The Last Days of Jesus

The Last Days of Jesus

by Bill 0’Reilly 

a review by John Haynes

I find it interesting that this is written completely by O’Reilly, without Martin Dugard. This book is written primarily for children.

Flyleaf: He lists some contemporaries of Jesus, which include Julius Caesar. Caesar died in March of 44 b.c., so I don’t know how he could be called a contemporary. Even Herod the Great died probably the year after Jesus’ birth, so again, he wasn’t really a contemporary.

p. ix I don’t like the way he numbers the preface pages. Most pages don’t have numbers, and it is hard to identify what page I’m on.

He uses the terms “gospels” of the first four books of the New Testament. This should be capped: “Gospels.”

p. x The Family of Jesus: It lists Joseph, Mary, and Jesus. No mention of his half brothers and sisters. Typical Catholic nonsense. Disregard what the Bible says.

p. xii Joseph of Arimithea: He says he “gave his tomb for Jesus’s body.” First off, this should be “Jesus’.” That is the normal way of making Jesus possessive. Second, what is this like a trade?  Joseph gave his tomb in trade for Jesus’ body? It should say that he “gave his tomb for the burial of Jesus’ body.”

p. xiii “Anna: Pilgrim at the temple who bore witness to the divinity of Jesus.” Killing Jesus was touted at a book of history, not of theology. I don’t know if this book is the same. He does say earlier that “this is a story of the struggle between good and evil” (p. ix).

p. xx There is a lot of mention on this page about God. Again, I wonder if this is a book of history or theology or both.

p. xx “They journeyed each year to their birthplace for the census count.” I’m not sure about that. I’ve never heard that the census in Luke 2:1 was anything other than a one-time occurrence. It may have become a yearly matter after this, but I’m not sure it was something that had always happened.

p. 3 “March, 5 BC” Should be small caps: b.c. Also how does he know the month? And no information is given about how he arrives at this specific date.

p. 5 The Tanakh is also the Jewish Bible, what Protestants call the Old Testament. This is important to note.

p. 5 “The wealthy foreigners [Magi] travel almost a thousand miles.” Then at the bottom of the page, “The wealthy foreigners travel more than a thousand miles.” Which is it?

p. 6 “The Magi see through the deceit [of Herod the Great].” No, they didn’t. God made clear to them to leave another way (Matt. 2:12).

p. 9 The Temple was “rebuilt nearly fifty years later [after the Captivity]”. Probably much later. The Captivity lasted 70 years (Jer. 25:11).

p. 13 Says that Anna “was an eighty-four-year-old widowed prophetess.” First off, we don’t need a gender-specific term like “prophetess.” We don’t say “doctoress” or “lawerette” for females of that job description. Prophet serves both sexes well. Second, it is uncertain how old Anna was. The language of Luke 2:37 is unclear. It could mean she had been a widow for eighty-four years. The King James Version says, “She was a widow of about fourscore and four years.” Since the KJV is painstakingly literal, this could mean she had been a widow that long.

p. 13 “Then she [Anna] made a most unusual claim, predicting to Mary and Joseph that their son would free Jerusalem from Roman rule.” She did nothing of the sort. The Scripture says, “She talked about Jesus to everyone who had been waiting for the promised King to come and deliver Jerusalem” (Luke 2:38, NLT). It does not say what deliverance meant. But from Jesus’ ministry, it is clear that it was talking about spiritual deliverance.

p. 22 Note at the bottom of the page says that the previous page contains the text of the Shema. It does not. I know Hebrew, and this is definitely not the Shema.

p. 27 Calls the Israelites the “ancestors of the Jews.” That’s just nonsense. The word “Israelite(s)” appears 18 times in the Old Testament. You didn’t have to be an Israelite to be a Jew (you could be a convert, as were many Egyptians after the Exodus (Exod. 12:38), but all Israelites were Jews.

p. 29 Talks about things he thinks Mary, Joseph, and Jesus saw, such as “the crucifixion of more than two thousand Jewish rebels outside Jerusalem’s city walls.” He doesn’t know that they saw this. Pure speculation.

p. 31 Mentions Augustus Caesar at the top of the page and at the bottom it says, “Casaer Augustus.” Which is it?

