The Letter to the Hebrews, (not written by St. Paul, nor one of his disciples), is a section of the New Testament I confess I’ve never taken much into account, but I had some text going around in my brain recently and couldn’t remember its place so I looked it up, and lo! it was from Hebrews. In the Authorised Version the quotes I was looking for appear thus:
Chapter 2 :18 For that he himself hath suffered being tempted, he is able to succour them that are tempted. And 4:15 For we have not an high priest (Jesus) which cannot be touched with the feeling of our infirmities but was in all points tempted like we are, yet without sin.
The RSV has (2:18) Because he himself was tested by what he suffered, he is able to help those who are being tested And 4:15 For we do not have a high priest who is unable to sympathize with our weaknesses but we have one who in every respect has been tested as we are, yet without sin.
It is interesting to notice the interpretive differences, but not something to get hung up on. The Jerusalem Bible uses tempted rather than tested; tempted is a normal translation of the Greek word used here. As the context is regarding not giving way to sin, for me, the use of ‘tempted’ works best.
In theological discourse and in parish worship Jesus is spoken of as the Son of God far more than Jesus as Man, the exemplary human, the acme of what it means to be human. My concern here is that this way of presenting him tends to obscure the fact of his manhood and that is a significant attenuation of the reality. Accenting his humanity at the expense of his divinity or his divinity at the expense of his humanity, either way, technically is heresy. My point is not to debate heresies but to suggest that, historically and continuously that he was the Son of God has figured more largely in the teaching. While for earlier times that was good, useful, appropriate, I want to question whether it is useful today. The concept Son of God may have very little meaning to people outside of the Church who live intellectually in a far vaster Universe than their forebears.
These texts from Hebrews become very important as we restate or re-evaluate his humanity. They raise important questions about what it means to be human and what it means to give way to sin or not to give way to sin. The man Jesus we are usually presented with appears to be so far above temptation that, once his sojourn in the wilderness was over, before his ministry began, he was done with the struggle; temptation a thing of the past.
We have to remember that the Evangelists were writing post-Resurrection, they knew the end of the story and they were wanting to promote this new faith in all its glory. Presenting anything like an on-going struggle may have worked against their message. Maybe there wasn’t an on-going struggle and if there was, the chances of Jesus broadcasting the fact are pretty slim. Even we ordinary folk don’t go one about our spiritual conflicts and confusions, they are intensely private matters between us and God.
If the struggle was not a regular aspect of his life, then we have to reconsider the meaning of his humanity. Possibly it is now more vital than in ages past, that we focus on the humanity of Christ. He is the model, according to Hebrews he is also our aid and support in our struggle to be human. In order for this to be more than a pious platitude we have to ponder his humanity not denude it of struggle, growth, development. These are what account for the ‘fullness of the stature of Christ’. Struggle, growth, confusion, these are all part of the process of maturing as a person. He didn’t, surely, get there by being a static image stepped out of a stained-glass window.
There are some bits in the gospel accounts that sound odd and need an excessive amount of ‘spiritualizing’ to make them fit; the cursing of the fig tree is a case in point, (see my blog on this story). Perhaps these instances of words of Jesus that were heard, not understood but included because they were remembered, are moments when we glimpse something of his process. For example, we are not entirely comfortable with his flicking off his family (Mark3:31) but his preference for those who truly hear him, over the claims of filial duty signals to us the choice of the priority of vocation over the comfort of familiarity or doing the ‘right’, the ‘normal’ thing.
The Hebrews texts certainly suggest that he was subject to temptation throughout his life, “just as we are”, but just like us I am sure it wasn’t a question of whether ‘to be naughty or not’. We are not talking about Sunday School ideas of sin, he, as have we, ‘put away childish things’. It is more a question of taking up, daily, the responsibility for what that day brings and responding with ‘our best selves’ or according to our highest value.
I have a tee-shirt with the slogan “Being a self-responsible adult every day seems a bit excessive”; that is a common enough feeling, though not always felt with any humour! The demand of ‘being splendid’ can feel a bit much; our history is too much present, often. Surely the more highly evolved one is the less our history interferes with our present, being true to our best selves becomes our norm; choosing the highest and the best comes so naturally it is no longer conscious choice. And it is doubtless true that the opportunities for stepping back are more severe, more demanding, eventually they are a matter of life and death. At every point the requirement of oneself is to make the responsible choice. At this level I do not think it is ‘obedience’ as such, to an external source. The obedience is to one’s commitment, to stay true to the calling to which one has consented.
It may be remembered that Luke wants to assure us that Jesus was capable of an exceptional level of discernment from a very early age (Luke 2:49) but that little story raises loads of textual issues and may be, as some commentators suggest, “represents another retrojection of Christological faith, born of post-resurrection days, being pushed back to an earlier phase of Jesus’ existence”. (This quote comes from the Anchor Bible Commentary on Luke I-IX by Joseph A. Fitzmyer p 437). This is a constant reminder of the point I made earlier that whenever we read the Gospel stories, we are encountering what it meant to know that the man Jesus had risen from death and been seen by many of his followers, not only Mary Magdalene, and other women, but, according to Paul, in excess of 500 people (1 Cor 15:6). Each one of whom, we can assume, had their own recollection of the event and the stories that circulated would have been as many and as diverse as there were people.
In conclusion I want to suggest that though the term ‘Son of God’ may not have any real meaning for the average, non-church-going person today. Raising consciousness, living one’s full potential, in Jungian terms, striving for individuation, whatever words one uses to convey this quest for a greater reality, these ideals make more sense to increasing numbers of people the world over. The human Jesus, as he is presented in the Gospels shows us the full realization of humanity, gives us pointers as to the way to go, and lest anyone should think this is purely a blokesy thing I would point out the he was known to be the incarnation of the Sophia of God. By historical necessity he was in the fleshly form a man but in his being he was in perfect balance, both the masculine and feminine aspects combined to encompass his full humanity.
To speak of the balance of masculine and feminine as an ideal of human maturity is a fairly recent understanding. In the Middle Ages, when the Virgin Birth was unquestioned as a physical fact, some women got the point that his whole humanity was female since there was no human father’s contribution to his being so, being women, they were closer to the reality of Jesus’ life. And then there were devout men, who rather than arguing against that view, in their desire to follow the humility of Christ, worked hard to prove they could be better women than the real, physical women! Clearly, getting the balance of masculine and feminine as a manifestation of full humanity is an ideal rarely to be encountered outside of the Gospel stories. Laying aside centuries of traditional teaching and studying the stories with fresh eyes, in the desire to discover more of the humanity of Jesus can be a rewarding and surprising venture.
(See my book blog on The Reclaiming of Wisdom for a fuller discussion of Sophia, the Wisdom of God)).