Torah, Israel, Jesus, Church - Today
by Paul M. van Buren
Outline:
The first half of the lecture defines the four terms:
Israel, the living Jewish people
Torah, the constitution of this people/nation, instruction in how to
live its calling, Israel's kettubah
Jesus, the Jew whose story is told according to Israel's Scriptures who
brought many Gentiles to the service of God
The Church as that community of Gentiles serving alongside Israel
Today - all four terms refer to living phenomena of our world today
The second half of the lecture pairs the terms in three different
combinations.
First, the traditional pairing:
Torah with Israel
Jesus with the Church
This expresses our genuine differentness, but also draws attention to our mutual
isolation and mistrust.
Second, a pairing that has become visible only over the past three decades and reflects a
radical reversal of traditional Christian teaching concerning the Jewish people:
The inseparable connection of Jesus to Torah
The Church inseparably connected to the Jewish people (Israel)
Finally, a speculation or hope about the future, expressed in a third possible pairing:
The Church with Torah
Jesus with the Jewish people
Were the church finally to come to an affirmation of the Torah (including the use of
Israel's Scriptures as a check on the New Testament), then the Jewish people might
acknowledge God's hand in using the Jew of Nazareth to call Gentiles to be Israel's allies.
I have been asked to address, in the present tense, and I invite you to think through
with me in the present tense, a theme consisting of four terms that are familiar to us all,
but misunderstood by many: Torah, Israel, Jesus, Church. Anyone who knows reasonably well
both the Jewish and the Christian traditions, and that, as we sadly know, includes not a
great many Jews and not a great many Christians, will know that each of these terms only
really matters in the present tense. The Torah that matters is the lived and living Torah
today, not what may or may not have been written or spoken by Moses in the wilderness of
Sinai. The Israel that matters is living Israel, the Jewish people today, not a collection
of tribes of the ancient Middle East. The Jesus that matters, whether you believe in him or
not, is Jesus today, not some historical reconstruction of a first century Jew. The church
that matters is the living congregation of Christians today, not Luke's idealized community
in Jerusalem, or that wild congregation in ancient Corinth that the apostle Paul had to deal
with. If we are to be serious about these terms, then of course we shall deal with them
today, in the present tense. For after all, we meet here today as members of living
communities, real flesh and blood Jews and Christians, not as historians of dead traditions.
What I shall do to encourage your reflection is, first, define the most essential
characteristics of each of our terms, taking them one by one, and then move on to consider
the connections between them. Depending on how we pair them up, we shall find ourselves
confronted with a less happy past. With a different pairing, however, we come upon the
situation in which we find ourselves today. And with a third pairing, we are challenged to
consider a future toward which we may be moving.
Back to Outline
I
Israel, the living Jewish people
Let us begin with Israel, for not only does Israel come first chronologically, but Israel
is the historical context within which alone each of the other terms is understandable, and
so, that on which all the other terms depend. Israel means and refers primarily to the
people Israel, the Jewish people, the people who for millennia have recited the Shema,
"Hear, O Israel," from sunrise to sunset. The name Israel, first given to Jacob,
then transferred to the descendants of Jacob - "the children of Israel" - has,
since well before the beginning of the Common Era, been the standard term for the Jewish
people. Says who? Says Israel! Outsiders may call them "the Jews". They call
themselves Israel. Read the Talmud or any other bit of rabbinic literature. Go to the
synagogue or read any version of the Siddur, the Daily Prayer Book. Israel means this
people.
But who is this people? Well, if you ask them this question, they, true to there
long-standing custom, will undoubtedly answer you with another question. They may ask, by
way of answer, "So, and what sort of a reply would count as an answer for you?" To
save time, I shall jump to the answer that would count for a serious Christian: This is a
people called to be apart or distinct from, and thus ever in the context of, all the other
nations of the earth. That, in our conventional religious jargon, is called holiness. This
is a people called to be different from, and so a sign for, all the others. The One who
decided on this strange calling is the One whom Christians as well as Israel call God.
Israel is the people who think they have heard this call and who have decided to live by it.
