"And I will follow You all of my days"

[hermionesviolin]

I've been reading some stuff off of friendsfriends about Christianity co-opting Judaism (i.e., I'm reading posts by Jews who are reacting to ways in which Christians are discussing Kings), and my visceral reaction is reminding me of how some white people reacted to some of the discussions in RaceFail2009.

I feel like crying, "No! That's not how my personal Christianity thinks of Judaism -- and the ways in which my understanding does overlap with this one that you find offensive, let me explain how it's really not offensive."

I know that when people (who aren't even mutually friended with me) are sharing their personal pain, that that's not the time or the place for me to step in and share my alternative interpretation.

I'm still sitting with the issue (of how I should be responding in my own head -- I'm not gonna go start an argument in someone else's LJ).

***

Sometimes I think of Abraham
How one star he saw had been lit for me
He was a stranger in this land
And I am that, no less than he
And on this road to righteousness
Sometimes the climb can be so steep
I may falter in my steps
But never beyond Your reach

Comments

[hermionesviolin.livejournal.com]

The first post I read was one some days back by Kita (whom I have on StalkerPin) about how David and Jonathan aren't Christian, and I read some of the comments thereon. And then yesterday I was reading the comments on your post and wandered over to LadyCat's LJ, and I should know better than to read things which are labeled rants, but I read all the comments there (and near the bottom there was something about the post having originally been locked). I'm totally not trying to call out those two individuals (or anyone who commented on their posts), 'cause they have experiences and pain which while different from mine are no less valid, but I feel like I should note somewhere what it is specifically that I'm reacting against. (Obviously I do not want anyone to go over to their LJs and start fights.)

>> the ways in which my understanding does overlap with this one that you find offensive, let me explain how it's really not offensive.
> Do you want to say a little more about that?

I'm primarily thinking about the idea of the "Old Testament" as being a "precursor" to the New Testament. I agree that a lot of Christians (both "liberal" and "conservative") are dismissive of the OT, but I think that one can have an understanding of Jesus as fulfilling Messianic prophecies, of Jesus expanding the Covenant that God had made, of Jesus participating in a long Jewish tradition. Maybe we can't do full justice to the Jewish history, but I don't think these basic premises of Christianity have to be inherently offensive to Judaism. Yes, the Jesus Movement spread to Gentiles and after some time its Jewish roots weren't very evident except for the fact that it retained some of the sacred texts from Judaism, but Jesus and his early followers WERE Jewish, and understood themselves to be Jews, and while I recognize that people are reacting against the way that the Christians they interact with today understand things, it feels a little bit unfair (willfully blind, even) to me.

Does that make any sense?

And to a smaller degree I'm reacting against the criticism of "everyone's going to hell unless they accept Jesus," because lots of liberal Christians are uncomfortable with that idea and I'm often defending it within a Christian context (arguing that the people with the view of a narrow way to salvation do have a lot of legitimate grounding in the New Testament; and that they don't hold this view because they WANT people to go to Hell, quite the opposite in fact), and I don't know how to begin to defend that idea to someone who doesn't have a shared belief in the New Testament Scriptures as having at least some authority, so that part makes me like instantly weary. [NB: I believe strongly in universal salvation or at least something very close to it, but you know how much I try to make opposing sides understand each other.]

[sk8eeyore.livejournal.com]

I'm actually pretty much in agreement with you!

[lunabee34.livejournal.com]

I frankly feel like I don't understand enough about Judaism to really address the issues at hand. And even though my knowledge of Southern Baptist Protestant Christianity is extensive [that's how I was raised], it was [and continues to be as I live in an area of the country in which Christianity is largely although not exclusively Southern Baptist or closely related other Protestant denomination, socially and philosophical conversative and radically Republican] such a profoundly negative experience for me that I have knee-jerk reactions against Christianity. I am aware of them and I try very hard to be aware of them and realize when my reactions are valid and when they're not. Just putting that out there.

For me [and again, my own limited understanding--not attempting to speak for any Jews or Christians], Kita and LadyCat's posts resonated really strongly for a couple reasons. I think of myself as a not stupid person. Maybe not Rodney McKay-like levels of genius-tude but, you know, not stupid. And I did not know that the Bible wasn't written in English until I was an age I am too freaking embarrassed to admit. I thought that Jesus looked like all those Renaissance paintings where he's blonde and blue eyed and Aryan. I had heard the word Jew before but I didn't know any and I certainly didn't know that Jesus was a Jew whose message was originally intended for Jews.

My religious upbringing was not one of inquiry. It was not one of scholarly pursuit. It was not one of healthy skepticism. [Although Catholicism really doesn't do it for me either, the one thing I have rejoiced in since converting is the way that Catholicism approaches religious training like college courses; this is your faith so *learn* it, dumbasses. Thank God for the Jesuits.] My religious upbringing was one of elision and misinformation and *tears out hair*--I just want to scream. Because Elizabeth, I desperately want to have faith. To believe in something. I feel like I am missing something vital like an arm because the spiritual is completely divorced from my life. But I cannot make myself forget being told that I shouldn't go to college because I should get married and have babies or that black kids and white kids can be friends but they probably shouldn't have sleepovers. It's like I've been poisoned and I don't know how to heal. Man, I am really digressing here.

