-6-
(The
Gospels as Revelation)
In light of the present day preoccupation with
the Image of Jesus as Savior, Redeemer, and God incarnate; what is the responsible
theologian or clergyman to make of the Gospel accounts in the Bible? How should
these accounts be utilized? And in what manner should they be presented to the
faithful if religion is to be responsible and constructive in the reality of
today's world?
Before we can answer these questions we need
to point out, that many of the existing religious beliefs, and the authority by
which those beliefs are presented, is achieved by what one might consider a
deceit of the followers by a misrepresentation. By this we mean, the gospels
are often-portrayed to the faithful by religious leaders (by omission of facts)
as being written by four men who had associated with and knew Jesus on a
personal level, recording this association at a time very shortly after his
death. Yet, we know, and have known for some time, the gospels that we are so
familiar with in the Bible were written later in Christian literature. In fact,
the writings of Paul, a man who never knew Jesus on a personal level, predate
the gospels we are so familiar with. We also know that the four gospels were
not written by the men who are assigned authorship of those works. These
implications are misleading because people believe that the gospels are in fact
eye witness accounts of the life of Christ and that they are accurate histories
written as witnessed by these eye witness accounts. What is implied to the
faithful is an apostolic account of the life of Jesus by those who knew him at
a personal level - which is simply not the truth.
Any reasonable person knows, that the accounts
of a persons life are going to be significantly
different when written by strangers than by people who knew them. It also makes
a vast difference if the story was written within reasonable time frames, where
people who knew of the person could attest or deny many of the claims. The
gospels, as we know them today, were written anywhere from 40 to 70 years after
Jesus' death. Yet, many Christian churches lay claim to the apostolic authority
of these works, the historical accuracy, and cite the infallibility of these
books in proclaiming Jesus to be God Incarnate. Such becomes a psychological
deceit.
Even when religions do act somewhat
responsible, teaching the truth about the origins of scripture, it is usually
only at an intellectual and in depth level. But even at this level,
justification of the authority of the work is proclaimed in that Divine
intervention gives the gospels the same authority as if they were written by
the hands of the men who have been assigned there authorship. And so from the
pulpits of these churches, the clergymen read Matthew, Mark, Luke and John as
if they were physically written by the hands those men.
And what becomes an even more problematic psychological
deception is the way these books are taught to children, so that by the time a
child comes to understand any scholarly approach to these works, he or she can
only become confused in the foundations of their faiths. More often than not,
Christian education so conditions children to the implied concepts of this
deception that they do not even think about looking at the origins of these
stories. The Bible in general, and the gospels in particular, are portrayed as
the infallible Word of God that is above reproach, the absolute and
unquestioning truth which is completely free of any error. Religious concepts
are fed to the children in Sunday School in such a
manner that they fear to do any questioning for such becomes an attack upon the
integrity of God and a sign of weakness of their personal faith. Religious
leaders are using such tactics in the interpretation of the inspiration from
these books to club the faithful into submission by asserting their own Divine
authority based upon an apostolic authenticity which in reality does not exist.
In reality, because of what one could
construed as an unethical religious practice of omission, masses of the
faithful remain faithful because they believe that the gospels are an accurate
and precise account of Jesus' life, his exact words, and that the teachings in
these books are from the mouth of Jesus himself; despite the fact, that there
are major discrepancies among these stories. The work of archeologists,
Biblical Scholars and historians are often overlooked, or rationalized with
preposterous rhetoric, so the proclamations made in the name of these books can
be declared infallible and historically accurate.
Such ideals often psychologically deter
questions like: How could the author of John know what was said between Pilate
and Jesus when his account was written after the turn of the first century? How
could any disciple know of that conversation, when the gospels themselves say
they all fled the scene? How can we assert that Jesus fulfilled all the prophecies
when such things could have been researched by the authors to make Jesus fit
the bill? Why are there no objective accounts about the man who split time? The
truth and reality is, we have no independent proof or
historical independent evidence that Jesus even existed. To use the accounts of
these books as eye witness testimony and concrete evidence of infallible truth
is not only irresponsible of religion, it is misleading, deceitful, and
completely self-serving! The psychological conditioning keeps people from
asking questions that might pose a problem for those declaring the Word of God,
but they offer no threat to God. In fact, to ask such questions might help us
make a more productive use of these inspirations in our daily lives.
