At this point, having read the Gospels, we should have a fairly accurate picture of Jesus. Let us now hold it firmly before our eyes and use it to measure what we will read next, which naturally, will be the story of the very first Christians, as told by Luke in the Acts of the Apostles. It is pleasant reading, but I do wish to make a premise; although the first Christianity was the one started by Jesus himself, the original which we should refer to, it is not always, nor in every way, the best model, and we'll see why.
The book of Acts, or Acts of the Apostles, defined by some critics as a romanticized account, has been proven to be historically accurate and the most reliable for that early period of Christianity. There is much to be learned from this book, where we see the role of the Holy Spirit energizing the first disciples to bear witness and practice Jesus’ teachings - we see God working great miracles to spread his message and protect his young church - we see the courage of the first Christians and their spirit of love, unity and sacrifice - but we also see some problems arising in their midst, a disagreement, the cause of which already existed in Jesus' days, and that ran so deep that it eventually broke into the first Christian schism. Paul’s Epistles, which we will study after Acts, deal extensively with the reasons of this rift. To prepare for their later study, we must then seek to understand the background and dynamics of this event, as told by Luke in the book of Acts (and later by Paul in Galatians). Another reason for seeking understanding of this event is that it is not relegated to the past, but lives on to this very day, howbeit in different forms.
The importance of what is not written
When reading the book of Acts it is also crucial to note what is not written. For example if we see that a particular aspect of our Christianity is not mentioned as part of early Christianity, then it would behoove us to put it aside, for the time being, and return to the original simplicity. I'm not implying that there are no other valid aspects of our faith, which were revealed or understood later, but I am simply recommending that we proceed by stages, like in the building of a house, the foundations first, then the walls, etc...
On the other hand we will also note that certain practices of the early Christians are no longer part of modern Christianity. They were mainly part of an Israelite cultural heritage, with no particular relation to Christianity and were thus abandoned over time. A closer look at the socio-cultural environment of that period might help us understand better.
The historical socio-cultural context
The Israelites were the “chosen people” to whom God, through Moses, had given his laws, the so-called commandments. To get an idea of how these laws affected society in those days, one could perhaps look at a present day country in which the Islamic Law, or Sharia, is the constituted legal system. I am not using this example because the two things are identical, but simply because it gives an idea of a society where religious commandments do not determine only ethics and morality, but are also the official legal system. In the Israel of the early Christians, the Mosaic Law was the actual law as well as the religion. There was no distinction between the two and it regulated the social order, as well as expressed the will of God to the people. Unfortunately, under this provision, abuses of the law were often committed in the name of God, and those who exercised power did so legally, as well as spiritually, oppressing others in the name of God. Jesus came into this state of things and clashed with it brutally - especially with the religious leaders, those who interpreted and applied the law, who soon had him crucified. It wasn’t any different for his followers, who soon met the same wrath from the same hierarchy.
The beginning of a new era
Despite being ostracized by the authorities, and thanks to the many miracles and powerful manifestations of the Holy Spirit, the early Christians multiplied rapidly. These, including the apostles, all derived from that same Israelite culture which we just described. Though painfully aware of its shortcomings, they were nevertheless still influenced by it. One aspect of such cultural conditioning was that, by virtue of Abrahamic descent, they all felt part of a privileged elite, God’s chosen people and his representatives on earth. Their upbringing brought them to see all non-Jews condescendingly, as gentiles, pagans, infidels, and not worthy of equal respect and dignity. With these “inferior races” they even avoided contact, lest they became contaminated by it.
Many early Christians were also part of those crowds who initially rejected Jesus and voted in favor of his crucifixion. The reason was that he did not match their idea of a Messiah but, rather, that of an impostor. He had not liberated them from the Romans, nor restored the throne of David or made them powerful, as they though the Messiah would do. Later, as they heard of Jesus’ resurrection, saw further miracles by his disciples, many of them changed and came to recognized in Jesus some great one sent by God. It was not yet a complete change, nor enough to give them a new culture and a change of attitudes, and they continued to be Israelites in religion, laws, culture and outlook towards the outside world. For a few decades, Jerusalem’s Christians still lived in the Old Testament, with Jesus as a new supplement to it. Christianity thus belonged to the “chosen people” and, if it wasn’t for God’s intervention to bring about more substantial changes, it would have remained a sect within Judaism.
