Reflections on “Convictions

I have just finished reading the book, “Convictions: How I learned What Matters Most” by Marcus Borg. This is labelled as ‘A manifesto for progressive Christians’. There is much that is commendable here. As the book cover shows, Borg goes back into Christianity’s roots so that he can better garner the outgoing fruits that should emerge. This is a call for the prophetic role of Christianity in its struggle for social justice. It is also a reminder of Christianity’s initial stance of non-violent resistance and confrontation of the world’s many evils.

There is plenty here that I can agree with. I have spent a large part of my life struggling for social justice in a Christian context. This began with my spiritual conversion while in University. This led me for a time out of engineering and into theological studies. Subsequently I have been involved in the civil rights movement and anti-war activities in the USA. Later, together with my family, I have spent eight years in Africa, teaching and practicing water supply and sanitation in developing countries. This was followed up by working, teaching and consulting as a water engineer in Africa, Latin America, the Middle East and even in the Far East. I have worked in some pretty desperate places; to wit, Gaza, Haiti and the DR Congo. Now later in life I have drifted into human rights activities and social issues. A Congo support group that I helped create, Canadians for Human Rights in the Congo (CHRC) (www.humanrightsinthecongo.com ) is a case in point.

All of the above is to say that I have been involved in the struggle for social justice of which Marcus Borg speaks. It may therefore seem strange that I disagree with him on a few points in his book. Chapter five is entitled “Jesus death on the cross matters – but not because he paid for our sins”. In this chapter Borg states that the payment understanding of the cross was first fully articulated in 1098 by the monk Anselm. I find this statement astounding and I will tell you why.

First of all, let us admit that it was the teaching of Paul which gave us this interpretation of the cross. This occurred somewhat earlier than 1098. Paul never knew Jesus in the flesh. He was trying to exterminate this emerging Christian religion when he received his blinding vision on the road to Damascus. The Christ that he claims to have seen in his vison was the very one being proclaimed by the Christians. If we are to trust the record in the book of Acts, Paul had just seen Stephen being stoned to death for his beliefs. The fact that Stephen was able to forgive his oppressors as he died must have made a deep impact on Paul. It was this same Paul who wrote the following in his epistle to the Romans,

“You see, at just the right time, when we were still powerless, Christ died for the ungodly. Very rarely will anyone die for a righteous person, though for a good person someone might possibly dare to die. But God demonstrates his own love for us in this: while we were still sinners, Christ died for us. (underlining mine).

Since we have now been justified by his blood, how much more shall we be saved from God’s wrath through him! For if, while we were God’s enemies, we were reconciled to him through the death of his Son, how much more, having been reconciled, shall we be saved through his life! Not only is this so, but we also boast in God through our Lord Jesus Christ, through whom we have now received reconciliation”. (Romans 5: 6-11 NIVersion)

This is not the only reference to this interpretation of Jesus’ death on he cross. It can be found in other Pauline writings (i.e. Gal:2, 20-21, 3:13).

I would maintain that this inner illumination resulted in liberating power, based on grace not on our works. The rebirth which followed was the driving motivation of these early Christians. I will go even further. We should cease debating whether this interpretation of the cross is “true or not”. The experience of grace is very powerful. It was the energizer for the early Christians. Like all operative myths, it is its working within the believers that gives it it’s substance and relevance.

It is pretty clear that Paul rewrote the Christian narrative. His influence was crucial in leading the message out of the Jewish landscape and into the Gentile world. As a Jewish religious leader and a certified Roman citizen he was especially suited for this role. However, it was the religious conversion that provided the spark that lit the fire within. Paul reshaped the story surrounding Jesus. To say that this interpretation of Jesus’ death on the cross was only articulated in 1098 quite frankly boggles my mind.

Perhaps I should interject something that may explain the difference in Borg’s view of this and mine. How one experiences a dramatic spiritual conversion is very influential on the interpretation of that and other subsequent events. In other words, the context in which one’s spiritual conversion occurs is very important in explaining one’s own transformation and even and that of similar events in others. Borg, in his own words experienced the revelation of the ‘divine’ in a sublime, sometimes nature-based context (see ch.3 in his book, ‘God is real and is a mystery’). On the other hand, my conversion occurred in a very evangelical Christian background. Borg, also had this evangelicalism in his background, but as far as I can discern for his account, his spiritual opening occurred in a more universal context.

I have another difference of opinion with Marcus Borg. He quite correctly reminds us that to correctly understand the scriptural writings we must take into account their historical context and use our reason to comprehend all the relevant factors at work. Now to try to understand the biblical view of government, consider the following:

Saul, who later became known as Paul was Jewish. But he was also a certified Roman citizen (Acts 22: 23-30). This fact stood him in good stead in some of his most difficult situations. We should therefore not be surprised that Paul’s view of government was pretty friendly, as he writes to the Romans,

“Let everyone be subject to the governing authorities, for there is no authority except that which God has established by God. The authorities that exist have been established by God. Consequently, whoever rebels against the authority is rebelling against what God has established, and those who do so will bring judgement on themselves. For rulers hold no terror for those who do right, but for those who do wrong. Do you want to be free from fear of the one in authority? Then do what is right and you will be commended. For the one in authority is God’s servant for your good. But if you do wrong, be afraid, for rulers do not bear the sword for no reason. They are God’s servants, agents of wrath to bring punishment on the wrong doer. Therefore it is necessary to submit to the authorities, not only because of possible punishment , but also as a matter of conscience”. (Romans 13:1-5) (underlining mine)

Now let us fast forward in time. The emerging church is now running into direct conflict with the government of Rome. Their view of Lord (kyrios) Jesus is definitely in disagreement with Rome’s view of their deified Roman emperors. A pseudonymous tract, full of purposely written allegorical references, is written. The purpose of this book of ‘Revelations’ is to encourage the embattled Christians and to sharply critique the Roman state. The monolithic Roman state is now called the “beast”, and is even known as a manifestation of “Satan” himself. However one interprets this enigmatic book, the view of the Roman government is definitely NOT that it has been established by God and therefore should be submitted to and obeyed.

So what happens when you try to understand these writings in their historical context? How can one then discern possible meaning of this for us today? These scriptures are at times very human in nature, with all the frailties and foibles thereof. Yes, it is good to see Jesus as the norm for interpretation. However, let us be careful. Even what we know of Jesus is coloured by the personal biases of the gospel writers. In the end it is a question of faith, the inner light, reasonable conscience, mind and spirit at work – May God save us all!