Burton Mack, professor of the New Testament at
the school of Theology at Claremont, and author of the book "WHO WROTE THE
NEW TESTAMENT" explains nicely in his prologue the concept we are working
with here:
... the New Testament is commonly viewed
and treated as a charter document that came into being much like the
Constitution of the
Yet, as is stated, this is an ideal that is
simply not true, as he goes on to explain:
Unfortunately for this view, that is not the way it happened.
Scholars locate the various writings of the New Testament at different times
and places over a period of one hundred and fifty years, from the letters of
Paul in the 50's of the first century, through the writings of the Gospel of
Mark and Matthew in the 70's and 80's, the gospel of John and Luke around the
turn of the second century; and on to the Acts, letters, and other writings
during the first half of the second century, some as late as 140 to 150 CE.
This fact alone INTRODUCES ANOTHER HISTORY OF CHRISTIANITY'S BEGINNING THAT IS
NOT ACKNOWLEDGED BY OR REFLECTED IN THE WRITINGS OF THE NEW TESTAMENT.
(p5, Harper
San Francisco, c1995)
At this point the reader may ask what is the
harm in such sins of omission?
0Well; in the first place, psychologically, a
faith that is built on a false set of information, or dependent upon an
inaccurately placed confidence, is a weak faith subject to fall when tested
with reality - or worse yet, create delusional and ridiculous logic to promote
a false rationalization of one's beliefs.
The second problem has to do with the
doctrines proclaimed in the name of these gospels. If the historical events
such as the Virgin Birth, the Crucifixion, Resurrection and Ascension, did not
actually happen; then, the redemptive interpretations of the Gospels are
questionable to say the least. And by extension, if the redemptive doctrines
are to be correct, the story of Adam and Eve must be factual. If doctrines are
wrong and faith misplaced, these things can actually stand as an obstacle to
our human potential, and even be psychologically damaging. For example,
historically, religion has been responsible for holding science back for years
by both persecuting and deterring the questioning minds that are so necessary
for the advancement of a society. Even today, there are religions which will
strive to discredit science in order to hold onto their literal interpretations
of scripture. On the other side of the coin though, a faith that is lived and
exercised, that is harmonious with the realities we understand, can inspire us
to ask questions, which in turn, can move us as individuals to sore to new
heights. Too often, our religious beliefs are more focused on supernatural
implications, causing us to loose sight of the practical and beneficial
messages these beliefs could have in our society.
It is clear from most independent scholars
today that the death of Jesus was not relevant to the very earliest of Jesus'
followers, at least not in any similar way to the orthodox interpretations of
today. In fact, the reconstructed Gospel of Q and its first layer of writings,
which pre-date any of the later gospels, were only the ethical teachings of
Jesus. The earliest versions of gospels did not even include the prophetic
Jesus which developed over time. (See
What stands out so clearly from so many of
these observations is that the historical Jesus, as near as we could tell, was
much more concerned with our ethical behavior, our treatment of one another,
and our actions in life - these were his keys for our relationship with God.
If one looks to the gospels themselves,
isolated in their content, whether we want to see them as literal truth or
mythology, the same ethical message is demonstrated with no emphasis given to
the worship of Jesus or the redemptive foundations of so many of the Christian
faiths. In fact, when Jesus talked about the final judgement
(Matt 25:31-46) there is no mention of faith, worship, prayer, or redemptive
salvation. He clearly states God judges us on our interactions with one another,
a theme that is consistently and repeatedly stated throughout the New
Testament. How can theology be responsible, when in its efforts to promote
salvation, they ignore the very words from the man that they proclaim is of the
Son of God? It is clear that in these verses in Matthew that Jesus is summing
up the whole basis of any ideal of judgement. Doesn't
it seem that we have lost the priority of that particular concept in so many of
our faiths today?
If Christian theology is to be responsible and
truthful, it must return to the religiously humanistic teachings of the gospels
that appeared to be the priority of Jesus. The complexities of our doctrines
and the rhetoric of our words of faith are often burying the true message and
spirit of the gospel of Jesus.
