Introduction to the Subject

      This is a non-religious, academic study intended for believers and non-believers alike.  The author explains how the Christian beliefs originated and evolved (from 2000 BCE to 400 CE). He employs the historical, analytical, and rational approach. In his book you will find a broadly based academic research, a collection of the latest findings by numerous scholars from around the world.

     On this web-site you can read a few sample-chapters from the book. (To read such chapters, scroll to the bottom of this page and click on the appropriate links.) The following is a discussion that focuses on one subject: Jesus' identity.  To see the subjects that this book covers check its Table of Contents. To examine the list of books that the author studied and quoted in this book, see  Bibliography.

    Who Was Jesus?

         Was Jesus a Jew, or was he a Christian? Did he teach Christianity at the Temple of Jerusalem? Or rather, could he have taught Christianity at the Temple? To answer this question, one has to first answer the following question: Were the Jews of Jerusalem fanatic about Judaism? 

    Who was Jesus? To understand Jesus' identity and his religion, one needs to learn about his setting: the religious, political, and social setting of Palestine and of the Roman Empire before, during, and after Jesus' lifetime. Such learning necessitates (in addition to studying the Bible) the study of various ancient writings, which were written during the Hellenistic Era (300 BCE to 100 CE) and during the Roman Era (ca. 100 BCE - 330 CE). Such study includes examining the writings of Josephus, the writings of Philo Judaeus, the writings of Roman historians and Greek philosophers, the Dead Sea Scrolls, various intertestamental writings, the Apocrypha, the Pseudepigrapha, certain Gnostic writings, and certain writings of the early Christian Church Fathers. During the past 17 years Andrew Benson has studied those writings and conducted advanced computerized searches within them; and you can read the results of his study and his searches in his book.

        Here is a brief discussion, which focuses on the subject of Jesus: During Jesus' times the Romans ruled Jerusalem and there was turmoil in Palestine. Even though the Romans allowed religious freedom, they inevitably and unavoidably interfered with the religious customs of the Jews. Jerusalem was the holy city of the Jews: “O Jerusalem, the holy city; for the uncircumcised and the unclean shall enter you no more.” (Isaiah 52:1 NRSV) And the Romans brought Gentiles to Jerusalem. The "uncircumcised and the unclean" defiled Jerusalem. The zealous Jews (= the Zealots, the Sicarii, the Essenes, the zealous Pharisees, and the Jewish Christians) were offended by the presence of Gentiles trampling the holy grounds of Jerusalem. They wanted to expel all Gentiles from Jerusalem, and instead of serving Caesar they wanted to serve God (= they wanted to establish the Kingdom of God). In an attempt to gain complete religious freedom, they repeatedly revolted against the Romans. In retaliation, the Romans crucified thousands of zealous Jews (like Jesus), over a period of several decades. The chronic turmoil led to the Great War of the Jews, which resulted in the destruction of the Temple and Jerusalem, in 70 CE. The historical Jesus was part of that intense milieu. He was a zealous Jewish rabbi, who preached about the Kingdom of God and sanctioned with his teachings the Jewish resistance against the Romans and against the Sadducees (who collaborated with the Romans). The historical Jesus was a product of his environment. He did not establish a new religion. He did not preach Hellenistic Christianity (this is a scholarly term for the religion of Paul). The religion of Paul, Hellenistic Christianity, was vehemently rejected in Jerusalem. Hellenistic Christians could not have possibly existed in Jerusalem before 70 CE. Jesus' Christianity was the so called Jewish Christianity (this also is a later term), which was a form of zealous Judaism, a mixture of Pharisaism and Essenism. Also,  Jesus did not introduce salvation and eternal life (for more info, read the short chapter  below). These statements sound strange only because the facts about early Christianity are not commonly known. They are not taught in churches. Andrew Benson explains the religious/political history of Palestine in the first century, with copious documentation.

 (Note: Words and phrases within large braces { } within biblical quotations are furnished by the author to explain such quotations.) 

 Jesus Did Not Introduce Salvation and Eternal Life

Christians believe, “… the Son of Man {: Jesus} came … to give his life as a ransom for many.” (Mark 10:45 NIV) They believe Jesus’ sacrificial death brought salvation and eternal life to the world: “For God so loved the world that he gave his only Son, so that everyone who believes in him may not perish but may have eternal life.” (John 3:16 NRSV) The truth is that centuries before Jesus was born, God made salvation available to every Jew and Jewish proselyte who obeyed the Law. Jeremiah wrote, “Truly in the Lord {Heb. Yahweh [1]}our God is the salvation of Israel.” (Jeremiah 3:23 NRSV) “Our God” refers to Yahweh, the god of the Jews. Yahweh is the salvation of Israel. Yahweh and Jesus are two different persons. Yahweh is the God of Israel. Joel wrote, “Then everyone who calls on the name of the Lord {Heb. Yahweh} shall be saved;” (Joel 2:32 NRSV) Every Jew who calls on the name  "Yahweh" (not on the name "Jesus") shall be saved. The Psalmist wrote, “Our God is a God of salvation, and to God, the Lord {Heb. Yahweh}, belongs escape from death.” (Psalm 68:20 NRSV) Yahweh offered salvation and “escape from death” to the Jews who feared him: “Surely his salvation is at hand for those who fear him …” (Psalm 85:9 NRSV)

