William Mennie

Christian Beginnings Revisited: Jesus, His Disciples and the Evangelists / Fresh Perspectives on Old Puzzles William Mennie

Innumerable scholars, theologians and others have studied the historical evidence about Jesus and his disciples. What more can be said? Actually, quite a bit more. New information and new insights are continuing to shed light on some very old puzzles and contradictions. Many myths emerged over the centuries that may or may not contain some truth. Perhaps the most useful approach is to focus entirely on writings that were probably composed within 80 years of Jesus' death. In particular, we should look for clues that point to early material likely to have been written by disciples who actually walked with Jesus during his lifetime.

In so doing, the author makes the case for a very early lost narrative gospel, partially embedded in later canonical writings. Could this be the missing Gospel of the Hebrews mentioned by the 4th century Christian scholar Eusebius as "spurious" (see Erhman, Bart D., Lost Christianities, p. 244)? Not likely. Nevertheless, careful chasing of clues does point to a lost text later used as source material by the canonical author-editors of Mark, Luke and John. It seems to be about actions and events in the life and death of Jesus, and about his being a new kind of Messiah of Israel chosen by God. This inferred gospel parallels the hypothetical Q1 Sayings Gospel acknowledged by many scholars as a primary source for the public words of Jesus reported in the gospels of Matthew and Luke. A third candidate as an early source gospel is the found Sayings Gospel of Thomas which contains some surprising Gnostic-type teachings of Jesus to an inner group of disciples.

Jesus was attempting peaceful change in the hearts and minds of the people of Israel. He failed. According to the inferred lost narrative, he was betrayed by an insurrection in the Jerusalem Temple that led eventually to his crucifixion by the Roman authorities. The inferred contents of the early non-canonical sources help to explain how this happened, and the subsequent extraordinary post-crucifixion activity of his followers. The hypothesized story that emerges is what generated the later canonical versions, but is different in many respects.

All histories are reconstructions of the past. They matter even if they are only about probabilities. The author's attempt at connecting the dots offers a new and hopefully useful angle of historical vision.