Was Jesus a failure?

[hanzosbm]

Was Jesus a failure?

By Steven McAfoose​

I know this might be a bit of a sensitive topic to post on Christmas Eve, but I figure, if the man was willing to die to get his message out, the least we can do is honor that sacrifice and discuss it, even if it might be uncomfortable.



The following paper paints the story of Jesus Christ and his mission on Earth in a much different light than that traditionally told by Christian churches. This paper was not designed to be inflammatory, nor can anyone say with any degree of certainty that the theories contained within are true. It is just that; a theory, but one which will hopefully lead to some thought, perhaps some discussion, and maybe even a different view of the man that has become the figurehead of one of the largest religions in history.

The theories laid out here follow a relatively gnostic line of thinking, and while supported with arguments, are not complete. For this reason, there are at times leaps made to connect certain dots. The strength or weakness of the arguments contained here are based on one’s willingness to accept those leaps of faith. I would ask, that at least for the purposes of understanding this paper, that the reader indulge me. Furthermore, many of the texts cited in this paper will be apocryphal and therefore largely ignored by organized churches. I have included them because I feel that it is the untold story that contains the truth. Regardless of the reader’s final thoughts on this paper, I hope that it will at least pique their interest in the apocrypha enough to dig a bit deeper for themselves.


The beginning supposition of my argument goes back prior to the birth of Jesus to his mother; Mary. The New Testament tells us very little of Mary prior to the Annunciation. In Luke 1:26-27 we are told that Mary is already engaged to Joseph and living in Galilee at the time of the Annunciation. Matthew 1:18 stops just short of saying she was engaged already when he says “…When as his mother Mary was espoused to Joseph, before they came together, she was found with child of the Holy Ghost”. This seems to indicate that they were already espoused when she was found to be pregnant, but, breaking it down, it makes two separate statements. The first is that at the time the narrative begins she was espoused to Joseph. The second is that before they came together, she was found to be pregnant. He never actually says that they were espoused prior to her being found to be pregnant, although I will concede that it does lean that way. Mark and John don’t speak about Mary’s early years, so for the moment, we’ll leave them out. Instead, we’ll turn to a book that cannot be found within the New Testament; the Infancy Gospel of James. In this book, a man named Joachim attempts to make offerings at the temple but is shamed and turned away by Rueben because he has “not made seed in Israel”. Joachim leaves and goes out into the desert to fast and pray for forty days and forty nights. His wife, Anna, is very upset by this and prays to God to bless her womb the way he did for Sarah. Angels then appear to both Anna and Joachim and tell them that she will conceive. That child was to become Mary. When Mary is 3 years old, she is taken to the Temple and is blessed by the priests and which time she dances around on the alter steps and is fed by an angel and is generally showered with good omens and is received into the Temple to serve. At age 12, the priests have a problem. Mary is beginning to enter into adulthood which brings with it certain biological functions of a young woman that the priests worry will defile the temple. So, the high priest, Zacharias, goes to the alter to pray to God about what to do with her and an angel appears and gives him instructions. So, Zacharias sends out heralds to round up all the widowers; one of which is Joseph. That’s right, you read that correctly, Joseph is a widower. So, each man takes up a staff and a dove comes out of the rod and lands on Joseph’s head indicating that he is the chosen one at which point Zacharias informs Joseph that he is to keep the virgin. We are then told “But Joseph refused, saying: I have children, and I am an old man, and she is a young girl”. Ultimately, he is persuaded, but as he is just there to keep Mary, he typically goes off and does his thing and it is during one of these absences that the Annunciation takes place, though not until she is 16 years old. The first person she tells is Elizabeth who is identified as her ‘kinswoman’ and in fact, Joseph doesn’t even come back to see her until she is 6 months pregnant. We don’t know how far in advance of the Annunciation he last saw her, but clearly they are not all that close.

Those familiar with the New Testament might be seeing some interesting, if not confusing, parallels at this point. In Luke 1:5 we are told that “…a certain priest named Zacharias, of the course of Abia: and his wife was of the daughters of Aaron, and her name was Elisabeth”. Also in Luke, we are told that it is Zacharias and Elizabeth who cannot conceive and who are blessed by an angel, echoing the story told about Mary’s parents. Was this confusion, or simply similar circumstances? At the time of her pregnancy, Mary is 16, Joseph is considerably older, Elizabeth is pregnant at the same time, and while we don’t know her age, in Luke 1:18 Zacharias “said unto the angel, Whereby shall I know this? For I am an old man, and my wife well stricken in years”. So, while not critical to this narrative, I think it is worth mentioning here that while Mary and Elizabeth were related, they were not the same age; Mary is most definitely alone in this way.

