Post 16 - Biblical Scholarship New Testament

The historical Jesus that John Dominic Crossan presents a Jewish peasant who was more historically accurate than the picture painted by most Christians. Jesus was a real man, who lived in Israel during the time of Roman Occupation and brought a message of healing and compassion to people like himself, peasants from local villages and settlements. The historical Jesus was a social revolutionary telling those he healed to go forth and heal with others. The message preached by the historical Jesus included the disregard for class or gender or any other distinction. Unlike the Jewish society in which he lived, Jesus wasn’t preoccupied with these distinctions. This is evident in his willingness to visit the home of even a fallen woman. The reading states that Jesus was creating a grass roots movement based off “religious and economic egalitarianism.”

I do not think the historical Jesus presented by Crossan should at all affect ones religious view. The New Testament is a story about a man who cared more about others than himself, and who taught one to be kind, compassionate and to love one’s neighbor and enemy. I don’t see this as much different than the historical Jesus.  Perhaps Christians take issue with the concept that Jesus was simply a man who taught and spread goodwill and not a divine incarnation of God? In my opinion, Crossan doesn’t deny Jesus as part of the trinity of God, but instead seeks to verify and record who the real Jesus was in accordance with ancient culture and customs, along with verifiable evidence and scholarly accounts. If a religion is true, how can the truth harm or destroy people’s faith? I believe that if one takes into account the fact that the religious scriptures of Christianity have been modified over the years by human beings, we can understand how Jesus grew from a Jewish peasant into a divine being sent to save the world.

I like the historical Jesus. I feel that I can relate more to a historical person than a being of divine legend. Looking at Jesus and Christianity from a historical perspective actually increases my appreciation for the religion and for their core values. If Jesus was a poor, illiterate peasant who taught others to give freely, to be kind and to love everyone isn’t that more remarkable than a being sent here specifically for that purpose? Isn’t more admirable for a man to have these thoughts of social and economic equality, and to live his deeds and teachings each and every day? I am more impressed by Jesus’ wisdom and compassion when looking at him as man who faced sorrow and temptation just like an ordinary person. The historical Jesus makes his message far more accessible to people of all cultures and religious belief.

                                                         

Post 15 - Biblical scholarship of the Old Testament

Biblical scholarship is a field of study that seeks to find historical and archaeological proof of the claims and events of the bible. Biblical scholarship looks beyond theological evidence and belief and searches for the truth in a real, verifiable and scholarly way. While traditional biblical scholarship seems to have attempted to fit facts into an already preconceived framework, modern biblical scholarship is more focused on the actual evidence and proof. Modern biblical scholarship is very similar to a “higher criticism” German biblical school of thought that relied solely on linguistic and textual evidence of biblical accounts. Biblical scholarship goes further than this by including physical evidence from archaeological digs which include pottery shards, writings, ruins of cities and settlement as well as other historical records.

I think this type of research is important because so many people assume the Bible is a historically accurate book that accurately depicts the events and culture of the early Jewish culture. Millions of people around the world are of an Abrahamic faith that takes the Old Testament as truth, yet Biblical Scholarship is beginning to show that while some events did take place, other events are an amalgamation of various local myths or an embellishment upon a less grand history. In addition, some of the figures of the bible, such as David and Solomon have very little factual evidence to support their existence. This is not to say they didn’t exist, but there is very little scholarly proof to confirm their existence. Take for instance the example of King David and his successor, King Solomon. Despite the biblical claims that David created a relatively large, militaristic empire there is very little archaeological evidence to prove this. Along with the physical remains that would have been left behind to prove this civilization, there is very little mention of the Davidic Empire in other countries records and histories.

I find Biblical Scholarship to be fascinating. While the bible was not created as a historical book, it still contains the mythology and stories of a unique culture of monotheism. What I really find fascinating is the idea that some of the stories were created after the fact to emphasize the power and authority of Jewish Priests, and to create a sort of national pride for the Jewish people. Biblical scholarship, even if it disproves some of the claims of the bible, gives a much richer history to the adherents of the Jewish or Christian religion or even to the people that identify with these cultures.  Regardless if King David was a great king or a tribal chieftain, his legacy and history is intertwined with three of the largest religions in the world.  I also think biblical scholarship almost gives more meaning to the Abrahamic religions because instead of simply being claims based on faith we can find out who truly lived during ancient times and the kind of people they were. When one approaches Biblical Scholarship it should simply be from a scholarly point of view, instead of a theological one. With that we can understand the truth of these historical events and give more weight to the ideas and culture of the bible. The bible has been edited, censored and modified throughout time, so perhaps at one time these ancient writings were more accurate in their time frames and references but with archaeology and biblical scholarship we can begin to uncover this worlds long and varied past. 

