For many Christians, the words of Jesus printed in red in modern Bibles carry special significance, representing His direct teachings. But did Jesus actually say these words? Or were they shaped, added, or altered over generations? Examining the historical reliability of the Gospels, as well as alternative sources such as Gnostic and non-canonical texts, reveals a more complex picture of how the sayings of Jesus may have evolved. Additionally, the works of Jesus Mythicism challenge the very existence of a historical Jesus, proposing that Jesus was a mythological figure rather than a historical person.
The Reliability of the Gospel Accounts
The four canonical Gospels—Matthew, Mark, Luke, and John—were written decades after Jesus’ death, and none were authored by direct eyewitnesses. Scholars estimate Mark, the earliest Gospel, was written around 65–70 CE, while John, the latest, was completed between 90–110 CE. This means that oral traditions were the primary means of transmitting Jesus’ teachings for at least a generation.
- Mark’s Authorship and Language: The Gospel of Mark was written in Greek, not in Aramaic, the language Jesus would have spoken. This suggests that the sayings of Jesus were already being translated and interpreted before being recorded. Furthermore, Mark’s Greek style indicates that the author was educated in Hellenistic thought rather than being a direct follower of Jesus from Judea.
- Oral Tradition and Memory Distortions: Studies in oral history suggest that stories change over time, with embellishments and reinterpretations occurring naturally. The telephone game effect could have influenced the way Jesus’ sayings were remembered and recorded.
- Theological Evolution: Each Gospel has a theological agenda. For example, Jesus’ divinity is more pronounced in John than in Mark. Did Jesus explicitly claim to be divine, or is this a later theological development?
- Variations in Sayings: Comparing Gospel parallels reveals discrepancies in Jesus’ words. For instance, the Beatitudes in Matthew (5:3-12) and Luke (6:20-26) differ significantly in wording and emphasis. This raises the question: which, if either, accurately reflects Jesus’ original teachings?
The Theory of Progressive Embellishment
Some scholars propose that each generation of Christians reshaped Jesus’ teachings to fit their own theological needs. This can be seen in several ways:
- The Miracles and the Supernatural: Mark’s Gospel presents Jesus as a wonder-worker but does not explicitly equate him with God. By the time John’s Gospel was written, Jesus is presented as the pre-existent Word (Logos) made flesh (John 1:1-14). The trend toward making Jesus more divine over time suggests embellishment.
- The Resurrection Accounts: Mark’s earliest manuscripts end at 16:8 with the empty tomb but no post-resurrection appearances. Later additions to Mark (verses 9-20) and the other Gospels provide increasingly detailed resurrection narratives, suggesting later theological insertions.
- Jesus’ Last Words: The last words of Jesus differ among the Gospels (compare Mark 15:34, Luke 23:46, and John 19:30). These variations imply that different communities had different understandings of Jesus’ final message.
Gnostic and Non-Canonical Accounts
Beyond the New Testament, early Christian and Gnostic writings offer alternative perspectives on Jesus’ teachings. Some of these texts suggest that His words were interpreted in radically different ways:
- The Gospel of Thomas: A collection of 114 sayings attributed to Jesus, the Gospel of Thomas (discovered in the Nag Hammadi library) lacks narrative structure and presents a more mystical Jesus. Some scholars argue that its sayings may predate or be as old as those in the Synoptic Gospels.
- The Gospel of Peter: This non-canonical text contains a resurrection account more elaborate than the canonical Gospels, including a talking cross. Such details illustrate how legendary elements could develop over time.
- The Infancy Gospel of Thomas: This text depicts a young Jesus performing miracles, striking people dead, and later resurrecting them—elements absent from the New Testament, further showcasing the evolution of Jesus’ image.
Jesus Mythicism and the Question of Historicity
Some scholars go beyond questioning Jesus’ words and challenge the idea that Jesus was a historical person at all. The Jesus Mythicism theory argues that Jesus was not a real figure but rather a mythologized character, shaped by religious and cultural influences.
- Lack of Contemporary References: There are no contemporary accounts of Jesus from the first century. Writers such as Philo of Alexandria, who documented Jewish life at the time, make no mention of Jesus.
- Parallels to Mythological Figures: Jesus shares characteristics with earlier deities such as Horus, Mithras, and Dionysus, all of whom had virgin births, divine fathers, and resurrection themes. Some argue that Jesus’ story was influenced by these pre-existing myths.
- Pauline Silence on a Historical Jesus: The letters of Paul, the earliest Christian writings, rarely reference Jesus’ earthly life or teachings, focusing instead on a cosmic Christ figure. This absence raises questions about whether the historical Jesus was a later invention.
Manuscript Evidence and Redaction
The earliest manuscripts of the New Testament contain variations, raising doubts about the exact words of Jesus:
- No Original Manuscripts Exist: The earliest complete Gospel manuscripts date to the 4th century (Codex Sinaiticus and Codex Vaticanus). These copies differ from one another and from earlier fragments.
- Textual Variants: Scholars have documented thousands of textual variants, including changes to Jesus’ words. One famous example is John 7:53–8:11 (the story of the woman caught in adultery), which is absent from the earliest manuscripts and appears to have been added later.
- The Role of Scribes: Copyists sometimes altered texts to clarify doctrine or support theological positions, raising the question of whether Jesus’ sayings were edited to fit later Christian beliefs.
Conclusion
There is no way to verify that the words attributed to Jesus in the Gospels were spoken by him. The lack of contemporary sources, the decades-long gap between Jesus’ life and the writing of the Gospels, and the theological evolution observed in different Gospel accounts all indicate that the sayings of Jesus were altered, added to, and mythologized over time. With no way of knowing what Jesus actually said—if he existed at all—scholars must conclude that the “words in red” are not reliable quotations. If accuracy matters, the tradition of printing Jesus’ words in red should be abandoned.
References
- Ehrman, Bart D. Misquoting Jesus: The Story Behind Who Changed the Bible and Why. HarperSanFrancisco, 2005.
- Crossan, John Dominic. The Historical Jesus: The Life of a Mediterranean Jewish Peasant. HarperOne, 1991.
- Pagels, Elaine. The Gnostic Gospels. Random House, 1979.
- Carrier, Richard. On the Historicity of Jesus: Why We Might Have Reason for Doubt. Sheffield Phoenix Press, 2014.
- Doherty, Earl. The Jesus Puzzle: Did Christianity Begin with a Mythical Christ? Age of Reason Publications, 1999.
- The Nag Hammadi Library. The Gospel of Thomas, translated by Marvin Meyer, HarperOne, 2007.
- Codex Sinaiticus and Codex Vaticanus, 4th century, digital archives.