My point is that I think A LOT A LOT A LOT of people went/go to the same kinds of churches in the area in which I currently live. And these people *are* co-opting and appropriating Jewish history and stories. Hell, they're deleting that culture entirely. And while I completely sympathize and agree with your position that "all Christians aren't like that," I still think that even Christianity that is ecumenical and welcoming of the Jewish faith has still appropriated Jewish sacred text. Because even though the Jews were waiting for a Messiah, Jesus wasn't him. Does that make sense? If the OT is largely to be retconned in light of Jesus, doesn't that negate the original purpose?

Maybe not. I am not theologian so maybe what I'm saying is really stupid. You can tell me gently.

[hermionesviolin.livejournal.com]

I just want to scream. Because Elizabeth, I desperately want to have faith. To believe in something. I feel like I am missing something vital like an arm because the spiritual is completely divorced from my life. [...] It's like I've been poisoned and I don't know how to heal. Man, I am really digressing here.

*hugs you*

I wish I could plop you into First Church Somerville UCC or something. I'll try to think of some books I can recommend to you.

So many people I encounter in various progressive/liberal Christian contexts come from repressive religious backgrounds, and while obviously I've heard about such traditions before (at a cultural level, I think all of America is aware of the phenomenon of repressive Christianity) it still feels foreign to me. The church I grew up in wasn't great, but it didn't drill real negativity or misinformation into me, and then once I started actively engaging with church I was mostly dealing with progressive/liberal churches. The church I grew up in tended to be fairly apolitical, and the pastor's sermons put me to sleep, so I mostly just absorbed stuff by osmosis (Sunday School was blandly superficial), and since my mom's into meditation and Julian of Norwich and stuff and my dad's an armchair economist/scientist and an atheist/agnostic, there wasn't anything in my homelife discouraging me from asking questions or being skeptical or going off to find my own path.

It's definitely important for me to be reminded that not everyone who grew up Christian had the same sort of religious upbringing that I did.

I still think that even Christianity that is ecumenical and welcoming of the Jewish faith has still appropriated Jewish sacred text. Because even though the Jews were waiting for a Messiah, Jesus wasn't him. Does that make sense? If the OT is largely to be retconned in light of Jesus, doesn't that negate the original purpose?

I think my problem with the language of "appropriation" is that it implies outsiders coming in and taking stuff from a culture that isn't their own -- which, yes, is in some ways what happened as the Jesus Movement spread to the Gentiles, but the NT writers were Jews, and they understood Jesus in a Jewish context.

I don't think "retcon" is entirely appropriate -- because the NT writers don't say, "No, the OT didn't actually say thus-and-such," it's more like they're saying, "We have received new revelations -- through Jesus -- that change our understanding of some of the OT and supersedes some of it." Paul talks about Jesus as being the "telos" of the law, which one can translate as either "end" or "fulfillment." (Though yes, there are some OT prophecies which were arguably specific to a specific historical moment which the Jesus Movement co-opted as Messianic prophecies.)

And yes, Christianity is inherently saying, "The Jews had it right, but they should have gotten on board with this Jesus fellow when he showed up." Since I am Christian I'm inclined to think that Christianity has a fuller understanding of The Truth than any other religion/tradition, though I don't think Christianity entirely understands The Truth, nor do I think that we Christians don't have anything to learn from other religions/traditions. And I can definitely see how that can be offensive to any non-Christian, particularly a Jew. It just frustrates me because it shouldn't be anywhere near as offensive as it so often is.

I'm not sure any of what I said was helpful or clarifying, but definitely feel free to keep asking me stuff or saying more about where you're coming from or what you understand certain problematics to be or whatever.

[lunabee34.livejournal.com]

I think my problem with the language of "appropriation" is that it implies outsiders coming in and taking stuff from a culture that isn't their own -- which, yes, is in some ways what happened as the Jesus Movement spread to the Gentiles, but the NT writers were Jews, and they understood Jesus in a Jewish context.

Okay. I don't think the anger I read in those posts was directed at NT writers or even at Jesus because as you say here, they *were* all Jews and their audience was Jewish, etc. I think the anger is at current Christians who are not aware of the historical roots of their faith and who use language that denies the Jewish experience. But again, maybe I'm really wrong and again not speaking for anyone who is Jewish.

I wish I could plop you into First Church Somerville UCC or something. I'll try to think of some books I can recommend to you.

*hugs you back*

This is why I am so consistently grateful for having you on my flist (and now Ari and LadyCat who both consistently post about religious issues) because you force me to reflect on my spirituality where I otherwise would not.

[hermionesviolin.livejournal.com]

The anger in the posts was definitely aimed at current Christians, but it was often phrased (as I read it) as a criticism of Christianity in and of itself taking the Jewish stories for its own purposes, which felt excessive to me. Though in going back and skimming to refresh myself, it really is anger at the way that Christianity now/historically (i.e., once none of its followers thought of themselves as Jews) has treated/thought about Judaism . . . in a way which sort of blurs into talking about Christianity in and of itself, because the posters were angry and hurt and not making any claims to be crafting thorough wholly logical arguments, but yeah, my impression of an opposition to Christianity per se might well have been a bit of an overreading on my part, especially since I was reacting emotionally as well.