Another part of this narrative worth noting is what happened to Zacharias. We know that he is the high priest at the temple at the time that Mary is received, but then something happens. The Infancy Gospel of James simply says “And at that time Zacharias was dumb, and Samuel was in his place until the time that Zacharias spake.” However, in Luke 1:20 we get a clearer explanation. The angel Gabriel appears to Zacharias to announce that Elizabeth is pregnant and for some reason, takes away his power of speech, only to be returned once the baby is born and named John. This of course, is John the Baptist. Once Zacharias is able to speak, it is said that he speaks with the tongue of the prophets. So, clearly, it is speaking in a way not normally attributed to a high priest. So what happened to Zacharias (and why does it matter)? Well, Luke 3 tells us that by the time John begins preaching the baptism that Annas and Caiaphas where the high priests of the temple, not Zacharias. However, both Luke 11 and Matthew 23 explain his fate. In Matthew 23, Jesus is railing against the Pharisees and says “Wherefore, behold, I send unto prophets, and wise men, and scribes: and some of them ye kill and crucify; and some of them shall ye scourge in your synagogues, and persecute them from city to city: That upon you may come all the righteous blood shed upon the earth, from the blood of righteous Able unto the blood of Zacharias son of Barachias, whom ye slew between the temple and the alter”. That’s right, Jesus is saying that the Pharisees killed Zacharias, inside the temple no less! The reason isn’t crystal clear, but he links him with prophets, wise men, and scribes and we already saw that Zacharias was speaking with the tongue of prophets. Was he delivering a message that wasn’t popular with the Pharisees? We don’t know. The Infancy Gospel of James says that it was Herod, in his search for John whom he wanted to kill as one of the first born, murdered Zacharias for failing to deliver him. Yet Jesus blames the Pharisees. It is worth noting that Simeon is then named the next high priest, and we’ll be seeing his name again soon.

So, let’s summarize here. Mary, who is raising Jesus somewhat as a single mother since Joseph is her husband in name alone, has family made up of a high priest who is killed for his teachings and John the Baptist who is preaching a new salvation heavily involving ritualistic bathing and we see Jesus resentful towards the established church for silencing who he feels are prophets and the killing of his relative.

Ready for one of those leaps I talked about? Here is comes. I propose that Jesus and his family were Essenes. ‘Who were the Essenes’ some of you might be asking. Well, the truth is, despite all the conjecture, we know very little about them. There have been some recent documents “discovered” that talk about them, but these are all modern texts said to be copied from long lost documents or divinely inspired, so I will rule them out for our purposes. We have 3 contemporary sources: Josephus, Philo, and Pliny the Elder. There are a number of different interesting parallels here. For one thing, they were known for their frequent, ritualistic bathing. They were also seen as outcasts from the two much larger sects of Judaism; the Pharisees and Sadducees. They were a communistic group who shared everything and when travelling, took nothing with them relying on the hospitality of others. The Essenes were also known to teach by way of parables. They felt that commerce was disdainful and did not agree with the monetary trades such as lending and money changing. Josephus also indicates a particular Essene by the name of Simon. Could this be the same as the Simeon that prophesizes Jesus’ rising in Luke 2 and who is the high priest after Zacharias? In addition, the Essenes were an initiatic tradition that required members to spend a certain number of years cleansing themselves and then committing to the group. This is the information given to us by the above named contemporary authors. The second set of evidence we have regarding them comes from the teachings in the Dead Sea Scrolls. It is worth noting that we cannot be 100% certain that they came from the Essenes or that they Essenes followed their teachings. All we know is that they were found near Qumran where there were settlements that seem to match descriptions of the Essenes living conditions and dating to approximately the same time. Those texts contain a large number of esoteric writings about Judaism of the time and would fit into the classification of gnostic.

My theory is that Jesus’ family were Essenes. John continued the tradition of bathing by preaching baptism, they are estranged from orthodox Judaism based on the teachings of Zacharias (though we can’t say whether his unusual teachings came from the Essenes or were his own) and Jesus rails against the Pharisees and Sadducees, in Jesus’ ministry, he and his disciples share everything living in a communal way, they travel with nothing, Jesus teaches by way of parables, and he scorns the money changers in the temple. I feel that this theory also helps to explain the lost years of Jesus’ youth. In the bible, Jesus goes from age 12 to roughly 30 with almost nothing being said of where he or his mother are. In an Essene society, he would’ve spent a number of his early years going through the process of becoming a member and being thoroughly taught the gnostic beliefs of the Essenes. When he reemerges, he begins his ministry; an outward preaching of lessons previously unknown to the masses. But, were these lessons already being practiced by the Essenes?

