Yom Kippur is usually expressed in English
as Day of Atonement.
- There are two great ceremonies in the Jewish calendar.
One was Passover and the other was Yom Kippur.
And this one, every year there would be this,
you have the two goats, the two identical goats,
they have to be, look the same.
One you would cast the sins of Israel on
and cast it into the crowd,
release it into the wilderness, and the other,
you would sacrifice on the alter
in the temple its blood would atone
for all the sins of Israel.
- The braveous story seems to be saying
that the goat sacrifices,
which had replaced human sacrifices in Judaism
are now being replaced once more
with the ultimate human sacrifice.
Mark is writing for one of Paul's communities,
possibly in Rome.
Originally it was written to symbolize the Gospel.
It wasn't written to be taken as literally true,
at least not by informed insiders in the sect.
- This story by the way
is where we get the term scapegoat.
- Forgive me Lord, I have committed murder.
- That's a terrible sin,
have you pushed a goat over cliff.
- Why yes, Lord I did.
- Then no problem see you next year.
- Now most people who read the Barabbas story today,
probably aren't Jews
probably don't know their Leviticus very well.
So the whole story about two identical goats
goes right over their heads
- And I think you can go from story to story
through Mark and see, like, if you look at it as history,
it doesn't make a whole lot of sense.
But if you look at it as allegory,
as something representing something else,
then it makes perfect sense
and it looks literarily brilliant.
- Then towards the end of Mark's Gospel,
we find Jesus in the garden of Gethsemane,
where he's literally begging Yahweh
not to let him be killed.
"They went to a place called Gethsemane.
"He began to be deeply distressed and troubled.
"He fell to the ground and prayed that if possible,
"the hour might pass from him.
"Father take this cup from me," Mark 14:32-42.
- It's a very moving story
until you realize that Jesus is Yahweh,
so this was His own plan all along
and He's literally begging Himself not to kill Himself.
Which is pretty confusing.
In Mark, Jesus appears to be very human.
He doesn't talk or act like a God in disguise.
This might be an idea that Christians came up with later.
Speaking of humans and parables
one of the stories that we don't find in Mark
is the virgin birth.
- Mark starts his Gospel
and says the beginning of the Gospel
of Jesus Christ, the son of God.
And then he doesn't tell us a story about Jesus' birth,
but instead narrates Jesus' baptism by John.
And if you look carefully at this story
with the Holy Spirit, descending upon Jesus
like a dove and God saying,
this is my beloved son.
It sorta sounds like Mark is saying
that this is when Jesus becomes the son of God,
at his baptism.
- In ancient Rome, birds landing on things
was read as a positive sign from the gods.
The process of deciphering the movement
of the birds was called,
"taking the auspices,"
which literally translates as looking at birds.
It's the basis by the way of the English word auspicious.
Now, the person who took the auspices
was known as an Augur,
which is the basis of the name
Augustus, the original son of God.
So again, many people living in the Roman empire
1900 years ago reading Mark,
would probably have understood the symbolism.
- So what you see in early Christian history
is that the status of Jesus as son of God,
keeps getting kicked back further and further.
First, it's the resurrection
then it's at his baptism,
then it's at his birth,
then he's always been there from the beginning of time.
So it evolved the idea...
- Absolutely. - Of Jesus evolved
Over a century or so. - Yes, definitely.
- And that's just for Paul's communities.
The other factions,
including the one of the original disciples
had different ideas all together.
In fact, as we'll see a little bit later on
at least one major early Christian faction
didn't even believe Jesus was divine at all.
One of the other surprising things
that's missing from Mark's Gospel,
is one of the most important ideas in all of Christianity.
Jesus' resurrection appearances to his followers.
- It's so odd, the oldest Gospel is Mark's Gospel.
Most scholars believe that, I believe that.
And there are no appearances
of the risen Jesus to his disciples.
In fact, the Gospel ends in a very dark
and quite mysterious enigmatic way,
where this young man who just happens to be at the tomb,
says to the women, go and tell the disciples
and Peter what's happened to these women.
And the women just run away
and don't tell anyone for they're afraid, that's it.
So, I mean, if you believe Mark's Gospel,
no one ever found out about the resurrection,
cause they didn't tell anybody.
- Including Mark who - Right, right
couldn't have written it down because they didn't tell him.
- Yeah, yes, it's extraordinary.
- At some point a Christian scribe
decided to write a new ending to Mark's Gospel.
He decided to sex it up a little bit.
He like George Lucas making Greedo shoot first.
Have to wonder why bother,
why not just leave the original ending as it was?
