Analyzing the Four Gospels: A Neutral Investigation of Jesus’ Death and Resurrection

Suleiman | Posted on November 10, 2024 |

Abstract

This paper aims to provide an unbiased, fact-based analysis of the Gospels and related texts concerning the life, death, and resurrection of Jesus of Nazareth, with particular emphasis on Jesus’ own words as they are recorded in the Gospel narratives. The analysis will set aside Christian theological interpretations and aim to understand the events through the lens of historical facts, as well as prophetic and symbolic elements. Special attention will be given to Jesus’ predictions of his death, the use of metaphors like Jonah, the theological implications of the Psalms, and the Quranic account of Jesus’ crucifixion, with the goal of proposing an alternative interpretation of the events surrounding Jesus’ death.

Introduction

The Gospels, written decades after the life of Jesus, offer a portrait of a man whose teachings and fate profoundly impacted the course of history. However, these texts were penned by authors who had strong theological motives, reflecting the rise of Christianity as a distinct religious movement. These authors wrote not as eyewitnesses of the events they describe but as adherents of a faith seeking to affirm the divine nature of Jesus. A neutral and historical analysis, free from Christian theological assumptions, is necessary to disentangle the narrative and assess the accuracy of the events and claims made, particularly those regarding Jesus’ death and resurrection.

The central theme of this paper is the death of Jesus. The Gospels describe his crucifixion and resurrection as the pivotal events of his life. However, examining these events in light of Jesus’ own words, the prophetic background in the Psalms, and the Quranic narrative, we find several inconsistencies with the conventional Christian understanding of Jesus’ death. This paper seeks to explore these contradictions and propose an alternative interpretation that aligns with the broader religious and historical context.

1. Jesus’ Predictions of His Death: “Son of Man” and Third-Person Language

A recurring feature in the Gospels is Jesus’ use of the term “Son of Man”, particularly when predicting his suffering and death (e.g., Mark 8:31, Matthew 16:21, Luke 9:22). The phrase “Son of Man” is commonly understood within Christian theology as a reference to Jesus himself. However, the manner in which it is used—often in third person—raises the question of whether Jesus was speaking about himself or referring to a future event involving a Messianic figure.

Third-Person Reference: Jesus’ repeated use of the third-person title “Son of Man” could indicate that he was not explicitly referring to himself, but to another figure. This interpretation is important because it suggests that Jesus’ predictions about suffering and death were symbolic or prophetic in nature, rather than referring to his own imminent demise. The use of third-person language suggests that his disciples may have misunderstood the significance of these sayings, perhaps assuming they referred to Jesus when, in fact, they referred to the future fulfillment of prophecy concerning a Messianic figure.
Disciples’ Misunderstanding: In the Gospels, we find numerous instances where the disciples failed to understand Jesus’ teachings (e.g., Mark 9:32, Matthew 16:22, Luke 18:34). This points to the possibility that Jesus’ words were deliberately veiled or symbolic, rather than straightforward predictions of his own fate.
Conclusion: The use of third-person language suggests that Jesus may not have been directly predicting his own death, but rather speaking cryptically about a future event that was not immediately understood by his followers.

2. The Example of Jonah: Death and Resurrection as Metaphor

In Matthew 12:39-40, Jesus uses the story of Jonah to describe the nature of his suffering and the time he will spend in the “heart of the earth”. He says:

Matthew 12:40: “For as Jonah was three days and three nights in the belly of a huge fish, so the Son of Man will be three days and three nights in the heart of the earth.”

This comparison presents a metaphor rather than a literal description of death. Jonah was alive in the belly of the fish, despite the outward appearance of being swallowed and consumed. Jesus’ reference to Jonah may be a symbolic statement, suggesting that he too would appear to be in a state of “death”, but in reality, he would be preserved and ultimately vindicated by God.

Key Insight: The story of Jonah in the belly of the fish suggests that Jesus’ death may not have been literal, but rather a symbolic death followed by resurrection. Just as Jonah survived the fish, so too might Jesus survive what appeared to be a “death” on the cross.
Further Interpretation: The three days spent in the belly of the fish is a symbolic period of waiting or temporary death, not permanent death. Jesus’ own words may have been intended to indicate that his burial was only a temporary state, and that he would be vindicated by God, just as Jonah was preserved.

