|
So
a bible from the fundamentalist school of free Presbyterism
was found amongst a cache of weapons linked to the
UVF, this at the same time as the brethren were marching
in their thousands proclaiming in part religious liberties.
What I find intriguing is that while many talk of
our historical conflict, it is that 'Jesus within
our conflict' and the scenario of both his supposed
existence and the questioning of differing religious
beliefs that I have found to be a taboo subject. This
both within the media and within many established
parties. Ironically in a way this in part has
directed me towards a firmer understanding of this
acknowledged taboo and to
question why this issue is continually sidestepped
or avoided. Initially I thought it could be because
of the obvious and hidden contradictions within various
religious beliefs, which are of no benefit to both
consensual party politics or differing religious.
Or maybe it is just the fact that temperatures and
feelings are raised especially within 'our own wee
world' on such matters. Whatever the case my first
understandings is that it is no co-incidence that
religion has always found a residence amongst the
poorest, the downtrodden and the exploited more so
than any differing layers of society.
Historically
many religions and their believers have both been
used to unite in a cross class common cause as well
as being used as a weapon for communities' divisions,
yet this almost always set in the context of a particular
ruling interest. Many people including former paramilitaries
during our recent conflict have been born again, moved
to libertarian or fundamentalist theology, became
Christian socialists or reverted back to their traditional
inherited religion. Some through a growing appreciation
of that little book 'left' in their cells, others
through witnessing an unusual event or life saving
experience. While others still, seeking a way out
of
exploitation with some stating feeling unloved and
so found a spiritual being who will love them despite
their earthly faults.
Yet
for every one person that has turned away from conflict
and found God, a thousand others can be found who
have used God to turn to conflict. As fewer people
within our increasingly modern society practice actively
their traditional religious upbringing I will attempt
to answer that taboo question about Jesus and his
actual existence or not. For this I have to ask initially
who was this Jesus that some find for peace while
many use for war?
For
an understanding of this we need to look at the time
and period where this historical person was said to
have existed. The main academic studies of this period
in relation to this are concentrated on the writings
of the Jewish historian Josephus, with the first Gospel
not being written until approximately seventy years
after the supposed death of Jesus. The Gospels themselves
on reading are interpreted by various groups to portray
various messages in which differing lessons can be
drawn. This is not surprising as a detailed and objective
study of them depicts a differing Jesus in each, which
indeed runs constant to the various historical happenings
of the time.
This
is due in a large part to the big time span both after
Jesus's supposed death and that between some of the
Gospels being written, as between those years there
was the development of immense social and political
situations in that region. Mark's Gospel for example
was finished about AD70 - this at the end of the upraising
against both Roman and Jewish authority rule which
took place between AD66-AD70, with aspects of the
Gospels reading reflecting such factors of the period.
Through
out history within conflicts and through exploitation
peoples have sought immediate answers to immediate
concerns. Is it then a co-incidence in this period
with the brutal crushing of the upraising, the historic
destroying of the people's temple, with the people
crying out for a saviour, a Messiah, that Mark came
forward with the Gospel of Jesus, the saviour, the
Messiah, seventy years after his supposed death?
Although
there is no real evidence of the time that this Jesus
existed many have and do still follow his teachings.
Nevertheless some have attempted revisionism of what
little evidence there is at the time which did not
mention Jesus. For example the early Christian monks
forged Josephus's writings to include a brief piece
on Jesus as they were concerned that such was the
detail of Josephus's writings of the time that it
did not mention Jesus. Why had this historian of the
time within his detail not mention this man Jesus
who made the dead rise and indeed arose from the dead
himself - Could it be that such a man did not exist?
Yet despite this Jesus's teachings have carried and
sustained through out the centuries. Why and how
I will deal with in a later article.
Within
my research my interest was directed towards the libertarian
theology and more so to those who follow the 'radical
Christian socialist' tradition. Those who follow this
tradition on many occasions hold similar thoughts
to myself. They provide a radical analysis of change
to the economics of present society combined with
the 'radical' teachings of Jesus. Their understanding
is based on the spiritual but relating also to the
physical and economic. 'The kingdom of God' (1838)
was an early theological basis for such thought on
Christian Socialism. Frederick Maurice and others
who supported Chartism argued that politics and religion
were inseparable. So
the combination held within their spiritual socialism
was defined as the means of change (differing changes)
as opposed to that of scientific socialism. Therefore
their belief is in the spiritual emancipation alongside
the economic, so a relationship is developed both
within their class as well as within Jesus.
