120 Things ABC CBS CNN FOX and NBC Won't Tell You" Cont..
40. Christianity was not copied from the mystery religions.
Ankerberg: A lot of the folks over on the Jesus Seminar side have said things like, the whole story that you find in the Gospels actually was copied from the mystery religions. What do you think about that?
Witherington: Well, the mystery religions are a mystery. By which I mean that the rituals of the mystery religions were secret and private, and so there has been a lot of speculation about what went on behind closed doors in Corinth or Rome or Alexandria, but the truth of the matter is we don’t know a whole lot about what went on in early secret mystery religions, and we certainly don’t have any evidence that early Jews in Palestine were practicing mystery religions. Remember, all the writers of the New Testament, with the possible exception of Luke, were all Jews before they were Christians. They were all Jews. We just have no compelling evidence, or any reason to think, that early Jews would make up a story about the Jewish Messiah on the basis of some rituals or beliefs about Greco-Roman mystery religions. This is simply historically improbably.
41. The "Kingdom of God" is more than a mere political statement.
Ankerberg: John Dominic Crossan says, "If you say the kingdom of God, you’re speaking about in-your-face, Caesar. This is the way God wants the world run." So when Jesus was talking about the kingdom of God, the Jewish people listening to him, according to the folks in the Jesus Seminar, weren’t hearing him say that this was a place you were going to after you die, he interprets that to mean we’re setting up a political movement here, we’re going to have a revolution. What do you think?
Witherington: Well, I think this is a yes and no proposition. On the one hand I would not want to overly or purely spiritualize the phrase the kingdom or dominion of God. There is clearly a material dimension of this. When you say, I, by the finger of God cast out demons, if I do that you’ll know that the dominion of God has happened in your midst. He’s talking about a real physical healing a real person who has now been set free, saved, by the saving, redemptive act of God. This is involving real people in real time. It’s not just what happens when you die and go to be with God. So, clearly enough, there’s an already dimension to the kingdom of God right here in space and time, and there’s also a not yet dimension to the kingdom of God in the future. And so, it’s a half-truth to say, well, they weren’t talking about¼ they were talking about something that’s happening now. Of course that’s true, but that’s not the whole story. Jesus talks about in the future entering, or inheriting, or obtaining the kingdom of God as something that will come in the future for people. And he like other early Jews was looking forward to a final resurrection of people, and a Messianic banquet, and a time when, in fact, the Holy Land would once more be ruled by the people of God. Now they were under the oppressive Roman rulers.
I do think it’s right to say that there is a political edge to the phrase the dominion of God. When you say God is the ruler of the world, you are implying the Emperor is not God, and he is not the ruler of the world. And whatever human rulers they are, they would be under the rule of God and they should not be making divine claims. So I think there is a political edge to this, but we must not miss the spiritual heart of the significance of this either.
42. Jesus died for reasons far beyond any political process.
Ankerberg: But how do you weight it then, when you evaluate the evidence of Qumran, John and Jesus, in terms of, if they took this stance, and part of it was against the Roman rule of that day, and they were talking about an eschatological arrival of God’s kingdom in power. Alright, the Jesus Seminar says put all that together, that’s why Jesus died, because he went against the time. He got caught in the political process. Is that the message that the New Testament is presenting?
Witherington: Well, I would not want to rule out that there is a political factor. You need to understand that it’s true to say that religion and politics were interwoven throughout the fabric of first century Jewish society. That’s absolutely true. I think it is certainly true that part of the reason why Jesus died as he did is because his movement had political implications. His was not a revolutionary movement in the sense of taking up arms and storming the legions of Rome, but his movement certainly had political implications. He was a politically hot potato. There’s no doubt about this, and this is part of the reason why he died.
But he didn’t just die for that reason. After all, the people who were critiquing him, who brought him to justice, or injustice, were in the first place, Jews, not in power, not the Romans. They only handed him over to the Romans at the very end of the process. Early Jews were the ones who most objected to him, whether we think of Herod Antipas, who was a ruler in Galilee, or the Pharisees, or some of his other dialogue partners. That tells me that the issue was not just purely political. It was also theological.
Ankerberg: When you’re taking this in, John Dominic Crossan says that, as far as he is concerned, Jesus is a political figure. The primary emphasis of his life is just that. If you’re saying that’s a part of it, how do you separate that part from the other? Where do you put the emphasis?
Witherington: Well, that’s precisely the question. Are we going to put the em-PHA-sis on the wrong sy-LLA-ble, or not. And what I would want to say about that is that for Jesus there is both a spiritual gospel and a social gospel. There are two sides to this Jesus picture. There are social implications, political implications to being a follower of Jesus. If in fact you turn the other cheek, if in fact you do some of the things that Jesus urged his disciples to do, this changes the social situation. You know, there’s no doubt about that. But, if the heart of the matter has to do with atonement for sins, if the heart of the matter has to do with the fact that Jesus believed Israel was lost, the question is, what is the solution to that problem? Where is the heart of the solution to that problem? In Jesus’ view, the ultimate sacrifice had to be made to redeem the people of God, and indeed, to redeem the world. That’s the heart of the matter. The heart of the matter is not whether or not you turn the other cheek or not. The heart of the matter is how in the world can the people of the world, especially the people of God, be redeemed? That’s the heart of the matter.
43. Jesus himself taught that his death was a factor in recovering a right relationship with God.
Ankerberg: Is there any way for the disciples to have written that in after the fact?
Witherington: Well, all kinds of things are possible, but not all possible things are equally plausible. What we know about the Old Testament whether you read Leviticus or other parts of the Old Testament is that a system of purification, of atonement for sin, was at the heart of Judaism. Every day in the Temple, sacrifices were offered for sin. This was the heart of the matter for early Jews as to how they would get in right relationship with God. This was the most crucial matter. Far more crucial than the food laws, or the ritual purifications that were just ritual ablutions. The heart of the matter is, how do we recover our right relationship with God? What are we going to do? And you know, Jesus believed that in himself, he was embodying the heart of that matter that he was dealing with.
Ankerberg: Give me some of the words that lead you to that conclusion, that Jesus spoke?
Witherington: Well, obviously Mark 10:45, which we’ve already referred to: "I did not come to be served, but to serve, and give my life a ransom for many." Now, he also talks about, with his disciples, about drinking the cup, and in the larger context of the Old Testament, talking about drinking the cup of God’s wrath, has to do with judgment, has to do with God’s judgment on sin. It’s not a neutral statement about just suffering a martyr’s death. |
