Image from amazon.com

[This concludes Chapter 8: Jesus of Charles Freeman’s The Closing of the Western Mind:  The Rise of Faith and the Fall of Reason.  Related articles from this MUST READ book are:

• In search of the Historical Jesus – 3 – “all things to all men”
• In search of the Historical Jesus 2 – A reconstruction from the Gospels
• In search of the Historical Jesus 1 – The Closing of the Western Mind

—Admin1.]

—————————-

Whatever he may have claimed to be, Jesus was bound to provoke reaction from the authorities.  He was a highly popular leader, and although he never appears to have counseled any kind of active resistance to the governing group, crowds following charismatic men who appear to have miraculous powers are always a concern to authorities, especially at times of social unrest.  

Herod Antipas had already, after all, executed John the Baptist, whose teachings on the coming of the kingdom he appears to have seen as insurrectionary.  There was also the underlying antagonism of local Pharisees, who were understandably wary of any teacher who claimed to have his own interpretation of the Law.  In particular, Jesus’ teaching that sinners would be welcomed in heaven even if they have not repented through the making of a sacrifice offended traditionalists.

Clearly Jesus was vulnerable, and it may have been a growing sense of insecurity that drove him with his immediate followers from Galilee into the Roman province of Judaea, perhaps in A.D. 30 (although other dates between 29 and 33 have been proposed), and then to Jerusalem, where they arrived in time for the feast of Passover.  (John, however, suggests that Jesus had made several previous journeys to Jerusalem, as indeed would have been expected of a conventional Jew.)  However, the journey to Jerusalem may also have been deliberately planned as the next step in his ministry, the culmination of his mission, even to the extent of bringing him into confrontation with the Temple authorities.  

Jesus’ arrival was certainly greeted in the city as if it were about to inaugurate some kind of political or religious transformation in fulfillment of ancient prophecies.  He rode in on a donkey as if to fulfill the prophecy that “a king’ would enter Jerusalem on a donkey (Zechariah 9:9), and according to Mark (11:9) the crowd shouted, “Blessings on the coming kingdom of our father, David.”  In Matthew (21:9) the crowds actually call Jesus “Son of David.”

As the great crowds of pilgrims in Jerusalem gathered for the Passover, the tension can only have been raised by the presence, with his troops, of the Roman governor Pontius Pilate, who had come inland from Caesarea, the seat of Roman government of the province, to make sure that order was maintained.  This year there had already been trouble, some form of insurrection within the city, and one of its leaders, Barabbas, was in custody and facing almost certain execution.  The official responsible to the Romans for good order was Caiaphas, the high priest.  Now in his 12th year of office, he was highly experienced and must have been a consummate political operator to have maintained the support of the Jews for so long while at the same time satisfying his Roman overlords.  Pilate, who, as we have seen, had already shown himself to be erratic, cruel and insensitive to Jewish feeling, would have required very careful handling.

So then, among the mass of pilgrims, arrives an itinerant preacher from Galilee, an outsider who brings his followers, with their distinctive accents, with him.  He enters on a donkey with the crowds shouting that he is perhaps the Messiah, or at least a member of “the House of David.”  In itself, his arrival might have been containable, but then comes the incident that tips the balance, Jesus’ entry into the Temple, where he overthrows the tables of the money lenders and may have spoken of the later destruction of the Temple.  There is no hint in the Gospel accounts that any of Jesus’ followers were involved with him in this, understandably perhaps in view of the immense significance the Temple held for Jews.  

What Jesus meant to achieve by this provocative action has been endlessly debated.  His gesture may have been a symbolic one, a recognition of the passing of the old order –and the Temple with it—at the coming of “the new kingdom,” but he may also have had the more overtly political aim of expressing popular disquiet with the ruling elite.  The intrusion was too threatening for the priests to overlook, and Caiaphas had little option but to take the initiative in dealing with it.  There could have been many motives for his action — fear that disorder would spread if Jesus was not dealt with promptly, a need to be seen to be supporting his fellow priests in the Temple at one of the most sacred moments in the year when good order was essential, even a desire to show Pilate that he could act decisively if he needed to.  John specifically notes that one of the fears of “the chief priests and Pharisees was that Jesus’ teachings would bring Roman retaliation” (John 11:46-48), and if so Caiaphas had little alternative.  There may have been other motives.  The crowds in Jerusalem were restless and might be more so if Barabbas was executed.  It could be that Caiaphas decided to exploit the custom that a prisoner be set free at Passover to release Barabbas, thus avoiding the displeasure of the local crowds, while offering Jesus to the Roman authorities in his place as evidence that the Jewish authorities were committed to good order.  “It was Caiaphas who had suggested to the Jews, ‘It is better for one man to die for the people,’ “ notes John in his Gospel (18:14).  So the chief priests and the elders “persuaded the crowd to demand the release of Barabbas and the execution of Jesus” (Matthew 27:20).  In short, Jesus the outsider was being used by the authorities in their quest for overall good order within the city.

