A 1000-word excerpt of The Gospels: Greatest Story Ever Told?

Chapter 1 (from the Gospel of Mark)

Vs. 1 The word "gospel" was likely added by the Church Fathers, because the first descriptions of the sayings and events in the life of Jesus of Nazareth were by word of mouth. The word "gospel" as used here likely means a summation of the accounts of the life of Jesus. It is difficult to imagine someone telling a story about Jesus beginning with the statement, "The beginning of the Gospel of Jesus . . ." The oral accounts must have begun with something like, "And then Jesus of Nazareth did such and such . . ." It is also unlikely that the early storytellers of the accounts of Jesus used the term Jesus "Christ." They would have referred to him something like "Jesus of Nazareth, who some believed was the Christ (messiah)." The term "Jesus Christ" reads as though Christ is his surname. "Jesus Christ" obviously is the name given to Jesus of Nazareth by the Church Fathers. The term "Son of God" also was likely added by the Church Fathers. The writer of Mark presents the term to the reader without explanation, assuming that the reader should know what it means. The word-of-mouth descriptions of the sayings and events of Jesus would not have used the term. Perhaps the teller of the stories suggested that because of Jesus' extraordinary sayings, he must have been "the Son of God." Just exactly what the term "Son of God" meant wasn't worked out until years later by the Church Fathers.

Vs. 2-3 Mark states that Vs. 2-3 come from Isaias (Isaiah), when actually, only Vs. 3 does. Vs. 2 is taken from Malachias (Malachi) 3:1. When one reads Vs. 2-3 in their Hebrew Scripture (Old Testament) contexts, it is not obvious that they are referring to Jesus of Nazareth. It must have been the Church Fathers who concluded that they foretold Jesus' coming. The word-of-mouth accounts would not have done this.

Vs. 4-5 It is assumed that the reader knows about this mysterious figure of the desert. The word "baptism" poses a trap for the reader, who most likely associates it with Christian baptism. John obviously is a Jew, and the Jews had a baptism, which was a purification with water. It is this Jewish baptism that John administered. One may justifiably wonder why this mysterious character, John, was administering the Jewish rite of baptism "in the desert" in "the river [sic] Jordan." Wouldn't the Jewish rite of baptism have been administered by a Jewish official, such as a priest, in either a synagogue or in the temple? Would "all the country of Judea" and "all the inhabitants of Jerusalem" have gone out to this mysterious character? Furthermore, why would all those people, obviously Jews, have gone out to John "confessing their sins," when the Jews had their own rites of repentance in the synagogue and temple?

Vs. 6 This verse hints at John's appearance: "clothed in camel's hair, with a leathern girdle about his loins." Indeed, would all those people from Jerusalem and Judea, presumably all quite civilized, have rushed into the desert to throw themselves at the feet of this mysterious character clothed in such strange attire? Furthermore, this verse says John "ate locusts and wild honey." His eating habits, along with his attire, strongly suggest that John was, indeed, a hermit, and a bizarre one at that!

Vs 7-8 John tells his audience that "one mightier" than himself is coming, who will not baptize them with water, but "with the Holy Spirit." The capitalized "Holy Spirit" almost certainly refers to the divine God person, the third person of the Trinity, indicating editing by the Church Fathers, since the Jews believed in a "holy spirit," not a divine person, but simply a divine inspiration. Since the word "baptize" meant a Jewish purification ceremony involving water, would John's audience have known what he meant by a baptism "with the Holy Spirit," or even with the "holy spirit"? Was this, indeed, the baptism that Jesus would later administer? Didn't Jesus also baptize with water?

Vs. 9-11 Why would Jesus have gone from Nazareth to the Jordan to be baptized by John? Wouldn't Jesus, a Jew, have already been through a baptism ritual in a synagogue in the Nazareth vicinity? When Mark describes the baptism of Jesus, Jesus had not yet chosen his followers. Therefore, who witnessed his baptism for this account in Mark? Who knew that Jesus "saw the heavens opened and the Spirit, as a dove, descending and remaining upon him"? Who knew that the dove was actually the Spirit? Who, indeed, was this "Spirit"? Was it the same "Holy Spirit" whom John referred to in Vs. 8? Or, must the reader assume this? Who spoke out as the "voice from the heavens," saying, "Thou art my beloved Son, in thee I am well pleased"? Mark's description assures the reader that the voice was not that of "the Spirit." A footnote attributes the voice's statement to Ps. 2:7. But Ps. 2:7 actually reads, "The Lord hath said to me: Thou art my son, this day have I begotten thee." It is difficult to infer that Ps. 2:7 actually refers to a messiah.

Vs. 12-13 These verses tell of Jesus being tempted in the desert. Vs. 12 says "the Spirit drove him forth into the desert." Who was around at the time to witness this? Why would the Spirit drive Jesus into the desert? It connotes the idea of a parent sending a child somewhere against the child's will. Vs. 13 gives a summation of Jesus' temptations, stating that "he was in the desert forty days and forty nights, being tempted the while by Satan, and was with the wild beasts, and the angels ministered to him." Once again, who was around to witness Jesus' temptations? How did Mark know that it was Satan who was tempting Jesus? Who witnessed the angels ministering to him? If "the angels ministered to him," could it have been much of an ordeal for Jesus "being tempted the while by Satan . . . with the wild beasts"?