My own christianity doesn't center around the idea of Jesus as God. I'm perfectly content with the idea, even, that the resurrection may be just another metaphor for everlasting life through self-sacrifice and faith in god. Growing up I learned Jesus' message was to love our neighbors, care for the poor, and center our lives around god. This message speaks to the core of my being and it's why I consider myself christian rather than, say, Buddhist or Unitarian. My religion also centers entirely around the notion that the stories the Bible tells (which are metaphors as far as I'm concerned, not literal history) can help us be kind to each other and make the world a more peaceful place.
What then if there really was no Jesus as I've always assumed there was? Can I have faith in a myth? Can the idea of the story sustain me even if there was no human being who was so spiritually connected with God that he believed love and peace were the purpose of life? I'm not sure.
My father-in-law, Joseph Denk, a former Catholic monk who currently teaches a class called "The Bible as Literature" notes, "the greatest of those who either are looking or have looked for the historical Jesus - Rudolph Bultman, Albert Schweitzer, Jesus Seminar in California – all of these have given up on the ability to find the specific person."
I set out to see if these arrogant know-it-all atheists from the newsgroup discussions were right. And it turns out they were. Even among the most Christian of historians, there are no solid claims of first-hand accounts of this man Jesus of Nazareth. Even the Romans who were serious record keepers probably only listed Jesus' crucifixion as just another executed poor carpenter. A handy resource for my few weeks of research was the Frontline series, "From Jesus to Christ." On this site there's a good article from TIKKUN Magazine by Claudia Setzer that summarizes the closest any historian I've found will come to claiming there was, without a doubt, this man name Jesus. In this article, Setzer writes:
"His followers, and even a non-believer like the Jewish historian Josephus, recall Jesus as a healer, exorcist, and miracle worker."But going a bit deeper into the Josephus records I learned that even these are a bit sketchy. My father-in-law had this to say:
"In the first century ce, only one non-Christian source mentions Jesus, a citation from the Jewish historian Josephus. Not a direct proof it refers to him as Brother of James. (A second citation in Josephus is a Christian corruption of Josephus done three centuries later and has to be totally discounted.) No one can be sure that the first citation even refers to the same person that is in the gospels; there were very many Jesus’ in that period and a couple of them were revolutionaries."His comments pretty much sum up what I found all over the Internet, save for some obviously skewed sites from fundamentalist Christians who clearly thought the Bible was real historical proof.
Personally, I don't find this troubling. I also don't find it anything close to proof that the man didn't exist. However, it does cause me to question what matters to me in my faith.
When I consider if Jesus was a real man who taught such important lessons, who washed the feet of the prostitutes and dined with lepers and tax collectors, I realize it really is that message that drives me. In fact, the earliest Christians seem most in tune with how I view christianity. While they did celebrate the death and resurrection of Jesus (Christ) as their reason for being, their communities also centered around equality in societies where hierarchical social structures were the norm.
In my Dad's most recent book, Ritualizing Nature: Renewing Christian Liturgy in a Time of Crisis, he writes about the earliest Christians bringing together the bread and the wine. He writes:
"This was part of 'the work of the people.' But the very poor among those members typically could not afford to bring wine. So they brought water (which, according to cultural mores, was perfectly appropriate). That water they poured into the large, common chalice, mingling it with the wine from the others, so that, in the end, there was then only one offering. All social, political, and cultural distinctions were thereby countermanded and transfigured...Thus, for what Christians today is often merely a routine act of traditional symbolism--biblically rooted, to be sure, but not of major ritual importance--was for those early Christians a profound and revolutionary public acknowledgment of a new kind of egalitarian society and a new kind of hope for the whole world."There are countless examples like this of the earliest Christians authentically living by Christ's example. Christianity got off track, in my relatively uninformed and humble opinion, when it moved beyond the countercultural activism through spiritual connection and adopted hierarchical power structures.
The focus on loving your neighbor as yourself, living as equals, and communing with God was driven away in many of the Christian communities. My father-in-law had this to say about that transformation:
"Too many movements in the first century involving many Jesus’ provide only an indirect contact with a figure (or more than one) we can never reach historically. Taking over the entire Roman Empire by the fourth century meant that the variety of religious activities called Christian coalesced into an institutional church under the heavy hand of the Roman Emperor, Constantine."If we recall, though, the earliest Christians and the messages that people claim came from Jesus of Nazareth, we can find a powerful and inspirational message. Guidance for life.
I'll admit my world was a bit rattled when I confirmed the argumentative atheists were right about the absence of first-hand historical proof of Jesus' existence. I've questioned all sorts of aspects of Christianity, but always assumed there was no doubt that the man lived, taught, and healed. I don't feel any closer to knowing if he was an amalgamation of lots of good ideas or if he was truly a living human being. After these searches, however, I do feel closer to my commitment to the message. Love your neighbor. Help the needy. Care for the Earth. Commune with god. Strive for peace. These messages are why I still consider myself a christian person.
.






5 comments:
I love '...hard core atheist.' It's like, I really, really, REALLY don't believe in God or gods.
I highly recommend some readings from Shelby Spong, Marcus Borg, John Dominick Crossan, and other "Jesus Seminar" folk. They take scholarship, faith, and post-critical naivete, very seriously. The distillation is a more solid grounding in a faith which is not dependent on Biblical literalism or culturally suspect myths.
Ah, fundamentalist atheists. So much fun, they are.
Like your other commenter, I would highly recommend Spong. I think I was reading a lot of him right after R was born.
To be, the question of whether Jesus existed or not is moot. Rather like talking about whether there were really Greek gods. It's a part of our Western heritage. And the fact that a lot of people still believe in a historical Jesus figure (while no one really believes in a historical Zeus) means that we, whatever our faith, have to understand what that means if we're going to live in this world.
I like the ancient Greeks. The Gods are a great big dysfunctional family with Daddy always bird-dogging other women, Mommy always finding out and ruining the womens' lives, all the lesser gods and goddesses constantly sleeping around and making trouble, and nobody can do anything about anything because the Fates sit there spinning away. Also I always wanted to see someone bring in a pair of milk-white bulls and slaughter them and cook up some of it and offer it up, which would be much more entertaining than a sermon.
hm. interesting thought (that Jesus wasn't real), but Jesus did exist in actual time-space history. If we applied the same biased, 'historical' criticism to other historical figures we might have to deny the existence of Alexander the Great, Hannibal and maybe even Socrates.
there are plenty of well-written, scholarly, intellectual (unbiased is impossible in any writing, whether secular or sacred) writings available discussing the very things you mention here.
(Especially the Josephus argument -- the early Christians were too obscure of a minority to be 'fudging' copies of Josephus' work.)
Maybe Jesus was just a lovely man with 'acceptable' teachings for society?
Post a Comment