Bible Topics

I read the article on the lands of the Bible. It was interesting and gives a good critique. The writer's basic point could be summed up in a statement we have made for several years. The Bible is a prime example of "Semitic history." Western history demands all the facts before a statement of truth can be made. The Semitic mentality sets out to teach a point. The writer chooses the facts that develop this point and does not hesitate to alter the facts to fit the story.

The Noah story and the flood are an example. There are three different accounts of the flood in the three chapters in Genesis. I have the three stories underlined in green, red and blue in my Jerusalem Bible. The story of the rain of 40 days and nights became the popular choice and the others were ignored.

The crossing of the "Red Sea" is another example. The Bible account says clearly "Sea of Reeds," a muddy swamp. The translators chose "Red Sea."

I have written down my Biblical ideas and these grow steadily. Now the historic person, Jesus Christ, is real to me and the teaching and ideals of Christ are really intriguing. He publicly condemned the ritualism of the Pharisees.

When I was in Rome, I was amazed at how little recognition St. Joseph received. There was no basilica or big church with his name. He was clearly ignored in spite of his huge role in the Christian story. The sad part was that he was depicted as an old man to safeguard the "virginity" of Mary. One tradition was that there were other children and cousins. They came to take Jesus home to Nazareth before he got the whole family in trouble with the religious and civil authority by his brazen opposition to and condemnation of them. It makes the picture much more real.

The ideas I've written on St. John are the products of my study, lecturing and discussions here at home. The greatest point of growth for me is that Jesus Christ was truly only man. He was a child who had been well instructed by his mother, as was the custom in the Jewish family of the times. He was a truly gifted child and he spent lots of time with his gifted cousin, John. His mission was the outgrowth of his background, observation of the people around him, the pomposity of the leaders, and meditation.

Pope John Paul II is certainly setting the "aggiornamento" back at least one century. He defies the notion of the leader as presented by Christ. But Christ said the leader is supposed to be a Kepha, a bedrock, down on the bottom as a solid foundation. In many ways, Pope John Paul II has many of the unlikable qualities of St. Paul. The early church sent Paul on the foreign mission to get him out of Rome. Luke was the one person who could control his antagonism somewhat.

I think Luke's writings are so helpful and meaningful because he was counteracting Paul.

Proverbs were several centuries in the making. Then the priestly editors brought them together in a single collection. At times, there are two or three versions of the proverb scattered through the collection. Sirach or Ecclesiasticus is a more developed set collected and edited a couple centuries later.

To understand the meaning of Luke's Gospel, we have to see how it is the fulfillment of a plan set up and carried forward for several centuries. Luke came in contact with Jesus and his message because Paul needed a doctor and Luke was hired. Luke tells us explicitly he went back to the living sources for all that he said or wrote.

I've thought more and more about the Good Shepherd. I have a clear picture of Christ now from my work on the gospels and discussions with you. Once I rid myself of the dual nature of Jesus Christ and come to see him for his real self, I can really admire him and want to continue his work. His work is to help all the people in your life according to their needs and your abilities to help.

The more I think of the plan of Christ, the more simple and sensible it is. His "Ekklesia," gathering of people, was to be a part of the society in which it lived. There was not to be any special building but any place where they gathered for a meal. The work of the people was to be seen in the way they removed selfishness from their midst. The real error was changing the "gathering" to the "church building."

I've admired the picture of the Good Shepherd. I think it is one of the most meaningful pictures of Jesus that I have seen. It is the story of the Good Shepherd and the story of the lost sheep in Luke's Gospel. The shepherd counts his sheep as they get to the fold at night. One is missing. He leaves the 99 at the fold — a safe enclosure — and goes back to find the one that was lost. When he finds the lost sheep, he brings it back and joyfully invites his friends over to celebrate because the sheep that was lost is back again.

When I look at the Good Shepherd (picture in computer room and living room), he is almost saying, "How's it going today?" And I start to recall all the ideas I have developed over the past few years.

I read my commentary on Mark and the letters of Peter. These always go together because Mark was the companion of Peter at the end and he wrote the Gospel as he heard it from Peter.

Mark's checkered career started as an enthusiastic young kid with Paul. Mark found the work too tough and went home. Paul saw it as desertion and would have nothing to do with him. Then Barnabas took Mark with him. Finally, Mark ended up with Peter.

Those first followers of Christ certainly had "feet of clay" like all others. Yet they carried the ideas and ideals of Christ through 2.5 centuries of intermittent persecutions and deaths.

The more I think about Luke's role in the development of Christian ideals, the more I like and appreciate him. He was a medical doctor, a man of kindness, friendliness and personal interest in patients.

Luke meets the story of the Chosen People and Jesus Christ in the hot-tempered missionary, Paul. He cares for Paul and takes an interest in what he is saying. Luke becomes a dedicated follower of Jesus and then writes a story about Christ and describes our picture in our home of the Shepherd perfectly.

You (Lois) asked me which of the prophets I liked best. It's really hard to say. These men saw the way the people were going farther and farther from their ideas and ideals as the People of Yahweh. They felt they had to speak up even if it meant rejection, suffering and even death. Some of the prophets were from the upper class and had to suffer less physically but they were despised by their social peers.

Most of the prophets were ordinary men who spoke about the horrible crimes committed in the name of fertility goddesses and gods. They stressed the moral and physical harm of the actions of the people. Others talked about the harm to come to the next generation.

As the situation grew worse, some prophets talked about a new Moses who would rise up and lead the people back to Yahweh. These are the people who finally gave rise to John the Baptist and Jesus.

