Jarl Waggoner's Articles

Free Web space and hosting from jesusanswers.com

THE OTHER SIDE OF JESUS

Jarl K. Waggoner

Scripture quotations are from the New American Standard Bible, The Lockman Foundation

THE POPULAR JESUS

Jesus was a good man. Indeed, he was a great man. On this there is almost universal agreement. Jews, Muslims, Christians, and even atheists affirm the greatness of this man who lived in an obscure nation almost 2000 years ago.

Why is it that this man is so admired even today? At least part of the answer undoubtedly lies in the strength of Jesus' character.¹ He was a man of principle and commitment. But even above this, Jesus is admired as a man of compassion and love. Jesus' love encompassed not only those who followed him and accepted his teachings but also the outcasts of society, the infirm, the hated foreigners, and even his enemies. It was a love that cut through the complexities and prohibitions of Jewish life in order to meet human needs. On more than one occasion, he ignored the Sabbath restrictions of contemporary Judaism in order to help people (Luke 6:1-11; 13:10-17).

This popular view of Jesus as an ideal man, a great moral teacher, and an exceedingly compassionate human being is shared by people of every class, race, religion, and nationality. It is shared by intellectuals and common people of every walk of life. It is this view of Jesus that has been so frequently portrayed in films, books, and popular culture in general.

In view of this popular opinion in regard to Jesus, one might properly wonder why Jesus was executed after only three years of public teaching. What was it that swayed the public opinion of his day to the point that a multitude of people cried out for his death by crucifixion (Matt. 27:22-23)?²

The answer to this question lies in the fact that the popular view of Jesus is selective and inadequate. It is not wrong; it simply doesn't go far enough. It focuses on only one part of Jesus' character and teaching. To say that Jesus was a great teacher or a great man is like saying Dwight Eisenhower was a great general. It is true, but it is not the complete picture. The answer to why Jesus was killed rests in the truth that he was not merely a great moral teacher and example.

THE OTHER SIDE OF JESUS

It was not so much what Jesus did that offended his contemporaries (and still offends many today) as it was what he taught. Those who view Jesus as merely a great teacher and example focus on his moral teaching--those things that people innately recognize as virtuous, such as love, compassion, honesty, responsibility, and justice. Yet Jesus' teaching went far beyond this. Truth was preeminent in Jesus' life, and he did not shy away from proclaiming it, whether he was teaching moral principles, revealing his own purpose and mission, or castigating the religious leaders of his day as hypocrites.

Jesus taught at least three things that demonstrate the inadequacy of the popular view of him.

HIS IDENTITY

First, Jesus clearly claimed to be God in the flesh. There can simply be no denying this fact.³ An entire book could be written on Jesus' claims to be God,⁴ but for our purpose we can point out several examples of such claims.

Perhaps clearest is Jesus' statement in John 10:30, where he said in the face of a hostile audience, "I and the Father (the God of the Old Testament) are one." There is no doubt about what Jesus meant. "The Jews took up stones again to stone Him" (vs. 31) because they understood that he was claiming to be God. They saw this as an act of blasphemy, an act worthy of death. They said to Jesus, "You, being a man, make yourself out to be God" (vs. 33). Jesus did not contradict their statement.

Similarly, Jesus' claim to be the Son of God was also an affirmation of his deity for which he was charged with making himself equal with God (John 5:16-18). From time to time, some have charged that claiming to be the "Son of God" is not equivalent to claiming to be God. This, however, is to ignore the Jewish culture of Jesus' day in which the expression "son of" "did not generally imply any insubordination, but rather equality and identity of nature."⁵ It is clear that this is how Jesus' contemporaries understood the expression and explains why they reacted so violently to Jesus' repeated claims to be God's Son.

When questioned under oath by the high priest after his arrest, Jesus gave a clear affirmative answer to the question of whether he was the Son of God (Mark 14:61-62).⁶ Jesus' reply, in fact, sealed his execution, for the Jewish religious leaders considered such a claim to be the ultimate blasphemy. They taunted him for making the claim even as he hung dying on the cross (Matt. 27:43).

Jesus accepted the worship of men (Matt. 14:33; 28:9) after affirming that God alone is worthy of worship (Matt. 4:10). He also claimed the power to forgive sins, a right only God possesses (Mark 2:1-12).

This is only a sample of the evidence that Jesus himself taught that he was God. His first followers, most of whom were devout Jews, accepted and promulgated this teaching (cf. Matt. 16:15-17; John 20:28; Col. 2:9). Any honest reader of the gospels cannot escape the conclusion that while Jesus was obviously a man, he also claimed to be the one and only God (Deut. 6:4; Isa. 45:5).

The popular view of Jesus as simply a great teacher and great man is wholly inadequate in view of his claim to be the one, true God. In fact, the popular view of Jesus is a logical impossibility! Why? Jesus' claim to be God has to be either true or false.

