Bishop Spong Q&A 12/2008

William from Newmarket, Ontario, writes:

If the roots of the Christ story are indeed in Egyptian mythology (according to Tom Harpur's book The Pagan Christ) or the continuation of Jewish Epic History (according to your Jesus for the Non-Religious) then who were the writers of the gospels? How did they acquire the expertise to make such a complex adaptation and what drove them, in spite of the risk of persecution, to adapt these myths to the person of Jesus of Nazareth, either as if this person was an historical figure, or if he never existed?

Dear William,

The writers of the gospels were Jewish people who represented the second or third Christian generation. They wrote in Greek, not Aramaic, which was the language Jesus and his disciples spoke. The gospels — at least the first three: Mark, Matthew and Luke — are the products of the Synagogue, which had shaped the Jesus story dramatically over the 40-70 year period that transpired between the crucifixion and the gospel writing tradition.

I disagree with Tom Harpur's thesis, for I do not think Egyptian mythology can shape the Jesus story in as short a period of time as existed. I note that Paul writes in Galatians, a book that is usually dated in the early 50's, that he had conversed with Peter and other "pillars" of the Christian movement within four to nine years of his conversion, which scholars date one to six years after the crucifixion. Mythology needs more time than that to develop.

People need to embrace the fact that the Jesus story was kept alive, recalled and celebrated in the Synagogue, for that is where the followers of Jesus worshiped every Sabbath. The Synagogue and the Christian Church did not separate until 88 C.E.

I am quite sure Jesus of Nazareth was a person of history in whom and through whom Jewish people believed that they had experienced the presence of the holy God. It was in that experience that Christianity was born. The earliest articulation of that faith came from Paul who wrote, "God was in Christ, reconciling the world to God."

How we tell the world of the meaning of that experience is still what Christianity is all about.

– John Shelby Spong

On Faith & Beliefs

(A paraphrase of Lloyd Geering)

Once we distinguish between faith and the holding of certain beliefs Christian faith can be seen in quite a new light. The very act of discarding worn-out beliefs, far from demonstrating a lack of faith, may in fact be just the opposite. It may open the door for genuine faith to operate again. Indeed, the modern doubter who rejects the Biblical description of God in the interest of truth may be manifesting more faith than the traditional theist.

The assertion that one needs to believe a particular set of doctrines in order to have faith is an invitation not to faith but to credulity(gullibility). There is a world of difference between child-like faith and childish credulity (gullibility).

In a remarkable little book, The Faith to Doubt, M. Holmes Hartshorne wrote,

People today are not in need of assurances about the truth of doubtful beliefs. They need the courage to doubt. They need the faith by which to reject their idols. The churches cannot preach to this age if they stand outside of it, living in the illusory security of yesterday’s beliefs. These lie about us broken, and we cannot by taking thought raise them from the dead.

Doubt is not the enemy of faith but its ally, as the enemy of false beliefs. All beliefs should be continually subjected to doubt and critical examination and, when found to be false or inadequate, they should be discarded.

Quote from Joseph Campbell – ‘An Open Life’

What the Eastern teachers are telling us is that the important thing is not what happened thousands of years ago when the Buddha was born or when Jesus was crucified: what’s important is what’s happening in you now. And what’s important is not your membership in a religious community: it’s what that membership is doing to your psyche.

The divine lives within you. Our Western religions tend to put the divine outside the earthly world and in God, in heaven. But the whole sense of the Oriental is that the kingdom of heaven is within you. Who is in heaven? God is. Where’s God? God’s within you. And what is God? God is a personification of that world-creative energy and mystery which is beyond thinking and beyond naming.

We think not only that our God has been named and known, but that he’s given us a whole set of rules. But this system of rules is not from God, it’s from man, and the rules are man’s clues as to how to get to the realization of God. …

A Response to 'The Shaping of the Lord's Prayer'

From Cliff L., Retired UCC Minister....

Barry, regarding your article about the changes in the "Lord's Prayer," it is unfortunate that we cannot get back to the person known as Jesus of Nazareth. We cannot know exactly what he said. We can only know what others said about him. Many have tried to isolate the sayings and the activities of Jesus, but have failed.