Here, then, is my second theory; that Jesus was going against the typical Essene practice of not revealing their secrets to the outside world. Jesus decided to go out into the world and preach these lessons rather than simply allowing seekers to find them. If this is true, we would expect to see Jesus’ teaching style to be similar to what we know of the Essenes. Well, we know that they both taught by way of parables, and we believe that the Essenes would likely have had multiple layers to their teachings the way that most initiatic, esoteric, gnostic, and mystery schools did. The first layer was the literal given to the masses, but underneath was the hidden secrets given only to those most worthy of understanding them. So then, is there any evidence that Jesus did this? The answer is ‘yes’, and the evidence is everywhere.

“And the disciples came, and said unto him, Why speakest thou unto them in parables? He answered and said unto them, Because it is given unto you to know the mysteries of the kingdom of heaven, but to them it is not given” – Matthew 13:10-11

“When he was alone, they were about him with the twelve asked of him the parable, and he said unto them, Unto you it is given to know the mystery of the kingdom of God: but unto them that are without, all these things are done in parables” – Mark 4:10-11

“His disciples asked him, saying, What might this parable be? And he said, Unto you it is given to know the mysteries of the kingdom of God: but to others in parables.” – Luke 8:9-10

It is important to note that the real teachings were not hidden or withheld per se, but rather were given in parable so that only those with the ability to see through the parable could understand it. John 18:19-20 says “The high priest then asked Jesus of his disciples, and of his doctrine. Jesus answered him, I spake openly to the world; I ever taught in the synagogue, and in the temple, whither the Jews always resort; and in secret have I said nothing”. This then brings us to the apocrypha. Probably the most obvious of which is the Gospel of Thomas; the very opening line of which is “These are the secret sayings that the living Jesus spoke and Didymos Judas Thomas recorded. And he said, “Whoever discovers the interpretation of these sayings will not taste death” thereby saying that one must interpret the lessons rather than take them at face value. In the Gospel of Thomas, an interesting expression pops up again and again; “Anyone here with ears had better listen!”. If these were words spoken only to the disciples, and Jesus obviously knew that they all had ears, why make this statement? The answer is that it is a parable in itself and he is saying that anyone who has the ability to understand these teachings ought to take notice.

So, we have established that Jesus was raised as an Essene with gnostic beliefs that he now wished to share with the world and wanted to go out and preach this, but was going to do so with parables. Surely he had to know that not everyone would understand; in fact that was the purpose. But he would’ve hoped that enough would understand his message that it could take root and propagate. In the Gospel of Thomas he even makes a reference to this. “And he said, “The person is like a wise fisherman who cast his net into the sea and drew it up from the sea full of little fish. Among them the wise fisherman discovered a fine large fish. He threw all the little fish back into the sea, and easily chose the large fish. Anyone here with ears had better listen”. So then, the first question is; did his followers understand his message? The bible and the apocrypha are full of references to the disciples asking Jesus questions about how to pray, how to fast, how to make offerings, etc, and Jesus always diverts the question or admonishes them in a way to suggest that those things don’t matter.

“His disciples asked him and said to him, "Do you want us to fast? How should we pray? Should we give to charity? What diet should we observe?" Jesus said, "Don't lie, and don't do what you hate, because all things are disclosed before heaven. After all, there is nothing hidden that will not be revealed, and there is nothing covered up that will remain undisclosed." – Gospel of Thomas.

Now, this doesn’t mean that the disciples weren’t understanding. In fact, in a great number of texts Jesus is seen taking the disciples aside and giving them special information that opened their eyes and was for them alone. Thomas, James, even Judas and Mary Magdalen are given special knowledge in various texts. But, since none of them share this information, we don’t know how black and white it was or whether any of it really sank in. The disputes that occur after Jesus’ death seem to indicate that not all the disciples (or even any of them) were in agreement about Jesus’ message. There were traditionally 12 disciples, although that number varies depending on the source, which means the potential for 12 different ideas about the message of Jesus. Of course, that doesn’t mean that any of them were correct. Going back to the theory that Jesus gained his insight with the Essenes, he had approximately 18 years to learn these lessons. He was trying to teach a group who were questionable at best in terms of their ability to absorb the lessons he was teaching in the space of approximately 3 years. That’s a tall order by any account.

Wrapping it all up, I theorize that Jesus had the knowledge of the Essenes. In fact, he may have been their most gifted member. At some point, he decided to break with tradition and go out and spread the word. “Jesus said, I have cast fire upon the world, and look, I’m guarding it until it blazes”. Furthermore, he had to know that it was going to be dangerous going against the status quo. Even if he succeeded in getting his message out, the ramifications of upsetting the establishment would lead to chaos. “Jesus said, Perhaps people think that I have come to cast peace upon the world. They do not know that I have come to cast conflicts upon the earth: fire, sword, war”. With this in mind and prophesizing what happens to prophets according to Matthew 23, Jesus had to have gone about his mission knowing that it was only a matter of time before they tried to shut him up. He had a finite amount of time to get his message out, and as he predicted, his time was cut short. The question is, was he successful, or did he fail in his mission?