Years ago, I gained new friends in an organization of primarily fundamentalist Christians. Throughout my life, fundamentalists have appeared to me to be somewhat bipolar. On the one hand, better people you could not hope to find. They will care about you and for you without question, except, perhaps for the obligatory probe, “Have you accepted Jesus Christ as your personal savior?”
Basically, they are wonderful, honest, helpful, kind, patriotic, loving, and family-oriented individuals. However, whenever the discussion turns to religion, from the depth of his or her being there arises a cynical, judgmental, assertive, and intractable presence that hovers over the conversation like a vulture awaiting the death of all living opposition. As I said, it can be an almost shocking change in the social atmosphere.
Despite disagreements on issues of theology, I doubt neither the sincerity of their Christian faith nor the depth of their concern in trying to save me from my own way of thinking. It was suggested that I read the Bible again and meditate on it. I said that I would and I did. After my reading and meditation, I felt even more strongly that many specific sections of the Bible directly contradict other sections in both the Old and New Testaments. There are, also, many sections that directly refute their fundamentalist dogma.
Feeling a need to study the Bible more carefully, I started reading what Biblical scholars have to say about how the Bible was written, assembled, and interpreted. I am grateful that my friends had suggested I look at the Bible anew.
Much to my astonishment, what I had noticed as a non-expert Bible reader, is already well known and has been thoroughly studied and discussed for centuries. Bible research, discussion, and debate is continuing right into the 21st century.
It seems to me that there are two major contrasting perspectives from which the Bible has been viewed and interpreted through the ages. One is what has been called the prophetic view and the other is the apocalyptic perspective.
The apocalyptic viewpoint assumes God’s imminent return by a direct, supernatural intervention to place his final messiah into power to rule over the end of the human domination systems that exist and to make final judgment on every soul. The origin of this kind of thinking comes from Jewish traditions several centuries preceding Jesus.
"Messiah" comes from the Hebrew word māshīach, which means “anointed.” This was the title given to all the kings of the Jewish nation. Saul was the first anointed king of the Jews (messiah), but he was unable to unite the various Jewish tribes. However, the second messiah, King David, through his military and political skills, did establish a strong and prosperous Jewish nation over which he reigned for 40 years. One of his sons, Solomon, was the third king (messiah) and he ruled successfully for another 40 years. This was the foundation for the thinking that successful messiahs could be expected from the line of David.
Centuries later, after being defeated as a nation and oppressed by other countries for generations, there seemed no hope that a new messiah could arise from within the remnants of the Jewish nation. Gradually the expectation grew that God would have to directly intervene in world events to provide his chosen people with a messiah, in the tradition of David, who would bring forth God's final kingdom and rule on earth. This is why John The Baptist was calling for Jews to repent, for the day of the Lord was coming.
Into this atmosphere Jesus arrived with a message that had an unexpected, non-apocalyptic angle. His message of love and ethical conduct is based on the prophetic viewpoint, first articulated by ancient Jewish prophets. Jesus' parables and sayings suggest that righteous motives from within are what please God. Jesus taught that to conform to religious law and rituals has its place, but external appearances are secondary to inner attitudes and behavior based on unconditional love. Recall Jesus’ ethical reconstruction in his Sermon On The Mount of the laws of Moses.
Jesus’ teachings strongly state that God’s desire for loving behavior (righteousness) from human kind is ever-present and meeting this expectation is all that is necessary to enter into His kingdom on earth. This perspective is expressed in Hosea 6:6, and echoed in Matthew 9:13, and Matthew 12:7. Jesus’ teaching that the kingdom of Heaven is ever present and within mankind’s reach or “at hand” as written in Matthew 4:17 (RSV) clearly indicates the prophetic viewpoint. Through either the Aramaic or Greek language, whichever was used by Jesus, the meaning of that passage is unambiguous. The Kingdom of God is specifically available now.
Despite this emphasis by Jesus, Paul and other early members of the developing Christian communities appeared to revert to an apocalyptic view after Jesus was gone. Plus, they expanded their mission to include people beyond the Jewish nation, which actually was consistent with Jesus' teachings. Since their message found willing listeners among the gentiles (pagan non-Jews) this helped alter the purpose of the anticipated apocalypse.