- What's happening, I think is that the secret doctrines
some of the secret teachings are leaking out
into the public teachings.
- First rule about Jesus' club
is you don't talk about Jesus club.
- These particular doctrines
became less important to keep secret.
And so you see them leaking out over time.
So you gets, the nativity idea,
or you get the magical incarnation idea.
More of their secrets are being leaked out
and more attempt to try
and prove points by creating stories
that support your points.
And so you get more, more at miracle stories,
you get more doctrinally relevant stuff.
- It really makes me wonder about the intentions
of these early Christians.
If the truth was so important to them,
why bother rewriting the ending of the first Gospel?
And just like Paul, Mark is counting down.
- Mark's Gospel believes just like Paul does,
that the end is absolutely eminent.
So there is a line in Mark's Gospel,
"Some of those standing here," Jesus says
"will not taste death
"before they see the kingdom of God come with power."
It's one of these interesting ironies of history
that every time there's a delay in the Eschaton coming,
the faithful don't kind of give up on the idea.
They become all the more eager
in thinking that it's about to happen.
The Eschaton means the end times,
the end of the world, as we know it.
Like a modern UFO cult.
- Yeah, modern religious cults as well
I mean, they do this all the time.
When disappointment comes,
they don't say, we must have been wrong.
Or at least they don't say we must have been wrong
in our fundamental identity.
They just, we may have gotten the timetable a bit wrong.
So you revise it, you change it.
And the early Christians were no different from that.
- Those Christians who believed
that the Bible is literally true
must have a hard time explaining
why the world hasn't ended yet.
- It's one of the things that I think many Christians
across the centuries have really struggled with,
the fact that Jesus appears to say
that he is coming back within the lifetime of his followers.
And that clearly didn't happen.
It clearly didn't happen.
You can spiritualize it,
you can kind of try and find some sort of fine fancy way
of saying in a very real sense spiritually, he did come.
But, the fact is that he didn't return
in the lifetime of his followers,
as he had said that he would.
And this is something that has always been
at the heart of some real anxiety in Christianity.
It's almost like a kind of a trauma
trying to come to terms with,
how can it be that Jesus said this
when it didn't actually happen?
- Yeah, definitely, you can see a trajectory
in the New Testament writings
as you move from letters like Paul's.
So the earliest writings we have
to writings composed in the first half
of the second century
where the apocalyptic expectations,
just continue to get sort of toned down
and there become sort of an increasing recognition
that Jesus is not coming back anytime soon.
- Each generation of Christians
was probably led to believe
that it would happen in their time,
just like still happens.
And they may not even have noticed
that there had been a delay.
It's not like most people had copies of the Bible to read.
So they only knew what they heard in church.
- Don't worry though,
the end of the world is coming any day now.
The next Gospel to be written was Matthew
probably 10 or 20 years after Mark,
around 80 or 90 CE.
So who was he?
- Gospel of Matthew is attributed to Matthew,
one of the 12 disciples.
But it's improbable that this was actually written
by an eyewitness, because Matthew's Gospel
is using as one of its major sources, Mark.
And if Mark is not written by a disciple even,
why would a disciple, an eyewitness to Jesus ministry,
use somebody else's secondhand reports.
Why wouldn't they just tell their own story?
So it does not seem
that Matthew is actually written by an eyewitness.
- And also Matthew again is writing in Greek.
- Matthew is written,
I think by a Jewish Christian
who he kind of likes Mark's Gospel.
He copies his whole passages verbatim.
So he clearly quite likes Mark's Gospel,
but I think he thinks Mark got some things wrong.
- For Mark, who's firmly in Paul's world
of Christian Gentiles,
Jesus doesn't appear to be very Jewish.
Matthew on the other hand,
calls BS and all of that.
In Matthew, Jesus is quite clear
that he's only interested in the Jews.
"I was sent only to the lost sheep
"of the House of Israel.
"It is not right to take the children's bread
"and throw it to the dogs," Matthew 15:24-26.
"These 12 Jesus sent out with the following instructions,
"do not go among the Gentiles
"or enter any town of the Samaritans.
"Go rather to the lost sheep of Israel," Matthew 10:5-6.
- Which makes Paul's claims
that the ghost of Jesus
told him to go and preach to the Gentiles, pretty suspect.
I mean, if that was Jesus' original intention,
you think he would have told his apostles.
- So Matthew's engaged in this fascinating project
of re-jewdianising Jesus.
And quite interestingly,
because Jesus was a Jew
and because he was probably quite faithful to the law,
Matthew in a away is also re-jesusizing Mark's Gospel.
He is actually bringing it a bit back around
to what Jesus was probably more like.
