We truly don't read much about inspiration or hope anymore and as Easter 2010 rolls around this weekend it is even less likely that you are going to hear anything positive in the news or even be reminded of what happened nearly 2000 years ago. If you turn on the nightly news on TV you might see a little video clip of the pope giving an Easter Mass in the Vatican. It is all but certain that there will be a Whitehouse Easter Egg hunt with lots of children running on the lawn. So, these things that happened long ago are mostly forgotten. This is a holiday to celebrate Spring, the new life is in nature. It is not about historical events, the historical accuracy or facts. Anti-Jewish sentiment long has influenced history, so even if you are not feeling like Easter is any different this year, I understand. Anything I write here will most likely not make any difference in how or what you believe about Easter, but can you give me a chance? Even if it doesn't work, at least you have ammunition to get into a scholarly argument with some Christian on these talking points. Who knows, you might even talk some sense into them and they will give up this fable called Christianity.
There is a scholarly group who has studies these Easter events extensively. They formed a group called the "Jesus Seminar" and, for lack of a better word, disenfranchised evangelical Christians with their conclusions. Dr. John Crossan is an original member of the Jesus Seminar group and co-chaired it. He has excellent academic credentials and was a professor at DePaul University for 26 years. Basically, his premise is that we have a historical Jesus Christ and a second one, a Jesus hailed as the leader of the Christian religion as we know it today. So, bottom line what are his historical conclusions about the events we know as Easter? I mean only be fair and objective, it is very difficult for me to articulate his position and some of you may "blast" me for trying to do this. Anyway, here we go.
- Jesus of Nazareth actually did exist, but the resurrection is more of an allegory than a historical event.
- The burial story of Jesus is inaccurate; most likely Jesus was buried in a common "ditch" much like the other common criminals executed in his day. Most like his body was eaten by dogs.
- The visit of women to an empty tomb was a fabrication made up by the gospel writer, Mark.
- The disciples never experienced any postmortem appearances of a risen Jesus.
- The disciples never really believed in the literal resurrection of Jesus.
These conclusions for many non-Christians will seem perfectly plausible and will carry much weight because this group, the Jesus Seminar, was based on a consensus of responsible scholarship. So, there you have it. Stripped of all the embellishments of tradition and objectively written and published by professors who know a great deal about history.
If you want to quit here, I completely understand. Maybe you don't want to read a rebuttal or some persuasive argument to the contrary of the five above points. Or maybe, in the interest of being politically correct and because you might know me, you let me have a shot at it. Fair enough, exit now or read on!
Christianity is unique from other world religions for on two key issues about their "religious leader." What are these? It all relates to Jesus of Nazareth's 1) Virgin birth and 2) Resurrected body following his death.
Got it? These 2 facts only. Now there are differences in claims and identity as well. BUT, I am trying to keep things simple.
On fact #1, I guess the real question is was that Jewish peasant girl lying? She said she was a virgin and that she was pregnant. Let me "up" the "spin" of this story, she said an angel had visited her and told her these things. OK, right. You don't believe it. On the surface, I wouldn't either. Yes, there are some other facts on this story like "God sent an angel to Joseph in a dream to verify Mary's story." But, really an entire world religious movement dependent on this young woman's claim that she was a virgin and that this child was conceived by someone other than a human being? I could go off on so many tangents right now, but I won't. Let your imagination run wild if you wish here. Hey, I am with you. Honestly, that single fact alone doesn't convert me to Christianity and I don't expect it will you either.
On fact #2, I don't even know how to write this. It is my sole basis for being a Christian. It is a matter of faith that I accept fact # 2. Yes, and so a lot of you are going to shut me down right there. You might say, "OK it works for you." Great. To be honest, when you say it that really ticks me off. It seems like you have put me in a category of blind, stupid people who somehow believe in fables. Even though on the surface, you won't offend me with saying that out loud. You believe it, don't you. You believe something about me that is false.
