Epilogue

For the Curious

It occurred to me that you might have wondered, as you read this book, how much of it was based on the historical record of the Gospels, and how much was made up.

Let me say by way of introduction that this novel is one of what is supposed to be seven novels that dovetail with each other, each dealing with one of the Seven Deadly Sins: Matthew exemplifying greed, Mary Magdalene lust, John anger, Thomas gluttony (actually, intemperance in the form of alcoholism), Andrew envy, Nathanael sloth, and of course Judas pride.

By "dovetail," I mean that when the same incident is treated in each novel, it is objectively exactly the same as in all the others; but it is from the point of view of the hero of the particular novel. Thus, when Matthew speaks to Mary in this novel, the words are exactly the same as in the Mary novel, but we see in this novel how Matthew takes what is said, and in the other how Mary understands it, and so on.

The novels, however, are supposed to stand on their own feet, so to speak, and be complete in themselves. It is also not necessary to read them in any particular order. The hope is that it will be enlightening to read more than one of them, to see how the same thing can appear from different points of view.

So far, I have completed only this one and the one about Mary Magdalene. Whether I will have the ability (and time; I am 74 years old) to do all seven is an open question.

As to what is historical in this novel and what is fiction, first of all, let me say that there is absolutely no evidence that Matthew had any connection with Pontius Pilate, or with Longinus (that is, the soldier who crucified Jesus)--no evidence, in fact, of anything that happened to him before Jesus called him from his tax-booth. I needed to imagine a situation in which a Jew (what I called a "Judean" in the novel) would have learned Latin and Greek and been motivated to become a tax-collector, a person Judeans hated. I also had to give him a very strong reason for suddenly getting up from his station and following Jesus.

We know that Matthew was fluent in Greek from the Gospel he wrote, and we can infer that he knew Latin, because he had as a tax-collector to deal with the Romans. Beyond that, we know nothing about him except that the other evangelists call him "Levi." So I had to think of a plausible reason for his changing his name for a time, but then changing it back to Matthew. Perhaps, of course, like Nathanael, he went by both names all the time.

I read a book in which Matthew was called the brother of James the Less ("Little James") because Levi was the son of Alpheus, and so was James. I reject that on several grounds. Two pairs of brothers are mentioned among the Twelve: James and John, and the Rock and Andrew. They are explicitly identified as brothers, and are usually mentioned as pairs. But in the list of the Twelve, Matthew seems paired with Thomas, not James, and there is no hint that he was thought of as his brother. The solution? There were two different Alpheuses who were their parents.

At any rate, in the first chapters, everything is fictional. If you want to say that Longinus was a real person, he is fictional as I portray him. David also, the boy who abducts Matthew, is purely fictional, with this exception: I made him be the son of the Widow of Nain--of whom we know nothing whatever from the Gospels except that he was dead and Jesus brought him back to life.

In Chapter 2, Matthew sees the baptism of Jesus from the other side of the Jordan River. This is recorded in Matthew, Mark, and Luke.

In Chapter 4, Pontius Pilate is, of course, a historical figure, but his personality and everything he did as a child were dictated by the needs of the novel.

In Chapter 5, I made Matthew do what the tax-collector in Jesus's parable in Luke did, and do it just before the incident in Luke in which Jesus read the scroll in the Nazareth synagogue and was almost killed by his townsmen. There is, of course, no evidence that Jesus ever helped build Matthew's mansion.

The call of Matthew in Chapter 6 is recorded in Matthew as a call of Matthew, and in Mark and Luke as a call of Levi, though the three clearly refer to the same incident.

The incident in Chapter 8 of the paralyzed boy being lowered through the roof was from Matthew, Mark, and Luke. In that same chapter, the fact that Joseph is sick and near death is an inference from the fact that he is not mentioned in the public life of Jesus, though other relatives are, which implies that he died before it, or at the beginning of it. Also, Matthew's account of the childhood of Jesus is obviously from Joseph's point of view, and so I assumed that he had access to Joseph before his death.

Chapter 9 through 11 are the result of my reconciliation of Luke's and Matthew's accounts of the infancy of Jesus. For the Scriptural evidence, see my The Synoptic Gospels Compared.

In Chapter 13, there is, of course, no evidence that St. Thomas was an alcoholic. I made him one, because I needed someone to be intemperate, and the cynicism shown by Thomas in John's Gospel made him a reasonable candidate. There is also no evidence that Judas ever was a Jewish priest; I suppose I made him one because when I was in the seminary, we learned to say "Judas Priest!" as an exclamation in order to avoid using the name of Jesus in vain. It is no accident, by the way, that it is Judas who gives the theory of the "Jesus of History" that fascinates so many modern theologians. The incident they discuss about destroying the Temple and rebuilding it is from the early chapters of John. The restoring of the son of the widow of Nain is from Luke.

The feast in Chapter 14 is just mentioned after the call of Matthew in Matthew, Mark, and Luke, but what happened during it is fictional.

In Chapter 15, the curing of the official's son is from John. That Longinus was there is fictional. The naming of the Twelve is reported in Matthew, Mark, and Luke. The Sermon on the Mount (or on the plain) is in Matthew and Luke

In Chapter 16, the incident of the rich young man is in Matthew, Mark, and Luke. The naming of Simon as the Rock is also in all three of those evangelists, and John mentions it by anticipation toward the beginning of his Gospel.

At the beginning of Chapter 17, the prophesy that Matthew is musing about is in Ezekiel. The curing of the paralytic at Bethesda is in John, as is Jesus's speech afterwards. Of course, the interview of Matthew with Pontius Pilate is purely fictional.