             
            Isaiah wrote, “Israel has been saved by the LORD {Heb. Yahweh} with an everlasting salvation;” (Isaiah 45:17 NASB) According to Isaiah, Yahweh established an everlasting salvation plan for Jews. Salvation was available only to those who obeyed the Law: “Salvation is far from the wicked, for they do not seek your statutes. … I hope for your salvation, O Lord, and I fulfill your commandments.” (Psalm 119:155, 166 NRSV) These verses were written centuries before Jesus.
            The author of Daniel wrote, “And many of them who sleep in the dust of the earth will awake, some to everlasting life ...” (Daniel 12:2 KJV) This verse was written for the Jews long before the times of Jesus. The Jews believed that those who obeyed the Law “will awake … to everlasting life.” Long before the times of Jesus, God provided salvation and eternal life to the Jews. Before his death, Jesus said, “... salvation is {available} from the Jews.” (John 4:22 NASB) Before his death, salvation was available from the Jews to Jews and those who became Jews through circumcision.
            In the second century BCE, during the Maccabean revolt, certain young Jewish men, who were being tortured by King Antiochus’ executioner, told the executioner, “... the King of the universe will raise us up to an everlasting renewal of life, because we have died for his laws. … But for you {Gentiles/sinners} there will be no resurrection to life!” (2 Maccabees 7:9, 14 RSV) At the time of King Antiochus IV, righteous Jews anticipated to rise from the dead. The mother of those young martyrs told her sons, “But doubtless the Creator of the world ... will ... give you breath and life again, as you now regard not your own selves for his laws’ sake.” (2 Maccabees 7:23 KJV) The mother of those martyrs loved Judaism because it offered eternal life: “She loved religion {Judaism} more, the religion that preserves them for eternal life according to God’s promise.” (4 Maccabees 15:3 NRSV) The above verses indicate clearly that God made salvation and eternal life available to the Jews and to proselytes to Judaism, long before Christianity came around. He promised eternal life only to those who obeyed his Law.
            Philo Judaeus (Philo of Alexandria) was a contemporary of Jesus. He did not know Jesus or Christianity. He was an Alexandrian Jew. He wrote, “… the true everlasting life, as the law says, is to live in obedience to and worship of God;” [2] Philo believed that God promised the Jews and the proselytes to Judaism (those who practiced the Law) eternal life. He wrote, “… those who think fit to show themselves obedient to the sacred commands {of God} shall live for ever and ever as in a light which is never darkened …” [3]
            Josephus wrote that the Pharisees believed that God offered them eternal life: “They {the Pharisees} also, believe, that souls have an immortal vigor in them, and that under the earth there will be rewards and punishments, according as they have lived virtuously or viciously in this life; and the latter are to be detained in an everlasting prison, but the former will have power to revive and live again.” [4] The Pharisaic sect held these beliefs long before the times of Jesus.
            The Wisdom of Solomon is an intertestamental book, which was finished in the 5^th decade of this era (before 50 CE) by a Hellenistic Diaspora Jew and for Hellenistic Diaspora Jews. It explains, “The souls of the just {= those who obey the Law} are in the hands of God ... In the eyes of the fools it seemed as though they died ... but they {the just} are in peace ... it is immortality that awaits them ... they are richly rewarded.” (Wisdom of Solomon 3:1-5) According to this writer, God rewarded righteousness with eternal life. He wrote, “For righteousness is immortal.” (Wisdom of Solomon 1:15 KJV) God rewards righteousness with immortality. What is righteousness? According to Deuteronomy, righteousness is obedience to the Law: “And it will be our righteousness, if we observe to do all these commandments before the LORD our God, as he has commanded us.” (Deuteronomy 6:25 KJV) Obedience to the Law brings immortality.
            Jews and proselytes who practiced the Law did not need Jesus’ “sacrificial” death, to earn eternal life. Eternal life was available to them before the arrival of Jesus. Jesus told his fellow Jews, “Search the scriptures; for in them you think you have eternal life.” (John 5:39 KJV) This verse shows that while Jesus was alive, the Jews believed that God had made eternal life available to them. Jesus taught what other Jews taught. He taught that to earn eternal life, one must obey the Law: “... there came one running, and kneeled to him, and asked him, Good Master, what will I do that I may inherit eternal life? And Jesus said to him ... You know the commandments, Do not commit adultery ...” (Mark 10:17-19 KJV) Jesus told him to obey the Law.
            The reality is, Jesus’ death did not bring eternal life, neither to the Jews, nor to the proselytes, because eternal life was already available to them. Also, Jesus’ death did not bring eternal life to Gentiles. Jesus did not die on the cross for Gentiles because he did not minister to Gentiles. “But He {Jesus} answered and said, ‘I was sent {to minister} only to the lost sheep of the house of Israel’ ” (Matthew 15:24 NASB) He instructed his disciples to avoid ministering to Gentiles: “These twelve Jesus sent out with the following instructions: ‘Go nowhere among the Gentiles, and enter no town of the Samaritans, but go rather to the lost sheep of the house of Israel.’ ” (Matthew 10:5-6 NRSV) Jesus ministered to Jews: “Now I say that Jesus Christ was a minister of the circumcision.” (Romans 15:8 KJV) “The circumcision” is a metaphor for “the Jews.”

Who Was Jesus? Was He God?

    No one who is mentally healthy and able to make rational decisions would want to go to Hell and suffer agonizing pains forever. Why, then, hundreds of millions of people, such as Jews, Jehovah's Witnesses, Mormons, Unitarians, Muslims, and others, who are sane, and who believe in God, have rejected the belief Jesus is God? Is it because they are ignorant of what the New Testament says about Jesus? Or is it because they lack faith? The answer is, ... Neither one! They know what the New Testament says and they have faith in God. Besides, one does not need faith to ascertain Jesus' identify. One needs historical and biblical knowledge. Anyone with an open mind (the willingness to learn) can learn how to ascertain Jesus' identity.  Here are a few pointers.
 

Introduction to the term "god"

        Today most people agree that the term "God" (with capital letter "G") is a name that refers to "the supreme being, the all-powerful all-knowing creator of the universe"; and that the term "god" (with small letter "g") is a noun that refers to "one of many supernatural male beings." Today we are able to make this distinction because our way of writing allows for it. But the writers of the New Testament were not able to make such distinction because their way of writing did not allow for it. All the letters of the language in which they wrote (the Koine Greek) were the same: capital. Now they had one way available to them for distinguishing "God" from "a god" and that was by using the definite article "ὁ." For example,  ὁ θεός   in most instances means "God," and θεός in most instance means "a god." But one cannot depend on the definite article. For example, in the following case ὁ θεὸς  instead of "God," it means "Satan": "... the god {Gr. ὁ θεὸς} of this world has blinded the minds of the unbelievers" (2 Corinthians 4:4 NRSV) Also, several New Testament writers were not well versed in the Koine Greek language, because the New Testament writers were not Greeks; they were Diaspora Jews. So they did not follow the grammatical rules, and therefore, they were not consistent with the use of the definite article "ὁ," and thus, sometimes is difficult to determine their beliefs from their use of this article. Also, unlike the Old Testament writers who used the name "Yahweh" (Jehovah) to identify the Supreme Being, the New Testament writers did not use such a name. They used the generic terms "Lord," "Father," "Almighty," and "god," to refer to God.

