20260714 Q&A

The Zealots of Jesus' Time

And I'm going to get um some water while Leandro finds your questions for me. I want to begin by thanking folks who have u been giving donations in the chat. Uh JPFL, thanks so much for your um donation. Anders and Alistister, thanks for your uh support.

(1:36:47) Anders also asks um what do we really know about the Zealots of Jesus' time? Are there primary sources that discuss their goals? How dangerous were they? What did the Romans think about them? What happened uh to them after Jesus? So, Anders, just like uh almost everything that we know about um the context, the background context of Judea and Judaism at the time of Jesus and indeed the century leading up to it and the century after is pretty much our main source is Josephus because he wrote so much and so much is surviving.

(1:37:24) Um and so um zealots are one of the factions that Josephus cites and he sees them as uh you know anti- Roman militants. Um and so that's our again our primary source for it. There are, you know, other than that we have, you know, mentions and so one of the apostles is identified as a zealot, you know, and so he the idea of it is um that that he maybe had converted from that from that faction.

(1:37:56) Um what happened to them after Jesus? So I think that what's um they're like like all of the other factions. So the um the Sadducees and the Essenes are other factions that Josephus cites. They are essentially exterminated during or die out during the um the Roman Jewish wars. And so the Sadducees had been, you know, the temple elite.

(1:38:17) The temple's destroyed, the elite are are wiped out or spread away. They don't have they don't aren't able to maintain themselves the way they used to be. Uh the Essenes too had um um communities like the Dead Sea Scroll community at Kumran that get destroyed uh during the wars and so they no longer exist.

(1:38:36) And the Zealots are another one of those that ceases to exist. And so um the main heirs then of second temple Judaism are Christianity and then rabbitic Judaism that both reorganize themselves into new religions after the destruction of of second temple Judaism. Gabriel Knight, thank you for your support. We appreciate that.

The Formation of the Biblical Canon

(1:38:56) Um, Nathan Gail says, "Has there been major effort efforts to remove James from the cannon before Luther? Um, other major efforts to remove James since Luther?" So, so again, I was saying that how at the very beginning the canon formed a lot more slowly than um it's usually thought. And so sometimes people think that there um that was all decided like at the council of Nika where they just put together a list and they said this is the Bible and this is not the Bible and so forth.

(1:39:27) But actually um it's not at the council of Nika. It's kind of a slower process where um early church fathers in the 4th century and even a little bit later are are sharing kind of lists. And so um you know it's already as late when I'm quoting those things where I'm saying that uh um that Ucius who's in the 4th century and Jerome um are actually saying that they're aware that um not everybody thinks that this is an authentic letter or should be included in the canon.

(1:39:59) They're very late for that. So so it's not that um um so that wasn't removing it but it's not putting it in then. There really isn't any um any substantial taking anything out of the canon having happening after the create canon gets created. Christians are pretty much have got it all the way up until the Protestant Reformation.

(1:40:18) And so when Protestantism re the forum happens, um they're throwing a lot of stuff out, you know, so they're saying, well, we're not going to do, you know, this that and the other thing. And so we also want to, you know, take another look at how this cannon got formed and were the you know, did it get formed properly? And so there isn't anything, you know, between the canon forming and the reformation in terms of um trying to remove books, I think.

(1:40:42) And then and then subsequently um you know so cath you know Catholicism has emerged as one of the main heirs of medieval western Christianity and then the other era is is Protestantism. Um the uh Catholics have kept the whole cannon all the way back to the um original uh councils that you know that that decided on the final list.

(1:41:05) So they haven't they haven't gotten rid of anything. Um, Protestants don't make decisions together anymore, you know. So, so Protestants are um, you know, continue to, you know, break apart into smaller and smaller denominations or down to, um, churches, individual congregations and churches. And so, you know, anybody could any Christian church could decide to change the canon if they if they want to and presumably if that's what they decide that they want to do.

Paul vs. James: Faith and the Law

(1:41:29) I'm not aware of anybody taking uh, James out, but they could. Um Winston Barquez says, "Could we say that Paul wrote about works of the law in particular, but James wrote about good works in general? Was James written to counter the misinterpretation of Paul?" So that is Winston that is the um the normal uh Protestant take on on the two.

(1:42:00) So when Luther did not get rid of James um rather than believe that there are two books that have um competing potentially diametrically opposed positions um there is an interpretation that that actually these guys are in not arguing with each other because Paul is talking about one thing and James is is talking about another thing.

