ottilie.org blog

The first time that we  learn that, quite possibly, Jesus did not exist was a handful of Liberal Protestant German scholars in the 19th.century.   This did not catch on but with Rudolf Bultmann and his disciples in the 20th century the idea gained ground that we can know very little, if anything, about the earthly Jesus.

What are the counter-arguments?

• As mentioned elsewhere on this Website, there is very much better manuscript evidence for the existence of Jesus than there is for Caesar, Livy, Pliny. Plato , Tacitus , Aristotle etc..   The earliest copy we have for the New Testament is dated 100-250 years after its composition whereas for the above the gap is 850-1400 years.
• Pagan writers who mention Jesus are Pliny, Suetonius and Tacitus.   Most scholars accept this view but there  is a minority view (e.g., from Professor George Wells) that these writers were simply recording what they had learned from or about Christians.
• A stronger card is Josephus, a Pharisee writing in the latter part of the 1st.century A.D..   There is debate about what he actually wrote about Jesus but most scholars accept that he wrote about Jesus and believed in His existence.
• In the modern world there is no shortage of Jewish scholars who believe in the historical Jesus.   In fact, many of these compete to reclaim Jesus as one of theeir own.   Thus we have Klausner, Montefiore, Vermes,  Maccoby,Flusser, Goldstein, Goodman,Jacobs, Lapide, Baeck,Ben-Chorin,Sandmel, Schonfield etc,
• What about the originality of the Jesus’ teaching?   A liberal scholar, Professor E.P. Sanders states that there are sayings in the gospels which could not conceivably have been created in the early Church: e.g.,”Jesus said to him, ‘Why do you call me good ?’ “.
• Ernst Kasemann says of the 1st, 2nd and 4th antitheses of the Sermon on the Mount (not being angry; not lusting; not swearing) that they could not be regarded as normal Judaism, since it could not tolerate such sayings.
• Professor Geza Vermes, a Jewish scholar, has this to say:   “A negative, but significant, feature of Jesus’ representation of God consists in the absence of any royal figure”.
• The kernel of Jesus’ message was the proclamation of the Kingdom of God.   There were very few analogiess in the Judaism of His day.   The ministry of Jesus shows that who He and what He did were closely related to His message of the Kingdom.   In this there is clear blue water between Him and other prophetss and charismatic figures in Jewish history.
• Professor B.Gartner has drawn attention to 5 feaatures of Jesus’ ministry:  He acted in the place of God in forgiving sins; He considered Himself to be greater than Moses in separating the rule of God from acceptance of the O.T. Law; He  claimed divine authority to exorcise demons; He spoke authoritatively of God’s judgement on sinners; and in His activity He manifested the actual presence of the Kingdom.
• Dr. Christopher Rowlands speaking of Jesus’ uniqueness, says that the parables found in the gospels contain teaching which is neither the minutiae of the lawyer nor the ethical maxims of the sage.   (For fuller information on the parables see elsewhere on this website)
• Professor J.Riches states that Jesus strikes a subversive note with the call of the disciples and appointment of theTwelve to sit on the twelve thrones of Israel
• It is contended that St. Paul did not know about the earthly ministry of Jesus.Consider the following:
  1. Paul said that Jesus was descended from Abraham (Gal 3:16)
  2. He said that He was a Son of David (Rom 1:3)
  3. He was born of a woman, born under the Law (Gal 4:4)
  4. He welcomed people (Rom 15:5,7)
  5. His lifestyle  was one of humility and service (Phil 2:7,8)
  6. He was abused and insulted (Rom 15:3)
  7. He had a brother named James (Gal 1:19) and other unnamed brothers (1 Cor:5)
  8. He was betrayed (1 Cor 11:23)
  9. He was killed by Jews of Judaea (1 Thess 2:14-5)

• For the uniqueness of Jesus’ healings see “Miracles” elsewhere on the Website.
• With regard to pre-Christian antecedents of the after-life Professor G.R. Osborne states: For Israel the after-life is Sheol – a rather shadowy existence; immortality; national resurrection; an incorruptible existence; etc..   It will be seen that none of this tallies with the redemptive death and rising again of one man,
• Professor Geza Vermes refers to the various strands of Messianism among Jesus’ contemporaries:  The Messiah will be victor over the Gentiles, a saviour and restorer of Israe; will appear in trappings of royalty; will be associated with the image of the Priest-King; will be a Prophet Messiah; and will be slain as an unsuccessful commander-in-chief of Israel in the first phase of the war against the final enemy.   With the possible exception of the Prophet Messiah Jesus’ concept of Messiahship is quite different.
• If  the gospels are a concoction of various mythical tales, it is surprising that the authors should have portrayed themselves in such dark colours.
• One issue which embroiled the infant Church was the question of tongues.   Why did Jesus not speak about this, if it was to be so important in the Church’s life, assuming He was a mythical figure?