That is the ground of their story, as it is told from the story of Abraham up to the story
of today.
Christians should be aware of the fact that many Jews are not happy about, disbelieve,
and try hard to forget or ignore the story of their calling which they have carried with
them through a long and difficult history. Be that as it may. As long as those Jews continue
to identify with their people, and continue to have children and raise them in some sense
Jewishly, the story of their calling will be served. In them too, the people Israel lives.
Back to Outline
Torah, the constitution of this people, Israel's kettubah
But how do you live as Israel? How do you live as a people with such a calling? The
answer is provided by our second term, Torah. Torah means instruction, instruction in how
this people is to conduct itself. Torah is first of all the five books of Moses, received as
the constitution for the government of this people. Torah is to Israel as a constitution is
to a nation, so it regulates what is to be done and what is not to be done in the life of
the nation. In that sense, it is a part of the truth, surely not the whole truth, to
translate Torah as Law, as the authors of the New Testament did. Now, a workable
constitution for a continuing nation needs constantly to be interpreted, in order to meet
new situations not foreseen by the original document. And all that body of interpretation
has itself the force of the original constitution. It too is constitutional, instruction for
how such a people is to live and govern its life. And so in historical fact, there grew up
in Israel a body of what was called the Oral Torah, as distinct from , but developing and
applying, the Written Torah. In the course of time, it too came to be written down in the
form of the Mishnah. Then, as that too was further interpreted and expanded to cover more
cases or new situations, what we now know as Talmud was also compiled and written down. All
that is Torah for this people. And not only that, but to this must be added all the opinions
of later rabbis on further cases and new situations, right up to this day. All that is also
Torah. Indeed, any wise and helpful advise that any Jew may give to another is also called a
word of Torah.
Torah is certainly seen by Israel as God's word, God's quite special word to Israel,
which is binding on all Israel, but which no one else in the world has to follow. It is
burdensome at times, yet on the whole it is Israel's joy, for it marks out concretely, for
every moment of life and in each situation, how to live the special love affair between God
and Israel. It is Israel's Kettubah, its marriage contract with its God. Consequently, it is
Israel's guide for how to live out its distinctive life in the midst and on behalf of all
the nations of the earth.
Back to Outline
Jesus, the Jew according to Israel's Scriptures,
who brought Gentiles to the service of God
Third, we come to the Hellenized name of one member of the people Israel, a first
century, pre-Mishnahic Jew, Jesus of Nazareth. All that we know of him comes from those who
wrote his story, several generations after the Roman occupation forces killed him. Those
authors passed on to us the story as they had heard it, but what they passed on was a story
told, as they put it themselves, "according to the Scriptures". That is to say,
their story was molded to the story of Israel that the Scriptures present, and often word
for word. So Jesus is born in the city of David, is taken down to Egypt in his youth, and
spends 40 days in the wilderness, as Israel spent 40 years there, before coming out in the
open. Many of the details of his life and especially of his death are given in words taken
from the Scriptures. So the only Jesus that Christians or anyone else have ever known is one
who comes wrapped in and inseparable from the Scriptures of his people.
This intimate relationship between the story of Jesus and the story of Israel surfaces
anew when we consider why it was that the Jesus story survived. It survived because Jesus
survived. It survived because Jesus continued, after his death, to have the same effect on
some people that he had had upon his first Jewish disciples: as he had brought his disciples
more compellingly into the presence of the God of their people, so he began to bring some
Gentiles, for the first time, face to face, so to speak, with the God of Israel. Thus the
biblical story of Israel, called out from and for the sake of all the nations of the world,
began to be reenacted or re-presented in the story of Jesus, the Israelite who awakened
Gentiles to know and praise the love with which God loved his people Israel. And just this
living effect of Jesus, realized through the witness and lives of his followers, has
continued and continues to this day.
Back to Outline
The Church as the community of Gentiles serving alongside Israel
Finally, the church. We Christians say in our creed that we believe in the church.
