20. - Philippians 3:10
"All I care for is to know Christ, to experience the power of his resurrection, to share in his sufferings . . . "[NEB]
The final silence in our "Top 20" is one that resonates throughout the entire record of early Christian correspondence, but we can focus on it through one passage in Paul. This striking and pervasive silence, perhaps the most telling of them all, can be summed up in one question: Where are the holy places? ..Once again, such considerations render unacceptable the standard rationalization that Paul was uninterested in the earthly life of Jesus. Moreover, when Paul undertakes to carry his mission to the gentiles, surely he would wantand needto go armed with the data of Jesus' life, with memories of the places Jesus had frequented, ready to answer the inevitable questions his new audiences would ask in their eagerness to hear all the details about the man who was the Son of God and Savior of the world. Instead, what does he do? By his own account in Galatians, he waits three years following his conversion before making a short visit to Jerusalem, .
Why is it only in the 4th century that pieces of "the true cross" begin to surface? Why is it left to Constantine to set up the first shrine on the supposed mount of Jesus' death, and to begin the mania for pilgrimage to the holy sites that has persisted to this day? Why would someone in the first 100 years of the movement not similarly seek to walk on the same ground that the Son of God himself had so recently walked on? The total absence of such things in the first hundred years of Christian correspondence is perhaps the single strongest argument for regarding the entire Gospel account of Jesus' life and death as nothing but literary fabrication.
1. Silences in passage/challenge to a historical Jesus:
Holy places and relics are associated with Jesus' life.
2. Relevancy within context:
The passage refers to neither holy places or relics, so it has clearly been chosen to indicate a mindset of Paul's which is contrary to interest in such things. Let's examine the passage Doherty provides to see if we can better understand Paul's mindset:
Paul begins the chapter warning his readers of those who preach adherence to the Jewish law of circumcision. He then recounts how he was a strict follower of the law until he discovered that righteousness from God depends on faith in Christ. (3:9). The goal of knowing Christ is resurrection from the dead. (3:10) Paul is looking ahead: "13..but one thing I do: forgetting what lies behind and reaching forward to what lies ahead, 14I press on toward the goal for the prize of the upward call of God in Christ Jesus." Then in verse 19 he says that those who live as enemies of the cross of Christ have "set their minds on earthly things."
Are Jesus' tomb, cross, chalice, clothes, hometown, birthplace, etc.. earthly things that do little to help Paul look forward? They might be. Doherty claims that "if .. the places and relics of Jesus' recent life had been in the air..we would find an inevitable orientation of thought and expression. Such a phenomenon would have been unavoidable." This is Doherty's opinion. Holy places and relics are important to some people. To others, they simply aren't. Doherty's statement may or may not be applicable to Paul.
3. Related information in other early writings:
I think a person can have a great interest in the person of Jesus without having an interest in the holy places or relics. At the same time I don't think ALL people interested in Jesus would have no such interest. There would be interest.
I know of only one reference that implies knowledge/belief of/in in a holy place in the early writings Doherty is looking at herein.
Hebrews 13:12 "12Therefore Jesus also, that He might sanctify the people through His own blood, suffered outside the gate." As mentioned in another answer the author strongly implies that it was outside the gate of Jerusalem. It may be that the author saw that as a holy place since he was comparing Jesus' crucifixion to sacrifice offered by priests in the holy temple. But, he doesn't explicitly discuss it as a known holy place people visited, nor one that he personally cared about.
I indicated in the beginning of this review that I find argument for silence to be of little value without a good example of a passage where a mention would be expected. Doherty seems so convinced that an "air" about Jesus would be so strong that traditions regarding holy places and relics would inevitably have arisen, and quickly, and that mention by the early writers would be inevitable. Since relics and holy places did eventually find their way into Christianity, I grant that it is human nature for some followers to find value in such things, so his impression is at least reasonable in principle. So, I will make an exception and respond to his comments in part:
1. Early Christians were expecting the imminent Day of the Lord. Some, Paul tells us, had stopped working in anticipation of it. The people believed that Jesus' death was the fulfillment of God's plan leading up to an imminent unveiling of the kingdom. The view was forward, not backwards. Pilgrimages and relics are reminders of past events and serve their purpose better when there is no expectation of an immediate re-emergence of the one on whom they are based.
2. I would also expect a lesser interest in relics and places by those who knew Jesus personally: Traditionally this would include those who authored the books of 1 Peter, 123 John, Revelations, James, and Jude. This leaves few early writings outside the gospels in which we might expect a mention: And none of Hebrews, the Didache, 1 Clement, the Epistle of Barnabas, and the Gospel of Thomas have a tone that seem befitting to a discussion of visits to holy places and the relishing of relics. Again, where does such a mention fit?
