|
No. VIII
To the Rev. Mr. Miller
Dear Sir:
I promised you in my last
letter (Occident, Tebeth 5611, pp. 509-514) that I
would continue to write on the contradictions found
in the New Testament, which promise I now fulfil,
with the ardent wish to convince you and all
intelligent men, that the canonical Gospels of the
Christians are neither of divine revelation nor can
they be viewed as authentic historical records.
You will admit, that the
miracles, which Jesus is supposed to have wrought,
are related by the evangelists in a contradictory
manner; each of them speaks of a different set of
miracles, which were wrought at different times, in
other places, and other occasions that those related
by his colleagues; and you have therefore a right to
expect, that I shall make some observations on
<<595>>them; but the miracles recorded in the New
Testament are so numerous, of so extravagant and
hyperbolical a nature, and lack so greatly every
historical evidence, that I consider the matter not
only beyond every rule of rational criticism, but
also unworthy to waste my time and the space of the
Occident therewith.
The parables of Jesus are by no means the same in
every canonical gospel; every evangelist has his own
species, written in his own style, and represented
as given on those occasions which suited him best.
We will take for example Matthew xiii., where we
read, that Jesus recited seven parables, when he sat
in a ship, and a numerous audience was on the shore.
Mark iv. describes the same scene, but there we find
only three parables, two of which are similar to
those of Matthew, whilst the second is a new
invention. Luke and John have not described this
scene, nor do they relate the same parables; and
this is the case with nearly all the others. The
sermons of Jesus labour under the same misfortune as
his parables; every evangelist records other
sermons, written in different style and spirit, so
that they can by no means be ascribed to one author.
A fair specimen of contradiction are the two sermons
given in Matthew v. and Luke vi. (commonly called
the Sermon on the Mount). The one re presents Jesus
standing on a mountain, when delivering it, and the
other as sitting on a plain; the one makes him
recite a long address, the other but a short one;
the one fixes as the time when Jesus was known
already in all Palestine and Syria, the other at
some few weeks after his baptism; and still every
impartial reader must see that they intend to record
the very same address.
Another, a complete specimen of contradiction, is
the speech about the little child; according to
Matthew xv ii. 1, it was delivered because “At the
same time came the disciples unto Jesus saying, Who
is the greatest in the kingdom of heaven?” According
to Mark ix. 33, 34, because they had a dispute on
the way, who should be the greatest? According to
Luke ix. 46, because “then there arose a reasoning
among them, which of them should be the greatest,
and Jesus perceiving the <<596>>thought of their
heart,” &c.; but John knows nothing about all this.
According to Matthew, they had neither a dispute nor
a reasoning; according to Mark, they had a dispute;
and according to Luke, it was a fair reasoning,
which troubled them; according to Matthew and Mark,
they asked Jesus; but according to Luke, Jesus
perceived it without being asked; according to
Matthew, the question was about the greatness in the
kingdom of heaven; but the other two let them reason
and dispute about worldly greatness, as the answer
plainly indicates, “If any man desire to be the
first, he shall be the last of all.” The same amount
of contradictions will be found in the answer of
Jesus to this query, which the reader will easily
detect in the respective passages.
We
read (Matthew v. 17), “Think not that I am come to
destroy the Law or the Prophets; I am not come to
destroy but to fulfil;” but in Matthew xix. 3, and
Mark x. 2, Jesus speaks severely against the Mosaic
law of divorcement, which we deem to be a plain
contradiction.
Judas the traitor is represented in the Gospels as
having repented, and returned the money to the chief
priests and elders, which he cast down in the temple
and departed, after which he committed suicide; hut
the Judas of the Acts not only kept the money and
bought a field for it, but he did not repent and
died accidentally.
The grossest contradictions in the Gospels are about
Jesus’ last days, his death, resurrection, and his
ascent to heaven. If we compare Matthew xxi., Mark
xi., Luke xix., and John xii., we meet with the
following contradictions : Matthew and Mark
assert that Jesus came to Jerusalem from Peraea,
which is east of Jerusalem; but Luke states that he
came from Samaria, which is north of Jerusalem; and
according to John he came from a city called
Ephraim, which, as he states (xi. 54), was near the
wilderness, and consequently south of Jerusalem. We
think it impossible for a man to come at the same
time from the north, south, and east. Matthew tells
us, that he sent two of his disciples for an ass and
a colt; Luke and Mark assert that he sent them for
an ass only; but according to John, he sent for
<<597>>neither of them. According to Matthew, they
were not questtioned by anybody, when they took the
ass and the colt; but according to Luke and Mark,
they were questioned and made an answer. According
to Matthew, he rode on the ass and on the colt;
according to the two others, on the colt; and
according to John, on the ass. When arriving at
Jerusalem, John and Matthew represent the people as
rejoicing and shouting hosannah; but the other two
speak only of the disciples as those who made the
exclamations; so that according to Luke, some of the
Pharisees told him to stop them.
