Lee Harmon's Blog, page 115
October 2, 2011
Book review: Early Christian Writings
Letters of the Church Fathers
★★★★
If you're looking for a brief collection of early Christian writings, this one hits all the high points. For someone wanting a taste of the emerging church, Christianity in its infancy, nothing beats reading the letters and theological treatises themselves, and this is a good collection. Nothing fancy; the introduction is short and the notes are sparse, limited primarily to historical settings, so you're getting it from the horses' mouths.
And what you're getting is the founding Fathers, after the excitement of the first century and its expectation of the immediate return of Christ died down. The men who took the scriptures seriously and built a religion for the long haul. Jewish customs are still evident, early doctrine is solidified, martyrs are glorified. Here's the lineup:
The first epistle of Clement to the CorinthiansSeven epistles of IgnatiusThe epistle of Polycarp to the PhilippiansThe martyrdom of PolycarpThe epistle of DiognetusThe epistle of BarnabasThe Didache
This is a Penguin Classic, translated by Maxwell Staniforth with commentary by Andrew Louth.
★★★★
If you're looking for a brief collection of early Christian writings, this one hits all the high points. For someone wanting a taste of the emerging church, Christianity in its infancy, nothing beats reading the letters and theological treatises themselves, and this is a good collection. Nothing fancy; the introduction is short and the notes are sparse, limited primarily to historical settings, so you're getting it from the horses' mouths.
And what you're getting is the founding Fathers, after the excitement of the first century and its expectation of the immediate return of Christ died down. The men who took the scriptures seriously and built a religion for the long haul. Jewish customs are still evident, early doctrine is solidified, martyrs are glorified. Here's the lineup:
The first epistle of Clement to the CorinthiansSeven epistles of IgnatiusThe epistle of Polycarp to the PhilippiansThe martyrdom of PolycarpThe epistle of DiognetusThe epistle of BarnabasThe Didache
This is a Penguin Classic, translated by Maxwell Staniforth with commentary by Andrew Louth.
October 1, 2011
John 8:41, Was Jesus Illegitimate?
"We are not illegitimate children," [the Jews] protested. "The only Father we have is God himself."
Some interpret this verse to be a subtle accusation by the Jews that Jesus was illegitimate. As in, "we aren't the illegitimate ones, you are."
It appears that quite early after the Gospel story began, rumors began to surface that Jesus was illegitimate. That Mary had been raped by a Roman soldier named Pantera. I personally don't buy it, the whole accusation sounds like "normal" slander bolstered by flimsy evidence, but the logic runs something like this:
John the Apostle (or The Beloved Disciple, if you prefer) knew Jesus best, having been with him from the very beginning to the very end of Jesus' ministry.
John's Gospel was the last one written, probably in the mid-90's, by which time any such rumors could have easily found their way to him. It's possible, then, that John was cognizant of the slander and intentionally addressed the issue in his Gospel.
At the same time, this Gospel is quite hesitant to talk about Jesus' parents. John mentions Jesus' father Joseph only twice in passing, and refuses to call Jesus' mother by name.
This same Gospel redirects attention away from Jesus' beginning, rejecting the virgin birth story in favor of a different theology: That Jesus existed eternally and came down from heaven.
So … where did Jesus come from?
Some interpret this verse to be a subtle accusation by the Jews that Jesus was illegitimate. As in, "we aren't the illegitimate ones, you are."
It appears that quite early after the Gospel story began, rumors began to surface that Jesus was illegitimate. That Mary had been raped by a Roman soldier named Pantera. I personally don't buy it, the whole accusation sounds like "normal" slander bolstered by flimsy evidence, but the logic runs something like this:
John the Apostle (or The Beloved Disciple, if you prefer) knew Jesus best, having been with him from the very beginning to the very end of Jesus' ministry.
John's Gospel was the last one written, probably in the mid-90's, by which time any such rumors could have easily found their way to him. It's possible, then, that John was cognizant of the slander and intentionally addressed the issue in his Gospel.
At the same time, this Gospel is quite hesitant to talk about Jesus' parents. John mentions Jesus' father Joseph only twice in passing, and refuses to call Jesus' mother by name.
This same Gospel redirects attention away from Jesus' beginning, rejecting the virgin birth story in favor of a different theology: That Jesus existed eternally and came down from heaven.