The historical Jesus that is.
A Jew preaching to Jews
about being a good Jew. - Right.
- It is an irony of history
that the most popular Gospel in Christian history,
far and away has been the Gospel of Matthew.
And yet it presents the most Jewish,
of the four Gospels
and probably would have been quite hostile
to the kind of law free Christianity
that Paul is proposing.
These two sources, Paul and the Gospel of Matthew
would definitely come into conflict
over whether a Gentile Christians,
should follow the law.
But Paul definitely says, no they don't.
Matthew says yes, absolutely, they do.
- And it's one of the amazing things about Christianity
is that, most people just ignore that.
Most people just ignore it,
but it was a very important strand in early Christianity
and emerging Christianity,
that saw the Christians duty
as being not just to be loyal to Jesus,
but also to be loyal to the Jewish law.
And they were loyal to the law
because they believe
that's what Jesus had taught them to do.
- So Matthew's position is, if you're not going to temple,
you're not circumcised and you're not eating kosher food,
you're doing Jesus wrong?
- That's right, they have to get,
well at the very least have to get a copy of the Talmud
and start learning Hebrew.
- Wear a yamaka. - Yeah.
- The Matthew Gospel is where some of those most famous
and dubious Jesus stories first turn up.
Remember how in Paul's day
there seemed to be lots of factions
telling different stories about Jesus.
Matthew seems to have included stories
he had heard that Mark either hadn't heard
or just didn't like.
Stories like the sermon on the Mount,
the resurrection appearances
and the massacre of the innocence.
Where Herod the great, King of Judea,
orders the execution of all male babies around Bethlehem.
Historians by the way,
have found no other evidence of that ever happening.
Matthew probably just made it up
to sound like the similar story
about Moses in the Old Testament.
Matthew is also the first person
to mention the virgin birth.
- So fully half a century appears
before we ever get anyone writing about a virgin birth.
- The story of the virgin birth
I think is is baffling.
You heard in Matthew's Gospel,
this genealogy that connects Jesus right back to Abraham,
going through David.
King David, the possibly mythical
second King of the United Kingdom of Israel and Judah,
who supposedly killed a giant with a slingshot.
- All going through Joseph, Jesus' father.
Then the very next story
is about how Joseph isn't Jesus' father.
I mean, religious people are very good
at getting their head around contradictions,
but there's a big one
right there on the very first page of the New Testament.
It's fascinating, what did Matthew think he was doing?
Why is he telling a story about a virginal conception,
when he also wants to tell us
that Jesus was descended from David via his father?
I don't know, I think it's a mystery.
- Did he just hope no one would notice.
- And so Jesus is the descendant of King David,
because Joseph is his father?
But I thought Mary was a virgin?
- Yeah, look over there, it's the Messiah.
- Where? - No, no, it's just Larry
they got the same beard.
- No, no, no, now I lost my place.
- Hey, don't worry about it,
let's go get a kosher kebab.
- And the fact is lots of people don't notice.
Many Christians will happily affirm,
Jesus is the son of David.
They will also affirm
that Jesus was conceived by a virgin.
- Scholars believe that Matthew's idea of a virgin birth
is possibly based on a bad translation of the Old Testament.
See, in the Hebrew version of the prophet Isaiah,
he predicts that a baby boy will be born
as a sign that God is going to destroy his enemies.
And the Hebrew word that Isaiah uses to describe
the mother of the boy is Almah.
Now Almah just translates as a childless young woman,
but Matthew wasn't using the Hebrew version of Isaiah,
he was using a Greek translation,
which mistranslated Almah into virgin.
Another unfortunate thing about Matthew's Gospel
is despite it being fairly pro Torah,
it's also inspired 1900 years of antisemitism.
- In Matthew's Gospel,
you have this ideal of a kind of loyalty
to Torah, loyalty to the synagogue,
to all of these Jewish traditions.
And yet also, this bitter,
bitter vitriol against fellow Jews.
- Now keep in mind that although Matthew is a Jew
and he's writing for a community of Jewish Christians,
they're an extremely fringe, sect,
kind of like the way that Catholics view Mormons today.
And he's writing 10 or 20 years
after this big Jewish Roman war,
so Jews are probably pretty unpopular across the empire.
And the Jesus Jews, wanna distance themselves
from the traditional Jews as much as possible
for political reasons.
And Matthew just like Mark and Paul before him,
believes that the end of the world
is gonna happen very soon.
But keep in mind by the time he's writing,
most of those original disciples are probably dead
and yet there's still no sign of Jesus.
According to most scholars,
the next Gospel to be written is Luke.
