A rabbi once came to speak in my previous church. The goal of his visit was to tell the youth something about Judaism. I was still young and furiously curious, but in my questions to the rabbi I was slowed down by the pastor. However, the rabbi found it interesting questions, so we decided to meet. To this day we are still friends. One day I was so free to question the Rabbi about his personal views on Jesus of Nazareth. He said that he thought Jesus was a Jewish man who stood in the Essene tradition and wanted to proclaim this tradition to the rest of Israel.
This led me to an investigation of Second Temple Judaism. I found out that there indeed is a movement within the historical research that argues about Jesus that he was influenced by an 'Enochic tradition', a tradition that is indeed related to the Essenes. I continued to study the historical Jesus and found that he places a great emphasis on what we should do in life to become responsible people.
This became the new basis for the conversations between the rabbi and me; how can we live responsibly? I found that the moral teachings of Jesus and the moral teachings of modern Judaism are very similar. I cherish the open dialogue between the rabbi and me, because I heard of other Jews and Christians that such a conversation is still not self-evident.
Unto other Jewish people, Christians are known for their ‘evangelization drive’. I regret that, because this remains a blockade for the things that we can share with each other. When I talk about the Bible with others, I do so to exchange knowledge about the way of life that we can read in it. I wonder what everyone, but especially Jewish people, think about that way of life. The Jewish people I know are also very busy with how we can live responsibly and I can learn a lot from them.
Not only experiences with regard to evangelization can be a blockade for our dialogue. Occasionally Jewish people blame Christians for how they have behaved as a group against Judaism, as crusaders, or as people who looked away in considerable numbers during the Holocaust. On the other hand, it seems difficult for theologians to explain certain difficult texts in the New Testament that apparently ventilate a negative view of Judaism. By explaining them in their context, we actually can get rid of their presupposed anti-Semitic content. If we want to move forward with each other, we should radically let go of our prejudices, which have never brought us any further.
Incidentally, I also see progress. In both Judaism and Christianity I see people standing up who see our agreements and are willing to work together for a better world. Only then will our God, the God of Israel, become visible to the world as a God who does not set up groups against each other, but reconciles us with each other. Both beliefs can be a light to the world. If we can let go of our disagreements and prejudices from the past and break the circle, then together we can become a relevant social factor in this world.
Jewish people have a wonderful tradition of learning and doing. Both Christians and Jews are born from the world of Second Temple Judaism. We have both developed separately over the past 2,000 years. I hope that one day we can speak so familiar to each other that we can join together a bit while learning, but above all join together in caring for the world. Our traditions overlap in social action.
Rabbi Lord Jonathan Sacks did a TED-talk in 2017. The theme of his speech was "How we can face the future without fear, together". He stated in his speech that only in open conversations we discover that people are 'not like us', just people 'like us'. That is where the healing of brokenness begins. In my view, that also applies to where there is still brokenness between Jews and Christians.
But what happens to our traditions? Do we have to leave our cultures to join closer together? Absolutely not. We must care for our different identities. When we talk to each other about what responsible living is, our ethics exist not 'in spite of', but 'because of' our culture. Rabbi Sacks states, and I want to conclude with that:
“I think collectively we've got to get back to telling our story, who we are, where we came from, what ideals by which we live. And if that happens, we will become strong enough to welcome the stranger and say, come and share our lives, share our stories, share our aspirations and dreams.”
Reflection: Theological rationale of choices
I have written the above blog for the website Joods.nl.[1] There are two sections on this website where the blog would fit, the section ‘opinie’,[2] and the section ‘cultuur-jodendom’.[3] Because of my contacts as described in the blog, I have positive experiences with dialogue with Judaism and I would like to contribute to improve the dialogue between Christians and Jews.
Unfortunately, I also encountered negative reactions about the contact between Jews and Christians. These negative reactions concern a number of topics. On the side of Christians there are still negative ideas about Judaism, because those Christians base themselves on texts from the New Testament that are misunderstood both by them and by Jews. Jonathan Sacks mentions a striking example from Galatians 4:21-31.
In this text the two women of Abraham are compared with two covenants. The first covenant with Judaism is put away by Paul as a dismissed slave covenant. Sacks correctly states that Paul's purpose in this passage was not to put Judaism away, but the teachers who said it was necessary for Christians to become Jewish. It is important that such texts are discussed, as many Jews are hurt when reading this text,[4] and Christians think that Paul states that Judaism has ended. We must therefore be able to speak to each other about each other's texts.