Having decided to offer Jesus for execution, Caiaphas’ problem was finding a reason for doing so; the varied debates outlined in the Gospels show that this was not easy.  Attempts were made to make Jesus incriminate himself through admitting he was the Messiah or “the son of God,” and stress was laid on the disorder he was provoking.  Eventually he was handed over to Pilate, who acquiesced in the accusation that Jesus had called himself “King of the Jews” and ordered the crucifixion.  It seems likely that Pilate saw Jesus’ mission primarily as a political issue–there is also evidence from John’s account that he was influenced by threats of disorder from the crowd and fears that he would be denounced as disloyal to the emperor if he did not crucify Jesus (19:12-16).  As we have seen, “good” emperors recognized that it made more sense to replace an unpopular governor than risk stirring up a major popular revolt.  In the light of his unhappy experiences early in his rule, Pilate was probably acutely vulnerable to such threats.  With such powerful considerations in mind, it is unlikely that a man so apparently insensitive would have hesitated long over ordering another crucifixion.  

One remarkable thing about the trial and execution of Jesus is that neither the Jewish nor the Roman authorities followed it up with a move against Jesus’ followers.  There was no action on the suspicion that Peter was one of his adherents, and the disciples were left free to visit his tomb without hindrance.  This tends to support the view that Caiaphas kept his response to Jesus to the minimum necessary (and also that it was Jesus’ solitary intrusion into the Temple that was the catalyst for his arrest).  Caiaphas presumably gauged, rightly as it turned out, that the Romans and the Temple officials would be satisfied with Jesus’ crucifixion, and that he would not be faced with further disruption.

What Caiaphas could not have foreseen was the aftermath of the death for Jesus followers.  A charismatic leader who had made great promises of the coming of God’s kingdom for the poor, who might even be the Messiah and thus royalty, come in triumph to Jerusalem to establish his rule, had been swept aside by the Roman administration backed by the Jewish hierarchy as if he had been no more than a minor political nuisance.  One of his followers (Judas) had betrayed him, and the others had dispersed.  

One can only begin to imagine the psychological devastation of the disciples.  Those close to him had spent months with him, sharing the dangers of the road and the tension of opposition, dealing with the crush of crowds and the emotional power of his teachings, a range of experiences unlike any they could have undergone before.  His execution brought much more than the shock and emptiness of any sudden and unexpected death of a close companion. With the loss went the apparent destruction of all their hopes for the coming of the promised kingdom. The ritual humiliation inherent in crucifixion, the stripping naked and very public death agony, was particularly devastating.  The point was underscored by the label on the cross, INRI, Jesus of Nazareth, King of the Jews.  We are familiar with the image of the crucifixion now, but for nearly 400 years Christians could not bring themselves to represent Jesus nailed on the cross.

The resurrection experiences reported in the Gospels and the letters of Paul have to be set within the context of this trauma and despair.  As might be expected from the circumstances, the accounts of these experiences are confused and contradictory.  Mark ends his original account with the empty tomb, and it seems that it was not until the 2nd century that his version of Jesus’ appearances was added.  In his account Jesus appears first to Mary Magdalene, then to two of the disciples, then to all 11 “at table” before being taken up to heaven. (Mark does not make clear where these appearances take place.)  Matthew reports one appearance near the tomb and then a single meeting with the 11 disciples at a mountain in Galilee, where Jesus had agreed to meet them.  In Luke Jesus’ appearances all occur in or near Jerusalem, but Jesus is not always immediately recognizable (24:16).  John also credits Mary Magdalene with the first vision and reports two appearances to the gathered disciples in Jerusalem as well as one at the Sea of Galilee.

Separate from the Gospel accounts is that of the Apostle Paul.  Paul had received a vision of Jesus as a blinding light on the road to Damascus, but he later returned to Jerusalem to meet Jesus’ disciples. (According to Galatians 1:18, he was there with Peter for 15 days).  The date, perhaps in the mid 30s, is not certain, but what is important is that Paul had direct contact with Peter only a few years after Jesus’ crucifixion, and he records his own interpretation of the resurrection in the early 50s, at least 20 years before the Gospels or any other surviving sources.  