         In some instances some New Testament writers used the term "god" to refer to Jesus. Since those writers were not grammatically adept and since they had no choice between capital and small letters, the question arises,  Did they believe Jesus is "God," or "a god"?  In order to answer this question one must understand what the term "god" meant in the ancient times, and especially during the times of Paul. This is a big subject (explained in the book) but, briefly, here are a few examples, which will elucidate the meaning of this term.

         In the ancient times the term "god" meant "spirit" and "angel." Clement of Alexandria wrote, “Aristotle’s disciple, the celebrated Theophrastus of Eresus {born ca. 371 died 286 BCE}, suspects ... that God is spirit.” (Clement of Alexandria, Exhortation to the Greeks, cha. V, par. 58.) Clement also wrote, “For the Stoics say that God is spirit by nature.” (Clement of Alexandria, Stromateis, 5, 14.) The writer of the Gospel of John wrote, “God is spirit {Gr. πνεῦμα ὁ θεός}.” (John 4:24 NRSV) Angels were called "gods" and "spirits" because they have the same nature as God: “Are not all angels spirits ...?” (Hebrews 1:14 NRSV) Even Satan was called "a god," because Satan was a fallen angel. Paul used the term "god" to refer to Satan: "... the god {Gr. ὁ θεὸς} of this world has blinded the minds of the unbelievers" (2 Corinthians 4:4 NRSV)

     Here are some examples from the Old Testament where angels are called "gods." Psalm 82 reads, “God presides in the great assembly; he gives judgment among the gods {Heb. elohim}.” (Psalms 82:1 NIV) The "gods" mentioned in this verse are the angels of God. In the following verse God says, “I said You are gods, and all of you are sons of the Most High.” (Psalms 82:6 NASB)  In other words, God says, "I said you are angels ..."

 To further understand the meaning of the term "god" compare the following two renderings of Psalms 8:5 by two major translations of the Bible (the New American Standard Version and the King James Version):

Here are two  renderings of another verse by two different reputable translations (both renderings are valid):

“For you, O Lord, are most high over all the earth; you are exalted far above all gods.” (Psalms 97:9 NRSV) In other words, "you are exalted above all spirits" or "you are exalted above all the angels."

    According to 1 Peter, after Jesus died, he became a spirit: "He was put to death in the flesh, but made alive in the spirit ..." (1 Peter 3:18 NRSV) Paul wrote, “... the last Adam {Jesus} became a life-giving spirit.” (1 Corinthians 15:45 NRSV) According to these and other New Testament verses, Jesus rose as a spirit, and spirits were called "gods." (Notice, some New Testament writers or editors wrote that Jesus rose physically, while others wrote that he rose spiritually. This issue is discussed in the book.) The writers who believed that Jesus rose spiritually called him "a god" (because the risen Christ had a spiritual body, an angelic body). There is a big difference between "a god" and "God": "a god" is a noun, whereas "God" is a name. The Christian belief "Jesus is God" is based on interpretation. In the fourth century CE such interpretation caused ecclesiastical controversies, divisions, and feuds.

Mark Did not Believe Jesus is God

    Mark believed that Jesus had limited power. He wrote, “{Jesus said,} But to sit on my right hand and on my left hand is not mine to give.” (Mark 10:40 KJV) “He {Jesus} entered a house and did not want anyone to know he was there. Yet he could not escape notice.” (Mark 7:24 NRSV) The expressions “did not want … Yet he could not escape” reveal that Jesus had limited power. Jesus did not have the power to make himself inconspicuous. He was not omnipotent. Mark would not have written this verse, had he believed that Jesus was omnipotent. The same applies to the following instance: “He {Jesus} could not do any miracles there, except lay his hands on a few sick people and heal them.” (Mark 6:5 NIV) Jesus’ power was limited because he could not always perform miracles. He was not omnipotent. Only God is omnipotent. According to Matthew, God has no limitations [1]: “... but with God all things are possible.” (Matthew 19:26 KJV) Also, Mark believed that Jesus had limited knowledge. He wrote, “{Jesus said,} But of that day and that hour no man knows, no, not the angels who are in heaven, neither the Son, but the Father.” (Mark 13:32 KJV) Jesus did not know the day of his return. Only God is omniscient (has unlimited knowledge). Therefore, Mark believed that Jesus is not God.