p. 33 March 22, AD 7. He doesn’t know the exact date. Same with p. 35.

p. 35 “Son of God, as Jesus will refer to himself for the first time this on this very day.” No, he didn’t. He called God his Father. He said, “You should have known that I would be in my Father’s house” (Luke 2:49). Jesus rarely called himself the Son of God.

p. 36 Says about Jesus that it “never crosses his mind that Mary and Joseph will be worried about him.” Really? You don’t know much about what it means that he is God, do you? He knew all (John 2:25).

p. 38 “The place where God is thought to have gathered the dust to make Adam.” Unless God decided to take it from someplace quite a ways away instead of locally, this is probably not true. The Garden of Eden was near the Tigris and Euphrates Rivers (as well as two other rivers that have since disappeared, Gen. 2:11-14). Mount Moriah is in Israel, near Jerusalem. Also mentioned on pages 40 and 76.

p. 47 Gives specific description of Herod Antipas. How does he know what he looked like?

p. 57 “The end of the known world is coming, John [the Baptist] preaches.” I don’t think anything John said can be construed to mean that he was saying the end of the known world was coming.

p. 57 Bill seems to think John baptized by immersion. That is the description he gives. We don’t know how John baptized.

p. 58 “Isaiah had foretold that a man would come to tell the people about the day the world would end and God would appear on earth.” I don’t think that is what Isaiah said at all.

p. 65 Discusses the Sadducees and Pharisees. Never mentions that the Sadducees did not believe in the resurrection or angels or anything supernatural. The Pharisees did. 

p. 65 Says the Sanhedrin had 71 members. Not true. Probably had 69.

p. 66 “Speaking softly with John the Baptist, Jesus does declare who he is. Bowing his head to accept the water, he tells John ‘Let it be so now; it is proper for us to do this to fulfill all righteousness.’” That does not declare who Jesus is. And we don’t know that he said this softly.

p. 66 Says that John the Baptist said about Jesus “This is the Son of God.” Not true. I can find no evidence in Scripture that John said anything like this.

p. 72 “The spiritual emotion that flows through the city is wondrous, as these many Jews come together.” Simple grammatical mistake that drives me nuts. Should say, “since (or because) these many Jews come together.”

p. 76 “Seventy years later, on the same site, construction began on a new sanctuary, which was finished in 516 b.c.” This is accurate but in contrast with what he says on p. 9, where he says it was built some fifty years after the Captivity began.

p. 71 “The Temple itself was visited by only the most senior high priests.” I think the word “Temple” should be capped, but Ø’Reilly isn’t consistent with this. See p. xiii, p. 116, and p. 134. Also, there is only one high priest. This should read, “The Temple itself was visited by only the most senior priests.”

p. 80 “April, AD 27.” How does he know it was in April? He doesn’t.

p. 81 “‘Very truly I tell you, no one can see the kingdom of God unless they are born again.” Incorrect. Unless he is born again. “No one” is singular.

p. 81 “He has been telling all who listen that a person must be spiritually reborn to be judged kindly by God.” That’s not it at all. Being born again is the only way into the Kingdom of Heaven.

pp. 87-88 “Jesus should remember his place: his family is not the wealthiest in town, nor is he the smartest among them.” I’m betting he is the smartest. He is God incarnate, genius!

p. 93, bottom “Colored engraving, no date.” So why is the picture not in color?

p. 102-03 “The sermon [on the Mount] is intended to remind the men and women of Galilee, who feel oppressed and hopeless, that their current circumstances will not last forever.” This sermon was not preached to the masses. It was preached to his disciples. See Matt. 5:1: “Jesus went up the mountainside with his disciples and sat down to teach them.” He taught his disciples, not the crowds.

p. 104-05 “For the peasants of Galilee, his [Jesus’] words off solace for their life under Roman rule: the need to rely on God, the worry about daily nourishment, the constant struggle to stay out of debt, and finally a reminder that in the midst of this cruel life, succumbing to the temptation to lie, cheat, or steal will only lead people farther and farther away from God.” No, it should be “further and further away.”

