THEODORE
PARKER
274
STRAUSS
’
S
LIFE
OF
JESUS
275
sus on the part of John; nor is it probable that, while in prison
on the charge of sedition, (as Josephus says,) he would be per-
mitted to hold free intercourse with his disciples. The historical
facts are, perhaps, the following: Jesus was baptized by John;
perhaps continued for some time one of his followers; was en-
trusted by John with the idea of the approaching Messiah. Af-
ter John was cast into prison, he continued to preach the doc-
trines of his master in a modifi ed form, and afterwards, when
he rose far above John, never ceased to feel and express a deep
reverence for him. Now we can trace the gradual formation of
these stories. John spoke indefi nitely of the coming Messiah;
tradition added, that, he proclaimed Jesus as that Messiah. It
was thought the rumor of the works of Jesus might have led
him to this conclusion, and, therefore, Matthew’s story of the
mission of two disciples from the prison was formed. But since
Jesus had been a disciple of John, it was necessary the relation
should be changed, and this purpose is served by Luke’s stories
of events before his birth, which prove Jesus is the superior.
But these accounts were not suffi ciently defi nite, and, there-
fore, the fourth Gospel leaves no doubt in John’s mind that
Jesus was the Messiah, but makes him give the strongest as-
surance of this, the fi rst time he sees him, and ascribes to him
the most distinct expressions touching his eternal nature, di-
vinity, and character, as a suffering and atoning Messiah. Now
the accounts of John’s imprisonment and execution are easily
reconciled with one another and with Josephus; and hence we
see that his life, as portrayed in the Gospels, is surrounded by
mythical shadows only on the side turned towards Jesus, while
on the other, the historical features are clearly seen.
The miraculous events at the baptism of Jesus, Mr. Strauss
maintains, also present diffi culties. The Synoptics mention
both the dove and the voice; the fourth Gospel says nothing of
the voice, and does not say, — though, perhaps, it implies, —
that the spirit descended on him at the baptism. The lost gos-
pels of Justyn and the Ebionites, connected with this a celes-
tial light, or fi re burning in the Jordan. According to the fourth
Gospel, John was the only witness of the spirit descending
upon Jesus like a dove; but Luke would make it appear there
were many spectators. Taking all the accounts, there must
have been some objective phenomena visible and audible. But
here the cultivated man fi nds diffi culties and objections. Must
the heavens open for the divine spirit to pass through? Is it
consistent with just notions of the infi nite spirit, to suppose it
must move like a fi nite being from place to place, and can in-
corporate itself in the form of a dove? Does God speak with
a human voice? The various theories, naturalistic and super-
naturalistic, fail of removing these diffi culties. It cannot have
been an aggregation of natural events, nor a subjective vision
of John, Jesus, or the multitude.
In some of the old gospels now lost, the words, “Thou art
my beloved son,” &c. were followed by these, “This day have
I begotten thee.” Clement of Alexandria and Augustine seem
to have found them in their copies, and some manuscripts of
Luke still contain the words. These words, (from Psalm ii. 7,)
were supposed by Jewish and Christian interpreters, to re-
late to the Messiah, in their original application. Now to make
them more effective, and their application to Jesus, as the
Messiah, the more certain, this story naturally grew up, that
a celestial voice applied them to Jesus. It was perfectly in the
spirit of Judaism, and primitive Christianity, to believe such
voices were addressed to men. Some of the Rabbis, it is said,
received them not rarely. Still farther, Joel and Isaiah had
predicted the outpouring of the divine spirit in the days of
the Messiah. This spirit he also was to receive. If Jesus were
the Messiah, he must receive this spirit; and the occasion of
his baptism afforded a very favorable opportunity. But how
THEODORE
PARKER
276
STRAUSS
’
S
LIFE
OF
JESUS
277
should it be known that it came upon him? It must descend
in a visible form. The dove is a sacred bird in Syria, and, per-
haps, in Judea. The Jews supposed the spirit of God “moved
on the face of the deep” in this form. The dove, therefore, was
a proper symbol and representative of the divine spirit. These
features were all successively united in a mythus, which gradu-
ally grew up. There is, then, no reason for doubting that Jesus
was baptized by John; but the other circumstances are myth-
ical, and have been added at a later date. Here Mr. Strauss is
false to his principles, and separates the fact from the drapery,
which surrounds the fact.
But the whole story of the descent of the spirit on Jesus,
continues the author, seems at variance with the previous ac-
count of his conception by that spirit. If the divine spirit was
the proper parent of Jesus, why should that spirit descend
and abide upon him? It could not thereby produce a more in-
timate union between them. We must suppose this story orig-
inated in a community which did not believe the supernatu-
ral conception of Jesus; and in fact we fi nd that Christians,
who did not admit the supernatural conception, believed the
divine spirit was fi rst imparted to Jesus at his baptism, and
the Orthodox fathers persecuted the old Ebionites for noth-
ing more rigorously, than for maintaining that the holy spirit,
or the celestial spirit, fi rst united himself with the man Je-
sus at his baptism. According to Justin, it was the Jewish no-
tion, that a higher power would be fi rst imparted to the Mes-
siah, when he was anointed by Elias. This seems to have been
the primitive belief; but afterwards, when reverence for Jesus
rose higher, a myth grew up to prove that his Messiahship,
and divine son-ship, did not commence with his baptism, but
with his conception; and then the words, “this day have I be-
gotten thee,” were left out, because they could not be recon-
ciled with the Orthodox view.
The story of the Temptation also, Mr. Strauss contends,
has its diffi culties. John does not mention it, but makes Je-
sus appear in Galilee three days after his baptism, while the
Synoptics say, he went immediately after this event into the
wilderness, and fasted forty days. The Synoptics also differ
slightly among themselves. There are other diffi culties. Why
did the Divine Spirit subject Jesus to this temptation by a vis-
ible Satan? Not to ascertain what manner of spirit he was of;
nor to try him, for his subsequent trials were suffi cient. Again,
a man could not abstain from food for forty days. Therefore
some say, this is only a round number, and the fasting was not
total abstinence from food; but this theory does not agree with
the text. Still farther, wherein consisted the utility of this fast?
But the personal devil is the chief stone of stumbling. His visi-
ble appearance has its diffi culties. How could the devil hope to
seduce Jesus, knowing his superior nature? and if ignorant of
this, he would not have taken the pains to appear visibly before
him. The second temptation could offer no attraction to Je-
sus, and therefore is not consistent with the alleged character
of the devil. How could he transfer Jesus from place to place?
Their appearance on the pinnacle of the temple would create a
sensation. Where is the mountain, whence he could show Je-
sus all the kingdoms of the world? To say the world is Pales-
tine, with its four provinces, is no less absurd than to maintain
with Fritzsche, that the devil showed Christ all the countries
on the map of the world. Attempts have been made to explain
this story as an account of what passed in the mind of Jesus,
either in an ecstatic vision, occasioned directly by God, or the
devil, or by his own natural thoughts arising in a dreamy state,
when he spontaneously transformed the thoughts into per-
sons speaking and acting. But why should the Deity, or how
could the Devil effect this? To suppose it was the result of his
own natural thoughts, implies that Jewish notions of the Mes-