Scholar to Address
"Jewishness of Jesus"
(Remnant News Watch
March 15, 2010)
by Mark Alessio
REMNANT COLUMNIST, New York
(www.RemnantNewspaper.com
Posted 1/18/10)
Should Jews who are committed to their faith be interested
in Jesus? Would Christians who believe in the divinity of
Christ want to know about Jesus the Jew? “James Tabor, a
scholar of early Christianity, says he will pose these
‘deliberately provocative’ questions in his talk ‘What Kind
of Jew Was Jesus?’ … at UNC Asheville's [University of North
Carolina-Asheville] Reuter Center,” writes Arnold Wengrow in
the Asheville Citizen-Times (Feb. 7, 2010):
“Next to Moses, Jesus was the most famous Jew on the
planet,” Tabor said in a telephone interview from his office
at UNC Charlotte, where he chairs the religious studies
department. “If he was a faithful Jew in his own world,” he
said, “there's a sense, as (Jewish philosopher) Martin Buber
said, that Jews can reclaim him. Not as what the church made
him, but as he was” …. Asheville resident Jay Jacoby, who
chairs the advisory board of the Center for Jewish Studies,
agrees that Christians and Jews need to understand better
how Jesus lived his entire life as a Jew. Tabor, he said,
“is redefining what we know about first-century Judaism
because it's the same historical context as early
Christianity.”
According to Baptist minister Mark Mullinax, learning about
“Jesus the Jew” is an antidote to the idea that Jesus “only
wants to
save
us for heaven”:
“If we emphasize the Christ that only wants to
save
us for heaven,” he said, “then citizenship is only for the
next world.” Mullinax calls that “purchasing heaven at the
price of earth.” If the emphasis is only on Christ and one's
salvation, he said, “that's only half the Gospel. I think
Christians can do very well to get back in touch with the
full range of the teachings and life of Jesus the Jew.”
Comment:
James Tabor gives the game away when he states that Jews can
reclaim Jesus “not as what the church made him, but as he
was.” Therein lies the true agenda of those who claim to
present the “historical Jesus.” They posit a threefold view
of Christ: (1) He was merely another itinerant teacher or
rabbi who courted controversy; (2) After his death,
unscrupulous disciples created a false cult of divinity
around him; (3) The Catholic Church, aided by the Gospels
(which are mostly composed of mythological fantasies and
fables), has propagated and profited from the superstitious
cult of the Divine Jesus for centuries, fooling billions of
people over the centuries in the process.
The Chairman of the advisory board of the Center for Jewish
Studies says “Christians and Jews need to understand better
how Jesus lived his entire life as a Jew.” A Baptist
minister says “Christians can do very well to get back in
touch with the full range of the teachings and life of Jesus
the Jew.” In effect, we are to take Jesus Christ –
God-made-man, the Redeemer of the human race – and compress
Him into a tiny box labeled “Jesus the Jew.” It is not His
miracles, His Resurrection, His Ascension that are important
here. It is His “Jewishness.” Imagine looking back at the
life of Michelangelo and saying, “It was not his art, not
the Sistine Chapel, that was of import – it was his
‘Italian-ness’.”
There is another point to mention here, and that is the
condescension shown to Catholics by those who claim to know
the “historical” Jesus. They approach us wide-eyed, like
eager kindergarten teachers, and say, “Did YOU know that
Jesus was Jewish, boys and girls?” And we are supposed to
gasp in amazement, as though we had never heard the like.
Well, guess what? It is none other than The Jewish
Encyclopedia that notes, regarding the early Church Fathers:
The
most important of the fathers lived and worked in a period
when Christianity still had many points of contact with
Judaism, and they found that the latter was a splendid
support in the contest against paganism, although it had to
be combated in the development of Christian doctrine. So the
Fathers of the Church are seen at one time holding to a
Jewish conception of the universe and making use of Jewish
arguments, at another rejecting a part of such teaching and
formulating a new one. In the contest of Christianity
against paganism the Church Fathers employ the language of
the Hellenistic literature as found in Philo, Josephus, the
Apocrypha, and the Sibylline Books, all of which draw upon
the Prophets of the Old Testament. Thus, practically, only
the polemic features in the activity of the Church Fathers
directed against Judaism can be considered as new and
original. But in order to wage successful war against
paganism, they, as well as Christians in general, had to
acquaint themselves with the religious documents of Judaism;
and this was possible only if they entered into personal
relations with the Jews: through these personal relations
the Church Fathers become of signal importance to Judaism.
Catholic scholars have always understood the relationship of
Catholicism to Judaism. Through the Old Testament readings
at Mass, Catholic laypeople have always been exposed to this
Jewish “connection.” But, this connection was always seen
correctly in the context of the Plan of Salvation and the
Salvific Mission of Jesus Christ. This will sound
mean-spirited to tender modern ears, but it is this context
alone that gives Judaism its meaning for Catholics – and the
world.
Jesus
proclaimed on the banks of the Jordan: “Bring forth
therefore fruits worthy of penance; and do not begin to say,
We have Abraham for our father. For I say unto you, that God
is able of these stones to raise up children to Abraham.”
And St. Paul, writing to the Galatians, said: “For as many
of you as have been baptized in Christ, have put on Christ.
There is neither Jew nor Greek: there is neither bond nor
free: there is neither male nor female. For you are all one
in Christ Jesus.”
