Now, during the Christmas season, I get a funny feeling that I am living in the wrong era. I feel like I am back in ancient Greece and Rome over 2000 years ago when people held celebrations in honor of various Gods. Some of them believed in the God Mithras and celebrated his birth on December 25. In Rome, during December, they celebrated the life of Saturn in their Saturnalia. They believed in their gods and were devout in their celebrations. They had songs and hymns sung in veneration of their gods. They brought trees into their homes and decorated them just as we do today. Yet today we universally assume that such gods did not exist. Why do we seem to believe that our choice of god exists and theirs didn't?
Richard A. Schweder, in an op-ed column for the New York Times, “Atheists Agonsties,” suggested that the world of the twentieth century was no better than the old world. “The big causes of all the death and destruction had rather little to do with religion.” He says: “A shared conception of the soul, the sacred and transcendental values may be a prerequisite for any viable society.” In other words, we are better off in a world with religion.
There are two problems with his argument. First, religion is the cause of almost every conflict in the world today. Thousands of people are killed every year because Moslems hate Jews, Sunnis hate Shiites, Moslems hate Hindus, Buddhists hate Moslems, Protestants hate Catholics, and so on. Religion is also the cause of most of the intolerance in the world. Gay people in today’s America are being assailed and insulted by shared religious values that our society could do without.
Second, and more important, religion is the worship of God, and there is no such thing as God. God is a figment of the human imagination. Should people go on believing in God even if he does not exist? He is no more real than the thousands of local gods, witches, and ancestor spirits worshipped by primitive tribes in remote areas of the Earth. He is no more real than the Loch Ness Monster, the Yeti, Arabian djinn, Greek satyrs, Hindu bluts, and other assorted demons. He is no more real than Santa Claus or the Easter Bunny.
On September 11, 2001 an event occurred that should choke the faith of every civilized person. The President, the Mayor of New York, the Fire and Police departments, and the American people responded gallantly. But one aspect of that response puzzles me. People turned to God! The churches were packed. The President declared a national day of prayer. Memorial services were conducted by religious leaders in cathedrals and stadiums. Everybody prayed. Why?
If God is real, and if God can be prayed to, and if God answers prayers and acts on our lives, why did he let this happen? Does God favor the Muslim fanatics? Does God reward Muslims who carry out jihad against the infidels by sending them to Paradise? Or is God just a myth we create to give us some comfort in times of stress.
The fact is that there is absolutely no evidence for the existence of God. We can prove the existence of everything else on earth, but we cannot prove that there is a God. Unlike scientific theories, which are subject to verification, we cannot go into a laboratory or an astronomical observatory and conduct an experiment to prove that there is a God. He is conveniently invisible and unavailable.
Many people say you cannot prove the existence of God because there is something higher than mere human knowledge; call it grace, or inspiration, or being "born again." I believe we have to use our rational mind to know anything, and without common sense the rational mind is, well, irrational. It does not make sense to say we "know" that there is a God, but deny that the very faculty of knowing, the rational mind, is what you are using to “know” God.
The fact that we never see God and that God does not seem to answer anybody’s prayers should be taken as strong evidence for his nonexistence. But people want to believe in God so badly that they are willing to do so even when such belief is absurd.
Consider the various ways people worship God. There are many different religions and many different ideas about God. For some reason, most of these religions assume that they are the correct way to God. Which one is right? Are all of them right? Why should we assume that any of them are right? If there were a God, would he reveal himself only to the ancient Israelites, or to Mohammed, or to the Twelve Apostles? What about the beliefs of billions of Hindus, Janes, Buddhists, and Shintos? Have they been wandering blindly while only Christians, Jews, or Moslems have known the truth?
Most faiths presume that God is good and loving. The evidence would seem to the contrary. Is life on earth perfectly happy? No, the majority of people live in poverty, disease, war, famine, and misery. If a god was responsible for this he would have to be some detached, ruthless, amoral demon.