Dr. Albert Schweitzer was one of the first and foremost to begin this search in his 'The Quest for the Historical Jesus' (1906). The Bible literalists insist that Jesus actually said the things that the Bible says he said, but no serious scholar of the Bible would hold to that view, I think.

This means that the "Lord's Prayer" is a misnomer. Jesus may have prayed similar words, but we have no tape recording of his actual sayings. This, of course, has implications for worship. If we are to be honest, do we keep saying, "Let's pray the words Jesus taught us to pray?" Perhaps the best we can do is to pray as Jesus "might have prayed" or "the words ascribed to Jesus."

Worship is and ought to be always changing to reflect our understanding of our faith.

The Shaping of the Lord’s Prayer

“Let us now pray the prayer that Jesus taught his disciples, saying…..Our Father, who art in heaven….”.

With this (or a similar) preamble, on any given Sunday morning, millions of Christians around the world are prompted to recite the Lord’s Prayer. But is it true that the prayer we pray today is the prayer Jesus taught?

Answer: Absolutely not! The words of the Lord’s prayer have actually been changed many times by many people.

Here is a litany of some of the dramatic changes that have shaped the verbiage of the Lord’s Prayer over the past two millennium…

Biblical historians mostly agree (?) that Jesus probably spoke several one sentence prayers during his years of ministry….

“Your name be revered.”
“Let your basileia (kingdom) come.”
“Give us the bread we need for today.”
“Forgive us our debts to the extent we forgive those who are in debt to us.”
“Please don’t subject us to test after test.”

Of course, none of these things were written down at the time they occurred.

Some forty years later, in about the year 75 c.e., the writer(s) of the book we call Matthew wrote these words….

“Our Father in the heavens, your name is revered. Let your kingdom come. Enact your will on earth ,as you have in heaven. Give us the bread we need for today. Forgive us our debts to the extent we forgive those in debt to us. And please don’t subject us to test after test, but rescue us from the evil one.”

Several years later, in the early 80’s, the writer(s) of Luke wrote….

“Father, your name be revered. Let your kingdom come. Give us the bread we need day by day. Forgive us our sins, for we also forgive everyone in debt to us. And please don’t subject us to test after test.”

Then, somewhere between 100-150 c.e. a Christian document known as the Didache records these words….

“Our Father in heaven, hallowed be thy name. Thy kingdom come. Thy will be done as in heaven so on earth. Give us this day our daily bread. And forgive us our debt, as we also forgive our debtors. And lead us not into temptation, but deliver us from evil: for Thine is the power, and the glory, forever.”

From another church document (anon.) supposedly authored sometime in the third century, we find ….

“Our Father in heaven, hallowed be thy name. Thy kingdom come. Thy will be done as in heaven so on earth. Give us this day our daily bread. And forgive us our debt, to the extent we have forgiven our debtors. And lead us not into temptation, but deliver us from the evil one, for Thine is the kingdom, and the power, and the glory, forever.”

Today, the words that are recited have a more modern sound….

"Our Father who art in heaven, hallowed be Thy name. Thy kingdom come, Thy will be done on earth as it is in heaven. Give us this day our daily bread and forgive us our debts, as we forgive our debtors.* And lead us not into temptation but deliver us from evil. For Thine is the kingdom and the power and the glory, forever. Amen."

· * In some churches an alternate, “…forgive us our sins as we forgive those who sin against us.” is used.

So, perhaps the intent, but certainly not the words of Jesus are ensconced in what we recite today as the Lord’s prayer.

Just and interesting bit of history. Enjoy…

barry e

Honesty First

Many of you will remember the cartoon character named Pogo Possum... Pogo was the creation of cartoonist Walt Kelly... Pogo is remembered for many wise sayings, but perhaps the most quoted of his axioms is this one; “We have met the enemy, and he is us!” This is what is referred to as a ‘circular declaration’. WE have met the ENEMY and they are US!

The 14th century Christian theologian Eckhart von Hochheim, referred to by most writers as simply Meister Eckhart wrote a somewhat circular declaration when he wrote these words; “The eye with which I see God, and the eye with which God sees me… are one and the same eye.”