In addition, there are also Christians who do their very best to win the Jews for Christianity. The Jewish people I know see behind the friendliness of some Christians an agenda. As stated in my blog, I do not think that is the right way to communicate with Judaism. There are, in my opinion, three ways how we can communicate with each other.
Right forms of communication
The way to communicate with Judaism is, in my opinion, speaking together about God and speaking together on behalf of God.[5] Speaking together about God is reflected in learning and dialogue. My blog shows that by telling each other stories, of course without an agenda to convert, we can learn a lot from each other. Thus, thanks to the rabbi, I have come across the 'Enochic tradition', the tradition within Judaism from, according to him, the Jesus movement is a sprout. This has led to a very interesting investigation in books from for example Gabrielle Boccaccini[6] and Simon J. Joseph.[7] On the other hand, we as theologians can take the lead in combating anti-Semitic interpretations of the New Testament and also show Judaism how we do this.
Grethlein states that the basis for communication about the gospel is telling stories.[8] According to Grethlein, communicating about God requires understanding of the people with whom we communicate and how they have oriented their lives. Sacks recognizes this by stating that:
“I think collectively we've got to get back to telling our story, who we are, where we came from, what ideals by which we live.”[9]
Learning together was important in the mission of Jesus. He stood in the tradition of the prophets, the wisdom teachers and the rabbis. The word ‘Torah’ also implies learning the words of God. Jesus was also addressed as a rabbi, which is a teacher and his disciples as students.[10] Learning together therefore has a solid Biblical foundation for both Judaism and Christianity.
This also applies to dialogue.[11] Even Jesus, according to Grethlein, was open to adjust his opinion on the occasion of the conversation with the woman from Matthew 15:24. Grethlein points to a way of dialogue that does not lead to bitter struggles over doctrines, but dialogue out of respect for the different lives and values of the participants.[12]
Finally, we can join together in speaking on behalf of God. This is what Grethlein calls 'helping for a living'. Helping each other on behalf of God is a requirement within Jewish and Christian life. In the Old Testament this is expressed in the call to help the poor and oppressed, in the New Testament in the life of Jesus and his message about God's Kingdom.[13] In Christianity this way of communicating synchronizes with the praxis model of intercultural communication. In Judaism this synchronizes with its ethics of responsibility.
The praxis model
The praxis model understands theology in terms of social change. It is a model that is often associated with 'liberation theology'.[14] The praxis model has strong roots in the Jewish-Christian tradition. The prophetic tradition requires words and deeds. In the letter of James, it is stated that we should not only 'hear' but also 'have to do'. In the praxis model there is a close connection between ethical behavior and theological thinking. Bevans quotes Barth when he states that:
“Only the doer of the word is the true hearer.”
The philosophers of enlightenment also argued that nothing can be true faith or morality if it is not practiced by ourselves.[15] What Christians believe, should be practiced meaningfully. According to this model, therefore, we should focus on orthopraxy; doing the right thing. The correct expression of the Christian faith is therefore Christian action.[16] This also seems to me an excellent starting point to counteract the drive to evangelize.
The practitioners of this form of theology discovered many forgotten things about Christianity and its Jewish roots. The message of Jesus was not primarily about doctrines, but about an attitude and behavior that shakes the establishment. Social changes are seen as the primary source of theology. Devoting ourselves to social change leads to social transformation of society and to a deeper understanding of God, argues Bevans.[17]
Importance of culture in the praxis model
The praxis model presupposes the importance of the cultural aspect of context in developing the understanding of faith. Theologians of the praxis model are sensitive to newer concepts of culture as hybrid identity and culture as a product of social conflict.[18] This is in line with the postmodern concept of culture of Tanner. By recognizing in my blog that there are different levels of interests within Judaism and Christianity for each other's culture, I acknowledge the pluralism within culture.
For the postmodern understanding of culture it is important that the researcher also dares to criticize his own culture. I do criticize Christianity in the blog because I think it is important to work with Judaism and because I regret that this is still so little endorsed among my own fellow believers. By addressing this, I also try to point out the internal differences within Christianity on this point and to indicate that there is no homogeneous standpoint with regard to Judaism. It would be naïve to assume that all Christianity already wants to enter into a dialogue with Judaism and to provoke together with them a social change in society.