(1:42:25) So, um, and and so that's the general interpretation that people have about, um, about it being there. I actually think that, um, it's it's not really the case. I think that they're both talking about the law. So, I think they're both they're neither one of them is talking about what, um, what Luther and Protestants are talking about, which is whether or not um um, people are justified by faith alone and whether salvation comes from grace alone.

(1:42:50) um so as to not uh ruin our motivations by making us mercenaries who are trying to earn rewards or avoid punishments and so forth. Um but both of them both James and uh Paul are writing about want something very particular which should Christians um obey Mosaic laws and Paul makes a really strong case. No. Uh, James explains why, you know, it makes a makes a strong case, but one that I don't agree or I'm not I'm not going to follow.

(1:43:24) I prefer Paul's case, and that's the one we've gone to. James makes the opposite case, I think. And so, I think that they are um that neither one of them is talking about good works in general. Both of them are talking about the law and they've been misinterpreted by modern Protestants to be talking about good works in general and that therefore they conflict with each other.

Community of Christ Perspective on Paul

(1:43:42) And so people who think that uh the Bible isn't self-contradictory are not correct. There's many other proofs of that. Angelfish, thank you for your support. Um Black Anglican says, "Where does Community of Christ stand on Paul?" So um so commun Christ has a uh interpretation of scripture which is that um that scripture is uh like in Paul's own words is uh a divine treasure given in earthn vessels and what that analogy means is that um whereas uh God in revelation is eternal and and perfect all of the words written down are human and those are the

(1:44:27) human response to to the divine and that the words written on the page don't come apart from humanity with all of its limitations but um through humanity. And so therefore all of the um human authors, the apostles, prophets, evangelists, psalmists, sages and so forth who are um composing text, they all have their own limitations.

(1:44:54) And so Paul um because he is living in a Greco Roman uh worldview, he believes um arisatilian ideas about hierarchy uh that cause him to make false biological assumptions uh and those uh cause him to um just assume by default that males are superior to females or that uh homosexuality is unnatural. And so he takes that background context and talks about it.

(1:45:28) And then Christians misinterpret that into being divine or revelatory when we should instead understand it as Paul speaking out of ignorance because of his own context. And so that's how community of Christ understands both Paul and all scripture that it has to be read responsibly today and that it only becomes meaningfully meaningful today through responsible interpretation that also includes you know current spiritual practice.

(1:45:59) So as we ourselves seek the um enlightening power of the Holy Spirit that's been promised us so that we can uh make ancient words of text revelatory and new in our own day. Uh and and then ultimately that we use all scripture uh that we model it on the authority of Christ who came not as a tyrant but as a servant to the saving purposes of God's grace.

The Birth Narratives and Paul

(1:46:26) And how much more then should the texts that speak of Christ um also not be authoritarian that are used to harm and uh cajul people uh to marginalize people but rather to act as Christ did to empower people and to create uh healing and love and and wholeness instead of uh marginalization and division. Mary Magnuson asks does anyone ever address the fact that Paul never mentions the birth narrative? No one ever mentioned it to him.

(1:46:58) So um so Mary um it we we we do sometimes. The reason why we um why we don't is that there so Paul is the earliest writer right and so he's writing in the 50s um as far as the the first gospel writer knows the person who wrote Mark uh Mark is not aware of any birth tradition and includes none in his text written around uh 70 or 73 um during the first Roman Jewish war.

(1:47:30) Um then um the birth narratives are the um are the creation or they are created by uh the two um two evangelists that are working from Mark's texts who feel that we need to have one and it needs to be supplied and they each supply their own out of their own methan and Lucan traditions.

(1:47:52) So it might have a tradition that goes back a little bit or it might be just the work of the individual author. But in any event, these two birth narratives, as we had in the lecture, are contradictory. And so neither one of them um likely represents any historic tradition that's going uh going back to the historical Jesus. So Paul is not aware of either of those two stories because they haven't been composed or created yet.

(1:48:15) and he is not aware of um he doesn't if he if if Paul knows anything about a a birth tradition for for Jesus which would be very unusual because um nobody nobody really knows nobody wrote biographies like that and that was not something that became important um in the antiquity unless you were somebody who had eventually understood to have divine significance and then it would be written in.

The Meaning of 'Pistis' and Faith

(1:48:39) So Paul isn't aware of one any such story or if he is it's not important enough for him to mention it to anybody. So mo most likely scenario is uh that there is no such tradition yet and that that uh comes later. Icegator in your research did you come across any commentary on the word pistus and how ancient Greek people uh might have thought of the word differently from Luther and more recent people.

