I, Jesus: An Autobiography

by Chuck Missler

THALLUS (CA. 52 AD) AND AFRICANUS (CA. 221 AD) Arguably the earliest non-biblical writer to mention the events of the New Testament surrounding the person of Jesus is so ancient that his writings are no longer extant. But Julius Africanus, writing in his Chronography 18:1 (ca. 221 AD) quotes Thallus as having previously attempted to explain away the darkness that occurred at the point of Jesus’ crucifixion: On the whole world there pressed a most fearful darkness; and the rocks were rent by an earthquake, and many places in Judea and other districts were thrown down. This darkness Thallus, in the third book of his History, calls, as appears to me without reason, an eclipse of the sun. Africanus was educated enough to realize why the “explanation” offered by Thallus was “without reason”: solar eclipses cannot occur during full moon, because at that time of the lunar cycle’s full moon, the earth is located directly between the sun and the moon. As a result, solar eclipses cannot, by definition, occur during a full moon. Whatever the cause was of the darkness mentioned by Thallus, it wasn’t caused by a solar eclipse.

TACITUS (CA. 56-120 AD) Cornelius Tacitus is acknowledged virtually universally as the most trustworthy of the roster of ancient Roman historians whose writings survive to the present day. A senator who served the Roman Empire under Emperor Vespasian, he also was a proconsul for Asia. Writing ca. 116 AD, Tacitus describes Emperor Nero’s response to the great fire in Rome and Nero’s claim that the Christians were to blame: Consequently, to get rid of the report, Nero fastened the guilt and inflicted the most exquisite tortures on a class hated for their abominations, called Christians by the populace. Christus, from whom the name had its origin, suffered the extreme penalty during the reign of Tiberius at the hands of one of our procurators, Pontius Pilatus, and a most mischievous superstition, thus checked for the moment, again broke out not only in Judea, the first source of the evil, but even in Rome, where all things hideous and shameful from every part of the world find their center and become popular. A discerning reader will observe that, while Tacitus was not a Christian believer, his writings tend to authenticate that Jesus lived in Judea, was crucified under Pontius Pilate, and had followers who were persecuted for their faith in Jesus as the Messiah.

In modern times, people seem to show a tendency of late to redefine Jesus, molding him into their perception of what they wish him to be. Reminiscent of diners at a Chinese food restaurant, these folk choose a character quality (or a perceived quality) from a variegated menu of interpretations regarding Jesus that appeals to them. Then they ignore the things he said and did that do not agree with their preconceptions, proceeding to craft their own image of Jesus—an image that all too often resembles themselves and their amoral views rather than creating an accurate picture of what the man was really like:

THE CRUX OF THE PROBLEM: LEGEND, LIAR, LUNATIC, OR LORD? And so we are presented with a choice. C. S. Lewis summarized that choice in one of his more famous statements, which he originally penned as part of his classic apologetic work Mere Christianity: I am trying here to prevent anyone saying the really foolish thing that people often say about Him: “I’m ready to accept Jesus as a great moral teacher, but I don’t accept his claim to be God.” That is the one thing we must not say. A man who was merely a man and said the sort of things Jesus said would not be a great moral teacher. He would either be a lunatic—on the level with the man who says he is a poached egg—or else he would be the Devil of Hell. You must make your choice. Either this man was, and is, the Son of God, or else a madman or something worse. You can shut him up for a fool, you can spit at him and kill him as a demon or you can fall at his feet and call him Lord and God, but let us not come with any patronizing nonsense about his being a great human teacher. He has not left that open to us. He did not intend to.

In Part One of our study, we’ll demonstrate that Jesus made no less than 32 separate and astounding claims concerning himself, claims that in the cultural and theological economy of monotheistic Israel were nothing less than blasphemy. We’ll show that the man claimed to be the God of Israel, Yahweh Elohim, not merely divine, like a manifestation of deity.

Once he took upon himself human flesh, the God of Israel would forever be “Emmanuel,” or, as the Hebrew name means, “God with us” in human form.

