I've been reading Zealot, a book that tries to get at the historical Jesus. I like books like this - I feel like we miss so much of the context of the time when we try reading our modern, English language Bibles.
Particularly since the original Bible was written in an entirely different languge, in an entirely different period of time, where people had no reason to care about or insist on historical accuracy.
Truth is, I think such writing offers a richer and more nuanced understanding of God. It's less...
Close-minded.
And in many ways, more miraculous. It's not hard to see and understand what draws people to a leader. Conventionally. Just look at our rock stars and pundits. You need someone charismatic. Someone who looks good, and presents well. Someone who makes everyone feel like they're your friend.
Someone who gives the impression that they can come in on a white horse, and save the day. Someone who is larger than life, greater than everyone around them.
Which fits in rather well with our modern world. Cowboys, superheroes. The people who seem to get ahead are the ones who successfully fit the mold. And they cater to what we want to hear, present what we want to be told. (Even if they are actually worse at leading, worse at saving the day. In Jim Collins' research, having a CEO get hired in order to save the business was often a sign that things were about to get even worse. He described a type of leader completely at odds with the cowboys and saviors that make so many headlines...and yet company boards of directors, financial news reporters, headhunters, and those who decide who gets promoted all still seem to fall for the narrative of someone larger than life who comes in to save the day.)
So how interesting, that in the Bible Moses is not a good speaker. Some say he stuttered, or had a speech impediment, but it looks like the exact quote was "But my Lord, never in my life have I been a man of eloquence, either before or since you have spoken to your servant. I am a slow speaker and not able to speak well" (Exodus 4:10)
And even more interesting that God kept insisting Israel worship Him and Him alone, when the Israelites clearly kept wanting to worship a god the way everyone else all around them did. Why give such a strange and unusual rule? Something so different? Novel, even?
But I digress. I am reading Zealot, and it's interesting how much the events of that time can be reflected in the world today.
I'm having a hard time saying where, and how, other than that it's a time of turmoil in which the rich are getting richer and the poor are getting poorer. Certain sentences and phrases keep resonating, as I think "that's true of the world today."
Some of the contextual history makes me think of the jihadists of today, and I'm not sure what I think about that. This idea that the Zealots (not Jesus, but the movement shortly after his ministry) are so remarkably similar to the jihadists of today. From the insistence that everyone must worship God the way they say is required, to their willingness to assassinate, to the divisions and fault lines as certain zealots claimed others weren't right-minded, or were in it for themselves.
In that time and place, the movement was squelched when Rome came in and burned it all down.
Yet that was then, and that was Rome.
Particularly since the original Bible was written in an entirely different languge, in an entirely different period of time, where people had no reason to care about or insist on historical accuracy.
Truth is, I think such writing offers a richer and more nuanced understanding of God. It's less...
Close-minded.
And in many ways, more miraculous. It's not hard to see and understand what draws people to a leader. Conventionally. Just look at our rock stars and pundits. You need someone charismatic. Someone who looks good, and presents well. Someone who makes everyone feel like they're your friend.
Someone who gives the impression that they can come in on a white horse, and save the day. Someone who is larger than life, greater than everyone around them.
Which fits in rather well with our modern world. Cowboys, superheroes. The people who seem to get ahead are the ones who successfully fit the mold. And they cater to what we want to hear, present what we want to be told. (Even if they are actually worse at leading, worse at saving the day. In Jim Collins' research, having a CEO get hired in order to save the business was often a sign that things were about to get even worse. He described a type of leader completely at odds with the cowboys and saviors that make so many headlines...and yet company boards of directors, financial news reporters, headhunters, and those who decide who gets promoted all still seem to fall for the narrative of someone larger than life who comes in to save the day.)
So how interesting, that in the Bible Moses is not a good speaker. Some say he stuttered, or had a speech impediment, but it looks like the exact quote was "But my Lord, never in my life have I been a man of eloquence, either before or since you have spoken to your servant. I am a slow speaker and not able to speak well" (Exodus 4:10)
And even more interesting that God kept insisting Israel worship Him and Him alone, when the Israelites clearly kept wanting to worship a god the way everyone else all around them did. Why give such a strange and unusual rule? Something so different? Novel, even?
But I digress. I am reading Zealot, and it's interesting how much the events of that time can be reflected in the world today.
I'm having a hard time saying where, and how, other than that it's a time of turmoil in which the rich are getting richer and the poor are getting poorer. Certain sentences and phrases keep resonating, as I think "that's true of the world today."
Some of the contextual history makes me think of the jihadists of today, and I'm not sure what I think about that. This idea that the Zealots (not Jesus, but the movement shortly after his ministry) are so remarkably similar to the jihadists of today. From the insistence that everyone must worship God the way they say is required, to their willingness to assassinate, to the divisions and fault lines as certain zealots claimed others weren't right-minded, or were in it for themselves.
In that time and place, the movement was squelched when Rome came in and burned it all down.
Yet that was then, and that was Rome.
No comments:
Post a Comment