Jesus' civic influence is neither semitic nor antisemitic

Pondering “Semitism” juxtaposed with “anti-Semitism”

Minimal knowledge invites misunderstanding. The Holy Bible seems a mystery about mysteries. Personal experiences and observations, many at University Baptist Church, Baton Rouge, led me to curiosity on which I earned this opinion:  Paul is history’s pivotal anti-Semite. The consequence is perpetual harm to children, and I want Paul’s impact undone. I choose Jesus’ civic influence to the good. I write in order to listen-to viewpoints of fellow citizens who are also curious and wish to precisely, accurately, and deeply consider Jesus’ civic influence.

How “semite” was constructed

                What is a Semite? The term is constructed on genealogy, geopolitics, and language, each of which is popularly, I think erroneously, constructed as racial. One Biblical opinion is Hagar was black, reasoning, “In the Old Testament . . . several terms . . . refer to Africa and Africans [including] Ham, Cush, Egypt, Put, and Canaan”, Hamites, or descendants of Ham. Japhethites were Gomer, Magog, Madai, Javan, Tubal, Meshek and Tiras. Semites were “descendants of Shem, Noah’s first son”, (Genesis 10). But

Semitic languages include Akkadian, Arabic, Aramaic, Ethiopic, Hebrew, and Phoenician (McCray 1990). [And] not all Semitic-speaking people are non-Hamitic people. For instance, the Ethiopians and Phoenicians are descendants of Ham, although their languages are Semitic (McCray 1990).

Hope that there is a non-racial humankind is offered by the human genome. A Stanford study is highlighted in a Harvard article, which seems to castigate Donald-Trump-white-skin, yet asserts,

In the biological and social sciences, the consensus is clear: race is a social construct, not a biological attribute. Today, scientists prefer to use the term “ancestry” to describe human diversity. “Ancestry” reflects the fact that human variations do have a connection to the geographical origins of our ancestors—with enough information about a person’s DNA, scientists can make a reasonable guess about their ancestry. However, unlike the term “race,” it focuses on understanding how a person’s history unfolded, not how they fit into one category and not another. In a clinical setting, for instance, scientists would say that diseases such as sickle-cell anemia and cystic fibrosis are common in those of “sub-Saharan African” or “Northern European” descent, respectively, rather than in those who are “black” or “white”.

The studies referenced above have information coming from homo sapiens’ inventions of language, writing, alphabet, and grammar, each starting hundreds of years ago: more than 1500, 55, 40, and 30, respectively. By 55 hundred years, Sumer civilization developed political philosophy that assumed their pantheon of gods left pursuit of the good on earth to humankind. That principle is expressed in Hebrew vernacular in Genesis 1:26-28. But the Holy Bible reports opinions held between 40 hundreds of years ago and 1.9 hundreds of years ago and interpreted exponentially in recent decades. I assert that every good thought was expressed before the many Bible canon were negotiated. And opinion about prior opinion strains actual reality.

My choice about Paul

After study, I tentatively choose and urge to civic citizens this opinion: neither a Semite nor an anti-Semite be. Instead, accept the mystery of theGod and pursue Jesus’ civic influence. My grounding for this opinion is Sumerian political philosophy expressed by Genesis 1:26-28, Complete Jewish Bible, “Let us make humankind in our image, in the likeness of ourselves; and let them rule [to the good] . . . over all the earth . . .” Today’s crisis is evidence that only a civic people can choose the good on earth: neither theGod nor a government may or can usurp human duty. “Civic” means responsibly reliable to the good in human connections and transactions. I would appreciate Nomads’ and others’ thoughts and comments about my findings if not my opinions.

What does the New Testament (CJB) suggest?

To present my case, I cite the Complete Jewish Bible, in order to distinguish “God” from Adonai, the Spirit, and other expressions such as “the One”. I use “theGod” to express personal humility to whatever constrains the consequences of human choices; and consider statements attributed to each Jesus, Peter, Paul, and James, Jesus’ brother plus the reported presence of John.