The Irrationality of the Trinity Doctrine

The author of the letter of James believed that God remains constant, invariable, never changing: “… {God} the Father … with whom there is no variation or shadow due to change.” (James 1:17 NRSV) If God is invariable and if God is three persons united into one, then the bond that unites those persons must be likewise: invariable. But Mark indicated that the bond between the Father and the Son was severed during Jesus’ crucifixion: “… Jesus cried out with a loud voice, ‘My God, my God, why have you forsaken me?’ ” (Mark 15:34 NRSV) This verse debunks the idea that God is an eternal trinity.
    Jesus was confident and strong when he pursued with a whip the money changers at the Temple, but he became emotionally weak before his crucifixion. He told God, “ ‘Father, if you are willing, remove this cup {the crucifixion} from me; …’ Then an angel from heaven appeared to him and gave him strength. In his anguish he prayed more earnestly, and his sweat became like great drops of blood falling down on the ground.” (Luke 22:42-44 NRSV) These verses debunk the belief that Jesus is God  because with God “there is no variation or shadow due to change.” (James 1:17 NRSV) Jesus became weak, whereas God cannot become weak.
            God’s title is “the Father”: “I {God} will be a Father {to the righteous men} and they will be my sons. And they all will be called sons of the living God, and every angel and every spirit will know ... that these are my sons, and that I {God} am their Father ...” (Jubilees 1:24-25) All righteous men are sons of God. Paul wrote to the Galatians, “You are all sons of God ...” (Galatians 3:26 NIV) Jesus was a righteous man, and therefore, he, too, was a son of God.  Like the rest of the Jews, Jesus referred to God as “Father.” The appellation “Father” is a title of superiority. A father is greater than his son. Jesus said, “My Father ... is greater than all.” (John 10:29 NASB) The word “all” includes Jesus. He also said, “... the Father is greater than I. … I do as the Father has commanded me.” (John 14:28, 31 NRSV) God commanded Jesus. There is no verse in the New Testament which says or hints that Jesus commanded God. Had Jesus been equal to God, he would have referred to him as “Brother.” He would have said, “… Brother, forgive them as I forgave them; for they know not what they do.” (Luke 23:34)
            Today’s Christians believe that before Jesus incarnated he was a spirit in Heaven; he was “fully God.” Then he came down on earth and incarnated: he united his spirit with flesh. He added to his spiritual nature the carnal nature and thus from “fully God” he became “fully God and fully man” … (whatever that means). The point is that Jesus changed. How can Jesus be God, when James said that God does not change? “… {God} the Father … with whom there is no variation or shadow due to change.” (James 1:17 NRSV) Today’s Christians claim that Jesus changed from “fully God” to “fully God and fully man” and at the same time they believe that “Jesus Christ is the same yesterday and today and forever.” (Hebrews 13:8 NIV) And even though they believe that Jesus has “two natures in one” (carnal and spiritual), they still believe he is equal to the Father, who has only one nature, spiritual: “God is spirit {Gr. πνεῦμα ὁ θεός}.” (John 4:24 NRSV) Since God is spirit, he does not have flesh and bones. Luke wrote, “… a spirit does not have flesh and bones …” (Luke 24:39 NASB) But, according to today’s Christians, Jesus is not a spirit because after his resurrection, he ascended to Heaven with his flesh and bones. So the Father and Son are not equal, because the Father is spirit but the Son is not, because he is flesh and bones.
      God cannot incarnate into a man because man is a beast: “So I decided, as regards to men, to dissociate them from the divine beings and to face the fact that they are beasts.” (Ecclesiastes 3:18 TANAKH) God cannot turn himself into a man because man amounts to nothing: “Man has no superiority over the beast, since both amount to nothing.” (Ecclesiastes 3:19b TANAKH) Man’s nature is earthly. Paul wrote, “Put to death, therefore, whatever belongs to your earthly nature: sexual immorality, impurity, lust, evil desires and greed, which is idolatry.” (Colossians 3:5 NIV) Man’s earthly nature is sinful. “What is man, that he should be clean? and he who is born of a woman, that he should be righteous?” (Job 15:14 KJV) Therefore, God cannot incarnate into a man, into an inferior nature, a sinful nature. Besides, God does not change. If God changes he will cease being perfect, because perfection does not allow for variation. God is eternally perfect. Justin Martyr, the 2nd century Christian Church Father and leading theologian (ca. 150 CE) wrote, “ ‘But what do you call God?’ said he. ‘That which always maintains the same nature, and in the same manner, and is the cause of all other things--that, indeed, is God.’ ” ^[1] (Justin Martyr did not believe Jesus is God.) Since God “maintains the same nature and in the same manner” and Jesus added a second nature to his original one, then Jesus cannot qualify as God.
            The Mormons recognized this problem, so they attempted to resolve it as follows: Joseph Smith wrote, “The Father has a body of flesh and bones as tangible as man’s.” [2] James Talmage, another leading Mormon, wrote, “Therefore we know that both the Father and the Son are in form and stature perfect men; each of them possesses a tangible body, infinitely pure and perfect . . . a body of flesh and bones.” [3] In trying to solve the problem, the Mormons made it worse. Here is the problem with the Mormon solution: if the carnal bodies of the Father and the Son have no sexual organs and no sex hormones, then the Father and the Son are not “in form and stature perfect men.” And if they do have sexual organs and sex hormones, then they got carnal desires: “passions of flesh.” And Paul wrote, “… the passions of our flesh, following the desires of flesh and senses, and {therefore} we were by nature children of wrath …” (Ephesians 2:2 NRSV) Since the Father and the Son cannot be “children of wrath,” they cannot have “a body of flesh and bones.” Furthermore, the nature of the flesh is contrary to the nature of spirit: “For what the flesh desires is opposed to the Spirit, and what the Spirit desires is opposed to the flesh; for these are opposed to each other …” (Galatians 5:17 NRSV) Also, a human body does not have an “infinitely pure and perfect” shape (as James Talmage proposed) because it has a limited presence: its presence is limited to a specific location. Whereas, omnipresence, according to the Bible, is found only in spirit. Therefore, perfection can be found only in spirit. And since perfection does not allow for variation, God cannot be anything but spirit.
            The Mormons forgot something else: Jesus’ body saw corruption: it changed. It was mortally wounded and it decomposed for “three days” in the grave. Since Jesus died, his soul separated from his decomposed body. (Tertullian wrote, “death is defined to be nothing else than the separation of body and soul.” [4]). Jesus cannot be equal to the Father, because his soul separated from his carnal body, and his body decomposed for three days, whereas the Father’s soul has never separated from his carnal body (the Mormons believe God has such a body), and his carnal body has never decomposed. God is invariable: “… {God} the Father … with whom there is no variation or shadow due to change.” (James 1:17 NRSV)
            Let us assume that the Mormon belief (that the Father and the Son have carnal bodies) is correct. Then, what about the Holy Spirit? “… and the Holy Spirit descended upon him {upon Jesus} in bodily form [5] like a dove {Gr. σωματικῷ εἴδει ὡς περιστερὰν}.” (Luke 3:22 NRSV) The phrase “in bodily form” indicates that the Holy Spirit, too, incarnated. No pastor makes talks about the incarnation of the Holy Spirit. Yet it is clear that the Holy Spirit incarnated and took the form of a dove. A dove is not equal to a man. “Two men and a dove” cannot constitute a balanced trinity.
            The Mormons did not take into consideration the following: “And the Word became flesh …” (John 1:14 NRSV) Before Jesus incarnated, he was a spirit. Before Jesus incarnated, he could not have been equal to the Father because the Father had a carnal body. Also the Holy Spirit could not have been equal to the Father, because it was a spirit. The Mormon solution fails to show that Jesus and the Holy Spirit are equal to the Father.
            Saint Augustine used a different approach. He explained that Jesus is equal to the Father “according to substance; therefore the substance of both is the same.” He wrote, “… confess the Son Homousios, ‘of one substance with the Father.’ ” [6] But Saint Augustine forgot that the Father has no “substance,” because he is spirit (a soul). Substance is “a kind of matter, a physical reality that can be touched and felt.” God is spirit, and therefore he cannot be touched or felt with our hands.
    In order to be truly equal, the three members of the Trinity must be identical. However, had they been identical they would have not been identifiable. We are able to identify the members of the Trinity by their differences: different names, different functions, and different ranks. For example, the Father ranks higher because he dispatches the Son and the Holy Spirit. The Father ranks higher because he is unapproachable by man, whereas the Son is approachable by man. The Son is the mediator to the Father, but not the mediator to the Holy Spirit. This indicates that the Father is superior to the Son and to the Holy Spirit.  Also, one can blaspheme God or Jesus, but one cannot blaspheme the Holy Spirit (see Mark 3:28–29), therefore the Holy spirit is different from the Father and Jesus. Since God is prefect, then he cannot have three different qualities, because perfection does not allow for variation: “… {God} the Father … with whom there is no variation …” (James 1:17 NRSV) Anything that is different from perfect is imperfect. Jesus is different from the Father. The Father is superior because he knows things that Jesus does not know: “But about that day or hour no one knows, neither the angels in heaven, nor the Son, but only the Father.” (Mark 13:32 NRSV) When two persons are different, they are not equal. In some way, one is superior to the other.  There is no way of getting around this rule.
    Since it takes three persons to make the Trinity complete, then each person of the Trinity must be incomplete. In other words, the Trinity is greater than any of its members because the sum is greater than its parts.
            People learn in school that 1+1+1= 3. But in church they are told 1+1+1= 1. How can three distinct persons be one being? Some Christians admit that the Trinityxe "Trinity" does not make sense. M. R. DeHaan, a renowned Christian apologist, wrote, “The Trinity, that is, three persons in one, is a mystery which is revealed in the Bible, but cannot be understood by the human mind. Since man is finite, and God infinite, this is one of those things which must be accepted by faith, even though it cannot be reasoned out. The Trinity cannot be explained, but it must be believed ...” [7] Saint Augustine says that one must believe before he can understand: “… believe and understand, for the Prophet says, “Unless ye believe ye shall not understand” Do ye not comprehend? Be enlarged. Hear the Apostle: “Be ye, enlarged, bear not the yoke with unbelievers.” They who will not believe this before they comprehend {it} are unbelievers. And because they have determined to be unbelievers, they will remain in their ignorance. Let them believe then that they may understand.” [8] Believers are told to submit to the judgment of their spiritual leaders without questioning a doctrine, which their leaders themselves do not understand and cannot explain. And this doctrine was established by shedding the blood of those who questioned it and refused to accept it.
            Christians justify the concept of Trinity by saying that human beings are finite and liable both to sin and err.  And for this reason, the finite mind of man cannot understand the concept of Trinity. The reality is, when one believes in things he does not understand, he believes superstition.

