THE IMPERSONATION THEORY

– WAS IT REALLY JESUS DIED AND ROSE OR AN IMPOSTOR?

Index for this site

AN IMPERSONATOR COULD HAVE BEEN CRUCIFIED

The Church says that Jesus was put to death under Pontius Pilate by crucifixion. The gospels however leave room for doubt. This study analyses the data and gives possible explanations. Let us take the dubious data of the gospels at face value in light of the question: Could someone pretending to be Jesus have started off the resurrection hoax?

AN IMPERSONATOR COULD HAVE BEEN CRUCIFIED

The historical Pilate was more a monster than a man but the gospels say he was anxious to get out of being forced by the Jews to execute Jesus Christ because he thought that Jesus was innocent. Jesus might have made him behave out of character but that is unlikely.

Jesus claimed to be a spiritual king and thus to have more right to obedience than Caesar or Pilate so Pilate would have lost everything mainly his head for standing between Jesus and Jesus’ death. Caesar commanded by law that his rivals must be slain and if before they had a chance to cause trouble all the better. Jesus called himself the Messiah which meant a political king. If Pilate was willing to die for Jesus then he would have made it look like he had Jesus killed. The Gospels were lying when they said that Pilate publicly admitted he wanted to let Jesus go for he would have kept that to himself.

Pilate had Jesus scourged (Matthew 27:26) and he was beaten round the face and crowned with thorns. This would have made it harder to identify Jesus so this man could have been somebody else. Some would say that Jesus would still have been recognisable so that nobody could surmise that it was not Jesus who had been crucified. But nobody would have anticipated a faked death and they would not have looked that closely. The man probably was unrecognisable with a face beaten and bloody for we are told he had a crown of thorns on his head and was battered around the face. Even if we could not be sure of that nobody could be sure that Jesus or somebody else pretending to be Jesus died.

The New Testament says the Temple Guard knew Jesus from his visiting the Temple but had problems believing the man they were arresting in the Garden was him. Perhaps the substitute was arrested in case Jesus would be lynched in the quiet garden and the real Jesus was tried before Pilate and the substitute pulled in for the crucifixion.

Isaiah 52 tells us that God’s servant will be marred and unlike a human being. The text says that the servant will be exalted and as many were shocked by his marred appearance will be shocked at him when they see his glory. If this describes Jesus then Jesus had a terrible inhuman face when crucified. Most of the Isaiah prophecies with a bit of fantasy can be made to fit Jesus and the New Testament says they are about him. The New Testament is so fond of them which suggests that though his text was never said to have been about Jesus it is said to be by implication. It would say if Jesus had been recognisable and if that verse were not about him for undoubtedly, there would have been a rumour that the man on the cross was impersonating Jesus in the aftermath of the resurrection proclamation.

The impostor not sounding like Jesus would have been put down to fatigue and stress. Maybe he whispered so nobody would be any the wiser.

The man who was about to be nailed to the cross was first offered a drug which he refused (Mark 15:23). They wanted him doped in case he would give something away but he reassured them. Crucifixion was designed to be as painful as possible and there was no need to dope Jesus to hasten death for the Romans would break the legs to do that. What was Pilate up to?

The Bible says that the friends of Jesus were at a distance from the cross (Luke 23:49). John and Mary could have been as well though Jesus spoke briefly to them. Thus nothing amiss would have been noticed.

The real Jesus would have called out for the people to repent and love God instead of shouting that he had been forsaken by God. His outburst would have fuelled the gossips who would say he was accusing God of not looking after him.

If Jesus was around after his death that is evidence that whoever died on the cross was not him. The John Gospel says that Jesus told the cohort in the garden three times that he was the man they were looking for and each time they were not sure. No Judas kiss here. Elsewhere, Jesus tells them he does not understand why they didn’t arrest him in the Temple (Matthew 26:55). This shows that he was not popular for he could not have thought that they could have arrested him with all the supporters about. But it shows they knew him. They took some convincing that the man before them was the same man. They let the apostles go which is strange unless they hoped they could track them to the real Jesus if this was not him.