(1:49:05) So yeah, so this is interesting too. what do we mean by um faith? You know, what do we mean by trust? How how do we understand it? So, this becomes um you know, especially when we're getting into like a uh um you know, like a what what's become in modern Christianity a a real jargon terms, you know, like faith versus works.

(1:49:31) And and by the way, even um even solid day by making that um justification by faith alone, this is already getting into a very complicated argument. Um and so and so I think that um that in the same way I think that uh the modern this modern um association of works um with just all deeds as opposed to adherence to mosaic law. I think the same way that we have had a um a transformation in what we mean um what we mean by faith and that uh that and that Paul again is the is the pivot point for this in part because of his uh his um his testimony. So what so ancient people

(1:50:17) really aren't um trying to argue with everybody you have to have faith in God. you have to believe in God and that and that this is the main argument is that people don't believe in God. Um more or less everybody um believes in in the divine because they um they don't have anywhere near like the modern naturalistic explanations of causality.

(1:50:41) So um so there are you know some technical atheists there's more likely people are accused of atheism including Christians were accused of atheism. Certain philosophers are accused of atheism because they have such a different understanding of the divine than the people who believed in the traditional gods.

(1:51:01) Um but Paul's point is not that when you have to have faith in God, you have to believe in God and arguing against people who don't believe in God. Paul's point, Paul's uh confession of faith is that you have to believe Christ is Lord. And so this is a very particular technical um thing which is that uh that had already been developed within second temple Jewish um uh theology which is the idea that the that God the source is so um so far removed from this giant cosmos this infinite cosmos um that that that God is unknowable unseen that you can't say

(1:51:39) God's name without blaspheming and so forth. forth. And so how can we uh connect to that God? Well, that God's um presence in the world, God's word, God's logos, God's glory is felt in the world. And in Judaism, we call that um person of God's glory, the logos or holy wisdom, sometimes other things, God's glory.

(1:52:08) And Paul's saying that person of the divine is Christ. That's what you have to believe. And so that's becomes um you know then beliefing then becomes central to Christianity. Christianity then dominates uh the idea of religion in the west. And so therefore um we have a completely different understanding about what faith is um than we would have had when these texts were first being written. So you're quite right.

Universalism and the Concept of Heaven

(1:52:33) Uh, Michael Anol says, um, how little popular has been done, I'm sorry, has been the idea that everyone will eventually go to heaven regardless of what they did in life since God is love. Um, how popular has the idea that everyone will go to heaven regardless of what they did in life since God is love. Okay. So, yeah.

(1:52:55) So, um, so there is there's a different ways that this is popular. Um, one of the ways like I was saying kind of like even at the beginning is uh almost everybody surveyed um I mean like when you do surveys of Americans, do you believe in heaven and hell? I think that Americans are way more likely to believe in heaven than they are in hell, you know, and uh and they also when you're asked, "Do you think you're if you believe in heaven, do you as a follow-up, do you believe you're going to go to heaven or that you're going to go to hell?" That again,

(1:53:21) most people self assess and they think they're on their way to heaven or maybe that's just aspirational or hoping. Um but u but yeah, but that's so that's kind of a popular idea, right, about how it would work. Um but to your point that since God is love um the the popular of the idea is that well then everybody will go to heaven.

(1:53:43) This is the idea of universalism and universalism has been um argued certainly theologically a lot by a lot of people that that there is no um there's no justification that a truly uh loving good God could ever have for um eternal punishment for any being regardless of whether it's punishment for their own actions or punishment just by predestination or whatever it would be.

(1:54:12) and that uh that when we therefore say that um you know Christ's salvation is uh died for all sins and for everyone then that that includes everybody and so that's the universalist position and you know universalism has has at different times been more and less popular and so I'd say it's you know certainly one of the origins of of uh the modern movement of unitarianism which is the merger of universalism and um and unitarianism which is the idea of um getting away from the trinity, just the idea of going back to God as one.

Philosophical and Christian Truth

(1:54:47) Uh Jeremy Brown says, "Uh it's exciting to be here present. Um I've been watching at two times speed to catch up." No, >> what's in yellow is what I >> Oh, okay. >> Okay. Well, so he's excited to be here present. Leandro is noting that he was watching at two times speed in order to catch up.