In his 1st letter to the Corinthians, Paul tells how it was Peter who experienced the first appearance, then the 12 disciples, then a meeting of 500, next James and then the Apostles and finally Paul himself, an appearance which Paul doubtless wishing to reinforce his authority (hotly disputed as it was) with the Corinthians, equates with those earlier ones.  Mary Magdalene is not mentioned, and one wonders whether this appearance to a “mere” woman was deliberately obliterated by either Peter or Paul.  But what did Paul understand as having been seen?  He goes on in his letter to stress the difference between the perishable human body and the body in which Jesus appeared, so it can be assumed that he believed that the resurrected Jesus was not a resuscitated corpse but some kind of spiritual being.  In John’s much later account, Jesus is able to pass through closed doors and to disappear into heaven.  The first appearance of Jesus (by the tomb) and the last (the Ascension) take place in or near Jerusalem.  Yet Jesus was also seen in Galilee.  There is no record of any journey there or back. This suggests a series of distinct and unconnected apparitions and not Jesus living on earth as if his body had simply been restored to life.

In Matthew, John (Chapter 21), and possibly Mark’s account, the disciples initially went home to Galilee, but they returned to Jerusalem, probably in the belief that the promised kingdom would still materialize there.  From this time, when they strike out as independent preachers, one can call them Apostles, “those who are sent,” and their activities are recorded in the Acts of the Apostles (whose author is, according to tradition, Luke, author of the 3rd Gospel).  It is certainly true that the imminent arrival of the kingdom dominated their thoughts, and under the leadership of Peter they began preaching their continued belief in Jesus and his promised return.  As the followers of a man who had been condemned to death, they were under suspicion and experienced some harassment.  However, they still saw themselves as part of Judaism, continued to frequent the Temple and observe Jewish rituals.  

As the second coming failed to materialize, they began to reflect on how Jesus could be interpreted within Jewish tradition.  The idea that he might have been divine was too much for any Jew to grasp, as it was completely alien to any orthodox Jewish belief, but Jesus could be seen as one through whom God worked (as with the earlier Jewish prophets) and who had been exalted by God through his death.  Peter put it as follows (Acts 2:22-24): “Jesus the Nazarene was a man [sic] commended to you by God by the miracles and portents and signs that God worked through him when he was among you . . . . You killed him, but God raised him to life, freeing him from the pangs of Hades [Sheol, the underworld.]”  

Jesus was still referred to as the Messiah, but how could he be accepted as a Messiah when his earthly life had ended not in the prophesied triumph but in tragedy?  The only possible way to explain the crucifixion was to draw on different prophecies.  The prophet Isaiah talks, for instance, of a servant of God who was “torn away from the land of the living, for our faults struck down in death.  If he offers his life in atonement . . . he shall have a long life and through him what God wishes will be done” (53:8-10).  Such texts were used by Christians to create the idea of a “suffering Messiah,” who had died for the sins of mankind.  This was very far from the most popular interpretation of Messiah as one coming in triumph, but it was enough for Jesus’ followers to be able to call him Christos, the anointed one.  The first recorded us of “Christians” to describe Jesus’ followers comes not from Jerusalem but from Antioch in Syria (Acts 11:26).

If we return to the question of whether the historical Jesus can be identified, the answer must be “only with the greatest difficulty.”  Although this chapter has tried to set out what appear to be the developments in his life and the elements of his teaching about which there is some consensus, virtually every point will still be challenged by one scholar or another.  

Jesus’ charisma, the brutality of his death and stories of a resurrection had such an impact that they passed quickly into myth, and this myth was soon being used by those committed to his memory in a wide variety of ways. (The word “myth” is used here not pejoratively but as the expression of a living “truth” that can function, as it certainly has done in Jesus case, at different levels for different audiences.  Apart from Christianity itself, the impact of Jesus can be gauged from the number of spiritual movements outside Christianity—Gnosticism, followers of theos hypsistos, Manicheism, and, later, Islam—that recognized him as a spiritual leader.)

No one can be sure where the boundary between Matthew (and the other Gospel writers) and Jesus’ original words should be drawn.  This left and still leaves Jesus’ life, death and teachings open to a wide variety of interpretations and uses by those who followed him.  Nevertheless, the trend in recent scholarship towards relating Jesus to the tensions of the 1st-century Galilee, in particular as a leader who appealed to the burdened peasant communities of the countryside and reinforced rather than threatened traditional Jewish values, has much to support it.

As Christian communities established themselves, it was perhaps inevitable that there would be tensions between those who remained traditional Jews, focusing on the Temple, and those who, perhaps drawing on Jesus prophecy of the Temple’s destruction, were more openly hostile to the Temple and all that it represented symbolically in terms of wealth and power.  The Acts of the Apostles tell of one Stephen, a Hellenized Jew, who took the provocative line that the Temple should never have existed at all and that the God of Jesus stood independently of it (Acts 7).  These assertions were treated by the Jews as blasphemy.  Stephen was stoned to death and thus earned himself a revered place within the Christian tradition as the first martyr.  Acts records that a man called Saul, or Paul as he was to become better known, watched over the outer clothes of those who carried out the stoning.