Jesus And World Religions

In this article a comparison between the World Religions and Jesus is made.   This shows the similarities and dissimilarities

There are basically two typessof religion:  those who believe in Resurrection and those who believe in Reincarnation.

MONOTHEISM: Jews, Christians and Muslims are monotheists and believers in Resurrection

• For all three faith means an unconditionally trusting commitment to and reliance on God and his word by the whole person here and now
• Jews, Christians and Muslims are at one in their faith in the God of history.   God certainly transends history but is immanent in it.
• For all three religions God is someone they can talk to.
• For all three God  is a gracious and merciful God.
• All three are  the joint representatives before the world of faith in the one God

JUDAISM: Jesus was born and brought up in Judaism and longed for His native soil to accept Him.   There were diivergencies between Him and most of the leaders of Judaism.   These came to a head on Calvary, where, in Christian eyes, Jesus died for the sins of the people.   The idea of His resurrection was a bridge too far for Judaism.   His earliest disciples and some after the Resurrection were Jews.

• The two religions share a belief in one God; the Resurrection at the “end of the age”; the Old Testament…
• Some Jewish scholars and quite a large number of liberal rabbis speak highly of Jesus, going as far as reclaiming Him for Judaism.   They generally accept Him as prophet but not the Messiah
• Christians have little difficulty in accepting the Jews’ Bible – the Old Testament, which Jesus also accepted.
• Unlike Moses (and Muhammad) Jesus was not a detailed legislaator

ISLAM: Mohammed himself can to a certain extent be viewed as a witness for Jesus

• He reminds the Jews that Jesus fits into the continuity of Jewish salvation history.
• He conspiicuously refrains from passing over Jesus in silence.
• Muhammad is said to have had a supernatural birth,to have worked miracles. to have been without sin and to have gone up to heaven.
• Jesus (to whom Muhammad bore witness) has a message of lasting importance for Muslims.
• Jesus is the most important prophet after Muhammad in Islam.
• The Koran calls Jesus “the word” of God and the bearer of the “gospel”
• The free spirits of  Islamic mysticism found in Jesus not only the example of piety, love and asceticism but also the Christ, who exemplifies fulfilled humanity.;

HINDUISM: A religious tradition developed over several thousand years and intertwined with the history and social system of India.   It does not trace its origins to a particular founder; has no prophets; no set creed and no particular institutional structure.   It emphasises the right way of living rather than a set of doctrines and thus embraces diverse religious beliefs and practices.

• For purposes of comparison Krishna is selected here.   According to Hindu tradition, he is eighth incarnation, in human form, of the deity, Vishnu.   He was a great hero and ruler.   He delivered the great moral discourse of the “Bhagavad Gita”.
• Jesus is not, like Krishna, one revelation or incarnation of God among many.   From a Hindu point of view he might be easily absorbed into the dynamic system of Indian mythology and cultic practice.   Some Hindus do this – often in a spirit of great tolerance and understanding.
• If Christ’s state of being (as seen by Hinduism) is to be preserved, then He would need to be placed in relation to Brahma himself. – the personified creator god.   As seen  by Christianity He would need to be placed higher.

BUDDHISM: A tradition of thought and practice originating in India c.2’500 years ago and now a world religion, deriving from the teachings of Buddha, who is regarded as one of a continuing series of enlightened beings.   A central tenet, in Hinduism, is the law of karma, by which good and evil deeds result in appropriate reward or punishment in this life or in a succession of rebirths.

• A number of broad ethical are common to Buddhism and the entire Jewish-Christian-Islamic tradition: Do not kill, do not steal, do not lie, do not indulgein sexual vice
• Jesus shows a greater similarity to Gautama than to, say, Muhaammad, the warrior and statesman.
• Like Gautama, Jesus was a wandering preacher, poor, homeless unpretentious, who experienced a crucial turning-point in his life that moved him to go out and proclaim his message.
• Like Gautama, in preaching that message Jesus did not use a sacred language that had become unintelligible but the colloquial language of His area.
• Like Gautama, Jesus points out a way of redemption from self-seeking, fallenness, blindness,   This liberation is achieved through religious experience and inner transformation: a thoroughly practical way to salvation.
• Like Gautama, Jesus occupied no formal office.