These four gospels have been preached to the
four corners of the world. Jesus is declared Divine, but the present state of
affairs in so many of our religious structures should have any serious believer
asking questions about the direction and priorities of their faiths. It seems
that so often the messages interpreted by so many claimed representatives of
the gospels are in direct opposition to Jesus' actual gospel messages. Many
churches, for example, pronounce God's judgement and
wrath; Jesus proclaimed we should not pronounce judgement
(Matt 7:1-5 \ Luke 6:37-38 \ John 8:15). Some churches say our salvation rests
in the redemption and our faith in it; but the gospels tell us it rests in our
treatment of one another (Matt 25:31-46 \ Matt 22: 34-40 \ Mark 12:28-34 \ Luke
10:25-37 \ John 13:35). Too many Christian religions have us praying in
elaborate churches and worshipping in public testimony in those churches, when
the gospels encourage us to pray in a secret place and not to make a show of
our faith (Matt 6:1-18). Many theologies instruct us to worship and adore
Jesus, but the Jesus of the gospels proclaimed: "I do not look to men
for honor" (John
Such a list and such reasoning could go on for
pages here. We listen to so many instructors of our faiths who often teach us
that unbelievers, prostitutes, homosexuals, and even humanist are going to be
denied entry into God's kingdom. But the Gospels single out the rich (Matt
These kinds of theological contradictions are
clear. Christian theologies, which claim to be based upon,
Jesus, the God who became incarnate, are forced to use Paul, or Augustine, or
apostolic interpretations more often than Jesus to support their conclusions.
The fact is, the gospels cannot clearly be cited to conclude: that Jesus is a
Divine Incarnation, that Jesus' death atoned for our sins, that faith is more
important than action, or many of our moral conclusions, and a whole hosts of
supernatural declarations and ritualistic rites which are proclaimed to be of
Divine origin.
If the inspiration of God is to serve God and
truly better society, it cannot ignore or mislead the faithful by giving false
impressions. Inspiration must be able to align itself with truth and reality.
If we see Jesus as special (as we can), or as the Christ (which also can be
applied, albeit in a different way than now accepted) we cannot brush off the
importance of his message. We cannot make the message secondary to our
interpretations, or glorify his death while ignoring the example of his life!
It is a lie to cite the gospel as a basis for our faith, and then ignore the
principles of love, compassion, and tolerance which its message so clearly reveals.
This road we walk here does not mean that the
gospels cannot be seen as inspiration by the responsible theologian or
clergyman. But it does force us to take a look at the way we interpret those
inspirations. It also requires approaching these sacred books in light of the
knowledge of how God chose to bring these inspirations to life. And, it forces
us to examine the consequences of our teachings in terms of the psychological
impact they have on individuals - and the effect of those same individuals in the
community as a whole. Any reading of the gospels will clearly demonstrate that
we cannot address the needs of our brothers' soul while neglecting the physical
and psychological necessities of that individual.
In earlier sections about revelation we stated
that revelation needs to give meaning to the reality of our everyday lives.
Rising God's, redemption theologies, and second comings that are literal rather
than symbolic, do not give substantial meaning to the reality we experience
every day. We can't apply them to the workplace, nor do they do much in our
world of business. They are fine to comfort the grieving and ward off our fear
of the unknown, but they offer us fairy tale solutions to the awful problems
that are ever present in the reality of this world. A magical approach to these
things allows us to project our failures and short-comings into the hands of
Jesus. They feed our indifference by making our efforts less important than our
words. And by implication, they place the onus of changing the human heart in
the hands of God; rather than, encouraging us to be responsible before Her. When the message is lost to the word, the inspiration
becomes dead!
If we are to think about it, can we believe
that a God of love ordered our salvation from sin in a blood bath that involved
the crucifixion of His Son? In this ideal, what we are saying is that God
ordained that we slaughter Jesus in order to atone for a minor sin of
disobedience? What Image of God is implied here? And this logic begs the
question: how come we did not return to
Present theologies have us preaching and
spreading a "Word" all over the globe, a gospel which proclaims our
salvation in faith in the blood of a Savior. And, as this global scope of
Christianity reaches around the world - hatred, greed, bigotry, the
exploitation of third world peoples, war, crime, pollution, rape, murder,
persecution, indifference, lack of compassion, and economic injustices run
rampant around the globe - all while masses of people are asserting their
belief and singing praises of God and salvation through redemption! People
starve, while the faithful build grand houses of worship to a man that
proclaimed feeding people should be our first priority. We offer fame, glory,
and luxury to men who proclaim a gospel of a man who said that those who
represent him should be humble, the least among men - give more than they
receive - and offer love and compassion over law and judgement.