The
fact that Jesus was born to a Jewish woman and raised as a
faithful Jew is important, not in a merely racial or
nationalist sense. It is important because “salvation is of
the Jews (Jn. 4:22),” because the Redeemer and Savior of the
World would come from the lineage of David. Isaias wrote,
“And there shall come forth a rod out of the root of Jesse,
and a blossom shall come up from it.” The root is the House
of David; the rod coming from the root is the Virgin Mary;
the blossom is Jesus Christ.
Writer
and broadcaster Howard Jacobson of the BBC has provided us
with one of the more egregious examples of the true agenda
of the “historical” Jesus crowd. In his article, “Behold!
The Jewish Jesus” (The Guardian – Jan. 9, 2009), Jacobson
states:
Messiah does not mean son of God. Nor did Jesus ever claim
to be the son of God. The idea would have been nonsense to
him. The God of the Jews is indivisible, capable of
refulgence – a shekhina, a shining presence – but not
incarnation …. Remove the slippery metaphor of personal
salvation and the blasphemy of his being the Son of God –
with neither of which concept Jesus himself had the
slightest bit to do – and there is nothing that he is
reported to have said or performed that would have raised
the ire of his fellow Jews sufficiently for them to chant
for his death. In so far as we can separate his actual words
from later theological interpretations of them – the
historical Jesus from the person Christians writing after
the event needed him to be – the voice we hear is that of an
unequivocally Jewish healer and teacher …. Ours is not a
peaceable world, but it would go a way to restoring harmony
in some parts of it were Christianity to acknowledge
responsibility for the anti-Jewish crimes committed in its
name. Admitting the consequences of its falsification of the
Jew Jesus would be a place to start.
Got it? If we Catholics want to restore “harmony” in the
world, all we have to do is deny the Divinity of Christ.
That’s all. Do men like Jacobson care one whit for their
“historical” Jesus, or does it just make for a convenient
club with which to bash those “blasphemous” Catholics over
the head? Jesus did not regard Himself as the “Son of God?”
Just how stupid does Jacobson think his audience is? Jesus
proclaimed:
And no man hath ascended into heaven, but He that descended
from heaven, the Son of Man who is in heaven. And as Moses
lifted up the serpent in the desert, so must the Son of Man
be lifted up: That whosoever believeth in Him, may not
perish; but may have life everlasting. For God so loved the
world, as to give His only begotten Son; that whosoever
believeth in Him, may not perish, but may have life
everlasting …. Before Abraham was, I AM …. I and the Father
are One.”
After Jesus read from the Prophet Isaias in the synagogue at
Nazareth, He proclaimed, “This day is fulfilled this
scripture in your ears.” As a result, “All they in the
synagogue, hearing these things, were filled with anger. And
they rose up and thrust Him out of the city; and they
brought Him to the brow of the hill, whereon their city was
built, that they might cast Him down headlong.” THIS is what
the “historical Jesus” people are doing today, in words if
not in actions. Their aim is simple: the eradication of the
Divine Jesus (and His replacement by a harmless “teacher”).
And what is James Tabor’s motive? Tabor is the author of the
2007 book, “The Jesus Dynasty: The Hidden History of Jesus,
His Royal Family, and the Birth of Christianity.” The book
is a desperate attempt to attribute an earthly father for
Jesus. Among the theories put forth by Tabor (who clings to
the unscholarly apocryphal concept that Joseph was an old
man when he married Mary), was that Joseph died without
children by Mary, so, according to the practice of “Levirate
Marriage,” Clophas or Alphaeus married his widow, Mary, the
Mother of Jesus.
Seriously, how much faith can you put in a Biblical
“scholar” who mistakes St. James for the “Beloved Disciple,”
believes that James was the physical half-brother of Jesus,
and makes the preposterous claim that “no one in the early
church even imagined” the doctrine of Mary’s Perpetual
Virginity? It is no wonder that Dr. Donald Carson, an expert
in New Testament history from Trinity University in Illinois
and a critic of Tabor’s book, stated, “What Dr. Tabor has
done is assumed that the whole thing cannot be. It is a sham
and therefore the evidence has to be jiggered, it has to be
selectively appealed to in order to take away the evidence
of God actually doing something in space, time, history. At
that point, no amount of evidence will ever convince him
unless he's open to the possibility that Dr. Tabor himself
is wrong.”
No, we Catholics will NOT pretend that the Redemption of the
human race was a fairy tale. We will not pretend that Jesus
Christ was just an ancient “Walter Mitty,” or yet another
ambitious reformer who got too big for his sandals. Unlike
those “scholars” who would rewrite the History of Salvation,
we will continue to proclaim, along with St. Paul:
For if the dead rise not again, neither is Christ risen
again. And if Christ be not risen again, your faith is vain,
for you are yet in your sins. Then they also that are fallen
asleep in Christ, are perished. If in this life only we have
hope in Christ, we are of all men most miserable. But now
Christ is risen from the dead, the first fruits of them that
sleep: For by a man came death, and by a man the
resurrection of the dead. And as in Adam all die, so also in
Christ all shall be made alive. (1 Cor. 15:16-22)
ALSO IN THIS WEEK'S REMNANT
NEW WATCH...
-
The Sacred Music of Dave Brubeck
-Unearthed
Relics Help Determine Pilgrimage Routes
Want
More News?
Mark Alessio's
"Remnant News Watch" column appears in every issue of
The Remnant
Subscribe to
The Remnant! For more information, please click
here |