I really enjoy the story showing the great qualities of Moses as a leader and at the same time all his weaknesses. He is certainly the center of the whole OT picture. All the prophets, teachers and wise men who arose spent their time and labor explaining how Moses was writing for the people who followed.

It is essential to be fully aware of the difference in mentality, outlook, and sense of morally good and bad between the Semitic people and the western world. For this, we should read and understand the Old Testament. In the peak of the history of the Jewish people, might made right. David was set up as the "idol-king" precisely because he was so good at underhanded military tactics.

The prophets saw the wrongfulness of this attitude. They preached against it and were rewarded with ridicule, punishment and death. Moses tried his hardest to offset this attitude. Jesus Christ modernized Moses in the Roman times.

I think this background picture is essential to understanding the problems today and finding a real and true solution.

We've had quite a change of outlook in the USA since two weeks ago. We've known for centuries of the conflict between Israel and Palestine. The Muslim religion was seen as a threat by Christians. There was a deep-seated rivalry for supremacy in Jerusalem. There has been turmoil for centuries. Then the Christians, specifically Rome, decided that no religion served God except the Roman Catholic faith and this was to be imposed on all people. This attitude gave rise to wars and even the Pope had armies.

Finally, in 1918 the dogma of infallibility was defined and then the superiority complex really took over. The foreign missions were set up and the missionaries labored to turn the people from their ancient beliefs to the foreign dogmas of Rome.

The Roman church became more and more involved with rubrics and rituals. In short, the ideas and ideals of Jesus Christ have been lost to legalism and authoritarianism.

The Book of Revelation is the first of five writings by John in the NT. It is in apocalyptic style. Ezechiel was the first to use it, in the 6th century BC. Ezechiel wanted to speak to the Jews in the Babylonian captivity but did not want the captors to understand. Then Daniel developed the style in 164 BC. He wanted to raise the hopes of the Jews and hide his ideas from the captors. In 85 AD, John wrote his work to teach the faithful Christians and hide his words from the Romans.

I'll try to get all the ideas about Apocalypse or Revelation put together today. I mentioned the three principal times when this literary style was used. It never deals with the future. Rather, the writers are concerned about a very real present problem that threatens the whole people.

Revelation has been wrongfully applied to other times and places as if it was intended to be a foretelling. This wrongful application gave rise to many threatening ideas in Christian teaching.

We talked about the notion of Purgatory. There is no evidence. The one Scriptural citation is from the letter of James where he says it is a "holy and wholesome thought to pray for the dead."

The Gospels stress that the whole issue at the time of death is the identity a person has established at the moment of death. This "identity" is determined solely by the way in which we have worked with people in our lives. No point of teaching is more clearly stated in the Gospels.

Church structure is the very thing that Christ condemned in the Jewish structure of the Pharisees, Sadducees and Scribes in his own time.

I intend to read my whole commentary on St. John's work before Christmas. He gives me the most complete picture of the life of Christ from the beginning to end. He was just a young teenager when he and his brother met Christ. They are called "boanerges" or "sons of thunder" because they were always "up and doing." Peter used John to get his ideas to and from Christ. He was the one to whom Jesus entrusted his mother, Mary, from the cross.

The study of the Bible is coming more and more to center stage for lots of reasons. September 11 and the terrorist attack has affected the thinking and outlook of most people. Suddenly the hatred and dislike for the USA among the Muslim world is a vibrant and urgent thought. Only in the Semitic background of the Bible can we find the basis for these feelings.

Jesus Christ had grown up in the midst of this "hate-ful" world. He saw it all around him. He saw the response of Rome and the Caesars to the world. They would stop the hate by physical force and set up a different kind of military supremacy where most of the world were abject slaves.

Out of this milieu, Jesus saw the only solution: sincere respect and love had to take over and the human dignity of every person had to be upheld. He was so convinced of his ideals and ideas that he was ready to suffer and die for them. He convinced a handful of people and they continued his work.

I have been thinking a lot about the history of Israel as recorded in the Bible and world history up to the present time. The friction started with Abraham and his nephew, Lot. They came from the Far East and settled in Palestine or the land of the Philistines. Abraham went north but Lot wanted the action so he settled near Sodom and Gomorrah.

These people attacked Lot and family and carried them away. Abraham took his men and delivered Lot. On the way back, they were told not to waste time in the Dead Sea area. Lot's wife dallied around and was covered by an explosion of salt.

Then Jacob's sons sold their brother, Joseph, to an Egyptian. Joseph was quite a talker and got to Pharaoh's attention. Joseph "foretold" drought and famine. The Egyptians stored their food and the whole area came to them for help. Joseph tricks his family and then gets them well established in Egypt.

The Hyksos, foreigners, came into power and enslaved all non-Egyptians. Moses gets them out of Egypt but the people gripe and complain against him because the escape was difficult. The Israelites enter Palestine and expel the natives or intermarry. They divide the country into Judea, Samaria and Galilee. Judah considered itself the big turkey, despised Samaria, and kept Galilee because they brought their "tithes" to the capital.

I can't get all this written now so I'll continue in another entry.

The Israeli-Palestine war is getting worse. It certainly is not something new. The story of Israel from its very beginning is one of antagonism, fighting and scheming. They left Egypt and as soon as there was a problem they had one solution — kill Moses — and go back to Egypt. They forcibly took Israel from the people who lived there and called it a holy war. They couldn't get along with each other and were finally destroyed and taken into captivity.

When the remnant was allowed to return, they began to fight among themselves. Finally, the Romans all but decimated them. Today, they carry on the self-righteous attitude of the past. Today they have bigger war machines and can do more destruction.

I say we should let them fight as long as they fight among themselves. We should stay out of the mess entirely. We have enough problems to face without mixing into their mess.