So … where did Jesus come from?
September 30, 2011
Book review: Toward a True Kinship of Faiths
by the Dalai Lama
★★★★★
The most special thing about this book is the way it leaves you with the feeling that you've been talking face to face with His Holiness, the Dalai Lama. He writes with humility and passion, on matters close to his heart.
This book is about learning to get along, because the world is shrinking. Advances in science and industry have brought us closer together, even as religious differences seem extreme. Yet, the fascinating thing is, all of the world's most respected religions seem to share one thing in common: A teaching of compassion. Even while some religions are theistic and others, like the Buddhist tradition of the Dalai Lama, are non-theistic, the basic teaching is the same. Compassion is, in different variations, the common denominator.
As such, the Dalai Lama shows familiarity and respect for all the popular religions, and maintains that pluralism is the healthiest answer. He pleads for inter-denominational understanding, and he writes with the authority and intelligence that would be expected of his title. I couldn't help but be both impressed and inspired. Yet, when it comes to discussing alternative religions, I doubt he will ever be able to relate on the same level to those born into those religions. The Dalai Lama can appear logical and naive in the same breath, as he dreams about mutual respect across religious boundaries. Consider this problem formula, which arises in any religion where adherents are taught that theirs is the "only true way:"
I feel the Spirit ==> God is with me and my chosen religion ==> I have found the one true way
Yet, though the Dalai Lama is optimistic for the future (as am I), he understands the problem. Religions tend toward exclusivism, so while adherents are taught concern for others, this concern often translates merely into an urge for evangelism. Christians want everybody to enjoy being a Christian! On this topic, the Dalai Lama strongly disagrees. When speaking outside his country, he often begins by assuring his audience that he is not promoting Buddhism; rather, he maintains that the best religion for any person is usually the religion of their heritage. Respect for one another's beliefs is the only way to overcome religious squabbles and promote peace.
Which, of course, is another place where the book appears a bit naïve. Fundamentalist Christians don't want peace; they get positively giddy at the thought of a world war, since this means Jesus is coming to rescue them.
So what's the answer? I'm not convinced this book has any, because I'm not convinced there are any quick fixes. But I agree that believers must, one at a time and at a grass-roots level, come to see the world in a different manner. We must see across religious boundaries and welcome every human as a brother or sister, like Jesus taught.
Well, we can dream.
★★★★★
The most special thing about this book is the way it leaves you with the feeling that you've been talking face to face with His Holiness, the Dalai Lama. He writes with humility and passion, on matters close to his heart.
This book is about learning to get along, because the world is shrinking. Advances in science and industry have brought us closer together, even as religious differences seem extreme. Yet, the fascinating thing is, all of the world's most respected religions seem to share one thing in common: A teaching of compassion. Even while some religions are theistic and others, like the Buddhist tradition of the Dalai Lama, are non-theistic, the basic teaching is the same. Compassion is, in different variations, the common denominator.
As such, the Dalai Lama shows familiarity and respect for all the popular religions, and maintains that pluralism is the healthiest answer. He pleads for inter-denominational understanding, and he writes with the authority and intelligence that would be expected of his title. I couldn't help but be both impressed and inspired. Yet, when it comes to discussing alternative religions, I doubt he will ever be able to relate on the same level to those born into those religions. The Dalai Lama can appear logical and naive in the same breath, as he dreams about mutual respect across religious boundaries. Consider this problem formula, which arises in any religion where adherents are taught that theirs is the "only true way:"
I feel the Spirit ==> God is with me and my chosen religion ==> I have found the one true way
Yet, though the Dalai Lama is optimistic for the future (as am I), he understands the problem. Religions tend toward exclusivism, so while adherents are taught concern for others, this concern often translates merely into an urge for evangelism. Christians want everybody to enjoy being a Christian! On this topic, the Dalai Lama strongly disagrees. When speaking outside his country, he often begins by assuring his audience that he is not promoting Buddhism; rather, he maintains that the best religion for any person is usually the religion of their heritage. Respect for one another's beliefs is the only way to overcome religious squabbles and promote peace.
Which, of course, is another place where the book appears a bit naïve. Fundamentalist Christians don't want peace; they get positively giddy at the thought of a world war, since this means Jesus is coming to rescue them.
