Editor's Note: The authenticity of the document described in the original post below was called into question. As is our policy, the author was notified, and below is his response and retraction:
Author's Note:
I was in the process of making a case for the authenticity of the letter since Wikipedia isn't a reliable source. I could have taken the position that that left a plausible question mark in the readership's mind as to the authenticity of the letter. But Goodspeed is a scholar of the subject and his position on the letter is for me the final word.
I found that the letter was created in the 14th century. The letter has history but it is not, according to Goodspeed, authentic. I retract my position on the authenticity of the letter based on Goodspeed's position as stated and on the fact that Publius Cornelius Lentulus could not have written the letter. This does not negate the existence of Christ nor the virtues synonomous with the letter based on the four Evangelists. It negates the letter, not Publius Cornelius Lentulus nor Christ.
The following lead is what led me to draw my conclusion:
Modern Apocrypha, Famous "Biblical" Hoaxes by Edgar J. Goodspeed (The Beacon Press, Boston, 1956) the Library of Congress catalog card number is 56-10075,
Goodspeed talks about this document in chapter eleven. He prints one English variation of this document and speaks of several variants. The document has existed in some form or another since medieval times. Goodspeed refers to another work, Christusbilder, by Von Dobshutz that contains a list of these manuscripts. He also mentions the Latin MS 22 in the library of the University of Chicago written in 1466-1469.
I'll quote his evaluation of the description from page 91 of his book:
"The 'Letter of Lentulus' is evidently a fiction, designed to give currency to the description contained in the printers' manuals about the personal appearance of Jesus. The varying accounts of its provenance are simply devices to explain its survival from antiquity until today. It is probably as old as the thirteenth century; but it was unknown to Christian antiquity, and has no claims to serious attention as throwing any light upon the personal appearance of Jesus.">
I could have used the first five books of the bible which most people believe are historical but the scholars classify as allegorical (fiction) to make my case. To put the letter in perspective, there is more historical facts in the letter that I submitted than are in the first five chapters of Genesis. My position is that of seeking the truth and that requires honesty in the search, which led to my retraction.
"Mum's" position, that fraud (intentional dishonesty) was the motivation, is an unfortunate position. Anyone who wants to denigrate Christianity will use anything written or said to denigrate it. Skeptics with attitudes will always see the glass half empty, not half full. In seeking the truth sometimes one can be lead down a rabbit trail. Such encounters only serve to refine the truth. When taking dinner with a fellow chef who doesn't believe in Christ, he said "prove to me that there is a Christ." I said "prove to me that there isn't a Christ." Whether one believes in Christ historically or religiously is less important than believing in the meaning of his story. Christ used Parables to make a spiritual point. So what if some consider Christ's story is a parable? Confusing belief in the historically spiritual Christ with the quagmire of religious dogmatic institutional beliefs seems to be where the ideology of our conversation rests.
Our beliefs don't change the truth. That Christ is an historical figure is factual. My question is why do you or don't you believe? Does one not believe because of an "attitude" towards religion or believe because one is told to believe? Neither position deserves philosophical or intellectual respect in that they both have closed minds to the subject matter. The first negates the subject matter's academic worthiness and the second accepts it without question. Do we discard the historical and spiritual relevance of the Bible because the first five chapters of Genesis are a fairy tale? Do we discard the relevance of the letter about Jesus Christ because the letter was written 1,400 years after Christ lived?
As Nelson Montana stated in his commentary, "Superstition: a belief in the supernatural, a ritual that trust in that which cannot be proven or logically explained." Do you think people would have considered is superstitious to believe that we would have computers sending electronic messages around the world in minutes 300 years ago? Thomas Merton, in Zen and the Birds of Appetite, wrote, "....Zen enriches no one. There is no body to be found. The birds may come and circle for a while in the place where it is thought to be. But they soon go elsewhere. When they are gone, the "nothing," the "no-body" that was there, suddenly appears. That is Zen. It was there all the time but the scavengers missed it, because it was not thir kind of prey." We have to recognize the truth within the allegorical letter about Christ before we can pursue it.