It is not intended in the foregoing to present indifferentism.   Rather it is hoped that there will be a greater appreciation of World Religions: their similarities and dissimilarities.

Through Christian eyes God loves all His creation and longs for them to be saved.   Where Christian and other Faiths co-incide that must be cause  for rejoicing, it means that God’s will is being enacted.   There remains the need for full Christian enlightenment.

All four gospels report Jesus as making reference to a future destruction of the Temple., an event which would seem to assume the Fall of Jerusalem.

If the evangelists had been in the business of retrojecting prophecies about the future of Jerusalem and the Temple on to Jesus, they gave very little space to the subject and did it in an amateurish way.    This last point is corroborated by the following:

1. There is no reference to the barricading of the city with a four-mile wall.
2. There is no reference to the civil war going on within the forces of the Jews, which facilitated a Roman victory
3. There is no reference to the famine within the city.
4. There is no mention of the destruction of the Temple  by fire.

• But how could Jesus know what was going to happen?  There are several points here.
• It is fascinating to find scientists talking and writing about “the arrows of time” and “reversing time”.   The basic laws of Physics, the reductionist equations, are almost perfectly symmetrical between past and future.
• Einstein said: “To us convinced physicists the distinction between past, present and future is an illusion, though a persistent one”.
• Forty-six years ago, the prominent British Humanist, Professor Eysenck , a psychiatrist wrote:   “Unless there is a gigantic conspiracy involving some thirty University departments all over the world, and several hundred highly respected scientists in various fields, many of them originally sceptical to the claims of the psychical researchers, the only conclusion that the unbiased observer can come to is that there does exist a small number of people who obtain knowwledge existing in other people’s minds or in the outer world by means as yet unknown to science”.
• Predictions of future events are well-known and, in a number of cases, well-documented and corroborated by researchers:  e.g.,air disasters, earthquakes, road accidents, ships sinking.
• Two books which provide valuable reading opportunities in this field are “Forbidden Science” by Richard Milton and “Visions of the Future” by Dr. Keith Hearne.

• The practice of cleansing by water was known in some pre-Christian religions, where it represented transformation, promising immortality or regeneration.
• In the Jewish tradition people were immersed in water seven days after initiation.
• John the Baptist and the Dead Sea Sect practised baptism.
• Baptism is rarely mentioned in the gospels.   Jesus is said to have baptised and to have committed baptism to His disciples.
• The necessity of baptism is stated in Jn.3:5:  “Unless a man is born again of water and the spirit, he cannot enter the Kingdom of God”.
• In Acts baptism is explicitly reported of almost every individual or group who accepts Christianity.
• Although there seem to be exceptions, the main thrust is that the Spirit is given in baptism.
• For Paul baptism is the believer’s experience of the passion, death and resurrection of Jesus in him/herself.
• By baptism the Christian is washed, sanctified and made righteous in the name of Jesus.
• Christ sanctifies the Church, cleansing it by the washing of water in the word.   By this experience the believer is reborn, regenerated.
• The believer is redeemed through the blood of Jesus Christ and the water of baptism, to which the Spirit testifies.
• Baptism effects the remission of all sins.
• In case of emergency baptism by water can be replaced by baptism of desire or baptism by martyrdom.
• According to Scripture perfect love possesses justifying power: Luke 7:47:”Many sins are forgiven her because she has loved much”; Jn.14:21: “He that loves me shall be loved of my Father and I will love him and will manifest myself to him”  and to the dying thief who had confessed Him at the last: “This day you will be with me in paradise”.
• Baptism by martyrdom.   This signifies martyrdom by confession of the Christian faith on the part of an unbaptised person.
• Jesus attests the justifying power of martyrdom: Mt.10:33: “Everyone therefore that shall confess me before men, I will also confess him before my Father who is in heaven”; Mt10:39: “…..he that shall lose his life for me shall find it”.
• Infant baptism cannot be proved from Scripture.   From the earliest documents outside the N.T. we have references to the baptism of children by inference.    Polycarp and Justin Martyr attest to this and their references are to the 1st.century AD.   Other, slightly later, Fathers attest to infant baptism.
• St. Paul in his first letter to the Corinthians mentions “baptism for the dead”.   He neither supports nor condemns this practice.   We hear nothing more of the practice until the Mormons introduced  it.   They carry out detailed research to identify every human being who has ever lived with the aim of baptising them in this or the after-life by proxy.