How did God change things? In the book of Acts we notice some key elements and the first is in chapter ten. There, Peter received a revelation from God instructing him not to consider the gentiles (non-Jews) as unclean, since in his eyes there was no difference between Israelites and gentiles. The enormity of the problem was expressed by Peter when, in obedience to that vision from God, entered the house of a Roman and said, “You know that it is an unlawful thing for a man, a Jew to keep company with or to come near to one of another nation. But God has shown me not to call any man common or unclean” [1]. Nothing could be clearer than that, but it wasn’t enough to bring about a significant change. Instead, the event through which God took hold of the helm of Christianity and changed its route, was the transformation of Saul into the Apostle Paul, as told in Acts chapter nine.
Saul, an educated Pharisee, zealous of the Jewish faith and tradition, had initially fought against the “heresy” of the new Christian sect. God intervened by blinding him, then opening his eyes again and, finally, Saul saw things as they were and became Paul. He then recognized Jesus as the true Messiah, the author of a brand New Covenant, and everything changed. Paul became the apostle par excellence, who then lead Christianity in its transformation from Jewish sect, into universal church.
Being unwelcomed in Jerusalem, Paul went to other nations and population centers of the Roman Empire. There he preached the good news (gospel) of Jesus to the Gentiles, without the heavy burden of old Jewish mores and laws, which he now saw as superseded in Christ. His success was enormous and, with the Spirit of God sustaining him, his new model of Christianity spread rapidly among non-Jewish populations. Eventually this developed into a deep rift with the mother church in Jerusalem, who did not accept Paul, nor his new Christians. If it weren’t for his successes, they would have chosen to ignore him, but because of the numbers who followed his “new” theology, they had to eventually come to terms with him.
The root of the problem
At the root of the problem was the fact that the Jerusalem church did not believe Paul’s doctrine to be correct. To them Paul was a new young upstart who did not really understand original orthodoxy. To be a Christian, they said, it was necessary to first keep the required prescriptions of the Mosaic Law. For them, in fact, Christianity was a supplement to the one true religion, namely that of the Old Testament. Paul, instead, claimed that Christ had begun a brand new era, a New Testament, and that the Old One was no longer binding for Christians.
The clash between these two ways of understanding Christianity was so severe that it never ended. It even resulted in an open confrontation between Peter and Paul [2] and was the cause of the first council of Jerusalem [3], which was resolved by a compromise, but did not end the disagreement.
An epic change and its effects
Paul remained on the outer reaches of the official church and his ideas were poorly received, if not openly opposed, by his colleagues in Jerusalem. This state of things remained fairly unchanged until a catastrophic event occurred. Although prophesied in detail, its fulfillment is not described in the book of Acts, and we must search other historical sources to learn about it. That event was the destruction of Jerusalem in 70 AD, and it was then that that original brand of Christianity, who still followed the old Jewish religion, lost its central role. The Jewish Christians of the so-called Concision (because circumcised) migrated elsewhere, mainly towards Arabia and, supposedly, it was from their descendants that Muhammad learned about Jesus. This could explains why the Quran reflects an opinion similar to that of some factions of early Jewish Christianity, who saw Jesus as a great one, but not as God incarnate, nor as the founder of a New Testament.
At a heavy cost, with the destruction of Jerusalem, the Diaspora of the Jews and of the Church of the Concision, Christianity finally matured and cut his umbilical cord to the Old Testament. Paul, from being the odd one out, became instead the leading Apostle. His vision for a universal Christianity became finally recognized and others followed him to proclaim it to the whole world. His writings, and those of his disciple Luke, became widely accepted and eventually formed the majority of the New Testament.
With this I leave you to the reading of the Acts of the Apostles, which I'm sure you will find fascinating.
1. Acts of the Apostles 10, 28
2. Epistle of Paul to the Galatians 2
3. Acts of the Apostles15
Sunday 20 February 2011
Wednesday 16 February 2011
Part I - The Method and the Gospels
Here is the study method which I proposed. Again, I recommend starting with the laying aside of what’s been previously understood about Christianity. This is not because it’s necessarily wrong, but simply to facilitate an orderly reconstruction upon a sound, clean foundation. Reassessing the building blocks of our faith is, in part, the intent of this method, and to do this we must move from bottom up, putting at the very base only the strongest and most reliable elements. I will not furnish these, but the Bible itself. All I will tell, is where to find them.