p. 105 “There, soon after entering the city, a most amazing thing happens: the Roman military officer in charge of Capernaum declares himself to be a follower of Jesus.” He didn’t just declare that he was a follower of Jesus; there was something that happened first. Matt. 8:5-10 says that the centurion’s servant was sick and that he wanted Jesus to heal him. But he said that Jesus didn’t need to come to his house for that; he could do it from where he was. That’s why Jesus said, “I tell you the truth, I haven’t seen faith like this in all the land of Israel!” (v. 10, NLT).

p. 107 I don't think there’s any biblical evidence that Mary Magdalene was a prostitute. Some people think that, but it doesn’t make it so. Ø’Reilly also puts Mary Magdalene in the home of Simon the Pharisee. He says she anointed Jesus head with the expensive perfume. No evidence in the Bible that it was Mary Magdalene. John 11:2 and 12:3 says that a woman name Mary anointed his head with the essence of nard, but this Mary was the sister of Lazarus. And that didn’t happen in the home of Simon. The Simon in whose house there was an anointing was called Simon the leper (Mark 14:3). Nothing about him being a Pharisee. Luke 7:37 says that a woman anointed him in the home of a Pharisee. Jesus later identifies him as Simon (v. 40). That may have been the same as the Simon the leper. But we still don’t know who the woman was.

p. 113 “The eager disciples go on to tell John [the Baptist] that Jesus not only alluded to his own virgin birth, as foretold by Scripture.” I see no evidence of this at all. This is recorded only in Luke 7. Nothing at all about his virgin birth.

p. 116 “Other than the lone incident with the temple money changers.” Jesus did this twice, once at the beginning and once at the end of his ministry. See John 2:14; Mark 11:15; Luke 19:45.

p. 119 “Jesus is a spiritual and intellectual rival unlike any they have ever faced.” But what about what was said on p. 87-88, where he said he wasn’t the smartest among them?

p. 124 “Now Jesus’s words push him farther away from the group.” Two problems here; it’s “Jesus’” and it should be further.

p. 127 “‘Blessed are you, Simon son of Jonah, for this was not revealed to you by flesh and blood, but by my father in heaven.’” Father should be capped. I don’t know why it’s not.

p. 134 “And they [Pilate and Caiaphas] consider themselves devout men.” We know nothing about Pilate’s religious proclivities. I’m sure he worshiped the emperor, but that’s all we know for sure.

p. 134 Discussion about Jesus’ disciples telling Jesus to go to Judea to be a more public figure. I don’t know that his disciples ever did this. I know his brothers did, but they were not his disciples (John 7:3-7).

p. 140 “At the age of thirty-six, Jesus is clever enough to act out any prophecy.” He wasn’t 36. He was 33. He began his ministry at the age of 30 (Luke 3:23). It lasted about three and a half years. That makes him 33.

p. 144 March 30/31, AD 30. He doesn’t know this. It could have been a.d. 29 for all we know.

p. 145 “They have followed Jesus as a group for more than two years.” Yes, but it was actually for about three and a half years.

p. 145 “Peter is so sure that Jesus is going to use military might that he is making plans to purchase a sword.” I don’t know where he gets that. Also, what a great example for the first “pope,” eh?

p. 149 “As Jesus learned on the road yesterday morning, the local fig and date orchards will not ripen for months to come.” Really? Even a normal Jew would know this, and this is the Son of God! I don’t think he just found this out.

p. 150 “Sunday, April 1, AD 30.” Again, he doesn’t know the exact date.

p. 152 “Bethpage” Incorrect. Even the NIV has it as “Bethphage.”

p. 157 “Suddenly, Jesus begins to weep.” Nothing in the NT about Jesus weeping on Palm Sunday.

p. 160 Jesus “walks alone to the tree, hoping to pluck a piece of fruit, even though he know that figs are out of season.” Yet look at the discussion on p. 149. So did he know or not?

p. 163 “‘If a prophet, or one who foretells by dreams, appears among you and announces to you a sign or a wonder,’ read the Book of Deuteronomy, ‘that prophet or dreamer must be put to death for inciting rebellion against the Lord your God.’” He isn’t quoting the passage accurately. This is from Deut. 13:1-5. The punishment of death isn’t for simply announcing a sign or wonder. It’s when the prophet tells the people to worship other gods (v. 2). That is what makes this a death offense.

