The Rudolf Steiner Archive

15. The Christianity of the Gospels

[Ladies and gentlemen!]

[ 1 ] In the previous lectures, I have endeavored to show the elements that make up Christianity. I would now like to note once again that I am attempting to present Christianity only in the sense that it is to be understood as a mystical-theosophical teaching. I will attempt to show that the narrative before us—on the one hand in the three Gospels, the Synoptic Gospels—Matthew, Mark, and Luke—and on the other hand in the Gospel of John, and then also specifically with regard to Christian doctrine as it is presented to us in the various creeds of the Western Christian churches —I will attempt to show how this doctrinal content is nothing other than a result of the so-called Egyptian initiation, the Egyptian initiation process, to which every individual who wished to ascend to a theosophical worldview had to submit.

[ 2 ] This is summarized and described as a single historical event—the life, suffering, and death of an individual, a Savior—rather than as a process to which every human being is subject. These initiation processes, which varied in degree, have been attributed to a single personality and summarized, condensed into a single process. That is what I have sought to demonstrate.

[ 3 ] I endeavored to show how this matter became a historical event. I do not interpret the initiation process as an allegory. I wish to repeat Leadbeater’s words here—not as my own view, but as a fact established by theosophy: “It so happened that one of the most monstrous misunderstandings dawned upon the spiritual horizon of the ancient world, which then spread throughout the entire human race. This allegorically encompassed the descent of the Logos, which, however, was not to be an allegory at all, but the very embodiment of the descent itself. Nothing could lead one astray any longer,” and so on.

[ 4 ] Now that we know what the inner spiritual content was that was handed down to humanity and incorporated into people during the initiation process, we see it permeated by a philosophy—Philo’s philosophy—and then again as a creed, as an outward outlook on life among the Therapeuts and Essenes. Among these remarkable seekers of the soul and seekers of God, we find, on the one hand, the groundwork and, on the other, the philosophical deepening provided by Philo. Now that we have seen where what we observed in Jesus of Nazareth originated, it is up to us to observe how Jesus of Nazareth—this figure with whom we are dealing—takes up his mission himself, and how Jesus of Nazareth fits into this whole matter.

[ 5 ] Based on the various studies I have conducted on the Church Fathers, the Gnostics, and so on, I have come to the conclusion that it is entirely impossible to get by with the views of contemporary theology. [Bunsen] has written about the Gospel of John. This scholar’s creed corresponds more or less to the theosophical one, but it must be modified somewhat, as follows.

[ 6 ] The Gospel of John is either an account by eyewitnesses or a revelation. Anyone who takes the standpoint of exoteric Christianity—which is the standpoint of the sensory perceptibility of the personality of Jesus—must base their view on this sensory evidence. But if one takes the positive Christian standpoint, one must hold [Bunsen’s] view regarding the Gospel of John, which concludes roughly as follows: If the Gospel of John is a myth, then there is no historical Christ, and without him, all of Christianity is a delusion, the worship of God is a charade, and the Reformation is a crime. —You see that this scholar cannot get past these two points: Either the Gospel of John is valid for us, or it is not. If it is regarded as something concocted later on, or the like, then the fundamental idea, the very essence of Christianity, cannot be upheld.

[ 7 ] We must consider the Gospel of John in relation to the other Gospels. From the relationship between the Gospel of John and the other Gospels, we will gain an understanding of how this figure [the evangelist] viewed the founding of Christianity. We all know, of course, that the Gospel of John contains a passage indicating that the one from whom the Gospel’s accounts originate is to be regarded as an eyewitness—one who was present during the events and knows how to write about and describe them—and as one who was chosen to grasp the Master’s teachings most deeply.

[ 8 ] Let us consider the concluding passage: “But what about this one?”—“If I want him to remain until I come.” — “This disciple will not die.” The one of whom it is said, “I want him to remain until I come,” is the disciple who bears witness to these things. He has written this, and we know that this “testimony is true.” [May] we find the means, through mystical-theosophical contemplation, to [understand] the words of this concluding passage of the Gospel of John in such a way that they are revealed to us in their true light.

[ 9 ] We must realize that, when we examine them, the first three Gospels present us with a very different conception of Christianity than the Gospel of John. The Gospel of John presents us with a much more spiritual conception of Christianity. One cannot help but conclude that the Gospels arose from two spiritual currents. First, from what they heard from the Master himself, who is the subject here; and second, from what they associated with that. Sentence by sentence, verse by verse, we can distinguish between the true, deeper teachings—spiritual Christianity—and what has been associated with them. The three authors of the Synoptic Gospels recount what they heard from the Master and what they adopted from ancient beliefs, from Judaism. They lived within traditional Judaism and drew upon it for many of their ideas. Some of these ideas were confirmed for them. But deep in their hearts lived the idea of the Messiah, through whom the Jewish people were to regain power and glory. They have conflated these two things, and we must absolutely keep these two things—or currents—distinct. In this work, we will also discover which passages in the first three Gospels have no corresponding passages in the Gospel of John.