So what's the answer? I'm not convinced this book has any, because I'm not convinced there are any quick fixes. But I agree that believers must, one at a time and at a grass-roots level, come to see the world in a different manner. We must see across religious boundaries and welcome every human as a brother or sister, like Jesus taught.
Well, we can dream.
September 29, 2011
John 1:12-13, Are We Children of God Now or Later?
Yet to all who received him, to those who believed in his name, he gave the right to become children of God--children born not of natural descent, nor of human decision or a husband's will, but born of God.
//In the final age, the Jews of Bible times understood, God would come down to earth and make his dwelling there. There was an eschatological dream of kinship once again with God, as in the days of Eden.
Matthew, Mark, and Luke share this future expectation, though perhaps with a different understanding of the coming age. These gospels indicate that in the age to come and in the heavenly realm, we will become sons of God. According to Luke, if you love your enemies, "then your reward will be great, and you will be sons of the Most High," and of this coming age, Luke promises, "they can no longer die; for they are like the angels. They are God's children, since they are children of the resurrection." Becoming God's son is recognized as an eschatological sign of the final age, a promise speaking of the resurrection to come. I should repeat that for emphasis: Becoming a child of God is something that happens to the resurrected in the final age.
In contrast, John and Paul treat sonship as a gift already bestowed. Paul says, "Because you are sons, God sent the Spirit of his Son into our hearts." John 1:12-13 makes it clear that God has granted the opportunity to be born again, not of natural descent but of God, and that such believers are "children of God."
As I follow battles on facebook between Preterist and Futurist believers, I'm reminded of the very same fierce conflict in the first century. Has the final age arrived, or not? John and Paul say yes; Matthew, Mark and Luke say not yet.
//In the final age, the Jews of Bible times understood, God would come down to earth and make his dwelling there. There was an eschatological dream of kinship once again with God, as in the days of Eden.
Matthew, Mark, and Luke share this future expectation, though perhaps with a different understanding of the coming age. These gospels indicate that in the age to come and in the heavenly realm, we will become sons of God. According to Luke, if you love your enemies, "then your reward will be great, and you will be sons of the Most High," and of this coming age, Luke promises, "they can no longer die; for they are like the angels. They are God's children, since they are children of the resurrection." Becoming God's son is recognized as an eschatological sign of the final age, a promise speaking of the resurrection to come. I should repeat that for emphasis: Becoming a child of God is something that happens to the resurrected in the final age.
In contrast, John and Paul treat sonship as a gift already bestowed. Paul says, "Because you are sons, God sent the Spirit of his Son into our hearts." John 1:12-13 makes it clear that God has granted the opportunity to be born again, not of natural descent but of God, and that such believers are "children of God."
As I follow battles on facebook between Preterist and Futurist believers, I'm reminded of the very same fierce conflict in the first century. Has the final age arrived, or not? John and Paul say yes; Matthew, Mark and Luke say not yet.
September 28, 2011
Resurrection: Myth or Reality?
by John Shelby Spong
★★★★★
"Death cannot contain him, we have seen the Lord!"
What really happened two thousand years ago? Bishop Spong takes us on a journey through the scriptures as he uncovers clues leading to the truth about the resurrection.
[1] Beginning with Paul and then traversing the four gospels one at the time, Spong covers what the Bible tells about the historical event.
[2] Leading into "interpretive images," he next discusses several ways the Bible adds meaning to the story: the atoning sacrifice of Hebrews, the suffering servant, and the Son of Man.
[3] Then come five "clues," Biblical stories that lend insight into how the resurrection of Jesus was perceived.
[4] Finally, Spong provides his own "speculative reconstruction" about what he believes truly happened.
Spong is, of course, a liberal Christian. Don't expect a conservative explanation. He concludes, however, that "Behind the legends that grew up around this moment, there is a reality I can never deny. Jesus lives. I have seen the Lord."
★★★★★
"Death cannot contain him, we have seen the Lord!"
What really happened two thousand years ago? Bishop Spong takes us on a journey through the scriptures as he uncovers clues leading to the truth about the resurrection.
[1] Beginning with Paul and then traversing the four gospels one at the time, Spong covers what the Bible tells about the historical event.