Thank you for your honest responses and Happy New Year
Original Post:
Up till now the historical grandeur of this document has remained untouched. By possessing this document, the world owns an authentic testimony of immense historical value about Jesus, his character, looks and personality. It is a letter about Jesus written by Publius Lentutius, Pontio Pilato's predecessor as the Governor of Judea, which he addressed to the Roman Emperor.
The document was written in Latin, around the time when Jesus appeared as preacher in the town. Below, we are quoting a translation of this document in the Castillian language.
"I understand, Oh Caesar!, you wish to learn some things about the virtuous man named Jesus Christ, who the town considers like a prophet and like God, and who, his disciples say, is the Son of God, maker of heaven and earth.
Truthfully, Oh Caesar! wonderful things are heard about him every day that goes by. To explain it briefly, he resuscitates the dead and heals those who are sick. He is a medium size man, of benign looks, and greatest dignity, which is also reflected on his face, so that when a person is evaluating him, one infallibly feels the necessity of loving and fearing him.
His long hair down to his ears, has the color of ripe walnuts, and from there, falling down on his back, is of a brilliant and golden color. It is divided on the middle of his head. Like the Nazarene fashion. His forehead is smooth and there are no wrinkles or spots on his face. The beard, which has the same color as the hair on his head, is curly and even though it is not long, is divided around the middle. His serious eyes possess the virtue of a solar ray. No-one can look at him steadily at the eyes.
When he speaks admonishing, he inspires apprehension, but as soon as he is through reprimanding, he looks like he is crying. Even though he is solemn, he is very affable and amiable. It is said no-one has ever seen him laughing, but that he has been seen crying. Everyone finds his conversation affable and pleasant. Very few times he appears in public, and when he does, he is always very modest. He looks very noble.. As for the rests, his mother is the most beautiful woman ever seen in these regions.
Oh Caesar!, if you wish to see him, like you requested once in writing, let me know, and I will send him over right away. He never undertook studies; nevertheless, he knows all sciences. He goes around barefoot and with his head uncovered. When he is seen at a distance, many laugh, but no sooner they approach him, they tremble, and admire him. It is said that never in these lands, has anyone ever seen a man like him.
The Hebrews assure they have never heard an indoctrination such as his. Many say he is God; others say his is Caesar's enemy. The bad Hebrews bother me a lot, but of Jesus it is said he has never displeased anyone; rather, his intentions are to please everyone. At any rate, Oh Caesar! I will execute any order I receive from you about him. In Jerusalem, Indict 7 of the eleventh month."
~ PUBLIUS LENTUTIUS, Governor of Judea.
This letter does is give us a brief idea of how Rome and His contemporaries viewed Jesus as a human being walking amongst them. He was born in a manger and crucified to a cross. He was a Nazarene and Israelis would say "What good can come from Nazareth?" This letter is a validation of how the four evangelist portray Christ in the New Testament. Creating an institutional religion with all its man-made dogma was not his intention. Rather, He came to give us a liberated version of spirituality and a spiritual path that is compassionate to our human nature.
He walked the middle road with the power of his convictions, not to appease or pander to the left or the right, only to stand firm in the wisdom of His convictions. He spoke the truth, not what people wanted to hear. And He took no pleasure in wounding the egos of the Pharisees whom eventually had him crucified. And while hanging on the Cross He said, forgive them for they know not what they do".
A modern day example of His forgiveness is was found scribbled on a piece of wrapping paper near the body of a dead child at the Ravensbrook concentration camp where 92,000 women and children died during World War II:
"O lord, remember not only the men and women of good will, but also those of ill-will. But do not remember all the suffering they have inflicted upon us. Remember the fruits we have brought, thanks to this suffering - our comradeship, our loyalty, our humility, our courage, our generosity, the greatness of heart which has grown out of all this . And when they come to their judgment, let all the fruits we have born be their forgiveness."
Ralph Waldo Emerson "The greatest gift is a portion of thyself." As we celebrate the birth of Christ, the King of Peace, and remember the contemporary example of the little child at Ravensbrook, it is worth contemplating that opening our hearts and forgiving those whom offended us is the greatest gift we can give. It will eventually lead to peace on earth.
Merry Christmas