Saying The Gospel is even partly Jesus moral and ethical teachings is to fundamentally miss the point of New Testament theology. The context of the Sermon on the Mount in it's introduction in Matthew chapter 5 is the futility of trying to earn Salvation.
Now people like MaggieMayFish in her video about Kirk Cameorn's Christmas movie don't like when Christians feel that way, saying all this over emphasis on The Resurrection is because people don't want to actually follow her interpretation of what Jesus taught.
I find it amusing how in a prior video of this series she pretends she's on the protestant side of the original Reformation when in fact her attitude on "good works" is exactly what Luther found anathema and pretty consistent with how reactionary Tridentine Catholics feel to this day. Also Luther was not a populist reformer who's message was later co-opted by the rich and powerful, he personally aligned himself with the Feudal Nobility of northern Germany and Denmark and the proto-Capitalists of the Netherlands and in turn persecuted the Anarcho-Communist Anabaptists and Jews.
There are other forms of basically this same thing, from both the right and left, people acting like the message of unconditional Grace somehow detracts from seeing what Jesus taught as the key to true good ethics.
And I as a Communist, Universal Salvation preaching Queer affirming YEC Pre-Millennial Futurist am looking at this Teachings vs Gospel dichotomy going.
Neither Kirk Cameron or any of these other Right Wing Conservative Christians she's opposing react to our Leftist interpretation of what Jesus said with "that doesn't matter because Resurrection, Faith Alone, yadda yadda yadda". They all believe they are being consistent with what Jesus taught however absurd that looks to us. And Trust me you can find economic and social conservatives among those who allegorize away The Resurrection to support a Platonic or Sadducean view on life after death. So no they aren't going to change their minds on morality, ethics or economic policy if they changed them on The Resurrection.
Everyone interprets Jesus as saying what we want Him to have said to some degree. I have little confidence that my own approach is completely without bias. And people observing Jesus from the outside don't entirely agree on what his message was either, some of course are instead biased towards making Him the enemy of their beliefs. That I am at least trying I hope is demonstrated by the fact that I have changed my mind on some issues over the years.
Also according to Josephus in Antiquities 18 the Zelots agreed with the Pharisees on theology and metaphysical matters, they were the Anarchist Revolutionaries of first century Judea. So even before Christianity it was the Resurrectionists who believed in taking action to change the world. The Essenes who were the Platonic "Spiritual is what really matters" viewpoint practiced a form of Communism but in a purely voluntary sense, they were not revolutionaries interested in changing the world.
Even the Maccabees seem to have been Pharisees originally, Aristobolus turned against them when a group of them called his mother a whore and implied he was actually a bastard son of Antiochus Epiphanes. The only Jewish Ruling Queen of antiquity, Salome Alexandra, was a devout Pharisee unlike her husband.
For me it's because Jesus defeated Death and Unconditionally Loves every single one of us without exception that I consider what He had to say about Ethics and Morality more valuable and trustworthy then anyone else. A "Savior" who intends to leave us in the dirt or save only those who "Merit" saving is little better then the God of Calvinism and therefore not someone who's opinions matter to me even slightly. The only context in which I'll care what a person from 2000 years ago has to say on anything is if He Rose from The Dead.
As a companion of sorts to this here is my latest post on my Prophecy Blog.
P.S. This isn't the first BlogPost I made partly inspired by this YT Video Essay.
No comments:
Post a Comment