The main point of divergence between Jesus' theology and the theology of other religious groups in first century Palestine was Jesus' understanding of the mystical power of forgiveness. Jesus' understanding of forgiveness is the key that unlocks the meaning of the Kingdom teachings, including the parables.
 |
| The Prodigal Son (or . . . Redemption Doesn't Happen Overnight). Photo credit JAT 2015 |
Jesus' teachings on matters other than forgiveness don't sound a whole lot different than the teachings of other groups. Jesus, like the Pharisees -- and, indeed, like most religious groups of the time -- believed in the importance of ethics, moral choices, and obedience to a code of moral conduct because, well, it's the right thing to do. So Jesus certainly didn't invent the idea of moral codes. But he did build on the radical teachings of the Jewish author we call Job to present a minority understanding of how to be in relationship with God. The minority understanding of Jesus (and Job before him) presented a model for relationship with God that was built on forgiveness (not mercy, not atonement, and not contract law); on agape/love (not obedience, not fear, and not contract law); on a "thinking" faith (not blind faith, not prophecy, and not revelation); on humbleness (not religious humility, not religious salvation, and not on status addiction);on radical inclusiveness (not clan chosenness, not honour-shame cultural norms, and not sectarian segregation); on courage (not fate, not predestination, and not abdication); and finally on the totally crazy idea that God is not a lone male figure (YHWH) but two distinct and separate figures, one male and one female (YHWH and his Asherah?), who together are the One God and make all decisions together based on mutual forgiveness, agape, thinking faith, humbleness, radical inclusiveness, and courage. As above, so below.
The parable of the prodigal son reflects Jesus' theology, Jesus' understanding of how we can be in full relationship with God during our lives as human beings.
Jesus' parables always ran counter to the Wisdom literature of his time -- what biblical scholar Michael Coogan once called "anti-Wisdom Wisdom" in his commentary on Job. It was Wisdom literature (currents of which ran through most major world religions of the time) which taught that obedience to divinely revealed laws and cultural norms would guarantee "happiness" and eventual acceptance into the heavens (in whatever form "the heavens" were envisioned in a particular religion). Those who willfully disobeyed God's laws (again, in whatever form they were envisioned) would surely be punished -- and rightly so. Wisdom literature (which was already ancient by the time Jesus lived) insisted that Materialist laws of cause-and-effect governed all Creation (including God's own choices) so stability, order, safety, and happiness could be built into a society by observing Creation's laws in scientific ways and then applying reason, justice, and piety to the whole affair.
Of course, the world doesn't really work this way, and Jesus knew it. He saw a completely different paradigm in operation in the world around him, a paradigm that blended both Materialist and non-Materialist laws of science in complex and intertwined ways. His parables reflect the anti-Wisdom Wisdom paradigm he observed. He didn't invent what he saw. He simply allowed himself to see what was already there. He allowed himself to hear what God was already saying. And then he tried to share with others the process of emotional, intellectual, spiritual, and physical change that would allow them to willingly and voluntarily enter "the kingdom of the heavens" as Jesus himself had done -- as any of us can do, according to Jesus (though it's a lot of hard work!).
The Kingdom parables are confusing, messy, non-linear, multi-layered, and filled with anti-Wisdom Wisdom because life is confusing, messy, non-linear, multi-layered, and filled with all sorts of irrational (but totally wonderful) emotions like love and gratitude and devotion and forgiveness and the courage to change.
Paul didn't agree with any of this, but that's another story.