[2] Leading into "interpretive images," he next discusses several ways the Bible adds meaning to the story: the atoning sacrifice of Hebrews, the suffering servant, and the Son of Man.
[3] Then come five "clues," Biblical stories that lend insight into how the resurrection of Jesus was perceived.
[4] Finally, Spong provides his own "speculative reconstruction" about what he believes truly happened.
Spong is, of course, a liberal Christian. Don't expect a conservative explanation. He concludes, however, that "Behind the legends that grew up around this moment, there is a reality I can never deny. Jesus lives. I have seen the Lord."
September 27, 2011
2 Chronicles 2:1-2, Solomon Builds the Temple
Solomon gave orders to build a temple for the Name of the LORD and a royal palace for himself. He conscripted seventy thousand men as carriers and eighty thousand as stonecutters in the hills and thirty-six hundred as foremen over them.
//"Conscripted." It means to draft, or compel, someone into service.
Where did Solomon find all these workers? 153,600 of them? I never wondered, because I had always read the story of the construction of God's Holy Temple in the book of Kings, rather than the book of Chronicles. Reading the same story in Chronicles, though, we uncover an interesting tidbit. Want to know how many foreigners were living in Israel? That's recorded in the book of Chronicles, too:
Solomon took a census of all the aliens who were in Israel, after the census his father David had taken; and they were found to be 153,600.
Can't be coincidence. Here we find what sounds like the greatest slave-labor project ever, the construction of the Holy Temple, using about six times as many workers as were required to build the pyramids of Giza.*
(* Note: Most scholars now believe the pyramid construction employed little or no slaves.)
//"Conscripted." It means to draft, or compel, someone into service.
Where did Solomon find all these workers? 153,600 of them? I never wondered, because I had always read the story of the construction of God's Holy Temple in the book of Kings, rather than the book of Chronicles. Reading the same story in Chronicles, though, we uncover an interesting tidbit. Want to know how many foreigners were living in Israel? That's recorded in the book of Chronicles, too:
Solomon took a census of all the aliens who were in Israel, after the census his father David had taken; and they were found to be 153,600.
Can't be coincidence. Here we find what sounds like the greatest slave-labor project ever, the construction of the Holy Temple, using about six times as many workers as were required to build the pyramids of Giza.*
(* Note: Most scholars now believe the pyramid construction employed little or no slaves.)
September 26, 2011
Book review: The First Paul
by Marcus J. Borg and John Dominic Crossan
★★★★★
This book is my favorite among the works produced by the alliance of Borg and Crossan. What happens when you separate the original works of Paul from the later pseudonymous works? What kind of Paul emerges as the "real" Paul, the one who really walked the earth, the one who witnessed the post-resurrection Jesus as a light from heaven and whose visionary experience instilled a radical, superhuman drive to spread the message of Christ?
Of the thirteen Pauline letters in the New Testament, only seven are universally accepted as genuine. The pastoral letters to Timothy and Titus are generally accepted as not written by Paul. Scholarship waffles on the third group: Ephesians, Colossions, and 2 Thessalonians. Borg and Crossan are among those who see these three letters as post-Pauline. They break the Pauline letters into three categories: The radical Paul behind the authentic letters; the conservative Paul behind the questionable letters; and the reactionary Paul behind the pastoral letters.
Slavery: What does the radical Paul have to say? The pseudo (conservative) Paul? The anti (reactionary) Paul? Patriarchy: What do the three Pauls have to say? How about suppression of women? The meaning of the cross? The return of Jesus? Lordship and Christology?
We watch, within the New Testament's pages, the historical Paul evolve into pseudo-Paul, and finally into the anti-Paul--in many cases, a 180-degree turnaround from what Paul actually taught. The subtitle of this book is Reclaiming the Radical Visionary Behind the Church's Conservative Icon, and anyone interested in first-century Christianity will be delighted by this portrayal. This is an eye-opening, controversial book you don't want to miss.
★★★★★
This book is my favorite among the works produced by the alliance of Borg and Crossan. What happens when you separate the original works of Paul from the later pseudonymous works? What kind of Paul emerges as the "real" Paul, the one who really walked the earth, the one who witnessed the post-resurrection Jesus as a light from heaven and whose visionary experience instilled a radical, superhuman drive to spread the message of Christ?