Written somewhere between 10 and 30 years after Matthew.
Luke, by the way also wrote the Acts of the Apostles,
which is kind of a sequel to the Gospels.
- Luke's writing, I think this really big epic narrative.
He wants to tell the story of Jesus
and the story of the early church.
Luke, according to tradition,
was a traveling companion of Paul.
He was a Gentile, a physician,
a doctor in the ancient world.
So he was definitely a,
what we would call a second generation Christian.
- He says, this is the stuff that was handed on to us
and written down by earlier generations.
And I'm, working with it myself.
- In reality, we know he's not using oral
or we know he's using the previous books, Mark and Matthew.
So yeah, so the traditional attributions
are clearly late legend,
and mainstream scholarship has long since realized that
and gotten off that wagon.
- Acts of the Apostles, Luke's account
of what happened after Jesus died,
tries to white wash all of this tension
and conflict that obviously existed
between Paul and the original Jesus gang.
- Luke undoubtedly is trying to present
an idealized account of the early Christian community.
Certainly at the end of Acts, chapter two,
you've got everyone gathered around the apostles teaching,
breaking bread, worshiping God,
finding favor of God and all the people.
So it's definitely an idealized account.
- All of the anger, tension and bribery
that we see in Paul's letters,
either disappears in Luke or gets toned down.
It's kind of like he's saying,
Oh, it was no where near as bad as you've probably heard.
- So I think he does try to paint generally,
a rosy picture of it.
But it's certainly not a complete white wash,
he does include some instances of division and differences.
And I mean he does portray Paul as quite a hothead.
- By the time Luke's writing Acts
towards the end of the first century,
the Paul line community,
had tried to strengthen their credentials.
Trying to solidify their connection
to the original founders, Peter and James
who were probably dead at this stage.
Their community is pretty much wiped out
and so they can't fight back.
Winners get to write the history.
All in all, Luke's not a very credible historical source.
And Luke just like Matthew, Mark, and Paul before him
believes the end of the world
is gonna happen anytime soon.
"Truly, I tell you,
"this generation will not pass away
until all these things are fulfilled." Luke 21:32.
- The last of the full Gospels to be written
is John, probably written around 100 or 110 CE.
Compared to the other three.
- John is different.
Think of it this way.
The synoptic Gospels.
The Gospels of Mark Matthew and Luke
are called synoptic,
which means they share a common vision of Jesus.
- New York, LA, Chicago.
John is basically New Orleans, okay.
He's just, he's doing something very different down there.
- With John, this whole thing is so obviously
a literary creation.
Jesus in the Gospel of John,
does not sound like he does in the other Gospels
and, all the characters in John sound the same way,
like you're watching a Woody Allen movie,
everybody's talking like Woody Allen.
And its, 'cause he wrote everybody's part.
And, and it's obvious this is not anybody's recollection.
- Instead of telling everyone
to keep the stories about his miracles, a big secret.
- He might as well have on a t-shirt,
"I am God," written in big letters
and you have to wonder
well, didn't they have blasphemy laws then,
why wasn't he stoned to death five minutes out of the gate?
"The woman saith unto him,
"I know that Messiah cometh
"He, that is called Christ.
"When he is come, he will declare unto us all things.
"Jesus saith unto her,
"I that speak unto thee am He," John 4:25.
"I and my Father are one," John 10:30.
- John's Gospel contains no parables,
no last supper,
no sermon on the Mount.
But it's the only one
with Jesus raising Lazarus from the dead.
And it's the most antisemitic of the Gospels.
As for the second coming,
as far as John's concerned,
it's happening right now.
Why is John so different from the other three Gospels?
No one really knows,
but if we look at Paul
and the four Gospels in chronological order,
we can kind of see how the Jesus story evolved over time.
In Paul, he doesn't do any miracles
and become special after he died.
In Mark, he becomes special
when a bird lands on him,
walks around being a secret miracle worker
whose body disappears from a cave.
Matthew and Luke making the product of the divine pregnancy
who comes back from the dead
and in John he's proudly out of the God closets.
But if you think the variation in these stories is strange,
wait till you see the stories
that didn't even make it into the Bible?
- So one of the things that many Christians don't know,
is that in addition to the four canonical Gospels
there's a number of other early Christian Gospels out there.
Canonical means approved by the Vatican.
- In the early centuries,
there were some fairly significant Christian factions.
The Ebionites, the Marcionites and the Gnostics.
And they all had pretty different ideas about who Jesus was.
Their Gospels were all destroyed
by Imperial decree, around 400 CE.