God's Nature Cannot Blend with Man's Nature

 
          Christians claim that Jesus was simultaneously fully human and fully God. Is this possible? Certainly Jesus could not have had a mind with two qualities: human and divine. The human quality would have prompted him to do one thing and the divine quality would have prompted him to do another, and thus he would have been double-minded. The Bible condemns double-mindedness: “I hate the double-minded …” (Psalm 119:113 NRSV) “A double minded man is unstable in all his ways.” (James 1:8 KJV) In the Old Testament, God said to mankind, “For my thoughts are not your thoughts, nor are your ways my ways, says the Lord." (Isaiah 55:8 NRSV) The thoughts and the ways of man are unlike and even contrary to the thoughts and the ways of God. The thoughts of God are good, whereas the thoughts of man are evil: “And God saw that the wickedness of man was great in the earth, and that every imagination of the thoughts of his heart was only evil continually.” (Genesis 6:5 KJV) Ecclesiastes wrote, “Follow the inclination of your heart … but know that for all these things God will bring you into judgment.” (Ecclesiastes 11:9 NRSV) Therefore, the thoughts and the inclinations of God cannot mix with the evil thoughts and inclinations of man. The inclinations of God are good whereas the inclinations of man are evil. It is impossible for Jesus’ mind to have had contrary qualities.

    In what way, then, Jesus was simultaneously human and God? Was he, then, the mind of God clothed with a human body? Is it possible for God's mind to unite with human flesh? Human flesh has natural passions and desires (sex hormones), just like animal flesh. Justin Martyr said, “He pre-existed, and submitted to be born a man of like passions with us, having a body …” (Justin Martyr, Dialogue with Trypho, cha. 48.) As Justin Martyr explains, Jesus had a beastly flesh. Ecclesiastes explains, “So I decided, as regards to men, to dissociate them from the divine beings and to face the fact that they are beasts. … Man has no superiority over the beast, since both amount to nothing.” (Ecclesiastes 3:18-19b TANAKH) God’s infinite and perfect mind cannot unite with the body of a beast, which amounts to nothing. God cannot be clothed with human flesh, which has glands which produce testosterone, which stirs up passions and desires. Such flesh prompts evil: "... flesh and blood devise evil." (Sirach 17:31 NRSV) Human flesh is lustful. Lust sometimes begins in the flesh. For example, sometimes men experience involuntary sexual arousals. Such arousals prompt their mind to lust. Paul explains how this works: "... nothing good dwells within me, that is, in my flesh. I can will what is right, but I cannot do it. For I do not do the good I want, but the evil I do not want is what I do. Now if I do what I do not want, it is no longer I that do it, but sin that dwells within me." (Romans 7:18-20, NRSV) As Paul wrote, "nothing good dwells" in the flesh. "Sin dwells within" the flesh. Flesh has carnal desires and passions, which, according to the Bible, induce a person to sin. "... fleshly lusts which wage war against the soul." (1 Peter 2:11 NASB) Paul explains, "For what the flesh desires is opposed to the Spirit, and what the Spirit desires is opposed to the flesh;" (Galatians 5:17 NRSV) Flesh is sinful.  It is impossible to live in the flesh without sinning.  It is impossible to live in the flesh without sinning because, “… flesh and blood devise evil.” (Sirach 17:31 NRSV) In other words, in order for God to become fully a man and live as a real man, he has to sin. The Old Testament says that all men, without exception, sin: “... there is no man who does not sin ...” (1 Kings 8:46 NRSV) Since God cannot sin, he cannot become man. The scriptures state clearly “... there is no man who does not sin ...” and, according to the Bible, Christians cannot annul this scripture, because Jesus said, "... the scripture cannot be annulled ..." (John 10:35 NRSV)

The author of Hebrews explains, that Jesus became a man in every way: “For this reason he {Jesus} had to be made like his brothers in every way…” (Hebrews 2:17 NIV) Jesus had a beastly flesh. He had a penis and he had erections just like any other man. Since Jesus was a man in every way, he sinned. And for this reason he was baptized by John the Baptist. The historical Jesus (the real Jesus, not the fictional Jesus) was baptized for the remission of his sins.