Post 14 - Denominations

I was brought up in a Christian/roman catholic environment but my parents were not particularly concerned with imparting religious belief in me. My grandmother is an observant Catholic and I have attended church with her many times in my life, as well as many other types of churches.  All the lessons about Christianity and its assorted denominations has been very interesting to learn textually but my personal experiences add an extra dimension to the understanding of the Christian church. For example, the Lutheran Church has many different branches. I attended the WELS branch of Lutheranism with a good friend of mine; the Wisconsin Evangelical Lutheran Church originated in Wisconsin and is actually expanding to many other states. This particular branch trains their ministers, and sends them to other states to start their own churches. I’ve also attended a Baptist church, Catholic Church,  Presbyterian church (The United Church of Christ), a Methodist church and a number of Protestant churches.  My husband was raised in the Mormon Church and we were actually married by a bishop of that faith. Mormonism is perhaps the religion that I am most knowledgeable in thanks to my extended family, but due to the relative newness of this particular religion I am sure it would be considered a cult, or new religion. During the 1800’s Mormonism was founded by a man named Joseph Smith who basically found, or created, a history of Jesus on the American continent. I have heard from some people that Mormons are not Christians because of their belief in the additional testament of Jesus Christ and I have heard from others it is a Christian church because of their belief in Jesus Christ as the son of God. It is a religion focused on the eternal afterlife with an emphasis on family and living morally.

Despite my extensive history with Christianity, I am not a Christian.  I do not believe in a personal God and I do not know if Jesus Christ was a deity or just a spiritual teacher. I am an agnostic because how can one truly know what is out there? All we have is subjective experiences with conflicting evidence. I also have trouble identifying with Christianity because of the numerous social and political issues in regards to sexuality, women’s rights, inclusiveness and often the belief that there is only one way to salvation. I have difficulty believing in such a large world that a great deity would only have a plan for a specific group of people. The Church I found most inclusive and in line with my personal beliefs was the United Church of Christ. This particular church of the Presbyterian denomination has advocated for the LBGT community and for women’s reproductive choice. They believe that God loves everyone, regardless of their sexuality. The UCC also supports reproductive choice and safe access to birth control and abortion. These are two issues that are very important to me, and the UCC’s advocacy is certainly an attractive point for me.  From the reading, I was also interested in the Society of Religious Friends for their interesting worship services of simply waiting for the holy ghost to move them and for their aversion to violence.

Learning about the history and development of Christianity has certainly been very interesting.  Christianity started out as a religion of social change and inclusion and each time it has strayed from that ideal, there have been new movements in an attempt to reach back to what its adherents consider the true teachings. I also understand the draw of Christianity to people throughout the ages. It has offered guidelines for living, comfort and hope to its followers in trying times. The Christian Church has also become a powerful entity in many peoples lives, becoming more than a religion but a way a life. 

Post 13 - Christian History

Do you believe the story of Jesus is true? Based off your reading and film, why or why not? Are your opinions scholarly or theological/personal? 

I personally believe that there was a historical Jesus who was a Jewish teacher. I base this belief off of the scriptures of Christianity and Islam. Some of the stories of his life do seem to correspond to actual historical events and records, like the census taken by the Romans. Even the star that was shining above his birth seems to possibly have been an actual event.  I do not know how much of his story is truth and how much it is religious syncretism or straight out fabrication. The film "Did Jesus Die on Cross" suggested that while we perceive the gospels as historical biographies, they were not actually so. The gospels are religious holy texts designed to illustrate the meaning and importance of Jesus not to provide historical evidence. The writers of the gospels were more concerned with the theological importance of Jesus and the cult of Christianity than with being extremely factual and investigative. It is also difficult to accept the gospels as historical evidence because these gospels were not written until 14 - 100 years after the death of Jesus and were originally anonymous gospels without a known author. Although this anonymity may be due to the persecution faced by early Christians, when one is evaluating a religion from a scholarly point of view this timeline is important.

