Thursday, March 27, 2008 at 1:01am
The Judas story still has traction. Why?
Column: Spiritual Psychology
James Carville's remark last week which likened New Mexico Gov. Bill Richardson's switch from Hilary Clinton to Barack Obama to Judas' betrayal of Jesus for 30 pieces of silver has stirred up a media brouhaha that refuses to go away. If Carville had just called Richardson's defection a betrayal without the Judas metaphor, it probably would have gotten a shoulder shrug from the press and public; Carville is well known for his pit bull-like broadsides.
Of course, the Judas metaphor, particularly at Eastertime, becomes an instant attention-grabber for its implication of playing the "Jew Christ Killer" card, which has a long, pernicious history. I don't believe that Carville meant it that way at all. But it does show the tenacity of the Judas story that defies all logic and facts.
How the betrayal of Jesus by identifying him to the Roman centurions in the Gethsemane Garden became the basis for vicious anti-Semitism is even more baffling in its defiance of even a shred of rationality. In fact, the charge that the Jews killed Jesus is so off the wall that it's almost embarrassing to explain why. So many untold numbers of Jews have been slaughtered since Christianity separated from Judaism, often generated by the "Jesus Killer" indictment, that it can't be lightly dismissed.
I've always been puzzled that the Church has not condemned the accusation of anyone killing Jesus, be it Judas, Jews collectively, Pontius Pilate, or Romans collectively, other than the real perpetrator.
Just the fact that all the disciples were thoroughly Jews from birth till death would make condemnation of Jews for the death of Christ ridiculous if it weren't tragic for the slaughter that it generated throughout history. Nowhere in the New Testament is there any indication that Jesus or his followers intended to start a new religion. It wasn't until well after the crucifixion that a separate religion slowly evolved, led by Paul, the orthodox Jew who jump-started Christianity separate from Judaism.
The 12 disciples representing the 12 tribes of Israel were sent out by Jesus to deliver his message strictly to Jews:
"These twelve Jesus sent forth, and commanded them, saying, 'Go not into the way of the Gentiles, and into any city of the Samarians enter ye not: But go rather to the lost sheep of Israel." (Matthew 10:5-6)
And when a Canaanite woman pleads with Jesus to exorcise demons from her daughter, Jesus responds: "I was sent only to the lost sheep of the house of Israel. It is not fair to take the children's bread and throw it to the dogs." (Matthew 15:24)
The Gospels and other parts of the New Testament make it perfectly clear who killed Jesus. God killed Jesus and did so, according to Christian scripture, for the salvation of mankind. Jesus understood and acknowledged this, confirming it as part of a Divine plan — the events and outcome were necessary and could not be stopped. Judas and all the players in this divinely choreographed dance were merely props with predetermined roles to ensure that events would unfold according to God's design. It's not my story, it's the Christian story.
The recent discovery of the Gospel of Judas absolves Judas for the same reason that I'm presenting — that his role was part of the plan. Even more explicitly, according to the Gospel of Judas, Jesus told him to commit the betrayal for the unfolding of the Divine plan. Although the authenticity of the Gospel of Judas has been questioned, we don't actually need it to make the point that the events had to happen, according to scripture, the way God ordained:
"For God so loved the world that he gave his one and only Son, that whoever believes in him shall not perish but have eternal life." (John 3:16)
"[God] did not spare His own Son, but delivered him up for us all." (Romans 8:32)
"In order to set us free from this present evil age, Christ gave himself for our sins, in obedience to the will of our God and Father." (Galatians 1:3-4)
"He loved us and sent his son as the payment for our sins" (1 John 4:10).
And Jesus acknowledges the inevitability of his crucifixion:
"Don't you know that I could call on my Father for help, and at once he would send me more than twelve armies of angels? But in that case, how could the Scriptures come true which say that this is what must happen?" (Matthew 50-54)
Jesus adds, "The father loves me because I am willing to give up my life, in order that I may receive it back again. No one takes my life away from me. I give it up of my own free will. I have the right to take it back. This is what my father has commanded me to do." (John 11:17-18)
How is it, then, that the Church has not condemned the accusations against Judas and Jews collectively? Such accusations would appear to be extreme acts of anti-Christ blasphemy that would warrant excommunication from the Church, since the accusations undermine the very foundation of Christianity. The accusations take the story of the Crucifixion away from God and prophesy and reduce it to the human level of petty emotions. The Church has excommunicated people for far lesser "crimes."
The long-standing hatred spawned by the accusation of "Christ Killers" implies that it would have been better if the Judas betrayal had not occurred. If that were so, it would further undermine Christianity. Most scholars agree that without the Crucifixion, Jesus and his small group of followers would have fallen into obscurity — just as many other charismatic rabbis traveling among the more than 1 million Jews of Judea and its environs performing "miracles" for their bands of followers. In other words, there would be no Christianity without the Crucifixion.
So why does the Judas narrative still have traction? Good question for reflection.
(My recently published book "Escape Your Own Prison: Why We Need Spirituality and Psychology to be Truly Free" is now available at Amazon.com,Barnes & Noble.com and other major book outlets.)
— — —
Bernard Starr, Ph.D., formerly professor of developmental and educational psychology at the City University of New York, now teaches "Spirituality in Film" and leads "The Spiritual Forum" at Marymount Manhattan College. In addition to his work in radio, he is a longtime contributor of commentary and opinion articles to numerous major publications. He is also the president of the Association for Spirituality and Psychotherapy and is the main United Nations representative for the Institute of Global Education that founded the Mucherla Global School in Mucherla, India. His book "Escape Your Own Prison: Why We Need Spirituality and Psychology to be Truly Free" is published by Rowman & Littlefield (October 2007). He can be reached at: {email OmniCns@aol.com}OmniCns@aol.com{/email}. © Copyright 2008 by Bernard Starr.
