The Bible and Salvation history
THE
BIBLE AND SALVATION HISTORY
Cl. Mario D'Couto SDB
Introduction:
The Bible is a
collection of books where each book has been written for a different purpose by
different authors at different intervals of time. Given the diversity of time
period that exists among the various authors of the Bible, it would be
important to ask the question as to who was responsible for bringing all the
books of the Bible into one composite unit and at what period of time? There is
certainly no clear cut answer to this question although there are pointers
which may help us arrive at a deeper understanding of the Bible.
The Bible is
plainly divided into two categories, the Old and the New Testament and quite
often we have many references from the New Testament pointing out or basing its
teachings on the Old Testament. Hence, if we have to make sense of the New
Testament, we need to understand the Old Testament. In fact, we have to begin
with the Old Testament in order to understand the origin of the sacred
scriptures.
The
origin of sacred scripture:
To
understand the origin of sacred scripture, we have to understand its history.
For although there are different section of books or different categories of
books, the source is found in its history. After the Exodus of the Israelites
from Egypt, they were told to enter the land of the Canaanites. Now the
Canaanites were pagan and so the Israelites were instructed by God to destroy
them lest they mix around and lose their faith. The Kings of Israel played a
crucial role in this as they were looked upon as models and leaders who would
lead the people of Israel. For the Israelites, the King was an ambassador of
God. However, when we read the history of Israel, we find that there have been
a series of ups and downs. Thus whenever Israel was with God, nothing happened.
But the moment they went against Him, He delivered them to their enemies. All
this forms part of sacred scripture as it can be seen in the historical books,
namely, Joshua, Judges, 1st and 2nd Kings and the book of
Maccabeus. John Miller explains this whole phenomenon in his book, “How the Bible came to be,” in the
following words, “The origins of the
scroll are traced back to the day of Joshua (Josh 1:7-9; 23:6) and Moses (Deut
31:9, 26). After Joshua the scroll itself is not mentioned again, except in
passing (2 Kings 14:6) until its rediscovery during the reign of Josiah.
However, developments are separated that partly explain why Moses’ teachings
were so little heeded in the affairs of the two Israelite Kingdoms prior to the
reign of Hezekiah and Josiah. The Levites, whom Moses had made custodians of
his teachings (Deut 10:8; 33:8-11) and who were priests in Israel from Joshua
to David, were dismissed by Solomon for having opposed his succession (1 Kgs
2:26) and another priesthood was put in their place (1 Kgs 2:35). While devoted
to the same God, the latter priesthood (Sons of Zodak) had seemingly no
objective to ‘other gods‘ being worshipped alongside Yahweh. Thus it happened
that Solomon becomes a follower of Astarte, the goddess of Sidonians and of
Milcom, the Amorite abomination …… Thus it was Solomon who built a high place
for Chemosh, the abomination of Moab, on the mountain of the east of Jerusalem
and to Milcom, the abomination of the Amorites (1 Kgs 11:5-7).
Upon Solomon’s death strife erupted
which resulted in the formation of a northern kingdom where something similar
happened (1 Kgs 12: 1 -19). Priests from ordinary families were appointed who
were not Levites (1 Kgs 12:31) and these presided at calf shrines associated
with Aaron, not Moses (Deut 9:15-21). In this case, too, there were seemingly
no sanctions against religious syncretism, that is, against worshipping ‘other
gods’ alongside Yahweh (1 Kgs 16:31-34). It was for this reason that Israel,
the northern Kingdom, was invaded and destroyed by the Assyrinas, we are told
(2 Kgs 17). To try to save the southern Kingdom, Judah, from a similar fate by
ridding it for similar abominations and by replacing them with devotion to
Yahweh in accordance with Moses’ Torah was quite obviously the goal of the reforms
of Hezekiah (2 Kgs 18:1-8) and Josiah (2 Kgs 22:23). In all likelihood it was
in support of the state – initiated reforms of Kings Hezekiah and Josiah that
the first editions of Deuteronimistic history were originally written. Seen in
this light, certain distinguishing features of the literature of this period
become visible.”