Looking our fellow Christians in the eye, or worse, looking at ourselves in the mirror, we
have to believe, it being so hard to see, that these sorry Gentile creatures are really
called to serve the God of Israel, right alongside the people Israel, really called by the
God of Israel to be holy or different in their own Gentile way. For the calling of the
church is not to become Jews, not to join Israel, but to join with Israel, to serve shoulder
to shoulder alongside the people Israel, working with them and with God, as Gentiles, for
the redemption of this unredeemed world.
The church is of course just as concrete and visible as are the Jewish people, but what
makes the church to be the church is no more visible than that which makes the Jewish people
to be the people of God. In both cases, it is God's call that makes the difference. But
whereas Israel has been given the Torah as God's pattern of how to live its calling, the
church has been given the Jew of Nazareth as its guide. It is called to conform itself to
that Jew, and to do so as a community of Gentiles, living evidence that God's covenant with
Israel has effects in the real world. If Israel is called to be, by its simple existence,
God's light to the Gentiles, then the Gentile church is called to demonstrate, by its simple
existence, that Israel's light has not gone out, that that light still shines. In this way
the church demonstrates that, as the apostle Paul put it, Jesus is God's confirmation of all
God's promises to Abraham, Isaac and Jacob. (I'll have a word to say to that patriarchial
phrasing in a moment.)
Back to Outline
All four terms refer to living phenomena today
Israel is living Israel. The people Israel lives, including their State, to which
they could have given no other name. The State of Israel is a good reminder that the people
Israel lives, but most of Israel does not live there. Most of them live right here in North
America. The State of Israel has been much in the news, but fascinating and worth visiting
as it is, it is not the whole story. The Jewish people here in Canada and the US and
elsewhere is where Israel is to be found. In these various lands as well as in their
historic Land, they confront the world to this day with the story of which they are the
inescapable bearers.
Israel lives in part because Torah lives. Jews are not of one mind about how to
live lives shaped by the Torah, and they never were. But what matters more than any single
interpretation of the Torah is the fact that it goes on being interpreted. The very argument
about the Torah is evidence that the Torah remains a living issue for Israel. The argument
about who is a Jew and how to be Jewish is an argument about how the Torah is to be
interpreted. You don't have arguments like that over a dead letter. The arguments are alive
because Torah is alive.
Jesus, as a careful reading of the Gospels shows, is consistently presented as
having been, in his short life, a consistently Torah-true Jew, although perhaps one who
interpreted the Torah somewhat more flexibly for his Jewish disciples than he did for
himself. But after his death, as the living reality that enlivened his disciples after his
death, and more specifically in working through them to call Gentile disciples to serve the
God he called Father, his emphasis was not primarily on Torah. It was, as it seems to have
been from the beginning, on the reign of God on earth, here and now, today, or in a tomorrow
that was so near as to be effective today. The only Jesus whom the church has ever followed,
and the one they follow today, is the one who calls his disciples today to work and pray for
the reign of the God of Israel over the whole earth, here and now. The story of Jesus that
matters to the church is and has to be an unfinished story, for the task that Jesus took up
is far from finished and still needs to be done. So if Christians were more serious and
careful about what they say, they would never claim that they have been saved: they would,
with the apostle Paul, speak of salvation, as Jesus spoke of the reign of God, always in the
future tense, a future that makes so important what we do and how we behave today.
And so the Church too lives. Don't be fooled by sociological studies that say that
the church is dead or dying. I give you concrete evidence to the contrary: dead communities,
like dead organisms, don't change. If they change, that is a sign of life. In the past
thirty years, the churches, Protestant and Catholic, European and North American, have begun
a most remarkable reformation of their most basic thinking, teaching and behavior, and that
at a point that is far more fundamental than the issues involved in the Reformation that
they went through in the sixteenth century. The church has begun - it's only a beginning,
but it has really begun - to redefine and live anew its relationship to the people over
against whom it came to its own self-definition, the Jewish people. Indeed, it has begun a
one hundred and eighty degree reversal of its understanding of those from whom they had
drawn their whole vocabulary for understanding themselves and God. That reversal is what
will occupy us for the rest of this talk, but the fact itself is evidence that the church is
alive. Indeed, it is going through what must be counted the most important transformation in
its whole history since the time, in the first century, when it and the Jewish people turned
their backs on each other. If the church were dead, there couldn't be happening what is
actually going on today.
