THE REFUTATION OF JOHN
by miriam berg
Chapter XX
THE RESURRECTION
(John 20:1-18)
The greatest disparities among the four Gospels
occur in their versions of the reported resurrection
of Jesus, where no two of them mention the same appearances
to the same persons or the same time or the same place.
This alone should cause us to regard the entire story
of the resurrection as mythology. Mark alone cites
appearances found also in both Luke and John, but
without specifying where or when; but these last eight verses
of Mark are not found in the oldest manuscripts of that Gospel
and read like a brief summary of the appearances
reported in Luke and are considered by many scholars
to have been a later addition, possibly not until the
mid-second century, especially since some ancient
manuscripts contain a different ending to the Gospel.
Paul gives a list of the appearances (I Cor. 15:5-8),
including his own vision, but astonishingly not a
single one of these is reported in the Gospels!
Be that as it may, John reports that Mary Magdalene
was the first to visit the tomb on Sunday morning,
finding it empty. Each of the other three Gospels
reports a different group of women who came
and found the empty tomb. John reports next
that she went and told Peter and "the other disciple"
and that they had a little race which Peter lost so that
Mr. Mysterious reached the tomb first and peeked in,
but that Peter was the first to go inside. Luke's is the
only other report which says that Peter came to look
in the tomb, with no mention of the other disciple.
John then reports that Mary saw two angels, and when
she turned around she saw Jesus himself, who told her
not to touch him. Matthew and Mark report that a
single angel appeared to all the women, Luke reports
the two. But only Matthew reports that Jesus appeared
unto these women; Mark and Luke do not; nor does
Paul in his catalogue of appearances, doubtful though
it be. The spurious nature of the appendix to Mark's
gospel is proved by the reference to casting seven
devils out of Mary Magdalene (Mark 16:9),
as if that event had been mentioned previously,
but no such event is reported in Mark; and also by
the reference to Jesus as "Lord Jesus" and "the Lord"
which form of reference to Jesus
is not found anywhere else in Mark's gospel.
(John 20:19-29)
Next, John reports that Jesus appeared
to the disciples in Jerusalem, at which time
he supposedly gave them power to forgive sins and to
"retain" sins. Luke, parroted by Mark but with no
reference to time and place, reports that the second
(not the first) appearance was in Jerusalem. Matthew
does not mention an appearance in Jerusalem at all.
Paul does not mention it clearly, but does mention an
appearance to the Twelve (was he including Judas or
was this appearance after Stephen had been voted an
apostle?) and another vague appearance to "all the
apostles". John claims that this appearance was to all
the disciples except Thomas who was absent and did
not believe it when they told him. The Synoptics say
only that "some doubted". Then John reports that
"eight days later" Jesus appeared in the midst of them
without coming through the doors, also in Jerusalem,
and this time he invited Thomas to touch his wounds,
implying that Jesus' body was still mutilated as it had
been on the cross; and John adds a homily intended to
ward off any future doubting Thomases; "Blessed are
they who have not seen, yet believed." But not only is
this appearance not reported in any of the other gospels,
nor in Paul's list, but Luke tells us that he was carried
up to heaven the same day (Luke 24:13,33,51),
although in Acts we are told that Jesus was seen
continually of them for forty days. With all these
conflicting reports, eight days later, that very day,
forty days, just what are we supposed to believe?
However, we find also that Luke reports that the
first appearance was to two of the disciples on
the road to Emmaus outside of Jerusalem,
but he does not say which two they were. Neither
Matthew nor John nor Paul mention this appearance;
Mark mentions only that Jesus appeared to two of them
outside Jerusalem, obviously copied from Luke. In all,
Matthew reports only one appearance, in Galilee, on the
mountain where Jesus named them as his disciples. It is
impossible to make any sense out of all these conflicting
reports, this Jesus who "appears" to them at different
times and places, through solid walls, and "vanishes
from their sight" (Luke 24:31); how can it be other
than hallucinations, no different from hundreds and
thousands of other reported appearances of ghosts?
If he had risen, why did he not go to the temple and
teach, saying, Here is the evidence that I am the Son of
God? Was he afraid that he would be killed again? If
he appeared to any, in the physical flesh after stripping
the linen cloths from his body, how come no two of the
reports are alike? His other acts have all been public;
why was this last most unbelievable act presented to
only ten or eleven persons, and why should we believe
all kinds of fantastic things, just because they said so,
or that others reported that they said so?
(John 20:30-31)
The final verses in this chapter look
like the conclusion of the Gospel,
and many scholars believe that the twenty-first chapter
was added much later. Whether so or not, our final
observation on this chapter is that, like the rest of
John's Gospel, Jesus makes no moral appeal to the conduct
of his followers. He says, Believe that I am the Son of God,
because Thomas could stick his hand into my side (was it not
bleeding?). He does not say, Do good unto those who
harm you, forgive those who crucify you, even as I
have forgiven those who crucified me; although that
would seem to give the crucifixion some meaning as a
sign or a lesson to us. No indeed, this Jesus of John is
unacceptable; he is arrogant, conceited, narrow-minded,
petulant, and bigoted, he is a fictional character at best,
but an unworthy standard for any person today or in the
past or the future who believes in the love of all
humanity, or even in the love of God. No God worthy
of being called a universal God and creator of all people
could do less than love all persons equally, not just those
who believe that an obscure teacher in the Middle East
centuries ago was the unique Son of God.
Next chapter