The meaning of Jesus (What did Jesus do and teach?)

Wright: The mission and message of Jesus (Chapter 3)

Borg: Jesus before Easter (Chapter 4)

Wright roots Jesus in first century Israel where Jews believe Yahweh was the only God and Jews were that God’s chosen people. Their current situation as vassals of Rome was seen as the result of past sins, which a Messiah would redeem, and by redeeming them restore the kingship of David. Jesus was a prophet who preached that that longed-for restoration of the (literal) kingdom was at hand. Rome would be overthrown and Yahweh would rule the world along with the people that he had chosen. This was a political vision but it was more than just politics in that it was tied up with religion (p. 33) and with a belief that the restoration of the old kingdom would bring the world to an end much as fundamentalists today believe that the second coming will usher in the end of time. This belief that the end of time was at hand is what Wright calls eschatology and he thinks that Jesus believed that the world was coming to an end.

Jesus, says Wright, was preaching that the end of the world was nigh but the way to bring this in was not by yet another revolt like the Maccabean, which had failed miserably. Instead, Jesus called people to become kingdom people. The call to repent was not a call to confession, as we tend to interpret it, but a call to turn away from idea of military revolution and to accept Jesus was of love and forgiveness. Jesus welcome all to his cause, rejected the temple as the center of religion, and challenged his contemporaries to live in such a way that the Kingdom of God would be realized. Jesus warned that if they did not follow his agenda that Israel would suffer terribly.

Wright emphasizes over and again that Jesus was no anti-Jewish. He was not offering a new religion, but calling, like Jeremiah and Isaiah before him, for a renewal of the existing faith. (Does this suggest that Paul, not Jesus, was the founder of Christianity?)  Jesus, says Wright, was focused on keeping kosher, keeping the Sabbath, and honoring the temple, but in each case he challenged people to observe the meaning and not the letter of the law. In particular (p. 43), Jesus’ clash with the money changers in the temple was a direct challenge to Jewish practice at the time. Likewise, the open table that he kept was an offense to those who believed that their holiness laws precluded eating with unclean sinners.

Jesus was not the only person who believed that he was the Messiah around that time. There had been several before him and would be several after him. He was also not unusual in believing that the real battle was not against Rome, but against the evil cosmic powers that led to Rome. As Messiah, and with a full understanding of the implication of the Suffering Servant, Jesus went to the Cross to take upon himself the accumulated sins of Israel that were the cause of its travails, sure that in so doing, history would end and the kingdom would be ushered in.

So was Jesus a failure? If one measures Jesus in purely political terms then the answer is probably yes. Although as Borg points out, just three centuries later the Roman empire had indeed fallen and Jesus was Lord of the known world. But, as Wright points out, Jesus’ death was not purely political, but has to be seen in its wider, cosmic sense. When looked at in this way, Jesus was not a failure (p. 51) but a resounding success. 

After all this dense argumentation involving the understanding at the time of the Messiah and his mission, Borg comes as somewhat of a relief. He distinguishes between Jesus the man and Jesus the Christ – the before-Easter and the after-Easter figures. Focusing on the before-Easter figure, he sees him a a mystic, one who lived close to God, intoxicated by God is a phrase Borg uses somewhere. He was a healer and a great teacher of wisdom. He did not, though, according to Borg see himself as the longed for Messiah. Borg, though, does believe that Jesus actually was the longed for Messiah even though he did not recognize himself as such during his life. In other words Borg and Wright agree completely on who Jesus was even though they disagree on whether Jesus was conscious of his messiahship.

Why might his distinction matter? The question, says Borg, is whether Jesus (the man) was trying to get people to believe in him or whether he was trying to get people to believe in his message.

Part of the reason why Borg is sceptical about Jesus as Messiah is that he does not believe in a God who is “out there,” sitting on a throne above the blue sky who then “sends” his son from out there into the world “down here.” God, for Borg,  is “here and now,” always present, always with us. Jesus, therefore, could not be sent from out there. So, in place of the sent, Borg envisages a man who was acutely aware of this ever present God, a man who lived in the Spirit, in other words what we would term a mystic.