Of the thirteen Pauline letters in the New Testament, only seven are universally accepted as genuine. The pastoral letters to Timothy and Titus are generally accepted as not written by Paul. Scholarship waffles on the third group: Ephesians, Colossions, and 2 Thessalonians. Borg and Crossan are among those who see these three letters as post-Pauline. They break the Pauline letters into three categories: The radical Paul behind the authentic letters; the conservative Paul behind the questionable letters; and the reactionary Paul behind the pastoral letters.
Slavery: What does the radical Paul have to say? The pseudo (conservative) Paul? The anti (reactionary) Paul? Patriarchy: What do the three Pauls have to say? How about suppression of women? The meaning of the cross? The return of Jesus? Lordship and Christology?
We watch, within the New Testament's pages, the historical Paul evolve into pseudo-Paul, and finally into the anti-Paul--in many cases, a 180-degree turnaround from what Paul actually taught. The subtitle of this book is Reclaiming the Radical Visionary Behind the Church's Conservative Icon, and anyone interested in first-century Christianity will be delighted by this portrayal. This is an eye-opening, controversial book you don't want to miss.
September 25, 2011
Mark 11:13-14, Cursing the Fig Tree
And seeing a fig tree afar off having leaves, he came, if haply he might find any thing thereon: and when he came to it, he found nothing but leaves; for the time of figs was not yet. And Jesus answered and said unto it, No man eat fruit of thee hereafter for ever. And his disciples heard it.
//Ever wonder why Jesus cursed the tree for not producing fruit, when it wasn't the season for figs anyway? This seems to puzzle a lot of people, but it wouldn't puzzle Palestinians. Because the fig tree does produce fruit before its fig season. This fruit is called phage (fah-gay) in Hebrew, and begins to appear as soon as the first leaves appear in the spring. While Mark's story takes place before the season for sukon (Greek, meaning, ripe figs) and the fact that the tree had leaves at all indicates that it should have also had the edible preseason phage.
After Jesus visits Jerusalem, he and his entourage passed back by the fig tree, and found it withered. This is a literary technique Mark uses multiple times; he sandwiches one story inside another. In this case, his visit to Jerusalem was the time when he overturned the tables of the moneychangers in the Temple. He says the merchants are making the House of God into a den of thieves … "and the scribes and chief priests heard it," echoing the language at the end of verse 14. Clearly, Jesus' ties the withering of the fruit tree to the upcoming destruction of Jerusalem and the Temple forty years later, when it literally became a "den of thieves."
//Ever wonder why Jesus cursed the tree for not producing fruit, when it wasn't the season for figs anyway? This seems to puzzle a lot of people, but it wouldn't puzzle Palestinians. Because the fig tree does produce fruit before its fig season. This fruit is called phage (fah-gay) in Hebrew, and begins to appear as soon as the first leaves appear in the spring. While Mark's story takes place before the season for sukon (Greek, meaning, ripe figs) and the fact that the tree had leaves at all indicates that it should have also had the edible preseason phage.
After Jesus visits Jerusalem, he and his entourage passed back by the fig tree, and found it withered. This is a literary technique Mark uses multiple times; he sandwiches one story inside another. In this case, his visit to Jerusalem was the time when he overturned the tables of the moneychangers in the Temple. He says the merchants are making the House of God into a den of thieves … "and the scribes and chief priests heard it," echoing the language at the end of verse 14. Clearly, Jesus' ties the withering of the fruit tree to the upcoming destruction of Jerusalem and the Temple forty years later, when it literally became a "den of thieves."
September 24, 2011
Book review: Beyond Belief, The Secret Gospel of Thomas
by Elaine Pagels
★★★★★
Pagels is a recognized scholar of religion, and the author of The Gnostic Gospels, among others. This book might be her best.
Don't buy this expecting a dull, scholarly exposition on the Gospel of Thomas. It's hardly that. It's sort of an unobtrusive evangelism for unorthodox Christianity, a plea for the kind of "religious truth" that can never hide behind a stale set of doctrine.
