strengthened by the observation that the Jesus tradition in the Pauline letters coheres with what is preserved in the Synoptic Gospels. Indeed, this coherence militates against the idea that the Jesus tradition of the Synoptic Gospels is the product of imagination and invented stories. After all, Paul was personally acquainted with several early Christian leaders who had been personally acquainted with and instructed by Jesus (Gal 1:18–2:14).16 The coherence of the Jesus tradition in Paul with what we find in the Synoptic Gospels constitutes important evidence of the antiquity and authenticity of the Synoptic tradition.
Summary
The text of the New Testament Gospels is fully extant in manuscripts 250 years or so removed in time from the originals, and it is partially extant in several manuscripts much closer in time. It is widely agreed that the text we have today is very close to the original, so close that no major teaching is in doubt. This fact calls for a presumption that we have something pretty close to the original text of the Gospels.
How reliable is the text of the Qur’an? It is hard to say, because proper collation and comparison have not yet taken place. The work of Francois Deroche, Keith Small, and Dan Brubaker, among others, suggests that a lot of work needs to be done with Qur’anic manuscripts before we know if the text of the Qur’an has been as well preserved as the text of the New Testament.17
In chapter 1 we were able to show that there are good reasons to conclude that the Greek New Testament Gospels provide us with early, reliable historical information about Jesus. In the present chapter we have seen that the manuscripts of the Greek New Testament are old, numerous, and accurate. In the next chapter we will address the important question of how Jesus understood himself and his mission.
Chapter 3—How Did Jesus Understand Himself and His Mission?
Messiah and Son of God
Probably the biggest debate relating to Christian origins and theology centers on the question of who Jesus really was (and is). This debate centers on the question of how Jesus understood himself. Did Jesus understand himself as the Messiah? Did he think of himself in divine terms?
The first question can be answered by appeal to the crucifixion of Jesus as “king of the Jews,” which is acknowledged by all four New Testament Gospels (Matt 27:37; Mark 15:26; Luke 23:38; John 19:19) and in an indirect way by Paul (Rom 1:3–4, NKJV: “born of the seed of David”; cf. 2 Tim 2:8). The execution of Jesus as Israel’s king almost certainly implies that Jesus had allowed, even encouraged, his followers to regard him as Israel’s anointed king. In Roman eyes, of course, the Jewish Messiah is the equivalent of what Rome preferred to call “king of the Jews.” Accordingly, the first question is not especially difficult. We’ll pursue it further in chapter 12.
The second question is much more difficult to answer: Did Jesus think of himself in divine terms? Part of the problem stems from the Jewish religious culture, in which modesty is expected: “Are you he who is to come?” “Go and tell John what you hear and see.” “Are you the Messiah?” “You have said so.” These questions and their respective answers are examples of this modesty. As a rule, Jesus does not provide an explicit answer. He does not tell his disciples that he is the Messiah; he asks them their opinion (Mark 8:27–29). He does not say “yes” to the messengers of John; rather, he tells them to go back and report to John what they have observed (Matt 11:2–6).1
The second question is especially difficult in reference to Jesus, because he and his disciples were devout Jews and as such were strict monotheists. But if they were monotheists, in what sense could they have viewed Jesus as divine? Before we can answer that question we need to look at Jewish monotheism.2
Jewish Monotheism
The major distinctive of the religion of ancient Israel was its commitment to monotheism, the belief in one God. The people of Israel did not always live up to that ideal, and without doubt many were henotheists (those who believe in one particular deity) as opposed to genuine monotheists (those who believe that there is only one God).3
In any event, Israelite monotheism was quite remarkable in light of the fact that, with rare exception, the ancient Near East was a polytheistic world. Most peoples worshipped many gods, even if one or two of their deities were held in especially high regard (such as Baal by the Philistines or Marduk by the Babylonians). The temptation faced by the ancient kings of Israel was to compromise their monotheistic faith by agreeing to treaties with other nations in which the gods of these nations would be respected, perhaps even worshipped. Sometimes this meant placing an image (or idol) of a foreign deity in the city of Jerusalem, perhaps in the temple sanctuary itself. It was against this sort of thing that the Old Testament prophets spoke so harshly, calling Israel a harlot for chasing after other lovers, as it were (e.g., Isa 1:21; Jer 3:1; Ezek 16:26).
In the aftermath of destruction and exile at the hands of the Babylonians (586 BC), the people of Israel had learned their lesson. The nation was now committed to the ancient command of Moses:
“Hear, O Israel: The LORD our God is one LORD; and you shall love the LORD your God with all your heart, and with all your soul, and with all your might. And these words which I command you this day shall be upon your heart; and you shall teach them diligently to your children, and shall talk of them when you sit in your house, and when you walk by the way, and when you lie down, and when you rise. And you shall bind them as a sign upon your hand, and they shall be as frontlets between your eyes. And you shall write them on the doorposts of your house and on your gates.” (Deut 6:4–9)
This is the famous passage known as the Shema’ (“Hear”). In Deuteronomy, the fifth and final book of Moses, in which the Law is given a second time (for the benefit of the generation of Israelites about to cross the Jordan River and enter the Promised Land), Israel is commanded to love the Lord their God. But even here it would be possible to hold to henotheism, loyally holding to only one God (Yahweh), but at the same time, at least in principle, acknowledging the existence of other gods.
It is against this possibility that Isaiah speaks, giving voice to the word of Yahweh:
“You are my witnesses,” says the LORD, “and my servant whom I have chosen, that you may know and believe me and understand that I am He. Before me no god was formed, nor shall there be any after me.” (Isa 43:10)
“Fear not, nor be afraid; have I not told you from of old and declared it? And you are my witnesses! Is there a God besides me? There is no Rock; I know not any.” (Isa 44:8)
These prophetic utterances give clear expression to what we would today call strict monotheism. Isaiah asserts that there simply is no other God than Yahweh (or “the LORD”). He and he alone is God. No god existed before Yahweh and no god will exist after him. There is no god besides Yahweh. Moses and the prophets were not only monotheists; they were Yahwists. That is to say, the God they believed in was Yahweh, the God of the patriarchs Abraham, Isaac and Jacob. The people of Israel are commanded to embrace monotheism and not merely henotheism.
Jewish monotheism only intensified in the struggle against Antiochus IV Epiphanes, the Syrian Greek ruler who in 167 BC attempted to coerce the Jewish people into giving up their ancestral faith and embracing that of the Greeks. The attempt failed, resulting in an independent Jewish state and a deeply entrenched commitment to Yahweh as Israel’s only God. Those who suffered and died for their faith in Yahweh (the “Maccabean martyrs”) were regarded as heroes and exemplary models. Polytheism or belief in another god was
