Telling the Story of Jesus: The Misunderstood Jew
Rev. Lee Ann Bryce
Community Christian Church
April 3, 2011
Today we continue with our Lenten sermon series, “Telling the Story of Jesus.” We began with considering the primary ways that Jesus is viewed in our culture. Then we explored the value of seeing the gospels, Matthew, Mark, Luke, and John through a historical-metaphorical lens. If we understand the gospels not as the divine, infallible Word of God, but rather as memory and testimony of Jesus’ followers in the decades after his life then it impacts how we understand and tell Jesus’ story. Last week we discussed the difference between a pre-Easter Jesus and a post-Easter Jesus. By pre-Easter Jesus, I mean Jesus before his death; by post-Easter Jesus, what Jesus became after his death. With this distinction, we understand that the pre-Easter Jesus, the finite, mortal Jesus, likely did not consider himself as the Messiah, King of Kings, Lord of Lords, Divine Savior of the World. Jesus didn’t talk about himself in this way. He likely did not think that a primary purpose of his life was to die on the cross for the sins of humanity. Jesus didn’t come to start a new religion, Christianity. Jesus was a Jew, whose teaching might well have simply led to a reformation within Judaism. Christianity as we know it developed gradually over the centuries after Jesus’ death; a movement led by those who had found in this first century peasant, Jesus, spiritual food that fed their hunger, light that banished their darkness. We concluded last week with considering a bit of Jesus’ context, his culture. Jesus grew up in a small Jewish, peasant village in the oppressive Roman Empire. Jesus was a Jewish peasant whose message would liberate other peasants and would challenge the ruling elite. Today our focus is on another factor that fundamentally shaped Jesus, his religious and cultural identity as a Jew.
It is possible to read the gospels, in fact passages throughout the New Testament, as being anti-Jewish. In fact, in the history of Christianity this has often been the general feeling among many Christians and, I might add, continues to be so today. We need look no further than Mel Gibson’s The Passion of Christ. In that film, “the Jews” are clearly depicted as the bad guys, responsible for Jesus’ death. Unfortunately, Gibson is not alone in drawing this interpretation from the gospels and an anti-Jewish bias is particularly found in the Gospel of John, from which we draw our text today. If we are going to tell the story of Jesus who was deeply shaped by the Judaism he held dear, we must start with addressing this bias.
Earlier in worship we read John’s story of the blind man whom Jesus healed. We’re going to return to John chapter 9 and hear the rest of the story. A brief warning, it is passages like this that have often been read to support an anti-Jewish bias.
They brought to the Pharisees the man who had formerly been blind. Now it was a Sabbath day when Jesus made the mud and opened his eyes. Then the Pharisees also began to ask him how he had received his sight. He said to them, ‘He put mud on my eyes. Then I washed, and now I see.’ Some of the Pharisees said, ‘This man is not from God, for he does not observe the Sabbath.’ But others said, ‘How can a man who is a sinner perform such signs?’ And they were divided. So they said again to the blind man, ‘What do you say about him? It was your eyes he opened.’ He said, ‘He is a prophet.’
The Jews did not believe that he had been blind and had received his sight until they called the parents of the man who had received his sight and asked them, ‘Is this your son, who you say was born blind? How then does he now see?’ His parents answered, ‘We know that this is our son, and that he was born blind; but we do not know how it is that now he sees, nor do we know who opened his eyes. Ask him; he is of age. He will speak for himself.’ His parents said this because they were afraid of the Jews; for the Jews had already agreed that anyone who confessed Jesus to be the Messiah would be put out of the synagogue. Therefore his parents said, ‘He is of age; ask him.’
So for the second time they called the man who had been blind, and they said to him, ‘Give glory to God! We know that this man is a sinner.’ He answered, ‘I do not know whether he is a sinner. One thing I do know, that though I was blind, now I see.’ They said to him, ‘What did he do to you? How did he open your eyes?’ He answered them, ‘I have told you already, and you would not listen. Why do you want to hear it again? Do you also want to become his disciples?’ Then they reviled him, saying, ‘You are his disciple, but we are disciples of Moses. We know that God has spoken to Moses, but as for this man, we do not know where he comes from.’ The man answered, ‘Here is an astonishing thing! You do not know where he comes from, and yet he opened my eyes. We know that God does not listen to sinners, but he does listen to one who worships God and obeys God’s will. Never since the world began has it been heard that anyone opened the eyes of a person born blind. If this man were not from God, he could do nothing.’ They answered him, ‘You were born entirely in sins, and are you trying to teach us?’ And they drove him out.
