History is full of men who have claimed that they came from God, or that they were gods, or that they bore messages from God - Buddha, Mohammed, Confucius, Christ, Lao-tze, and thousands of others, right down to the person who founded a new religion this very day. Each of them has a right to be heard and considered. But as a yardstick external to and outside of whatever is to be measured is needed, so there must be some permanent tests available to all men, all civilizations, and all ages, by which they can decide whether any of these claimants, or all of them, are justified in their claims. These tests are of two kinds: reason and history. Reason, because everyone has it, even those without faith; history, because everyone lives in it and should know something about it.

Reason dictates that if any one of these men actually came from God, the least thing that God could do to support His claim would be to pre-announce His coming. Automobile manufacturers tell their customers when to expect a new model. If God sent anyone from Himself, or if He came Himself with a vitally important message for all men, it would seem reasonable that He would first let men know when His messenger was coming, where He would be born, where He would live, the doctrine He would teach, the enemies He would make, the program He would adopt for the future, and the manner of His death. By the extent to which the messenger conformed with these announcements, one could judge the validity of his claims.

Reason further assures us that if God did not do this, then there would be nothing to prevent any imposter from appearing in history and saying, "I come from God," or "An angel appeared to me in the desert and gave me this message." In such cases there would be no objective, historical way of testing the messenger. We would have only his word for it, and of course he could be wrong. (...)

With this test one can evaluate the claimants. (...) Socrates had no one to foretell his birth. Buddha had no one to pre-announce him and his message or tell the day when he would sit under the tree. ⁽¹⁾ Confucius did not have the name of his mother or his birthplace recorded, nor were they given to men centuries before he arrived so that when he did come, men would know he was a messenger from God. But, with Christ it was different. Because of the Old Testament prophecies, His coming was not unexpected. There were no predictions about Buddha, Confucius, Lao-tze, Mohammed, or anyone else; but there were predictions about Christ. Others just came and said, "Here I am, believe me." They were, therefore, only men among men and not the Divine in the human. Christ alone stepped out of that line saying, "Search the writings of the Jewish people, and the related history of the Babylonians, Persians, Greeks, and Romans." (...)

If one searches out the various Messianic currents in the Old Testament, and compares the resulting picture with the life and work of Christ, can one doubt that the ancient predictions point to Jesus and the kingdom which he established? ⁽²⁾ (...) From an historical point of view alone, here is uniqueness which sets Christ apart from all other founders of world religions. (...)

Turn to pagan testimony. Tacitus, speaking for the ancient Romans, (...) Suetonius, in his account of the life of Vespasian, (...) [t]he Annals of the Celestial Empire [from China] ⁽³⁾ (...) the Greeks (...) Cicero, (...) [t]he Fourth Ecologue of Virgil (...) Plato and Socrates (...) Confucius ⁽⁴⁾ (...) the Sibyls (...) All these were on the Gentile side of the expectation. What separates Christ from all men is that first He was expected; even the Gentiles had a longing for a deliverer, or redeemer. This fact alone distinguishes Him from all other religious leaders.

A second distinguishing fact is that once He appeared, He struck history with such impact that He split it in two, dividing it into two periods: one before his coming, the other after it. (...)

A third fact separating Him from all the others is this: every other person who ever came into this world came into it to live. He came into it to die. Death was a stumbling block to Socrates - it interrupted his teaching. But to Christ, death was the goal and fulfillment of His life, the gold that He was seeking. Few of His works or actions are intelligible without reference to His Cross. He presented Himself as a Savior rather than merely as a Teacher. It meant nothing to teach men to be good unless He also gave them the power to be good, after rescuing them from the frustration of guilt. (...)

A fourth distinguishing fact is that He does not fit, as the other world teachers do, into the established category of a good man. Good men do not lie. But if Christ was not all that He said He was, namely, the Son of the living God, the Word of God in the flesh, then He was not “just a good man”; then he was a knave, a liar, a charlatan and the greatest deceiver who ever lived. If He was not what He said He was, the Christ, the Son of God, He was the anti-Christ! If He was only a man, then He was not even a "good" man.

But He was not only a man. He would have us either worship Him or despise Him - despise Him as a mere man, or worship Him as true God and true man. That is the alternative He presents. It may very well be that the Communists, who are so anti-Christ, are closer to Him than those who see Him as a sentimentalist and a vague moral reformer. The Communists have at least decided that if He wins, they lose; the others are afraid to consider Him either as winning or losing, because they are not prepared to meet the moral demands which this victory would make on their souls.

If He is what He claimed to be, a Savior, a Redeemer, then we have a virile Christ and a leader worth following in these terrible times (...) But He will not allow us to pick and choose among His words, discarding the hard ones, and accepting the ones that please our fancy. We need a Christ Who will restore moral indignation, Who will make us hate evil with a passionate intensity, and love goodness to a point where we can drink death like water.

(end of excerpt - for a fuller account, please refer to Life Of Christ by Fulton J. Sheen, an Image Book published by Doubleday, 1990)

Jesus Christ is no mere historical figure. When you encounter Him, He gently challenges you, "Who do you say I am?" (Matt 16:15) Is he liar or lunatic (because His claims to be God are so outrageous)? Or could he really be our Lord and our God, as Thomas (the ex-doubter) had declared (John 20:28)? Whatever it is, there is no middle ground, no sitting on the fence”: we can never look at Him as just a good man anymore. To the honest inquirer, Jesus invites, "Come and see. (John 1:39) Read My words, find out what My Apostles and My Church say about Me. Test My claims, and see if they are historical, true and valid. And once you have discovered the reason to believe, ask Me for the gift of faith. We are happy to share the Good News with you. Please contact us or your local Catholic parish, if you are interested in finding out more about Jesus, "... the one who is to save his people from their sins." (Matt 1:21)