Although
my understanding is held within the Scientific, and
despite disagreeing with the spiritual aspect of Christian
socialism, I find it to be a religion 'with the people'
as opposed to that of 'of the people'. All persons
have a right and a respect to personal beliefs, yet
I would be of the opinion that in differing circumstances
in a period of revolutionary unity of the working
class, huge questions would arise, with the economic
and Scientific understanding ascending above the spiritual
as the the
material concerns, and ruling interest are replaced
by class interest. I also believe some lessons can
be learnt though through the personal, as with myself
for example.
I
was born at the RVH in the first week of October in
the early seventies. My primary school years were
spent both in the Lower Falls and in Ballymurphy where
for several years I lived with my Grandmother who
was and is a devout Catholic. My schooling was by
'Christian Brothers' in St Finian's School on the
Falls Road. My father, a labourer, when he got work;
my mother worked in the factory mills until she had
kids which was usually the norm. Again both practicing
Catholics who found it important that I should constantly
pray (we said the rosary every night until I left
home). At the same time I was also encouraged to practice
my religion, so apart from the normal participation
I became an altar boy at Clonard Monastery.
So
like many others I had baptism, first confession,
first rosary, first holy communion, confirmation,
twice weekly mass attendances (with parents), another
with school, the priest's school visists, plus doing
other masses as an altar boy doing marriages, deaths
etc. Like those others in differing religious upbringings,
my whole world was directed at religion through church,
school and home all dominated by and tuned into 'our
Lord' from an early age. Despite this I was always
inquisitive and remember one of the first questions
I dared ask, as the authority of the priest or brother
was such that you feared to ask let alone question.
'Why should I and billions before me take the blame
for what two people did (Adam and Eve)'? I was
granted with a spiritual and philosophical answer,
which maybe because of my youth I felt didn't really
answer the question.
So
I repeated the question while adding that 'even in
this present society I am judged on what I do and
not by what a relative a million times removed had
done supposedly in my name' - surely if it was the
latter that would not be fair', from a fair God?'.
The
reply right up to my face was 'FAIR, FAIR' don't talk
to me about fair, that's the way it is written so
that is the way it is'. So from an early age the answer
I remember most vividly was 'so that is the way it
is'. Despite this I did honour the religious tradition
while under my parents roof.
As
I got older I reflected on the ten commandments as
my parents religious practice for the kids intensified.
I placed the commandments into four categories as
I could recite them back to front while reading a
book as through school, church and home they had been
constantly drummed into me. Firstly to respect authority,
then honour and respect family values, respect society
and its lawful stability and above all respect private
property. Isn't it funny the real similarity of those
commandments and those now thrust at us through the
present ruling classes? Isn't it interesting how the
commandments both equate the law of authoritive rule
under presently capitalism and previously under different
systems? While these commandments concretize stability
for the ruling classes I wonder If one or two could
have been added to give a tad of stability to the
poor and exploited. Thou ruling classes must redistribute
the wealth,thou must end slavery etc etc. Yet no such
commandments were etched on those supposed tablets
of stone and it does not take a scholar to understand
why not.
Despite
this many point to the 'radical teachings of Jesus',
(there were many Jesus's as Jesus was a common name),
who supposedly helped and worked with the exploited
and poor as did also many other such 'prophets' and
'miracle workers' crucified at the time. While some
'find' God others are spoon-fed him while increasingly
others, again especially youth, do not believe in
such. From the traditional teaching at home, the church
and school amongst others, young minds have and are
directed one way. The freedom to think and acquire
knowledge is also hampered by the state who direct
us on what to learn and how best to answer.
Such
rules and laws have common threads where we are taught
to acknowledge
then obey the relevant tradition, thus the status-quo.
Revisionism is used and answers are given not acquired
but expected to be followed, from early youth. Although
the church authorities and the state differ they are
in unison ideologically within both their authoritarism
and protectionism of their relevant ruling interest.
Of course there are individuals who follow the path
of Jesus and his 'radical teachings'. They may feel
spiritually and at times some limited economic freedoms.
Yet unless we collectively direct ourselves at the
root cause of exploitation little will change for
the world's poorest. While some follow God to attempt
to end exploitation it is
constantly used as a tool for exploitation and stability.
As the Christian master once said to his unruly christian
servant 'worry not about earthly suffering as paradise
awaits you'.
In
conclusion in this first in a series of articles on
this issue I will finish with an understanding from
my initial period of study on this matter. Firstly
it must be said that everyone has a right to their
beliefs, for example my partner and immediate family
believe in 'a God' of some description and on that
issue I both at times compromise and at all times
respect their belief. Yet on those initial studies
it must be said that it is my belief that God did
not create man in his own image but in fact man created
God as an image.
Index: Current Articles + Latest News and Views + Book Reviews +
Letters + Archives
|