There is no rational, logical, or scientific reason to believe in God. Belief in God can be relegated to the realm of wishful thinking. When humans believe in God they violate every aspect of human consciousness. It is hard for people raised with religion and brainwashed by parents, relatives, and teachers, to critically examine these irrational beliefs. Humans created the concept of God to fill some deep needs.
Biologists and anthropologists believe that there are evolutionary reasons for the development of religion. Religion certainly assists humans in their fear of death. It promises a life after death. This is apparently a life in which we get together with the people we loved during our life on earth. In other words, we remember our life on earth and the people we shared it with. Death is not the absolute end of our existence. Rather, we go to live in happiness with God. It is certainly an inviting idea. The fact that we die to eternal oblivion is quite unappealing. Nevertheless, it is obviously true.We were in a state of nonexistence before we were born, and after death we return to such a state. Any other scenario is silly wishful thinking.
It is dubious indeed to argue that a shared conception of the soul, the sacred, and transcendental values may be a prerequisite for any viable society. The world would be a better place without religion. Atheists are more peaceable, tolerant, and intelligent than those who embrace religion. But more important, in a world where God does not exist, it is a violation of everything that makes us human to go on believing in fairy tales that should have been abandoned long ago.
Monday, December 17, 2007
Thursday, December 6, 2007
Who Was Jesus
As we approaach the feast of Christmas it might be useful to look at what scholars say about Jesus. Was he the "Son of God?" Was he divine? Was he the Messiah? Or was he just a holy man who tried to teach certain ideas about Judaism.
Jesus’ message, that the Kingdom of God is at Hand, was not new. It expressed the common hope of the Jews of his time. His exorcisms were a traditional function of the Pharisees. His use of parables was typical of the Pharisees’ method of teaching. His Sermon on the Mount was strictly in accord with Mosaic Law. His teachings expressed traditional Jewish beliefs. The Lord’s Prayer is derived from the Kaddish prayer of the ancient synagogue. His other teachings and behavior show that he was a devoted Jew who worshipped at the temple, abided by the Jewish Law, and believed that God dwelled in the Temple. He affirmed the widely influential exhortation in Leviticus 19:18, “You shall love your neighbor as yourself.”
The Gospels falsely portray Jesus as one who broke with the rigid and stale, even false, piety of the Pharisees. The Pharisees of Jesus' day were a highly respected sect of Jews. Jesus may have been a Pharisee. He appears to have followed the teachings of the great Pharisee Rabbi, Hillel. Although Jesus may have had disputations with certain Pharisees, they often had disputations among themselves.
Jesus did not found a new church naming himself as the Son of God. He was the leader of a group within Judaism. The few passages in the Bible that support the idea that Jesus wanted to start a new church are not based on anything Jesus said but on ideas that were developed after his death. Jesus wanted to renew Judaism, which already had a Temple, priests, worship, and sacrifices. Jesus believed that the Kingdom of God was at hand, and certainly did not wish to form a church which would last for centuries. To this extent, he was not very different from many other contemporary religious leaders. There were at least twenty-four Jewish sects in Jesus’ day, including the Essenes, the Sadducees, the Pharisees, and others. There were a number of people like Jesus who had small followings and who went about teaching, healing, and casting out devils.
The primary teaching of Jesus was that the "Kingdom of God" was at hand. It was either about to happen or was already present through him. Although Jesus did not explicitly describe what he meant by the “Kingdom of God,” the Jews of his day would have understood him to mean that that the reign of God would be established in Israel and that the kingdom of Israel and the twelve tribes of Israel would be restored. They believed that God would rebuild the temple, and that there would be a period of tribulation followed by a last judgment. It would be, in effect, the end of the world as they knew it. Needless to say, it never happened. If Jesus had been the Son of God, wouldn't you think that he could have predicted such an event?