In addition to pointing out the motives of the gospels as well as the frame of time they were written in, it is also important to note the inconsistencies that exist from gospel to gospel. Some of the details are relatively minute, like how many people Jesus fed with the fish and loaves to even the hour of which he died. If the story of Jesus was a true historical event, and if the gospels were historical biographies, why would these inconsistencies exist? To me it may stand to reason that the writers may have embellished their stories and ideas. My personal belief is that Jesus was a man who became deified, much like the Buddha (who was simply a man who became enlightened) somehow becomes a deity like figure in certain forms of Buddhism. Having a deity at the center of one's religion may inspire more converts than a wise teacher.

My views are based off scholarly inquiry. I cannot say for certain what happened because I was not there and because I have not read much historical evidence to support the claims the gospel makes. I do believe he existed and I do believe he was an important teacher and figure in the Palestine area. According to Wikipedia  most scholars agree that Jesus existed, that he was baptized by John the Baptist and that he was crucified by the Romans when he was in his 30's. I don't deny the life or divinity of Jesus because I can simply don't know. I have no personal or theological views that would sway me in either direction. Regardless of my personal beliefs, the figure of Jesus is an important theological and historical figure. His life, death and Resurrection have created the largest religion in the world. This religion has waged wars and helped others all in the name of God.

One final interesting point from the film is how Jesus' teachings appear to have a Buddhist influence, such as the meek inheriting the earth and how a rich man cannot get to heaven. Could Jesus simply have been an enlightened being, a Buddha? It is very interesting to see these two philosophies compared.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Historicity_of_Jesus

Post 12 - Gnosticism

I appreciate Gnosticism approach to God and other theological problems; in fact the gnostic ideas of God make more sense to me than the traditional Judeo-Christian views. Gnostics view the God of the bible as a demon, a vengeful, petty creator. He is not the transcendent God that we are looking for, but rather a distraction. This demonic god, a lower deity than the true god, only seeks to keep us in ignorance and suffering. In the film, it was mentioned that we can discern the nature of the creator god by simply looking at his creation, our world. It is full of pain, hate and suffering. The reading even mentions that we are created out of hate, which is why some more ascetic Gnostic sects refuse to marry and procreate. They viewed having children as entrapping “a seed of light into an evil creation.” I have heard this particular view from many different people in my life about why they choose refrain from having children. It is interesting that some Gnostic sects favored this approach, while others took sexual liberties and some took the middle way.

Not only does Gnosticism take the traditional biblical god and reinterpret it, but it also reinterprets the story of Adam and Eve. I do find this fascinating. Gnostics take  a story about the humanities fall from grace and the inherent wickedness of women, and turns it into a positive story. In the Gnostic version, Adam and Eve are in the Garden of Eden and told not to eat the forbidden fruit from the tree of knowledge. However, the god who tells them this is not a good, just god. This god wants to keep humanity in a prison of ignorance. The serpent that convinces Eve to eat the forbidden fruit is a positive figure in this story. The reading mentions that the serpent is acting through the agency of the mother, wisdom or Sophia, and when Adam and Eve partake in the fruit they become superior beings, realizing their divine nature. I love this take on the traditional story, because instead of original sin being a fall from grace based off a women’s action, the original sin is forgetting our inner nature and focusing on worldly things. Indeed, it is a woman who helps us understand our divine nature. Within the story of Adam and Eve is the story of Seth, Adam’s son. Adam imparts on him secrets of a spiritual nature and Seth incarnates as the “great illuminator” or a Christ figure.

Jesus Christ is presented more of a teacher that has become enlightened, like Buddha or a Sant, than a holy being. Jesus is sent into the world to teach the secret ways, to call the souls back to the divine and lead them out of the cycle of reincarnation and entrapment by the jealous god. Jesus comes from the true god, a transcendent, indescribable God who appears to more of a cosmic force than a being. He imparts wisdom onto those who are ready for it. The Gnostic tradition is a very interesting topic because it takes familiar material and transforms it into something very much like the Indian mystic tradition, with a focus on the inner self and the outer world being an illusion. 