About a decade after Jesus’ death, there were informed, like-minded groups in lands surrounding the Mediterranean, as follows:

·         Hebrews who followed and worked to improve the Torah -- the Hebrew law.

o   A majority expected in future a Messiah to unite Israel.

o   A minority expected a second coming of “Messiah Jesus” -- to unite Israel.

o   Each of the 12 tribes had its own like-minded particulars, such as opposing circumcision and Torah-hypocrisy.

o   Other Messiah-claims emerged.

·         Gentiles were non-Hebrews

o   Most were pagan, heathen, or mystical to idols.

o   Some were wanton or evil.

o   A minor-few believed Jesus is the Hebrew Messiah but did not want to pursue the Torah, especially circumcision. Call them “believers”.

o   A tiny few vaguely pursued the mystery of theGod.

·         Tradition holds that descendants of Noah’s 3 sons geographically dispersed as follows:

o   Ham NE Africa and Arabia

o   Shem in 3 areas, the north, the far-east, and the south of the Arabian Peninsula

o   Japheth, seafaring across SW Asia and southern Europe.

Noah’s descendants dispersed into lands dominated by Latin and Arabic, with a small development of Greek and even smaller area, Israel and Judah, developing Hebrew. A small Shemite faction developed Hebrew. Perhaps the Hebrew faction is the target of anti-Semitism; I don’t know.

Where does Jesus stand in the Hebrew Messiah controversy?

Returning now to the Jesus controversy, from the ancient background, extrapolation of the Greek equivalent of “anointed one”, χριστός (chrīstós), emerged as European “Crist”, which 500 years ago became “Christ”. About 2.173 billion people look to Christ for salvation each perceives. There are about 0.0139 billion Hebrews, 40% of whom consider Jesus’ Messiah-ship plausible. That is, Jesus’ influence could eventually unite Israel. I agree and think Jesus’ civic influence is lessened by chrīstós; Crist; Christ. Churches and synagogues may and can accept the mystery of Divinity and promote Jesus’ civic influence to the good. I now turn to that suggestion.

            If so, I think the principle villain in lessening Jesus’s impact seems to be Paul, the ancient Christ-promotor. It seems to stem from his letter to the Galatians perhaps 16 years after Jesus’ death. Therein, he proclaims divine authority to censor competitive thought. Quoting statements that express a message,

From: Sha’ul, an emissary — I received my commission not from human beings or through human mediation but through Yeshua the Messiah and God the Father . . . who picked me out before I was born and called me by his grace, chose to reveal his Son to me, so that I might announce him to the Gentiles I did not consult anyone . . . We are Jews by birth, not so-called ‘Goyishe sinners’ [sinners from Gentiles]; even so, we have come to realize that a person is not declared righteous by God on the ground of his legalistic observance of Torah commands, but through the Messiah Yeshua’s trusting faithfulness  . . . For neither being circumcised nor being uncircumcised matters; what matters is being a new creation. And as many as order their lives by this rule, shalom upon them and mercy, and upon the Isra’el of God!

Paul seems to denigrate not only “sinners from Gentles” but Hebrew factions who do not think Jesus was the Messiah -- and the entire legacy of improving Moses’ law, which Hebrews continue as I write. Paul assesses the legacy, ignoring both Genesis 1:26-28 and Jesus’ improvements such as in Matthew 19:3-8. Paul concludes in Romans 9:6, “But the present condition of Isra’el does not mean that the Word of God has failed. For not everyone from Isra’el is truly part of Isra’el.” He especially castigates “Judeans” in 1 Thessalonians 2:14-16:

For, brothers, you came to be imitators of God’s congregations in Y’hudah that are united with the Messiah Yeshua — you suffered the same things from your countrymen as they did from the Judeans who  both killed the Lord Yeshua and the prophets, and chased us out too. They are displeasing God and opposing all mankind by trying to keep us from speaking to the Gentiles, so that they may be delivered.

Paul uses civic and civil injustice to Jesus’ execution to divide Israel! He constructs Paul’s “new covenant” in 2 Corinthians 3:18, “So all of us, with faces unveiled, see as in a mirror the glory of the Lord; and we are being changed into his very image, from one degree of glory to the next, by Adonai the Spirit.” I doubt theGod agrees that Adonai is less than NIV’s “the Lord God”. Each generation of civic citizens keeps Jesus’ civic influence alive and developing. Some of them feel antinomian to the Torah rather than to civic integrity. It seems there will always be minor factions of dissidents, rebels, and evil people.