    Luke did not believe Jesus is God, because he indicated that Jesus' strength was limited. He wrote, “An angel from heaven appeared to him {Jesus} and strengthened him.” (Luke 22:43 NIV) God does not need strength. He has unlimited strength. Since Jesus lacked in strength, he was not God.

     Jesus was born of a woman, and he was born under the Law: "... God sent his Son, born of a woman, born under the law," (Galatians 4:4 NRSV) The phrase “under the law” means, that Jesus was subject to the Law of the Old Testament. And the Old Testament says, “How can one born of woman be pure?” (Job 25:4 NRSV) Therefore, at the time of his birth, Jesus was impure. In the birth account of Jesus, Luke wrote, “When the time came for their purification {the purification of Mary and Jesus} according to the law of Moses, they brought him {baby Jesus} up to Jerusalem to present him to the Lord.” (Luke 2:22 NRSV) Mary and the new-born Jesus were impure until the purification ritual was performed on their behalf at the Temple. Since Jesus was born impure, he cannot be God, because God does not need to be purified; he is eternally pure.  There is no way of getting around Job 25:4, 1 Kings 8:46, Isaiah 55:8, and Ecclesiastes 3:18-19. These (and other) verses preclude Jesus from having been pure and sinless. (This is one reason that the Jews, who believe in the Old Testament, cannot accept Jesus as God.)  

He who is not omnipresent is not God

    According to certain verses of the Bible, God is omnipresent (continuously and simultaneously present throughout the whole universe). In the Gospel of John,  Jesus said, “I am the living bread that came down out of heaven.” (John 6:51 NASB) Since Jesus had to "come down out of heaven," he was not simultaneously present throughout the whole universe. In the Gospel of John, Jesus said, “You heard me say to you, ‘I am going away, and I am coming to you.’ ” (John 14:28 NRSV) He who is omnipresent does not "go away" or "come to" anyone, because he is everywhere. Since the author of the Gospel of John did not believe that Jesus is omnipresent, he did not believe Jesus is God. (Muslims, Jews, and Jehovah's Witnesses understand this concept. The Christians don't. And this misunderstanding has caused the Christians to persecute the Jehovah's Witnesses and the Jews and it has stirred the Christians repeatedly to go to war against the Muslims. For this reason, this subject is very important.) Here is another example.“Now if He {Jesus} were on earth, He would not be a priest at all … ” (Hebrews 8:4-6 NASB) The expression “if he were on earth” indicates that the writer of Hebrews believed that Jesus was not omnipresent. (For a continued discussion of the subject Who Was Jesus? Was He God?  click here.) 

About the Concept of Omnipresence

 Jews and Christians claim that God is spirit (intangible, insubstantial), and that God never changes, and that God is omnipresent and omnipotent. This definition is fine. But they fall into a fallacy when they add that God is a person and therefore he has a body. If God has a body then he cannot be omnipresent because his presence is limited by the shape of his body. If God wears a body like a garment from time to time (to appear to humans), then he cannot be unchanging, because he alters himself from omnipresent to locally present.
    Some believe that God has a “spiritual body.” A “spiritual body” is an oxymoron. “Spiritual” means “insubstantial,” and “body” implies “substance.” God cannot be an “insubstantial substance.” In order for God to be omnipresent and unchanging he cannot have or can never acquire a body. A body has substance. And all substance has shape. It has the shape of atoms, or the shape of subatomic particles. Shape limits presence. Notice that the New Testament writers visualized God with a shape: “… Jesus standing at the right hand of God. … the Son of Man standing at the right hand of God.’ ” (Acts 7:55 NIV) “… he {Jesus} sat down at the right hand of the Majesty in heaven.” (Hebrews 1:3 NIV) “… who sat down {i.e. on a seat} at the right hand of the throne of the Majesty in heaven …” (Hebrews 8:1 NIV) “... a throne was set in heaven, and one {God} sat on the throne.” (Revelation 4:2 KJV) These descriptions depict God with a local presence. The following verse says that God “will dwell with” his people: “... Behold, the tabernacle of God is with men, and he will dwell with them, and they shall be his people, and God himself shall be with them ...” (Revelation 21:3 KJV) This verse tells us that God is locally present. So do the following expressions: “In the presence of God and of Christ Jesus ...” (2 Timothy 4:1 NRSV) “And Cain went out from the presence of the LORD ...” (Genesis 4:16 KJV) The expressions “in the presence” or “out of the presence” indicate that the god of Judaism, exists in a specific place. As for the god of Christianity he is three distinct persons (the Trinity): the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit. Each person of the Trinity occupies his own space; otherwise he would not be distinct from the other two persons. Three locally present persons (the three persons of the Trinity) cannot constitute an omnipresent entity. (This is why there can only be one God and he cannot be a person. As we will examine further on, God can only be a power.)
    The following passage says that God forbade the unclean from coming into his presence. God commanded, “… while he is in a state of uncleanness, that person shall be cut off from my presence: I am the Lord.” (Leviticus 22:3 NRSV) The idea that God does not dwell in the realm of sin and in the realm of sinful persons is incompatible with the idea that God is omnipresent.
    Some people claim that they feel the presence of God when they walk into a holy place (i.e. a temple or a church) or when they enter the company of spirited worshippers, believers. What they feel is the result of their thinking. The “presence of God” is a figure of speech which describes one’s feelings.

END

The historical approach to understanding the Bible

    Here is a brief historical overview of how the Judaic beliefs evolved. (This subject is discussed in detail in the book.)

    Abraham is called "the Father of the Jews," because he established the fundamental ritual of Judaism: circumcision. Judaism originated with circumcision. This tells us that before Abraham, Judaism did not exist. Abraham was a religious reformer: he reformed the religion of his ancestors (the Sumerians) and established Judaism. Abraham did not believe in the Ten Commandments. He did not observe the Sabbath. Several hundred years after him, Moses reformed the religion of Abraham by introducing most of the Ten Commandments (such as observing the Sabbath) and a few other laws. Moses did not teach about Heaven (about life in Paradise), Hell, or Satan, because he did not believe in such concepts. Such concepts were introduced to Judaism during the exilic era (597 to 538 BCE) and the post-exilic era. Obviously, the religion of Judaism evolved.