However. - One suspects,
that some monk in upper Egypt
decided I can't do this to,
I've spent my entire life writing them out
for example, I can't do this to that.
So I'm gonna gather them up
and put them away safely
and say that they're destroyed, whatever.
- But the wonderful thing that happened in 1945,
is there was the discovery of 12 codices,
12 ancient leather books
found in a jar in Nag Hammadi in Egypt.
- Some of them and the ones that I love the most
are infancy Gospels.
So stories about Jesus' birth and childhood.
And one of the most interesting of these,
is a text that is generally known
as the infancy Gospel of Thomas.
And what this text seeks to do
is say, what would Jesus have been like as a child.
If he's a divine being,
which this text believes him to be,
if he's a divine being from the beginning,
he's got all this miraculous power.
What does he actually,
what does a kid like that look like?
According to the infancy Gospel of Thomas,
it's not a pretty picture.
- It's Jesus, the bot Simpson
of the kind of the early Christian world.
He's really a brat.
- One story in the infancy Gospel of Thomas
says that when Jesus was five years old,
he was sitting by a pool of water
making clay sparrows which were coming to life
and when another kid came
and messed with his pool of water,
Jesus cursed him and he withered up and died.
He's basically a little super villain.
- Yeah, I'd say so,
because he essentially gets angry
at a number of his playmates
for different things and kills them.
And so he kills one playmate,
he kills another playmate.
Then the villagers start to complain
to Mary and Joseph.
- What's kid Jesus' response to all this?
He makes his accusers go blind.
Oh what the?
Oh I can't see
What's going on?
Why, why would you do
- As Ron Burgundy says, "That escalated rather quickly."
So it's a fascinating story
and yet, if we think that the story is saying,
Oh, Jesus had these sort of,
immature things that he had to work out of his system.
I don't think that's what
the Infancy Gospel of Thomas is saying.
It's essentially saying that's who Jesus is.
He's got all the power of God
and if people are jerks to him,
he can strike them dead.
This is how they viewed Jesus,
weird and upsetting to us as it seems to be.
And I love, I love Joseph's instructions to Mary
after all of this has happened.
He takes Jesus, puts him in their house
and tells Mary don't let him outside
because those who annoy him end up dead.
- Oh, you might think,
well, that's an unbelievable story.
No wonder if didn't end up in the Bible,
but is it any crazier
than stories about walking on water
or turning water into wine
or raising people from the dead
or zapping demons into a herd of pigs.
Why do we say these magic stories are crazy,
but these other stories about magic,
well, they're just fine and dandy.
Back then, they were arguing over what Jesus was,
who he was.
What was his relationship to God,
all the controversies about Christology.
And this included of course,
whether Jesus was even a human being.
- Just a really interesting human being
who somehow became possessed by God.
Others thought he was an angel,
still others thought he was part of God.
Still others thought he was just a good teacher.
They didn't know.
- One of the really big early Christian factions
the Ebionites, might've closely resembled
the original Christians, team Peter.
- The Ebionites again, that means the poor,
they claim to be the descendants
of the Jerusalem Christians, maybe they were.
- To be a true Christian,
you had to obey the Jewish law.
They seem to have denied
the idea of the virgin birth
and they had a kind of Gospel,
that sounds very much like a Jewish Christian Gospel.
Maybe one of the earliest forms of the Gospel.
- We have people who were following Jewish law,
honoring the Sabbath on Saturday
and keeping it Holy.
Circumcising their kids,
and they're worshiping Jesus.
- The Ebionites declared Paul a heretic.
On the other hand,
another one of the major early factions
the Marcionites loved Paul,
but really hated Judaism.
- The Marciones said
that Jesus had come from a different God,
not the Hebrew God, not the creator God,
not the Torah giving God.
- The God of the Old Testament.
So the God of the old Testament
was a wicked God who made the world.
I mean, that's why the world was so messed up.
- The Gnostics claimed to have a special teaching
from Jesus that only they knew about.
- Well, the word Gnostic really means
somebody who's claiming to have knowledge.
- But it's basically,
the idea that this world is bad and wicked
and we have to get away from it.
And getting a certain secret knowledge
of the universes origins
and your own cosmic origins
is how you get away from all.
- So why didn't all of those Gospels
make it into the Bible?
Well, a common Christian view
is that the ones that made it in
were the real stories,
and the ones that didn't,
were just made up.
- Well, when it comes to the stories of Jesus' birth
and childhood, it's all made up.
If you talk to most New Testament scholars
about the infancy narratives,
the Christmas story in Matthew's Gospel and Luke's Gospel,
they'll say, there's not much historical basis
behind any of that.