3. Just because an early writing doesn't mention holy places or relics, doesn't mean they didn't exist. There is evidence that St. Peter's house in Capernaum, the same one Jesus stayed in during his ministry according to the gospels, was considered special early on: A quote from http://www.christusrex.org/www1/ofm/sites/TScpsyEN.html "Finally one should note that in all of the village of Capernaum, of which a great part has been excavated, this is the only room which has plaster on the walls and floor. All this points to the conclusion that Peter's house, containing the room which was venerated, had already been set apart as a meeting-place for the community by the second-half of the first century A. D."
4. Doherty says Paul doesn't mention Jerusalem in connection with Jesus. He mentions Zion, the name for Jerusalem, in connection with Jesus twice:
Rom 9:33 "33just as it is written, "Behold, I lay in Zion a stone of stumbling and a rock of offense, and he who believes in him will not be disappointed."
Rom 11:26 "And so all Israel will be saved, just as it is written: "The deliverer will come from Zion; he will remove ungodliness from Jacob."
1 Peter also quotes 9:33. Hebrews also strongly implies that Jesus was crucified just outside the gate of Jerusalem.
5. Doherty downplays the effect that a threat of or actual persecution may have played on preventing visits to places, or mentioning them in letters often read public in. This is debatable.
6. There is a reasonable explanation for Paul not going to Jerusalem for 3 years: 1. He was feared and distrusted by those who knew of his prior persecutions. (Acts 9:26) 2. He already had learned enough about Jesus to convert, and had access to Christians elsewhere.
7. Paul doesn't say why he stayed with Peter for 15 days. Did they study scripture together? Did they discuss revelations or the life of Jesus? Did they visit Calvary? Paul doesn't say one way or the other. What a great silence this appears to be! Should we expect that? Even if we shouldn't, it is there.
8. Why is it that with very few exceptions it took 300-400 years for relics and pilgrimages to be reported when the gospels had been believed to be historical for some 200 years already? If Jesus was believed to be historical, and Doherty is right about expectations, we certainly should have heard of many shrines, pilgrimages, holy places, and relics by 200AD.
9. What holy places and relics would have survived and been accessable right after the Jewish War? The number of Christians in that area had greatly diminished. Any early writings in Judea would have been destroyed. We don't know for certain which of the non-Paul early writings were prior to that time. Paul's earlier writings were to churches far away.
10. Let's look at some of Dohery's suggestions, with my comments:
1. The birthplace of Jesus. Maybe some would be interested. Maybe.
2. Nazareth. Sounds good, but in reality what excitement would there be from visiting a nearly non-existent city inhabited probably by many poor people?
3. Sites of his preaching. Ok.
4. Calvary, the hill on which he was crucified. Most astonishing, according to Doherty. Ok, but if it was still being used for crucifixions, that takes away a lot of the allure. Think of going to the site of a hanging, only to find out another hanging is taking place. Kind of ruins the moment.
5. Upper room where he held his Last Supper. Ok, but maybe the family would like to have some peace and quiet!
6. The tomb. ok, good one.
7. Jesus' clothes. Did he have a large wardrobe?
8. Things he used in his everyday life. Like what?
9. A cup from the Last Supper (the holy grail). Would we expect the cup to stay intact more than a few years?
10. A "single nail with Jesus" flesh on it. Serously? Who went and pulled out the nail? Or even knew where the cross was?
11. A thorn from the bloody crown. Sure, I'll take a thorn, please.
12. The centurion's spear. Did he leave it in Jesus' side? I doubt that.
13. A piece of cloth from garments left over from the foot of the cross. Was a piece left over? At what point would we expect people to go back to the site to look for some cloth?
14. A piece of the true cross. How do we know anyone could get a piece? Maybe they re-used them, or burned them, or threw them in a pile somewhere.
11. Doherty presumes that writers would have "made occasion for working them (mention of holy places, etc.) into their letters". This objection is implied for all of his top 20 silences. I'll address this further in the final conclusion.
4. Conclusion
It is true that there is no mention of holy places and relics, though Doherty's passage is too general to expect a mention of such things.. The author of Hebrews implies that the place of crucifixion was a holy place, but says nothing of visitations to it. We have some evidence that the place Jesus stayed at in Capernaum was a special meeting place from very early on, so there may have been some additional unmentioned veneration of places and objects associated with Jesus, which history has not preserved. Even so, there are a number of reasons that might reasonably explain this silence.
|