Back to Outline
In order to understand our theme, we must move beyond looking at each of the terms one by
one. That which the terms designate never existed one by one, but always in combinations. So
let us consider them by pairing them up. As we shall see, it makes all the difference in the
world just which terms we pair together.
Before I begin the second, and I think the more important half of my presentation,
however, I cannot let pass unnoted, that both the Jewish and the Christian traditions speak
of God's promises to the patriarchs, and that it has taken women scholars to open our eyes
to see, for example in Genesis 18, that the greatest promise of all, the promise of a child
and so of a future, was made just as much to Sarah as to Abraham. Both of our traditions
share in having done scarcely better than their surrounding cultures in giving women an
equal place and an equal voice with men. Speaking for the moment only of the Christian side
of the matter, I think we should note, however, that whereas the church shared in and thus
helped to preserve a widely based sexism that many of us today find unacceptable, our
peculiarly Christian anti-Judaism is something we actually invented. We didn't teach the
world to be patriarchial; we did teach all of western culture, and so influenced all of the
modern world, to despise Jews and Judaism.
That being noted, I return to the matters of pairing the terms of our theme in several
combinations.
Back to Outline
Torah with Israel
The most obvious, because most familiar, set of pairs is the connection of Israel with
Torah and the church with Jesus. That's easy, because we've all been doing it for nineteen
centuries. It's easy, but the history of the abysmal relationship between the church and the
Jewish people during those nineteen centuries should alert us to the danger in such a
pairing. If the Torah is Israel's affair, so that Israel is defined by the Torah, and if
Jesus is the church's affair, so that the church is defined by Jesus, then why should either
community have anything to do with the other? Christians could and did say, Let the Jews
have their old Torah; we have the truth in Jesus. And Jews could and did say, Let the church
have its crazy Jesus; we have the truth in God's Torah.
There is, however, an important truth that is brought out by this traditional pairing:
the two traditions really are different, and a crucial part of that difference lies in the
fact that each tradition is grounded in a different foundational moment. Israel, the Jewish
people, looks to Sinai and the gift of Torah as its founding moment; the church looks to the
life, death and resurrection of Jesus as its founding moment. Moreover, and more important,
this pairing can also suggest the functional parallel that Torah performs for Israel and
Jesus for the church. We could put it in the form of a ratio: Torah is to Israel as Jesus is
to the church, or Jesus does for the church what Torah does for Israel. That is, Torah and
Jesus serve, for their respective communities, as the origin, the normative guide for
living, and the assurance of divine care of, divine concern for, and divine presence with
the community.
Back to Outline
Jesus with the Church
The evidence of history, however, suggests that that first pairing has demanded the
terrible price of mutual remoteness, not to speak of enmity. Being the smaller and weaker of
the two, in numbers and power, Israel has had to pay in the flesh for the resulting
hostility. The church, for its part, had to pay in the spirit for cutting itself loose from
its God-given relationship to Israel. Finally, the church shocked by the unintended
consequences of its long, long tradition of teaching contempt for the Jewish people, carried
out by a modern neo-Paganism, but largely unprotested by the church, has been trying, over
the past three decades, to find its way out of and free from its traditional anti-Judaic
stance. As it has wrestled with this issue, it has come to consider a rather different
pairing of the terms of our theme than that of the past. What has been coming more and more
to attention are the pairs Torah/Jesus, and Israel/the church. What many of us have been
trying to work through and see in fresh terms is the inseparable and positive relationship
between Jesus and Torah, on the one hand, and then and as a consequence, the inseparable and
positive relationship between the church and the Jewish people, the people Israel.