[ 10 ] Above all, we must point out the one crucial fact that there are no corresponding passages in the Gospel of John for various passages in the Gospels of Matthew, Mark, and Luke. Chapter 24, verses 32–33 of the Gospel of Matthew reads:

[ 11 ] “Learn a lesson from the fig tree. When its branches become tender and put forth leaves, you know that summer is near. So also, when you see all these things, know that the Kingdom of God is near.”

[ 12 ] These words, which are found in the Synoptic Gospels, have no corresponding passage in the Gospel of John. The parable of the fig tree symbolizes the decline of Judaism and the rise of the new teaching. This passage could easily be interpreted to mean that a world order, as it exists in exoteric teaching, is being replaced by a new, purely earthly world order. As I said, I believe that individual passages such as this can be interpreted in one way or another, with varying degrees of depth. [However, we may certainly assume that the “Master” of Nazareth is hidden within these words, if they are understood correctly.] Let us take another passage, Matthew chapter 16, verse 28:

[ 13 ] “Truly, I say to you, there are some standing here who will not taste death until they see the Son of Man coming in his kingdom.”

[ 14 ] This passage is found in all three Synoptic Gospels, but not in John. These words shed profound light on the relationship between the Gospel of John and the others. John is described [by the disciples]—[not] by Jesus himself—as the one who will not die. “This disciple will not die.” But Jesus does not say, “He will not die,” but rather, “I want him to remain until I come.” John was Jesus’ beloved disciple. He was regarded as the one who would not die before the Messiah came. So when John wrote the Gospel, he refuted the outward fact—not outwardly—but John did not die before he saw the Kingdom of God come. Thus, what had been said earlier in the other Gospels, such as in Luke, was indeed fulfilled in John:

[ 15 ] “The children of this world marry and are given in marriage. But those who are raised from the dead neither marry nor are given in marriage. They are like angels and are children of God.” [Luke 20:34–36]

[ 16 ] Once again, there is no passage in John that supports this. John is thus described as the one who experiences the resurrection, in which there will no longer be any mention of people with earthly bodies, but rather of people who will be like angels.

[ 17 ] [The conclusion of the Gospel of John was written only after John had composed his Gospel.] And all of this resounds like a song of joy throughout the Gospel. John has no need to report on these prophecies; he had a far more significant event to recount. He had experienced the hour of which it is said that it will come like a thief in the night—an hour known only to the Father, according to Jesus’ own words.

[ 18 ] John did not have a prophecy to recount, but rather an experience. Therefore, he had only a fact to describe. He need only say: “What Jesus foretold has been fulfilled in me; I have experienced within myself the new kingdom and the spiritual resurrection.” He could therefore say that the kingdom has truly come. Consequently, the relationship of the Gospel of John to the three earlier Gospels is that of a spiritual understanding as opposed to the understanding of the three Synoptic Gospels, which is steeped in Jewish elements.

[ 19 ] When the time has come, he can say:

[ 20 ] “Truly, I say to you, unless a grain of wheat falls into the ground and dies, it remains alone. But if it dies, it bears much fruit. Whoever loves his life will lose it, and whoever hates his life will keep it for eternal life.” [John 12:24–25]

[ 21 ] John had recognized this. He had recognized the Master’s words: “The Kingdom will come, and I have nothing to proclaim to you except what must be fulfilled within you yourselves. Whoever believes in me does not believe in me,” says the Master. “True faith belongs to the one who does not believe in me, but in the one who sent me.”—This faith can only be born within each person, prompted and inspired by me. “And whoever sees me sees the one who sent me.”—[The Father] has instilled in me and given me what I am to say and do.

[ 22 ] “Truly, truly, I say to you, whoever believes in me will also do the works that I do, and he will do even greater works than these, for I am going to the Father.” [John 14:12]

[ 23 ] It is clear that the Master who spoke these words did not teach: “I am one with the Father.”—Rather, he taught: “I have been sent by the Father to teach you the path that can lead you into infinity, to teach you to do works that lead into infinity.”—It would make no sense at all to say that he is able to take away the sin of the one of whom he himself says, “He will do greater works than I.”

[ 24 ] We stand before a great awakener who has shown the disciples the path. We thus see in the Master an initiator who has guided his disciples along a specific path, and we see how each one wanted to understand the words of his Master. They were meant to continue to work as forces behind which lies a deeper meaning. Then the higher powers will dawn within human souls. Some will experience the Kingdom of God, especially the beloved disciple John. And when he had experienced it, he let out a cry of joy that he had recognized the truth. Then he wrote down his Gospel. He had understood what it means to follow Christ. He had understood what it means to truly be a Christian. He had understood that one can only set out on the path that Christ has laid out if one celebrates the Resurrection in the Spirit.