“Binding And Loosing”

In Mt.16:13 f. Peter is given  the power of “binding and loosing”, a power that is also given to the other apostles in 18:18.

What does it mean?

The apostles are given the power to bind or loose on earth and this will be bound or loosed in heaven.

Binding and loosing are rabbinical terms that can refer to binding the devil in exorcism; to the juridical acts of excommunication; and to defining decision-making.

Peter was singled out for leadership by Jesus and so he was in the very early days of the infant Church.   We learn from the Gospel of Thomas, however, that the key role is accorded to James, the leader of the Jewish Christians.   For Gentile Christians St. Paul would have been the preferred candidate.

Do Animals Have Soul?

St. Francis told animals to praise God,   To do this they would need souls.

Pope John Paul II on one occasion stated: “Animals, too, have souls”.   It is only fair to point out that he meant something less than saved eternal souls.

In Rom.8:18f. St. Paul writes: “I think that we suffer in this life can never be compared to the glory, as yet unrevealed, which is waiting for us.   The whole creation is eagerly waiting for God to reveal his sons.   It was not for any fault on the part of creation that it was made unable to attain its purpose, it was made so by God; but creation still retains the hope of being freed, like us, from its slavery to decadence, to enjoy the same freedom and glory as the children of God.   From the beginning till now the entire creation, as we know, has been groaning in one great act of giving birth”.

In the new heaven and new earth Isaiah forsees:  “The wolf lives with the lamb, the panther lies down with the kid, calf and lion cub feed together with a little boy to lead them.   The cow and the bear make friends, their young lie down together.   The lion eats straw like the ox…..”

Enough has been said to say that in the after-life, whether in heaven or the new heaven and new earth, there will be animals.   This could encompass pets who have bonded so closely with their owners on earth.

Contraception

Scripture seems to say little about the subject.   It is to St. Augustine that the Church through the centuries owes its traditionally negative attitude to contraception.

Most Christian churches to-day accept and practise contraception.   The Catholic Church, however, stands aloof, although it has to be said that, where a choice exists,most Catholics opt for contraception.

Those who support the Catholic view point to the dramatic rise in pre-marital sex, the rise in sexually transmitted diseases including Aids, and occasional side-effects of the pill as evidence for their view.   Critics point out that these points do not affect the case for contraceptive practice,in marriage, whether by means of the pill or the  condom.

Regarding political abuse, it is instructive to note that, apart from Hitler’s abuses, in the mid-40s 30 of the  United States allowed mandatory non-voluntary sterilisation of various groups in society, including the retarded, the deviant, the criminal and racial minorities.

The most compelling case for contraception relates to population size.   Many Third World countries to-day and many European countries until recent years have had to struggle with over-population and widesppread hunger aand disease as a result of the Catholic ban on contraception

In Africa the ban on contraception intensifies the massive spread of Aids.   It is good news that often priests, monks and nuns disregard the Vatican and administer contraceptives.   It leads to a better world.

Holy Communion

Mark’s gospel records that “And as they were eating he took some bread and, when he had said the blessing, he broke it and gave it to them.   “Take it”, he said, “this is my body”.   Then he took a cup, and when he had returned thanks he gave it to them, and drank from it, and he said to them, “This is my blood, the blood of the covenant, which is to be poured out for many.   I tell you solemnly, I shall not drink any more wine  until the day I drink the new wine in the kingdom of God”.

• The disciples are invited to share in Jesus’ sacrificial death.
• “The blood of the covenant” alludes to Ex.24:8, where Moses seals the covenant by sprinkling  the blood of sacrificial animals on Israel.
• The” poured out for many” allludes to Is.53:12 and gives the action a sacrificial dimension.
• The two OT allusions serve to characterise the death of Jesus as sacrifice.
• The concluding saying places  the Last Supper in the context of the messianic banquet.
• In the early centuries of the Faith we have different statements from the Fathers about the Eucharist:

From earlliest times the Eucharist was regarded as a distinctively Christian sacrifice (e.g., Justin Martyr and the Didache)

The identification of the eucharistic bread and wine with the Lord’s body and blood is to be found throughout the first three centuries of the Faith.

Occasionally, the Fathers use language which may be held to imply that, for all its realistic sound, their use of the terms, “body and blood”, may be merely symbolic.

Athanasius clearly distinguishes the visible bread and wine from the spiritual  nourishment they convey.