Jeremiah,
Ezekiel, Isaiah and the 12 Minor Prophets were inspired critics warning of
disasters ahead because of social and religious perversities, but they were
also pioneering global visionaries with words regarding Israel and the world’s
future. As critics, they clarify why Israel was destroyed and warned of similar
things happening again if similar conditions prevail (Zech 1:4-6). Yet this was
also followed by words of hope as can be seen by the way the contents of the
books are arranged, with words of criticism and warning coming first in most
cases and words of hope in the latter part. Thus, Israel’s history can be
summarized in a three act drama as John Miller puts it this way, “Act one is the narrative account of the
world’s origins – and of the gradual emergence of the world’s many peoples and
notions (Gen 1 -11). In this act we
are introduced to the cosmic and international world stage on which Israel’s
story unfolds. Israel’s God is pictured as creatively and lovingly active in
the world in the same way He is active in Israel’s history. He is the world’s
creator. The world is depicted as beautiful and good, but because of
humankind’s sin, it has been tainted. After the great flood, God instructs
humanity (Gen 9: 1 -7). At the same
time an unqualified promise is made to uphold and maintain the created order
(Gen 9: 8 – 17). In the midst of pride
and imperfections, conditions now exist for the mergence and proliferation of
the world’s teeming people and nations (Gen 10: 1 – 11:9).
Act two is the story of Israel’s
calling to be a people blessed by God who will in turn intensify blessings
among all the world’s nations and people. Here we learn of Israel’s origin,
rise and near destruction (Genesis 12: 1 – 2 Kgs 25). In this act we follow
Israel’s slow motivation and metamorphosis into a great nation with a
magnificent temple, but then also, after Solomon’s apostasy (1 Kgs 11), its
decline and fall despite two state initiated reforms (2 Kgs 17 – 25). The same
God who created the world is in Act Two, but here the focus is on the calling
and nurturing of a people who by attending to His ways, will intensify
blessings worldwide (Genesis 12: 1 – 3; 18: 17 – 19) but they end up as a
Kingdom that is destroyed because of their sins (2 Kgs 25). This, however, is
fortunately not the final act. There is Act Three! The departed people are
restored, their temple is rebuilt and they are renewed at home and abroad.”
Christ
as the link between the Old and the New Covenant:
Despite
all this, we see that in the history of Israel, it has always been marked by a
two and fro movement, which is to say, that it was destroyed – restored –
destroyed – restored and so on. The first were the Assyrians, then the Greeks,
the Romans and finally the Muslims. The temple which was built by King Solomon
was of great importance for the Israelites and it was also subjected to a
cyclic pattern of destruction and restoration. Unfortunately, today we don’t have
the temple of King Solomon instead there is a mosque built on the very same
site. It is for this reason that the Jews have built the Veiling Wall.
Our
Lord was born around the time when Israel was already under the dominion of the
Roman Empire. Hence, this led to the formation of a Hellenistic culture. In
this regard, we could infer or deduce that the birth of our Lord came at a
significant time when Israel was in turmoil, not to mention its turbulent past
which was marked by constant wars with other neighbouring cities like Canaan,
Assyria and Palestine.
The
peace and freedom that our Lord brought to the people of Israel was of a
different kind. There were, indeed, some who thought He was the Messiah but not
in a way He intended. Rather, they thought of Him as a political redeemer. Very
few recognized the real person He was as we find it in the Gospels.
The
New Testament has a lot of references to the Old Testament and this brings us
to the question, “How did they come
together?” This question has a lot of implications, in the sense about
whether is Christianity different from Judaism or is it a perfection of
Judaism? In a sense, we can say that Judaism and Christianity are different as
Christ was the new path to God. Now if we were to accept such a claim that
would in turn imply that the God of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob is different from
Jesus. But, as we all know, that is totally absurd for Jesus Himself claims
that He and His Father are one. This Father is the same God of Abraham, Isaac
and Jacob.
The
formation of the scriptures: The opposition of Marcion
After
the death and resurrection of Our Lord, the formation of scriptures in the
early years was not all smooth sailing as this was a time marked by a lot of
controversies and misunderstandings. In the middle of the 2nd
century A.D., a wave of anti – Judaism swept through the Gentile Churches,
cresting in Gnostic theologies that decided Israel’s scriptures and God. It was
at this time that an entrepreneurial leader named Marcion challenged the Churches
to get rid of their Jewish Scriptures and adopt a new set of scriptures because
according to him, the God revealed in Christ and Israel’s God are not the same.