The actual course is divided into six main sections, titled Part I to VI. Each consist of some introductory pages, but the actual studying is carried out in the Bible. For example, this is “Part I” and concerns the Gospels and so it must be followed by the studying of the same. We can read the Gospels, or listen to them on audio, but it is essential that we immerse ourselves in these for a while. For whatever time that will take, it is best to refrain from going elsewhere in the Bible. I recommend the gospels of John and Matthew, as a start, as Mark and Luke are fairly similar to Matthew and can be read later.
Why start at the Gospels? Simply because in them we hear what Jesus himself taught, how he lived and what he did. Eventually we will move on to other things, but the Gospels will remain our foundation and the criterion for judging what will come later. While studying the Gospels, we will also come across some apparent contradictions and things that are hard to understand. We will eventually be able to resolve these as well, by either looking back to the Old Testament, or forward to the epistles. For the time being, however, we will stick to the Gospels and leave some of these questions for later. If we don’t first give priority to the words and works of Jesus Himself, we risk confusing Christianity with something else and create just one more syncretism, like so many before. This is why we must proceed step by step, laying first the foundation, and then building the rest of the house.
How to read the Gospels
The accounts of any event, however true and accurate they might be, always involve a measure of subjectivity and personal interpretation. The Gospels, moreover, speak of things that happened two thousand years ago. They were written in ancient languages and were geared to different people and cultures, which accounts for some of their differences in style, emphasis and content. Upon hearing this, some will perhaps doubt their reliability and wonder how much we can really trust them. The answer is simple – VERY MUCH! - and here is the reason why.
There are four evangelists and four Gospels, therefore, four points of view. If four different people see the same event unfolding before them, when they describe it, obviously, it will be from four different points of view. The event was the same but the accounts will be different. Some will emphasize those aspects that seemed most important to them, while others might barely mention them, or ignore them altogether. This diversity of emphasis, perspectives and narrative, however, does not at all weaken the reliability of the story. As a matter of fact it increases it. Why? Because if we had only one eyewitness, we would not so easily recognize the subjective elements of his story. We could not so easily separate his intention, opinion, or simple writing style from the events and the person portrayed in his account, which in our case is Jesus. The comparing of the accounts, allows us to see that indeed the events occurred, that the writers were either eyewitnesses or writing fro those who were, and even from their differences we gain further insight. In fact, the four stories, from four different perspectives, give us the opportunity to triangulate, so to speak, which allows depth of field and creates a three-dimensional image of Jesus, instead of just a flat one. There are more reason why the four Gospels can be trusted, but the ones I listed are those that account for the fairly accurate picture of Jesus which we received, even at such a time distance.
The personal experience factor
As I mentioned earlier, it all starts with a meeting that allows us to "try" Jesus, to personally experience that He is exactly what he claimed to be. Now we are studying the Gospels because we wish to know Him better and therefore deepen our relationship with him. Learning what He was like, will allows us to know what He is. Reading the Gospels is the most available and effective way of acquiring that knowledge, but it has some limits. Because the Gospels are written in human languages, they are therefore also limited by the same. Thankfully, our understanding of Jesus transcends those limits because He also communicates with us also by other means. The Gospel of John does, in fact, begin with these words "In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. He was in the beginning with God. All things came into being through Him, and without Him not even one thing came into being that has come into being. And the Word became flesh, and dwelled among us. And we beheld His glory, the glory as of the only begotten of the Father [1]. By this we see that Jesus is referred to as the “Logos”, translated as “Word” and that he is that part of God that creates and communicates. To this end He does also employ human languages and the printed page, but He alone is the eternal "Living Word" and not everything we read, not even in the Bible, can be considered exactly that. (For further reading on this please see appendix "Errors in the Bible?")
The apostle Paul, an expert on ancient scriptures said, “For now we see in a mirror dimly, but then face to face. Now I know in part, but then I shall fully know even as I also am fully known. [2]. By this we know that even the most thorough study of the Bible is limited and will only allow us a partial view - maybe not even that, if we don’t combine what we read to our personal experience with God, listening also to the other ways in which he seeks to communicates with us. This, I most earnestly encourage you to do, all through our study, through prayer, meditation and reflection on the partciular way in which God is revealing imself to you.