There's no census,
there's no slaughter of the innocence by Herod,
there's no star of Bethlehem, no wise men.
Jesus probably was not born in Bethlehem,
he was probably born in Nazareth.
Those stories are all propaganda
that are designed on the one hand
to present Jesus as a divine being
from the moment of his birth
and also to say,
he can fit the qualifications for a Messiah
because he's born in the city of David.
- Of course, all of these factions
believe that their version of Christianity
was the correct one.
Just like they all do today.
- There are many different Christianity's today.
There were many different Christianity's back then.
- Eventually team Paul sold there soul
to the first Christian emperor, Constantine,
who fought his way to power in the year 305 CE.
According to his contemporary Bishop Eusebius,
the so-called father of church history,
Jesus appeared to Constantine in a vision
and said he'd help him defeat his rival
for the throne in a bloody war.
Hallelujah, Jesus is finally the warrior King Messiah
that the Jews had been waiting for.
According to Christian sources from the time,
Jesus used his supernatural powers
to help Constantine kill thousands of Roman citizens
and consolidate his control over the empire.
- Winners are grinners.
And so, because the, a version of Christianity
secures Imperial supported early in the fourth century.
They are able to suppress their opponents
ever more effectively.
- Once Christianity and Orthodox Christianity
became the official religion of the empire,
they had official patronage.
You then could use Imperial power
to put the thumbscrews down
on any dissident Christian groups.
- The final selection of books
that made it into the Bible,
wasn't actually decided upon until 400 CE.
It seems like a number of competing Christian factions
might have merged into some sort of mega church.
- Each of these Gospels has a faction behind it.
There's a lot of people
like they have their own favorite Gospels.
It's like everybody has their own favorite
Harry Potter novel or whatever.
And so, if you want to win this battle
for control of the church,
you want as many people on your side
to outnumber the other side.
And the best way to do that, is to pick Gospels
that had a lot of supporters behind them
that were not too deviant.
- The other Gospels were declared fake news.
- Constantine does not enforce Christianity on everybody.
Constantine allowed pagan temples to stand
and pagans to worship,
and he let Jews be Jews.
- But he does favor just one Christian faction
and tries to shut down all the rest.
And this one faction has no hesitation
at putting their head of the Roman empire,
the same Roman empire
that killed Jesus, Paul, Peter and James
at the head of their church.
- And so Constantine,
I think he treats Christianity
as any emperor has treated
any other religious kind of group,
by saying, well, I'm the head of religion.
I am the Pontifex Maximus.
So therefore, I'm the head of this community.
The Bishop seemed to agree to that
without much hesitation.
- Overnight, the persecuted become the persecutors
and the first group that they persecute,
are other Christians who they now declare heretics.
- You're only a heretic if you lose the historical battle.
And it takes the church about three to 400 years,
to figure out who's in and who's out.
- About 50 years after Constantine,
another Roman emperor, Theodosius
drove the final nail into the cross
and made Catholic Christianity,
the state religion of the empire.
- So not only are preexisting varieties
or versions of Christianity wiped out
or put on a banned list,
new dissident groups emerge
and a dealt with this new kind of Imperial authority.
- Temples were shut down,
pagan priests if they wanted to keep their job
became Christian priests.
Jews had their movements restricted,
were not allowed to join certain guilds,
had their synagogues burned down.
And the empire becomes Christian
and it remains Christian,
because of the force of the state
and the force of the army.
Was this a good thing or a bad thing?
It was a thing.
And it's something we have to deal with.
- To put a modern perspective on it.
Imagine that the Scientologists, were able to get Tom cruise
elected president of the world,
and he passed a law making Scientology mandatory.
And that's what team Paul did around about 400 CE.
The Roman empire became a theocracy,
not unlike the caliphate
that ISIS has been trying to set up
in the middle East in the last few years.
It's not that hard to be a successful religion
when you're the only game in town
and everything else is pretty much outlawed.
So that's the story
of how Christianity went from being irrelevant
to inescapable, but in the words of a different God,
wait, there's one more thing.
It wasn't that long ago, that most historians believe,
that the characters in the old Testament
like Abraham or Moses
or figures from literary history
like King Arthur were also based on real people.
But today, most historians think
they are completely mythical.
So what about Jesus?
- Well, when I started as a historian
and I was actually quite certain
that Jesus existed as a historical person, and I thought,
anyone who suggested otherwise was a crackpot.
And what happened was, the more I looked at the evidence,
the worse it looked.
The more you pull up the threads,
the more it falls apart.
And I started to realize by the end of it,
it's like actually unbalance of evidence
it looks like it goes the other way.