If Jesus had miracle powers then why could he not have turned somebody into his own likeness to get them crucified in his place like Judas was metamorphosed into Jesus and crucified as Jesus in the notorious Gospel of Barnabas? The answer depends on whether we can trust the gospel account of Jesus’ perfection. We cannot because we are told very selective and repetitive stuff – and are in fact being told very little, people who know as much about their boyfriends or girlfriends would not trust them as far as we are asked to trust Jesus - about him and we have not a single independent witness to this sanctity but only that of his fans which is not the same thing. Though the fans might be telling the truth we do not know for all fans exaggerate and imagine the greatness of their idol. And Jesus himself only told the Jews that they could not prove he sinned not that he never was a sinner which weakens the fans estimate of his perfection and we cannot prove that any of them knew him well or knew enough about his disciples to entitle them to be sure that Jesus was sinless.

It was not the usual policy to bury executed people. If Pilate permitted the burial of Jesus as the gospels say, he may have desired to get the body of “Jesus” hidden from the world for if it were thrown on the dump like the rest it might be seen by somebody who noticed it was not Jesus. Letting Jesus have a proper burial would have brought disrepute and more unpopularity on Pilate so he must have had a good reason for allowing it. The reason was not bribery. The gospels say it was not bribery. That would have been discovered too easily for his behaviour was suspicious in any case. The alternative would have been to allow Jesus to be buried but make sure that nobody knew about the burial. Pilate had nothing to lose from letting it be thought that Jesus was on the dump unless the body was not of Jesus.

It is by no means certain that Jesus was really crucified. It is possible that Jesus was a very useful informer and his death had to be faked for his own safety.

WAS THE RISEN LORD RECASTED

Was the risen Jesus an impostor and not Jesus?

We do not know. But we do know that the early Church was saying Jesus had a change in appearance following the resurrection. If the gospels are reliable , then he probably did change and perhaps more than once for they would not have made that up in case people would say that “it was all a case of mistaken identity unless they were having hallucinations”. Who was it that said that many would come in his name, meaning using the name Jesus and pretending to be him, and that they would come before the temple was destroyed? See Luke 21. He said elsewhere that these fake Jesuses could deceive even the saints. Yet the only candidates for fulfilling this prophecy were the guys who seem to have been masquerading as Jesus after Jesus died. Also, Jesus was saying they would be very convincing. They would not be unless they assented to his teaching but added new elements to it. A new Jesus cannot afford to contradict the old one. What Jesus said then lays an obligation on the gospellers to be totally convincing that the man who claimed to be the risen Jesus was really him but they are not.

Jesus's appearances describe an entity that didn't say much and which tended to vanish as soon as he was recognised. That is exactly what you would expect if somebody was pretending to be the risen Jesus.

When the gospels say that people met the risen Jesus and paid him homage we are not told that they instantly recognised him or that they were totally sure it was him.

Mark 16 tells us that Jesus appeared in another form to two disciples. The problem with most of Mark 16 is that all scholars agree these days that it was not part of the original text and that Mark must have ended with no reference to the appearances of Jesus (page 25, The Metaphor of God Incarnate). But it still reflects the early Church belief that Jesus didn’t appear recognisable after his death.

Jesus in Luke 24 might have had his face well covered up while he walked with two followers to Emmaus. The men could have thought he was like Jesus and sounded like him which would not amount to recognising him and he might have looked the same. But when they did not recognise him until he broke the bread it is clear that he was facially different. At that moment they decided it was Jesus in a new form. It could be that they realised that the man was claiming to be Jesus risen when he had gone to the trouble of convincing them that Jesus rose. Mark was probably on about the same event when he alluded to Jesus having a different form when he appeared to two men.