    Here is something of interest and of importance. During the era of the judges (before King Saul) God accepted human sacrifices:
Notice the story of Abraham. Abraham attempted to sacrifice his son Isaac to God. This is a clue that in early Judaism the Hebrews and later the Israelites offered human sacrifices to their god. Jephthah lived after Moses, in the period of the judges, perhaps about a century before King Saul. Jephthah was a man of God: “Then the spirit of the Lord came upon Jephthah … ” (Judges 11:29 NRSV) He promised to God a human sacrifice, if God would grant him victory. “And Jephthah made a vow to the Lord, and said, ‘If you will give the Ammonites into my hand, then whoever comes out of the doors of my house to meet me, when I return victorious from the Ammonites, shall be the Lord’s, to be offered up by me as a burnt offering.’ ” (Judges 11:30-31 NRSV) God accepted Jephthah’s vow and granted him victory: “So Jephthah crossed over to the Ammonites to fight against them; and the LORD gave them into his hand.” (Judges 11:32 NRSV) God willed for Jephthah’s daughter (his firstborn) to come out of the house to meet him: “And Jephthah came to Mizpeh to his house, and, behold, his daughter came out to meet him with tumbrels and with dances: and she was his only child {i.e. firstborn}; beside her he had neither son nor daughter.” (Judges 11:34 KJV) So Jephthah sacrificed (burned on an altar) his firstborn to God: “{he} did with her according to the vow he had made.” (Judges 11:39 NRSV) God accepted human sacrifice. This is a clue, that during the times of Jephthah (a little more than a century before Solomon) the Israelites, on special occasions, offered their children as sacrifice to God. And since they ate the sacrifices, they practiced cannibalism. As the writer of Baruch explains, “Under the whole heaven there has not been done the like of what he has done in Jerusalem … Some of us ate the flesh of their sons and others the flesh of their daughters.” (Baruch 2:2-3 NRSV) This is evidence that  during the time of Jephthah the following verses of Leviticus, which prohibit human sacrifice, did not exist: “You shall not give any of your offspring to sacrifice them to Molech, and so profane the name of your God:” (Leviticus 18:21 NRSV) “Say further to the people of Israel: Any of the people of Israel, or of the aliens who reside in Israel, who give any of their offspring to Molech shall be put to death; the people of the land shall stone them to death.” (Leviticus 20:2 NRSV) Moses did not write these verses because the phrases “Say … to the people of Israel … aliens who reside in Israel” refer to a situation which existed in Canaan after the lifetime of Moses. (Scholars believe that a considerable part of Leviticus was written between the 7th and the 5th centuries BCE.) Also, Moses did not write the above verse because during his time the Israelites did not worship Molech. The worship of Molech (scholars are not sure about the term “Molech,” whether it refers to a god or to a cultic practice or it is a dysphemism) appears to have been established among the Israelites by Solomon, who lived more than two centuries after Moses: “Then Solomon built a high place for … Molech the abomination of the Ammonites, on the mountain east of Jerusalem.” (1 Kings 11:7 NRSV) The fact that a century after Moses’ time Jephthah sacrificed his daughter and God approved of such sacrifice, raises big questions about Moses and the type of religion he established. Micah wrote, “Shall I give my firstborn for my transgression, the fruit of my body for the sin of my soul?” (Micah 6:7 NRSV) It appears that some Israelites sacrificed their children, intermittently, from the times of Jephthah to the times of King Josiah. Josiah abolished the human sacrifices to Molech: “He {King Josiah} defiled Topheth, which is in the valley of Ben-hinnom, so that no one would make a son or a daughter pass through fire as an offering to Molech.” (2 Kings 23:10 NRSV)
    After the times of Moses, the Law was augmented. That is, Judaism continued to evolve. Here are some examples (these are just samples of what is presented in the book). In the 8th century BCE, King Hezekiah revised the Mosaic law, which commanded the Israelites to eat the Passover at home:

 Later on, in the 7th century BCE, at the time of King Josiah, there was another reformation of Judaism: the high priest Hilkiah introduced the book of Deuteronomy, which contains additional reforms (click for more). As Judaism evolved, prophets or scribes wrote new books to accommodate the new beliefs. A few decades after the end of the Babylonian exile the high priest and scribe, Ezra (click for more)  edited the books of the Law. Here is one change he introduced:

Notice that Ezra ignored the fact that the statute, which prohibited the eating of fat was a "perpetual statute."   This goes to show that no belief is perpetual (everlasting). 

     During the Greek-Roman era, Judaism went through further reformations (the Judaic beliefs changed again). In 323 BCE the Greeks (through the conquests of Alexander the Great) occupied Israel. In the following 150 years the Greeks influenced the Jews. The Jews fell in love with the Hellenistic culture. Judaism became to some degree Hellenized. At about 167 BCE the Greek king Antiochus IV Epiphanes abolished Judaism in Palestine and imposed Hellenism and the worship of the Greek god Zeus. The Samaritans complied eagerly, but the Maccabees (who were Judean Jews) with the help of the Hasidim (those who were zealous for the Law) revolted. After a successful revolt and liberation from the Greeks they established Maccabean Judaism (pious/conservative, anti-Hellenistic, zealous Judaism) in Judea. 

   Here is another example of how the Law (Judaism) evolved. Before the times of Antiochus IV Epiphanes the Jews did not fight on the Sabbath because God commanded: “Remain every man in his place; let no man go out of his place on the seventh day {on the Sabbath}.” (Exodus 16:29 NASB) This law was modified during the times of Antiochus IV Epiphanes, to allow fighting on the Sabbath: “And all {the Jewish soldiers of Mattathias} said to their neighbors: ‘If we all do as our kindred {our fellow Jews} have done {i.e. rest on the Sabbath} and refuse to fight {on the Sabbath} with the Gentiles for our lives and for our ordinances, they will quickly destroy us from the earth.’ So they made this decision that day: ‘Let us fight against anyone who comes to attack us on the Sabbath day; let us not all die as our kindred died in their hiding places.’ ” (1 Maccabees 2:40-41 NRSV) Mattathias, the father of the Maccabees, is the hero of Judaism. Yet, he broke God's Law. This shows that the laws of God are flexible. One can break them in exceptional situations. Jesus walked in the footsteps of the Maccabees. Like the Maccabees, in some exceptional, justifiable, situations Jesus broke the Sabbath. When the Jews questioned him, "He {Jesus} said to them, 'Suppose one of you has only one sheep and it falls into a pit on the Sabbath; will you not lay hold of it and lift it out? How much more valuable is a human being than a sheep! So it is lawful to do good on the Sabbath.' " (Matthew 12:11-12 NRSV) Here is an alternative version of that incident: "Then he said to them, 'If one of you has a child or an ox that has fallen into a well, will you not immediately pull it out on a Sabbath day?' " (Luke 14:5 NRSV) 