Leander E. Keck, former Dean of the Yale Divinity School, says: “However universal the appeal of his teachings—at least some of them—the indissoluble fact is that they were addressed to his fellow Jews, a mission that fused teaching, healing and exorcism...it takes shape in a mission so thoroughly Jewish that the gospels report not a single word of criticism of constitutive elements of the religion he inherited and shared, such as the holy days Passover or Day of Atonement.”
It is ironic that Christianity became a Gentile religion in which Gentiles and Jews mutually rejected each other. Jesus never intended his teachings to apply to non-Jews. Jesus did not preach to the Gentiles or tell his disciples to go out and convert the Gentiles. He did just the opposite. He was critical of the Gentiles. In Matthew 10:5-15, Jesus says to his disciples: “Go nowhere among the Gentiles, and enter no town of the Samaritans, but go rather to the lost sheep of the house of Israel.” Jesus made disparaging remarks about the Gentiles (See Matt. 5:47, 6:7, 6:22, 18:7, and Mark 10:42-43). In one case, Jesus implied that Gentiles were dogs (Matt. 15:21-26). In that encounter, a Gentile woman sought to have Jesus heal her demon-possessed daughter. Although he healed the daughter, Jesus said, “I was sent only to the lost sheep of the house of Israel” (Matt. 15:24). Leander E. Keck points out that the gospels do not mentionJesus going to the homes Gentiles to perform healings. There is no record of his ever visiting the cities in Israel where there were heavy populations of Gentiles. Says Keck: “Although Gentiles later were attracted to him through the gospel, he was not attracted to them, nor was he the least interested in attracting them to him.”
Jesus did not refute the Mosaic Law or create a new law. He taught strict adherence to the Jewish Law. In Matthew 5:17-19, Jesus says: “Think not that I have come to abolish the law and the prophets; I have come not to abolish them but to fulfill them. For truly, I say to you, till heaven and earth pass away, not an iota, not a dot, will pass from the law until all is accomplished.”
In the New Testament, Jesus does not proclaim himself the “Son of God” in the divine sense. Although the Gospels, especially the Gospel of John, refer to Jesus as the Son of God in the divine sense, those passages are considered by scholars to be inauthentic later additions to the story of Jesus. In Jesus' day the term "Son of God" applied to all Jewish men and did not mean a divine being. Jesus repeatedly says that he is not equal to God (John 14:28 “…I go to the Father; for the Father is greater than I;” and John 7:16 “My teaching is not mine, but his who sent me.” See also Luke 18:18, Matt. 19:17, Mark 13:32, 14:36, John 5:20, and Acts 2:22-24). Jesus calls himself the “Son of Man” which, scholars agree, meant only a “human being.” Reginald H. Fuller, Professor Emeritus, Verginia Theological Seminary, says: “It is not a title but means ‘human one,’ and is best understood as a self-effacing self-reference.”
Jesus was obviously a charismatic Hasid, or holy man. He probably thought that he was a prophet. When the people of Galilee criticize him he says: “A prophet is not without honor except in his own country and in his own house” (Matthew 13:57, See also Mark 6:4, 8:28, and Luke 7:16, 13:33 ). There are several places in the New Testament where it is indicated that Jesus thought of himself as an Elijah-like prophet.
Saint Peter does not say that Jesus is God, but a man “raised up” by God (Acts 2:22). Reginald H. Fuller explains that when Jesus asks Peter, “who do you say that I am,” and Peter answers “the Christ,” (Mark 8:27-30) “it seems more likely... that Peter meant it in the sense of the anointed prophet of Isaiah 61.1.”
The earliest Christians did not look upon Jesus as a divine person, a “Son of God” in the Greek sense. Some believed that by his death he had been “appointed” the Christ, but not that he was the Christ when he lived. The Gospel of Luke implies that Jesus was raised up or promoted to divine status by God. Reginald H. Fuller explains in The Oxford Companion to the Bible:
The meaning is not that Jesus became
something he was not before, for example,
a divine person; rather, he was appointed to
a new office and function, that of being the
one in whom God would finally judge and
save the world(Acts 3.21; Thess. 1.10) and
through whom he was already offering sal-
vation after Easter in the church’s procla-
mation (Acts 2.38).
