Charles Victor on Religion

Part 7—The Evangelists

Before considering the works of the four evangelists, it needs to be noted that the gospels (and Acts) are not histories, but catechetical-theological tracts meant for teaching and preaching. Some opine they were written to supplement the synagogue lectionary, allowing a distinctly Christian aspect to the gatherings for prayer and fellowship the early Christians would enjoy after the synagogue service. Second, while in some way under the pen of Mark, Matthew, Luke, John, the gospels we have today each developed over a period of twenty to thirty years. Thus, Mark reaches its final edition in the mid-60s, Matthew and Luke in the 70s, and John in the 90s. The various editings reveal the changing relationship betwixt the specific audience of the gospel and the Jewish community and synagogue. While there was certainly factional discord and disagreement between the early followers of Jesus as Messiah and others in the synagogue, and the tensions between them fluctuated from time to time, place to place, after 70AD and the destruction of the Temple there arises a steady push to oust the Christians. 70AD fosters an understandably conservative tincture in Judaism. By the 80s there is introduced into the daily synagogue prayers a curse on heretics aimed directly at the Christians. The Christian had either to curse himself before God, or remain silent and reveal himself at odds with his extended faith community. By the 90s formal condemnations and excommunications are introduced. We have a half century of internecine tensions, denunciations, persecutions, and finally expulsions. They that held themselves to be among the Chosen were understandably hurt, offended, bewildered. Their writings betray the evolving antagonisms and anger. Continue reading →

Part 6—Paul and the God-fearers

Paul began as a Jewish Pharisee erethismic to end the heresy being proffered by Jesus’ disciples. He underwent a conversion and began to fervently preach that which once he sought to extirpate. As a pious Jew he worked to enlighten his fellow Jews, and when he failed to gain traction in that effort, turned to the “God-fearers” and the gentiles in general. In his epistle to the Romans, written in the late 50s, he recounts his frustrations, observations, beliefs and hopes regarding Judaism and its rejection of Jesus as Messiah. While dolefully not discounting the freedom of the individual, he surveys the situation from heaven’s view, and sees in it God’s plan. By allowing Judaism in general to reject faith in Jesus, to find him and his cross a “stumbling block” and “scandal”, God has given impetus to the preaching of the gospel to the nations. Paul will not derogate Judaism, for it is the root from which Jesus springs, and while Christianity may need to be, for the moment, grafted onto another stock, God will not abandon his covenant with Israel, and ultimately, God’s indefectible way will provide for the inclusion of all into the fold of Christ. In the consideration of his gentile audience, Paul was forced to revisit the role of the Law in Judaism and its relationship with Jesus. He comes to see the Law as an accusatory mechanism given to school the Jews in the ways of righteous living. Its per se validity expires with the grace, the maturity of having it spiritualized, inscribed in the heart. Religion ceases to be a life by the rule book and is now, through faith in Jesus, a life lived in the spirit of Christ. Thus, he ejects as necessities all the external trappings of his former way. They who would find in Paul any support for anti-Semitic action or attitude have not read him well. Paul understands himself to his dying day to be a faithful Jew following after the Messiah of the Jews, the Christ of all the world. Continue reading →

Part 5–Jesus

Jesus enjoys a sparkling reputation in the modern West. Images of the good shepherd abound. Even troubled times in ages past whose sense of woe produced a plethora of images depicting the great and fearsome judge worked to ameliorate that image with one of the merciful Lord. There are, relative to the number of works, very few depictions of a judgemental or angry Jesus, the chasing of the money exchangers from the Temple being the most popular. In our day of social justice, eco-justice, and liberation theology, Jesus is muchly portrayed as the brave and good soul opening the door to or leading the charge for the welfare of the downtrodden and undefended. But if we were to transport Jesus from the first century to the present, and “set him loose” upon the world, how would we react, how would his churches react? Dostoyevsky attempted to examine that with his Grand Inquisitor, and Jesus fared not well. I think that were Jesus here today, he would still be dragged before the courts, both of church and state, and while that would not in the Western world end in his execution, it would lead to his excommunication, his being silenced, fined, and possibly imprisoned. The powers that be would not take kindly to being challenged by his free spirit. They that hold to the letter of the law—in any form—would not be well disposed to one who went always to the heart of the matter, the heart of the individual. Jesus is the eternal radical in the prime sense of the term. He seizes the issue by the root; he confronts the person at the core. That agility for intimacy is threatening, institutionally, personally. He might do well as a pastor of a small flock; he would never become a bishop or prime minister. Continue reading →

Part 4—Power groups within Judaism in the time of Jesus

Some note must be made of the power groups that emerge in the few generations before Jesus (specifically: priests, Sanhedrin, scribes, Pharisees, Sadducees, zealots, Essenes). These each had their distinctive political and theological views. Their relationship with one another was not always cordial. At times it was viciously belligerent. If one had the power, persecution and execution of the opposition were not unattainable. There are here a volatility and hostility not unlike that we find in Europe during the early years of the Reformation period. We do well to keep in mind that the constituents of these groups deserve to be considered sincere and honest about their beliefs, their assessments of their socio-political situation, and their proposed plans of action. Then as today, the left may have thought the right to be compassionless and close-minded, the right may have considered the left to be starry-eyed idealists without any grasp of the hard and cold realities of the situation, and the middle may have considered both left and right to be extremists. Human nature functions rather consistently below the surface of changing historical situations and idioms. Continue reading →

Part 3—Ten items of note regarding Jewish history

Israel–First, while Israel was the name of the northern kingdom, after its fall, the name is appropriated by the south as the indicative of its faith and race. The name Israel has an uncertain and muchly debated history. It is first found as a name given Jacob, the father of the twelve sons who are the eponyms of the twelve tribes. It was given him after a rowdy encounter with an angel and has been interpreted as meaning something akin to “Let El (God) rule”.  Continue reading →