- It just seems to me, the weight of probability
is that there was no Jesus.
- One thing that struck me
is just the case for this figure is extremely poor.
The main sources we have are the Gospels.
Over time, we found even more reason to doubt the Gospels.
They're just really, really poor sources.
They're not what we want.
E.P. Sanders says that ,
Jesus is better attested in history
than Alexander the great.
When you actually compare the evidence
for both of those figures,
that's not even close to correct.
And actually the evidence for Alexander the great
is way better than for Jesus.
- Obviously a lot of evidence gets lost
or destroyed over the years,
like the letters of team Peter.
So historians are trying to piece together
what happened using sketchy evidence
or evidence that's been corrupted, like Mark's Gospel.
- And the trick to that
is that you look at that body of evidence
You got to look at it all, you can't leave anything out,
even stuff that's weird
and say is that the evidence that should exist,
if this hypothesis existed, is it what we expect?
And, and that's what you look at.
And you can measure that, in the sense of your feeling
of how expected is this evidence,
or how weird is this evidence given that hypothesis?
- And then you look at all of the theories
and try and decide
which one does the evidence support best.
- And if you're stuck in this situation
where the evidence is equally expected
on all your hypotheses, then you don't know.
It could be any one of those hypotheses
and we just kind of have to settle on
well, it's one of those we don't know.
- So how does the evidence stack up
with the theory that Jesus actually existed?
- I think on balance,
he probably didn't exist.
I think the hypothesis that
he started out a revelatory being
and became historicized later,
I think fits the evidence better.
It makes the evidence more expected,
especially a lot of weird stuff.
- So in other words,
Jesus appeared as some kind of an angel
in visions to people like Paul.
And then later on, people decided that,
well, he must have been real.
But of course this kind of a view
is still a minority amongst scholars,
but will it always be that way?
- We saw the same thing with the challenging
of the historicity of Moses, right.
In the seventies,
everybody said, that's fringe, that's crazy.
Now it's the mainstream consensus
at least agnosticism about the historicity of Moses.
And that took, 20, 30 years.
So I always tell people,
come back to me in 20 and 30 years,
and then we'll see if that's still a situation
or if it's changed since then.
- This kind of talk get some people pretty, pretty cranky.
- Well, look, my blunt response to that,
the whole Jesus mythicism thing
to be frank, I consider it mental masturbation for atheist.
That's the best way I can describe it.
It's the ultimate get up,
telling your arch enemy that their superhero didn't exist.
It's with the joy, of going up to some bratty kid
you don't like and saying, "Hey kid, guess what,
"there's no Santa Claus."
- Telling a little kid that Santa doesn't exist
might be mean, but it's also true.
Look, the fact is that the historical evidence
that Jesus existed
is pretty slim to say the least.
But the evidence that the stories about him
were all over the place
and kind of evolved over time is incredibly strong.
Make from that what you will.
So let's take a look
at what our new updated Sunday school story looks like.
Around 2000 years ago,
the Romans decided that dead men could be gods
and living men could be sons of gods.
Meanwhile, in the backwaters of the Roman empire,
the Jewish people were waiting for their God,
Yahweh to send a warrior King
they called the Messiah to kick out the Romans.
But the Messiah was a no show.
Eventually several generations later,
a small fringe Jewish sect said
this is our guy, Jesus Christ,
which means Saving the Savior
was a very Jewish Jew,
but had two problems in his messianic resume.
He had not defeated the Romans
and he was already dead.
A few years later,
Paul who'd been busy beating up early Jesus' worshipers
suddenly changed his mind
and invented his own version of the Jesus sect.
He reinvented the Messiah,
to be a super powered celestial warrior King
for non Jews, who could keep their fore skin
and still get into heaven.
The OG Christians weren't impressed,
this is fake news, Paul didn't even know Jesus.
This is the Jews only club bubala.
According to Paul Jesus spoke to him in visions
and any day now, JC would come down to earth
with supernatural powers to defeat the Romans
and anyone else who didn't worship Him.
Unfortunately, Jesus didn't return within Paul's lifetime.
And despite writing lots of letters
in his 30 years of missionary work,
Paul never mentioned anything
about Jesus' life teachings or miracles.
But the Jews did get their war against the Romans
and got their butts badly kicked.
No warrior King Messiah showed up
and their temple was torn down.
The original disciples of Jesus were all dead,
leaving not a single written record
of what they thought about Jesus
or his teachings.
After the war, one of Paul's community
did document some stories about Jesus
in which he appears as a human,
but with super powers and a big secret,
who begs Yahweh not to let him be killed,
but Yahweh ignored his prayers.