Post 11 - Judaism

Many Jewish people feel they have the right to the land of Israel because it is their ancient homeland, taken from my conquest and invasion from several different civilizations including the Babylonians, Assyrians and Romans. Israel is the site for the Jewish people’s important religious sites and temples and part of their cultural heritage. After the horrors of the Holocaust, the need for a Jewish state became much more important to the Jewish people. However, their biblical homeland had already been occupied by Palestinian-Arab farmers for centuries prior. Originally Palestinian and Jewish people were able to coexist fairly peacefully when the Jewish community began a large land grab problems began to arise. I do not agree with the resettlement of the Jewish people in Israel. I do not agree with a people reclaiming land that has not been theirs for centuries at the cost of the local people. I do not agree with removing Palestinians from their homes and land, and then blaming the Palestinian’s for not agreeing to a prior settlement. Can you imagine the outrage if Native American’s demanded their lands back after centuries of American control? No one would stand for it. Native American’s are given reservations, a small area of land considering their traditions, not whole countries. To add to the frustration of the settlement and creation of Israel, most of the Jewish people are not ethnically Arab/middle eastern. There are two types of Jewish people, Ashkenazi and Sephardi. Most Jewish people in Israel are Ashkenazi, of European descent, and a minority Sephardi, of Arabic, Spanish or Portuguese descent. A different source I once read, I believe Wikipedia, said that the majority Ashkenazi Jews even discriminate against the Sephardi Jews. How a people can that only has biblical and ancient ties to a geographic region, not even ethnic ties, claim a land as theirs?

The Palestinian people feel they have a right to the land of Israel because they have lived on and worked the land for centuries. Palestine was not a complex civilization, but it was a land of self-sustaining villages and people. Palestinians idealize the life they were once able to live, but considering their current harsh reality, who can blame them?  Religious Jewish people have lived alongside the Palestinians for a long time without problem. The region of Israel was their home and suddenly with the Zionist movement they lost everything they once knew and became refugees in their own land? I understand that after the Holocaust the Jewish people wanted safety and their own home after centuries of Diaspora, but I cannot understand why they would force other people out.

I do not think Israel has lived up to its moral obligations to the Palestinian people. I think they have failed miserably in this regard. Not only do they take the lands and homes of Palestinians for Jewish resettlement, they forced the Palestinian people into small areas taking away their religious and civil rights. I once watched a documentary about the building of the wall between the Gaza strip and Israel, how the wall divides towns and villages were Jews and Palestinians once coexisted. I watched families torn apart, forced to carry travel paper and deal with soldiers on a daily basis. In this documentary, even a retirement home was cut off from the rest of the community by this wall! Even YouTube videos of attacks on the Gaza Strip are horrifying. Once I saw Israeli soldiers use white phosphorus, a blinding and burning substance, to quell a protest at a local school. I know that Palestinians also commit terrible acts of violence with Israel and that is not justified either. I don’t think any of the violence committed by either side is justified.

I don’t necessarily know what the solution for peace is. Both people want to be able to live in safety in their homeland, to live, work and raise their families. There is no wrong or shame in that desire. I would hope that the peoples would be able to set aside their claims and differences and work for the betterment of everyone. Instead of an Islamic Palestine or Jewish Israel why couldn’t there be a secular government meant to ensure the rights and safety of all; a government that was elected by all the people to promote prosperity and co-existence? Violence is solving nothing; aggressive encroachment still from Israel is not solving the problem. Only when both sides care more about the children and families than political and religious ideology can there be peace. This isn’t a very descriptive solution, but it’s the only place I know we need to start. 

Post 10 - Sufism

Sufi mystics and eastern mystics have a lot of similarities in both their philosophy and their practices. Both types of mystics are focused on spirituality and the inner self instead of the outside world. Sufis are particularly interested in their inner character in relation to God and Islam. Sufism also bears a resemblance to the ascetic lives of eastern mystics. Sufis eschew worldly things like wealth, prestige, finery to focus on the worship of Allah alone. Another practice of Sufism that is similar to eastern mystics is the use of teachers or Tariqas. Sufis believe it is imperative to learn Islamic Knowledge from teachers and not just the book alone.  Eastern mysticism relies on Gurus, or teachers, to show adherents the path to moksha. While Sufism doesn’t have the same value incentives as eastern mysticism, the focus on spirituality, the inner self, an ascetic life and the use of teachers bears a very strong semblance to eastern mysticism. It would appear on the outside that Sufis also seek an altered state of consciousness, much like an eastern mystic trance state, when the love of God is described as being inwardly drunk. I would attribute this drunkenness to being overfilled and overwhelmed into an altered state of consciousness.

