19.03.2015 Views

Winter 1984 - 1985 - Quarterly Review

Winter 1984 - 1985 - Quarterly Review

Winter 1984 - 1985 - Quarterly Review

SHOW MORE
SHOW LESS

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

YUMPU automatically turns print PDFs into web optimized ePapers that Google loves.

RELATIONSHIP OF JUDAISM AND CHRISTIANITY<br />

further event, one they had not anticipated at all; namely, the<br />

messiah's death.<br />

Caution: Whenever one responds to a new event, believing this<br />

event illuminates the original event, there is a risk. On the one hand,<br />

the response shows faithfulness. On the other hand, there are great<br />

dangers. One risk is to give your trust and faith to a false messiah—the<br />

new arrival may turn out not to be the true messiah. There is a further<br />

risk—the new developments may lead to a transformation of the<br />

original ideas. Then, out of trying to be faithful to the new experience,<br />

one may find oneself in some way leaving behind or betraying the<br />

original commitments. Which then are true: the old ideas or the new<br />

ones? Or both? The answer, of course, is that there is no guarantee in<br />

advance. Wait until it is all clarified and it will be too late. One must<br />

respond right now. Faith response is a wager of one's own life, out of<br />

faithfulness.<br />

Consider the Jewish Sitz im Leben of those faithful Jewish Christians<br />

responding to the messiah. Here was this man whom they<br />

experienced as the messiah. He was shockingly killed. It was a<br />

terrible, degrading death. Equally shocking was the belief the messiah<br />

was supposed to bring the final perfection: peace, dignity, prosperity,<br />

independence. Instead of doing all this, this messiah died miserably,<br />

according to some reports, even in despair and self-denial.<br />

Now, as faithful Jews (they still were not Christians) how ought<br />

they to have responded to his death? Should they have said, "He was<br />

a false messiah"? Should they have betrayed the original insight that<br />

this person was the messiah? Or should they have thought, "Maybe<br />

this death is another event that illuminates the meaning of the<br />

previous event"? Maybe the Crucifixion is not a refutation of Jesus'<br />

being the messiah, but rather a clarification of the nature of<br />

redemption. Up to now, they thought that the messiah would<br />

straighten out the political and economic world, because that was the<br />

mental image of what it meant to perfect the world. But if I as an early<br />

Christian knew this was the messiah but he did not bring worldly<br />

liberation, I had an alternative to yielding faith. The alternative was to<br />

say that the death is teaching a lesson. The lesson is that true<br />

redemption is not in this world. The kingdom of God is within you.<br />

Faith leads to a world of spiritual perfection: even though I am a slave,<br />

I am free in Christ.<br />

The Christians responded faithfully but later history suggests<br />

theymade a hermeneutical error. To put it another way: In retrospect,<br />

it was a mistake to say that the explanation of the Crucifixion is that<br />

9

Hooray! Your file is uploaded and ready to be published.

Saved successfully!

Ooh no, something went wrong!