Image from momstransformed.blogspot.com

[First posted in 2014.  A calming and conciliatory voice so badly needed in these troubled times and confusing age, Rabbi Harold S. Kushner has authored some bestsellers that we highly recommend:

• When Bad Things Happen to Good People,
• When All You Ever Wanted Isn’t Enough,
• Who Needs God,

His books are insightful and helpful to both Jew and Christian who wish to gain an understanding of God who is, after all,  the God of all humanity except that sometimes, religions get in the way of that understanding. Among the Jewish voices that call for interfaith discourse, we are featuring Jews and Christians in Today’s World, the 11th chapter from his book To Life!, another MUST READ in our RESOURCES.  After reading this one chapter, you will realize this book is a MUST OWN, whether you’re Jew or Christian or neither. Reformatting and highlights added.—Admin1.]

——————————————–

CHRISTIANS need to understand Judaism theologically, even if they never meet a live Jew. They need to understand what God had in mind when He entered into a Covenant with the Jewish people, and how that was changed by the birth and death of Jesus.

Jews don’t need to understand Christianity theologically, but we need to understand it practically, sociologically. We need to figure out what it means to live as Jews in a society where 90 percent of our neighbors are Christians, basing their religion partly on Hebrew Scriptures and partly on texts and traditions that go beyond them.

• How shall we understand Christianity?
• How shall we regard Jesus, who was born a Jew and is now regarded as the Divine Savior, Son of God, by so many of our neighbors?
• And how shall we understand the historical developments that saw Christianity begin as a tiny sect within Judaism and go on to become the religion of half the world?

If we worship the same God and revere the same Bible, why are so many people sitting in their section of the bleachers and so few in ours?

Let me emphasize that this chapter is not a scholarly history of Christianity or an introduction to its theology. Neither is it an attempt to suggest to a Christian reader of this book that his beliefs may be wrong. It is a Jewish perspective on the phenomenon of Christianity emerging from Jewish roots.

Image from www.humanjourney.us

We begin with the historical setting in which Christianity arose. What we now think of as the first century of the Christian era, the century in which Jesus lived and died, was a time of messianic ferment in the Roman province of Judea.

• In biblical times, that land had been called Israel.
• It would later be called Palestine, as the Romans tried to erase the memory of a Jewish presence by naming it after the seafaring Mediterranean people who had briefly inhabited the coast around 1100 B.C.
• Since 1948, it has been called Israel again.

The Roman rulers were cruel and greedy, collecting outrageous sums in takes to finance their empire and putting to death anyone suspected of being a potential troublemaker. Times were so hard that people believed God would imminently intervene to save them as He had in Egypt. They compared the pain of their situation to the travail of a woman giving birth; the pains are most intense just before delivery. They not only prayed for a messianic redeemer; they expected his arrival daily.

Image from pixgood.com

The Hebrew word Messiah was originally a synonym for the king. The word means “king,” the one who was crowned by having the anointing oil poured on his head. (It literally means “the anointed one,” as does the Greek christos.). In biblical times, the Messiah for whom the people prayed was a just and honest king, more decent and effective than the one currently ruling them. Like all legitimate kings of Israel, he would be a descendant of King David, but he was not seen as having any superhuman powers. The prophet Isaiah describes him this way:

There shall come forth a shoot from the stump of Jesse [David’s father], and a branch shall grow out of its roots. And the spirit of the Lord shall be upon him, the spirit of wisdom and understanding, the spirit of counsel and might, the spirit of knowledge and the fear of the Lord. He shall not judge by what his eyes see, or decide by what his ears hear. With righteousness shall he judge the poor, and decide with equity for the meek of the earth.[Isaiah 11:1-4]

In other words, if we could just have a good, honest, inspired king, he would solve all our problems.

Eight hundred years after Isaiah spoke, the land of the Jews, like most of Europe and the Middle East, had become part of the Roman Empire. Now it was not enough to hope for a fair and honest ruler. Before a Jewish king could begin judging the poor righteously, he first had to chase away the Roman occupier, and that would require divine intervention on a miraculous scale. Now the Messiah had to be a superhuman figure—not the Son of God or the Redeemer from Sin (those are non-Jewish concepts introduced by early Christianity), but a person capable of leading the Jews to victory over the greatest military force in the world.

It was into this setting that Jesus of Nazareth was born. We don’t know anything for certain about his life. All we know about him comes from accounts written two generations later by people who believed that he was the Messiah and wanted to persuade others of that fact. But the following seems to be a plausible outline of his career:

He was born into a working-class family in Nazareth, a rural city in Galilee in northern Israel, far from the centers of learning and political power. Later Christian sources would add an account of his parents traveling to Bethlehem when he was due to be born, because Bethlehem was King David’s hometown and there was a tradition that the Messiah would come from there. But many Jewish and Christian scholars doubt that.