Yet these gospels, which are full of the most
wonderful and profound inspiration, do not have to bring about these results.
The words can be used to help us see the presence of God among us, and Her concern for humanity. The wisdom, the psychology, the
advice on how we should live, and the example given by a Divine representation
(actual, or not) are of the most profound of inspirations that can grace our
human eyes. Even in our modern world, if the principles of Jesus were applied
to the everyday realities by large segments of the population, our world would
be glorious. Imagine a world, where people put other people first, where
compassion was the rule rather than the exception, where trust and truth took
true precedence, where love takes the priority over money, where hypocrisy and
deceit are seen as true evils, where we are ever vigilant about our own actions
instead of always seeing others faults!
Yes, we can assume that Christianity is
correct in its recognition that Jesus is the messiah or savior. The problem is
not really one of whether or not Jesus was a savior; but it is in the
interpretation of just how he saves us. Is that salvation in a profession of
words of faith? Is it in the crucifixion on
We have divided Christianity by arguing over
the theological assumptions of these great works, and in doing so we have lost
much of the greater message contained therein. God/men seated upon thrones are
a product of Greek mythology and do offer inspirational concepts. But love of
our neighbor is the primary message of the Gospel! Too many faiths are
promoting God's wrath and judgement, while the "Word"
from which they claim authority preached forgiveness and mercy even at the
hands of his own executioners.
The first question a responsible theologian
must ask him, or herself, is: how can the world
proclaim the gospel and Jesus as the Son of the Living God and seemingly ignore
so much of the message that is claimed to be of him? Jesus says it so nicely
himself:
Why do you keep calling me 'Lord, Lord" , and never do what I tell you?
(Luke 6:46)
Religion needs to rethink many of their
positions and work to present the gospels as an inspirational guide to help us in
our ethical thinking so that the meaning of the "Word" becomes
more important than the knowing of the words. Religion needs to emphasize the
message of Jesus of the gospels more than self serving doctrinal creeds. It
needs to bring the concept of Christ (as messiah) into the human heart, so that
the risen Christ of the gospels can live in the reality of human actions in the
everyday lives of people. Churches need to use the gospels to act as guideposts
which direct their own efforts in society; as opposed to, using them to sell
salvation to the faithful. THEOLOGY SHOULD BE USING THESE WORKS TO HELP PEOPLE
EXPRESS THEIR LOVE OF GOD, RATHER THAN, LOOKING TO GOD FOR WHAT HE HAS TO OFFER
PEOPLE. After all, God has already given us life, what right
have we to expect more?
We will go into a more in depth analysis of
the gospels, and more practical applications, when we deal with Jesus later in
this text. For now we are going to deal with the way to approach the gospels as
the key to a responsible theology.
As already stated, the gospels need to be
approached with acknowledgment of their origins. In doing so, we cannot see
them as accurate historical accounts, or as Divine literal events. We need to
see that Jesus was of such character that God built his inspiration around the
life of the individual. The historical, or literal, content of the gospels (as
with any inspiration) bears little or no importance in understanding their
relevance and timeless messages. When we look at the gospels as 'inspiration'
rather than the literal story of God as man, they can take on a symbolic ideal;
thus, the apostolic authority, historical accuracy, and profound theological
arguments over the nature of Jesus cease to be a dividing factor. What then
becomes the focus is what Jesus had to say, and the example he gave to live
according to that advice, which is the only responsible approach to this
inspiration.
If we view the gospels for the messages and
ethics contained therein, instead of combing them to find support for
supernatural and magical doctrines, they suddenly take on a new dimension:
offering us sound psychological advice for today's world, encouraging us to be
more loving and compassionate, and clearly revealing our personal
responsibility for the needs of others according to our means.