It was only later in the history of the Church that Christians began to believe that Jesus was a divine being, a god who had come down to Earth. Neither the suffering of the Messiah, nor his death and resurrection, appear to have been part of the faith of first-century Christians. The idea that Jesus was God seems to have developed over a period of time. It was not until the fourth century AD that the Church officially accepted the doctrine that Jesus was God in human form. At the Council of Nicea in 325 AD the leaders of the Church, encouraged by the emperor Constantine, declared that Jesus was a God, “of one substance with God,” not just a man.
Jesus’ message, that the Kingdom of God is at Hand, was not new. It expressed the common hope of the Jews of his time. His exorcisms were a traditional function of the Pharisees. His use of parables was typical of the Pharisees’ method of teaching. His Sermon on the Mount was strictly in accord with Mosaic Law. His teachings expressed traditional Jewish beliefs. The Lord’s Prayer is derived from the Kaddish prayer of the ancient synagogue. His other teachings and behavior show that he was a devoted Jew who worshipped at the temple, abided by the Jewish Law, and believed that God dwelled in the Temple. He affirmed the widely influential exhortation in Leviticus 19:18, “You shall love your neighbor as yourself.”
The Gospels falsely portray Jesus as one who broke with the rigid and stale, even false, piety of the Pharisees. The Pharisees of Jesus' day were a highly respected sect of Jews. Jesus may have been a Pharisee. He appears to have followed the teachings of the great Pharisee Rabbi, Hillel. Although Jesus may have had disputations with certain Pharisees, they often had disputations among themselves.
Jesus did not found a new church naming himself as the Son of God. He was the leader of a group within Judaism. The few passages in the Bible that support the idea that Jesus wanted to start a new church are not based on anything Jesus said but on ideas that were developed after his death. Jesus wanted to renew Judaism, which already had a Temple, priests, worship, and sacrifices. Jesus believed that the Kingdom of God was at hand, and certainly did not wish to form a church which would last for centuries. To this extent, he was not very different from many other contemporary religious leaders. There were at least twenty-four Jewish sects in Jesus’ day, including the Essenes, the Sadducees, the Pharisees, and others. There were a number of people like Jesus who had small followings and who went about teaching, healing, and casting out devils.
The primary teaching of Jesus was that the "Kingdom of God" was at hand. It was either about to happen or was already present through him. Although Jesus did not explicitly describe what he meant by the “Kingdom of God,” the Jews of his day would have understood him to mean that that the reign of God would be established in Israel and that the kingdom of Israel and the twelve tribes of Israel would be restored. They believed that God would rebuild the temple, and that there would be a period of tribulation followed by a last judgment. It would be, in effect, the end of the world as they knew it. Needless to say, it never happened. If Jesus had been the Son of God, wouldn't you think that he could have predicted such an event?
Leander E. Keck, former Dean of the Yale Divinity School, says: “However universal the appeal of his teachings—at least some of them—the indissoluble fact is that they were addressed to his fellow Jews, a mission that fused teaching, healing and exorcism...it takes shape in a mission so thoroughly Jewish that the gospels report not a single word of criticism of constitutive elements of the religion he inherited and shared, such as the holy days Passover or Day of Atonement.”
It is ironic that Christianity became a Gentile religion in which Gentiles and Jews mutually rejected each other. Jesus never intended his teachings to apply to non-Jews. Jesus did not preach to the Gentiles or tell his disciples to go out and convert the Gentiles. He did just the opposite. He was critical of the Gentiles. In Matthew 10:5-15, Jesus says to his disciples: “Go nowhere among the Gentiles, and enter no town of the Samaritans, but go rather to the lost sheep of the house of Israel.” Jesus made disparaging remarks about the Gentiles (See Matt. 5:47, 6:7, 6:22, 18:7, and Mark 10:42-43). In one case, Jesus implied that Gentiles were dogs (Matt. 15:21-26). In that encounter, a Gentile woman sought to have Jesus heal her demon-possessed daughter. Although he healed the daughter, Jesus said, “I was sent only to the lost sheep of the house of Israel” (Matt. 15:24). Leander E. Keck points out that the gospels do not mentionJesus going to the homes Gentiles to perform healings. There is no record of his ever visiting the cities in Israel where there were heavy populations of Gentiles. Says Keck: “Although Gentiles later were attracted to him through the gospel, he was not attracted to them, nor was he the least interested in attracting them to him.”
