As those of you who have been following this blog know, a few weeks ago I started going to church. I initially went to hear a co-worker preach, but ended up getting caught up in their study of the Book of Acts. Like playwright Oscar Wilde, who was asked to read just a paragraph for his Greek exams but kept on going, I want to know how the story ends. In the process I have been re-evaluating my relationship to organized religion in general and Christianity in particular, using Acts as a prism to sort out my feelings.
These last few weeks something has been really bugging me. I've been trying to look at the book from two perspectives: someone from the 21st century who is steeped in science and someone from the 1st century, who has never heard this message before. The thing that is bugging me is that I don't understand the message. I don't understand the impact it has on its listeners. And this is a message I've heard my whole life!
As I see it there are three possible ways one can react to the Gospel message. The first, which doesn't seem to feature much in Acts, is "Oh, god, here we go again with that religion ****." Possibly some of you are thinking that right now. And I can totally relate to that. I'd say that if anyone in Acts had that attitude, it was probably the Romans. They don't seem to be much interested in what Peter and Paul and the others were saying about a certain criminal executed by one of their own. Pontius Pilate, who ordered the Crucifixion, washed his hands and strode off the pages of the New Testament--but not history. Whatever misgivings he might have had on that Good Friday, he quickly got over them. He ended up being recalled by Rome because he was too brutal even for his superiors--and this was a time noted for its brutality.
The second attitude is that of the Jews, who are mostly portrayed as being hostile to the point of wanting to kill the apostles. Every time Paul steps inside a synagogue and opens his mouth, he starts a riot. And again, I don't have a problem understanding where they are coming from. Just think of what would happen if a visitor came to your church (if you are Christian) and started preaching that Christ had returned to earth in the form of a Persian nobleman called Baha'u'llah about a century and a half ago. I daresay he or she would be escorted out before he or she even had a chance to explain how the Scriptures (both Old and New Testaments) foretold Baha'u'llah's coming. And I don't think the congregation would be any too polite about it either. Well, that is exactly how the Jews of that time felt about Paul's preaching.
That leaves the third attitude, and that is of the "pagan" Greeks and Romans who embraced the Gospel. Again, they don't seem to ask very many questions, or at least not the kind of questions that we would expect. They don't seem to be concerned about the earthly life of the Messiah. It doesn't bother them that this Jesus, although risen, is no longer around. They just believe. And the farther Paul goes from Jerusalem, the more converts he makes. Something's kind of fishy here. It's almost as if Islam were to be accepted everywhere except in Saudi Arabia, home of the Prophet Muhammad. It doesn't make sense. And Paul, on his part, seems to be completely oblivious to the fact that dying and rising gods were all over the place in the Eastern Mediterranean world; that maybe the reason he made so many converts out there is that he was simply bringing them a new myth. This is the part that bugs me. I simply do not understand this response. I live in a different time and a different culture and I look at things through the eyes of science because that is how I've been trained.
In his later writings Paul repeatedly says that the message he preaches is foolishness to those who are not saved. Mathematicians talk about a beauty in numbers that I am totally blind to. I don't understand the rapture they feel when contemplating a blackboard full of equations; all I see is a jumble. But my inability to comprehend the truths of mathematics or physics does not condemn me to eternal damnation; instead, people like me are somewhat pitied because we are missing out on something wonderful. But Paul is not so generous when it comes to those who don't understand his vision.
These last few weeks something has been really bugging me. I've been trying to look at the book from two perspectives: someone from the 21st century who is steeped in science and someone from the 1st century, who has never heard this message before. The thing that is bugging me is that I don't understand the message. I don't understand the impact it has on its listeners. And this is a message I've heard my whole life!
As I see it there are three possible ways one can react to the Gospel message. The first, which doesn't seem to feature much in Acts, is "Oh, god, here we go again with that religion ****." Possibly some of you are thinking that right now. And I can totally relate to that. I'd say that if anyone in Acts had that attitude, it was probably the Romans. They don't seem to be much interested in what Peter and Paul and the others were saying about a certain criminal executed by one of their own. Pontius Pilate, who ordered the Crucifixion, washed his hands and strode off the pages of the New Testament--but not history. Whatever misgivings he might have had on that Good Friday, he quickly got over them. He ended up being recalled by Rome because he was too brutal even for his superiors--and this was a time noted for its brutality.
The second attitude is that of the Jews, who are mostly portrayed as being hostile to the point of wanting to kill the apostles. Every time Paul steps inside a synagogue and opens his mouth, he starts a riot. And again, I don't have a problem understanding where they are coming from. Just think of what would happen if a visitor came to your church (if you are Christian) and started preaching that Christ had returned to earth in the form of a Persian nobleman called Baha'u'llah about a century and a half ago. I daresay he or she would be escorted out before he or she even had a chance to explain how the Scriptures (both Old and New Testaments) foretold Baha'u'llah's coming. And I don't think the congregation would be any too polite about it either. Well, that is exactly how the Jews of that time felt about Paul's preaching.
That leaves the third attitude, and that is of the "pagan" Greeks and Romans who embraced the Gospel. Again, they don't seem to ask very many questions, or at least not the kind of questions that we would expect. They don't seem to be concerned about the earthly life of the Messiah. It doesn't bother them that this Jesus, although risen, is no longer around. They just believe. And the farther Paul goes from Jerusalem, the more converts he makes. Something's kind of fishy here. It's almost as if Islam were to be accepted everywhere except in Saudi Arabia, home of the Prophet Muhammad. It doesn't make sense. And Paul, on his part, seems to be completely oblivious to the fact that dying and rising gods were all over the place in the Eastern Mediterranean world; that maybe the reason he made so many converts out there is that he was simply bringing them a new myth. This is the part that bugs me. I simply do not understand this response. I live in a different time and a different culture and I look at things through the eyes of science because that is how I've been trained.
In his later writings Paul repeatedly says that the message he preaches is foolishness to those who are not saved. Mathematicians talk about a beauty in numbers that I am totally blind to. I don't understand the rapture they feel when contemplating a blackboard full of equations; all I see is a jumble. But my inability to comprehend the truths of mathematics or physics does not condemn me to eternal damnation; instead, people like me are somewhat pitied because we are missing out on something wonderful. But Paul is not so generous when it comes to those who don't understand his vision.