3. The Psalms and God’s Promise of Deliverance

The Psalms contain numerous references to God’s intervention and deliverance of the righteous in times of suffering. For example:

Psalm 50:15: “Call on me in the day of trouble; I will deliver you, and you will honor me.”
Psalm 37:39–40: “But the salvation of the righteous is from the Lord; He is their strength in the time of trouble.”
Psalm 118:17-25: “I will not die, but live, and declare the works of the Lord… The stone which the builders rejected has become the head of the corner.”

These Psalms depict God’s promise to save those who are righteous and call out to Him in times of need. Importantly, the Psalms highlight God’s deliverance as a core theme, showing that suffering is not the final end for the faithful.

Key Insight: The themes of deliverance and salvation in the Psalms align with the interpretation that Jesus was not destined to suffer indefinitely. His cries for deliverance in the Gospels (e.g., Mark 14:36, where Jesus prays, “Abba, Father, everything is possible for you. Take this cup from me.”) reflect a desire for God’s intervention, which was consistent with the expectations of divine deliverance expressed in the Psalms.
Conclusion: The Psalms provide a theological basis for the idea that God would save the righteous from suffering, supporting the interpretation that Jesus was preserved by God, and that his apparent death was a temporary illusion, not a permanent defeat.

4. The Quranic Perspective on Jesus’ Crucifixion

The Quran provides a distinct narrative of the events surrounding Jesus’ crucifixion. Surah 4:157-158 states:

Surah 4:157-158: “And [for] their saying, ‘Indeed, we have killed the Messiah, Jesus, the son of Mary.’ But they did not kill him, nor did they crucify him; but [another] was made to resemble him to them. And indeed, those who differ over it are in doubt about it. They have no knowledge of it except the following of assumption. And they did not kill him for certain. Rather, Allah raised him to Himself.”

The Quran asserts that Jesus was not crucified, but that God raised him to Himself. The passage further indicates that the apparent crucifixion was a divine illusion.

Key Insight: The Quranic narrative aligns with the symbolic interpretation of Jesus’ death. The crucifixion was not a literal event, but a divine intervention that made it appear as though Jesus had died, while in reality, Jesus was saved and raised to God.
Conclusion: The Quran supports the view that Jesus was preserved by God from the crucifixion, echoing the themes of divine deliverance found in the Psalms.

5. Theological and Philosophical Considerations

The primary question arising from this analysis is why a loving and just God would allow Jesus to suffer such humiliation and abandonment during his most critical moment. If Jesus was indeed the righteous servant of God, why would God not intervene to save him?

Key Insight: Given the consistent theme in both the Psalms and the Quran that God delivers the righteous from suffering, it seems unlikely that God would allow Jesus to undergo such extreme humiliation and abandonment. Theological consistency suggests that Jesus’ suffering was temporary and divinely orchestrated to fulfill a prophetic purpose, not a final act of abandonment.

6. Conclusion

By analyzing the Gospels, the Psalms, and the Quran in a neutral, fact-based manner, we propose the following alternative interpretation of the events surrounding Jesus’ death:

Jesus’ use of the third-person “Son of Man” language suggests that his predictions of death were symbolic or metaphorical, and not literal predictions of his own demise.
The Jonah metaphor further supports this view, indicating that Jesus’ death was a temporary state, not a permanent reality.
The Psalms provide a theological framework for understanding God’s intervention and salvation of the righteous, supporting the idea that Jesus’ suffering was not final.
The Quran reinforces the narrative that Jesus was saved by God and raised up before the crucifixion could take place.

This analysis suggests that the death and resurrection of Jesus should be understood as part of a divine plan involving temporary suffering and divine deliverance, rather than as a literal and permanent event of crucifixion. In this light, Jesus’ mission was fulfilled, his time on earth concluded, and he was preserved by God, in accordance with the promises of salvation found in the Psalms and affirmed in the Quran.

In addition to the analysis of the Gospels, Psalms, and Quran, it is crucial to acknowledge the role of Paul of Tarsus in shaping the theological narrative surrounding the death and resurrection of Jesus. Paul, who was originally a persecutor of early followers of Jesus (who were predominantly Jews), is often credited with introducing and promoting a theological framework that emphasizes Jesus’ suffering and death as a sacrificial atonement for the sins of humanity. Paul’s letters, such as those to the Corinthians and Romans, present a theological interpretation of Jesus’ death that aligns with his own experiences and beliefs, rather than a strictly factual or historically grounded account of Jesus’ life and mission.