Marcion
was a prophetic missionary and an effective organizer who hoped his views and
proposed new scriptures would be embraced by the elders of the Church at Rome
and by Christians everywhere. When the Roman Church condemned his ideas, it
only strengthened his resolve to propagate his ideas and agendas on his own.
There is sufficient evidence to prove this point as we see in the comments made
by John Clabeaux and Stephen Wilson. According to John Clabeaux, the
Marcionites may have nearly surpassed non – Marcionites in the decades of the
160s and 170s. For Stephen Wilson, the evidence suggests that during its heyday
in the second century, the Marcionite church was one of the dominant forms of
Christianity and that beyond the second centuries its influence continued to be
felt. It was thanks to the efforts of St. Irenaeus, Bishop of Lyons that he was
able to stand up against the heretical teachings of Marcion. In fact, he
carried out this through his 5 volume work entitled “Against Heresies” (published around 185 A.D.). At its heart, his
defense against Marcion in this work is this: both sets of scriptures (the “Law and the Prophets” and the newer
apostolic scriptures) are in fact part of the same unfolding story, guided by
the same God acting in progressively more meaningful ways towards the same goals. John Miller gives a fitting
conclusion to this whole scenario in the following words, “I will only emphasize that it was the larger Bible and not a ‘New
Testament’ that became the common – codex of the Church in its fight against
heresies. In fact, I am not aware of my evidence that would suggest that the
Church of this period did, or even intended to, publish a New Testament cannon
– codex as such, even though it is in these terms that the investigation of
this topic is repeatedly framed and pursued. Indeed, creating and publishing a
New Testament canon that would stand alone as a separate, independent volume is
precisely what the Church did not do at this juncture. This is what Marcion had
done. It was to meet this challenge that Church leaders opposing Marcion published
a canon – codex similar to his, but one that was many times larger, including
as it did a complete collection of Israel’s scriptures, plus a greatly enlarged
corpus of apostolic scriptures. Thus, it appears that the Marcionite challenge
not only puts pressure on the Gentile Churches of the time to decide what
scriptures would be normative but also motivated them to assemble and publish
them in a single codex.”
We
can certainly raise the question as to why was Marcion’s canon (his version of
the scripture) restricted to only the gospel of Luke and the letters of Paul for that was what found
his canon? Marcion’s thinking in this regard is reflected in the so – called
Marcionite Prologues to Paul’s letters, present in all branches of the Latin
Vulgate and thought by some to be surviving remnants from Marcion’s Bible. If
so, they afford us a rare glimpse into Marcion’s thinking from sources
emanating from Marcion himself. In these Prologues Paul is portrayed as the one
true Apostle who alone defended ‘the true evangelical faith’ against attack and
corruption by ‘false Apostles’ of ‘the sort of Jewish law.’ In the Marcionite
prologue to the Romans, for example, we read, “These Romans were reached before hand by false Apostles and under the
name of our Lord Jesus Christ had been brought in to the Law and the Prophets.”
The Prologue to the Corinthians makes a similar point; the Corinthians were
misled by false Apostles brought in by the sect of the Jewish Law but it was
the Apostle Paul who brought them true Evangelical Wisdom. The same can be seen
in the prologue to the Galatians. Thus, to sum up, we can say that Marcion
believed that Paul alone was a truthful witness to what had been revealed
through Jesus Christ. All others were false prophets because of their devotion
to the Law and the Prophets. This was the core conviction behind the formation
of Marcion’s canon and the chief reason why it included edited versions of
Luke’s Gospel and Paul’s letters and nothing else.
Looking
at what Marcion has done, it would seem that he is putting St. Paul on a
pedestal. The Church never had any problem with the work of St. Paul. However,
the point on which the Church could not agree upon was that there was undue
importance given to St. Paul. With all due respects to St. Paul and his work,
we cannot say that he was the only apostle who worked. This has been the
standpoint of the early Church Fathers. Thus the letters which he wrote were
retained but they were differently arranged. If I were to go into the details,
it would be too elaborate and hence I would not like to delve much into it. On
the whole, we can say that given the careful chronological arrangement of
books, this would imply that the collection as a whole was thoughtfully conceived
which includes its overall content, structure and meaning.