If we take just one story here, the first
Christmas story, we can briefly illustrate our point. We can argue about the
angels and their reality, the Divinity of Jesus. We can focus our attention on
whether or not King Herod existed, or how the seed of God got into Mary, or how
a woman could have a baby without a man - or, we can transcend all that and see
the beauty of the story for what it is. We can apply its message in the world
today.
We can choose to see that this tale is about
love, brotherhood and the meaning of life. That from the moment we come into
this world we are in danger and that God is aware of it, expressing his concern
in the form of guidance (symbolized in Joseph's warning in the dream). This
opening story tells us that God helps to protect us, but it also shows WE MUST
LISTEN and act upon the advice. It reveals to us that the upcoming story of the
gospel is about God's major concern for humanity, which is, brotherhood and
peace for all mankind.
The nativity also serves to raise the dignity
of womanhood, showing us there is no hope for mankind except through the love
and devotion that a mother expresses for her child, accepting that child, not
really knowing what it will become. Through Mary, we are reminded that the
"Word" of God can very much come from the love of a woman.
Its a tale about giving and looking out for our lesser
friends, even when we are well off (the three kings), for God chose to
represent Herself in the poor child lying among animals in a manger. It tells
us that the highest glory to God that mankind can give is peace and love in our
ranks. It's about the innocence, beauty and wonders of birth and God's Image in
that simplistic symbol.
These are the things that make Christmas such
an appealing time of the year, reaching a point where very often, even those
who do not believe can feel the true magic of what it stands for. The
theologian should see, if they are to be responsible,
that God's Image in the new born babe is a metaphor for how simple our
relationship with God can, and should, be. Our hearts need to open to God just
as they do to that child, and in that manner we can be reborn in Him,
expressing such rebirth in our treatment of one another.
When the simplistic and understandable
messages of the gospels are the emphasis, we remove the fuel for religious
bigotry, division, and mistrust that has plagued and divided Christianity since
its birth. Few loving individuals could argue about the ideals expressed in the
gospels; whereas, there can be many arguments over the nature and intent of any
literal interpretation.
Every story in the gospels has a moral point
that could help us evaluate our own actions. Individuals need to be encouraged
to look for those morals instead of being made dependent upon theological
interpretations that often serve the interest of the Church over the interest
of Almighty God.
When one examines the gospels for their
symbolic meanings, it becomes easy to see how they can serve as a simplified
manual that conveys the ideals of so many of the universal myths. Christ is
truly the light of the world, but we must look at the lamp in its pure form
rather than viewing it through the coverings of doctrines that have been placed
over it. We can proclaim any word of faith, worship and sing our songs of
praise, and it does little to make the world a better place. But if we lived
our lives in emulation of the man called Jesus, according to our personal state
and means to do so, we would soon see a vastly different world.
If any message stands out in the gospels, it
is that any final judgement rests in our treatment of
one another in the living of this life. We are told that we will be judged
according to the way we judge others. We are told that what we do to each other
is what we do to God. And, it is proclaimed we will reap what we sow. If we are
interested in eternal life at all, the words of Jesus as recorded in the
gospels tell us that we need not worry so long as our human relationships are
honorable, loving, and compassionate. What we do to one another is what we do
to God, and what we do to each other is what God will render upon us is the
essential key to the salvation Jesus came to deliver. What we believe about
Jesus is only relevant in how it helps us achieve that goal.
The gospels of Jesus Christ can be summed up
in his one glorious command; that is, TO LOVE ONE ANOTHER AS HE LOVED US. It is
a simple command that the average human can understand much more than a
complicated and gruesome blood sacrifice which is rooted in a complex theology
that even the most brilliant of theologians cannot agree upon. The message of
God as delivered in the inspiration given in the gospel of Jesus is not
complicated and was never meant to be. Jesus' kingdom of God is not a complex
church, it is the kingdom of responsible love which the pages of the gospels
proclaim so loudly. This needs to be the central focus of a responsible
religion which can enhance our world in the 21st Century. A responsible
theology will keep its focus in the simplicity of the infant Jesus, for that is
the true basis for a human relationship with the Divine.
NEXT CHAPTER-7-Personal Revelation
Please Email us with your thoughts and questions.
Express your opinion on our Message Board
Sign our Guest Book