[ 25 ] “Whoever loves his life will lose it, but whoever hates his life will not lose it.” [John 12:25]

[ 26 ] Dakob Böhme says:]

[ 27 ] “Whoever does not die before he dies will perish when he dies.”

[ 28 ] [Goethe says]:

[ 29 ] “And as long as you do not have this—this dying and becoming—you are merely a gloomy guest on this dark earth.”

[ 30 ] This is the relationship between the Gospel of John and the three Synoptic Gospels. John understood how to interpret the Word not in an exoteric sense, but in an esoteric sense—as a history of consciousness.

[ 31 ] We also understand how John, right at the beginning of this Gospel, set forth his esoteric view, as it were, to show that his teaching can only be interpreted in an esoteric way. It speaks of the rebuilding of the temple in three days. Jesus speaks of the temple of his body. [When John has Jesus speak of the temple here, he has him speak of the relationship between the divine and the earthly.] He has him speak in a parable—something meant to symbolically express that the divine power descended into the material world, only to find its way back to the divine. John intends for everything he says to be understood esoterically.

[ 32 ] We will see later what it means that John is called the true eyewitness, who is to confirm what he has seen as a witness.

[ 33 ] The very existence of Christianity depends on the Gospel of John. Christianity has had to admit that it is merely a spiritual concept, since the prophecies did not come true. This explanation can be found among the superficial Enlightenment thinkers. People thought that, according to John, we would still experience the coming of the Kingdom of God. But even according to John, we would not have experienced it, and so we would inevitably have arrived at a spiritual interpretation. What was meant was the esoteric interpretation of Christianity. The Kingdom of God will come unexpectedly. Watch and pray, lest you miss it when the Kingdom of God comes. When he tells us about the experience of the coming of the Kingdom, then we must admit that John understood what the Master had said. He knew that what the Master had communicated to him was something spiritual, and not an exoteric interpretation of Judaism.

[ 34 ] Now I would like to lay another foundation that will lead us to the deeper, more spiritual aspects of Christianity. I would like to point out facts that are, in essence, simple but are usually overlooked. We have seen that at the time when Christianity was spreading, there were the Therapeuts in northern Egypt and the Essenes in Palestine, and we have become acquainted with the teachings and way of life of the Essenes. The Essenes undoubtedly exerted a profound influence with their entire body of beliefs on the teachings of early Christianity. And when we examine the Gospels that have been handed down to us as the Synoptic Gospels—when we consider them closely—you will see that the individual Synoptic Gospels certainly contain teachings that have their origin in the Essene sect.

[ 35 ] An example of this is the tenth chapter of Matthew:

[ 36 ] “Go, therefore, and preach, saying, ‘The Kingdom of Heaven has drawn near.’ Heal the sick, cleanse the lepers, raise the dead, cast out demons. You received without payment; give without payment. Do not take gold or silver or copper in your belts, no traveler’s bag, no extra tunic, no sandals, and no staff. For a worker is worthy of his food.” [Mt 10:7–10]

[ 37 ] These words take on special significance when we consider them alongside a passage by the Jewish historian Josephus, in which the way of life of the Essenes within their community is described as follows: “They do not occupy a single city. In fact, each one lives in many cities.” The home of every member of the order is open to his fellow members as if it were their own. They therefore enter the homes of people they have never met before as if they had known them for a long time. They do not change their clothes or shoes, nor do they buy or sell among themselves. Everyone gives and takes what he has and needs.”

[ 38 ] If we compare this passage with this one and also with the passage in Luke, chapter 9:

[ 39 ] “He called the Twelve together and gave them authority and power over all demons, and the ability to heal diseases, and sent them out to preach the kingdom of God and to heal the sick. ‘Take nothing for the journey—no staff, no bag, no bread, no money. Do not take two tunics, no sandals, and no staff. For a worker is worthy of his keep.’ [Luke 9:1–5]

[ 40 ] We see that the way of life Josephus describes to us is the very one that Jesus recommends his disciples adopt. At the same time, we know that among Jews, such a way of life cannot originate from Judaism. This is therefore a presentation of Essene teachings. He speaks to them as a member of the Essene community who sought to spread the Essene way of life among his disciples.

[ 41 ] But there are many other things we can compare. There is a fact that we also know about the Essenes. They did not participate in the Jewish sacrificial service. Although they sent sacrificial animals to the Temple to pay tribute to the political authorities, they themselves did not enter the Jewish Temple. They did not participate in the Jewish religion, insofar as it was represented by the Pharisees and the Sadducees. They themselves had stone halls where their teachers imparted their teachings, but here, too, we find the teachings that we find in the Gospel of John. We hear talk of the temple there and know that this refers to the human body. And then again, there is the sense of belonging, the sense of community among the Essenes. The Essenes regarded it as idolatry to have any temple other than this one.

