I forgot to take my weapon

In spite of my last post, I have to admit that I have been trying to" find Jesus on the road" again. This was started, at least in part, by an observation of Sunday's preacher who was discussing the story of Jesus raising of Jairus daughter. Although we "skirted" fairly delicately the issue as to whether she had really died, it was a side-light on the story that caught my attention. Simply, if Jesus was a 20-something wandering Rabbi, his disciples would probably have been rather young, very possibly even just teenagers. Furthermore, it was mentioned that, rather than having his chief disciples come to him, Jesus is portrayed in some Gospel accounts as seeking them out. This led me to consider just whom Jesus picked, and a rather unlikely bunch of students they were. It occured to me that Jesus was probably able to read (witness his picking up the Isaiah scroll in the synagogue, reading it, and then sitting down to teach---not the likely actions of the "humble carpenter's son" and one suggesting some level of education, perhaps) and possibly to write (if one accepts that there may be some hint of the historical Jesus in the story of the Woman caught in adultery, for example, where Jesus "writes something" in the dirt). If then, Jesus was literate and educated, then his likely illiterate and uneducated pupils were rather a novelty. Following this line of thought, one might speculate that Jesus was not so shocking for what he taught (much of it not very original) but whom he taught. I intend the emphasis on both the "whom" and the "taught" because it is likely that such persons would have been felt to be uneducable. I do not believe that our egalitarian ideas today would have made sense to many at that time. Women, laborers, other country Yokels would not perhaps have been seen by most as economically disadvantaged and therefore uneducated, but as possibly "unteachable" or at least (in the case of social outcasts---sex workers and tax collectors) unworthy of being taught. This could create, as it were, a picture of Jesus as the "great educator" who tried to bring the teachings of the time that were important to him to the masses, perhaps like the first writer of "Judaism for Dummies."

Well, just like all "portraits" of Jesus, it is subject to criticism. What about all the "healing stories" and all the "miracle stories?" What about all this "Kingdom of Heaven" stuff? The latter is particularly bothersome, since it seems fairly likely that, at least the Pauline Christians were waiting for the eschaton---the return of "the Lord" in power on the clouds of heaven to usher in the messianic rule. Whether Jesus thought himself the messiah or not will never be known, but there is certainly, whether original or projected back, a content of the "last days" sort of thinking in the Gospel accounts of Jesus. Even if the Qumran scrolls represented even a minority opinion of the day, then this way of thinking existed outside the Jesus community, and would not have been so terribly unusual perhaps at the time (witness John the Baptizer and others mentioned in other historical accounts such as, I believe, Josephus).

If, indeed, Jesus was preaching an apocalyptic message, then clearly this is not a message that holds much resonance for me today. I do not expect to see "one come with the clouds of heaven" to usher in the new age. The "teacher of the poor" is better, I suppose, and at least could allow for some "imitation" as it were, but in the end it too is speculative.

I cannot help but be fascinated and admire the scholarship of those who study the Christian New Testament seriously and have looked for the "real" or "original" or "authentic" Jesus, but I have to admit that such studies, to me, seem likely to become only "sidelights" as it were, in the future development of the religion that came be called Christianity. We can "look for" the historical Jesus, but every time we "find him," I think that we end up a bit disappointed.

Jeffrey Shy
(Honey, get the gun!)
Mesa, Arizona