Does it Matter who Jesus was? (Or whether he was)?

I have decided to revisit that Time article from 2014 to which this prior post referred. The article in question was titled “The Search for Jesus: Inside the Scholars’ Debate.” After rehashing various revisionist positions on Jesus, the article drew the following conclusion:

This time of year, many people will conclude that those scholars are asking the wrong questions. They’ll answer as one reader did in the letters to the editor following the 1996 story: “It doesn’t matter who Jesus of Nazareth was or what he was,” he wrote. “What’s most important is the lessons he taught.” (You can find this online at Time Magazine’s website.)

To this we have to respond, “Hell, yes it matters!” And I stick by the expletive here for its literal meaning, which is an evocation of an unpleasant afterlife for those who are destined for perdition. It matters, because nothing less than eternity is at stake!

What, after all, were the lessons that Jesus taught? While a tiny bit of what Jesus said can be viewed as isolated nuggets of wisdom, a la Confucius, the bulk of his teaching was about himself. If a theme could be slapped on what is recorded about the teachings of Jesus, it would be something like “The Father has sent me; the Kingdom of God is at hand”. He spoke much about the nature of that kingdom (try to count the number of times he launched a parable with the words “the kingdom of Heaven is like…”). He spoke a lot about his own relationship to the Father (“I and the Father are one”, “whoever knows me knows the Father”–See John 10:30 and John 14:7). He spoke of his future glorification. He claimed to be the “Bread of Life,” and the “Good Shepherd.” He claimed to be the “Resurrection and the Life”. He called himself by the title “son of man”, which ancient Jews would have understood to be a messianic title (for example, see Daniel 7)

If Jesus didn’t exist, then you aren’t left with many teachings that should be taken all that seriously. Maybe you can go ahead and take away the so-called Golden Rule: “Do unto others as you would have others do unto you”.

If he did exist (which in fact is the majority report among scholars), and taught all these things, but was wrong about himself, then you are left with a sad tale of a misguided man. You are left with a man who was wrong about himself, and about the Kingdom of God, and who was ultimately tortured and killed for no good reason. In this scenario the “good teacher” was wrong, and therefore isn’t all that “good” a teacher. You can still take away the Golden Rule as a bonus prize.

If Jesus really existed, and really was a “good teacher” who was right about the things he taught, then we need to treat his words with commensurate awe and reverence. We need to decide how to respond to “I am the way, the truth, and the life: no man cometh unto the Father, but by me.”