Wednesday, 18 June 2008

Wrong Endings

Dougal in Scotland has enjoyed a bishop's lecture and I think it is worth adding an echo for that. The Bishop of Edinburgh has a theology of the transcendent God that seems to be along the lines of Isaiah Berlin's clashing values, and thus the Trinity is a "wrestle in intercession" as well as an exchange of perfect love. Anyway, whatever these metaphors - they are, aren't they? - there is a necessity of plurality in an Anglican Church in a place like Scotland whereas the Africans had missionaries in hostile climes where they were forced by oppositional necessity to sing from the same hymn sheet. Thus they are more rigid even today contrasted with Western plurality.

Not sure I agree, entirely. It is perfectly possible for Christianity to build on the local paganism and the magic and the expectation and the suffering - and for it to be multifaceted. Maybe this is a legacy of missionaries who created their opposition, who were themselves arrogant and narrow. African society is no less complex than Western. It could be that a sacred canopy that is still effective forces a kind of unity within itself, whereas a secular/ plural setting allows all manner of diversities. Nor do we live in splendid isolation even if cultural assumptions vary from place to place. Dougal puts it:

Disagreement, conflict and painful struggle is part of the Trinitarian nature of the Church and to opt out of that into a conservative holy huddle or a liberal glee club is to turn your back on God and fail to follow the Commandment not to take the Lord's name in vain...

I don't know what a liberal glee club is. It's complicated and I don't want to go into it too far here, but anyone reading my blog will see occasional references to Liberal Catholicism. I developed a contact with one group that saw its origins in both the theosophical related Liberal Catholic development out of Old Catholicism and with a historic Unitarian based offshoot into Free Catholicism. Developments that were unforeseen and pastorally based and showing something about small institutions have led me to break that connection now, which is a shame. None of the liberal connections I have had in the past were glee clubs, in fact they are rather testing because nothing can be left to just received doctrines. You have to test everything, and wondering what is myth, and fantasy, and supernatural, and magic, and faith, and history; and the relative importance and non-importance of these. James Martineau (pictured: an image used by the Unitarian Historical Society) projects right into this current religious situation: with him you can see how religion is on a knife edge, and he dealt with the fine and unstable balance between the objective and the subjective, and I would say takes us to the creative and awkward postmodern.

This evening in the Anglican setting there was a good discussion on the historical Jesus, and what if anything can be a method to find that person - and my approach is mainly a reconstruction from the outside in, but produces a very strange last days figure. Of course, if you can use secondary sources (like the Gospels, say) to construct a history of some sort, all it produces is a history of some sort. The speaker paid much attention to Albert Schweitzer, who of course made such a break with received doctrines and then went off to do something more practical. The Jesus Seminar, it seems to me, just produces something very dull and hardly of the immediacy of a preacher and healer who thinks he must act for God to act, to produce the coming of the Son of Man (whoever he or it was), and for all the woes to be cleared away and paradise to come. Well that is my construction, and on this if it is right or Schweitzer was right then Jesus was wrong. And if he was wrong - and there are no excuses (so say I) then there is no glee club, no easy way to have the doctrines, even relaxed a bit - and somehow you look at what faith is and how that works in the connection with the early Christians and what the connections exist through and back to the man himself.

3 comments:

Anders said...

Hello! My name is Anders Branderud and I am from Sweden.
You write: “This evening in the Anglican setting there was a good discussion on the historical Jesus, and what if anything can be a method to find that person - and my approach is mainly a reconstruction from the outside in, but produces a very strange last days figure. Of course, if you can use secondary sources (like the Gospels, say) to construct a history of some sort, all it produces is a history of some sort. The speaker paid much attention to Albert Schweitzer,”

Who then was the historical “Jesus”?

Did you know that the original “Matthew” was written in Hebrew and it’s called Hebrew Matityahu. It speaks about an Orthodox Jewish leader.
The historical Ribi Yehoshua were a Pharisee.

I am a follower of Ribi Yehoshua – Mashiakh – who practiced Torah including Halakhah with all his heart.
He was born in Betlehem 7 B.C.E . His faher name was Yoseiph and mother’s name was Mir′ yâm. He had twelve followers. He tought in the Jewish batei-haknesset (synagogues). Thousands of Jews were interested in His Torah-teachings. The “Temple” Sadducees (non-priests who bought their priest-ship in the “Temple” from the Romans, because they were assimilated Hellenist and genealogically non-priests acting as priests in the “Temple”; they were known by most 1st-century Jews as “Wicked Priests.” decided to crucify him. So they did - together with the Romans. His followers were called Netzarim (meaning offshoots [of a olive tree]) and they continued to pray with the other Jews in the synagogues.

Christianity does not teach the teachings of Ribi Yehoshua. Ribi Yehoshuas teachings were pro-Torah.

If you want to learn more click at our website www.netzarim.co.il -- than click at the lick "Christians"; click at my photo to read about what made my switch religion from Christianity to Orthodox Judaism.

Anders Branderud
Follower of Ribi Yehoshua in Orthodox Judaism

Pluralist (Adrian Worsfold) said...

Thank you for that. I don't think history is so certain - however, we said last night that Jesus was of the pharisee grouping and there was no opposition to the pharisees as such. He would indeed be Torah consistent - why ever not? But it is still having to be a construction in terms of trying to focus in on his historical figure.

The puzzle comes after his death and how it all developed.

There is another group like yours, the Kanai I believe, though they are split into two. The European Kanai are as of Messianic Jews of the kind before the term was confused by Christian fundamentalists.

Anders said...

Thanks for your answer!

My comment:
I think history is very certain. I recommend you to start studying at our website—which is founded on sources by scholars.

”Neither Ribi Yehoshua nor י--ה has changed. The same is no less true today. Only those practicing the same religion, and within the same community (whether Jew or non-Jew geir), as Ribi Yehoshua are authentic or legitimate. (Documentation and details in the book Who Are the Netzarim? (WAN).)
The Nәtzarim of today, like Ribi Yehoshua and his immediate Nәtzarim followers in their time, are the only followers of Ribi Yehoshua to reject the Hellenist (Roman pagan) apostasy of the antichrist and restore his authentic — pre-135 C.E. Judaic (as demonstrated from Dead Sea Scroll 4Q MMT) — teachings in the religious community with which

Ribi Yehoshua identified: the Pәrushim (today's Orthodox, i.e., legitimate, Jewish Community) and in legitimate, i.e. Orthodox, Judaism. Therefore, the Nәtzarim are the only followers or Ribi Yehoshua who can possibly be legitimate!!! All others professing to follow the displacement theology apostasy of the Roman-Hellenists and their antichrist — regardless of the name they cite (J*e*s*u*s, Yehoshua, Yeshua, et al.) — have been deceived, and are deceiving others, into the synagogue described in Revelation 2.9 & 3.9!!!”
(quote: Netzarim.co.il)

If you want to follow the historical Ribi Yehoshua you need to start studying in our Khavruta (Distance Learning). You will find it at “Foreign Ministry” in the left menu at www.netzarim.co.il

Anders Branderud
Follower of Ribi Yehoshua - Mashiakh (some translate it Mashiakh) - in Orthodox Judaism
If you want to learn more about my life and religion; then click at our website www.netzarim.co.il -- than click at the link "Christians" – then click at my photo.