Of course, the Judas metaphor, particularly at Eastertime, becomes an instant attention-grabber for its implication of playing the "Jew Christ Killer" card, which has a long, pernicious history. I don't believe that Carville meant it that way at all. But it does show the tenacity of the Judas story that defies all logic and facts.
How the betrayal of Jesus by identifying him to the Roman centurions in the Gethsemane Garden became the basis for vicious anti-Semitism is even more baffling in its defiance of even a shred of rationality. In fact, the charge that the Jews killed Jesus is so off the wall that it's almost embarrassing to explain why. So many untold numbers of Jews have been slaughtered since Christianity separated from Judaism, often generated by the "Jesus Killer" indictment, that it can't be lightly dismissed.
I've always been puzzled that the Church has not condemned the accusation of anyone killing Jesus, be it Judas, Jews collectively, Pontius Pilate, or Romans collectively, other than the real perpetrator.
Just the fact that all the disciples were thoroughly Jews from birth till death would make condemnation of Jews for the death of Christ ridiculous if it weren't tragic for the slaughter that it generated throughout history. Nowhere in the New Testament is there any indication that Jesus or his followers intended to start a new religion. It wasn't until well after the crucifixion that a separate religion slowly evolved, led by Paul, the orthodox Jew who jump-started Christianity separate from Judaism.
The 12 disciples representing the 12 tribes of Israel were sent out by Jesus to deliver his message strictly to Jews:
"These twelve Jesus sent forth, and commanded them, saying, 'Go not into the way of the Gentiles, and into any city of the Samarians enter ye not: But go rather to the lost sheep of Israel." (Matthew 10:5-6)
And when a Canaanite woman pleads with Jesus to exorcise demons from her daughter, Jesus responds: "I was sent only to the lost sheep of the house of Israel. It is not fair to take the children's bread and throw it to the dogs." (Matthew 15:24)
The Gospels and other parts of the New Testament make it perfectly clear who killed Jesus. God killed Jesus and did so, according to Christian scripture, for the salvation of mankind. Jesus understood and acknowledged this, confirming it as part of a Divine plan — the events and outcome were necessary and could not be stopped. Judas and all the players in this divinely choreographed dance were merely props with predetermined roles to ensure that events would unfold according to God's design. It's not my story, it's the Christian story.
The recent discovery of the Gospel of Judas absolves Judas for the same reason that I'm presenting — that his role was part of the plan. Even more explicitly, according to the Gospel of Judas, Jesus told him to commit the betrayal for the unfolding of the Divine plan. Although the authenticity of the Gospel of Judas has been questioned, we don't actually need it to make the point that the events had to happen, according to scripture, the way God ordained:
"For God so loved the world that he gave his one and only Son, that whoever believes in him shall not perish but have eternal life." (John 3:16)
"[God] did not spare His own Son, but delivered him up for us all." (Romans 8:32)
"In order to set us free from this present evil age, Christ gave himself for our sins, in obedience to the will of our God and Father." (Galatians 1:3-4)
"He loved us and sent his son as the payment for our sins" (1 John 4:10).
And Jesus acknowledges the inevitability of his crucifixion:
"Don't you know that I could call on my Father for help, and at once he would send me more than twelve armies of angels? But in that case, how could the Scriptures come true which say that this is what must happen?" (Matthew 50-54)
Jesus adds, "The father loves me because I am willing to give up my life, in order that I may receive it back again. No one takes my life away from me. I give it up of my own free will. I have the right to take it back. This is what my father has commanded me to do." (John 11:17-18)
How is it, then, that the Church has not condemned the accusations against Judas and Jews collectively? Such accusations would appear to be extreme acts of anti-Christ blasphemy that would warrant excommunication from the Church, since the accusations undermine the very foundation of Christianity. The accusations take the story of the Crucifixion away from God and prophesy and reduce it to the human level of petty emotions. The Church has excommunicated people for far lesser "crimes."
The long-standing hatred spawned by the accusation of "Christ Killers" implies that it would have been better if the Judas betrayal had not occurred. If that were so, it would further undermine Christianity. Most scholars agree that without the Crucifixion, Jesus and his small group of followers would have fallen into obscurity — just as many other charismatic rabbis traveling among the more than 1 million Jews of Judea and its environs performing "miracles" for their bands of followers. In other words, there would be no Christianity without the Crucifixion.
So why does the Judas narrative still have traction? Good question for reflection.
(My recently published book "Escape Your Own Prison: Why We Need Spirituality and Psychology to be Truly Free" is now available at Amazon.com,Barnes & Noble.com and other major book outlets.)
— — —
Bernard Starr, Ph.D., formerly professor of developmental and educational psychology at the City University of New York, now teaches "Spirituality in Film" and leads "The Spiritual Forum" at Marymount Manhattan College. In addition to his work in radio, he is a longtime contributor of commentary and opinion articles to numerous major publications. He is also the president of the Association for Spirituality and Psychotherapy and is the main United Nations representative for the Institute of Global Education that founded the Mucherla Global School in Mucherla, India. His book "Escape Your Own Prison: Why We Need Spirituality and Psychology to be Truly Free" is published by Rowman & Littlefield (October 2007). He can be reached at: {email OmniCns@aol.com}OmniCns@aol.com{/email}. © Copyright 2008 by Bernard Starr.