They knew that one of only three possible conclusions could be drawn from what Jesus was saying to the woman: either Jesus was committing blasphemy, or he was claiming to know a fact that only God could know, or that he was claiming to be God himself.

By concluding in Matthew 9:3 that “This fellow is blaspheming,” the Pharisees were letting Jesus and the crowd attending him know that in their view, Jesus was presuming to know only what God can know. And Jesus affirmed the accuracy of their conclusion—only God can proclaim sins as having been forgiven. In simple terms, the Pharisees had concluded that Jesus was claiming to himself a prerogative and an authority that only the God of Israel possessed.

His next actions said, in effect, that even though only God can proclaim that a person’s sins are forgiven, it was also true that anybody else could claim that those sins were forgiven. After all, absent outward proof of the claim, who could know if the claim were true or not? Then Jesus declared in full view of the assembled crowd of Pharisees that he intended to provide some outward evidence that his proclamation had validity. So Jesus healed the man from his paralysis. By doing so, Jesus was claiming that his outward, public healing of the paralyzed man was intended to demonstrate to everyone who was watching his debate with the Pharisees that Jesus was also claiming to do what only God can do to the inward part of a man.

Jesus casually remarks to the Pharisees that the person who seeks mercy and not sacrifice in Hosea’s prophecy is Jesus himself. The conclusion cannot be avoided: Jesus is claiming to be the God who prefers mercy over sacrifice, and specifically and deliberately claims to be the person called “the Lord,” that is, Jesus claims to be the offended covenant God of Israel mentioned in Hosea 6:4 and following.

Jesus points out that the first reference in Psalm 2:2 to “LORD” is the Hebrew word Yahweh, which English Bibles rightly render as “LORD.” The second reference to “Lord” in Psalm 2:2 is the word Adonai, which in English Bibles is also usually rendered “Lord.” In the original context of David’s prayer to God, King David is telling the reader that God is addressing the Messiah, who is the Adonai of David.

Jesus informs them that while it’s true that the Messiah is David’s son, he is also David’s Lord, toward whom David bowed down in worship as Yahweh Elohim. By this statement, Jesus links the divinity of David’s God to the humanity of David’s son. The Messiah, Jesus is claiming, bears within himself both human and divine natures.

Jesus is claiming to be the God who appeared to Israel as the Angel of the Lord, before whom Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob bowed in worship.

Jesus is making another astounding claim to the two men to whom he is speaking: he is claiming that the Torah (the five books of Moses) and the Nevi’im (the prophetic writings of Scripture) write about himself.

19“…I tell all of you with certainty that if two of you agree on earth about anything you request, it will be done for you by my Father in heaven, 20because where two or three have come together in my name, I am there among them.” In this statement, Jesus claims that in the future he will be present wherever two or three believers come together in order to facilitate an incident of church discipline. In order to fulfill this promise in centuries to come, Jesus must possess the quality of omnipresence, the ability to be everywhere at once.

For Jesus to be able to be present with everyone whoever believes in him throughout the centuries to come until the end of human history requires him to be omnipresent, omniscient, and eternal. There can be no escape from the claim: Jesus claimed to be God, and this truth was the foundation stone upon which he would build his Church.

Matthew 10:32-33 records the following rather startling statement: 32“Therefore, everyone who acknowledges me before people I, too, will acknowledge before my Father in heaven. 33But whoever denies me before people I, too, will deny before my Father in heaven.”

Matthew 10:37-38 records the following additional reminder by Jesus to those very same disciples: 37“The one who loves his father or mother more than me isn’t worthy of me, and the one who loves a son or daughter more than me isn’t worthy of me. 38The one who doesn’t take up his cross and follow me isn’t worthy of me.”

his statement recorded in John 14:1 settles the question once and for all. Jesus exhorted his followers as follows: 1“Don’t let your hearts be troubled. Believe in God, believe also in me.” In this astounding statement, Jesus equates belief in him with belief in the same Yahweh Elohim before whom the godly men and women of ancient Israel bowed in worship.

