The Masks of Christ: Behind the Lies and Cover-Ups About the Life of Jesus Book

Review: The Masks of Christ

By Dan Cooper

The Masks of Christ by Lynn Picknett and Clive Prince is a work of speculative nonfiction that has particular value for those interested in the scholarly study of Biblical and Christian history but without the necessity for dry and lengthy dissertations so common to scholarly works. Make no mistake, The Masks of Christ is not in the category of scholarly (and dry) studies. But it is also not in the category of fictional romps such as Dan Brown's The Da Vinci Code or even that of alternative nonfiction works such as The Holy Blood and the Holy Grail by Baigent, Leigh, and Lincoln. Instead, it occupies a space midway between these popular explorations and those scholarly works so devoid of popularity. As such, it creates a bona fide segue between them, offering a legitimate path for further exploration for those intrigued by the popular works but put off by the scholarly treatments. The book's examination of the Bible's contradictory treatment of John the Baptist is the most interesting portion, and is indeed the main thrust of this book.

Even if the jacket copy did not make it abundantly clear that this is not intended for those fundamentalist Christians who demand allegiance to the notion of infallible biblical reference, the text explicitly does so at the outset. The first sentence gives us, "Incredible though it may seem today, in early nineteenth-century Britain it was illegal not to believe that Jesus Christ was the Son of God."

But as obvious as their point of view was, I still found the jacket text to be far too sensationalistic, detracting from, rather than adding to, the book's interest value. Some editor earned her paycheck by ensuring the book would be controversial enough to attract immediate negative attention from overly defensive Christian fundamentalists bent on deriding anything critical of the absolute infallibility of the Bible or the unwavering authority and truth of mainstream Christian thought. This reaction was guaranteed by the sub-title: Behind the Lies and Cover-ups about the Life of Jesus.

However, if you can get past the sensationalism and get into the book, you will find it has great value in the exploration of possible alternative interpretations of Christian thought, history, and overall relevance for non-believers as well as believers. If alternatives are too much of an intimidation, this book is definitely not for you. But if you are intrigued by possibilities and alternatives not presented in mainstream thought, then the resources this book offer will be of immense interest. There are, after all, many areas of disagreement among scholars who are deeply involved in interpretation. These differences are rarely presented for popular consumption. In The Masks of Christ, they are offered up for examination in language that is accessible and engaging.

The authors do not accept--indeed, are quick to dismiss--divine inspiration for the canonical books of the Bible. Among their reasons for this are the many inconsistencies and contradictions found there. This dismissiveness is, of course, the main point of contention for evangelicals who themselves have ironically always employed a similar dismissiveness of those same inconsistencies and contradictions. They have always claimed these problem areas are the result of subjective human perspectives and not the fallibility of divine intervention. But Picknett and Prince do not simply dismiss divine intervention, they systematically dissect biblical authority quoting the work of many scholars and, as they put it, "peeling away the layers" of obvious and not-so-obvious editorial changes that have occurred in the Bible's books.

Biblical infallibility is dismissed early on, with this summary statement. "It is important, at the outset, to dispense with the idea that the Gospels are the 'word of God' -- that the authors were divinely inspired and their writings little less than the unvarnished truth." An example of their thinking on this can be found in the synoptic gospels' citation regarding what Jesus said in the Garden of Gethsemane on the Mount of Olives just before his arrest. Jesus goes off alone, praying to his Father.

"The 'take this cup from me' passage can be discounted simply on the grounds of common sense. The Gospels report that Jesus said this when alone, his companions not only elsewhere but asleep, so how can anyone possibly know what happened?"

Of course, defenders of the faith will point immediately to divinely inspired scribes who are told directly by God what occurred in the garden. But while believers have no problem believing this, Picknett and Prince are intent on textual criticism, which is (or should be) entirely independent of one's beliefs.

While there are some weaknesses to this book's appeal, its strengths are far more notable. It makes some firm criticisms of the mainstream Christian belief system. For instance, they attack the notion that early Jews were recruited into Christianity with rituals that included the drinking of blood--anathema for a Jew. Other weaknesses they attacked included the problem of Jesus' lack of a family. Jewish men were expected to marry and raise a family, yet for some reason we are to believe Jesus was unmarried and no one gave this a second thought.

Jesus was supposed to have a remarkable birth, but after this he had an apparently uninteresting early life during which somehow everyone, including his parents, "forgot" about his miraculous birth situation and had to be re-educated about his special nature later in life. And perhaps most damaging to the credibility of these stories were the two separate and conflicting human genealogies given for Jesus, offered as substantiation for his being in the line of David--fulfilling prophecy--while somehow also being virgin-born as a Son of God rather than by human intercourse.

Picknett and Prince do appear to get a bit carried away occasionally in their speculations. There are examples where they seem to claim certitude when mere probability would have been more prudent. While one of the more convincing sections deals with how John the Baptist was a more significant figure than convention now permits, the authors do skip to an unnecessary conclusion at one point. From prison, John the Baptist sends a question to Jesus asking him if he is, indeed, the Coming One, or whether someone else should be anticipated. It is rightly pointed out that on several levels this poses problems for Christianity, but our investigative authors then assume something. After Jesus responds somewhat ambiguously that he indeed is The One, John's further reply goes undocumented. The authors conclude, "…had [Jesus' response] mollified him, we certainly would have been told. As it is, apparently John went to his death still doubting Jesus."

Another example where the authors seem to take a bit too much for granted, is their characterization of a term applied to Jesus. The wording in question is where Jesus is referred to as one who is "called the Christ." They concluded that this "implies some skepticism." But even if it did, this passage is taken not from Biblical canon, but from Antiquities of the Jews by Josephus, so has little bearing on the veracity of the Gospels.

However, the purpose here was to examine Jesus, the person, and no limitations were imposed on what literature could be used to do so. And in fairness, the authors do question the validity of some points raised by other critics of Christianity's assumptions. For example, they point out the various logical weaknesses of the line of reasoning put forth by prominent scholar Burton L. Mack. Mack proposed that anything not found in the earliest presumed writings must have been later introduced and can be written off as mere myth making exercises. Picknett and Prince go into great detail rightfully rejecting this notion as lacking credibility.

Later they also quite fairly call into question statements that are known to be antagonistic toward Jesus' legend as it is accepted today, stating that "obviously, as they come from a hostile source they should be treated with caution."

And on the subject of caution, be careful how you approach this book. If you look for specific things instead of reading it cover to cover, you will be tempted to criticize the authors for assumptions or short cuts they only appear to have taken, since the book is composed in a defined sequence. You will miss some supporting arguments if you don't read it cover to cover.