Both Christianity and Judaism have no clear cores and boundaries in this area, but our traditions overlap in social action. That is the place where we have to find each other alongside learning and dialogue.
I want to do my best to ensure that Christianity becomes more unambiguous with regard to dialogue and cooperation with Judaism. This also fits within the postmodern concept of culture of Tanner. According to Tanner, a culture does seek a certain consensus. But this consensus can once again form the basis for certain conflicts. For example, where I emphasize a joint praxis of Christianity and Judaism, a group within Christianity could remind me that I do too little to evangelize the Christian message to Judaism.[19]
Other Christians will agree with me in my aspiration. The relationship that exists between Jews and Christians within their collective social commitment can lead to a new subculture; one of practical social believers who want to be committed to the God of Israel for his kingdom to come.
Context is also a product that makes human. In Judaism, the tradition exists that the people of God should be a light unto the nations. In Christianity there is a special interest in the mother religion. That is why the praxis theologian sees the existence of culture as something good. However, it may be necessary to liberate and heal culture. Healing is considered important where there is still a lack of understanding between the two traditions. The praxis model sees the presence of God in history, but also how it can go wrong in history. Bevans points to situations of oppression and the experience of the poor. God's presence is an invitation to participate in his healing work.[20]
Hall and 'Stewardship'
An important example of praxis theologians is Douglas John Hall. His ideas apply excellently to this case. For Hall, the concept of 'stewardship' is central to praxis theology.[21] He argues that theologians should reflect on the concept of ‘stewardship’ as it is practiced in the light of a re-reading of the Bible. Hall states that ‘stewardship’ is a rich concept that includes the entire message of Christianity and Judaism. He states:
“Thus to ‘think stewardship’ today is … to be plummeted into the center of the spiritual struggle of the late 20th century humanity, the struggle to find a future that is neither the pretentious lordship of the universe … nor on the other hand the cowardly slinking away from all thought, planning, and action that aims at change. Stewardship … belongs to the essence of things. … To engage in Christ’s mission on the world today is to be stewards of life in the kingdom of death”.[22]
According to Hall, an authentic theology therefore begins with individuals who are committed to transforming their world. Finally, Hall also points to the humility that must be exercised in the proclamation of the Christian message. He believes that we should devote extra attention to dialogue and reconciliation with Judaism.[23]
Jewish ethics of responsibility
Sacks has also written a book about this theme. In his first two chapters, he immediately argues strongly for the ethics of responsibility and faith as a protest. These themes are very similar to the praxis model. The ethics of responsibility is characterized by God who invites us to be partners in his creation work. This is a lasting insight of Judaism, argues Sacks. He refers to the tradition of the prophets and rabbis.[24] The following chapter is an argument against the suppression of the vulnerable. Justice forms the core value that, according to Sacks, Abraham distinguished from his contemporaries.[25] Sacks argues about the same theme:
“…we rediscover those beautiful, counterintuitive truths: that a nation is strong when it cares for the weak, that it becomes rich when it cares for the poor, it becomes invulnerable when it cares about the vulnerable.”[26]
Conclusion
In view of the above, I have argued in my blog for a threefold communication; learning together, dialogue and doing together. I hope that this combination leads to a reconciliation and cooperation with Judaism, in which neither of the communication partners have to compromise their tradition. Jews try to live the Torah, and we try to follow a faithful Jew. There is enough 'common ground' for dialogue and joint social action. When we recognize that:
“We will become strong enough to welcome the stranger and say, come and share our lives, share our stories, share our aspirations and dreams.”[27]
Bibliography
Christian Grethlein. An Introduction to Practical Theology: History, Theory, and the Communication of the Gospel in the Present. Vertaald door Uwe Rasch. Waco, Texas: Baylor University Press, 2016.
“Cultuur & Jodendom Archives”. Joods.nl (blog). Geraadpleegd 30 oktober 2018. https://www.joods.nl/category/cultuur-jodendom/.
Jonathan Sacks. Een Gebroken Wereld Heel Maken: Verantwoordelijk Leven in Tijden van Crisis. Vertaald door Hans van der Heiden. Vught: Uitgeverij Skandalon, 2016.