The Bible accidentally informs us that the man was not Jesus for he lied and the risen Jesus did not lie (1 Peter 2:22). He talked to the two men about Jesus as if he were not Jesus and he said that Jesus must rise again according to the Old Testament though it never says that at all.

Magdalene failed to recognise Jesus according to John 20 and thought he was the gardener. Perhaps she did not look properly or was not thinking straight. But the man said he was not Jesus when he asked her who she was crying for as if he were not Jesus and did not know her. The Bible says that Jesus never told lies. Perhaps the man decided to play the role of Jesus after that. He told her not to touch him for he had not ascended yet to God. This is a laughable reason. The original Greek shows that she was touching him a lot (note for John 20:17, NAB, New Testament, page 122). If he was too sacred to touch then he would not have let her touch him at all. Now he wanted her to stop. Perhaps if this man was Jesus who survived crucifixion she was hurting him and he was saying he would ascend to God to be safe from suffering forever. Perhaps the impostor if that was what he was did not want her to touch him and discover that he had no crucifixion marks or that he had only superficial marks of crucifixion that he made himself. He said to her to tell his disciples that he was ascending to their God and his God as if he believed he would never see them again. It looks as if he meant he was dying. However, she and Christianity since have taken a totally wrong meaning of his words.

The disciples did not know Jesus when he stood on the shore of the Lake of Tiberias even though he was close enough to converse with them (John 21:4-9). But the voice was different and he must have had a long chat before he would have succeeded in persuading them to put their net over the other side of the boat which seemed ridiculous to them when they had caught nothing. So they still did not know him after all that. Then when they caught the fish they thought the stranger was the Lord. When they stepped on shore the Lord had fish cooked for them on a fire. A resurrected being does not need to cook with a fire. The idea that since all this took place at daybreak they did not know Jesus for it was darkish is wrong because they had seen Jesus lots of times in similar conditions and because they had a chat with him. What makes it more odd is that this was not the first time they had seen the risen Jesus so it looks like they just assumed that the stranger was Jesus and perhaps he played along. Christians cannot prove that it was not a case of mistaken identity fuelled by wishful thinking so they cannot prove that the account is evidence for the resurrection.

Perhaps when some doubted in Matthew that Jesus rose though he was in front of them it was because he did not look the same.

The Bible tells us three times that Jesus looked like he had had radical plastic surgery. It never tells us that he looked the same as before on any occasion after his death.

Jesus did not need to hide his identity among friends. An impostor would for he would be testing the water first. Jesus did not need to alter his face. It scared them and was not very sensitive for they wanted the Jesus they knew.

The gospels show that the witnesses could have been taken in by a man impersonating Jesus for they were gullible and fanatical enough. And the fact that they never unmistakeably say the new Jesus had supernatural powers makes it worse.

Isaiah 53 allegedly predicts that that Jesus would be facially disfigured and unrecognisable. Perhaps the impostor used this text to explain why Jesus would seem to have come back with a head and body transplant. The early Church might not have been so keen to apply the prediction to Jesus unless Jesus really had come back all changed.

The risen Jesus was a man and not a supernatural being when he ate fish. He had no need to prove he was flesh and blood to his friends when they had already felt him. He really was hungry.

The gospels claim that the Jews were desperate to scupper the resurrection story. If so, then why didn’t the Jews get a Jesus look-alike and lie saying he was the cause of the resurrection rumours and had admitted it? They would have done this if the gospels are right about their conniving and dastardly ways. The Christians who were suspicious wouldn’t have mentioned this in case drawing attention to it would make evidence for an impostor surface. Why didn’t the Jews and Romans send out a warrant for a man pretending to be Jesus and claiming in effect to be the new Messiah? The impostor must have told the deceived to say nothing until he went back to Heaven. He was very afraid for a man able to return from the dead.