Former pagans had little interest in reviving the Jewish nation on earth, but they did have interest in saving themselves from the idea of an afterlife in hell. This was a doctrine perfect for the pagan mindset. We must remember that pagans constituted more than 90% of the general population. As a result mystical, magical polytheism was commonplace thinking, even for Christians.
In fact, there were numerous Christian centers of teaching that were polytheistic. One Christian group believed that the God of the Old Testament was angry and vengeful but a different God, described in the New Testament, was kind and redeeming. Other Christian groups claimed there were as many as 365 different gods. All these groups claimed to be Christian.
This resulted in considerable infighting among the various Christianity’s during the first couple of centuries. Each saw themselves as the true believers and the others as heretics. It is clear that paganism had a profound impact on the direction and course of Christian theology.
What is so amazing is that the common thread of Jesus’ prophetic viewpoint was maintained in the Bible, across the gospels, despite the apocalyptic notions of the writers and followers of the gospels. The biblical scholars believe this happened because both Jesus’ disciples and the leaders/teachers that followed them (e.g. Paul) did not fully understand what Jesus was teaching.
You might recall their lack of understanding was frequently reported in the gospels. What Jesus taught was so different from what they were expecting, yet so closely tied to familiar Old Testament teachings, that they were simultaneously spellbound, uplifted, and perplexed. Still, after Jesus was gone, they just couldn’t seem to free themselves of the need for something apocalyptic to occur, despite the clear prophetic message in Jesus’ teachings.
Paul, too, seemed affected by both Jesus’ teachings of love as well as Paul’s own background of dedication to every detail of Jewish law. Law and doctrine were at the foundation of his very being. When he had his spiritual awakening, he may have changed his spiritual view of Jesus’ role as redeemer, but not his need for strict religious discipline. The topics in his writings vacillate between beautiful expressions of Jesus’ prophetic message and detailed, legalistic explanations of proper Christian theology, unlike anything Jesus would have ever said about himself.
Despite this obvious clash of perspectives, even today fundamentalists appear to accept Paul’s apocalyptic perspective and dogma on faith, as opposed to Jesus' teachings and feel no need to explain or defend their decision to do that. In fact, I was told that Christian doctrine cannot be debated or rationally explained. It must be accepted on faith.
This stretches the meaning of “faith” beyond all limits. You can learn arithmetic and have faith in your ability to perform arithmetic calculations that you have never seen before. But how can you have faith in irrational doctrine and traditions that cannot be objectively confirmed through life events and which you must simply memorize? That does not demonstrate faith. That demonstrates obedience to what you have been taught and fear toward thinking differently. That is not developing faith. It is, rather, relenting to the propaganda of your own human heritage. There is a time for each of us to take on the responsibility for our personal spiritual thinking and development. When that moment occurs your journey of faith has truly begun.
My fundamentalist friends don’t seem to read the Bible to consider the accuracy or consistency of its contents. They simply assert there are no problems, no contradictions, then interpret the Bible however they wish. They continue to assert a lot of things, such as the inerrancy of the Bible, the need for literal interpretations including the stories of creation, heaven, hell, the devil, etc. which they accept ‘on faith.’ If fundamentalist Christian beliefs are considered the ‘orthodox’ beliefs for Christianity, then even Jesus could not qualify to be a Christian.
Even though my Christian beliefs appear to contrast sharply from my fundamentalist friends, they are spiritual Truth to me. I have lived them by applying them to the practical activities of my life and they have always provided better answers than I could have ever discovered on my own.
When you turn the other cheek in real life, it totally changes what’s happening and what others expect, and different outcomes result. Approaching people of different cultures, races, sexual orientation, etc. with an attitude of complete acceptance changes the dynamics of such encounters in ways that can easily lead to the resolution of conflicts. Applying Jesus’ teachings to everyday activities just hasn't failed me. I’m hooked and cherish dearly what I have learned from His teachings and example. I am compelled to hold firm to my Christian beliefs until God leads me through life experiences to even higher understandings.
I make only one demand of you, my fundamentalist friends. Just as I will always respect your right to practice apocalyptic Christianity as you understand it, (e.g. the teachings of Paul), I ask that you, also, respect my right to practice prophetic Christianity as I understand it (e.g. the teachings of Jesus). I must also thank you for prompting me to journey again through the Bible. It has meant more to me than you could ever imagine.
