Hot off the press. This material
was likely submitted to various Christian discussion
groups during the last week. It will
be shortly incorporated into my website at
http://geocities.com/Qbaal_99/index.htm
Kingdom of God Reinterpreted
What good was the 20th Century? Think of the mechanical progress. Airplanes, fast good-looking cars, household conveniences galore, machines to dig a hole for a fence post, drill hundreds of meters for oil or water. Combines invented to rapidly harvest corn, wheat or rice. And, the lowly but handy garage door opener.
At first glance, philosophical advances did not put this century on a par with the times of Plato and Aristotle. But it did have its bright moments. For me, this century's great intellectual achievement is the realization, in many disciplines, of the relative nature of our knowledge. There is no absolute position outside the parade of time and events passing where we can sit, detached, to make clear and unbiased observations and descriptions of the parade. The nature of reality forces us to see ourselves embedded in the parade, making our judgements and observations in the midst of hectic activity. Things happen around us not always crystal clear in their import for the future (or present). And we all have our own personal biases and quirks imposed by our personal backgrounds. And we try to see the input of those biases as we determine what is the "reality" before us.
The German Jew, Albert Einstein was into physics. Still, his theory of Relativity is a great philosophical achievement. An outstanding contribution to the history of ideas. And a reminder, even in physical terms, we possess not an absolute position in time- space to make our observations.
And, yes,
scientific observation continued in the 20th century to be applied to fields
like archaeology, paleontology and the social sciences. Science achieved
monumental success as it catalogued the empirical findings of the
five senses in many fields of study. And these findings would in
turn yield theories that would unlock the mysteries of the past and explain
the hidden secrets of nature. The theory of techtonic plates
explains ancient continental drift and the ongoing process of mountain
building. The frontal theory of weather from Scandinavia would
make weather prediction a true science. Well, almost.
Still the relative nature of knowledge is evident.
Historians, even in ancient times, probably knew their writings betrayed
personal biases as they assessed generals and statement.
Old Testament writings had a habit of seeing a ruler of Israel in
black and white terms. Jehosephat or whoever either "walked
in the ways of the Lord" and was a good guy or he didn't and was
totally bad and a God-endorsed loser. No middle ground. No
ruler who was really human and the good old standard mixture of good and
bad. No saints with their inevitable dark side. Not when Yahweh
ruled in the midst of the ancient Children of Israel. I must
add that King David did not fit this mold and was very "human" with a matching
dark side to go with the brilliance of his reign.
In archaeology
100 years ago, the emphasis was on a well organized dig. People were
scientifically trained to grid the site, record and locate every minuscule
find. Often used hair brushes to remove the grit and
grime of burial. Smart folk correlated the results with other
digs to establish a relic's age and significance in a particular
culture. This continues. But now wis archaeologists remind
themselves of their modern biases, and scientific worldview, as they
assess and interpret the findings from long ago. They also realize
even how you display artifacts in a museum is loaded with modern presuppositions
that don't exactly project the displayed object's original place
in some far away ancient world .
Suppose, I really
produced the original Ark of the Covenant and its two sacred tablets. The
National Enquirer would soon offer me a million bucks for my story (higher).
I would be invited to show up on Dave King's show.
Told the bring the Ark and appropriate certificates of authenticity.
Still it would be all too late. Soon, over on alt.atheist
I would be rudely reminded The Ark in no proof of God. "O, yes it
is," I would say. "Look at those two beautiful seraphim on top covered
in gold. What angels! And look here's the two tablets with
the ten commandments burned in them by the hand of God. What more
proof do you want?"
And the sceptics would reply "How do you know there are real angels? And sure there is some Hebrew writing there but how do I know God did it?"
And another funny thing. I notice folk keep touching the Ark and don't fall down, dead. In fact, they're just happy to touch something from ancient Palestine that they're laughing and having a good time and glad to have lived to touch the real Ark. I guess they're not dying because they are not primitive religionists who see everything numinous filled with spiritual power (mana) that can strike you down like lightning. Pretty good illustration how you cultural conditioning has very striking effects upon you.
Anyway, today's
avant garde Christian thinkers are digging up the real Jesus of Nazareth.
Better to say they are uncovering the real Jesus behind the ancient
(and present) Christian icon projected
by Mother Church. And once again we see what was at the core of Jesus
teaching - the Kingdom of God. The Jesus Seminar call it "God's imperial
rule." It's likely Jesus saw the Kingdom as both present and future.
And though difficult to see he regarded it as powerfully present.
I would like to think Jesus regarded God's Kingdom as a "frame of reference." A way for his followers to look at life and see it in a new way. This frame of reference allowed folk to see God is now working in the world in favor of the poor, sinful and oppressed. And for the rich, righteous and oppressor, too. It gave a new way of measuring things. Here a widow's mite in the temple treasury was more than all the rich moneybags poured in. Here, because of God's love, the reformed sinner got the angels dancing and celebrating. You could say to understand the Kingdom's values, simply take earthly values and reverse them. For instance, would it not be nice if loyalty were earth's number one value and not money.
Perhaps all the Kingdom's values are not so diametrically opposed to earth's. I don't have time to think it through. One thing is sure - Jesus invites us into a new mode of living, in the Kingdom, and a new perspective on the world and our life in it.
I'm pretty happy
with the New Testament the way it's written, and interpreted
in my mind. But I do think
we need to drop "Kingdom of God" and even "God's
imperial rule." These phrases
had their day and time and effectiveness. Now, they need changing.
For obvious reasons.
God still rules the
universe. But kingdoms are coming to an end. At least, in many
cultures the trend is away from kingdoms, towards democratic
republics. Let's face it, the Bible God is projected in terms
of a mid-east potentate. An emperor. Be it a benevolent emperor
at that. And it's common knowledge not all modern folk are in love
with empires, kingdoms or kings.
So, I suggest we see the Kingdom of God not as
place of rule but a reference
system for the believer to view
and make sense of the world. After all Jesus (and presumably
God) was into empowering folk and not establishing controlling
power over them. With Jesus thinking maybe we can maybe mitigate
the inevitable power games we play in our families, communities and nations.
And see the world as Jesus saw it - a place where God acts to heal and
forgive and empower everyone. This is the way to view the world
anew and in ways that only modern man with all his knowledge, power, and
strength can develop and appreciate. Just as I am doing now with
a central concept of Jesus Christ.
Vive God's
Frame of Reference
Website for
Qbaal and Historical-critical theology is
http://geocities.com/Qbaal_99/index.htm
Apr 27/99
.