After years of religious learning and experiences, Karen Armstrong was most drawn to Islam and Sufism for the plurality of the religion. Islam, and Sufism, recognizes the older prophets of history such as Abraham, Moses and even Jesus. Other religions that share a similar mythology are not looked down upon because it is believed that they are worshipping the same God. According to Karen Armstrong, Islam believes that all rightly guided religions come from the same god. Another thing I did not know about Islam is that Mohammad didn’t found a new religion; instead he was simply a prophet for the Arabic people because they were not yet part of the divine plan. This idea would mean that all Abrahamic religions are essentially one, despite the varied beliefs and practices and this is what truly draws Armstrong to Islam, she is looking for an accepting and pluralistic approach to god. It is hard for me to agree with Armstrong simply based off the history and current culture of Islam. To me, it does not seem to be a very accepting or pluralistic religion from what the media portrays and Islam does declare itself to be the only correct faith. To me, Hinduism is a more pluralistic religion than Islam. However, the current cultural and social attributes of Islam may not be the true Islam that was meant to be. I understand that while there are only 2 main branches of Islam, 3 if one counts Sufism, there are yet more sects and groups of Islam that teach different things. Sufism itself is more focused on the spiritual nature of Islam than on the worldly laws and rituals that most people are consumed with. 

Post 9 - Islam

What I find most interesting about Islam is that it began as a religion of social change, equality and brought a lot of changes to tribal life yet today it is often portrayed as a backwards, misogynistic religion in the media. From all of the readings and films, I learned the Islam is practiced differently by different sects and the laws of Islam vary based on the country or state where one resides.

When Islam first came into being, the laws and practices gave more rights and assistance to orphans, widows and the poor. Laws included that women and children should not be harmed, and women must not be raped. Muslims were, and still are, encouraged to give to charity and care for those who cannot take care of themselves. Even slaves were treated as humans, in a stark comparison to the Atlantic slave trade. In addition, the tradition of Hijab is meant as a principle of modesty in dress and behavior for men and women, not women alone. While it is encouraged that women be covered from males that are not close relatives, there is no one set of clothing that must be worn. The veiling of women also needs to be their choice, because it shows their obedience to Allah. This is most interesting to me and I can respect a women who chooses to cover herself for her religion and is not forced into it.

The ideas that resonate most with me are the ones about equality. I am particularly moved the equality that one should experience on the Hajj, or pilgrimage to Mecca. All Muslims, male and female and from many different countries and ethnic backgrounds, make a pilgrimage to Mecca during the 9th month of the Islamic calendar. Everyone is dressed the same, men in a two piece white garment and women in a simple white dress and head covering. Women are not allowed to cover their faces, despite what rules are in place in their country of origin. Equality in the mosques, with everyone sitting on the ground in prayer is another interesting facet. 

There are a great number of similarities between Islam and the other Abrahamic religions, Judaism and Christianity. To begin with, Islam believes in monotheism just like Judaism and Christianity. In fact, Islam believes that they are worshiping the same god, just that Jews and Christians are doing it wrong. The pre-Islamic mythology is also very similar to the stories of the old testament, containing many of the same important prophets and other figures. Muslims believe that they are descendant of Abraham/Ibrahiam, just like the Jewish people, but born from Abraham's first son, Ishamael/Isma'il, whereas the Jewish/Christian faith comes from Issac. Islam also hold Moses and Jesus as important prophets to their faith, although Jesus is a more human figure. 

According to the theory presented in the audio lecture, Islams continued growth can be attributed to meme theory. In order to be a successful meme, the meme must be simple, included an incentive and promote itself to be copied. Islam has a simple core message that "there is one God and Muhammad is his Prophet" and conversion is as simple as repeating this message 3 times in front of witnesses. Islam also includes the value incentives of heaven and hell, and also has the advantage of drawing on the already popular memes of Judaism and Christianity. I agree with this assessment of Islam from the perspective of meme theory. Not only is the message simple, easy to copy and include a reward, heaven,  Islam is a cultural way of life.