My church's Bible study group is still going through Romans: The Letter That Changed the World, With Mart De Haan and Jimmy DeYoung.
The
last two sessions have been about Romans 9-11, in which Paul is in
anguish because most of the Jewish people do not accept Jesus as the
Messiah, and yet Paul concludes that all Israel will be saved in the
last days. In the meantime, Paul argues, the Gentile Christians
(alongside Jewish Christians) are a part of God's chosen people, with a
mission to be a light to the nations, while the Jews who do not believe
in Jesus have been broken off of that olive tree. Paul exhorts the
Gentile Christians, however, to be humble about their status.
We had a lot of interesting discussions last night.
1.
We were talking about why so many Jewish people don't accept Jesus as
the Messiah. One person said that there are many Jews who would be
ostracized by their family were they to believe in Jesus, and he
remarked that this is also the case with many within Islamic families
who become Christians. That got us into the topic of Islam. One person
said that he works with a couple of Muslims at his place of employment,
and they are really nice people. Another asked whether Muslims in the
U.S. would be tolerant of Christians were Muslims to become the
majority, since there are Islamic countries that are not particularly
tolerant of Christianity. Someone else said that we should not judge
all of Islam by the acts of a few crazies, for most Muslims are probably
like many of us: they come home from work, they have to deal with their
children, they're trying to get through the day, etc. He also noted
that there are Christians who engage in acts of terror, such as the
bombing of abortion clinics, and yet we don't judge all of Christianity
on the basis of these particular Christians. Someone then retorted that
most Christians condemn such acts, whereas most Muslims don't condemn
the acts of terror that Islamic extremists engage in. I made a variety
of points: that there have been Islamic countries that have been
tolerant towards Christians, and that Muslims themselves have been
victims of some of radical Islam's acts of terror. A couple of people
agreed with me, acknowledging that Islam is a diverse movement.
I was pleased that, overall, the people in the group were not Islamophobes.
2.
We got into the issue of humility, since Paul exhorted the Gentile
Christians not to be proud. One of the people in the group said that
most of the Christians whom he has known in his life have been humble
people. His comment was interesting to me because this person is
someone who often looks for the best in people. And yet, paradoxically,
when we were in the part of Romans about how all of us are sinners, he
was really preaching about how human beings are corrupt! As an example,
he referred to those who invent computer viruses or hack into people's
computers.
Do I agree with my friend that most Christians are humble? I have often said otherwise on this blog, and in my mind. As
I think more about this topic, I have to admit that there are plenty of
Christians who are kind people, and my impression is that they don't
think highly of themselves, as if they believe that they're particularly
special. And yet, the dogmatism of many Christians comes across to me
as proud: how they seem to think that there is only one way to
see things, and that those who believe as they do have some moral or
spiritual edge that is absent among those who do not believe as they
do. I would probably be asking too much were I to suggest to
conservative Christians that they shed these aspects of their outlook in
order to become humbler people, for, after all, those are their
beliefs! I guess that, if I were to ask anything of them, it
would be that they might recognize that people are in different places
on their journeys, and that they would love those who are not where they
are. There are many conservative Christians who do precisely that.
3.
I was asked in the group what I thought about Paul's claim that all
Israel would be saved, for people in the group are aware that I have
studied Hebrew and Judaism. I replied that I thought that Paul did
envision Israel one day embracing Christ. Did I believe that this would
happen, however? I said that the Jews have their own interpretation of
Scripture, and that I do not believe that the Christian interpretation
of the Old Testament is so obviously correct. There are debates about
Psalm 22 and Isaiah 53. Moreover, earlier that evening, I said that
many Jews may not believe in Christ because of Christian persecution of
Jews throughout history, and also because they have issues with the
Trinity, on account of their strict monotheism.
Some
seemed to be surprised by what I was saying, but I'm glad that the
group did not reject me. Looking back, I agree with the gist of what I
said, for I believe that Judaism is faithful to prominent streams of the
Hebrew Bible (i.e., the laws), and that it's difficult to harmonize
Christianity with aspects of the Hebrew Bible (i.e., the existence of
animal sacrifices after the Davidic monarchy is restored, see here for my comments on that). But I think that what I was saying was rather simplistic. For example, many Jews did not believe in Jesus before
Christians persecuted the Jews, plus there are elements of Judaism
(i.e., the Zohar) that present God in a rather plural manner, and even
some Jewish professors have compared that to the Christian concept of
the Trinity. I'm not sure, though, if Kabbalists regard the sefirot of
God as independent persons in their own right, the way that Christians
view the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit as persons.
I
was afraid that people in the group would bring up hard questions that I
wouldn't be able to answer. For example, does not Psalm 22 present
someone being pierced in his hands and his feet? Whom would this
concern, if not Christ, whose hands and feet were pierced on the cross?
Could the Suffering Servant of Isaiah 53 truly be Israel, as a number
of Jews have contended, when the Servant was blameless, whereas Israel
in the Hebrew Bible suffered on account of God punishing her for her
sins?
When I got home from Bible study, I read my post on Psalm 22
from a while back. Does Psalm 22 say that someone's hands and feet
were pierced? Well, the Septuagint seems to think so, so there was at
least someone who understood the verb in v 16 to concern piercing, as debated as v 16 has been.
Is there a way to explain why the enemies in Psalm 22 would pierce
someone's hands and feet, without seeing Psalm 22:16 as a prophecy of
Jesus' crucifixion? Could the Psalmist in the days of the
Hebrew Bible have been saying that his enemies were piercing his hands
and his feet? Why would the enemies do that? Were they trying to
immobilize the Psalmist by wounding his hands and his feet, since the
hands and the feet are important body parts in terms of performing the
necessary tasks of life?
On
Isaiah 53, sure, Israel was not blameless, like the Suffering Servant of
Isaiah 53. Perhaps one could say that Israel was righteous in
comparison with the other nations; Balaam in Numbers 23:10 seems to call
Israel righteous, though God often expresses a different opinion within
the Pentateuch! Or maybe some of Israel's suffering in exile was
considered to be undeserved on her part, since Isaiah 40:2 says that she
was punished double for her sins. But these points would probably come
across as a stretch to people within my Bible study group, if not
convoluted. They don't entirely satisfy me, to be honest! On the first
point, Isaiah 53 does not present the Suffering Servant as righteous in
comparison with others, but as blameless, period! On the second point,
within Second Isaiah, even after Israel has suffered double for her
sins, she is still criticized by God. That tells me that, on
some level, the Suffering Servant is distinct from Israel. Maybe he was
a person or a community during the time of the Babylonian exile who was
encouraging Israel to return from exile and got punished by the
Babylonian authorities as a result. Isaiah 40-55 is about the
Babylonian exile, after all.
In
any case, I'm not an agnostic missionary out to challenge other people's
faith. But if I can encourage people to wrestle with issues and to
realize that there are different ways to see things, then I feel that
I'm doing something good.