Pagels bares her soul in this book, and her passion for spirituality, religion and Christianity shines. The result is inspirational. This is the book that turned me on to Pagels' scholarship, and I've felt a distant kinship ever since. It's really less about the Gospel of Thomas and more about diversity and meaning within the early Christian movement. John's Gospel actually gets as much attention as the Gospel of Thomas. While John hints of gnostic influence, it also finds itself in direct opposition to Thomas on many topics, such as the divinity of Christ. Pagels embraces this diversity of ideas, and spends a great deal of time discussing how the canon of acceptable scripture grew.
I love engaging, thought-provoking books, and Pagels never disappoints.
★★★★★
Pagels is a recognized scholar of religion, and the author of The Gnostic Gospels, among others. This book might be her best.
Don't buy this expecting a dull, scholarly exposition on the Gospel of Thomas. It's hardly that. It's sort of an unobtrusive evangelism for unorthodox Christianity, a plea for the kind of "religious truth" that can never hide behind a stale set of doctrine.
Pagels bares her soul in this book, and her passion for spirituality, religion and Christianity shines. The result is inspirational. This is the book that turned me on to Pagels' scholarship, and I've felt a distant kinship ever since. It's really less about the Gospel of Thomas and more about diversity and meaning within the early Christian movement. John's Gospel actually gets as much attention as the Gospel of Thomas. While John hints of gnostic influence, it also finds itself in direct opposition to Thomas on many topics, such as the divinity of Christ. Pagels embraces this diversity of ideas, and spends a great deal of time discussing how the canon of acceptable scripture grew.
I love engaging, thought-provoking books, and Pagels never disappoints.
September 23, 2011
Mark 13:2, Not One Stone Left Upon Another
And Jesus answered and said to him, "Do you see these great buildings? Not one stone shall be left upon another, that shall not be thrown down."
//As the story goes, one of Jesus' disciples pointed out to him the grandeur of the Temple, and Jesus responded that the day was coming when the Temple would be so thoroughly destroyed that not one stone would be left upon another. All three Synoptic Gospels (Matthew, Mark and Luke) agree on this wording.
A bit later, four disciples approach Jesus and ask about when these times will be. Jesus launches into a discussion of how there will be earthquakes and wars, famine and affliction. False prophets will arise, the Abomination of Desolation will be set up. The sun and moon will be darkened, the stars will fall, heaven will be shaken. Then the Son of Man will come.
Forty years after Jesus died, in 70 A.D., the Temple fell. The Romans so leveled the Temple that not one stone stood upon another. So dramatic was this time of tribulation for the Jews, and so closely did it match the Christian prophecies, that Full Preterist Christians today believe Jesus must have returned back in the first century as promised.
But here's the fascinating story behind the story. As the legionnaires of Rome set fire to the Temple, they suddenly discovered untold wealth within its walls. But the fire raged and the gold of the treasury began to melt. So intense was the heat that the molten gold seeped between the huge stones of the Temple. As the story goes—and I'm not entirely convinced, but many are—it was the greed of the soldiers and not their desire for revenge that caused them to dismantle the Temple. They toppled all the stones in search of gold.
//As the story goes, one of Jesus' disciples pointed out to him the grandeur of the Temple, and Jesus responded that the day was coming when the Temple would be so thoroughly destroyed that not one stone would be left upon another. All three Synoptic Gospels (Matthew, Mark and Luke) agree on this wording.
A bit later, four disciples approach Jesus and ask about when these times will be. Jesus launches into a discussion of how there will be earthquakes and wars, famine and affliction. False prophets will arise, the Abomination of Desolation will be set up. The sun and moon will be darkened, the stars will fall, heaven will be shaken. Then the Son of Man will come.
Forty years after Jesus died, in 70 A.D., the Temple fell. The Romans so leveled the Temple that not one stone stood upon another. So dramatic was this time of tribulation for the Jews, and so closely did it match the Christian prophecies, that Full Preterist Christians today believe Jesus must have returned back in the first century as promised.
But here's the fascinating story behind the story. As the legionnaires of Rome set fire to the Temple, they suddenly discovered untold wealth within its walls. But the fire raged and the gold of the treasury began to melt. So intense was the heat that the molten gold seeped between the huge stones of the Temple. As the story goes—and I'm not entirely convinced, but many are—it was the greed of the soldiers and not their desire for revenge that caused them to dismantle the Temple. They toppled all the stones in search of gold.
