The model of bottom-up change can be contrasted with the model of top-down change. Now, if you wanted to promote top-down change in the United States today, you would be well advised to get the NEW YORK TIMES on your side. In addition, you probably should get Ivy League academics on your side, because they are learned and articulate and influential.
This brings me to Yale's prolific learned literary critic Harold Bloom and his new book THE SHADOW OF A GREAT ROCK: A LITERARY APPRECIATION OF THE KING JAMES BIBLE (Yale University Press, 2011).
Bloom describes himself as "a Jew of Gnostic tendencies who neither trusts in the Covenant nor shares Christian faith in the Resurrection" (page 280). Earlier in his discussion of Paul the Apostle, Bloom argues that Paul's assertion that Abraham was justified by faith (pistis) and not by works is weird because "From Abraham to the present day, Jews are not required to have faith but to trust (emunah) in the Covenant" (page 268). Bloom also quotes the scholar Hans Joachim Schoeps as saying that "Paul had lost all understanding of the character of the Hebraic berith as a partnership involving mutual obligations" (quoted on page 264). As a result, Schoeps claims that Paul "failed to grasp the inner meaning of the Mosaic law, namely, that it is an instrument by which the covenant is realized" (quoted on page 264). What a wonderful indictment of a Jew who started off persecuting the upstart Christians!
In any event, I agree that the inner meaning of the Mosaic instructions is that the Mosaic law is an instrument by which the covenant is realized, because I have read those ancient Hebrew prophets who told the rulers and ruling class that this is basically the meaning of the covenant. In other words, if their rulers and ruling class wanted to be considered to be part of the covenant people, then they were to show this by doing their part to uphold the partnership of the covenant people involving mutual obligations toward one another, including those among them who could not take care of themselves.
But if this is basically what the covenant means, then we should conclude that all those so-called Christians who participated in the Holocaust or looked the other way demonstrated that they themselves were not part of the covenant people. But you could argue that spiritually all self-described Christians are Jews. However that may be, the covenant is surely one of the greatest ideas of all time.
Because I am not a Jew, and because I have never received any proper instruction in Jewish thought, I wish that Bloom had explained his statements, quoted above, regarding the Greek term pistis and the Hebrew term emunah. I enjoyed James L. Kinneavy's short book GREEK RHETORICAL ORIGINS OF CHRISTIAN FAITH (Oxford University Press, 1987).
I have also long been fascinated with Gabriel Marcel's distinction of belief-in (a person) and belief-that (a propositional statement is true). Over the centuries, Christians have been famous for formulating propositional statements into creeds (belief-that). However, in the final analysis, Christian religious faith is belief in God (belief-in). Marcel makes this distinction in the second volume of THE MYSTERY OF BEING (Henry Regnery, 1951, pages 68-84). Because of my fascination with Marcel's distinction, Bloom's brief comments about emunah meaning trust remind me of belief-in, as distinct from belief-that.
In his literary appreciation of the KJB, Bloom sets aside all questions of religious faith, trust in God, and supposed divine revelation in order to advance an aesthetic or literary appreciation, which is not necessarily contrary to having religious faith and/or trusting in God.
Next Page 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8
(Note: You can view every article as one long page if you sign up as an Advocate Member, or higher).
1
1
1