If Jesus planned to die and then make a comeback then it is plausible that he would have hired somebody to masquerade as him after his death. He liked to engage in supernatural hoaxes like riding into Jerusalem on a donkey to fulfil an ancient prophecy that anybody could fulfil.

The new Jesus did not dare show himself in public for he was not the real Jesus.

Very early tradition says that Jesus had a twin brother that many sources say was St Thomas who was an identical twin. Thomas was called the Twin in the New Testament but it is not said whose twin he was. Luke hints that Jesus had a twin brother when he said that Mary and Joseph did not know that Jesus was missing when they left Jerusalem. The twin led to mistaken information that Jesus was in the large company. It would also explain why there were problems identifying Jesus in the Garden and elsewhere.

Thomas had to be the twin of an important person in the group to be called the Twin among the twelve. Their calling him that infers that he was the twin of Jesus for why else would they have been so cagey about it? The books that just mention Mary having Jesus and don’t mention another baby are not lying for Jesus was important and the gospels were about him.

Thomas could have masqueraded as Jesus after his death or Thomas died on the cross leaving Jesus to masquerade as Thomas and Jesus risen from the dead. It is not actually said that Jesus and Thomas were seen together following the resurrection at John 20. Thomas could have been seemingly locked in his room and got out to make “Jesus” appear to the disciples and enter Thomas’ room and close the door behind him and change back into Thomas’ clothes before coming out saying Jesus showed him his wounds and proved his resurrection to him. It is interesting that the first time Jesus appeared Thomas was not there. However some of the appearances could be hallucinations because if you think your friend has come back from the dead your imagination will go haywire. We must remember too that this was no ordinary situation. The rules of hallucination will vary for people in a highly charged emotional state bolstered by religious pipedreams. And especially if somebody is egging them on and tricking them.

We read in the John Gospel, chapter 16 that Jesus told the apostles that it was best if he went away because unless he goes the comforter will not come. The comforter is the spirit of truth.

The John gospel speaks of the Spirit being in people long before Jesus died. The Spirit could still come without Jesus going away. Jesus could die and rise again immediately so that he dies but doesn't actually go away if his death is necessary for the coming of the Spirit. The Spirit knows that Jesus is going to die anyway so he doesn't need to wait until it actually happens.

Scholars tell us that the Spirit is another counsellor meaning another of the same kind as Jesus. The original Greek of Jesus’ promise to send the Spirit in John infers that this messenger is another of the same kind as himself (page 57, 398, The New Cults). He used the Greek word allos for another which means another of the same nature. Christians base an argument for the deity and personality of the Spirit on this. But Jesus is talking about a messenger and a comforter. He would have meant that the Spirit would have been like him in these respects exclusively. When somebody says, “He is the same as me,” the meaning of this depends on the context. And since the context does not mention the deity of Jesus it is no proof for the deity of the Holy Spirit. Some say that Jesus did mean the Spirit was divine and personal for Jesus was not a messenger or comforter so it was the nature he was referring to and not the roles. He was a comforter for his message was the gospel or good news and he sought to heal. And he was a messenger of God. Jesus was not referring to the nature for the Spirit was unlike him in that it did not come in human form.

So Christians take allos to mean that since Jesus is God, the Holy Spirit will be God too. The passage makes more sense when taken as meaning that Jesus will vanish forever and a Spirit will start appearing to people after he dies. The Spirit cannot come until Jesus goes for there is no need for him as long as Jesus is here and having the two at the one time would confuse the bewildered disciples. From this it would follow that the gospels were wrong to take the visions following the death of Jesus as being appearances of Jesus himself. They had visions but over time they embellished them and convinced themselves it was Jesus they saw.

Another of the same kind cannot be taken to be saying that the Spirit is God. The context is about how Jesus is messenger and comforter. The spirit is comforter and messenger of God. He would have to carry out this mission in the same way as Jesus did by being visible and speaking to people which is how he manages to be another of the same kind. Jesus says that when the spirit comes he will convince the world about righteousness for Jesus will be with the Father and seen no more. The Spirit is a total replacement for Jesus and teach the Church. He will remind the Church what Jesus taught and explain it and add to it (verses 13-15). No wonder most scholars believe the Church not the eyewitnesses of Jesus created the gospels.

