How to become a heretic

Submitted by Michael S. (United States), Dec 9, 2014 at 12:21

Hi, Tovey

I agree with you, concerning what you said about terrorism and the misappropriation of religion in categorizing it. To be sure, the terrorists are not moved by a genuine religious intent of pleasing God; otherwise, their very instincts would tell them that what they are doing in entirely wrong: You cannot please our Creator, especially one dubbed "The Merciful, the Compassionate", as Qur'an repeatedly describes Allah, by indiscriminately destroying His creation.

Concerning the savage slaughter of Muslim by Muslim, which we have been witnessing the past couple of years, historian Colin McEvedy:

"The provinces of the Caliphate in many cases first seceded in the name of Ali (Spain is an exception, but the Umayyad cause was a sufficient distinction). Their independence soon passed beyond challengs, and the second generation of Emirates, the Murabits, Zirids, anSamanids, returned to orthodoxy, readily acklowledging a community of culture with Baghdad, once doing so did not prejudice their freedom."

-- McEvedy, Colin, "The Penguin Atlas of Medieval History", p. 56

What we are seeing today, with the Egyptians and Saudis fighting the Muslim Brotherhood, Al Qaeda fighting Islamic State, Syria fighting Islamic State and everyone fighting Israel, is just the latest violent episode of Islamic history: All these players are using religion as a justification for their lust for power; and once they are comfortable (as the Saudis are, for instance), they will waste not time in going to bed with the "infidel" to protect their gains.

I have some theological bones to pick with you. First of all, you referred to James the Just (Ya'akov Tsadik) as the "step-brother" of Jesus, reflecting your Trinitarian bent. You believe, no doubt, that the Holy Spirit was somehow Jesus' biological father, and therefore Joseph could not have been. Paul contradicts this belief in Romans, however:

Romans 1:
[3] Concerning his Son Jesus Christ our Lord, which was made of the seed of David according to the flesh;
[4] And declared to be the Son of God with power, according to the spirit of holiness, by the resurrection from the dead:

Here, Paul calls Jesus the "son" of God (not of "God the Father", but of "God"); yet he makes it clear that this is an adoptive title; and that Jesus was physically the son of Joseph ("of the seed of David", as Mattew and Luke together proclaim with their dual genealogies -- both of them through Joseph). God created mankind from "the dust of the earth", this creation including the evolution of human DNA. God Himself does not have human DNA, as ought to be plain from the reading of scripture; so He certainly could not have been "of the seed of David". Jesus' physical father was Joseph, as Paul clearly implies, however miraculous an event may have brought this about.

You also make an interesting point concerning Jesus' death on the cross. You describe this as "the One eternal sacrifice of love":

blood has always been the medium of sacrifice, even in its malevolent and indiscriminate wasting of human life. Conversely, its only proscribed use is in a holy manifestation of redeeming mankind to the Almighty, which is NOT in the taking of more human casualties, but in recognizing by faith in the One eternal sacrifice that love, not terror, is what the Eternal seeks of humanity.

You speak well here. Jesus' sacrifice was not a ritual shedding of human blood, a concept that Jews rightly abhor. What makes his willing laying down of his own life acceptable to God, was the fact that he chose not to impute it to his followers, who had all deserted him. Zechariah, son of Jehoiada, died a similar death:

2 Chr. 24:
[20] And the Spirit of God came upon Zechariah the son of Jehoiada the priest, which stood above the people, and said unto them, Thus saith God, Why transgress ye the commandments of the LORD, that ye cannot prosper? because ye have forsaken the LORD, he hath also forsaken you.
[21] And they conspired against him, and stoned him with stones at the commandment of the king in the court of the house of the LORD.
[22] Thus Joash the king remembered not the kindness which Jehoiada his father had done to him, but slew his son. And when he died, he said, The LORD look upon it, and require it.

Like Jesus, Zechariah was killed out of jealousy while preaching to turn the Jews back to their God; but he did not forgive his tormentors. Jesus, on the other hand, speaking (as Zechariah had) as the spokesman of God, forgave these worst of all transgressors; so that we, who have committed lesser transgressions, likewise receive forgiveness by acknowledging what Jesus did and why he did it. The same God spoke through Zechariah as spoke through Jesus; but He chose to speake forgiveness of sin through the latter, to honor his father David.

I think it's interesting that Zechariah had been killed by Joash -- a king who had been righteous before God during the days of Zechariah's father; and most curiously, a descendant of David and, through Joseph (Matthew's genealogy), an ancestor of Jesus. He was one of many wicked Davidic kings, of a line which was eventually cursed.

It is for the sake of showing that Jesus was a rightful heir to the throne of Israel, I believe, that Matthew showed that genealogy -- a line that was probably adoptive, not through Joseph but through Joeph's adoptive father Jacob (no doubt, the one Ya'akov Tsadik was named after). Joseph's biological father according to Luke 3:23, namely Heli, was descended from David through Nathan, whose line was not accursed as Josiah's was.

Thus, Jesus was able to claim biological descent from David through Nathan, while at the same time claiming legitimate claim to the throne of Israel through Solomon. There are many alternate interpretations of the scriptures; but this is the only one that fits all scripture and legitimizes Jesus' claim to be the Messiah. This is also, unfortunately, the sort of interpretation that has estranged me from Christians for years, and that has led to others being ejected from the church as heretics.

Shalom shalom :-)

---

Note: Opinions expressed in comments are those of the authors alone and not necessarily those of Daniel Pipes. Original writing only, please. Comments are screened and in some cases edited before posting. Reasoned disagreement is welcome but not comments that are scurrilous, off-topic, commercial, disparaging religions, or otherwise inappropriate. For complete regulations, see the "Guidelines for Reader Comments".