How to see beyond the words
So what is it that we want to see in the Gospels? First of all what Jesus was like! We’ve already recognized that the writers had different perspectives of the events concerning Jesus’ life on earth. By the way they recounted their stroy, we will also recognise that they had different personality and somewhat different aims. Matthew, for example, wrote for an Israelite audience and to show them that Jesus was their long-awaited messiah, he often quoted Old Testament scripture. This is a major characteristic of his gospel, probably the first to be written, at a time when Christianity was still contained within Judaism. John, instead, was the last apostles to write a Gospel and he had time to mature things about the nature of Jesus, which others did not understand before. It is John, in fact, who remembers Jesus saying "I have yet many things to say unto you, but ye cannot bear them now. Howbeit when he, the Spirit of truth, is come, he will guide you into all truth: for he shall not speak of himself; but whatsoever he shall hear, that shall he speak: and he will show you things to come. He shall glorify me: for he shall receive of mine, and shall show it unto you"[3]. John did exactly that in his Gospel, he proclaimed those things which were revealed to him much later by the Holy Spirit, and we shall soon see what they were.
Clearly, it is not necessary for us now to understand all the differences between the four evangelists and their gospels, nor to have a full explanation of all aspect that are a bit difficult to understand. With time a fuller understanding will come naturally and, for the time being, our efforts are better spent in trying to connect the dots and get a picture of what Jesus was like. If Jesus is the Living Word, the expression of God the Father, then if we see Him, we’ll see God: “Philip said unto him, Lord, show us the Father, and it suffices us. Jesus said unto him, have I been so long time with you, and yet hast thou not known me, Philip? He that hath seen me hath seen the Father" [4]. So it is in the Gospels that we can see Jesus, and to see Him better we must not only listen to what he taught, but also look at what he did, how he reacted to certain situations and how he handled different types of people. We must also seek to understand the kind of world he came into and the changes he was aiming towards. All these combined elements will help us to obtain the clearest and most complete picture of Jesus available.
How not to read
What we, instead, must not do, is project our preconceived ideas into what we read. By doing so and using only partial aspects of the gospels, we could in effect end up with a skewed image of Jesus, or one that is perhaps more to (or in) our likeness. For example, if we tend to be quarrelsome, presumptuous and judgmental towards others, we could find some excuse for it in the image of Jesus angrily driving out the money changers and merchants from the temple. If we tend, instead, towards self perfection, legalism and an intolerant attitude towards sinners, we could feel justified by Jesus’ statement "Ye have heard that it was said by them of old time, Thou shall not commit adultery: But I say unto you, That whosoever looketh on a woman to lust after her hath committed adultery with her already in his heart"[5]. By focusing only on partial aspects of the Gospel, instead of looking at the whole, we can easily paint Jesus as an angry prophet who punishes the wicked with a whip, or as an unforgiving moralist who, not only punishes people for the wrongs they do, but even for those they merely imagine.
Getting the full picture
This is why is so important to aim for a full spectrum of what Jesus was like, which is done by reading, comparing and studying the Gospels until each aspect of His life and message blend together as one. Let us take, for example, the sentence which was just quoted on adultery; taken alone it leads to certain automatic conclusions, but if we wish for a fuller picture, we need to search in the Gospels for how Jesus handled the various cases of adultery which he encountered. There is the adulteress who was brought to him for judgment, the Samaritan woman who had had five husbands and was living with a man she was not married to, Mary Magdalene, and so on [6].
This same principle works goes for everything else that we’ll be studying in the Bible. If we now apply it faithfully to our reading of the Gospels, I am convinced that, except for a few questions here and there, we will gain a fairly clear picture of Jesus, of what he taught and how he behaved. What’s more, is that His thoughts will begin to run through our minds, and his behavior will start to show in ours. Hopefully we will have reached the goal of this first part of our study. In any situation which we may encounter, we’ll then be able to ask "if Jesus was here now, what would he do?" and the answer should be easy. At that point we shall be ready to move on, as we will have learned the basic criterion to use for the rest of our study.
I end here this introduction by wishing you a happy and rewarding immersion into the Gospels.
Note: I tried not to be repetitive, but to make each part as complete as possible so that it could be used also as a separate unit, some repeating was unavoidable. Some deeper insights into some aspects of this course, but which I did not consider essential to the same, I have included as appendixes. They are mostly answer to some specific question that may arise while studying.
