The end of the world as we know it part VI

The End of the World as We know it.

The Compassionate Christ Jesus of the Sacred Heart

Avatar vs. Apotheosis

A good place to start in understanding the dichotomy between avatar and apotheosis is the life of Jesus himself. By examining the historical Jesus we may arrive at a better understanding of the Christ. We may have some insight into how the Jesus story evolved. How does the story of Jesus develop from preacher and prophet to mystical legend, from mythical hero to religious doctrine? Is he the adopted son of God through apotheosis? Or was he divine to begin with; descended from heaven, in other words, an avatar?

The best source, in fact the only source, for a true understanding of the historical Jesus is the Gospels themselves.

Textual Analysis

According to textual analysis, scholars have determined that the synoptic Gospels are the most reliable. The time between the historical Jesus and the earliest synoptic biography is probably somewhere between 40 and 50 years. Most scholars argue that the gospel of Mark is probably no later than about 70 AD. While they contain little historical material, the letters of the apostle Paul expand the teachings of Christ and are supposed to appear about 20 years after the crucifixion. We know that the books attributed to Matthew, Mark, and Luke were not written by the apostles themselves. They are written by later followers as a collection of stories handed down through an oral tradition. As such they are hardly reliable as historical sources. And the gospel of John is heavily weighted with Christian theology and undoubtedly written at a later date.

In addition, there are many discrepancies between the different Gospels. Leaving aside for a moment the question of the historical veracity of these accounts, it is possible to reconstruct a more or less objective view of the historical Jesus based on the internal evidence of the synoptic Gospels and textual analysis. In his book, “Zealot: the life and times of Jesus of Nazareth” Biblical Scholar Resa Azlan points out that the gospels are the earliest and best most reliable sources available to us about the life of the Nazarene:

“… The methodological tools for determining the historical accuracy of any given passage in the Gospels have been in place for nearly 2 centuries. For example, there is broad consensus among scholars that earlier passage (say, from the Gospel of Mark) is more reliable than a later one (say, from the Gospel of John). If the passage appears in all four canonized Gospels – a phenomenon known as “multiple attestations” – that it, too, is more likely to be historically accurate. The same is true of aversive passage that seems to contradict basic church doctrine. For instance, those passages in which Jesus emphasizes the exclusivity rather than the universality of this message are widely acknowledged to be historically reliable because they conflict with the early church’s emphasis on the universality of Christianity. There are many more worlds that have been adopted by scholars to help place the Gospels in their historical context, but to put it in the simplest way possible: those passages that coincide with what we know about the political, social, and religious milieu first century Palestine are generally accepted as historical, while those that do not are rejected. Although it is almost unanimously agreed that, with the possible exception of Luke-Acts, the Gospels were not written by the people for whom they are named, for the ease and sake of clarity, I will continue to refer to the gospel writers by the names by which we now know and recognize them.”

Legend?

Furthermore, it may be that the version of the Gospels is mere legend. Perhaps the Christ story is entirely mythological. It certainly incorporates many mythological elements such as the miracle of the loaves and fishes, the raising of Lazarus from the dead, the temptations of the devil in the desert, and the resurrection of Christ himself.

But before grappling with the mythical and legendary aspects of the Christ story, and putting them in context, I want to understand more about who Jesus was, what he taught, and the motivation for this ministry. His followers, even in the early days of the church, insisted on the transcendental event of his resurrection. In many ways his death and resurrection have become more important symbolically that his life. But for the moment, I wish to consider the life of Jesus and how it is that he became exalted in the imagination of generations of Christians. And I believe that we may get a more cogent idea of the Jesus biography by going through the synoptic Gospels in an attempt to understand at least what his earlier followers believed about his life.

The Synoptic Gospels

And yet, even after stripping away obvious hyperbole and supernatural events in the Christ story, a close study of the Synoptic Gospels in the accepted Bible canon reveals shades of difference in the apotheosis versus avatar interpretation of Christ’s divinity.

The gospel of Mark, for example, views Christ as one who became exalted through his sacrifice. He gives us a more human portrait of Jesus. His moment of doubt in the Garden of Gethsemane where he asks God in anguish “why hast thou forsaken me?” seems to define Jesus as human. By sacrificing himself the sins of the world, he becomes exalted. His compassion and sacrifice even in the face of his own doubt in suffering are divine acts that raise him to the godly level. If Jesus is human before his crucifixion, his sacrifice has elevated him to heaven. The proof of this, for Mark as well as other early Christians, is found in his resurrection.

