Hard act to follow: Elizabeth Coleman on Jesus
‘The problem with Jesus’ worldview is that it proved to be false.’
I am a follower of Jesus, inspired by the Gospels, and in particular the Sermon on the Mount. I do not accept the later teaching of the church, such as the incarnation and the trinity, or that Jesus’ death was a necessary sacrifice to save the world from sin. And I do not believe in the afterlife.
I have studied the historical Jesus, and have been convinced by the Jewish view in Hyam Maccoby’s book Revolution in Judaea: that Jesus expected that God would intervene in the world in his lifetime, to establish a kingdom of justice and peace, centred on Jerusalem, and that Jesus himself would be ruler in this kingdom. This deals with the big problem that Christians face: if God is both good and all-powerful, why is there so much evil and suffering in the world? Jesus did not answer this question directly, but declared the good news of the kingdom – that this was about to end, and all the present suffering would be nothing compared with the joy to come (John 16:21).
The problem with Jesus’ worldview is that it proved to be false. God did not bring in the kingdom, but allowed Jesus to be crucified.
Jesus’ followers were desolate after his death, but then had a strong and unexpected experience of him still alive, raised from the dead. So they continued to believe in the coming of the kingdom; Jesus ascended to the Father, and would soon return. As the years went by, this expectation became less strong, and other ways of interpreting Jesus’ life and death came to the fore, which developed into creeds.
Jesus believed in a God who intervenes in history to save his people, but I do not. God is something vaguer and more uncertain for me. The image of light speaks more to me than those of ‘father’ and ‘king’. But uncertain things can be powerful. To quote from Kahlil Gibran’s The Prophet: ‘And is it not a dream which none of you remember having dreamt, that builded your city and fashioned all there is in it?’
We have to look at Jesus’ teaching in the light of his belief in the coming kingdom. Scholars talk about ‘interim ethics’ – the ethics appropriate for the short period before the end of the current world order.
It is clear that Jesus is on the side of the poor (Luke 6: 20 & 24). He teaches that people should not accumulate wealth on earth, and those who have possessions should sell them and give to the poor (Luke 12:33).
I own the house that I live in. Should I sell it and give the proceeds to the poor? What about our Meeting houses? I think that Jesus’ teaching here is ‘interim ethics’, which makes sense if the world as we know it is about to end. We need to ask, how can we best serve the oppressed? By selling our possessions, or by using them in God’s service?
Jesus’ message was one of love and forgiveness, which is quite astonishing in the context of the brutal Roman empire, where entertainment largely consisted of seeing people killing and being killed.
We ask, ‘What does love require of us?’ I think it requires us to work for change in our society, which is certainly not based on love, to bring in a world where there is justice and peace, and everyone is valued.
Comments
Please login to add a comment