The young man (whose Hebrew name meant “God will save”) grew up to be a compelling and charismatic teacher and preacher, offering a view of Judaism (shared with many of the leading Jewish teachers of that time) that emphasized inward perfection more than external performance. Albert Schweitzer has suggested that the central idea in Jesus’ teaching was the conviction that the world was going to end very soon, probably in his lifetime. Everyone, therefore, needed to put aside all other concerns (getting married, earning a living) and prepare for the End of Days and the Judgment. That is why he preached an ethic (turn the other cheek, don’t hate or covet, don’t worry about your parents or family), that people might be able to follow in the short run but not for a lifetime.

Many responded to his message and his effective way of presenting it, and he began to develop a reputation and a following. Because he had this gift of making people want to follow him and do what he asked them to do, some people began to wonder if he might be the heaven-sent redeemer.

What follows is a personal, somewhat unconventional but plausible interpretation of the Gospel accounts in the New Testament. One day, someone asked him,

“Master, shall we pay our taxes to Rome?” In other words, “Shall we rise in revolt?” Stopping the flow of taxes was the traditional way of beginning a revolt. Jesus held up a coin and asked, “Whose likeness is this coin?” “Caesar’s,” the people answered. “Then render unto Caesar what is Caesar, and unto God what is God’s.”

That is, pay your taxes; the revolution I have come to call for is a spiritual one, not a political one. In the next verse (Matthew 22:22), “When they heard these words, they marvelled and left him and went on their way.” I take that to mean that they were disappointed that he did not promise to expel the Romans, and stopped following him.

Shortly after that, Jesus and a few disciples made their way to Jerusalem for Passover. As we remember from our discussion of the pilgrim festivals, every Jew who was physically able to do so would travel to Jerusalem to celebrate Passover at the Temple. I can imagine that this made the Roman authorities nervous. First of all, the streets were crowded with tens of thousands of pilgrims who might easily become an uncontrollable mob.
Second, the message of Passover, a message of divinely assisted liberation, was likely to inspire some hotheaded Jews to rise in revolt. I can believe that the Roman authorities adopted a policy of “crack down first and investigate later.

Jesus celebrated what has become known as the Last Supper (it may or may not have been a Passover Seder) with a dozen of his followers, and after that was arrested and brought before the High Priest and the elders of the Jewish community.

Image from www.jonmcnaughton.com

 

The New Testament account, written years later and slanted to impress a Roman audience, tells of the Jewish authorities convicting him of blasphemy and turning him over to the Romans for punishment. But I am attracted to the theory of Israeli Supreme Court Justice Haim Cohen, who suggests that Jesus was brought before the Jewish authorities not to judge him or condemn him (Jewish courts did not meet at night or on the eve of holidays, and if the Last Supper was a Seder, it is inconceivable that the Jewish court would meet on Passover) but to warn him.

Here was this popular, gifted young Jewish teacher from a small town in the Galilee who did not realize what a dangerous place Jerusalem was at Passover time. Make yourself too conspicuous, I can picture the elders telling him, attract large crowds, and the Romans will see you as a potential troublemaker.

 

Image from www.wikiart.org

A day or two later, Jesus was put to death by crucifixion, a particularly cruel form of execution. It is very clear from all accounts that he was killed by the Romans, not by Jews, and that he was one of many people crucified by the Romans in Judea. After his death, his closest friends and followers began to see visions of him (it is not unusual for people to dream or daydream about someone they loved and lost; it has happened to me) and began to believe that he had risen from the dead and must indeed have been the Messiah.

At this point, we begin to move from the religion of Jesus (love your neighbor, turn the other cheek, prepare for the End of Days) to the religion about Jesus (he was the Son of God who died to absolve us of our sins). The key figure in this shift was a Jew named Paul, known in Christian tradition as Saint Paul, author of many of the books of the New Testament.

 

Jesus’ disciples, all of whom were Jewish, tried to persuade their fellow Jews that the young teacher who had been put to death was the Messiah. They had very little success doing so.

Image from www.religionfacts.com

Paul, who had never met Jesus but became convinced of his divine mission, found the non-Jewish world more receptive. He brilliantly combined the strenuous moral teachings of the Jewish tradition with familiar elements of pagan religion that had not been part of Jesus’ original message—the leader, born of a divine father and human mother, who dies and comes back to life. Perhaps out of conflicts within his own personality, he crafted the very non-Jewish notion of Original Sin, that because none of us is perfect, we are all condemned to hell and only the willing sacrifice of a perfect, sinless man (God come down in human form) can save us.

 

Within three hundred years, Christianity went from being a handful of individuals within Judaism to being a persecuted sect, to being a tolerated sect, and finally to becoming the official religion of the Roman Empire. Why did Christianity succeed in winning the hearts of tens of millions of people while Judaism, which was an energetically missionary religion at that time, remained the inheritance of a much smaller population?