Jesus's meeting with Martha and Lazarus is fictional, except that Luke mentions the story of the rich man and Lazarus. Since this is the only parable in which Jesus used a person's name, I decided to give him an ironic reason for doing so.

At the beginning of Chapter 18, there is the incident of the transfiguration on Mt. Tabor, mentioned in Matthew, Mark, and Luke, except that Matthew knows nothing of what happened, since the three witnesses were forbidden to speak of it until after the Resurrection. The prediction of the Passion is also in the three evangelists just mentioned (it is the second one, actually). The incident of the sinful woman in this chapter and Chapter 19 is in Luke; I conflated her with Mary Magdalene, from whom seven devils had been cast out, and also Mary of Bethany (you will notice that she was not there when Jesus visited Lazarus previously). For the details, read the Mary novel.

In Chapter 20, it should be obvious to the reader that Matthew is smitten by Mary; but at this point neither knows it. Of course, there is no basis in the Gospels for this.

In Chapter 21, I made Joanna, whose name is mentioned in the Gospels as one of the women following Jesus, a chatterbox; and I suppose I will have to apologize when I meet her on the Other Side. The story of the Prodigal Son is from Luke. There is no evidence that he intended it to have any application to Mary.

In Chapter 22, the discussion of who is to hold office in the Kingdom is in Matthew, Mark, and Luke, though I assumed that the subtext of what was in the Gospels was what I brought out in the novel: that they thought Jesus was too other-worldly to bother himself with practical details of governance, and they wanted to see to it themselves. The incident of Jairus's daughter and the curing of the woman with the hemorrhage was reported by Matthew, Mark, and Luke, though there is no evidence of any connection with Mary. Judith, by the way, is a completely fictional character, introduced because of the needs, basically, of the Mary novel.

In Chapter 23, Matthew mentions the call of the Rock, Andrew, James, and John, which is in Matthew, Mark, and Luke (though Luke's version possibly conflates it with the miraculous catch of fish that John relates as happening after the Resurrection). That Judas is the treasurer, we find in John.

In Chapter 24, Thomas mentions the incident of the forgiveness seventy times seven times, which is in Matthew and Luke. There are some allusions to the Sermon on the Mount, which is in Matthew; and the discussion of the parable of the workers in the vineyard is also in Matthew.

Matthew's taking notes and jotting down Scriptural parallels is based on what is distinctive in his Gospel, and also to a statement by Papias that Matthew had made a collection of the sayings of Jesus in Hebrew (which cannot be his Gospel, for reasons I give in The Synoptic Gospels Compared). Judas gives the view of contemporary theologians about Jesus. The sexual approach of Judas to Mary and then to John is fictional, having relevance to the needs of the respective novels.

In Chapter 26, the incident of the loaves and fishes is in all four Gospels (in Mark and Matthew there is a second incident with different numbers of people fed), as is the walking on the water.

Chapter 27 deals with John's report of the aftermath of the incident of the loaves and fishes, the Bread of Life speech It is practically verbatim from John.

In Chapter 28, Judas's attempted seduction of David, is, of course, fictional. The incident of the relatives of Jesus is, first of all, from Matthew, Mark, and Luke, conflated with the meeting of Jesus with his relatives in John.

In Chapter 29, the Zacchaeus incident is mentioned in Luke; Matthew refers to the curing of the crippled man at Bethesda in John, and the speech Jesus gives is from John.

In Chapter 30, David sees Judas embezzling the group's funds; the fact of embezzlement is mentioned in John. The incident of the woman taken in adultery is from John, as is the speech of Jesus afterward.

Chapter 31 is fictional, as is the first part of Chapter 32. The incident of the visit to Martha and Mary is from Luke.

In Chapter 33, Little James relates what is in John, and the incident at the Feast of Dedication is also in John, as is the incident of the resurrection of Lazarus.

In Chapter 34, the dinner at Lazarus' house is in John, including Mary's pouring nard over Jesus's feet and wiping them with her hair.

In Chapter 35 and 36, the triumphal entry into Jerusalem is in all four Gospels. Jesus's statement about being lifted off the ground is in John. The Last supper is in all four Gospels, but each treats it differently; I used John, mainly, but included the consecration of the bread and wine which John does not mention, from the other three Gospels (It is also in First Corinthians). The agony in the garden is in Matthew, Mark, and Luke. Jesus's statement to the soldiers and their reaction is from John. Matthew's going to Lazarus to warn him alludes to what John says about Lazarus' also being wanted by the Pharisees. The death of Judas is the version in Matthew's Gospel (Luke's version is different).

In Chapter 37, John relates the trial before Annas, from John, and cites Nicodemus as his source for the trial before the Sanhedrin, from Matthew, Mark, and Luke (Luke has Herod's men put the mocking cloak on Jesus). The trial before Pilate is basically as John reports it, except that Pilate's washing his hands is from Matthew. The forcing of another man to take Jesus's cross is in Matthew, Mark, and Luke; the meeting with the women is in Luke; the falling three times is tradition, not actually recorded. The mocking by the other criminals is in Luke. The darkness is in Matthew, Mark, and Luke; the dividing of the clothes is in all four Gospels: Jesus's quoting the 22^nd Psalm is in Matthew and Mark; the plea for forgiveness of the executioners is in Luke. The appearance to Matthew of his father alludes to the appearance of the dead in Matthew.

In Chapter 38, the allusion is to the burial which is related in all four Gospels. The return of the women, who were not believed, is in Matthew and Luke (Mark says that the women said nothing). The appearance of Jesus is in all four Gospels, but there are differences among them. I mainly used John and added some touches from Luke. Of course, Matthew's meeting with David is purely fictional.