Jesus’ life thus becomes central for Borg because it was during his life that people became aware that God was shining through him. In other words, God was made visible in this world through the life of Jesus. After his death and in the light of the after-death experiences that the disciples and Paul had, the early church struggled for words to describe what they had experienced. Truly, they said, this man must have been the Son of God. There are simply no other words to explain what we experienced. Jesus ability to heal, his wisdom teachings, his willingness to reach out to everyone as typified by the meals that he shared, are for Borg signs of the kingdom of heaven, signs of God demonstrating His nature through Jesus,

Central themes

Both Borg and Wright seem to bring a central theme to their work, which they embroider as they go.

• Wright’s basic theme is that Jesus was a first century Jew whose life and death was determined by the current eschatology. Jesus, for him, is consciously fulfilling Old Testament prophecies as interpreted by the later Jewish books, some of which have found their way into the Apocrypha. He believed, says Wright, that the was acting on behalf of Yahweh and he saw his role as restoring the political kingdom of Israel. As such he believed that he was the Messiah. The Resurrection confirmed his belief in himself.
• Borg’s basic theme is that Jesus, the man, was a mystic, meaning someone who live a life that was filled with the Spirit. Borg believes that after the crucifixion, the disciples including Paul experienced a risen Christ. As the early church pondered on their amazing experience, they began to interpret the life and death of the man Jesus in Old Testament terms. They began to see that he was indeed the Messiah, even though he had not recognized himself as such in his lifetime.

Both Borg and Wright end up at the same place regarding Jesus the Christ, Jesus the risen – both acknowledge him in their own lives as Lord. Both believe that Jesus was engaged in a larger struggle than ensuring personal salvation for each of us. Both believe in a spirit world and see the Cross as a victory won in a battle between good and evil. Where they differ is in how much Jesus the man as opposed to Jesus the Christ knew of his destiny. Both agree that Jesus the Christ is victorious.

The Meaning of Jesus (How do we know about Jesus?)

Borg: Seeing Jesus: Sources, Lenses and Method (Chapter 1)

Wright: Knowing Jesus: Faith and History (Chapter 2)

Borg & Wright begin the book in their own individual ways but by addressing the same question: What does the educated Christian do with the knowledge that we have gained about the Bible in the last half-century. I, like them, grew up believing that the Bible was the Word of God and essentially inerrant. Any conflicts between the gospels were explained away by the blind men touching an elephant story. It was only later in life that I realized that David did not write the Psalms and that Moses did not write the Torah. It was later still that I was to discover just how much of the gospels were created by the Church, years after the death of Jesus, in order to promote a particular theology that the church had developed. This new knowledge has not been easy to fit into my old faith.

Both authors also discuss the challenge to religiont that our current world-view to religion poses. They describe this world view as one that treats the world that we can see as “real” and the world that we cannot see as “unreal.” For the Greeks and most of humanity for thousands of years, heaven was Real, with a capital R, and the earth was an emanation or unreal. Jean can talk about Aristotle’s cave in which the things that we see are merely reflections on the wall from the light that is shining from the Real World outside the cave. I tried, in my talk on modern science, to point out that modern atomic science has shown that what we can see and touch is really, truly “unreal” and that reality, which consists of atoms, is the true reality. But, until we all absorb that into our own world views, we will all continue to treat God as unreal and the trash bin, which we can kick, as reality.

Borg responds to these challenges by distinguishing between Jesus the man and Jesus the Christ, the human and the cosmic. Borg doesn’t particularly care whether the wedding at Cana really happened; he does care greatly about his relationship in the present to God through Christ. Borg makes the good point that by focusing on Jesus the man, “he” disappears from history until he returns whereas by focusing on Christ, that is the risen Jesus, the after-Easter Jesus, we are reminded that he is here and now with us.