27“All things have been entrusted to me by my Father. No one fully knows the Son except the Father, and no one fully knows the Father except the Son and the person to whom the Son chooses to reveal him. 28“Come to me, all of you who are weary and loaded down with burdens, and I will give you rest.” The enigmatic statement by Jesus is fourfold: • First, Jesus claims that his heavenly Father has entrusted control of the entire Universe to him. • Second, Jesus claims that he has a complete and full knowledge of the infinitely eternal God who created the Universe. • Third, Jesus claimed that it would be possible for those who know him to know God the Father after the same fashion that Jesus knew the Father. • Fourth, Jesus linked these three claims to a command for those who were weary and loaded down with life’s burdens to come to him for relief: 29“Place my yoke on you and learn from me, because I am gentle and humble, and you will find rest for your souls, 30because my yoke is pleasant, and my burden is light.”

If you’re looking for evidence that Jesus claimed to be God, you won’t have to look much further than to a set of promises recorded in Matthew 19:28-29 regarding what Jesus told his followers what life would be like under his reign over the world: 28Jesus told them, “I tell all of you with certainty, when the Son of Man sits on his glorious throne in the renewed creation, you who have followed me will also sit on twelve thrones, governing the twelve tribes of Israel.” This statement contains at least the following surprising presuppositions: • First, Jesus declines to refer to himself in the first person singular, as is his custom when discussing his activities as God incarnate. • Second, when he introduces his remarks with the phrase “I tell you all with certainty” (verse 28), it means that he considers his remarks that he is about to make as of utmost importance and spiritual gravity. • Third, Jesus tells them that he intends to rule the world one day as a monarch. • Fourth, he claims that his reign will take place in a renewed ecosphere that he calls “the renewed creation,” a theological term used by first-century rabbinic scholars to describe a worldwide change in earth’s biosphere and environment that will come about at the coming of Israel’s Messiah to rule the world with Jerusalem as his capital city. • Fifth, he claims that his reign will be characterized as “glorious,” a term of theological art that harkened back to the time when the Shekinah, or the visible ...

“The Son of Man is going to come with his angels in his Father’s glory, and then he will repay everyone according to what he has done.” It’s the presuppositions contained in this statement to which we’d like to call your attention. The context of these words is a claim by Jesus that: • First, one day in the future, he would return to earth (an action that presumes by definition that he will have left it for some span of time and will be preserved alive, even though he won’t be living on the earth). • Second, he would bring his angels with him upon his return. • Third, he would come surrounded by the Shekinah glory of God. • Fourth, upon his return he would provide retributive punishment or gracious reward to everyone, basing his actions on a review of every person’s life activities.

40“Just as weeds are gathered and burned with fire, so it will be at end of the age. 41The Son of Man will send his angels, and they will gather from his kingdom everything that causes others to sin and those who practice lawlessness 42and they will throw them into a blazing furnace. In that place there will be wailing and gnashing of teeth. 43Then the righteous will shine like the sun in their Father’s kingdom. Let the person who has ears listen!” This statement isn’t merely a promise. It’s a threat that is shrouded in unmistakably dark tones regarding future punishment and in unmistakably bright nuances regarding the righteous. Do notice, if you would, the following component elements of what Jesus is promising to do: • First, Jesus claims (as noted earlier) that he would bring his angels with him upon his return. • Second, Jesus claims that he would command them to gather everyone who either causes others to sin or who denies God’s right and prerogative to design and enforce rules for human behavior. • Third, Jesus promises that his angels will punish those individuals with blazing fire. • Fourth, Jesus promises a different situation for the righteous: they will be resurrected to share the same Shekinah glory of God that the Angel of the Lord disclosed to ancient Israel when he appeared to his people.

18Then the Jewish leaders asked him, “What sign can you show us as authority for doing these things?” 19Jesus answered them, “Destroy this sanctuary, and in three days I will rebuild it.” In this short and succinct statement, Jesus tells the Jewish leaders in charge of the Temple that if they kill him, he will raise himself from the dead.