p. 169 “‘Why are you trying to trap me?’ Jesus seethes.” I don’t know that Jesus was angry when asked if it was right to pay taxes to Caesar. If anything, I think Jesus delighted in showing them what fools they were to ask such a question.

p. 170 “But Jesus does not choose from one of the established laws. Instead, he articulates a new one: ‘Love the Lord your God with all your heart and with all your soul and with all your mind. This is the first and greatest commandment.’” This is not a new commandment. Moses wrote this in Deut. 6:5. It appears many times in the book of Deuteronomy and elsewhere in the OT.

p. 170 “Then Jesus goes on to add a second law: ‘Love your neighbor as yourself.’” This is from Lev. 19:18, and again, it is not new.

p. 170 “Jesus says these words [about destroying the Temple] to his disciples, but a Pharisee overhears. That statement will become a capital crime.” That is not why Jesus was put to death. It is because he admitted to being the Son of God. See Matt. 26:61-66. The Jewish leaders tried to make a case out of Jesus’ statement about the Temple, but what really got Jesus into trouble was his admission in verse 64 that he was the Christ, the Son of God.

p. 171 “A week that began in this very spot with him weeping while astride a donkey now finds him reflective.” Weeping on Palm Sunday? Again, where is this in the NT? Luke 19:41 says that Jesus wept over Jerusalem, but this wasn’t on Palm Sunday.

p. 173 “Jesus has yet to publically announce that he is the Christ.” Actually, he has announced this to his disciples. When Peter made his declaration in Matt. 16:16, Jesus never corrected him. He accepted what Peter had said. He was indeed the Christ.

p. 174 “This time he [Judas Iscariot] is not alone in his disgust. Several other disciples join in before Jesus puts an end to the discussion.” He’s getting stories confused. When Mary anointed Jesus’ feet with perfume, no one but Judas complained. There is another time when at the home of Simon the leper (Matt. 26:6) when the disciples complained. But these are two different occasions.

p. 177 “Judas has live the hand-to-mouth existence of Jesus’s disciples for two long years.” No, it was about three and a half years. That is how long Jesus ministry was. All you have to do is read the Gospels and add up the time. This is a well-established fact of Jesus’ life.

p. 186 Discussion about Jesus washing the disciples feet. Nothing is said about Peter objecting to Jesus doing this (John 13:6-9).

p. 191 “Peter draws his new sword and cuts off the ear of one of the men.” I don’t know how he knows it was a new sword, and I also don’t know why he doesn’t mention that Jesus healed the man’s ear. Luke 22:50 says it was his right ear, and verse 51 says Jesus healed him. John 18:10 says the man’s name was Malchus.

p. 194. “Jesus sees . . . Annas, the aging and regal leader of a priestly dynasty dating back a thousand years.” How does he know this? He gives no proof for almost everything in this book.

p. 196 “Annas, his sons, and his son-in-law Caiaphas will all take turns serving as high priest.” Again, how does he know?

pp, 201-02 “Voices of dissent come from Nicodemus and from a wealthy Sadducee named Joseph of Arimathea.” How does he know Joseph was a Sadducee?

p. 212 “‘It was your own people and chief priests handed you over to me.’” Grammatical error. Should read, “‘chief priests who handed you over to me.’”

p. 222 This chapter deals with the crucifixion, which he dates as “Friday, April 6, AD 30.” But there is no certainty about that date. It could have been a.d. 29.

p. 228. “Jesus of Nazareth is dead. He is thirty-six years old.” Again, not true. He was thirty-three. I don’t know where he gets this idea.

p. 231 “They have received permission from Pilate to take the body, as the governor wants to put this execution to rest as soon as possible.” That stupid “as” again. Should read, “to take the body, for” or “to take the body because [since].”

p. 232 “Then they wrong the body tightly in linen, making sure to keep it loose around Jesus’s face in case he is not really dead, but merely unconscious.” No comma needed after “dead.” Also, I doubt they did this. There was no question that Jesus was dead. The Romans never made a mistake.