If I were to be so bold as to paraphrase Meister Eckhart in the language of Pogo Possum, it might sound like this; “We have met God, and He is us!”

Some might hear this statement and cry, blasphemy!… Others will hear it and simply ignore it, not realizing the depth of its wisdom…. Still others, in growing numbers, will hear and understand the implied message that “God and humankind are one.”

Certainly the statement, “We have meet God and He is us,” is a considerable departure from the description of the Biblical Deity, and one that requires a great deal of study and dialogue to understand.

This is, however,- in my opinion – the first point of departure that must be taken from ‘Popular’ Christianity, if we are to ever reach a more intellectually honest state of ‘Progressive’ Christianity.

Those who would skirt this most important issue in order to safeguard the comfort level of those who think they cannot deal with the loss of their “Father who art in heaven”, are simply being dishonest with both themselves AND those they profess to protect.

An honest understanding of the concept of god is an absolute requirement if we are to preserve the future of the Christian faith.

That’s what I think….. but I could be wrong !

barry e

Paul and the Doctrine of Atonement

Have you ever thought you would like to travel backward in time and experience some particular event or happening from the past?

I can think of several that would interest me…. Religiously speaking, I think I would like to go back to the day Paul’s letter to the church at Corinth was received by that little group of followers. We really don’t know how little or big the group was. It could have been six people or it could have been sixty. We just don’t know.

The year was somewhere around 56AD.On that day, the people gathered either in the synagogue or perhaps someone’s home, or in some public place to have one of their number read this letter, just received, from this self-proclaimed itinerant preacher named Paul.

I have stood in the ruins of those homes in Corinth. I have walked up the steps of the synagogue there. I stood in the public meeting place and listened to part of the letter from Paul being read, ….but this was in 2005.

The church at Corinth was having problems. Apparently discipline problems among its members. Paul was writing to attempt to get them to ‘straighten up’.

I’ll not read the entire letter, just one sentence from chapter five where he writes, “For our Passover feast is ready, now that Christ, our Passover lamb, has been sacrificed.”

Had I been there, that day in 56AD, I think I would have spoken up at that point and said to the reader…”Wait, wait… read that part again, please.”

“For our Passover feast is ready, now that Christ, our Passover lamb, has been sacrificed.”

I may have listened in silence to the rest of the letter, but then I would have hurried to my home and searched for a piece of parchment and I would have penned a letter to be carried back to Paul (he had written from Ephesus).

I would have written something like;

“Dear Sir….We just finished the reading of your letter. Thank you for your concern for the people of this area. It is very kind of you. However, I have one question for you…. By what authority have you called this man Jesus, ‘our Passover lamb’? ….Where did you come by the idea that he was sacrificed for us?”

You see, on those simple statements, hinges the entire church doctrine of Atonement and Salvation. …Paul said it, the people accepted it, apparently without question, and for the ensuing two thousand years, it has dominated the doctrine of the Christian church ….

By what authority?… what special knowledge?…. what evidence?

The answers, of course, are …None …..none …..and none !…. No authority,… no special knowledge,… and no evidence.

Where could Paul have gotten such a story? Did he make it up? Did he have a dream? Did this thought come to him through meditation/prayer? Did he base it on his interpretation of some portion of ancient scripture? We are not given a clear indication of any of these. Yet the church has followed this vague line of self delusional thinking ever since.

I wish I could have had the opportunity to query Paul about that statement and the other similar statements he made to the Galatians, the Thessalonians, the Romans, the Ephesians and others.

Perhaps Paul, knowing that many nations and many religions of that era had deemed certain of their heroes ‘Savior’, it would be quite alright for him to promote Jesus to the same status. If he could get people to believe such a thing it would certainly strengthen his cause as well.

Paul wrote nothing of the teachings of Jesus, only that he died for the salvation of all humankind.

By what authority did he declare these things to be true?….By what special knowledge?…. What evidence?

Unfortunately the answers seem to be,…None…. None…. and none.

Copyright © Barry E Blood 2008