Seems clear, doesn’t it? Jesus, blind man = good guys; “The Jews,” judgmental, legalistic, bad guys. On the surface, this conclusion can be drawn, however, to do so is, at best, inaccurate and ignorant. At worst, it is offensive. First of all, remember that all parties involved in this story are themselves Jews, Jesus, the blind man and his parents, the Pharisees. Thus, the blind man, with his newly found sight who proclaims Jesus a prophet, is a Jew. His parents, with their reluctance to take a stand, Jews, all fellow Jews right along with the Pharisees. And the one responsible for all this, Jesus, a Jew. This story, therefore, describes a conflict within Judaism, and at its basis is a question of who exactly are “true” Jews; who are the “disciples of Moses.”
Think of it as family quarrel. A conflict over who was rightly following the precepts of Judaism. This is not a sweeping condemnation of the Judaic faith – far from it. The question is over Jewish law: in pursuit of faithfulness, could one become so slavishly devoted to the letter of law that it actually obscured the point of the law? I understand from my friends who are Jewish that these questions continue to be disputed today within Judaism. Within the Jewish faith can be found a wide and diverse spectrum of understandings, much like can be found within Christianity. And so in passages such as we’ve read today need might be said that some Jews are disagreeing with other Jews. It is not accurately interpreted as a condemnation of Judaism. These are Jews, including Jesus, trying to understand how to be faithful.
As we’ve discussed, Christianity was a developing tradition at the time the gospel of John was written. It took many years for those Jews who were followers of Christ, to separate from Judaism. And so in the decades after Jesus’ death, we have this blurring as followers of Jesus become primarily identified as Christians, not Jews. Sometimes Christians wonder “what would Jesus do?” I think it’s safe to say one thing he would not do – condemn Judaism. To do so would have been to condemn the faith he practiced and held dear.
Let’s move to how Judaism might have shaped Jesus. Jesus grew up in Nazareth, a Jewish peasant village. Most likely no Gentiles would have lived there. And so Jesus was socialized into a Jewish social world. Its vision of life was very different from the domination system of Rome that we discussed last week. The beloved sacred traditions of Judaism included its sacred scriptures and stories, worship and festivals, prayers, practices, and observances. Its foundations were practice, the Jewish Bible, and the temple in Jerusalem.
Judaism has often been described as a religion of practice and so it was at the time of Jesus. To be a Jew meant to live as a Jew. This meant observing the Torah, Jewish law, which was considered not a burden, but a gift from God to the people. The law was a manifestation of the conviction that God had chosen Israel and that Israel had agreed to live in accord with God’s covenant.
Twice a day, in accord with Jewish practice, Jesus would have recited or chanted the Shema, the central conviction of Israel :
Hear, O Israel: the Lord is our God, the Lord is one. You shall love the Lord your God with all your heart, and with all your soul, and with all your might. Keep these words that I am commanding you today in your heart. Recite them to your children and talk about them when you are at home and when you are away, when you lie down and when you rise. Bind them as a sign on your hand, fix them as an emblem on your forehead, and write them down on the doorposts of your house and on your gates. (Deut. 6:4-9)
One day a week was the Sabbath. On this day, activities that could be considered “work” were prohibited. Again, this condition was not burdensome. Instead, the Sabbath was the most festive day of the week: free from labor, it was a time for eating, lovemaking, gathering community for prayer and worship, and leisure.
Festivals were also part of Jesus’ practice. A major festival was Passover, which recalled the exodus from Egypt. The Christian sacrament of communion, the Last Supper, was born when Jesus and his disciples were in Jerusalem sharing in a Passover Seder. (Come to our Seder in a few weeks and you’ll learn more about this.)
In addition to these practices, Jesus was shaped by the Jewish Bible. He didn’t have the Old Testament, as it is known to Christians now but he would have had parts of it. He would have had the Torah, the first five books of the Bible (Genesis, Exodus, Leviticus, Deuteronomy, Numbers). The prophets, such as Isaiah and Jeremiah were also in use. The New Testament refers to “the law and the prophets,” to describe Jesus’ Bible. The remainder of the Old Testament was not crystalized yet in final form; that took place after Jesus, though certain parts, such as the Psalms, were widely used in Jesus’ day.
The last thing I want to mention today is the critical importance of Jerusalem to first century Jews. Solomon’s temple was considered to be the dwelling place of God on earth. To be in the Temple was to be in God’s presence on earth. And so the Temple was the center of Jewish devotion, the destination of pilgrimage. As such, the Temple was the one and only place where sacrifices were made. Moreover, Jerusalem was the place where, one day, Jews believed God’s promise and the hope of Israel would be fulfilled. From Jerusalem, one day, God’s ideal king, a king like David would rule over a restored Israel, delivered from Roman occupation.
Next week we’ll talk more about how Jesus’ life unfolded among this violent tension between Israel and Rome and these expectations that God would send a triumphant messiah to deliver them. In respect and honor for the Judaism that Jesus held dear, I’d like to ask Rabbi Jennifer Gravitz to come forward and offer a blessing.
No comments:
Post a Comment