Back to Outline
Let me begin with Torah and Jesus. What has always been obviously a fact, but one little
noticed by Christians, is that Jesus of Nazareth was the product of Torah. That is, he was a
Jew, and this is beginning today to be taken as the starting point for what the Churches
have to say about him. He was a Jew and a Torah-faithful Jew at that. The Gospel according
to Matthew brings this out particularly sharply with a saying attributed to Jesus, that
anyone who relaxes the least of the commandments will be called least in the kingdom of God.
But this tradition concerning Jesus must have been fairly general, for not a single Gospel
writer, probably all Gentile, shows Jesus breaking a single Torah commandment. That Jesus
was a Jew, however, goes further than that. The best current New Testament scholarship is
coming to a solid consensus that Jesus understood himself to be a prophet of Jewish
restoration. That the Land of Israel was under a brutal occupation by the Roman army is a
fact more appreciated by contemporary scholarship than it was in the past, and the
subversive character of the Nazarene's preaching of the imminent reign of God is evident
when set in the context of that occupation. It has been suggested that for the puzzling
saying attributed to Jesus, about giving to Caesar and to God what belonged to each, the
only interpretation that takes that context of Roman occupation into account, is this: Let
that which belongs to Caesar - namely his army - return to Caesar, in Rome, and let that
which belongs to God, namely the Land, be restored to God and the people of God. Such an
interpretation makes it perfectly understandable why the Roman authorities condemned and
executed Jesus as an insurrectionist.
But if Jesus was in fact on the side of Torah and the freedom of his people, then there
could never be a Law-free Gospel, as the Reformers of the sixteenth century thought. For as
a faithful Jew, Jesus could only have seen Torah itself as Gospel, as good news. As the
Rabbis were to teach, "When Torah came into the world, freedom came into the
world." The service of God is perfect freedom, the churches have indeed taught, but
they have failed to see that the Torah is nothing but a pattern for the free and joyful
service of God. Absolute service to God was what Jesus taught - "This do and you shall
live," - and that was and is precisely the message of Torah.
We have, however, not yet come to the crucial relationship between Jesus and Torah. The
crucial relationship is established by the qualifier in our theme: Today. The Jesus
available to us today, despite all the efforts that critical, historical scholarship has
made, is the Jesus of the original apostolic witness, namely, Jesus according to the
Scriptures. The Scriptures contain more than Torah, and we know that the order of the books
in the Scriptures was different for the early Christians, as it remains for the church, from
that of the developing rabbinic tradition and of the Jewish people today, but in both
traditions, Torah comes first. So a Jesus who died and rose again according to the
Scriptures, the Jesus already being preached when the apostle Paul joined the
Jesus-movement, namely, at its very beginning, was and remains one of whom we have no
information at all other than of a Jesus according to Torah. His life was presented as a
recapitulation of that of his people of Torah. His teaching is formulated in the language of
Torah. Apart from Torah, Jesus is not only incomprehensible; he is unknown. That is where we
are today.
Back to Outline
The Church inseparably connected to the Jewish people
We turn, then, to the connection that we have come to see today between Israel and the
church, a connection that follows from that between Jesus and Torah. In contemporary terms,
the Jewish people and the Christian church are both linguistic communities, the Jewish
people by virtue of a common language, Hebrew, and common texts, the Scriptures, the Talmud
and the rabbinic tradition. The church is a linguistic community that lives, not by a common
language, but by virtue of the possibility of translation; it lives from a common story and
a common Scripture, translated into and told in almost every language on earth. More
specifically, these are two communities of interpretation, two rather different traditions
of interpretation, of the Scriptures.
It used to be said that Christianity was the daughter of and grew out of Judaism, but
today we realize that in the first century there were many forms of Judaism, many ways of
being Jewish. The particular form of first century Judaism that was the mother of rabbinic
Judaism, in turn the mother of every form of Judaism today, was the Pharisaic strain of
first century Judaism. But that was precisely the same general strain, mixed with a bit of
Jewish apocalyptic thinking, that was the mother of early Christianity. So it is more
historically accurate to forget the old mother-daughter image and to think of the two as
sibling traditions, both heirs to the Israel story of the Scriptures, but each interpreting
that story in different ways.