[ 42 ] We could cite a whole series of passages from Essene teachings. The Essenes were averse to Jewish sacrifices because they regarded the body of the individual and of humanity as the temple of God. This is evident in the Gospel of John. In the Pauline Epistles, too, we can see that Essene influences were at work and that the body was to be understood as the temple of God.

[ 43 ] We also find in the works of various first-century authors curious allusions that we can scarcely explain, which are accepted as a matter of course, and toward which the early Christian writers no longer have any real sense of significance, because they no longer know their origin. We are told that Christians do not turn their faces toward the Temple in Jerusalem during morning prayer, as the Jews do, but toward the sunrise. Christian church writers take it for granted that Christians face east. The Essenes did not offer sacrifices to Judaism. They did not turn their faces toward the Temple in Jerusalem, but toward the east. From this point on, all the way to Jacob Böhme’s book The Dawn and to Faust, where he admires the dawn, all these ideas can be traced back to the ancient Essene concept of turning one’s face toward the east during prayer.

[ 44 ] One more thing. In Clement of Alexandria, we find a passage about the clothing of the early Christians. We are told that the colorful splendor of clothing corrupts people and fosters extravagance because it stimulates the eyes. But those who are pure are to wear white, undyed garments. We can also trace this passage regarding the wearing of white garments among the early Christians back to the customs of the Essenes.

[ 45 ] Then, too, baptism with water and the Lord’s Supper are derived from genuine Essene customs. The Essenes baptized with water; they knew of no other sacrifice than the communal meal. In the sacrament instituted by Jesus, we see nothing other than the Essene meal that we see the Essenes celebrating every Sabbath.

[ 46 ] Then there is the concept of the holiness of oil, which has led to the sacrament and to anointing with oil. It is entirely consistent with the Essene view. The Essenes believe that anointing with oil is a mystical act that bestows mystical power upon the one who receives it. The peculiar aversion to oil in our time can be traced entirely to an Essene conception and can only be understood in light of it.

[ 47 ] And now, in order to bring this examination of the relationship between Esseneism and Christianity to at least some conclusion—and thereby to have established a foundation for the examination of the Master himself—I would like to point out—what might at first appear to be merely a hint—namely, some ancient accounts that we find in the writings of authors from the first Christian centuries.

[ 48 ] Above all, I would like to point out a passage in Eusebius concerning an ancient tradition about Jesus’ brother, James. We have not received this information directly, but rather through indirect sources. We are told that he led a way of life of a special kind. This is then described to us in more detail. It is none other than the very way of life that Philo describes to us regarding the Essenes. He lived just as they did. We can only understand this entire account if we assume that such a way of life was entirely natural among the Essenes. We see Jesus himself speaking to his disciples as if he were giving them instructions of the kind commonly given throughout the Essene community. John the Baptist baptized in the spirit of the Essene community. The earliest Christian teachings and beliefs were similar to those of the Essenes.

[ 49 ] Furthermore, we find a clear awareness of figures who exerted a profound influence on early Christianity. In Epiphanius, we find a new passage that seems to me more significant than many others. There we read: At first, all Christians were called “Nazirites,” but for a short time they bore the name [Jesseites] before the term “Christians” came into use in Antioch. —Thus, we have here a hint—which we will explore further—regarding the prevailing awareness at that time that the Christians, or “Christianers” as they were called, were nothing other than a continuation of the Essenes. We are thus dealing with the earliest period of our era and, within that, with the view that in Palestine, within Judaism, the Essene influence grew ever greater and manifested itself as a new religious movement. We have the understanding here that the Essenes were the first Christians and that later followers adopted the name “Christians.”

[ 50 ] Now there is evidence [on which everyone can form their own opinion], but it should not [be completely ignored]. It is clear that the Essenes existed. That cannot be denied. It is also clear that they had a major influence on Christianity. We hear accounts of the Pharisees and Sadducees in the New Testament. The entire New Testament contains not a single word about the Essenes. The writers of the first centuries, even Philo, say nothing about the Christians. We have nothing; we read nothing there about Christianity, and in the earliest Christian writings, nothing about the Essenes. This is an important fact. This fact can only be explained by the simple circumstance that the first people who wrote in the spirit of Christianity were aware that they were speaking only of others, not of themselves. This explains why the early Christians did not mention the name “Essene” and why Philo did not mention the name “Christian.” They spoke of others, but not of themselves.

[ 51 ] Whenever we live in any given time and hear stories about this or that, we must realize that someone has told us this, but that person will not speak about himself in such detail. We will come to the conviction that he is not speaking of himself, but that he is this third party. Thus, we can conclude that at that time there was an awareness that Essenism and Christianity were one and the same. And this will reveal to us the source of Christianity for the next time.