There
are numerous other instances in the Bible which speak about the exemplars of
faith other than St. Paul. The book of Hebrews conveys a somewhat similar
perspective when it relates how throughout human history from the dawn of time,
there has always been those who have been exemplars of that faith of which
Jesus Christ is guide and finisher (Heb 11:1 – 12:2). “At many moments in the past and by many means God spoke to our
ancestors through the prophets but in our time, the final days, He has spoken
to us in the power of His Son” (Heb 1: 1 – 2). Revelation is unfolding,
progressive and universal. That which has been revealed in Christ is continuous
with what comes before. Moses was faithful as ‘servant’ in the ‘the household
of God’ (Heb 3:5); Christ is faithful as ‘Son’ in the same ‘household’ (Heb
3:6; 12:2). The ‘new’ is better than the ‘old’ (Heb 8:7) but the ‘old’ is
simply ‘old’ (Heb 8:13) not ‘obsolete’ as some would translate.
The
formation of Christian scriptures was done precisely to ward off the accusation
that Jewish scriptures had nothing to do with Christian scriptures. The
propagator of this kind of thinking was the one whom we had already seen,
namely, Marcion. To state such a claim would have serious erroneous
implications as it would imply that
God (our Heavenly Father) which Jesus spoke of and the God of the Israelites
were different and having two different personalities. But, as noted earlier,
such is not the case. In fact, it cannot be that way. The Christian story is a
chronological and theological unfolding of Israel’s story. The older Jewish
scriptures so affirmed were at first received and read in a strictly
chronological arrangement similar to
that in Jewish Bibles today and are accordingly thought of, in the added
Christian writings not as ‘Old Testament’
but simply as ‘scripture’ (2 Tim
3:16) or ‘holy scriptures’ (Rom 1:2)
or sometimes as ‘the Law and the
Prophets’ (Matt 5:17) or the ‘Law of
Moses’, ‘the Prophets’ and ‘the Psalms’ (Lk 24:44) as was customary
at the time.
Thus,
the Christian Bible itself testifies to a stage when Israel’s scriptures were
known and read in the wider Jewish world. The added Christian scriptures were
likewise not set apart initially as ‘New Testament’ but were simply thought of
as belonging to ‘the rest of scripture’ (2 Peter 3:17). Furthermore, like the
older scriptures to which they were added, they too were chronologically
arranged so that the Gospels would come first, with their accounts of the
advent of Israel’s Messiah; then the book of Acts, showing how Jesus’ Jewish
followers (after death and resurrection) launched a missionary movement that
unfolded from its base in Jerusalem into the wider Gentile world; then a set of
letters to the churches of the world from the leaders of this Jerusalem – based
church; then the letters of Paul, a loading force in the Gentile mission and
finally the book of Revelation.
Conclusion:
It
is interesting to note how the salvation story unfolds itself as John Miller
notes in the following words, “Christians must bear in mind that renewed aspect
for Israel’s covenant mission will have implications as well for Christianity’s
revelation to the whole world, for Israel’s story as conveyed in the Tanak is
situated contextually within a very special vision of the benevolent
involvement of Israel’s God in the unfolding life of all people and nations.
The Sri Lankan Methodist, Welsey Ariarajah writes, “The opening chapters of the Bible, up to Genesis 12, where God calls
Abraham are an affirmation of God’s relationship with all people. The biblical
story could have only begun with chapters 12 with the call of Abraham but there seems to be
almost a conscious attempt to place the story of Israel in the broader context
of God’s creative, redemptive and covenant relationship with the whole of
humanity and all created order.”
Thus,
we see that the Old and the New Testament should be regarded as one composite
unit for the New Testament is a fulfillment of all the prophecies in the Old
Testament and an ongoing journey of the Christian life. I would like to end
this article with the words of the veteran missionary theologian Lesslie
Newbigin who narrates one of his experiences with a Hindu friend who had these
words to say of Jesus, “I can’t
understand why you missionaries present the Bible to us in India as a book of
religion. It is not a book of religion – and anyway we have plenty of books of religion
in India. We don’t need any more! I find in your Bible a unique interpretation
of universal history, the history of the whole creation and the history of the
human race and therefore a unique interpretation of the human person as a
responsible actor in history. That is unique. There is nothing else in the
whole religious literature of the world to put alongside it.”
The
figure of Christ is therefore central and of prime importance not just for the
Christians alone but also non – Christians as well. No wonder He is, indeed,
the Way, the Truth and the Life!