Although it is true to say that the two communities both bear witness to the one God and
the one revelation, they are nevertheless quite different. The Jewish people, Israel, is
both a people and a nation. Anyone can join Israel and become a Jew, but Israel's continuity
depends primarily on Jews having children and bringing them up as Jews. The sense of
peoplehood is therefore considerably stronger among Jews than among Christians. And
Jewishness is much more a matter of behavior than of belief. Think what you want and believe
what you can; it's what you do that matters. Christians put more emphasis on what to think
or believe. Yet all these differences are, in the last analysis, matters of emphasis. They
grow out of our different interpretations of our common heritage of the Scriptures.
One central feature of our relationship, however, has to be underlined. The great
difference between our relationship today and how it was in the past is that the churches
have come, over the past thirty years, to recognize the Jewish people today as continuing
Israel, still the people of God's calling, in continuity with ancient Israel. The churches,
certainly on an official level and increasingly in practice, have abandoned their
traditional view of Jews as those whose calling has been revoked and replaced by that of the
church. In a word, the churches, as a matter of official policy, however many individual
Christians haven't gotten the word, have repudiated their old displacement theology and come
to recognize that the covenant between God and the Jewish people, the covenant of Sinai,
however interpreted by Jews, is still a going affair.
The consequence of this reversal is that the church can only see itself as a community of
Gentiles, drawn from all the other nations of the world, who have been called by the God of
Israel to serve God alongside of and not in place of Israel. Because the church's Lord is a
Jew, one of Israel, the church cannot draw near to that Jew without drawing near to his
people, and the church cannot be servant of that Jew without also serving his people. This
recognition of the Jewish people as the people of whom Jesus is one, is unavoidable once
Christians really recognize Jesus as a Jew, for a Jew, including that one Jew, is first of
all a member of the people whom God called as a people. And so we can conclude that for
Christians, Jesus is the Jew who binds the peoples of the nations to his own people Israel.
Through him, we Christians share with Jews the heritage of Israel and the calling of God to
God's service for the sake of this dangerously threatened world. That is where we are today,
and that is what is brought to light by pairing Jesus with Torah and the church with Israel.
Back to Outline
A third pairing is also possible. Logically possible, that is. Only time will tell if it
is actually possible. Nevertheless, I want to explore with you some implications of another
set of pairings that challenges us to face a future into which we have not yet, but may
possibly, move. I want you to entertain the possibility of pairing Torah with the church,
and Israel with Jesus. This goes further than either the church or the Jewish people have
dared to move so far. I make no predictions about whether or when it will happen. But it
could!
a) Let us begin with the connection between church and Torah. At first brush, this seems
impossible, for Torah is God's special gift to Israel. Torah is God's definition of
precisely Israel's holiness, its separation from and distinctiveness over against all the
other nations of the world. How can this possibly be related to the church, made up as it is
of those called out from just those other nations?
As a matter of historical fact, of course, the Jewish movement that was to become the
church relied on the Torah and the rest of Israel's Scriptures from its beginning, but as it
became a predominantly Gentile affair, it started to justify its claim to Israel's
Scriptures by claiming it was itself Israel, the true Israel, replacing the Jewish people in
that role. That claim is no longer tenable for a church that has come to recognize that the
Jewish people is Israel. The church today and in the future can therefore only accept that
it is a predominantly Gentile community, called by God to live and work alongside of Israel.
This Gentile church, however, does believe itself to be made up of those called out from
among the nations. The church is not the world, nor does it believe itself to be of the
world. It too, along with Israel, is called to holiness, to be separated out and set apart
for the service of God. The church shares in that love with which God made covenant with
Israel. So the church can and should claim to take God's Torah seriously.
I am referring here to the full Torah, not just the so-called Torah for the Gentiles, the
more limited commandments which the Rabbis believed God had provided for Noah and his
descendants. The church's Bible begins with the full five books of Moses, the whole Torah.
And the ultimate reason for that is that the full Torah is mediated to the church by Jesus,
as the full Torah is mediated to the Jewish people by the Talmud. If we put this in Jewish
terms, we could say that the story of Jesus is the church's Talmud that takes us to Torah.