17“…I lay down my life in order to take it back again. 18No one is taking it from me; I lay it down of my own free will. I have the authority to lay it down, and I have the authority to take it back again….” As you read through this remarkable statement, we invite you to observe the presuppositions discernible in what he’s claiming: • First, Jesus claims that his death will be a voluntary one. • Second, Jesus claims that his approaching death will be no mere execution or murder. • Third, Jesus claims that his death will not come about by any simple acquiescence to the inevitable because he will be laying down his life by his own voluntary choice. • Fourth, he possesses the authority to return from the dead employing the same voluntary choice to do so that he will use to choose when, where, and how he will die.

Furthermore, Jesus bases all of these desires on his claim that God loved him before the world was made.

13“No one has gone up to heaven except the one who came down from heaven, the Son of Man who is in heaven.” The only way this statement could have any ontological validity would be if Jesus were claiming to be in two places at once. This is an obvious claim on the part of Jesus that he is omnipresent, an attribute possible only for God himself.

8Then the LORD instructed Moses, “Make a poisonous serpent out of brass and fasten it to a pole. Anyone who has been bitten and who looks at it will live.” 9So Moses made a bronze serpent and fastened it to a pole. If a person who had been bitten by a poisonous serpent looked to the serpent, he lived. In his discussion with Nicodemus, Jesus makes the astounding claim that just as all the ancient Israelis had to do to be healed from their rebellion against God was to look toward a bronze image of a snake, so also all anyone had to do to be delivered from their own rebellion against God was to look toward himself.

It’s obvious by examining the use of this verb in the New Testament that the term does not mean merely intellectual assent to the truth of something. He’s not talking about believing that something is true, such as believing a doctrine or a fact. The Greek phrase pistuein eis means to believe into, that is, to place a personal, no holds barred, lifelong commitment to obedience and fealty that was more properly demonstrated by obedience to the First Commandment, which as quoted in Exodus 20:2-3 reads as follows: 2“I am the LORD your God, who brought you out of the land of Egypt, out of the house of slavery. 3You are to have no other gods besides me.”

First, Jesus claimed to be “uniquely existing” (John 3:16), all the while declining to refer to himself in the first person singular, as is his custom when discussing his activities as God incarnate. This unusual Greek word monogenes refers to something that is one of a kind, with no other existing counterpart. By making this statement, Jesus is not claiming to be a “son of God” in the sense that all human beings are derivative of him by virtue of having been created by God. Jesus is claiming to be an absolutely unique being. • Second, Jesus claims he came into the world to save it from the consequences of disobedience to God and his standards. • Third, Jesus is claiming that his mission in coming to earth was not to condemn anyone.

In simple terms, Jesus is saying for someone not to make a full-time, lifelong, personal commitment to himself is to live in a permanent state of placing their own interests above those of God. All who do not believe are living in a state of disobedience to the First Commandment. The person who “does not believe has already been condemned, because he has not believed in the name of God’s uniquely existing Son” (John 3:18). Why is this so? As John 3:19 tells us: “…this is the basis for judgment: The light has come into the world, but people loved the darkness more than the light because their actions were evil. For God sent the Son into the world, not to condemn the world, but that the world might be saved through him.”

First, she says “Yes” to his question. In answering the direct question of Jesus to Martha, she tells Jesus that she believes this astounding claim by Jesus. • Second, she adds to her affirmation that she believes Jesus’ claims that he is the Messiah. • Third, she asserts that Jesus was “the one who was to come into the world,” a statement that contains within it an affirmation by her that she believed that Jesus preexisted in Heaven before his natural birth some thirty years or so before. Since under the theological structure of ancient Israel, no human being exists before they are conceived in the womb, Martha’s statement means that Jesus shares the characteristics of deity. • Fourth, this assertion that Jesus came into the world is the basis of her claim that Jesus is the Son of God, a statement that in the theology of monotheistic Israel can only mean that she believes Jesus shares the same eternal, divine attributes as Yahweh Elohim, the Lord God of Israel.