Jesus did not refute the Mosaic Law or create a new law. He taught strict adherence to the Jewish Law. In Matthew 5:17-19, Jesus says: “Think not that I have come to abolish the law and the prophets; I have come not to abolish them but to fulfill them. For truly, I say to you, till heaven and earth pass away, not an iota, not a dot, will pass from the law until all is accomplished.”
In the New Testament, Jesus does not proclaim himself the “Son of God” in the divine sense. Although the Gospels, especially the Gospel of John, refer to Jesus as the Son of God in the divine sense, those passages are considered by scholars to be inauthentic later additions to the story of Jesus. In Jesus' day the term "Son of God" applied to all Jewish men and did not mean a divine being. Jesus repeatedly says that he is not equal to God (John 14:28 “…I go to the Father; for the Father is greater than I;” and John 7:16 “My teaching is not mine, but his who sent me.” See also Luke 18:18, Matt. 19:17, Mark 13:32, 14:36, John 5:20, and Acts 2:22-24). Jesus calls himself the “Son of Man” which, scholars agree, meant only a “human being.” Reginald H. Fuller, Professor Emeritus, Verginia Theological Seminary, says: “It is not a title but means ‘human one,’ and is best understood as a self-effacing self-reference.”
Jesus was obviously a charismatic Hasid, or holy man. He probably thought that he was a prophet. When the people of Galilee criticize him he says: “A prophet is not without honor except in his own country and in his own house” (Matthew 13:57, See also Mark 6:4, 8:28, and Luke 7:16, 13:33 ). There are several places in the New Testament where it is indicated that Jesus thought of himself as an Elijah-like prophet.
Saint Peter does not say that Jesus is God, but a man “raised up” by God (Acts 2:22). Reginald H. Fuller explains that when Jesus asks Peter, “who do you say that I am,” and Peter answers “the Christ,” (Mark 8:27-30) “it seems more likely... that Peter meant it in the sense of the anointed prophet of Isaiah 61.1.”
The earliest Christians did not look upon Jesus as a divine person, a “Son of God” in the Greek sense. Some believed that by his death he had been “appointed” the Christ, but not that he was the Christ when he lived. The Gospel of Luke implies that Jesus was raised up or promoted to divine status by God. Reginald H. Fuller explains in The Oxford Companion to the Bible:
The meaning is not that Jesus became
something he was not before, for example,
a divine person; rather, he was appointed to
a new office and function, that of being the
one in whom God would finally judge and
save the world(Acts 3.21; Thess. 1.10) and
through whom he was already offering sal-
vation after Easter in the church’s procla-
mation (Acts 2.38).
It was only later in the history of the Church that Christians began to believe that Jesus was a divine being, a god who had come down to Earth. Neither the suffering of the Messiah, nor his death and resurrection, appear to have been part of the faith of first-century Christians. The idea that Jesus was God seems to have developed over a period of time. It was not until the fourth century AD that the Church officially accepted the doctrine that Jesus was God in human form. At the Council of Nicea in 325 AD the leaders of the Church, encouraged by the emperor Constantine, declared that Jesus was a God, “of one substance with God,” not just a man.
At this time of year when we are surrounded by beautiful decorations and music, it saddens me to realize that all of this is in honor of somebody who never existed. The real Jesus was not God or the Son of God. He did not want to start a new church. He was a Jew. That is all. All of the rest is the embellishment of two thousand years of imaginative fiction.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