1. John 1, 1 to 3:14
2. 1st Corinthians 13, 12
3. John 16, 12 to 14
4. Gospel of John 14, 8:09
5. Matthew 5; 27.28
6. John 8: 3 to 11 and John 4: 16 to 19
The actual course is divided into six main sections, titled Part I to VI. Each consist of some introductory pages, but the actual studying is carried out in the Bible. For example, this is “Part I” and concerns the Gospels and so it must be followed by the studying of the same. We can read the Gospels, or listen to them on audio, but it is essential that we immerse ourselves in these for a while. For whatever time that will take, it is best to refrain from going elsewhere in the Bible. I recommend the gospels of John and Matthew, as a start, as Mark and Luke are fairly similar to Matthew and can be read later.
Why start at the Gospels? Simply because in them we hear what Jesus himself taught, how he lived and what he did. Eventually we will move on to other things, but the Gospels will remain our foundation and the criterion for judging what will come later. While studying the Gospels, we will also come across some apparent contradictions and things that are hard to understand. We will eventually be able to resolve these as well, by either looking back to the Old Testament, or forward to the epistles. For the time being, however, we will stick to the Gospels and leave some of these questions for later. If we don’t first give priority to the words and works of Jesus Himself, we risk confusing Christianity with something else and create just one more syncretism, like so many before. This is why we must proceed step by step, laying first the foundation, and then building the rest of the house.
How to read the Gospels
The accounts of any event, however true and accurate they might be, always involve a measure of subjectivity and personal interpretation. The Gospels, moreover, speak of things that happened two thousand years ago. They were written in ancient languages and were geared to different people and cultures, which accounts for some of their differences in style, emphasis and content. Upon hearing this, some will perhaps doubt their reliability and wonder how much we can really trust them. The answer is simple – VERY MUCH! - and here is the reason why.
There are four evangelists and four Gospels, therefore, four points of view. If four different people see the same event unfolding before them, when they describe it, obviously, it will be from four different points of view. The event was the same but the accounts will be different. Some will emphasize those aspects that seemed most important to them, while others might barely mention them, or ignore them altogether. This diversity of emphasis, perspectives and narrative, however, does not at all weaken the reliability of the story. As a matter of fact it increases it. Why? Because if we had only one eyewitness, we would not so easily recognize the subjective elements of his story. We could not so easily separate his intention, opinion, or simple writing style from the events and the person portrayed in his account, which in our case is Jesus. The comparing of the accounts, allows us to see that indeed the events occurred, that the writers were either eyewitnesses or writing fro those who were, and even from their differences we gain further insight. In fact, the four stories, from four different perspectives, give us the opportunity to triangulate, so to speak, which allows depth of field and creates a three-dimensional image of Jesus, instead of just a flat one. There are more reason why the four Gospels can be trusted, but the ones I listed are those that account for the fairly accurate picture of Jesus which we received, even at such a time distance.
The personal experience factor
As I mentioned earlier, it all starts with a meeting that allows us to "try" Jesus, to personally experience that He is exactly what he claimed to be. Now we are studying the Gospels because we wish to know Him better and therefore deepen our relationship with him. Learning what He was like, will allows us to know what He is. Reading the Gospels is the most available and effective way of acquiring that knowledge, but it has some limits. Because the Gospels are written in human languages, they are therefore also limited by the same. Thankfully, our understanding of Jesus transcends those limits because He also communicates with us also by other means. The Gospel of John does, in fact, begin with these words "In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. He was in the beginning with God. All things came into being through Him, and without Him not even one thing came into being that has come into being. And the Word became flesh, and dwelled among us. And we beheld His glory, the glory as of the only begotten of the Father [1]. By this we see that Jesus is referred to as the “Logos”, translated as “Word” and that he is that part of God that creates and communicates. To this end He does also employ human languages and the printed page, but He alone is the eternal "Living Word" and not everything we read, not even in the Bible, can be considered exactly that. (For further reading on this please see appendix "Errors in the Bible?")
The apostle Paul, an expert on ancient scriptures said, “For now we see in a mirror dimly, but then face to face. Now I know in part, but then I shall fully know even as I also am fully known. [2]. By this we know that even the most thorough study of the Bible is limited and will only allow us a partial view - maybe not even that, if we don’t combine what we read to our personal experience with God, listening also to the other ways in which he seeks to communicates with us. This, I most earnestly encourage you to do, all through our study, through prayer, meditation and reflection on the partciular way in which God is revealing imself to you.
