Who's Lying?

As there are discrepancies between the various Gospels of the apostles concerning the so- called 'life' and public ministry of Jesus and his Dirty Dozen: so there are discrepancies between the gospel accounts of these matters and the prevalent teachings about them, as promulgated by Christian scholarship generally. For instance: Christian scholarship states emphatically (and without any exception I'm aware of) that Jesus was in the tomb three days and three nights; though the gospels say no such thing. What the gospels do affirm is that Jesus of Nazareth said his 'life' in this world was to him death; and that his 'death' lasted a total of three days and three nights.

Is it scholarship, or rather conspiracy, which compels scholars to declare with one voice that Jesus was in the tomb three days and three nights: in contradiction to what the scriptures actually say? Their reasons for doing so certainly are biblical, at any rate; which is to say they may be defended (albeit impotently) and refuted by scripture.

But, as there are prophets many, and some true, some false: so to defend or refute the misunderstandings of the scholars is more- or less- right or wrong, according to the scriptures; and in the eyes of God, who is judge of all. As Eve was deceived by the truth she received of the "serpent" in the garden of Eden-- and that because of her heart of deceit-- so scholars 'defend' the integrity of the word of God by assaulting the integrity of the Word of God. Shall their reward be their benefit? or the stripes by which we are healed? God knows.

The crux of this contention is found in Matthew's Gospel, where Matthew claims Jesus said of himself, "as Jonas was three days and three nights in the whale's belly; so shall the Son of man be three days and three nights in the heart of the earth" [Matthew 12:40]. Christian scholarship-- for one reason or another-- assumes "the heart of the earth" spoken of by Jesus is hell. Does this assumption betray the contents of their own hearts? Is the presumably 'inanimate' earth capable of holding hell in her heart the way a wicked man might? Does the earth-- as wicked Eve-- hold her dead in reverence? her living in revulsion? A cursory glance at a calendar should inform otherwise.

According to the timeline described by our observances of these events-- and the scriptural record of them-- Jesus was murdered on a Friday, and interred in the tomb at sunset the same day: which we ironically refer to as 'Good Friday.' Before sunrise the following Sunday (which scripture properly refers to as "the first day of the week"), the corpus Christi was peculiarly absent from the same tomb. Thus, the time Jesus spent in the tomb is described, by calendar and scripture alike, as: Friday night; Saturday; and Saturday night. That-- for those who obviously cannot count-- is two nights and one day; not three days and three nights.

Why does such an easily- refuted misunderstanding of the words of the Word of God so persist and abound? Why must some make Jesus out a liar in order that they might discover 'integrity' in the heart of God? If such were able to hear simple words, one might say to them, "Trust in the LORD with all thine heart; and lean not unto thine own understanding [Proverbs 3:5]." There was a time when calling a liar a liar could lead to the legal, (shall we say?) timely demise of a true witness-- if the liar were quicker on the draw, or his aim truer. That's real, practical honor; not 'spiritualized' honor. God's honor is likewise an inescapable fact; not an idyllic concept. It's no light matter to assail the person or character of God, or any of his children, through false witness or any other means. All judges are jealous of their honor; and God is The Judge.

Jesus said, "Whosoever therefore shall break one of these least commandments, and shall teach men so, he shall be called the least in the kingdom of heaven [Matthew 5:19a - c];" illustrating the importance of properly respecting him and his words. When contrasted with what he is recorded to have said about John Baptist elsewhere, the illustration thus provided speaks more clearly. While in prison, waiting to lose the head which was perhaps never squarely on his shoulders, JB-- through his own disciples-- sent a communication to Jesus: "Who are you [to paraphrase]?"

This is an ironical question, coming from the first Jew to say, "Crucify him!" Why would JB call for the crucifixion of a man who's identity he couldn't even discern? This is, after all, what JB's ejaculation, "Behold the Lamb of God, which taketh away the sin of the world [John 1:29c & d]" meant to the Jews he so identified Jesus to. There isn't a Jew alive today-- thousands of years after the last temple sacrifice-- who doesn't make of this declaration exactly what the Jews of Jesus' day made of it. In response to Johnny B's question, "Art thou he that should come, or do we look for another [Matthew 11:3b & c]?" Jesus says of JB, "Verily I say unto you, Among them that are born of women there hath not risen a greater than John the Baptist: notwithstanding he that is least in the kingdom of heaven is greater than he [Matthew 11:11] ;" meaning [again, to paraphrase] "Backatcha, Johnny. I don't know you, either."