• There are many other examples that could be cited.   Taken together they do not project the simple, single view of the Council of Trent in the 16th century.   There is a diverse set of beliefs.
• Whereas the Catholic Church sought to explain how Christ is really, truly and substantially present, the Orthodox Church, which was not involved in the Reformation, simply teaches that the bread and wine become the flesh and blood of Christ.
• The 39 Articles in the Anglican communion is clearly Calvinist in character.   “The body of Christ is given, taken and eaten in the supper only after a heavenly and spiritual manner.   And the means whereby the body of Christ is received and eaten in the supper is faith”.   As the centuries have gone by other interpretations have evolved in the Anglican communion.
• Zwingli became a Protestant a year before Luther,   He disagreed with other Protestant leaders over the Eucharist:  he rejected Luther’s, Calvin’s and the Church of England’s views and maintained that Holy Communion was a memorial meal, a symbolic act.
• For Luther the Eucharist is the true body and blood of our Lord Jesus Christ under bread and wine.   The body and blood of Christ are present in, with and under the bread and wine.
• For Calvin Christ is present, not in a corporeal manner but in a spiritual way through His life-giving operation.   In Calvinist theology it is often stressed that Christ’s presence in the Supper is a “dynamic presence”.
• A visitor from Mars presented with these theories of the Lord’s Supper might think that they are mere metaphysics and go on to say that there is not a blade of grass between the lot of them!
• It is up to Jesus, not Church semantics, to determine whether or not He is present in Holy Communion.

Footnote

It is sometimes argued in academic circles that the Last Suppers was not associated with the Passover.   The contrary case may be stated thus:

1. The Passover meal had to be eaten within the walls of Jerusalem,   The Last Supper was eaten within the city walls.
2. The Passover night had to be spent within greater Jerusalem, which included Jerusalem and the surrounding hills facing it.   Jesus and His companions observed this requirement.
3. Jesus and His disciples reclined as they ate.   It was customary to sit at ordinary meals but to recline at the Passover,
4. The Last Supper was eaten in the evening as required by the Law.
5. The Last Supper  ended with singing, as was customary at the Passover.
6. The interpretation of the elements was a customary part of the Passover and this practice was continued by Jesus in the Last Supper.
7. It was customary at the Passover to give some money to the poor, a practice that would explain Judas (the treassurer) leaving  the gathering.

(Acknowledgements for this Footnote to Professor RHStein)

The Agape (The Love-Feast)

Associated with Holy Communion is the Love-Feast.   We know of the existence of this from two biblical sources, one pagan source and a handful of early Fathers.

Our biblical sources are 1 Cor.11:17-29 and the epistle of Jude.   In both the Love-Feasts have deteriorated into wild-living and the writer seeks to correct it.

The pagan source is Pliny the Younger.   In interrogating Christians he discovered that  their normal practice was to assemble before day-break and sing hymns as to a god and make commitments to a good life.   They assembled later in the day for a common meal.

In the early Church Fathers the Agape is both a rite using bread and wine and a meal of fellowship to which the poor were invited.

It is not clear from the sources to what extent practice varied.   It seems that in some cases the Lord’s Supper was celebrated as part of the Agape; in others, the Agape followed the Lord’s Supper; and, in yet others, the two were clearly separated.

It should not be over-looked that in the original Lord’s Supper this took place during the Passover Meal.   If the intention is to be as near as possible to what Jesus did, the Eucharist should follow this practice.   It does not do this in virtually all the Christian denominations and sects in Christendom.

Jesus And Ancient Authors

Jesus is mentioned by three Roman writers of the late 1st/early 2nd century AD.   The Roman writers are Pliny the Younger, Suetonius and Tacitus.   Their references are brief and it seems that their knowledge of Jesus came from Christians rather than from academic research.

Jesus is also mentioned more importantly by Josephus, a Jewish historian at the end of the 1st.century AD.   There are two references to Jesus in Josephus: the Longer Passage and the Shorter Passage.