Many other versions of the Jesus story
were recorded over the next 100 years.
None by actual eye witnesses
or people who knew eye witnesses or people who knew people
who would, you get the idea.
As time passed, these stories grew more far fetched,
suddenly including miracles like walking on water,
the virgin birth,
the resurrection of violent teenage Jesus
and Jesus raising people from the dead.
All these authors were still certain
that the Messiah would come to defeat their enemies
within their lifetimes,
but he still didn't come.
For 300 years,
various Jesus' factions fought against the Romans lines
and amongst themselves about who Jesus was
and how to worship him properly.
Until one of these groups met with the Roman emperor
and said, give us protection and tax breaks,
and we'll make you the head of our religion.
- "That's an offer I can't refuse,"
said the emperor Constantine.
And within a hundred years,
this group managed to take control of the entire empire.
They burned competing Gospels,
tore down temples, killed pagan philosophers,
and banned other religions,
including competing versions of the Jesus club.
And that my friends
is the slightly more accurate story
of the triumph of Christianity, Amen.
Well, isn't that a far more interesting story.
And it's also one that's supported
by historical evidence and biblical scholars.
So what does the next century hold for Christianity?
Peace and love or another theocracy.
I guess only time's gonna tell
unless of course, Jesus does come back soon,
which I've been told with very good authority
should be happening any minute now.
♪ Jesus is a friend of mine. ♪
♪ Jesus is my friend. ♪
♪ Jesus is a friend of mine. ♪
♪ I have a friend in Jesus. ♪
♪ Jesus is a friend of mine. ♪
♪ Jesus is my friend. ♪
♪ Jesus is a friend of mine. ♪
♪ He taught me how to live, my life as it should be. ♪
♪ He taught me how to turn my cheek ♪
♪ When people laugh at me. ♪
♪ I've had friends before ♪
♪ And I can tell you that, ♪
♪ He's one who will never leave your flat. ♪
♪ Jesus is a friend of mine. ♪
♪ Jesus is my friend. ♪
♪ Jesus is a friend of mine. ♪
♪ I have a friend in Jesus. ♪
♪ Jesus is a friend of mine. ♪
♪ Jesus is my friend. ♪
♪ Jesus is a friend of mine. ♪
♪ He taught me how to pray, and how to save my soul. ♪
♪ He taught me how to praise my God ♪
♪ And still play rock and roll. ♪
♪ The music may sound different ♪
♪ But the message is the same. ♪
♪ It's just that instrument who praise his name. ♪
♪ Jesus is a friend of mine. ♪
♪ Jesus is my friend. ♪
♪ Jesus is a friend of mine. ♪
♪ I have a friend in Jesus ♪
♪ Jesus is a friend of mine. ♪
♪ Jesus is a friend of mine.. ♪
♪ Six feet two, eyes are blue, ♪
♪ Jesus Christ he was a Jew. ♪
♪ Has anybody seen my Lord? ♪
♪ Big hook nose, ♪
♪ There he goes preaching so that everyone knows. ♪
♪ Has anybody seen my Lord? ♪
♪ Speared in the abdomen by a Roman. ♪
♪ Blood gushing out. ♪
♪ Rose from the dead, ♪
♪ So it is said. ♪
♪ People believe without a doubt. ♪
♪ Jesus died still a Jew. ♪
♪ Still a Jew so why aren't you? ♪
♪ Has anybody seen my, ♪
♪ Has anybody seen my Lord. ♪
♪ Jesus is a friend of mine. ♪
♪ Jesus is my friend. ♪
♪ Jesus is a friend of mine. ♪
♪ I have a friend in Jesus ♪
♪ Jesus is a friend of mine. ♪
♪ Jesus is my friend. ♪
♪ Jesus is a friend of mine. ♪
♪ He taught me how to live, my life as it should be. ♪
♪ He taught me how to turn my cheek, ♪
♪ When people laugh at me. ♪
♪ I've had friends before ♪
♪ And I can tell you that, ♪
♪ He's one who will never leave you flat. ♪
♪ Jesus is a friend of mine. ♪
♪ Jesus is my friend. ♪
♪ Jesus is a friend of mine. ♪
♪ I have a friend in Jesus. ♪
♪ Jesus is a friend of mine. ♪
♪ Jesus is my friend. ♪
♪ Jesus is a friend of mine. ♪
♪ He taught me how to pray and how to save my soul. ♪
♪ He taught me how to praise my God ♪
♪ And still play rock and roll. ♪
♪ The music may sound different ♪
♪ But the message is the same' ♪
♪ It's just the instrument who praise his name. ♪