Now Johnny B is certainly one of those whom "all men shall speak well of [Luke 6:26b]," though in so doing they shall speak falsely of Christ, inasmuch as JB spoke falsely of Jesus. This word, "Lamb of God" was, after all, not the true witness Johnny received from heaven concerning Jesus. That witness said of Jesus, "Thou art my beloved Son [not Lamb], in whom I am well pleased [Mark 1:11c & d]." JB obviously thought he was the "Thou" so referred to by God, inasmuch as he said of himself, "this is the Son of God [John 1:34b]." For more on Johnny B and his baptism, see my post entitled 'Johnny B Not So Good To Me.' The point, here, is that two thousand years after Calvary: professing Christians still receive Johnny B's word about Jesus; and discard Jesus' word about Johnny B; though, of course, Jesus is the one they 'believe,' (whatever that must mean).

So it is with many things uttered by the Word of God: it is generally assumed that 'the children of the devil [John 8:44a]' know and understand more about God's words than his own children do; even when this requires the willful submission of God's children to the devil's torture imposed upon them by the cognitive dissonance necessary to so abuse God and the word he has "magnified... above all [his] name [Psalms 138:2c]." Speaking for myself, I can only say: Goddamn the devils. I believe God; and Jesus' prophecy is-- at the very least-- the surest word of God I've ever encountered. Devil take the Jews and their proselytes, "whom I have delivered unto Satan, that they may learn not to blaspheme [1 Timothy 1:20b & c]."

So, what does this "three days and three nights" business mean, anyway? The Word of God said, "No man taketh [my life] from me, but I lay it down of myself. I have power to lay it down, and I have power to take it again. This commandment have I received of my Father [John 10:18]." If we trust Jesus, we know where he laid his life down from, inasmuch as he said, "I came down from heaven, not to do mine own will, but the will of him that sent me [John 6:38]." As to why taking a journey would be likened to dying: It's rudimentary.

Concerning Adam's expulsion from the garden of Eden: the word of God does not refer to Adam's journey back to "the ground from whence he was taken [Genesis 3:23c]" as his birthday; but, rather, as his date of expiration-- inasmuch as the LORD God said, "in the day that thou eatest thereof thou shalt surely die [Genesis 2:17c]." Why, then, would not the same journey-- when taken by the one who does God's will; not his own-- be referred to as suicide? His ascension-- not his resurrection-- would naturally then be referred to as 'rising again,' as in Matthew 20:19, et. al.

What this then indicates, concerning the subject at hand, is that the whole of Jesus' 'life' in the world-- from condescension to ascension-- was three days and three nights. When the Jews murdered him, Jesus was-- like the sacrifices murdered in the valley of the son of Hinnom-- still an infant, in the eyes of his Father; though he was a grown man in the eyes of those fathers who murdered him and their own infants. [Is the light this sheds on the 'Baby Jesus Cult' black-- or darkness altogether?]

Now scholars have always 'known' Jesus was thirty- to- thirty- three years old at Calvary; and for those who can't reconcile Darwin with Genesis in light of the discrepancies they perceive in Darwin's 'calendar' (which is to say, the fossil record), this is going to hurt. But the simple truth of the matter is: the world (not to mention the universe) does not revolve around the scholars or their rabbis; even if their 'clocks' do. God is not a man that he should reckon time by "the sun dial of Ahaz [Isaiah 38:8c]." According to the apostle Peter, those who think otherwise are 'ignorant': "But, beloved, be not ignorant of this one thing, that one day is with the Lord as a thousand years, and a thousand years as one day [2 Peter 3:8]."

For some-- "faithful Abraham [Galatians 3:9]," for instance-- murdering babies has always been the key to salvation; and I know "salvation is of the Jews [John 4:22c]," because The Word of God said so, when he was a baby-- just before they murdered him 'to save the whole world.'