Wright is a little harder for me to read but as I understand him he is averse to separating Jesus the man from Jesus the Christ. He sees the one as the Jesus of history and the other as the Jesus of faith. He argues that if we are to proceed we must keep history and faith going hand-in-hand. In the chapters that follow, we will see Wright saying that the historical Jesus can only be understood through the lens of faith and that faith becomes empty if we disconnect it from history.

Since these first chapters are largely academic, they will be potentially difficult to discuss. I suggest – but I  am more than open to persuasion – that we might usefully begin by introducing the book and its authors and by outlining the challenge that they are addressing: modernism and modern biblical scholarship. We might then ask the class where they are on their faith journey when it comes to the Bible. I suspect that many will be where I am – and where our two authors find themselves – not nearly as certain today about whether David slew Goliath as they were when they were younger. The book promises a wonderful voyage through the two faith stories of two remarkable men.

The Meaning of Jesus (Style Issues)

The curriculum committee selected this book (suggested by Bob Coleman) for study throughout the year in hopes of giving the year a uniting thread. The book talks about the great events in the life of Jesus, which we celebrate at the various seasons in the church year such as Christmas and Easter. We have tried, therefore. to pick chapters that will go with the season rather than to study the book sequentially and week-after-week.

The point of selecting the book was NOT so that the class might hear the views of two distinguished theologians, but that the class might have a chance to reflect and discuss their own views. The great value of having a conservative and a liberal scholar, both very dedicated Christians, is that it gives everyone in the class space to air their own views without feeling that they are out of some mainstream. Wright accepts the Virgin birth; Borg does not. Both are good Christians. We, therefore, can feel free to take a position at either end or anywhere inbetween.

The vision that we have for these sessions is that each presenter will take 10 minutes, ideally, and certainly no more than 15 minutes to present the views of their alter ego. The topic will then be opened for discussion, lasting 20 to 30 minutes. I will chair the discussions and will prepare questions for discussion in advance of the lesson in conjunction with those who are presenting. Those questions will be phrased along the lines of “What do YOU think?” or “How do YOU envisage the Ascension?” The purpose, as stated earlier, is not to educate people about the views of Borg and Wright, but to get them to ponder on their own faith.

Once you have started reading your chapter(s), you will soon discover that there is enough material in each chapter for a year’s study and for at least a one hour presentation. We are going to have to be very disciplined in picking up ONE point (or maybe two) to highlight in one’s brief presentation and to form the kernel of the subsequent discussion. Thinking ahead, I could imagine us focusing on a single issue around Christmas such as, “Would it matter to your faith if the nativity scene were discovered to be a myth?” Both Borg and Wright address this in different ways and their thoughts could stimulate a healthy discussion – we hope!

I am hoping that we will all work together to turn this into a coherent, year-long study that will deepen the faith of everyone in the class and enhance everyone’s understanding of the gospel message. These are two marvelous men and I look forward to studying their words together with you and with the class.

Safe blogging

We had a little conversation at our last meeting about setting up a blog. The idea was tabled. I would like to reopen it for discussion since I think Ron and Liz had a good idea that is worth pursuing.

I run — well started to run (!) – a blog through WordPress. It is free. You can find it at

http://mondayfaith.wordpress.com

Among its many nice features is that it enables the administrator (me in this particular case) to assign various levels of responsibility to registered users. This would enable a number of us to be editors, for instance.

To leave a comment, the visitor has to give their name and e-mail address. In addition, WordPress itself searches for spam before posting a comment. As an added check, one is able to make it a moderated site — that means that no comments will appear on the site until one of the editors has cleared it for publication. You can read more about this at:

http://codex.wordpress.org/Comment_Moderation

I really do believe that with this safeguards in place, Ed’s concerns will be fully addressed.

Creation of a site is trivially easy. One name would be vmdallas.wordpress.com If we wanted to register a website like blog.vmdallas.org we could and we could redirect people from that URL to the wordpress URL.

Why not take a look at my own feeble beginnings and let me know if there is any interest in pursuing this idea.

Best to all. Michael