21“Just as the Father raises the dead and gives them life, so also the Son gives life to those he chooses. 22The Father judges no one, but has given all authority to judge to the Son, 23so that everyone may honor the Son as they honor the Father. Whoever does not honor the Son does not honor the Father who sent him.” From this introductory dialogue with the Pharisees we observe the following: • First, Jesus claims the very same authority to raise his followers at the end of the world that his Father has with respect to all life. • Second, Jesus claims that all authority to judge humanity at the last day has been bestowed upon himself. “The Father judges no one.” • Third, the motivation for this bestowal is that God his Father intends the followers of Jesus to display the very same honor to him that they previously showed to the Lord GOD of Israel. • Fourth, and of utmost significance, Jesus claims that whoever refuses or neglects to honor him as God incarnate is failing to honor God the Father.

First, that he knows the identity of each person who follows him; and, • Second, that he gives them each eternal life, which is something only God can do; and, • Third, that not even one single person who follows him can ever be lost eternally; and, • Fourth, that no one can take that eternal life away from his followers, which is a promise that only omnipotent power can guarantee or fulfill; and, • Fifth, that this stewardship of owning his own followers is not only a direct gift from God his Father, but also that it is the highest and best priority of Jesus' mission and purpose for having come to earth; and, • Sixth, that he is equal in character, attribute, and nature to God the Father.

In John 10:34-38, John records this conversation: 34Jesus replied to them,… 36“how can you say to the one whom the Father has consecrated and sent into the world, ‘You’re blaspheming,’ because I said, ‘I’m the Son of God’? 37If I’m not doing my Father’s actions, don’t believe me. 38But if I’m doing them, even though you don’t believe me, believe the actions, so that you may know and understand that the Father is in me and I am in the Father.” Instead of backing away from their charge of blasphemy, Jesus affirmed his claim. The response on the part of the Pharisees was predictable, as John 10:39 relates: 39Again they tried to seize him, but he slipped away from them.

Fourth, Jesus claims that every person who hears his voice—which means everyone—will rise from the dead.

In short, by prefacing his remarks with the warning to take his claims seriously, we can eliminate from consideration the possibility that Jesus was mistaken about his views. Quite the opposite, Jesus was claiming that he didn’t want his followers to misunderstand him by presuming that his power and authority to raise the dead were reserved for the future only. He claimed to possess the authority to raise the dead during his own lifetime. John 11’s record of the raising of Lazarus is claimed by the Apostle John to be a real-time historical occurrence of a demonstration of that power.

The Apostle John uses another verb besides saying that the Father “has granted the Son to have life in himself.” He describes Jesus in John 3:16 as being the “uniquely existing” Son of God. This term in Greek (monogenes) has sometimes been rendered to mean “only begotten.” The message of John 3:16 is that God gave his monogenes Son, the only self-existent God who has life in himself, for the salvation of human beings whom he described as “his people.”

Stunningly, not only does Jesus claim to possess self-existent, unending life, he also promises to extend that life to those who believe in him (that is, to those who cling to, rely on, obey, and worship him as Yahweh Elohim incarnate in human form).

28…Jesus told them, “When you have lifted up the Son of Man, then you will know that I AM, and that I do nothing on my own authority. Instead, I speak only what the Father has taught me.” By applying the Hebrew Scriptures term “I AM” to himself (Greek: ego eimi “I AM”), Jesus is describing himself using the name God uses in the Book of Exodus to describe himself. But this isn’t the only time Jesus spoke of himself using the “I AM” formula. Consider, for example, Jesus’ own repetition of the term just a few minutes later, in John 8:56-59. In speaking to the Pharisees about Abraham, Jesus made this astonishing claim: 56“Your father Abraham rejoiced that he would see my day, and he saw it and was glad.”