"If it was false then we have two and only two alternatives. He either knew it was false or He did not know it was false."⁷ If Jesus knew his claim was false, he was, quite frankly, a liar. "But, if He was a liar, then He was also a hypocrite because He told others to be honest, whatever the cost, while Himself teaching and living a colossal lie. And, more than that, He was a demon, because He told others to trust Him for their eternal destiny. If He could not back up His claims and knew it, then he was unspeakably evil. Lastly, He would also be a fool because it was His claims to being God that led to His crucifixion."⁸

If, on the other hand, Jesus was sincerely mistaken about being God and simply did not realize it, he was nothing less than insane. For a Jew to make such proclamations in a Jewish culture was akin to writing his own death sentence.

The fact is, to accept the popular view of Jesus without accepting his claims to deity is illogical. Does a liar or lunatic conduct himself as Jesus did? Cambridge University professor and novelist C. S. Lewis set forth the dilemma in stark terms:

I am trying here to prevent anyone saying the really foolish thing that people often say about Him (Jesus): "I'm ready to accept Jesus as a great moral teacher, but I don't accept His claim to be God." That is the one thing we must not say. A man who was merely a man and said the sort of things Jesus said would not be a great moral teacher. He would either be a lunatic--on a level with the man who says he is a poached egg--or else he would be the Devil of Hell. You must make your choice. Either this man was, and is, the Son of God: or else a madman or something worse. You can shut Him up for a fool, you can spit at Him and kill Him as a demon; or you can fall at His feet and call Him Lord and God. But let us not come with any patronizing nonsense about His being a great human teacher. He has not left that open to us. He did not intend to.⁹

HIS MESSAGE

A second teaching of Jesus that follows from the first and also demonstrates the inadequacy of the popular view of Jesus was his claim to be the exclusive means of salvation.

There is an uneasy feeling among people--a universal feeling of having violated the standards of their own conscience. It is this human condition that gives rise to various religious and philosophical beliefs and acts in an attempt to rid oneself of this guilt. Some simply try to ignore or deny their guilt; others resort to drugs or alcohol in their desire to escape it.

No problem--physical or otherwise--can be permanently and completely solved unless it is first correctly diagnosed. The diagnoses of the human problem vary widely, from denial that man has any inherent problem, to the biblical diagnosis that man is guilty of sin--that is, he has rebelled against the standards of his Creator. Whether one believes the biblical diagnosis or not, Jesus clearly believed that all people are guilty of rebellion against a morally perfect God. He not only stated that mankind is corrupted by sin (cf. Matt. 5:21-22; 7:11), but this was the underlying assumption in all his teaching regarding man (cf. John 8:24).

Furthermore, Jesus believed and taught that man's rebellion separated him from God and made him subject to God's just judgment (cf. Mark 9:43-48; Luke 16:19-31; John 3:36). While many in our day scoff at the idea of sin as being the creation of superstitious and unenlightened minds, this was exactly what Jesus taught was man's problem.

The people of Jesus' day did not disagree with Jesus' diagnosis of the human condition. What they rejected was Jesus' exclusive solution. His solution, however, is entirely consistent with his claim to be God in the flesh. For if man's problem is his alienation from God and if Jesus and Jesus alone is God, then Jesus' statement in John 14:6 makes perfect sense: "I am the way, and the truth, and the life; no one comes to the Father but through Me." What the Jews of Jesus' day, as well as people today, find offensive is not so much that Jesus diagnosed man's problem as sin, but that he claimed to be the one and only solution to the sin problem!

In our pluralistic society, such a claim seems extremely narrow and arrogant; yet this is one thing that sets Jesus and Christianity apart from every other religion. Neither Buddha, nor Confucius, nor Mohammed claimed to be God or claimed to be the exclusive way of salvation. In fact, among people today who claim belief in God, most seem to think that there are any number of ways to make oneself acceptable to God. Jesus rejected this idea. Indeed, he rejected the idea that people can do anything to earn acceptance with God. He made it clear that he offered the only way (cf. John 3:36). This is not the popular view of Jesus, but it is the historical one.

HIS MISSION

Third, the popular view of Jesus fails to acknowledge the goal of Jesus' life and ministry. Why did Jesus come? What did he see as his mission in life? Most people today seem to think Jesus wanted to show us the way of love, that is, set an example for us to follow. He wanted to show us the importance of caring about others, being compassionate toward the weak and oppressed, forgiving others, and seeking justice. Certainly these are all important virtues that Jesus demonstrated, and certainly we would all do well to emulate him in these areas. But being a great moral example was not the primary purpose in Jesus' life.

Jesus made it very plain what he perceived as his mission in life. He said that he had "come to save that which was lost" (Matt. 18:11). He saw that man's rebellion against his creator had separated him from God. Man was "lost." He had God's wrath (anger) resting upon him (John 3:36), and as such could look forward only to everlasting punishment at the hands of a holy, pure, sinless God. It was out of love for mankind that Jesus had come. He said, "For God so loved the world (mankind), that He gave His only begotten Son (Jesus), that whoever believes in Him should not perish, but have eternal life" (John 3:16).