If
we compare Matthew xxvi., Mark xiv., Luke xxii., and
John xviii., we find other contradictions. He went
from Jerusalem to Gethsemane, say the first three;
whilst John asserts, over the river Kidron; the
first three state that he was sorely afraid of
death, and that he wept bitterly, and prayed that
God might save him; but John knows nothing of the
story, notwithstanding he is represented as an
eye-witness of it. While Matthew and Mark represent
him as taking three disciples with him, and return
three times to the others, and finding them asleep:
Luke says nothing of any disciples who went with
him, nor of his returning three times; but he
relates as a fact what the others are ignorant of,
that an angel appeared to Jesus to strengthen him,
and that he was in such an agony that his sweat was,
as it were, drops of blood. . While the first three
evangelists let Judas kiss him to indicate him to
the soldiers, John states that he came forth from a
garden in quite another place, and delivered himself
to the soldiers, who fell on the ground, and
suffered Peter to draw his sword and cut off the ear
of one of them. According to the first, he was
brought to Caiphas, and according to John, to Annas.
If we believe the first two, he was examined the
same night (which is against the Jewish law); whilst
the other two say it took place the next morning.
According to Matthew, they sought for false
witnesses against him; according to Mark, they
discharged false witnesses, because they
contradicted each other; but according to Luke,
there were no witnesses whatever.
The farther you proceed in the evangelical books the
more confusion and contradiction you meet with; we
only describe the <<598>>principal ones, wherefore
we will now compare Matthew xxviii., Mark xvi., Luke
xxiv., and John xx., which speak of the resurrection
of Jesus. Matthew asserts that the two Marys came on
the Sabbath evening to see the sepulchre; the others
state that it was early in the morning; according to
Mark, Salome was with the two Marys; Luke says “they
came;” John asserts that only Mary Magdalene came,
and afterwards came Peter and others. They saw an
angel coming from heaven, causing an earthquake,
and, rolling the stone from the grave, he sat upon
it but Mark states that it was a young man in a
white garment, who sat in the grave, and not on the
stone, which was rolled off before they came. Luke
asserts that two men came to them at the grave; but
according to John, two angels sat in the grave.
According to Matthew, Jesus appeared first to the
two Marys, when they were on their way home;
according to John and Mark, he appeared only to Mary
Magdalene, and at the grave; but Luke states that he
appeared first to the two Marys, and to Johanna, who
told it to the eleven apostles. The long
conversation between Jesus and Mary, after his
death, is only told by John; the others are ignorant
of this important fact. According to Matthew, the
eleven disciples went out to Galilee, where Jesus
appeared unto them; but according to Mark, he
appeared to the eleven at a place which is not
mentioned; according to Luke, he appeared to them at
Jerusalem. According to John he appeared three times
unto his disciples; but according to Paul, several
hundred people saw him after his resurrection. The
same curious variety we find recorded in the Gospels
about the last words of Jesus before “he was
received up into heaven,” as Mark gives it; or
before he was “carried up into heaven,” according to
Luke; whereas Matthew and John do not tell us
whither he went.
It
is evident, that all the evangelists meant to tell
the same story; but as they contradict each other so
greatly, we are naturally led to believe that these
books were written long after the death of Jesus,
and that the materials for them were taken from the
fabulous traditions current among the people which
necessarily are neither a divine revelation nor
furnish an authentical record for the historian to
draw from. We Jews can‑<<599>>not, dare not, and
will not, sacrifice our ancient faith in deference
to the fabulous reports of the unhistorical
evangelists; and so you and your friends will
perceive, that their endeavour to convert us is in
vain, and ridiculous likewise. In my next I shall
have to say a few words about the origin of
Christianity and its dogmas, which deserve the
attention of all who reason on the subject.
Respectfully yours,
ISAAC M. WISE, D.D.
Albany, January 5, 5611, A. M. |