                In summary, Paul, born a conservative Hebrew, fancied himself the sole agent of reform. He would narrowly lessen the division of humankind by waiting for Hebrews who expected their Messiah to join Gentiles who believe Jesus’ death on the cross was Adonai’s grace. He expelled descendants of Hagar, ignored the rest of Earth’s inhabitants and intended to persuade the world to his view. Paul went to Jerusalem to persuade the leaders then left intending to pursue his agendum alone.

Opinions of five contemporary Hebrews long after Jesus’ death

First, I think Jesus, the topic of a meeting about his afterdeath, was neutral to both Gentiles and Hebrews, talking to anyone he encountered about improving personal behavior to the good. He collaborated with Pharisees’ queries about the Torah and suggested rational improvements. His integrity is especially highlighted in civic defense before Pilate. I say civic, because Pilate abdicated his civil duty, yet Jesus civically called Pilate to reliable responsibility. Jesus said, in John 18:37, “The reason I have been born, the reason I have come into the world, is to bear witness to the truth. Every one who belongs to the truth listens to me.” I cannot evaluate that statement -- can only accept it. Pilate irresponsibly did not accept it. Both theGod and Jesus could have flourished on Pilate’s justice rather than his abdication. I think humankind could have, would have been better off.

                Jesus’ afterdeath is critical to a Hebrew meeting perhaps 16 years afterwards. Paul went to Jerusalem to meet with leaders including Peter, James, and John. Three Hebrews debated with elders (including John) how the few Gentile believers, were to be accepted into the community. Were they to be circumcised and required to follow the Torah? Three critical thoughts are reported in Acts 15. There seems to be 2 Hebrew minds and one novel agendum: replacing both Jesus’ community and Hebrew legacy with Paul’s community!

Second, Peter seems cautious if not collaborating. After elders (including John?) spoke for circumcision and the law, Peter said in Acts 15:8-11,

God, who knows the heart, bore them witness by giving the Ruach HaKodesh [NIV, controversially, has “Holy Spirit”] to them, just as he did to us; that is, he made no distinction between us and them, but cleansed their heart by trust.  So why are you putting God to the test now by placing a yoke on the neck of the talmidim [folowers of their teacher] which neither our fathers nor we have had the strength to bear? No, it is through the love and kindness of the Lord Yeshua [the Lord Jesus] that we trust and are delivered — and it’s the same with them.

Peter seems neutral to both Hebrews and believers and working to share the message. He had a history of Hebrew approval, including Jesus’ affirmation in Matthew 16:16-18, after Jesus’ identity question:

Shim‘on Kefa answered, “You are the Mashiach, the Son of the living God.” “Shim‘on Bar-Yochanan,” Yeshua said to him, “how blessed you are! For no human being revealed this to you, no, it was my Father in heaven.  I also tell you this: you are Kefa,” [which means ‘Rock,’] “and on this rock I will build my Community, and the gates of Sh’ol will not overcome it.

Paul, in building his church gave no thought to “my Community” expressed to Peter.

Third, Paul, then a Pharisee (conservative to the Torah), in Acts 15:12, seemed to, perhaps unintentionally, discount each Jesus, Hebrews, and Gentiles by reporting the self-styled miracles “God” performed through himself and Barnabas. He would clarify independence 5 years later in Romans 1 - 15:

From: Sha’ul, a slave of the Messiah Yeshua, an emissary because I was called and set apart for the Good News of God . . . I owe a debt to both civilized Greeks and uncivilized people, to both the educated and the ignorant . . . And now I urge you, brothers, by our Lord Yeshua the Messiah and by the love of the Spirit, to join me in my struggle by praying to God on my behalf that I will be rescued from the unbelievers in Y’hudah, and that my service for Yerushalayim will be acceptable to God’s people there.

