Jesus’ Civic Influence
After 3 quarter centuries influenced by Jesus, I perceive his
appeal and want to share experiences and observations, in order to listen and
improve personal practice, facilitation, and encouragement while I’m here.
I plan to express Jesus’ influence
by reviewing impressions from a literature combination: Genesis 1 plus the Book
of John through Acts 1, overlaid by meagre understanding of what humankind has
discovered and practiced I know of during my lifetime. Genesis 1 portrays a 5,500
year-old view of the acts of a polytheistic, Mesopotamian creator-God. John depicts the
origin, life and unjust crucifixion of Jesus of Nazareth. Acts 1 erroneously expresses
Jesus’ presence during the 2,000 years since he died. Between Genesis
and John is the Hebrew scholarship that began 3,700 years ago, which I only
mention.
I write my opinion and request
readers not to expect the-ineluctable-truth. I do not know the
ineluctable-evidence, much less the-truth. I seek to improve my opinion and welcome
fellow-citizens’ differing opinions. By listening and considering other
people’s experiences and observations, I can and may increase Jesus’ civic influence
despite my singularity in opinion and comprehension.
My intention
is to: both accept the mystery of “my peace”, offered by Jesus according to
his definition, and consider suggestions that can be gleaned from reports about
Jesus by the generations of “ourselves and our Posterity”, especially through
dialogue with contemporary citizens. (The US Constitution defines a civic faction, We the People of the United States, who intend to pursue the-good to "ourselves and our Posterity".)
I don’t know how Jesus perceives
“before Abraham was born I am”. John expressed that Jesus and the creator-God
are one. Perhaps Jesus expressed that the-ultimate-good human being (verb) exists
and the continuum humankind may pursue perfection. John also refers to Jesus as "the word". Perhaps Jesus expressed that humankind has always pursued the-good and they may and can eventually succeed.
Even though homo sapiens is some
300,000 years old, no human knows the standards to the-good that humankind
can and may attain. Modern understanding extends “before Abraham” to 4.6
billion years ago respecting the earth and to 13.7 billion years ago for our
universe and beyond. No one knows how long humankind can preserve itself.
Genesis
1 ends with female and male human-being (noun) charged to independently pursue
order and prosperity to the living species and to the earth. See Genesis
1:26-28, NIV. John reports that Jesus referenced Genesis 1 as its author. By
considering Jesus’ statements and behavior among fellow citizens and reflecting
on humankind’s discoveries in the recent 2,000 years, we can consider Jesus’
civic integrity. “Civic” refers to responsible reliability to human connections and transactions, and Jesus sets the standard humankind may pursue: perfection in Jesus' likeness.
After explaining
the Genesis-1 meaning to me, I’ll study the attitudes toward Jesus by entities
depicted in the Book of John. The study is attached and published on my blog,
understandtheknoweldge.blogspot.com.
Genesis
It seems Genesis 1 is perhaps 5,500 year-old Mesopotamian
expression of the actions of creator-God in ancient-polytheistic political
philosophy. The-God created both the universe and the earth, then
awareness as “light”, then humankind. Humankind, given awareness,
power, energy, and authority like the-God could pursue order and prosperity to the living
species and to the earth. Anytime they choose, the individual human-being can
constrain chaos in their way of living. Among Genesis-1’s entities, I speculate
that Jesus is Verse 3’s “light”. The commission comes in Genesis 1:28 to
female& male human-being: “Be fruitful and increase in number; fill the
earth and subdue it. Rule [on earth].” My perspective is: since I can, I
will comply, for my own sake. My experiences and observations through 2023
affirm Genesis-1’s responsible-human-independence (RHI).
I
identify entities characterized in the Book of John and evaluate their
representations by John against the Genesis-1 commission to humankind. I think
Jesus, both spiritually and practically defines RHI as civic integrity, attribute any doubt to John’s opinion, and distinguish “John’s Jesus”. Referring to
the Book of John:
Jesus’ universal presence
John begins with Jesus as “the Word” and “the true light”,
perhaps the awareness I perceive in Genesis 1:3. Historical humankind did not
pursue order and prosperity, and the present society continues the neglect. Consequently,
spiritual Jesus came to earth as a man “full of grace and truth” to “save the
world”. To the benefits of order& prosperity, John adds eternal
life for people who believe in Jesus, emphasizing if not introducing a
new human division: believers and non-believers. Abraham had seen Jesus and was
glad. Jesus cites the Genesis-1 claim that humans who rule on earth are like
gods.
Under John’s opinion, Jesus changes
humankind’s objective to eternal life in another world. He speaks of rejecting the
prince to this world so as to attract people to himself. He deflects personal
responsibility by reporting that the one who sent him told him what to say. I
do not condone John’s Jesus and admit I could be wrong.