That is why the church can recite the Shema, for Jesus teaches the church to love the Lord
our God with all its heart and strength, and to love the neighbor as oneself.
Torah could be, and I would propose that it should be the principle Scripture for the
church, because there is where the church comes as close as it possibly can to the one who
comes wrapped in it. The connection between the Torah and the church is and should be
fundamental, because Christians can never relate to the real, the living Jesus without the
Torah. A Jesus apart from Torah is not the real Jesus, not the Jew of Nazareth, not the
living Jesus who died and rose for us according to the Scripture, but a figment of pious
imagination. Set the church adrift from Torah and you set the church adrift, not merely from
its foundations in Israel, but adrift from its foundation in Jesus Christ. The future for
the church, if it is to have a future as the church of the God and Father of Jesus Christ,
lies in its discovering, precisely as Gentiles and not Israel, the priority of the Torah and
so of its Old Testament in its liturgy and for life, and so of its learning to re-read its
New Testament always in the light of the Old Testament. In fact, the New Testament is only,
but then really, the story of how the church became authorized to read as its own the
Scriptures of Israel. It is the church's license to read the Torah, and only when the church
puts the Torah in first place will it have the antidote to the poison of the anti-Judaism
that has sickened so much of its history.
Back to Outline
Jesus with the Jewish people
Let us then turn to the other connection for the future: Israel and Jesus. In one sense,
the connection is inescapable, if hardly a happy one: no Jew other than Moses, not even the
Rambam, the great Maimonides, has had a deeper impact on the history of the Jewish people
than Jesus, for his church has been the most consistent and enduring enemy they have had to
face. I would like, however, to suggest the possibility of a more positive connection,
namely, that of the Jew Jesus in and among his own Jewish people.
This possibility calls for an emphasis, not on the divinity of Jesus nor on the humanity
of Jesus, but on the sociology of Jesus: a Jew among Jews. For to be a Jew is to be first of
all one of, and in solidarity with, the Jewish people. And that means, Jesus for his own
people. But is that even a possible thought for Jews? Is it not true that many Jews can't
abide even the thought of Jesus, much less the idea that he is one of them? Yes, that is
true, but I would ask Jews to think this matter through with care, for I believe the truth
of the matter is that what they really can't abide is not Jesus, but us Christians. What
have Jews against a poor Jewish boy who, along with a lot of other Jews, got killed by the
Romans? So he's the Jew who brought a lot of Pagans to bow down to Israel's God. So is there
anything wrong with that? No, Jesus isn't the problem; we are! The Jewish No to Jesus Christ
is fundamentally a No to the church and its faith in Jesus. And Jews have had to say No to
the church precisely in order to continue to say Yes to God and to the covenant that they
have made with God. Faithfulness to God has required them to say No to a church that has
tried for centuries to force Jesus down their throats and to deny their covenant with their
God. Thank God, in every sense, that they have done so and thus continued to be Israel!
But now, suppose, just suppose, that the church were one day truly to say, as it is only
just beginning to say, Yes to Torah, and to thank God that the Jewish people has remained
faithful to God by not becoming Christians. Were that day ever to come, in which Jews could
see Christians for the first time as friends and supporters, rather than as the missionary
enemy they have been for so many centuries, Jews might then feel free to reconsider Jesus as
indeed the Jew he was and as one of their own.
Now, of course, Jews will never see him as Christians do, for he can never be for them
the one whom the God of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob used to introduce them to Godself, but they
might find he was at least a fellow Jew, the consequences of w life had finally produced,
after so many centuries to the contrary, some friends and allies of the Jewish people. So it
would finally depend on the church for Jews to come to see the connection of Jesus with
Israel. That means, of course, that the connection of Jesus with Israel is a far greater
challenge for the church than it is for the Jewish people, for it means that Christians can
never serve this one Jew without serving his fellow Jews, for solidarity with him requires
solidarity with his people. Only a very few have come to this so far, but I hope that it may
be a possibility for the church of tomorrow.
Paul M. van Buren. With kind permission of the author.  |