What am I trying to say? No, I don't believe in the resurrection simply because I believe, I believe that I believe. Maybe you've been watching too many "Shrek" movies.
Jewish belief in a resurrection at the time of Jesus death was just about as strange a concept as it is today. According to Jewish law, the execution of Jesus proved that he was a heretic. The Messiah, as they knew it, was going to raise the dead at the end of earth MAYBE.
Bottom line, the death of Jesus was proof that the Jewish peasant girl was lying. The historical Jesus, according to Crossan, was really an ordinary man sent by God with an extraordinary message. Dr. Crossan would argue that he also believes in "a resurrection," but not the one most Christians believe in. He sees it as an "equal and important" resurrection, but one that is about the resurrection of new beginnings. He sees Easter as a embellished story of good news for everyone, that we can have a fresh start in life. But, a physical resurrection of a dead body? No.
So, there is NO REASON to my faith in the resurrection. Only a "belief" in a mystical fable that was written many times though the centuries. Thank you Dr. Crossan - that is a message of hope to me personally. I can know that I will die, maybe my friends will have a funeral for me, and what an encouragement that will be in my post-mortem unconscious existence.
Or, do we have a very detailed account of what happened. Was Joseph of Arimathea, a leader in the Jewish Council that convicted Jesus of heresy in the middle of the night, a wealthy man and did he have an unused tomb? What was the social cost of him sending a formal request to Pilate to remove the remains? We still have the clock "ticking" folks. The next day, after a hurried burial, a political theory is emerging. The religious leaders knew his teachings about "rising on the third day" and asked for a Roman Seal to be placed on the tomb. Clock is still ticking, plenty of time to prevent any misunderstanding. What else could be done, they knew the body was going to be stolen by the disciples. After all, none of them were afraid. During the crucifixion didn't you see them marching around Jerusalem with their signs "RELEASE JESUS NOW" ????
Historical credibility in what happened after, you ask? Now if Jesus appeared to the leader of the Jewish Council, the Sanhedrin, maybe you would be convinced. Wasn't that the ultimate most trustworthy person to document a risen Christ? Why not Pilate or Herod? After all, Herod was involved in the legal proceedings and hoped that Jesus would do some magical trick at this house. Pilate, all he had was his wife begging to let him let Jesus go because she had a bad dream that night.
No, again the credibility of this story lies with women. Gender is a common theme in Jewish tradition. If a you have a woman on the witness stand in court, you lost buddy. Women were prone to gossip and lies, they were not valid character references. However you feel about what I just wrote, that is the historical context. So, on Easter morning we have women as the first witnesses.
What about Jesus corpse? Was it possible he was only wounded and revived? After all it was a hurried burial. See my later blog posting on where that premise goes.
Did we have any eye witness appearances? You know, no matter what I write here many of you are going to blow it off. Not that I am being pessimistic, it is just that there is no mound of evidence that is ever going to persuade you to believe in the resurrection. So, don't review the evidence. But, all the disciples were witnesses. MAYBE THAT WERE WILLING TO DIE for an embellished tale told by Jewish women. I don't know, your call on that one. Maybe those names are not enough, or the list of eyewitnesses who were not part of the Jesus inner-twelve. Maybe you find that a member of the Jewish court, Joseph of Arimethea, a likely candidate to ask for the body of the religious leader. Maybe it is the stuff of legend, maybe 500 people didn't see the risen Christ. First-century Palestine skeptic, James (the brother of Christ and the one who tried to get him thrown in the insane asylum) was certainly not a prime candidate to know to about the risen Christ.
Oh my, what do we do with James. His own mother probably didn't talk about the virgin birth thing much while he was growing up. He had no sibling rivalry over his childhood brother, did he?
Why did Jesus specifically tell his disciples, please tell my brother James I am alive.
Jame's mother, the Jewish peasant woman. His mom. Was she lying? Tell me what you think!
No comments:
Post a Comment