The Greek word for “anointed one”, chrīstós, was used a couple hundred years before Jesus was born. Paul’s arrogance toward fellow Hebrews is shocking. Worse, in 2 Corinthians 12, Paul seems to juxtapose his influence against Jesus’ power:

I have to boast. There is nothing to be gained by it, but I will go on to visions and revelations of the Lord. I know a man in union with the Messiah who fourteen years ago was snatched up to the third heaven; whether he was in the body or outside the body I don’t know, God knows. . . . I am afraid that when I come again, my God may humiliate me in your presence, and that I will be grieved over many of those who sinned in the past and have not repented of the impurity, fornication and debauchery that they have engaged in.

Paul’s implication seems that Jesus’ civic influence is insufficient to God’s expectations to Paul. I think that’s to be expected from teaching divinity’s mystery rather than Jesus’ civic integrity.

                Fourth, returning to Acts 15, James, in Verses 19-20, offered a compromise, “My opinion is that we should not put obstacles in the way of the Goyim [non-Hebrew] who are turning to God.  Instead, we should write them a letter telling them to abstain from things polluted by idols, from fornication, from what is strangled and from blood.” The 4 constraints, while limiting chaos, seem a capricious lessening of the Torah. Incidentally, both James and Paul are concerned about fornication. I wonder if either of them share Jesus’ civic influence and Torah improvement in Matthew 19:3-8. (I oppose Paul’s neglect of the unity marriage creates, wherein bonding is a prayer; 1 Corinthians 7:5.)

                James is clear about Jesus in James 1:1, “From: Ya‘akov, a slave of God and of the Lord Yeshua the Messiah.” And in 2:1, “My brothers, practice the faith of our Lord Yeshua . . . ” again, a decade after Jesus’ death. Also, James advocated the Torah as improved by Jesus. In James 1:25, “But if a person looks closely into the perfect Torah, which gives freedom, and continues, becoming not a forgetful hearer but a doer of the work it requires, then he will be blessed in what he does.” Perhaps James writes about freedom from error and sin (intentional error according to James). And in James 2:10-11 he affirms Jesus’ urge to perfection, writing, “For a person who keeps the whole Torah, yet stumbles at one point, has become guilty of breaking them all. For the One who said, ‘Don’t commit adultery,’ also said, ‘Don’t murder.’” “The One” seems another name for theGod.

Conclusion

                It seems Paul constructed a utilization of Jesus’ life that increases chaos rather than rules the earth to the good, according to Genesis 1:26-28. But Jesus’ civic influence is apparent to some people in every generation. Civic citizens apply Jesus’ integrity to solve problems never before recognized or admitted. The church can benefit by listening to reliably responsible adults rather than trying to preserve traditions that do not appreciate humankind’s gradual discovery of the ineluctable truth. The unfortunate victims are the children, and Jesus suggests woe to people who harm them (Matthew 18:6).

Shock and happiness

                It is shocking to discover these controversies at age 80, after perhaps half my life’s leisure time was spent trying to understand the community I was reared in: Christianity within humankind. I am grateful to have known pastor George Haile and to have returned 2 years ago to UBC to attend Nomads Sunday school class, coffee room, and worship service. I dedicate my available time to aiding children, adolescents, and adults to comprehend the controversies and earn personal opinion early in life. I’m reminded of Niccolo` Machiavelli, in The Prince, Chapter XI -- one expression which I paraphrase:  Only a dreamer would imagine their opinion worthy of sharing. But if asked, what I would share follows.

                The advent of the Internet has made it possible for interested persons to ask creative questions, pursue answers, form opinions, and share them with fellow citizens, in order to listen to civic perspectives. Civic citizens may and can collaborate on the reality of the Bible’s confusions. The work can be enhanced by realizing that Hebrew literature is only 3900 years old and primitive writing is pertinent. While the Sumerian writing is worthy of study, so is literature from the Indus valley and from ancient China. Like Jesus, Confucius suggested that a human may and can pursue personal perfection.

                Thank you for reading this, and I would appreciate your comments and opinions from the study.

Phil Beaver, 2/10/2024, updated 2/11/2024

#USpreambler

Copyright©2024 by Phillip R. Beaver. All rights reserved. Permission is hereby granted for the publication of all or portions of this paper as long as this complete copyright notice is included.