Charting a New Reformation, Part XXXII– The Ninth Thesis, Ethics (concluded)

Column by Bishop John Shelby Spong on 25 August 2016 11 Comments
Please login with your account to read this essay.
 

Question

With all the information available today, why can’t biblical scholars deduce, as you do Bishop Spong, that the New Testament writings are interpretive based on Jewish writings and on traditions? Why don’t they do the comparisons between the Old Testament writings to the writings of the gospel writers

Answer

Dear Nancy,

Thank you for your questions and for being part of that great weekend at the First Congregational Church in Henderson, NC. That church is one of the great congregations in America, made so by a combination of outstanding clergy leadership and the Walter Ashley Lectureship that brings scholarly teachers into that church year after year. It was a privilege for me to be the Walter Ashley lecturer for the fifth time this past fall.

The question you ask is so basic. The gospels did not drop from heaven fully written. During the years after the crucifixion (30 CE) and before the first gospel was written (72 CE), the story of Jesus was passed on in the synagogue. During 42 years at a minimum, the memory of Jesus was wrapped inside and interpreted through the Hebrew scriptures. The messianic images of these scriptures were applied to him; the utterances of the Hebrew prophets were used to incorporate Jesus into those utterances. The liturgical life of the synagogue was used to organize the memory of the life of Jesus – so that he was said to have been crucified at the time of the Passover and transfigured at the time of Dedications or Hanukkah. Then Jesus was made to offer harvest parables at the time of Sukkoth, the harvest season of the Jews, to cleanse and heal people at the time of Yom Kippur, to have John the Baptist proclaim the arrival of the Kingdom of God at Rosh Hashanah and to have Jesus deliver the Sermon on the Mount at the time of Shavuot.

The gospels were thus never intended to be literal accounts of what Jesus said or did, but interpretive accounts of Jesus told against the background of the life of the synagogue. All Jewish readers of the gospel understood this. When the church became predominantly Gentile, however, around the year 150 CE, biblical literalism entered the picture. To literalize these Jewish scriptures is a Gentile heresy, born in Gentile ignorance.

Many parts of the Christian church continue to live in that Gentile ignorance. That is why many Christians do not see these obvious comparisons. Part of what I feel compelled to do is to help people read the gospels through Jewish lenses. That is the major theme of my latest book: Biblical Literalism: A Gentile Heresy. It will be at least another century before the revelation as to how the gospels were intended to be read will fully have won the day. I am confident that it will ultimately prevail. Religious ideas change very slowly, but they do change and they will change.

I am glad you are part of this change. Share it.

My best,
John Shelby Spong

 

Comments

 

11 thoughts on “Charting a New Reformation, Part XXXII– The Ninth Thesis, Ethics (concluded)

  1. WordPress › Error

    There has been a critical error on this website.

    Learn more about troubleshooting WordPress.