How to see beyond the words
So what is it that we want to see in the Gospels? First of all what Jesus was like! We’ve already recognized that the writers had different perspectives of the events concerning Jesus’ life on earth. By the way they recounted their stroy, we will also recognise that they had different personality and somewhat different aims. Matthew, for example, wrote for an Israelite audience and to show them that Jesus was their long-awaited messiah, he often quoted Old Testament scripture. This is a major characteristic of his gospel, probably the first to be written, at a time when Christianity was still contained within Judaism. John, instead, was the last apostles to write a Gospel and he had time to mature things about the nature of Jesus, which others did not understand before. It is John, in fact, who remembers Jesus saying "I have yet many things to say unto you, but ye cannot bear them now. Howbeit when he, the Spirit of truth, is come, he will guide you into all truth: for he shall not speak of himself; but whatsoever he shall hear, that shall he speak: and he will show you things to come. He shall glorify me: for he shall receive of mine, and shall show it unto you"[3]. John did exactly that in his Gospel, he proclaimed those things which were revealed to him much later by the Holy Spirit, and we shall soon see what they were.
Clearly, it is not necessary for us now to understand all the differences between the four evangelists and their gospels, nor to have a full explanation of all aspect that are a bit difficult to understand. With time a fuller understanding will come naturally and, for the time being, our efforts are better spent in trying to connect the dots and get a picture of what Jesus was like. If Jesus is the Living Word, the expression of God the Father, then if we see Him, we’ll see God: “Philip said unto him, Lord, show us the Father, and it suffices us. Jesus said unto him, have I been so long time with you, and yet hast thou not known me, Philip? He that hath seen me hath seen the Father" [4]. So it is in the Gospels that we can see Jesus, and to see Him better we must not only listen to what he taught, but also look at what he did, how he reacted to certain situations and how he handled different types of people. We must also seek to understand the kind of world he came into and the changes he was aiming towards. All these combined elements will help us to obtain the clearest and most complete picture of Jesus available.
How not to read
What we, instead, must not do, is project our preconceived ideas into what we read. By doing so and using only partial aspects of the gospels, we could in effect end up with a skewed image of Jesus, or one that is perhaps more to (or in) our likeness. For example, if we tend to be quarrelsome, presumptuous and judgmental towards others, we could find some excuse for it in the image of Jesus angrily driving out the money changers and merchants from the temple. If we tend, instead, towards self perfection, legalism and an intolerant attitude towards sinners, we could feel justified by Jesus’ statement "Ye have heard that it was said by them of old time, Thou shall not commit adultery: But I say unto you, That whosoever looketh on a woman to lust after her hath committed adultery with her already in his heart"[5]. By focusing only on partial aspects of the Gospel, instead of looking at the whole, we can easily paint Jesus as an angry prophet who punishes the wicked with a whip, or as an unforgiving moralist who, not only punishes people for the wrongs they do, but even for those they merely imagine.
Getting the full picture
This is why is so important to aim for a full spectrum of what Jesus was like, which is done by reading, comparing and studying the Gospels until each aspect of His life and message blend together as one. Let us take, for example, the sentence which was just quoted on adultery; taken alone it leads to certain automatic conclusions, but if we wish for a fuller picture, we need to search in the Gospels for how Jesus handled the various cases of adultery which he encountered. There is the adulteress who was brought to him for judgment, the Samaritan woman who had had five husbands and was living with a man she was not married to, Mary Magdalene, and so on [6].
This same principle works goes for everything else that we’ll be studying in the Bible. If we now apply it faithfully to our reading of the Gospels, I am convinced that, except for a few questions here and there, we will gain a fairly clear picture of Jesus, of what he taught and how he behaved. What’s more, is that His thoughts will begin to run through our minds, and his behavior will start to show in ours. Hopefully we will have reached the goal of this first part of our study. In any situation which we may encounter, we’ll then be able to ask "if Jesus was here now, what would he do?" and the answer should be easy. At that point we shall be ready to move on, as we will have learned the basic criterion to use for the rest of our study.
I end here this introduction by wishing you a happy and rewarding immersion into the Gospels.
Note: I tried not to be repetitive, but to make each part as complete as possible so that it could be used also as a separate unit, some repeating was unavoidable. Some deeper insights into some aspects of this course, but which I did not consider essential to the same, I have included as appendixes. They are mostly answer to some specific question that may arise while studying.