• The Longer Passage reads:   “About this time there lived Jesus, a wise man, if indeed one ought to call him a man.   For he was one who wrought surprising feats and was a teacher of such people as accept the truth gladly.   He won over many Jews and many of the Greeks.   He was the Messiah.   When Pilate, upon hearing him accused by men of the highest standing amongst us, had condemned him to be crucified, those who had in the first place come to love him did not give up their affection for him.   On the third day he appeared to them restored to life, for the prophets of God had prophesied these and countless other marvellous things about him.   And the tribe of the Christians,  so called after him, has still to this day not disappeared”.
• The basic problem with the Longer Passage is that it contains references to Jesus’ standing and actions which, it is argued, would hardly have been written by Josephus, a Pharisee.   The references to the Resurrection and particularly the Messiah are hard to accept from a non-believer.   A large majority of scholars think that Josephus’ words have been worked over by a later Christian hand.
• In the Shorter Passage we read that Annas the younger, a new high priest, seized the opportunity to pay off a number of old scores in the absence of a Roman governor so “he convened a judicial session of the Sanhedrin and brought before it the brother of Jesus the so-called Christ – James by name – and some others, whom he charged with breaking the law and handed over to be stoned to death”.
• This passage is very much less controversial and can be said to confirm the existence of the historical Jesus.
• Reverting to the Longer Passage a survey of scholars in the post-1950 period reveals that 18% of scholars think that it is more or less original ; 54% favour tampering by a Christian hand but on a solid, historical Josephan basis; and 28%  that the Passage has been completely forged/ too vague re Jesus to be sure.
• The Shorter Passage is accepted by almost all scholars.

Homosexuality

• This can be a highly emotive issue, especially  in Conservative theological circles.
• The causes of homosexuality are still hotly disputed.   At the time of writing (December,2008) the balance of argument suggests the most pronounced strain favours Nature rather than Nurture.   After all, homosexuality exists in the animal kingdom, so why not in the human?
• The Bible, both in the OT and the NT, comes down  against homosexual practices.   It does not criticise the homosexual bias as such.   This is very often forgotten by those declaiming homosexuals.
• It was even suggested by a future Anglican Bishop of Birmingham (UK) that Christ might have been a homosexual because, unusually for a Jew at that time, he was not married!!
• There is no room in Christian circles for censoriousness  towards homosexuals.
• We are all weak and stand in need of prayer and forgiveness.   Furthermore, Jesus told the censorious religious leaders of His time that the outcasts  would enter His kingdom before they did!

Reproductive Technologies

• Again, this is an emotive issue.
• Medicine is now able to afford hope to thousands of couples who have been unable to bear a child.
• While adoption agencies remain an option for some, the low numbers of avaiable healthy children (22,000 babies for 2,000,000 prospective couples per year in the USA)  create a strong demand for reproductive technologies.
• Artificial insemination by husband (AIH) has been the least controversial technique
• Artificial insemination by donor (AID) has been more controversial.   This is where the sperm of an anonymous donor is used to impregnate the mother.   It is often used where the husband cannot produce the right type of sperm.
• In vitro fertilisation (IVF) is the process whereby a woman’s egg is fertilised with sperm in the laboratory.   Typically, the ovaries are stimulated by a fertility drug, and then a few ova are removed and fertilised.   The most promising zygote is then placed into the uterus.   These are the “test tube” babies.
• “Rent a womb” involves impregnating the womb of a third party with the sperm of the husband of a childless couple.   The woman carries the child to term and then delivers the child to the couple.   This is done for money.
• A large number of ethical, legal, social and theological issues is raised by these technologies.
• Outspoken criticism has come from Conservative Protestants and from the Vatican.   This has not prevented millions of Christians, desperate for a child, from taking advantage of these facilities.
• Experiments on human embryos are very much more controversial, not least because of the Frankenstein scenario.
• By whatever means the baby is created, it is welcomed by Jesus and this is the main point to be made in the furore.

(With acknowledgements to Professor D.B. Fletcher)

• Spiritualism is an organised religion which believes that spirits of the deceased survive bodily death and can communicate with the living usually by means of a medium.
• While many cultures, past and preseent, believe in Spiritism, Spiritualism is primarily a Western culture/religion
• It claims to take a “scientific” approach.
• Spiritualists believe in God and feel that through communications with the deceased they may come to undersstand better the spiritual laws of God.
• Spiritualists also practise spiritual healing.   The healer believes that he/she is controlled by a spirit-guide, often a Chinese or North American Indian.
• It has to be said that many people feel that Spiritualism is prone to trickery.   The famous escapologist and show-man, Harry Houdini, said that he could do anything that a medium claims to do.
• Where does Jesus fit into all of this?   He doesn’t.   He did not urge His followers to focus on the departed but rather to look to themselves in this life.   Healing and passage to an after-life depend primarily on faith – faith in Him.
• The OT is against Spiritualism.   The most celebrated instance is Saul and the”Witch” of En-dor where Saul asks the “Witch” to contact the departed and is roundly condemned by the OT author.