———. “How we can face the future without fear, together”. Ted.com. Geraadpleegd 30 oktober 2018. https://www.ted.com/talks/rabbi_lord_jonathan_sacks_how_we_can_face_the_future_without_fear_together/transcript.
———. Niet in Gods Naam: Een Pleidooi tegen Religieus Extremisme en Religieus Geweld. Vertaald door Jaap Slingerland. 2de dr. Uitgeverij Kok, 2017.
“Joods.nl”. Joods.nl. Geraadpleegd 30 oktober 2018. https://www.joods.nl/.
Kathryn Tanner. Theories of Culture: A New Agenda for Theology. Guides to Theological Inquiry. Minneapolis: Augsburg Fortress, 1997.
Loren T. Stuckenbruck, en Gabriele Boccaccini, red. Enoch and the Synoptic Gospels: Reminiscences, Allusions, Intertextuality. Early Judaism and its Literature 44. Houston Mill Road, Atlanta: SBL Press, 2016.
“Opinie Archives”. Joods.nl (blog). Geraadpleegd 30 oktober 2018. https://www.joods.nl/category/opinie/.
Simon J. Joseph. The Nonviolent Messiah: Jesus, Q, and the Enochic Tradition. Minneapolis: Fortress Press, 2014.
Stephen B. Bevans. Models of Contextual Theology. Faith and Cultures. Maryknoll, New York: Orbis Books, 2017.
Notes
[1] “Joods.nl”, Joods.nl, geraadpleegd 30 oktober 2018, https://www.joods.nl/.
[2] “Opinie Archives”, Joods.nl (blog), geraadpleegd 30 oktober 2018, https://www.joods.nl/category/opinie/.
[3] “Cultuur & Jodendom Archives”, Joods.nl (blog), geraadpleegd 30 oktober 2018, https://www.joods.nl/category/cultuur-jodendom/.
[4] Jonathan Sacks, Niet in Gods Naam: Een Pleidooi tegen Religieus Extremisme en Religieus Geweld, vertaald door Jaap Slingerland, 2de dr. (Uitgeverij Kok, 2017), 115–17.
[5] Grethlein noemt dit ‘from God’.
[6] Loren T. Stuckenbruck en Gabriele Boccaccini, red., Enoch and the Synoptic Gospels: Reminiscences, Allusions, Intertextuality, Early Judaism and its Literature 44 (Houston Mill Road, Atlanta: SBL Press, 2016).
[7] Simon J. Joseph, The Nonviolent Messiah: Jesus, Q, and the Enochic Tradition (Minneapolis: Fortress Press, 2014).
[8] Christian Grethlein, An Introduction to Practical Theology: History, Theory, and the Communication of the Gospel in the Present, vertaald door Uwe Rasch (Waco, Texas: Baylor University Press, 2016), 208.
[9] Jonathan Sacks, “How we can face the future without fear, together”, Ted.com, geraadpleegd 30 oktober 2018, https://www.ted.com/talks/rabbi_lord_jonathan_sacks_how_we_can_face_the_future_without_fear_together/transcript.
[10] Christian Grethlein, An Introduction to Practical Theology: History, Theory, and the Communication of the Gospel in the Present, 133–35.
[11] Christian Grethlein, 213.
[12] Idem, 214.
[13] Idem, 166–67.
[14] Stephen B. Bevans, Models of Contextual Theology, Faith and Cultures (Maryknoll, New York: Orbis Books, 2017), 70.
[15] Stephen B. Bevans, 71.
[16] Idem, 72.
[17] Idem, 73.
[18] Idem, 75.
[19] Kathryn Tanner, Theories of Culture: A New Agenda for Theology, Guides to Theological Inquiry (Minneapolis: Augsburg Fortress, 1997), 57–58.
[20] Stephen B. Bevans, Models of Contextual Theology, 75.
[21] Stephen B. Bevans, 80.
[22] Idem, 81–82.
[23] Idem, 83.
[24] Jonathan Sacks, Een Gebroken Wereld Heel Maken: Verantwoordelijk Leven in Tijden van Crisis, vertaald door Hans van der Heiden (Vught: Uitgeverij Skandalon, 2016), 10–11.
[25] Jonathan Sacks, 29.
[26] Jonathan Sacks, “How we can face the future without fear, together”.
[27] Idem.