        In 63 BCE, the Romans (under General Pompeii) conquered and occupied Israel and granted religious freedom to the Jews. The Romans assimilated the Hellenistic culture and promoted it in the nations they conquered. The pious/zealous Jews of Judea, Galilee, and Qumran (the Hasidim) loathed Hellenism. Towards the turn of the century (about the time Jesus was born)  the Judean, Galilean, and Qumran Jews (Qumran is in Judea) yearned for total religious freedom and aspired to eliminate Hellenism from Palestine, which was promoted by the Romans. (Even though the conservative Jews were anti-Hellenistic, they were not able to truly eliminate Hellenism, because Hellenism had been embedded in their culture since the times of Alexander the Great.) The Romans had given the Jews a certain amount of religious freedom. But the zealous Jews stretched the limits of that freedom. Through protests and minor rebellions the Jewish rebels pressured the Romans, who repeatedly, for about six decades (during the 1st century CE), cracked down on the rebels, but with some restrain. (The chief priests, most of whom were wealthy Sadducees and some Pharisees, collaborated with the Romans. They disapproved of the revolts of the zealous Jews.) In 66 CE the zealous Jews resorted to an all out rebellion (which lasted seven years: until 73 CE) against the Romans and against the wealthy Hellenistic chief priests (mostly Sadducees and a few wealthy Pharisees), and attempted to establish their dream: "the Kingdom of God" (about which, Jesus preached). The Romans destroyed the Temple of Jerusalem (in 70 CE) and "shut down" zealous Judaism. Except for a few city walls, they razed the city of Jerusalem to the ground. Zealous Judaism ceased to exist. (Zealous Judaism was the Judaism, first, of the Maccabees, and later, (in the 1 century CE), of the Zealots, the Essenes, the common Pharisees, of John the Baptist, of Jesus and the Jewish Christians.) After the Great War of the Jews, new forms of Judaism (such as, Rabbinic Judaism) took the place of zealous Judaism (the Judaism of Jesus).

The types of Judaism in the times of Jesus and Paul

    To understand the historical Jesus it is important to distinguish the main types of Judaism in the times of Jesus and Paul. (The following table is a sketchy illustration, which needs explanations and qualifications. The data of this table are explained in the book.)

    Some scholars use the term "Palestinian Judaism." This term, is correct when applied to Judaism prior to the Hellenistic era. During the Hellenistic Era Palestine included Judea, Galilee, Decapolis, Philistia, Nabataea, and Samaria. The Judaism of those areas cannot be placed in one category. Even though the Samaritans used the Pentateuch, Samaritan Judaism was Hellenistic. It was similar to Diaspora Judaism. It was unlike Judean Judaism (the Judaism of the Pharisees, the Essenes, the Zealots, and the Jewish Christians). The Judean Jews had excommunicated the Samaritans, and considered them Gentiles. The Maccabees (who were Judeans) destroyed the Samaritan temple, at Gerizim, which had been dedicated to Zeus. The Samaritans belong to the category of Diaspora Judaism. It is from Diaspora Judaism that Hellenistic Christianity evolved. Today's Christianity evolved from Hellenistic Christianity.  

(These subjects are discussed in detail in the book and documented with numerous ancient quotations.)

Some differences between the followers of Jesus and the followers of Paul

   There is much to be said about the Jewish Christians. They are obscure and greatly misunderstood by today's Christians. (The book presents several pieces of historical evidence -quotations from ancient writings- which elucidate the Jewish Christians.) Briefly, they were Jesus' original followers in Jerusalem. They were part of Second Temple Judaism. They were against Paul. They are the "Judaizers" (mentioned by Paul in Galatians) who opposed Paul in the synagogue/church of Galatia. (The subject of the "Judaizers" is examined in depth in the book.) They were "zealous for the Law." They practiced the Law almost "to the letter," and blended with the Zealots, the common Pharisees, and the Essenes (the lower economic class of Jews: the "poor," about whom Jesus preached in the Sermon of the Mountain). The following passage of Philo illustrates the mindset of the zealous Jews: “But the single nation of the Jews … was suspected by him {the Roman Emperor Gaius Caligula 37-41 CE} of wishing to counteract his desires, since it {the nation of Jews} was accustomed to embrace voluntary death as an entrance to immortality, for the sake of not permitting any of their national or hereditary customs {the Law} to be destroyed, even if it were of the most trivial character (click for more), because, as is the case in a house, it often happens that by the removal of one small part, even those parts which appeared to be solidly established fall down, being relaxed and brought to decay by the removal of that one {trivial} thing .” [Philo, On the Embassy to Gaius, par. XVI, (117)]  Such Jews were the Essenes, the Pharisees, the Zealots, the followers of John the Baptist, Jesus, and the Jewish Christians: strict adherents to the Law: conservative Jews. (They were the lower economic class of Jews.) During the Great War of 66 to 73 CE, they fought against the Romans to establish the Kingdom of God: “… the God of heaven will set up a kingdom that will never be destroyed ... It will crush all these kingdoms and bring them to an end, and it will stand forever.” (Daniel 2:44 NRSV) Some of them fought the Romans after the destruction of the Temple (70 CE) until 73 CE.

    Up to 52 CE James, the brother of Jesus, was the leader of the Jewish Christians. He was a priest at the Temple of Jerusalem. The Jewish Christians prayed directly to God (not through Jesus). They used the Hebrew text of the Old Testament. They spoke Aramaic. They wrote the Gospel of the Hebrews (in Aramaic), which did not survive.  (The following table Christianity in the times of Paul, is a sketchy illustration, which needs explanations. The data of this table are explained in detail in the book.)

Christianity in the times of Paul

1