Moses and Moses’
law
From the first chapter, John compares “Jesus’ truth” with
Moses’ law. Jesus refutes the ban on work on the Sabbath, confronts the
subjugation of women, speaks in metaphor, taunts hypocritical intent to kill
him, mocks reactions to his miracles, refutes inherited sin, claims Moses wrote
about Jesus, and calls on the mysterious witness of “my Father” when the Jewish mystery is “the Lord God”. As the book unfolds, John builds
adversarial reference to Hebrew scripture – not an overture to reform or
preservation. It seems John drew from Greek thought and Hebrew Bible
interpretation.
Hebrew kingdom&
Messiah
John’s Jesus seems to overlook the Genesis 1:26-28 NIV
commission to humankind, in order to refute subsequent Hebrew prophesy. John's Jesus said
an earthly kingdom under their Messiah would not happen. Metaphors for minor
prophesies included John the baptizer, Jesus’ hometown known, Jesus’ claim to
be God but Jews eyes closed, the betrayer, dice and wound at crucifixion, and
destiny of the betrayer. The-God does not conform to prophesy.
The Father
John’s Jesus (JJ) prays as though the Father is a mystery to
him rather than co-presence from the beginning. With the disciples, JJ defines
eternal life: knowing Father and Son. He prays for the disciples but not for
the world, excepting those who would believe the disciples. He cites the
father’s love for him “before the creation of the world”. He contradicts that
the world knows the Father through the Son. These thoughts were good in John’s
opinion, but I cannot accept the breach of the Genesis 1:26-28 commission.
Spirit
The Bible presents bemusing use of “spirit”, with
multiple modifiers and controversial use of capitalization. Genesis 1 cites
only “the Spirit of God”. Acts 1, written by Luke, cites “the Holy Spirit” 4
times. In John, there are 17 “the Spirit”, 3 “the Holy Spirit”, 3 “Spirit of
truth", and no “Spirit of Jesus". With lower case “spirit”, there are 1 “to
spirit”, 1 “God is spirit”, 2 “in spirit”, and 1 “his spirit”, referring to
Jesus. I especially dislike “God is spirit” and “his spirit” referring to
Jesus. It seems clear that writers in the Bible canon, including John, perhaps
one of the latest, perhaps writing in 95 CE, do not accept the value of
consistency to establish civic reliability.
Metaphors for “the Spirit” include fog, a dove, wind,
rivers of living water, the Advocate, the bread of God, and power. After
struggling with so many metaphors for 7 decades, I am comforted to accept the
mystery of the-God rather than “the Spirit” so as to focus on Jesus’ civic influence to
the-good.
Jesus’ mother and
brothers
It seems both his mother and his 4 brothers
and several sisters wanted Jesus to serve as publicity promoter or civil
politician. Yielding to his mom may show his humanity before divinity. Interestingly, none of his brothers were apostles. None attended the last supper.
Jesus’ disciples
After Jesus’ death, there were about 120 disciples and 12
apostles, whom he chose, excepting the last, whom the eleven selected by straw
to replace the betrayer. During life, listeners numbered in the thousands and
divided on belief, apparently mostly un-belief. John’s Jesus (JJ) directly
claimed to be the Messiah and added eternal life to his promise. JJ defied
physics, the most shocking being the resurrection of a body in decay. The
primitive reason for John’s story was so that people would believe. But the
gullible faction was low. JJ seemed to accommodate a rivalry between John and
Peter, as John portrays it.
In
speeches to the apostles, JJ taught love for one another and service unto
life-sacrifice. He reassured them that they would end with him and that the Advocate
would assist them. They were subsidiary to him and should not teach more than
they had learned from him. They were friends rather than servants, who do not
know the master’s business. JJ taught hate. The “Spirit of truth” seems less
than “the Holy Spirit”. Synagogue defenders will kill apostles thinking it’s a
“service to God”. The apostles are to accommodate this abuse under the mystery
of “the Father”, who proves “sin and righteousness and
judgment”. The legal authority on earth is condemned.
Disciples
buried Jesus according to Jewish customs. They did not expect his resurrection.
He authorized the apostles to forgive sins. JJ taught them their relationship
with a sheep metaphor. JJ said he would return before John died. The apostles
sought the date of his return. Angles said he would return on a cloud, as he
departed. Alas, JJ left them the mystery of the Spirit.
