Christianity: Its Evidences, Its Origin, Its Morality, Its History — Context and Discussion

The Silence of Contemporary Witnesses

Besant's first major argument hinges on the absence of any mention of Jesus or the reported miracles in the works of contemporary historians. She points out that a star-guided birth, a massacre of infants, a three-hour darkness, an earthquake, and a resurrection—all supposedly public events—left no trace in the records of the Roman Empire. She specifically cites the Jewish historian Josephus, calling him a 'painstaking and laborious historian,' yet notes that his works do not corroborate the gospel narratives. This silence, she argues, undermines the credibility of the Christian story as history.

Gospel Contradictions in Detail

Besant provides a meticulous comparison of the four gospels' accounts of Peter's denial of Jesus. She lays out a table showing that Matthew and Mark place Peter outside the palace, while Luke keeps him inside the hall, and John has him at the door. The timing of the cock crow also differs: Mark has it after the first denial, while the others place it after the third. She then turns to the length of Jesus' ministry: the Synoptic gospels mention only one Passover, implying a single year, whereas John's gospel spans at least two Passovers. Besant quotes Dr. Giles to support the view that the first three gospels depict a one-year ministry, and she argues that the Fourth Gospel's mystical discourses and different timeline suggest it is not describing the same person.

The Problem of the Triumphal Entry

Besant highlights a specific narrative inconsistency: in Matthew, when Jesus enters Jerusalem, the city is moved and the people ask, 'Who is this?' She argues that if Jesus had visited Jerusalem before and performed miracles there, his identity would have been well known. The fact that the crowd—composed of those who had come to the feast, not residents—needs to ask indicates this was his first visit. She contrasts this with John's gospel, which implies multiple visits. This discrepancy, she concludes, further erodes the historical reliability of the gospels, showing that 'we know nothing certainly as to the birth, life, death, of this supposed Christ.'

Besant's text is a dense, argument-driven work that rewards careful reading. Readers should pay attention to her use of tables and parallel columns, which visually emphasize contradictions. Her tone is consistently analytical rather than polemical, though her conclusions are firm. The excerpts suggest that the book is structured as a series of evidentiary challenges, making it useful for those interested in historical criticism of the Bible or the development of freethought literature.

That rainy afternoon, I found Besant’s careful dismantling of gospel contradictions oddly calming—her insistence on evidence over inherited assumption. Later, rifling through shelves, I pulled down Systematic Theology (Volume 2 of 3) — Inside the Classic, and realized I was seeking not refutation but structure. Both books asked the same quiet question, from opposite doors.