It is important to recognize that Paul’s writings were formulated years after the events of Jesus’ life and crucifixion, and his views were not based on firsthand experience with Jesus. At the time when Jesus was alive, Paul (then known as Saul) was actively involved in persecuting early Christians, who were not yet followers of a separate religion called Christianity, but rather a Jewish sect that believed Jesus was the Messiah. Paul’s dramatic conversion to Christianity came after the death of Jesus, and his subsequent teachings became foundational for the emerging Christian Church.

Paul’s narrative, which centered around the concept of Jesus’ death as a sacrificial offering for sin, diverged significantly from the earlier, more Jewish-oriented understanding of Jesus’ message and mission. His theological framework was influenced by his own personal and spiritual journey, rather than by a direct connection to the historical Jesus or his immediate disciples. Over time, as Christianity evolved into a distinct religious tradition, Paul’s teachings became more central to the faith, and the narrative of Jesus’ suffering and death as an atonement for sin was increasingly embraced by the Church.

However, it is critical to recognize that Paul’s interpretation is not necessarily a factual account of Jesus’ death, but rather a theological construct that served to support his own religious agenda. It is Paul’s view, and not necessarily a reflection of the historical reality of Jesus’ life or death. The Christian Church, in its formation and later expansion, adopted and further developed Paul’s interpretation to suit its own purposes, creating a narrative that was more aligned with emerging doctrinal needs rather than grounded in historical fact. This Christian interpretation of Jesus’ death stands in contrast to the earlier Jewish understanding of Jesus as a prophet and Messiah, whose mission was to restore Israel and call his people to repentance.

In light of this, the Pauline theology that emphasizes Jesus’ death as a substitutionary atonement for the sins of humanity should be understood as Paul’s personal theological stance, shaped by his own experiences and beliefs, rather than as an objective historical account. The later Christian Church, in its effort to establish a unified doctrine, embraced this narrative and propagated it, further expanding and solidifying the idea of Jesus’ death as central to salvation. However, when stripped of the theological framework that has been built around it, the historical facts surrounding Jesus’ life and death remain more ambiguous, with the Gospels and other texts offering diverse perspectives that do not necessarily support the later Christian narrative of atonement.

One of the most striking assertions made by Paul is found in 1 Corinthians 15:17, where he writes, “If Christ has not been raised, your faith is futile; you are still in your sins.” Paul clearly links the resurrection (and by implication, the death and atonement of Jesus) as the cornerstone of the Christian faith. He states that without Jesus’ death and resurrection, the entire Christian belief system would be without foundation. However, in light of the historical and theological evidence presented in this paper—particularly the claim that God saved Jesus and prevented his death (as supported by both the Psalms and the **Quran)—the notion of Jesus’ death as a literal atoning sacrifice is called into question. If Jesus was indeed saved by God, as these texts suggest, then the fundamental premise of Christian faith, as articulated by Paul, would be untenable.

By acknowledging that God preserved Jesus and that his death was not literal, we are faced with the realization that the entire theological framework built upon the notion of Jesus’ sacrificial death and resurrection could be rendered futile. In this light, Paul’s assertion that Christian faith is meaningless without Jesus’ death does not align with the factual accounts and prophetic themes that suggest Jesus’ life and mission were not defined by a literal crucifixion. Instead, Jesus’ message and mission were centered on restoration, repentance, and divine deliverance, with his preservation by God serving as a key element in the fulfillment of these promises.

Thus, it is evident that Paul’s theology—which emphasizes Jesus’ death and resurrection as essential for salvation—was based on his own interpretation and was not necessarily grounded in the historical facts or the actual events surrounding Jesus’ life. As Christianity evolved, Paul’s narrative became foundational, but it is important to recognize that it represents a theological construction that diverges from the original Jewish understanding of Jesus’ role as the Messiah. Given the evidence that God intervened to save Jesus and that his death was not literal, we must consider that the Christian faith, as formulated by Paul and later expanded by the Church, may rest upon an interpretation rather than historical fact.