The
classical criticism of Jesus in Gethsemane sees him as pathetically weak and
whimpering. In modern times, the criticism has not gotten milder.
Condemning Fear of Death
One of the more polite modern critics of Jesus in Gethsemane,
David Friedrich Strauss, says, “From the earliest times this scene in Gethsemane
has been a stumbling-block, because Jesus therein appears to betray a weakness
and fear of death which might be considered unworthy of him.”[1]
Boasting Their Own Bravery
Others condemned to execution have boasted of their own
courage by contrasting themselves to Jesus, insulting him in the process.
Lucilio Vanini was an Italian philosopher who was condemned, had his tongue
amputated, and was burned at the stake at Toulouse, France in 1619. A witness
described his manner.
I saw him in the tumbrel as they led him to execution,
mocking the Cordelier who had been sent to exhort him to repentance, and
insulting our Savior by these impious words: “He sweated with fear and weakness,
and I die undaunted.”[2]
Church Leaders Defecting from Jesus
M. M. Mangasarian was born in Turkey in 1859. He was ordained into the
Congregationalist ministry at Robert College in Constantinople. He came to the
United States and studied for the Presbyterian ministry at Princeton Theological
Seminary. He became the pastor of Spring Garden Presbyterian Church in
Philadelphia in 1882. In 1909 he published his first book. By that time, he had
long since abandoned faith in Jesus. As part of his proof that Jesus is a myth,
Mangasarian there writes:
Next, the composers of the gospels conduct us to the Garden of Gethsemane, that
we may see there the hero of the play in his agony, fighting the great battle of
his life alone, with neither help nor sympathy from his distracted followers. He
is shown to us there, on his knees, crying tears of blood – sobbing and groaning
under the shadow of an almost crushing fear. Tremblingly he prays, “Let this cup
pass from me – if it be possible;” and then, yielding to the terror crowding in
upon him, he sighs in the hearing of all the ages, “The spirit is willing, but
the flesh is weak,” precisely the excuse given by everybody for not doing what
they would do if they could. . . .
The objection that Jesus' hesitation on the eve of the crucifixion, as well as
his cry of despair on the cross, were meant to show that he was as human as he
was divine, does not solve the difficulty. In that event Jesus, then, was merely
acting – feigning a fear which he did not feel, and pretending to dread a death
which he knew could not hurt him. If, however, Jesus really felt alarmed at the
approach of death, how much braver, then, were many of his followers who
afterwards faced dangers and tortures far more cruel than his own! We honestly
think that to have put in Jesus' mouth the words above quoted, and also to have
represented him as closing his public career with a shriek on the cross: “My
God, my God, why hast thou forsaken me?” was tantamount to an admission by the
writers that they were dealing with a symbolic Christ, an ideal figure, the hero
of a play, and not a historical character.[3]
Capitulation To Mythology
Of course the answer given in the 20th century for Jesus’ behavior in Gethsemane
would be that He is a myth. That was Origen’s answer to Celsus in the 3rd
century.
Celsus, in the 2nd century, had rejected Jesus as a myth. That was odd because Celsus was a
pious adherent to the myths of classicism. Origen replied, in the 3rd century, that such stories as
are told of Jesus are admitted to be true when told of Pagan divinities such as
Apollo, so why can they not also be true when told of the Christian Messiah? If
Apollo, though a myth, may be accepted, what could be wrong with adding the myth
of Jesus?
What kind of answer is that? What kind of truth does that ascribe to Jesus? That
is only mythical truth, not true truth, not historical incarnation. Origen’s
classical formulation of a defense of Jesus capitulates to mythology. No wonder
unbelievers take Jesus as a myth. The church told them to see him that way!
Are We Better? Do We Need Better?
It is easy for us church people to poke fun at the classical and modern critics
of Jesus in Gethsemane,
just as it is easy for them to mock Jesus. But are we doing any better? Do we
know – do we care – what Jesus saw assaulting him in Gethsemane? Do we know what
was killing him then and there? We will consider this in the next posting.
As we await that posting, consider this: Does mythical suffering atone for any
but mythical sin? Is our sin mythical? If our sin is biographical and
historical, then don't we need biographical, historical atonement? If our sin is
real, but the sufferings of Christ are mythical, how, then, are we not left in
our sin?
________________________
1. David Friedrich Strauss, The Life
of Jesus Critically Examined (New York: Calvin Blanchard; Marian Evans
trans. from the fourth German edition), p. 720.
2. Gabriel de Bartholomaei
Gramond, Historiarum Galliae ab excessu Henrici
IV. libri III (Tolosae: Apud Arnald Colomerium, Regis & Acadamiae Tolosanae
Typographum, 1643), p. 211.
3. M. M. Mangasarian,
The Truth About Jesus, Is He a Myth? (Chicago: Independent Religious
Society, 1909), 99-101.