The Gospel of John goes further. John defines Jesus as avatar or one who descends from on high. He identifies Jesus with the logos or the word of God:

“ In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. He was with God in the beginning. To him all things were made; without him nothing was made that has been made. In him was life, and that life was the light of all mankind. The light shines in the darkness, and the darkness has not overcome it. There was a man sent from God whose name was John. He came as a witness to testify concerning that light, so that through him all might believe. He himself was not the light; he came only as a witness to the light. The true light that gives light to everyone was coming into the world. He was in the world, and though the world was made through him the world did not recognize him. He came to that which was his own but his own did not receive him. Yet to all who did receive him, to those who believed in his name, he gave the right to become children of God – children born out of a natural descent, not of human decision or husband’s will, but born of God. The Word became flesh and made his dwelling among us. We have seen his glory, the glory of the one and only son, who came from the father, full of grace and truth. (John testified concerning him. He cried out, saying, “this is the one I spoke about when I said, ‘he who comes after me has surpassed me because he was before me.’”) out of his fullness we have all received grace in place of grace already given. For the law was given through Moses; grace and truth came through Jesus Christ. No one has ever seen God, but the one and only son, who is himself God and his closest relationship with the father, has made him known.”

Here at the beginning of his Gospel John identifies Jesus as avatar. He is one with the word of God. He was with God in the beginning. He says, “the true light has come into the world.” His meaning is clear: Jesus is the true light. The word of God, the light of God became flesh in order that his grace and truth may come through Jesus Christ. Avatar is a Sanskrit word. An Avatar is a manifestation, embodiment, or incarnation of God or an important deity who takes flesh for a specific reason usually to restore religious principles.

The Concept of Avatar

Thousands of years before Christ the concept of avatar was defined by Krishna in the Bhagavad-Gita:

यदा यदा हि धर्मस्य ग्लानिर् भवति भारत अभ्युत्थानम् अधर्मस्य तदात्मनम् सृजम्य् अहम् (yadā yadā hi dharmasya glānir bhavati bhārata abhyutthānam adharmasya tadātmanam sṛjamy aham) B.G. 4.7

“Whenever and wherever there is a decline in religious practice, O descendant of Bharata, and a predominant rise of irreligion-at that time I descend Myself. परित्रणाय साधुनम् विनाशाय च दुष्कृताम् धर्म-संस्थापनर्थाय सम्भवामि युगे युगे (paritraṇāya sādhunam vināśāya ca duṣkṛtām dharma-saṃsthāpanarthāya sambhavāmi yuge yuge) B.G 8 

“In order to deliver the pious and to annihilate the miscreants, as well as to reestablish the principles of religion, I advent Myself millennium after millennium.”

The Gospel of John

John’s version of the Gospel clearly defines Christ as an Avatara. He is the holy word of God made flesh, descended into this world to re-establish the principles of religion, just as prophesied by Krishna in the Bhagavad-Gita. And John’s theology carries a lot of weight among the different schools of Christianity that are founded on his Gospel. Still, Mark seems to advance the point of view that Jesus becomes transcendent by dint of his sacrifice. According to John, God’s compassion descends in the form of Jesus who is mercy incarnate, virgin-born. He began as the Word who was “with the Father,” and ends at the “Right hand of the Father.”

It might be useful at this point to consider who Jesus spoke of himself. Did he refer to himself as divinity? Did he teach his followers that he himself was God?

Who was Jesus?

Notwithstanding the version found in the Gospel of John, which does not form part of the “synoptic gospels” and is, admittedly from a later date, many early Christians writing in the apocryphal gospels considered Jesus as an apocalyptic prophet predicting the end of the world. They felt that God’s intervention would overthrow the forces of evil represented by the despotic Romans and usher in the Kingdom of God through a Day of Judgment. The Day of Judgment would be presided over by the “Son of Man.” But when Jesus refers to the “Son of Man,” he does so in the third person. Only in John does he refer to himself as “The Son of Man,” and we have discounted John as being unreliable historically.

Who did Jesus say he was?

Jesus did not represent himself as God Himself. He spoke of “God the Father,” or “My Father in Heaven,” but did not equate himself with the father. The trinitarian doctrine that says the Father, Son and Holy Spirit are One came much later. If Jesus did not represent as a divine being, as an angel, or as a god, what changed historical perspectives? Perhaps it was the belief in his resurrection. According to the biblical stories the disciples of Jesus insist that after his crucifixion and burial Jesus rose again. In fact without this belief in Jesus having risen from the dead, few would have accepted his divinity. But resurrection is an argument for apotheosis. An avatar who descends from heaven cannot be killed. Neither does he need a burial. The divinity of the avatar is seen in his descent, not in his asset. If resurrection is the single most important aspect of belief in Christ, then it would seem that Mark’s version of apotheosis trumps John’s version of avatar.

The Early Church

The second or third century on, views on the nature of Christ’s divinity continued to evolve. finally in the fourth century, the Emperor Constantine codifies Christianity at the Nicene Council where certain doctrines, such as reincarnation, are rejected and others such as resurrection are incorporated as holy doctrine.