p. 234 “But now they [Caiaphas and the Pharisees] are inside the palace, no longer fearful of being made unclean by the governor’s presence, for Passover is done.” Yes, but Saturday is still the Jewish Sabbath.

p. 236 “Mary Magdalene now takes it upon herself to perform the traditional task of examining the dead body.” Maybe this is true, but Scripture says that the reason she and other women went to the tomb was to finish anointing his body with spices (Luke 23:55—24:1).

p. 237 “And just as she [Mary Madalene] once anointed him with perfume and washed his feet with her tears, so now she plans to anoint the body with spices.” No evidence in Scripture that Mary Magdalene anointed him with perfume and washed his feet with her tears. See discussion at p. 107.

p. 239 “Peter’s missionary work eventually took him to Rome, where he formalized the new Cathloic Church.” No evidence that Peter ever went to Rome. He may have, but he certainly didn’t establish the Roman Catholic Church. That came long after by Pope Leo I, the Great (c. a.d. 400 to 461.

p. 240 “John died in AD 100 in Ephesus, in what is now Turkey. He was ninety-four, and the only apostle not to have been martyred.” He doesn’t know the exact year John died or how old he was. This is nothing more than a guess.

p. 241 Says that Mary, the mother of Jesus, was mentioned in “the book of Revelation as “a woman clothed with the sun.” That is from Rev. 12:1, but it is not certain that this is Jesus’ mother.

p. 241 “On November 1, 1950, the Roman Cathlic Church decreed that her [Mary’s] body had been ‘assumed into heaven.’ Pope Pius XII noted that Mary, ‘having completed the course of her earthly life, was assumed body and soul into heavenly glory.’” That’s a nice story, but there’s no truth to it whatsoever. No evidence at all, and it is beyond the bounds of credibility. She died just like anyone else.

p. 251 “The Church of the Holy Sepulchre, built on the location of Jesus’s crucifixion, is a sacred site in the city.” No one knows exactly where Jesus was crucified. This is nothing more than a guess.

pp. 252-53 This map is said to show Jerusalem about 4 b.c. But that cannot be. It shows the Muslim quarter and the Christian quarter as well as the Church of the Holy Sepulchre. These didn’t exist in 4 b.c.

p. 254 “It [the NT] contains twenty-seven books written between AD 50 and AD 100.” I think it was more like a.d. 45 to a.d. 95, but I won’t quibble too much.

p. 254 His list of writers of the NT do not include the writer of Hebrews. It was not Paul, but we don’t know who it was.

p. 260 “However, by the second century, Christians began touching their forehead, chest, and each shoulder to make the sign of the cross as a way of warding off demons.” I wonder where he gets this. Protestants disavowed this practice.

p. 260 “The iconic image showing the body of Jesus affixed to a cross did not become part of the Christian culture until six centuries after his death.” Not Christian culture but Roman Catholic culture.

p. 261 “It is said that the priest used the coins to buy a field to be used as a cemetery for foreigners.” He makes it sound like this is just a supposition and may or may not be true. It is true. The Bible says so (see Matt. 27:7-10 and Acts 1:18-19).

p. 263 Why list Oceania? Most people have no idea where this is. For the record, it is Australia and many island groups in that vicinity including Micronesia, Polynesia, and Melanesia.

p. 265 He discusses the Roman Empire in 44 b.c. Why does this matter? This was decades before Jesus was born. It is not during the lifetime of Jesus.

pp. 266-67 Why show a map of The Roman Republic  about 44 b.c.? Why not show it at its height in a.d. 117 (p. 265).

p. 279 “Apostle.” Should have some mention of being sent, since that’s what the Greek word means.

p. 279 “Heresy.” He defines it as “Views different from those of a particular religion.” There needs to be some negativity. A Christian heresy is something very bad, not just a “different” view.

p. 280 “Magi: The legendary wise men who visited Jesus soon after he was born.” Nothing legendary about them. They were real. The Bible says so. Also, we don’t know when they visited. The Bible says that they came when Joseph and Mary were in a house (Matt. 2:11). Jesus could have been two years old or more.

p. 285 In his recommended readings, he recommends the Jesus Seminar (www.virtualreligion.net/forum)I have heard R. C. Sproul talk many times about this heretical group. Not to be recommended!