Saving man from the consequences of his own rebellion and rejection of God was Jesus' mission as he himself clearly stated. The means of accomplishing that mission involved his own death, as the context of John 3:16 shows. In fact, Jesus repeatedly told his followers that he must die and be raised to life on the third day after his death (Matt. 16:21-23; 17:9, 22-23). In Mark 10:45 (cf. Matt. 20:28), he stated the reason his death was required: "The Son of Man (Jesus) did not come to be served, but to serve, and to give his life a ransom for many." The idea of "ransom" is that of paying a price to set another free. Jesus' mission, simply put, was to take on himself the penalty for man's sin so that man could be freed from the guilt and eternal punishment he deserves because of his sin. With the penalty God declared paid for by God himself, man is made acceptable to God. He is saved from God's eternal wrath.

This was the purpose for which Jesus came and the goal to which his life was directed--the spiritual salvation of human beings by means of his dying in their place. It was a mission he accomplished. The proof was in his bodily resurrection.¹⁰ Had he remained forever in the tomb, his death would have been no different than any other. As it was, his miraculous resurrection proved his words. After all, anyone could claim to be God and to have the solution to the human problem. The proof of Jesus' words lay in his works, which proved he was indeed no mere man but God himself.

In Jesus, the Creator came to save his creatures who had rebelled against him and were deserving of his wrath. He took upon himself the penalty for their sin, dying at the hands of his creation, and rose again to life that they might have unending life in his presence when life on earth ends. This was his stated mission, and it was a mission he accomplished. He asked nothing of those for whom he died except that they believe the truth he proclaimed. Such belief, Jesus made clear, is not mere intellectual assent, but belief that is evidenced by a changed life, a life that is committed to following the ways and teachings of Jesus Christ.

CONCLUSION

It is somewhat ironic that Jesus is still viewed positively by so many people. Jesus himself knew that the things he taught regarding his deity, his exclusive salvation, and his mission were offensive to first-century Jews (John 15:18, 25). They are equally offensive to many today who look beyond the popularized view of Jesus.

The things Jesus did and said cannot be separated from what he taught about himself. We must either accept him or reject him based on his life and teachings. Let us not be guilty of picking and choosing the kind of Jesus we want. Wishful thinking is no substitute for the truth.

NOTES

¹I am assuming the historical accuracy of the Bible and specifically the gospel accounts (Matthew, Mark, Luke, John) here. There is little reason outside of bias to seriously question the accuracy of the accounts of Jesus' words and works. As F. F. Bruce has noted, no scholar questions the historicity of such ancient documents as Caesar's Gallic War or the works of Tacitus or Herodotus; yet the manuscript support for the New Testament is literally thousands of times greater than for these ancient works (The New Testament Documents: Are They Reliable? Downer's Grove, Ill.: InterVarsity Press, 1964, p. 16; cf. Clark Pinnock, Set Forth Your Case, Chicago: Moody Press, 1971, pp. 77-84).

²Crucifixion was an extremely cruel and disgraceful form of execution. The Romans reserved it for slaves and criminals of the worst kind. Roman citizens were exempted from crucifixion (Kaari Ward, ed., Jesus and His Times, Pleasantville, NY: Reader's Digest, 1987, p. 256; Merrill Unger, Unger's Bible Dictionary, Chicago: Moody Press, p. 229).

³Many, of course, have denied it for their own reasons. To do so, however, is to deny the accuracy of the Bible as many skeptics have done or to claim some special understanding of the Bible that few others throughout history have possessed. This is what many cult groups do. On the face of it, the divine claims are undeniable to the objective, thoughtful reader who accepts the historicity of the gospel records (Charles Ryrie, A Survey of Bible Doctrine, Chicago: Moody Press, pp. 52-53).

⁴For example, Simon Greenleaf's The Testimony of the Evangelists (Grand Rapids: Baker Book House, 1965) and Michael Green's Who Is This Jesus? (Nashville: Thomas Nelson Publishers, 1992) and Tim LaHaye's Jesus: Who is He? (Portland: Multnomah Press, 1997) to name three.

⁵J. Oliver Buswell, A Systematic Theology of the Christian Religion (Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 1962), 1:105.

⁶The answer recorded in the parallel account in Matthew 26:63-64 may be somewhat obscure to readers of an English translation, but Jesus' answer clearly meant "Yes indeed!" (cf. William Hendriksen, New Testament Commentary: The Gospel of Matthew, Grand Rapids: Baker Book House, 1973, p. 932). The New International Version quite properly translates the expression, "Yes, it is as you say."

⁷Josh McDowell, Evidence That Demands a Verdict, Campus Crusade for Christ, 1972, p. 109.

⁸McDowell, p. 109. Note that these very opinions were expressed by some who heard Jesus (cf. John 10:19-21).

⁹C. S. Lewis, Mere Christianity (New York: MacMillan Publishing Co., 1943), pp. 55-56.

¹⁰Although one of the most maligned teachings of the New Testament, the physical, bodily resurrection of Jesus from the dead is one of the most thoroughly attested events in history (McDowell, pp. 185-270; Pinnock, pp. 92-99).