John’s
Jesus-story is not reassuring about the Genesis-1 story: you can& may be responsibly reliable. I was reared to think the Bible is the-God’s word. My person acquired
early doubt, because of the many threats expressed therein. When I discovered
my interpretation of Genesis 1:26-28 NIV, at age 78, I released hope in Bible
mysteries except Jesus, in order to comprehend, practice, facilitate, and
encourage choice of Jesus’ civic influence and to accept “my peace” as he
offers it.
The Jews
“The Jews” is a bemusement in John’s writing. Genesis 1 represents
5,500 year-old Mesopotamian political philosophy in pre-monotheism culture. It
may be expression by East-Semitic speaking Akkadians, who succeeded non-Semitic
Sumerians. Hebrew scholars expressed the-God’s creation from the void, in
Genesis 1, then introduced their Lord God, who communicated directly with Adam
in Genesis 2. They report the birth of Moses, a Levite, in Egypt in Exodus 2.
Finally, in 1 Samuel 2:10, an anointed one is prophesied. [A scholarly review
is at Messiah | Definition,
History, & Facts | Britannica. And there are detailed timelines
in my study.] I think Christians debated Jesus as the promised Messiah, and
can accept that Jesus did not do so, contrary to John’s book.
Right away, John calls Nathanial an
Israelite rather than a Jew. Why? John’s Jesus (JJ) is testy with “the Jews”,
for example, metaphorically retorting, “I will raise [this temple] again
in three days”. JJ leveraged the mysterious
Lord God he knew was in Jews’ hearts for political advantage. He used
metaphors, such as bread from heaven, to claim the Jews’ traditions.
Some Jews listened to the argument
that no one obeys Moses’ law, but JJ cited the few who sought to murder him. JJ
falsely imposed on the crowd the guilt of most Jewish leaders. Informed members
of the crowd were aware that the Messiah would come from an unknown origin, so
JJ was not logically the Messiah. When the crowd sought understanding, JJ responded with
metaphor but no information. JJ heightened the angst by rebuking the crowd:
“you do not belong to God” and “You belong to your father, the devil, and
you want to carry out your father’s desires”. Civic-citizens do not accept such
arrogance, erroneous as their politics may be.
Genesis 1 and
the-laws-of-physics& progeny inform me that I have the opportunity, the
power, the energy, and the authority to choose in my self-interest to RHI. I
reject JJ, in order to benefit from Jesus' civic influence. Jesus welcomes
thought from the Jews and responds with sincere confidence rather than
metaphor-ridden doubt. I report that I could be wrong and am prepared to face
judgement.
Other Semite
persons, Greeks, and Gentiles
Jesus' civic influence, which emerges despite John's Jesus (JJ), treated other people with
civic-integrity, including gentiles such as Greeks and Semite-speaking people
who were not Jews. Jesus’ approach was to establish dialogue-reliability,
unhide the other party’s concern, then encourage them to correct any erroneous
practices. He opposed the subjugation of women. We perceive Jesus' civic influence with the woman at the well and with the one proposed to be stoned for adultery.
The Jews were
teaching the Greeks, some of whom came up from Egypt to see Jesus at Jerusalem.
In the temple, Jesus drove out marketers and unreliable people regardless of
religion yet on Jesus’ civic authority. Jesus encouraged fellow citizens to follow
his civic advice.
Levites, Pharisees,
teachers of the law, Jewish leaders
JJ, was especially antagonistic toward leaders, both
religious and legal, rebuking hypocrisy. The Pharisees always wary of
competition, challenged John the baptizer. They took time for Jesus because of
the reported miracles. Eternal life, not promised in Jewish culture, was a
pivotal issue. JJ mocked Jewish leaders for hypocrisy and for not knowing
Moses’ law. Jewish leaders presented vulnerable law, intending to discredit
Jesus and his disciples. John’s view of politician’s admitting-to-sin by not
stoning an adulterous woman is not born out in actual-reality; real politicians
wield force despite justice.
JJ’s
shepherd metaphor, obscured by shepherd-sacrifice and resurrection, merely
antagonized the kingdom-seeking chief priests. The healing of a man 4 days
deceased caused the leaders to accept one politician’s plan that Jesus’
execution would unite the dispersed Jewish nation and “children of God”. Some
leaders disagreed but feared Pharisee-exclusion from the Synagogue. Jesus’
death did not unite the 12 tribes.
When Jesus surrendered, he
requested and seems to have received protection of the innocent disciples.
Also, he reliably defended his open speech. The chief priests did not want the
label, “The King of the Jews” on Jesus’ cross.
