I regard the teaching and work of Jesus Christ as having been encapsulated by the Fourth Gospel (of 'John') and confirmed by reflection and intuition.
Yet this is extremely different from recorded historical Christianity - which therefore suggests that the 'true' message has been greatly distorted (and also over-complexified); and from a very early stage after the death of Jesus.
The two great distorters have been the Old Testament and Ancient Hebrew Jewish religion in one direction; and, in another direction, the Greek and Roman ('classical') philosophy, especially that of Pythagoras, Plato and the Neo-Platonists and the 'Gnostics' - which comprise what modern Men call the Perennial Philosophy.
The Hebrew distortion is to regard Christianity as a development of Ancient Judaism, that preserves its Laws, is lived in accordance with Law, and remains guided by the ancient teachings, wisdom, prophecy etc.
It regards Christians as a tribe, and salvation as happening at a group (i.e. church) level ('no salvation outside the church'); it regards the Old Testament as true (inerrant) - just as true and important as any of the New Testament.
This Old Testament distortion came very early, and is most evident in the Gospel of Matthew; but also permeates Paul's letters - and indeed is mainstream among Christianity through its history.
The distortion from classical philosophy assimilates Christianity within pre-existent philosophical and abstract concepts of God (as the 'Omni-God'), a (modified) concept of the ultimate oneness of all things, and the idea that time (and mortal life) is an earthly and mortal illusion and a period of trial and suffering merely - such that divine reality is beyond time, and experiences all simultaneously; and the aim of a Christian should be to die and escape this illusory and essentially evil mortal life.
This distortion came in mainly with some of the early church leaders (church fathers). The Gnostics (who pre-dated the life of Christ, and continued afterwards) were, I believe, merely a more extreme version of the same distortion that afflicts mainstream Christianity: the distortion towards oneness and abstraction, the need for expert philosophical knowledge - the belief that the spiritual is higher than the material; a powerful aversion to the personal and to the incarnated a tendency to regard this mortal life as essentially evil, including our-selves, with the idea of Original Sin (the Gnostics went further to believe the mortal life and world was created by 'the devil' equivalent).
All of these Gnostic features were incorporated, to varying degrees, in mainstream Christianity (some via Paul, in particular; but mainly embedded by later theologians); and led to the powerful strand of asceticism and 'negative theology' (via negativa) which remains strong among intellectual Christians.
These distortions were probably inevitable, and perhaps necessary, to the history of Christianity; because Men saw themselves as members of a group; and therefore naturally saw and experienced salvation in a groupish way.
And the church leaders justified their role (and the dependence of laity upon them) mainly by their superior expertise and intellectual capacity - rather like Plato's philosopher-kings or Gnostic initiates.
But now that modern Men experience themselves as individuals, and the Christian churches and their leadership are corrupt, and mainstream secular discourse is almost wholly abstract - the time has come to take Christianity 'straight'...
I think more people need to focus upon Christ's message as it was taught and lived by Jesus Christ; as described by the only eye-witness to his ministry; the disciple who Jesus loved; and the first Man to experience resurrection - that is to say the account by Lazarus: the author of the Fourth Gospel.
5 comments:
The two great distorters have been the Old Testament and Ancient Hebrew Jewish religion in one direction; <...>.
The Hebrew distortion is to regard Christianity as a development of Ancient Judaism, that preserves its Laws, is lived in accordance with Law, and remains guided by the ancient teachings, wisdom, prophecy etc.
The Ancient Judaism referred to is a highly-influential literary construct whose relation to the actual breadth of religion(s) practised in the Holy Land before Christ, has yet to be fully elaborated by archaeological research. One thing we do know is that the Old Testament as we have it was still "under construction", or at least being edited, at the time the Dead Sea Scrolls were prepared. The editing process was (presumably) designed to suppress or at least disparage any evidence of real diversity of belief.
John the Baptist exhorted everyone to engage in an about-turn of mind, or metanoia, and I often suspect Christians think that Christianity represented a complete and novel about-turn from the religion of the day, that which is now equated with the Old Testament's "Ancient Judaism". But it seems implausible to me that the original Christianity would have ever taken off if it had not been able to build on a pre-existing proto-Christianity.
Who are the promoters of the Hebrew distortion? Apart from the Calvinists, there are the "on the defensive" people, who don't want to use the term "Old Testament" because it is derogatory to the Jews (hence the use of the strictly-incorrect term "the Hebrew Scriptures") and who will invite the local rabbi to give the sermon at Mattins. The attitude they manifest seems to be one of belated apology for someone in the past having supposedly taken over and squatted on a set of scriptures that are rightfully the property of another religion, and upon which novel and forced interpretations have then, it is assumed, been imposed.
No apology is warranted.
@wa Well you need to distinguish between what Jesus taught and what would catch-on, because that's exactly my point.
"I think more people need to focus upon Christ's message as it was taught and lived by Jesus Christ . . ."
I agree. Most believe that everything beyond the Fourth Gospel only serves to add to, flesh out, and enrich Christ's message, but I don't get that sense when I read beyond the Fourth Gospel. In my more critical moments, I am reminded of Dostoevsky's Grand Inquisitor and the arrogant insistence that Christ's original message needed "correcting".
A few months ago I visited the supposed tomb of supposed Gospel writing John. There was no-one there! Just an inscribed stone with a rope around that took half an hour wandering amongst the rubble to find.
I was flabbergasted.
While across the valley at Mary’s House, where she officially possibly spent the remainder of her days, restaurants and gift shops were heaving. Likewise down the road at Ephesus.
Officially John wrote the fourth gospel. And this site is his official resting place. Its decline from earlier reverence to a neglected pile of rubble over the last millennium reflects what Christianity really thinks of that gospel and it’s official author. And is in marked contrast to the amount of time spent explaining it from the pulpit.
(For clarity this is not a comment on the fourth gospels authorship which I believe to be the testimony of Lazarus but put out under Johns name for some reason. It seems they met.)
@Colin. Very interesting.
I can see why it was necessary, or at least contextually expedient, to frame and distort IV Gospel until at least the modern era (from c500 ya). But now its time has come.
Post a Comment