58Jesus told them, “Truly, I tell all of you emphatically, before there was an Abraham, I AM!” 59At this, they picked up stones to throw at him, but Jesus hid himself and went out of the Temple. John 8:58’s quotation of Jesus by which he identifies himself as the “I AM” Yahweh Elohim of the Hebrew Scriptures is a constant theme throughout the Gospel of John. Consider, for example, Jesus’ comments to his own disciples on the night of his betrayal. John 13:18-19 quotes Jesus as saying

18b“I know the ones I have chosen. But the Scripture must be fulfilled: ‘The one who ate bread with me has turned against me.’ 19I’m telling you this now, before it happens, so that when it does happen, you may believe that I AM.” In simple terms, John 13:18-19 records Jesus as telling them about the betrayal that is about to occur. He wants them to know about the event beforehand, so that when the betrayal occurs, they will realize that Jesus predicted that betrayal in his capacity of being God incarnate, using his sovereign omniscience and omnipotence to superintend the events of his own execution.

2“There are many rooms in my Father’s house. If there weren’t, I wouldn’t have told you that I am going away to prepare a place for you, would I? 3And since I’m going away to prepare a place for you, I’ll come back again and welcome you into my presence, so that you may be where I am.” The reference by Jesus to “rooms in my Father’s house” (verse 2) appears to be using the Jerusalem Temple as a model for God’s dwelling place. The Temple was known to have a large number of apartments and/or office spaces situated around the outer perimeter of the main edifice.

In his discussion with Peter and Thomas, comments by Jesus on his imminent departure from earth contain at least the following component elements: • First, Jesus claims that he is going away. This reference to going away is a not-so-subtle allusion to his death and subsequent departure from earth. • Second, Jesus claims that he is doing this so he can prepare a permanent home for his followers. He makes no statement regarding where that permanent home will be located. • Third, Jesus claims that he will return at a later time. • Fourth, Jesus claims that when he returns, he will welcome his followers into his personal presence. • Fifth, Jesus claims that his return is intended to make it possible for his followers to remain with him permanently. It would appear from our fourth and fifth observations regarding Jesus’ statement that the location where he will place the rooms in his Father’s house is on earth, since in other places in the New Testament Gospels, Jesus makes it clear that as the Messiah, he intends to rule the earth, with Jerusalem as his capital city.

4“You know where I am going, and you know the way.” 5Thomas asked him, “Lord, we don’t know where you are going, so how can we know the way?” 6Jesus told him, “I am the way, the truth, and the life. No one comes to the Father except through me.” The conservative Christian community needs to be frank and honest about this astounding claim. Jesus is saying that for anyone to infer that all spiritual paths equally lead to God is to make a false statement. Instead, Jesus dogmatically asserts that “no one comes to the Father except through me.” This statement is an unmistakable claim to exclusivity with respect to things related to God. In short, Jesus is claiming that all religious systems are false that do not acknowledge him as “the way,” a term that in the theological economy of first-century Israel is an unambiguous reference to what the Hebrew Scriptures call the derek eretz, or the righteous path ordained by God himself as the central focus of what it means to be in a relationship with him.

Jesus claims that he is the way, that he is, in essence, the derek eretz incarnate. He’s not saying, “I’ll show you the way,” but rather “I am the way.” In essence, Jesus is saying that if you want to know God, follow him, because to know him personally is to know God personally.

God “carries out his plans so as not to cast away permanently from him those who are presently estranged” from him. In simple terms, the woman from Tekoa is telling us that the invitation from God to be reconciled to him is universal. All human beings are invited to have their broken status before him repaired.

God is impartial with respect to those who fear him. Anyone who “fears him and does what is right is acceptable to him in any nation.”

universal invitation for all men to come through only one way: the Word of God that was first sent “to the descendants of Israel” and then came as “good news of peace through Jesus the Messiah.”

Jesus wasn’t merely being intolerant when he said that he is the only way to reconciliation with God. He was expressing the central exclusivity of the very heart of Judaism, as if the God of Israel had been incarnate as a human being. In essence, the astounding nature of Jesus’ claim to be “the way, the truth, and the life” of all who love God stems from the attitude expressed in the Hebrew Scriptures to other religious systems. Toward that end, the words of Jesus in John 14:6 are not that unusual.