The magistrate
JJ was not exactly accommodating to
civil authorities, and I speculate that the living Jesus was. The temple guards
reasoned with the Jewish leaders. But JJ considered “the prince of this world”
a mere pawn of “I love the Father” and nevertheless “stands condemned”. But JJ
was not true to Genesis 1:26-28 in “my kingdom is from another place”. Even “I
was born . . . to testify to the truth” is weakened by the light of Genesis-1s
demand for order and posterity to life and to the earth.
Jesus to come again
before John dies
John 21:22 states, “Jesus answered [Peter], “If I want
[John] to remain alive until I return, what is that to you? You must
follow me.” Luke’s Acts 1 says Jesus will return on a cloud, just as he
ascended. These events have not been observed in 2,000 years. According to Genesis
1, I have the duty to constrain chaos in my way of living. I do not accept
John’s ideas about Jesus. Perhaps Jesus lives in the behaviors of people who
accept that they can and may perfect their unique person before death. I think
I can and may, by understanding and practicing Jesus' civic influence.
Conclusion
It seems clear that the historical Jesus exceptionally
impacts humankind. Jesus-studies are fragmented such that almost no one can
retain the development of the story. It dates from dominance of polytheism and
mythology in the West and continues with monotheisms worldwide, including today’s
bountiful sects of Abrahamic religions.
It
seems that Sumerians, 5,500 years ago thought their pantheon was in charge of
another world in the heavens and they were responsible to pursue order and prosperity on earth. When they died, their bodies would return to dust. Among
the monotheisms that, 4,000 years ago, began to dominate, obedience to laws
would empower a person to pursue successful life. About 3,000 years ago, a
group hoped relief would come with an anointed one, who would protect them from
foreign& domestic strife. About 1,600 years ago, groups asserted that
Jesus, born 2,000 years ago was the anointed one.
I was
reared in a religious institution. During my life, what I learned from
institutions conflicted with what seemed evident from reports about Jesus. In
my 78th year, it became evident to me that institutional doctrine
conflicts with Jesus’ influence. I wondered what Jesus’ contemporaries thought,
so for the first time ever, decided to extract from one book of the Bible,
verses that hint at individuals’ reactions to the authentic Jesus we cannot
imagine.
From
prior readings, I chose the Book of John, completed 40 years after Jesus died. I
consider John more theological than the synoptic gospels, Matthew, Mark, and
Luke. I discovered I had to add Genesis 1 and Acts 1 to the study. Now, I want
to complete similar studies for the other 3 gospels. Not only that, I am more
impressed with my ignorance than ever before. It seems clear that his contemporaries
did not comprehend Jesus and cannot inform us.
I am
comfortable with the-ineluctable-truth, whatever it is: Jesus was God or Jesus
was an exceptional man, who, better than most people, comprehended the-good and
that each human being can and may pursue the-good. He appreciatively dialogued
with people, in order to encourage and facilitate their intent to perfect
their unique person. People who listened, benefited. People who ignored Jesus’s
guidance suffered. People who reported falsely about Jesus extend suffering
from the present into the future.
I don’t
know. But it seems Jesus was reliable in connections and transactions with
everyone he met. Opportunity to benefit from Jesus’ civic reliability has
increased since his death, through the dialogues between civic followers.
Civic followers perfect their human connections and transactions whether they
support a religious institution or not. Therefore, there are more civic people
on earth than pollsters can count. I think I am joining them.
If
Jesus was a man who understood the-good like no other, we know the opportunity
to choose the-good has existed for as long as humankind existed. We understand
that the present branch, homo sapiens, has developed during the last 300,000
years. But cognitive awareness does not seem possible without grammar, which
emerged perhaps 10,000 years ago. If we assume people started choosing the-good
10,000 years ago, Jesus had a lot to study 2,000 years ago.
I am
interested in Jesus' civic influence and found it by often opposing John’s-Jesus
(JJ). For example, JJ only confounded the Jews, by introducing eternal life to
believers, citing a mysterious witness to JJ’s claims and not answering to the
Jewish curiosity about a new concept. I’m keenly interested in the Jesus who
improved or corrected Jewish law. For example, in Matthew 19:3-8, Jesus
dismisses divorce-law with Genesis-1 reference to a man uniting to a woman,
touching political philosophy from then 3,500 years ago. I find spouse hood less
trivial than JJ’s contention with the Sabbath.
Grounding
This essay was developed in a study titled “Civic expression
in Genesis 1, the Book of John, and Acts 1”, which is posted on my blog,
understandtheknowledge.blogspot.com. This essay will be there too.
Phil Beaver, February 2, 2023
Copyright©2023 by Phillip R. Beaver. All rights reserved. Permission is hereby granted for the publication of all or portions of this paper as long as this complete copyright notice is included. Updated on October 5, 2023
No comments:
Post a Comment