david@cvl.UUCP (David Harwood) (04/02/85)
In reply to reply <1332@aecom.UUCP> by teitz@aecom.UUCP (Eliyahu Teitz) to Don Black, Re: Identity ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Black: > > 2. At the time of Christ, these people were known as the Scribes > and Pharisees. Christ had absolutely nothing good to say about them. > In fact, He even identified them directly as the sons of Satan Teitz: Of course not. Why should he have anything good to say about people who challenged his claims? If he was right, why did he bother with them. The only reason he fought them ( had nothing good to say about them ) could be because they were right and he didn't want those who listened to him to research and see how wrong he was. ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ According to Mr. Black, there is a question about his "Identity". First, let's not be so sure about who are the Scribes and Pharisees. In a manner of speaking, it may turn out that Eliyahu Teitz is not, while Don Black is. (I am speaking figuratively, of course, and do not want to offend Mr. Teitz.) Let us be more deliberative about this. While I cannot insist upon anything, on the basis of circumstantial evidence, it would seem that at least three or four of the NT figures about Jesus were probably Pharisees -- Nicodemus, Joseph of Arimathaea, certainly Paul, possibly Nathanael, also the beloved disciple, the witness of John. There is reason to believe that all were students of the Law, or known to the religious leaders, according to what is written. They were more likely to be Pharisees of the time than anything else, looking for the coming of the Messiah, the resurrection of the dead, and the rule of righteousness. (Of course, one may deny that the life of Jesus represented these things, but that is another matter.) In any case, John 8 does not say what is implied by Don Black, and apparently presumed by Eliyahu Teitz. Jesus does not say that these Pharisees are identically (~all and only~) the sons of Satan. To begin with, the style of scriptural writing is ordinarily hyperbolical, referring inclusively to groups of individuals. (This is not peculiar to the NT writings; the purpose is to be popularly, forcefully persuasive, not nicely accountable and precise. Commentaries are for nicer specu- lations.) Besides this, it is already reported that Jesus told a woman of the Samaritans, who were alienated from the Jews, that they worship what they do not understand, unlike the Jews, and that salvation comes from the Jews. Furthermore, in chapter 7 of John, which precedes the hostile encounter with some Pharisees in the temple where Jesus was teaching, it is reported that some of these Jews intended to kill him. In chapter 8, Jesus says that they are 'sons of Satan' because they want to kill him, that, therefore, they can hardly be expected to believe what he says. The point is that Jesus is observing their hostile prejudice. These 'Pharisees' had very good reason to want to be rid of Jesus, considering that he condemned the hypocrisy of the religious leaders, and claimed to represent God himself. How could the Messiah do this? We are better than the sinful rabble who know nothing. He is therefore a pretender we must get rid of. (We forget that ancient peoples were not 'humane', as we think of ourselves. It is a culturally relative thing. We don't go around stoning people; we threaten to annihilate the entire planet, while starving the poor who are racially inferior anyway.) It is dangerous hypocrisy to deny our own prejudice and hatred: elsewhere Jesus says that the one who hates has the heart of a murderer; there is no doubt that they hated him; just as Don Black hates the Jews; or as you may very well hate him, although you have equivocated. (I am not excepted; but I don't believe in marching him or anyone to the gas chambers, for any reason (as some have suggested on the Net). After all, while it is impossible for us, God in his merciful wisdom, may save the man with the murderous heart even tomorrow. This is simply 'justice' without mercy: it despairs of even the power of God to redeem us. The true 'atheist' is not one who denies the existence of God -- he is the one who denies redemption to another, acting as if he were God himself, knowing that another will never change. For this reason, Jesus said that we must always forgive those who ask; for the one who is not forgiven can never change.) My point is that both Jesus and those Jews who died in the holocaust were innocent victims of rationalized prejudice and hatred. It is total hypocrisy to deny this, and leaves us with the heart of repressed murderers, not children of God, but of blind, destructiveness. You ask why Jesus should reply to his accusers? Actually, this very question may be answered in this same passage. They ask "Who are you?" And it seems that he answers with the question, "Why should I speak to you at all?" Then he answers both questions, "I have much to say to you -- and in judgement. But he who sent me speaks the truth, and what I heard from him I report to the world." This is essentially what Jesus later told Pilate, that he had come to tell the truth. Obviously, this is not a welcome development, in any time or place. But then the Gospel is not an historical record; rather, it is eternally true. That the Gospel is eternal brings up my last point, which is perhaps most important. Everywhere 'Pharisees' or 'Jews' are referred to in the Gospel, you may substitute 'Christian', or 'atheist' also, and the scriptures are not less true. It is true so long as there are hypocrisy, prejudice, violence, merciless 'justice', and a self-serving elite. The proof of this is the holocaust, which was the terrible outcome of murderous 'Christian' ideology; this sin was so terrible that the nations, because of their collective guilt, did recreate the political state of Israel after nineteen centuries. And even the Catholic Church, which was largely but partly, responsible renounced the blood libel against the Jewish people. So I say that the extermination of millions of innocent Jews is like the execution of Jesus, and that those who deny the holocaust are like those who deny Christ. What, then, is the 'identity' of the 'Pharisees' and the 'Christians'? The truth is that it is we 'Christians' who have betrayed Christ to death. What do I mean? I mean that although we Christians did not live then, we have the same hearts as those who did condemn him. And our world history is still resounding with increasing injustice and violence, and no one knows what sacrifice will be, until we live in peace. Will there be another even more terrible holocaust, as many Nobel laureates have warned? Jesus lamented over Jerusalem, 'the city of peace', "If only you knew the ways of peace." But what he then said, to all of us, was that we shall not see him again (and we shall not see the civilization of peace), until we say "Blessed is he (Christ) who comes in the Name of the Lord." That is, we shall not have peace until we are willing to live as he has shown us. It is not a matter of the Messiah coming; it is a matter of our receiving him. Like the dove of Noah, the message of repentance of Jonah (dove), like the dove of the Holy Spirit. When shall the 'Shalom' of God be received? Everything must begin with some and end with others. According to the wisdom of God, Christ arose among the Jews of all nations on Earth. Not because they were already justified, but because we, as well, are not.