Apart from the use of gospel as insight into the historical Christ, a study of the early Christian church and its culmination in the Nicene Council affords us a glimpse into the deification of Christ. How was it that his position evolved from street preacher to apocalyptic prophet, saint and martyr, to Messiah and son of God, to being one with God himself? The Nicene Council rejected and anathematized what became known as heresies while codifying doctrine and sacred dogma.

Remember too, that the concept of God was also evolving. The Romans lived in a pantheistic world. They had gods for sun, wind, rain, and war. Apollo, Jupiter, Juno, Mars, Venus, and Minerva are the heavens from the heights of Mount Olympus. But Pantheism gave way to Henotheism, where one god in particular is ascendant over the others, to Monotheism where there is no God but God, as in the Hebrew model.

The Church of Jesus

How was it that the West came to embrace monotheism as a guiding principle of civilization? And how is it that Jesus Christ took the place of the one God and occupied his throne?

These are not easy questions and are obviously beyond the scope of this blog. But before moving on to consider the decline of our own civilization I think it’s important to reflect on how we got here. And monotheism is often cited as one of the most important aspects of modern civilization.

An important aspect of the teachings of Jesus Christ that any study of the historical Jesus reveals is his interest in apocalyptic prophecy. This extended article is called “the end of the world as we know it.” I’m interested in the decline of civilizations. Christianity is so much at the center of our own civilization that I’m giving it a close look. But it seems that Jesus Christ himself was very much interested in the decline of his own civilization In the end of the world.

Leaving aside the theological questions about the divinity of Christ raised by John, let’s take a quick look at the life and teachings of Jesus of Nazareth as they were recorded in the synoptic Gospels. Matthew, Mark, and Luke are known as the synoptic Gospels for between the three of them we may ferret out a synopsis of the life of Jesus.

Synopsis of the Life of Jesus

We know the story of the three wise men and the star that prophesied the birth of the Messiah. We know the story of the virgin birth.

But leaving aside the question of divine birth for a moment, the story of the life of Jesus according to the Gospels follows a simple path. The beginning of his story seems clear. All three synoptic Gospels record that Jesus was born in humble circumstances as the a son of a carpenter in Bethlehem, a tiny hamlet not far from Nazareth in Galilee. As a young man, Jesus seeks out John the Baptist, an apocalyptic prophet.

John the Baptist preaches that the end of the world is coming, when the “son of man” will judge evildoers and set up a new kingdom with a new rule. So much has been credibly documented. The middle part of the story is complicated. There are many questions and contradictions about the message of Jesus during his ministry, but the end of his story coincides in the different versions: after betrayal by Judas, Jesus is accused of sedition against the state. His lead before Pontius Pilate who condemns him to death by crucifixion after a summary trial. We know that crucifixion was reserved for enemies of the state and that a placard affixed to the cross proclaimed INRI, Jesus of Nazareth, King of the Jews. The accusation against him was that he had promoted himself as King of the Jews against both the authority of the Jewish Sanhedrin and Roman Emperor. While technically speaking, when challenged on the issue of tribute and taxes Jesus had replied, “render unto Caesar that which is Caesar’s” at the same time the idea that Jesus was the Messiah, or the King of the new reign that would be proclaimed after the end of the world had circulated among his followers, giving credence to the accusation.

We know that after the crucifixion of Jesus, his followers maintain that he rose from the dead. They taught that the end of the world would soon come and that Jesus would rule over the new kingdom.

These seem to be the basic facts of the Jesus story. The apocalyptic views of the early Christians are well-known. But since the end of the world hasn’t come yet, even 2000 years after the coming of the Christ, these doctrines are largely forgotten for the new theology based on the Gospel of John and the divinity of Jesus: He was God Himself, descended to save the people of the world from their sins. The new doctrine began downplaying the teachings, message, and ministry of Christ, especially his emphasis on end-of-the-world scenarios in favor of the idea that by believing in Jesus and by praying to him one would gain salvation. The ascension of John’s version took centuries to completely unfold. But the historical preacher of Nazareth lost his ethnic characteristics. No longer was he a dark-skinned, long-nosed Jew from a backwater town in the desert. He becomes a tall, fair-skinned, blue-eyed handsome man with a halo. He becomes “The Christ” or the “Anointed One,” the “Messiah,” and finally God Himself, the “King of Heaven and Earth.”