1. John 1, 1 to 3:14
2. 1st Corinthians 13, 12
3. John 16, 12 to 14
4. Gospel of John 14, 8:09
5. Matthew 5; 27.28
6. John 8: 3 to 11 and John 4: 16 to 19
Tuesday 1 February 2011
The First Step
Let us begin with the Gospels. Let us forget, or at least try to set aside, what we have learned so far about Christianity. Let us go back to the original, to the founder, to Jesus himself. I know that some will question the reliability of the Gospels, wondering if these are sufficient to know who the real Jesus was. I know there are apparent inconsistencies, contradictions and some aspects of the Gospels which are hard to understand, when taken into our modern day perspective. Please bear with me, as we examine the reasons why the Gospels can be trusted, and why they remain the bedrock documents of Christianity. Clearly, we will also move past these, into the more complex reasoning of St. Paul, of the theologians and historians, who help us understand the Gospels in their proper context. Yes, to answer more complex questions we will need more complex answers, but our aim will always be to return to simplicity. I am, in fact, convinced that when the work will be done, everything will appear simple and straightforward. Even those aspects of the Bible that are a bit 'hard to swallow, will find a suitable explanation.
Meeting Jesus
It would be no use to search for something, and be ultimately unwilling to find it. Equally pointless it would be to try and understand Christianity, while unwilling to try it. To try it one must simply meet Jesus, which can happen instantaneously, or gradually, and starts with a simple act of faith, a simple yes, a prayer, an opening up to him, the raising of a hand or a look. There are many ways in which a person can open the door of their heart and let Jesus come in. There isn’t a specific formula for it, but whoever does it, in whichever way they like, will meet Him and will know it. If you, who read, are not sure if you ever met Him, I invite you to stop right now, shut everything else out and open your heart to Jesus, with your own words, or in silence, but ask him to come in and to manifest himself to you.
Knowing Jesus
As we all know, it isn’t quite enough to meet someone in order to really know them. Just the same, meeting Jesus is only the beginning, and the real discovery comes after, extending for a lifetime and beyond. Even the disciples didn’t know Jesus very well, while He was with them. There were several obstacles to their full understanding of Him, like His physical presence, which prevented them from seeing who He really was in the Spirit. They were also conditioned by the culture of that time, especially by popular expectations on how the Messiah should appear, thus they were also unable to recognise his true role till the very end. Nevertheless, they followed Him, they healed the sick, cast out demons, preached the Gospel and did many great works in His name.
Later, the apostle Paul went far beyond their first understanding of Jesus and struggled long, epistle after epistle, to try and help them see what great change had come about with Jesus, a passage from Old to New Testament. The Apostle John lived longer and went even further, including in his Gospel concepts which had not been understood by his fellow apostles, nor by Paul. In essence, discovering and understanding Jesus is a never ending process, but it’s a road worth taking, with wonders to be had at every turn and it’s worth going the distance. In the following chapters we will walk together.
Meeting Jesus
It would be no use to search for something, and be ultimately unwilling to find it. Equally pointless it would be to try and understand Christianity, while unwilling to try it. To try it one must simply meet Jesus, which can happen instantaneously, or gradually, and starts with a simple act of faith, a simple yes, a prayer, an opening up to him, the raising of a hand or a look. There are many ways in which a person can open the door of their heart and let Jesus come in. There isn’t a specific formula for it, but whoever does it, in whichever way they like, will meet Him and will know it. If you, who read, are not sure if you ever met Him, I invite you to stop right now, shut everything else out and open your heart to Jesus, with your own words, or in silence, but ask him to come in and to manifest himself to you.
Knowing Jesus
As we all know, it isn’t quite enough to meet someone in order to really know them. Just the same, meeting Jesus is only the beginning, and the real discovery comes after, extending for a lifetime and beyond. Even the disciples didn’t know Jesus very well, while He was with them. There were several obstacles to their full understanding of Him, like His physical presence, which prevented them from seeing who He really was in the Spirit. They were also conditioned by the culture of that time, especially by popular expectations on how the Messiah should appear, thus they were also unable to recognise his true role till the very end. Nevertheless, they followed Him, they healed the sick, cast out demons, preached the Gospel and did many great works in His name.
Later, the apostle Paul went far beyond their first understanding of Jesus and struggled long, epistle after epistle, to try and help them see what great change had come about with Jesus, a passage from Old to New Testament. The Apostle John lived longer and went even further, including in his Gospel concepts which had not been understood by his fellow apostles, nor by Paul. In essence, discovering and understanding Jesus is a never ending process, but it’s a road worth taking, with wonders to be had at every turn and it’s worth going the distance. In the following chapters we will walk together.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)