One
day Jesus got into a boat with his disciples, and he said to them, ‘Let us go
across to the other side of the lake.’ So they put out, and while
they were sailing he fell asleep. A gale swept down on the lake, and the boat
was filling with water, and they were in danger. They went to him
and woke him up, shouting, ‘Master, Master, we are perishing!’ And he woke up
and rebuked the wind and the raging waves; they ceased, and there was a calm. He
said to them, ‘Where is your faith?’ They were afraid and amazed, and said to
one another, ‘Who then is this, that he commands even the winds and the water,
and they obey him?’
Luke 8:22-28 (NRSV)
Consider this story, often titled ‘Jesus calms a storm’. It
is a good example of the type of miraculous story that can send us and theologians into a
tizzy. As far as theologians go, there are three main approaches. First we have the literalist interpretation
that says never mind if it is impossible, it is there in the Bible so you will
just have to believe it is true, or else. Then along comes rational modernity
and liberal perspectives that say that since we know logically that things like
that don’t happen, that this must be a literary device or perhaps we can say
that the storm must have calmed just as Jesus began to speak. Thirdly we get
the postmodern, postliberal approach that stops looking for the ‘miraculous’ event
to be fundamentally true and sees the story in terms of its function in the
cultural-linguistic symbolic framework of the religious context.
All of these seem, at least for lived, practical purposes, unsatisfactory both as ways of understanding the story and for imagining it into our lives. All of these debates and interpretations focus attention
on the action, on what Jesus did, on the truth or significance of that action
of calming the storm. But if we step back we might wonder why we persist in
trying to make sense of the story at all. I think one reason why we bother to struggle
with a story like this could be because it holds some sort of power, because we very
much want it to be true for our minds
in the same way it resonates with some echo of truth in our hearts. We may want it to
be true because despite ourselves we long for there to be inexplicable mystery
and wonder in the world. We may want it to be true because we both know and feel
that if this story is true it means we are safe.
The place where the point is missed with stories like
this is in placing the action or event at the centre. I think that theological explanations and imagined versions of this story stumble unless we see that this is not primarily a story about what
Jesus did but a story about what Jesus did. It is a story about Jesus, a story about God.
So, then, what if we read and imagine the story that way? Instead
of focusing on what Jesus did, or on the storm, what if we focused on
Jesus? As Jesus asks, ‘Where is your faith?’ What if we imagine the scene in our
minds, the stormy waves, the boat, the disciples in the boat, Jesus, then pause
there, stop there, even before he calms the storm. What if we pause and turn our
eyes upon Jesus, placing him at the centre of our imagined version of the scene. Since, unlike the disciples, we know how the story ends, what if we then use the benefit of hindsight, resting assured in that moment, with that focus, that
he will calm the storm, both then and now. What comes next? It's wondrously unpredictable and perhaps it is
different for each of us and on each imagining. But in pausing there for a while all the rest may, in any case, grow
strangely dim.
2 comments:
So Emma, do you believe that Jesus existed historically, in the form that is contained within the Bible?
I have been struggling with this, and I wrote about it a few weeks ago, about how I don't know anymore, but that how in a sense he still seems as real to me and what he was going on about still seems as real as well - even down to redemption - but I'm just not sure how I sit with that anymore. It's very confusing. But then reading your post here I have that same feeling - that to all intents and purposes it really doesn't matter if Jesus was real or not. Because he has the same effect whether he was or whether he wasn't, whether an archetype or a real historical person.
I would just prefer the latter, that's all.
But that may possibly be beside the point, and please ignore all of this if it cuts in sideways on what you were saying. I love this post :)
Hi Sue, good questions. I think the question of whether Jesus was an actual historical person and the question of how he's portrayed in the Bible are distinct. After all, it's not an autobiography. I think for me 'belief' is becoming less and less about facts as such. I don't think I could do justice to the question in a comment but I agree with you that it's less about whether he and the stories about him are historically accurate and more about the effect. I do think there is Truth in the stories, and I think Jesus did live and breathe as a human being at that time and that's probably about all I could say with any certainty. But then, it's never really about certainty in this area of things. I think belief is less about believing six impossible things before breakfast. I think God wouldn't want us to switch off our brains, he might just want us to switch on our hearts, and use both together.
Post a Comment