Later in the chapter Jesus says he will go for a little while and cause much sadness but he will be back again. He says that when he comes back the veiled talk will stop and he will speak plainly (16:25). Again this to many, supports the notion of the Church developing the teaching ascribed to Jesus not Jesus. The saying is best understood as referring to Jesus dying and meeting his apostles again in Heaven. Evidence for this interpretation comes from 16:26 where Jesus says that at that time they won't even need him to pray to God for them for they will do it directly. He implies that he won't be necessary to them anymore except as friend. Jesus says that the stuff in the chapter he has been saying including that about going away and coming back is in parable but despite that the apostles say they understand him and are delighted he speaks plainly at last (16:29). They do not interpret the going away and coming back as referring to Jesus' death and resurrection. The Church ignores this and pushes the death and resurrection interpretation forward.

There is evidence in the gospels that some people in the times of the early Christians who believed that somebody else took Jesus' place after his death. Their garbled traditions ended up in the New Testament.

JESUS, THE SPIRIT GUIDE?

Christians claim that the resurrection of Jesus meant Jesus came back in a transformed body. It was like a spiritual body. How spiritual was it? Perhaps it was transformed so much that it could only make itself known through mediums and spiritualistic activity.

The risen Jesus appearing in the Bible could just have been what was thought to be the spiritual Jesus acting and taking through a stigmatised medium. The medium would then have been Jesus for the mind determines personal identity. The ascension could have been the spirit body of Jesus leaving the body of the medium for the last time.

Thomas asked for Jesus to appear with the wounds he had got in his body at the crucifixion so that he could feel them and Jesus obliged. But if a medium seemed to develop stigmata while possessed by Jesus it would suffice. Jesus was reproducing the wounds on his invisible spirit body – spiritualists believe that this body which they call the ethereal body affects the physical body – on the body of the instrument. Mediums are said to physically change a bit into the spirit they are allowing to take over.

In Spiritualism, there is a practice called transfiguration in which a bodily substance is emitted and seems to make the medium look like the dead person. Maybe this was what happened. Transfiguration is really just the imagination and is done in a low light if you stare at a person in a dim light you think the person is changing shape and appearance. Thomas could have been a medium to cause Jesus appear in a vision. Mediumship may be superstition but some people can alter their mental structure to see and hear and feel what is not there.

Paul saw Jesus in a light on the way to Damascus which converted him. The Bible does not require us to believe that there was only a supernatural explanation for all this. It could have been too much sun, drink or a hallucination that God was working through. Or was Paul a spiritual medium?

The Bible does not say how Jesus appeared so it could have been via Spiritualism. They were not bound to tell every detail and they did not wish the critics to sneer or to encourage other spiritists. As for the opposition of the Law to Spiritism everybody agrees that it is okay to be a medium if God lets and wants you to be one. If is solely unauthorised communication with the other world that is wrong or communication that attempts to bypass God. That might have been the belief of the early Church. But objectively speaking, all visions of dead people and raised people even those reported by the Church are nothing more than necromancy and are forbidden for the reason that necromancy is forbidden in accordance with Deuteronomy 18.

The resurrection vision stories are dubious when they could be spiritualistic.

Conclusion

The New Testament just assumes far too much about the death and resurrection of Jesus. It is an unbiased and unscientific and shows that the writers and the apostles didn’t have a clue about giving testimony. One would expect them to be excellent witnesses if they had really had loads of experience in defending their testimony. The evidence indicates that the gospellers were making up what they wrote and in fairness the alleged apostolic testimony that became the New Testament may never have been available to the gospellers. They never claimed that it was available.

August 18 2008