(1:55:08) Jeremy, I'm so happy you are here with us. Hopefully, you're caught up. Um, so Jeremy's question is, "What is truth?" [laughter] So, people were talking about truth in the chat. And so, uh, Jeremy has uh asked me um the very uh wonderful question that according to u the gospel of John anyway, Pontius Pilate asks Jesus, right? >> [laughter] >> So what is truth? And so that of course is one of the um you know the the main you know philosophical questions that's kind of at the basis of u uh the western tradition and it's also you know at the

(1:55:50) at the heart of the of the Christian tradition. And so um truth in the in the Christian context is partially um uh you know synonymous with our idea of God the divine. So in the same way that we say God is love, God is also truth. And so the irony in the text for um um for the gospel of John when Pontius Pilate uh is essentially behaving like a a sophist and saying what is truth? Um the irony is he's he's standing there next to Jesus who according to the profession of the author of John is God is truth. And

(1:56:29) so it's part of those equal signs uh for the Christian conviction. Um and this is not you know far out of keeping with the main um um you know Greek philosophical thought too which is that uh that the one the the unmoved mover uh is the source of um the ultimate platonic eternal ideal in the platonism.

(1:56:57) the um the ideal of the the form of the good good for goodness sake. It's a truth being a component of um of that that kind of um eternal oneness. Um Jeremy Brown also says John mentioned that he aligns more with Paul than James regarding whether Christians should follow Mosaic law. um how does he feel on the modern uh version of faith versus good works.

(1:57:25) So yeah, I don't think that Christians should um follow Mosaic law and I think that they don't. I think that Christians who quote Leviticus are doing that. Um for example, just usually to herang other people and to to avoid following the teachings of Jesus. Um because they are not sitting around following all of the things that are in Mosaic law.

(1:57:46) If you if you want to know what that looks like, you know, you go watch, you know, ultra orthodox different sects of ultraorththodox Judaism if you want to um see how people are trying to do that in the modern times. Um but Jeremy says, "How do I feel on the modern version of faith versus good works?" So I always like um you know the parable one part I like, I don't like most of it, but one part I like about the parable of the uh the sheep and the goats.

(1:58:11) It's not really a parable, but it's a story that is a teaching that's in Matthew alone. Um, and so Jesus and the and the the judge of the afterlife is dividing uh the sa the saved and the damned, which are the sheep represented by the sheep and the goats. And they neither one of them, you know, so they they ask why does it happen? And in some ways it's because they um they have uh you know, helped the poor.

(1:58:35) They've done all of these good works, right? But it's also mentioned that they also don't neither neither one of them were and the other one didn't do it. But the uh but they neither one of them are aware of why why it was happening. They have to ask the judge why it would have happened. And it's because again they neither one of them was doing it out of um for bad motivations.

(1:58:59) So in other words, you're not acting you're not doing acts in order to um in order to win a reward. then you're operating out of out of a flawed motivation. And so my take on on modern faith versus good works is yes, we should be doing good works. That's what we should be definitely be doing. But you in doing good works, if you're doing that in order to um you know have some sort of flawed motivation, you want people to think you're such a good person.

(1:59:27) You want to have you want to have people say, "Oh, I love that person. They're always doing good things." But you don't really care about it. You just care about your reputation. or um or you literally believe in a literal heaven and hell and you think you'll get rewarded if you do these good things. Again, this is all um flawed motivations. That's not being good.

(1:59:44) It's not desiring good. And so um so my take on it is you know more in line with uh you know again that sort of platonic ideal which is uh which is also expressed in in the gospel of John and things which is you need to you want to love others for love's own sake because you you know you love them you love love you want the world to be better and all those things.

Personal Salvation and Future Lectures

(2:00:12) It's not because you um uh you you feel you're doing it out of a duty or you'll get rewarded or punished or any such thing. It's because the closer you aligned to um to love which is God uh you know the closer you're part of that which is eternal. Okay. So final questions KPus Bradford am I saved or not? [laughter] [gasps] Well, I that's a a question for internal reflection.

(2:00:41) K Tempest, so certainly something um you know people can we can we can explore in in personal conversations or you know you can also through do through personal discernment. I'm not here to say or to be uh a judge. I will uh answer both um the teaching of James and Jesus and and not be the judge. All right.

(2:01:03) So, next week we have Who Was Abraham? Um, and by the way, I'll just mention if you are interested in exploring the Epistle of James with us um on Sunday at noon Eastern for our regular Beyond the Wall service, the next two weeks, we are going to be um exploring specific texts from uh James. So, our theme uh this week is from that quotation I have James 15, if any of you lack wisdom uh let them ask of God.

(2:01:30) And so that's what we'll be talking about then. And uh once again, we thank you for supporting the channel any way you can, liking and sharing the video, making donations, subscribing to the channel. Thank you all so much.