“Why is the greatest story ever told still the greatest mystery never solved?”

So asks CNN in its “CNN Presents” special, “The Mystery of Jesus”.

In this article, I would like to address a couple of assertions made by the special in regards to the Gospels.   Perhaps we can make the “Mystery of Jesus” a little less…uh….mysterious.

To be sure, one might turn such a question around on CNN and ask of them:

“Yes…just why IS the greatest story ever told STILL the greatest mystery never solved?”

Especially considering the profound evidence testifying to the reliability of the history recorded in the Gospels.  I mean, why is it that no matter what evidence is brought forth, skeptics continue to pretend that all we can know about the Biblical record is that we can’t really know anything for sure at all.

I have a theory.  Could it be that these “scholarly” critics of the Bible just can’t stomach the implications of the biblical story of Jesus as it stands?  Let’s face it, when you start with the pre-supposition that anyone who believes the Bible is a fundamentalist, right-wing wacko, such a view becomes powerful motivation for finding a view of history (any view!) other than the Bible’s.  This, in my opinion, comes nearer to the truth of the matter.  “Why, you don’t actually believe the Bible to be literally true do you?”

Yes, Virginia.  We do.

According to CNN, however, there seems to be nothing about Jesus that we can know for sure.  (Hmmm….sounds vaguely familiar…is my college professor working for CNN?)

To CNN, the story of Jesus is shrouded in mystery.  In fact, CNN makes the claim that Moses, Buddha, and Mohammed are less “mysterious” than Jesus is.  Why?  CNN says it’s because we know hardly anything about Jesus “the man”.

And why don’t we know anything?

Because the primary source for Jesus’ life comes from the Gospels and – according to CNN - the Gospels’ history cannot be trusted.  They say the reason for this is two-fold:

1)     The Gospels were written (a whopping!) 40 to 70 years after the crucifixion.

2)     The Gospels were written with the intent to convert people.

For these reasons, CNN says, we must distrust their history. 

Let’s examine these arguments.

Large Time Gap?

Okay, let’s put this in perspective.  If this “unbelievable” time gap were true, it would be like a 60 or 70 year old man relating some major life experience…say, from WWII… 40 or so years after the fact – an experience, I would add, that was so profound it was burned into his memory.  Wow, bet you couldn’t believe anything that guy said, huh?

 If you had an opportunity to interview a survivor from the Titanic when he or she was 80 years old, would you doubt his or her testimony simply because it was given many years after 1912? 

Corrie Ten Boom – famous Nazi death camp survivor – traveled the world sharing her experiences right up until her death in 1985.  Should we doubt her testimony simply because the actual events took place 40 years earlier?  To do so is dishonest and unfair to those who have tremendous stories to tell.

John and Matthew watched Jesus:

• open blind eyes
• heal the disabled
• raise the dead to life
• make a storm cease at his command
• feed 5,000 people with 5 small fish and 2 loaves of bread
• predict and fulfill his own crucifixion and resurrection. 

Hmmm….bet that would stay with you for awhile.  Peter walked on water at Jesus’ invitation.  I could see Peter (had he lived that long) relating such a story well into his 80’s or 90’s couldn’t you?  Would you not believe him simply because it was 40 years after the fact?

Given the phenomenal nature of what the Gospel writers experienced – 40 to 70 years after the crucifixion wouldn’t bother me at all.

If that were true…

However, considering such a time frame is really a moot point.  Why?  Because scholars do not place the writing of the Gospels at 40 to 70 YEARS after the crucifixion, but rather 50 to 80 A.D.  Big difference.  Jesus wasn’t crucified in 1 A.D. but rather around 33 A.D.  That places the earliest Gospel – Mark – within 17 years of the crucifixion.  And that’s according to the most conservative scholars. 

Considering our discussion above, 17 years makes any supposed time-gap problems laughable.

Don’t Bother Me with Facts!

Another reason to doubt the Gospel records, according to CNN, is that they were “written in order to convert people”.

And this is a problem…how?

First, let’s be up front and say that the Apostle John does not shy away from the accusation but owns it completely:

“And many other signs truly did Jesus in the presence of his disciples, which are not written in this book; but these are written, that ye might believe that Jesus is the Christ, the Son of God; and that believing ye might have life through his name.”  John 20:30-31

The Apostle John was, indeed, trying to “convert” people.  Certainly he was!  Wouldn’t you if you saw and experienced what he did?  If what this man Jesus was saying was true, then what people believe about Him has eternal ramifications – FOR EVERYBODY!  Should we disbelieve his testimony simply because he is relating the events which he witnessed with his own eyes?  Should we now automatically disbelieve him because he writes with the intent to persuade his readers of what he has seen?

Do you know how many books there are in Borders bookstore that have been written with the express purpose of persuading people?  Should we automatically count them as suspect simply because they are thus written?  Or should we look at the facts or data presented and then decide whether we believe what has been presented?

CNN seems to think that for John to say, “these things were written so that you might believe” is damning evidence that John was manipulating his facts. 

Let me ask this:  If John were indeed manipulating evidence – and leaving out clearly contradictory evidence – do you think he would admit that he was doing it right there in John 20:31?  Or could he have been saying, “Look folks, there are so many miraculous things Jesus did that proved He was the Son of God, but, here, I’m giving you these – I’m including these that I’ve seen and written – they should be more than enough to convince you.” 

Rather than doubting the motivation of the Gospel writers, somehow I find myself doubting CNN. 

John is, indeed, trying to convert his readers, but the motivation isn’t as sinister as CNN might suggest.  Why did John write?

Yes, John was writing to “convert”.  But, why?  The answer is not as sinister as CNN might suggest.  John tells us in his first letter (1John 1:4):

“And these things write we unto you...THAT YOUR JOY MAY BE FULL.”

Come on CNN…is that so terrible?