 

When I was in Hebrew School, I was taught that Christianity was more attractive because it was easier:

• no dietary laws,
• no Sabbath observance,
• no need to circumcise male converts.

But it was not that easy to be a Christian in the first or second century. (Remember all those movies where Christians are thrown to the lions to entertain Roman audiences?)

 

Image from www.barnesandnoble.com

Part of the answer lies in the fact that in the year 67 and again in the year 135 (the Bar Kochba rebellion), the Jews rose in revolt against Rome, seeking their freedom. Both times, they fought heroically, and both revolts were put down with great loss of life. The Romans were so angry at having to send troops to put down these revolts that they tried to crush Judaism in Judea, forbidding its teaching or practice. That was when they destroyed the Second Temple and changed the name of Judea to Palestine, and that is why the definitive Talmud, the commentary on how the laws of the Torah were to be lived, was written in Babylonia rather than in Judea. As a result, Judaism was physically and emotionally depleted at home, and had the image of being a nation of losers and troublemakers throughout the empire.

 

But mostly, the question “Why Christianity rather than Judaism?” is the wrong question.

 

The real question is “Why Christianity rather than paganism?”

 

Image from www.audible.com

The people of the Roman Empire did not have to choose between Judaism and Christianity. They had a third option: remaining pagans, worshiping the nature-gods of the old religions. Why did so many of them choose Christianity? Having the emperor designate it the official religion of the empire certainly helped. But I believe that there is something in the human soul that responds to the call to righteousness, the summons to be moral. We intuitively know that we are different from the animals, and that this difference is located in our ability to know right from wrong. We want to believe that our moral choices are taken seriously, and only biblical monotheism, whether in its Jewish or its Christian formulation, offered that message.

 

How shall we, twentieth-century Jews, regard Jesus and how shall we regard Christianity?

 

To be sure, if we are Jewish, we cannot regard Jesus as having been divine. Jews who accept Jesus as their Savior are not “Jews for Jesus”; they are Christians, in the same way that Christians who convert to Judaism are Jews, not “Christians who deny Christ.”

 

We can overlook his Jewish origins and the Jewish roots of much that he taught, and see Jesus merely as the central figure of someone else’s religion, as we see Mohammed, Confucius, and the Buddha. But my position would be to see Jesus and Paul as people used by God to bring the monotheism and the moral message of Judaism to the world, and to teach the world that the God discovered and worshipped by the Jews was the only true God.

 

Earlier in this century there lived a brilliant young German-Jewish scholar named Franz Rosenzweig. He grew up with minimal Jewish knowledge, became involved with Judaism as an adult, and died at a tragically young age, but in a few years produced a life’s work of books, essays, and projects. Rosenzweig was loyally Jewish but he recognized the spiritual depth and beauty of Christianity and the saintly lives of many of his Christian friends. He knew too many devout Christians to be able to claim that if one religion is true, the other had to be false. He came up with the “two covenant” theory, a way of affirming the religious validity of both Judaism and Christianity.

 

Judaism and Christianity, he taught, needed each other, and God’s plan for humanity needs them both. Christianity grew to be a religion of more than a billion people by absorbing great masses of pagans, sometimes converting entire nations en masse. In the process, these new Christians brought some of their pagan rituals and superstitions into Christianity, diluting its monotheistic message. Adoration of the Virgin Mary sometimes bordered on turning her into a goddess like the mother-goddesses of paganism. Christmas was celebrated with evergreen trees and other winter festival symbols; Easter was observed with eggs, rabbits, and other spring symbols of fertility. Christianity needs Judaism to remind it of what pure, uncompromised ethical monotheism looks like. As a counterpoint to the Christian notion of Original Sin, the idea that no human being can live up to all of God’s expectations, Christianity need the example of the Jewish community actually striving to do what the Torah calls upon us to do.

 

But Judaism needs Christianity to remind us that the word of God is not meant to be kept for ourselves alone. We are on not merely to live by God’s ways, but to do it in such manner that the world will be persuaded to turn to God.

 

Had Judaism been as successful in winning converts as Christianity was eighteen hundred years ago, it would have stopped being Judaism. It would have lost the sense of community and shares responsibility that only a small group can maintain. It would inevitably have absorbed many of the superstitions and habits of nature-worship brought by former (and to that point incompletely digested) pagan converts. And yet had the Bible, and the God of the Bible, remained the exclusive property of a few thousand families in and around Jerusalem, God’s ultimate plan for the world would have been frustrated. In that way, we Jews can see Christianity as God’s chosen instrument for redeeming the world from paganism, and Christians can recognize their obligation to preach the message of Christianity to the world, but not to the Jewish people, who had that message before they did.