Theological Shift

And as this theological shift took place over the years, there was a struggle among his followers. Gospels and accounts treating Jesus as a man or a prophet were discounted, lost, banned or censored. The Nicene council dismissed a number of historical versions that did not tally with the official doctrine. The Gnostic gospels became “lost books,” as did the Coptic gospels of the Egyptians with their own peculiar view of the life of Christ. The teachings of Jesus were no longer as important as his avatar. Less emphasis was placed on his message and greater value placed on salvation by appeal to his divinity. In this way, the teachings of Jesus became lost. Was he a soldier of God who raged against the money-changers in the temple and called for holy war? Or a man of peace who blessed the humble and the meek? Was he a vegetarian saint who eschewed violence and slaughter? A yogi who had visited India in his lost years? Or a rabble-rousing zealot who advocated the overthrow of an oppressive regime with the use of liberation theology?

The Teachings of Jesus and parallels with Buddhism

We wrote about the rise and fall of Buddhism in India in a separate piece. The apotheosis of Jesus parallels that of Buddha in important ways. The Buddha began as a truth-seeker who achieved enlightenment and taught his realizations to a small band of disciples. Later legends deify him and claim that he was virgin-born. Even today, people worship gold statutes of the Buddha and pray to him for blessings.

Jesus began as a teacher who felt he had an important revelation to make about the end of the world and the coming kingdom of heaven. Today he is worshipped by people who make pilgrimages on their knees to churches filled with gold crosses. Just as Buddha’s image was cast in gold, the crucifixion of Jesus which symbolizes both his suffering and resurrection has been cast in gold to be worshipped by millions.

My mother used to muse ironically, “If Jesus were executed today would we all wear little gold electric chairs around our necks?”

John’s doctrine of Avatar obliges Christians to worship him as God. But what of the teachings of Jesus?

Another way to try to understand the historical Jesus is through his teachings. But since there are so many Gospels where different sermons are preached, and since Jesus is often found preaching in parables, it is sometimes difficult to understand the essence of his message.

This is often a problem when a great saint, teacher, or prophet passes away from this world. His disciples create schisms and wrangle over the meaning of his words, parsing every expression that the master taught. The master’s sermons seem to contradict what he has written in his books and letters. And his personal instructions often show him to be more liberal or conservative in interpreting what he has written or said. How to understand the real teachings? I suppose this is what is meant by cultivating a “personal relationship with Christ.” In the end, everyone has his own version of Christ. In Africa he is seen as a black man. In Norway he is blonde. In China, Jesus Christ is shown as an oriental man with almond eyes. In Mexico he is brown-skinned. Perhaps this is testimony to his universal appeal.

Apart from the idea of accepting Jesus as God and praying to him for blessings, the matter of his teachings has always had more interest for me.

The worship of God in churches seems to be filled with hypocrisy. In Mexico a majority of the population believes in the Catholic version of Jesus. Churches are always full. I live and write 100 meters from a charming church where the bells ring on the hour. Multitudes turn out for mass to get forgiveness for their sins. And yet Mexico is a violent country where drug barons execute people with impunity. A famous narco-traficante and ruler of various drug cartels, Beltran Leyva, was surrounded by federales and arrested another hundred meters from the church, having fish on Friday after receiving communion. Chapo Guzman worships Jesus. Whose side is God on? It is rare that the priests will preach from the pulpit against violence, murder, and drugs. Some of the gold crosses have been bought and paid for with drug money by narcos seeking to expiate their sins. But what has this to do with the teachings of Christ himself?

Ironically, there are many similarities between the ideas of Buddha and the teachings of Christ, although this is scarcely remarked on by either Christians or Buddhists. “The Imitation of Christ,” by Tomas á Kempis offers many principles for daily practice based on the teachings of Christ. These principles parallel the Buddha´s eight principles. For example, here´s the Buddha from the Dhammapada on vanity:

“Fools follow after vanity, are ignorant and careless. The wise keep awareness as their best treasure. Do not follow after vanity nor after sensual pleasure nor lust.”

Here’s Thomas á Kempis on vanity:

“What good does it do to speak learnedly about the Trinity if, lacking humility, you displease the Trinity? Indeed it is not learning that makes a man holy and just, but a virtuous life makes him pleasing to God. I would rather feel contrition than know how to define it. For what would it profit us to know the whole Bible by heart and the principles of all the philosophers if we live without grace and the love of God? Vanity of vanities and all is vanity, except to love God and serve Him alone.

This is the greatest wisdom -- to seek the kingdom of heaven through contempt of the world. It is vanity, therefore, to seek and trust in riches that perish. It is vanity also to court honor and to be puffed up with pride. It is vanity to follow the lusts of the body and to desire things for which severe punishment later must come. It is vanity to wish for long life and to care little about a well-spent life. It is vanity to be concerned with the present only and not to make provision for things to come. It is vanity to love what passes quickly and not to look ahead where eternal joy abides.

Often recall the proverb: "The eye is not satisfied with seeing nor the ear filled with hearing." Try, moreover, to turn your heart from the love of things visible and bring yourself to things invisible. For they who follow their own evil passions stain their consciences and lose the grace of God.”