 

Significant differences remain, but they are less important than what we share. Some years ago, I was invited to speak to the women’s group of the local Methodist Church. The talk was advertised locally, causing one of my congregants to say to me after Sabbath services, “I see you’re speaking for the competition Tuesday.” I smiled, because I realized he intended his words as a joke, not as a theological statement. But in my mind, my response was—

 

“No, Christianity is not the competition.

Apathy and selfishness and a neo-paganism that sees Man as an animal and his every urge as legitimate—they are the competition.

And the church and the synagogue are allies, on the same side of the battle.”

 

 

 

 

[First posted 2012, when Sinai 6000 started this website.  A timely article which gives a glimpse of the religious traditions of the country where the core community of Sinaites are based.  This was contributed by Sinaite DVE@S6K/Admin2..–Admin1.]

Image from tx.english-ch.com

It’s the time of the year again when most Filipinos are gearing up for another vacation trek to beaches, to Baguio, to Palawan, to Boracay, Subic, and other popular vacation spots and resorts all over the Philippines. 

Juxtaposed with this time is the LENTEN SEASON or HOLY WEEK of this mostly Catholic-devotees nation.  There are quaint customs that are practiced in this country, foremost of which is abstention from eating meat and fasting during this season.  Even fast-foodchains jump into the bandwagon by offering non-meat options in their menu.  Then there is the “Visita Iglesia” [church visit] done every Maundy Thursday where it is a custom to visit at least seven different churches on this day.  Even Filipino families have traditional Good Friday fare that is served, the most popular being “Bacalao”, a dish prepared with dried cod fish. 

Image from tx.english-ch.com

Then there is the flogging and carrying and dragging of wooden crosses by penitents and even literal crucifixion on crosses.  These events have been extensively covered by National Geographic in a documentary.  Then on Easter Sunday, at dawn, there is the “Salubong” [meeting, welcoming] tradition where the “Virgin” Mother meets the Risen Christ.

These are my memories of “Holy Week”; as I matured in my spiritual walk, I understood that these practices are not even mentioned in the Tanakh, and all of them have pagan origins. 

Ask most Catholics, and even Christians, how these practices and traditions came about and you will surely get a blank stare or a shrug.  The following paragraphs will de-mystify these traditions and allow us to understand more fully that trusting the one, TRUE GOD, YHWH, is so simple and straight-forward:

Isaiah 56:13-17:   

Bring no more vain oblations; it is an offering of abomination to me; new moon and Sabbath, the holding of convocations-I cannot endure iniquity along with the solemn assembly.  Your new moons and your appointed seasons My soul hates; they are a burden to Me, I am weary to bear them, and when you spread forth your hands, I will hide My eyes from you, yes, when you make many prayers, I will not hear; your hands are full of blood.  Wash and make yourself clean, put away your evil doings before My eyes, cease to do evil, Learn to do well; seek justice, relieve the oppressed, judge the fatherless, plead for the widow.

EASTER/EASTER EGGS

 The word “Easter” is culled from Eastre, the Anglo-Saxon/Teutonic goddess of spring and fertility. A festival was held in her honor every year at the vernal equinox.  Easter Sunday is set on the first Sunday after the full moon after the vernal Equinox on March 21.  On Easter Sunday, it is typical to hunt for eggs, and

Image from www.shutterstock.com

rabbits are symbols that mark the day.  Why is this done?  The Easter Bunny is a rabbit-spirit. Long ago, he was called the “Easter Hare”, hares and rabbits have frequent multiple births so they became a symbol of fertility. The custom of an Easter egg hunt began because children believed that hares laid eggs in the grass. The Romans believed that “All life comes from an egg.” Christians consider eggs to be “the seed of life” and so they are symbolic of the resurrection of Jesus Christ. In one way or another all the customs are a “salute to spring” marking re-birth.  (Source:  Mary Bellis, About.com Guide)

Image from primeross.blogspot.com

Another view on these practices during Holy Week traces them back to pagan celebrations and beliefs. “Ishtar”, which is pronounced “Easter” was a day that commemorated the resurrection of one of their gods that they called “Tammuz”, who was believed to be the only begotten son of the moon-goddess (Semiramis/Ishtar), and the sun-god (Nimrod/Baal).  When Semiramis/Ishtar became queen due to the death of her son Tammuz, she proclaimed a forty day period of time of sorrow each year prior to the anniversary of the death of Tammuz.  During this time, no meat was to be eaten.  Worshippers were to meditate upon the sacred mysteries of Baal and Tammuz, and to make the sign of the “T” in front of their hearts as they worshipped.  They also ate sacred cakes with the marking of a “T” or cross on the top.  Every year, on the first Sunday after the first full moon after the spring equinox, a celebration was made.  It was Ishtar’s Sunday and was celebrated with rabbits and eggs.  Ishtar also proclaimed that because Tammuz was killed by a pig, that a pig must be eaten on that Sunday.  (Source:  David J. Meyer,  Last Trumpet Ministries)

Image from www.redicecreations.com

From these sources,

we can clearly see

that these practices

are not in any way

connected

to worshipping

the ONE, TRUE GOD,

YHWH.

Holy Week? Really?

DVE@S6K

[First posted 2012, when Sinai 6000 started this website.  A timely article which gives a glimpse of the religious traditions of the country where the core community of Sinaites are based.  This was contributed by Sinaite DVE@S6K/Admin2..–Admin1.]

Image from tx.english-ch.com

It’s the time of the year again when most Filipinos are gearing up for another vacation trek to beaches, to Baguio, to Palawan, to Boracay, Subic, and other popular vacation spots and resorts all over the Philippines. 

Juxtaposed with this time is the LENTEN SEASON or HOLY WEEK of this mostly Catholic-devotees nation.  There are quaint customs that are practiced in this country, foremost of which is abstention from eating meat and fasting during this season.  Even fast-foodchains jump into the bandwagon by offering non-meat options in their menu.  Then there is the “Visita Iglesia” [church visit] done every Maundy Thursday where it is a custom to visit at least seven different churches on this day.  Even Filipino families have traditional Good Friday fare that is served, the most popular being “Bacalao”, a dish prepared with dried cod fish. 

Image from tx.english-ch.com

Then there is the flogging and carrying and dragging of wooden crosses by penitents and even literal crucifixion on crosses.  These events have been extensively covered by National Geographic in a documentary.  Then on Easter Sunday, at dawn, there is the “Salubong” [meeting, welcoming] tradition where the “Virgin” Mother meets the Risen Christ.

These are my memories of “Holy Week”; as I matured in my spiritual walk, I understood that these practices are not even mentioned in the Tanakh, and all of them have pagan origins. 

Ask most Catholics, and even Christians, how these practices and traditions came about and you will surely get a blank stare or a shrug.  The following paragraphs will de-mystify these traditions and allow us to understand more fully that trusting the one, TRUE GOD, YHWH, is so simple and straight-forward:

Isaiah 56:13-17:   

Bring no more vain oblations; it is an offering of abomination to me; new moon and Sabbath, the holding of convocations-I cannot endure iniquity along with the solemn assembly.  Your new moons and your appointed seasons My soul hates; they are a burden to Me, I am weary to bear them, and when you spread forth your hands, I will hide My eyes from you, yes, when you make many prayers, I will not hear; your hands are full of blood.  Wash and make yourself clean, put away your evil doings before My eyes, cease to do evil, Learn to do well; seek justice, relieve the oppressed, judge the fatherless, plead for the widow.

EASTER/EASTER EGGS

 The word “Easter” is culled from Eastre, the Anglo-Saxon/Teutonic goddess of spring and fertility. A festival was held in her honor every year at the vernal equinox.  Easter Sunday is set on the first Sunday after the full moon after the vernal Equinox on March 21.  On Easter Sunday, it is typical to hunt for eggs, and

Image from www.shutterstock.com

rabbits are symbols that mark the day.  Why is this done?  The Easter Bunny is a rabbit-spirit. Long ago, he was called the “Easter Hare”, hares and rabbits have frequent multiple births so they became a symbol of fertility. The custom of an Easter egg hunt began because children believed that hares laid eggs in the grass. The Romans believed that “All life comes from an egg.” Christians consider eggs to be “the seed of life” and so they are symbolic of the resurrection of Jesus Christ. In one way or another all the customs are a “salute to spring” marking re-birth.  (Source:  Mary Bellis, About.com Guide)

Image from primeross.blogspot.com

Another view on these practices during Holy Week traces them back to pagan celebrations and beliefs. “Ishtar”, which is pronounced “Easter” was a day that commemorated the resurrection of one of their gods that they called “Tammuz”, who was believed to be the only begotten son of the moon-goddess (Semiramis/Ishtar), and the sun-god (Nimrod/Baal).  When Semiramis/Ishtar became queen due to the death of her son Tammuz, she proclaimed a forty day period of time of sorrow each year prior to the anniversary of the death of Tammuz.  During this time, no meat was to be eaten.  Worshippers were to meditate upon the sacred mysteries of Baal and Tammuz, and to make the sign of the “T” in front of their hearts as they worshipped.  They also ate sacred cakes with the marking of a “T” or cross on the top.  Every year, on the first Sunday after the first full moon after the spring equinox, a celebration was made.  It was Ishtar’s Sunday and was celebrated with rabbits and eggs.  Ishtar also proclaimed that because Tammuz was killed by a pig, that a pig must be eaten on that Sunday.  (Source:  David J. Meyer,  Last Trumpet Ministries)

Image from www.redicecreations.com

From these sources,

we can clearly see

that these practices

are not in any way

connected

to worshipping

the ONE, TRUE GOD,

YHWH.

Holy Week? Really?

DVE@S6K