Hi Aporia,
It may seem a little assuming, but I think that Christians have been led astray from the source of their traditions precisely by the oversimplification of theology. I agree that there are numerous Christians who apply their modern but simple understanding of things to extremely subtle texts, which are trying to transmit more than just reports of occurrences they had experienced, philosophising issues, paraphrasing, using analogies and metaphors freely, composing stories out of basic reports, arranging stories to force issues and address topical issues.
The reason why this is a problem is that we do not have the basic experience of the churches of the day into which the scriptures were then speaking. The Epistles were not designed to be timeless, the Gospels had certain audiences, and the message was explaining the arising common phenomena of the day and strengthening the faith. The assumptions that many bible-reading Christians make today often fail to take this into account, mainly because their own experience is far removed from that of those early churches.
I agree with Felix on the quote, since the word translated as “knowing” can also be translated as “being aware of”. It also refers to idolatry that chose to worship objects and certain natural phenomenon, although the basis of all life and phenomena was also recognised. Polytheism too, has often been a perversion of the narrative form of philosophy, written in mythology and analogy, not as a primitive world view, as is often believed. The arguments that are proposed to support modern views of scriptural expression in many cases lack the basic humility of early Christianity.
The problem, however, with the critics of Christianity is that they are just as guilty of oversimplification, often blatantly so. I would, on many occasions, have hoped for a more intelligent approach, but it becomes very apparent that a constructive objectivity is lost in the partisanship (and sometimes even superstition) of varying disciplines or in a per se deconstruction of Christianity, without any idea of what could take its place, which is precisely one of the accusations made towards Christianities missionary aspirations. Critics of Christianity often act as blatantly irresponsible as the people they have in their targets.
The question of historicity is something that is blown out of proportion by Christians, as though this is the only way to show the teaching of Christianity to be valid. It reveals that Christians are just as deluded by the materialistic view as their opposition is. Of course the discussion that came about it the seventies was run very polemically and conducted by theologian-historians who chose to position themselves outside of the church, rather than inside, possibly because of the opposition they expected. Unfortunately they supplied the necessary criteria to fulfil their own prophecy in doing that.
It seems to me to be quite apparent that the Gospels are compositions of a recurring theme in varying situations, presenting the experience of Jesus in a way that suggested a significance that the Jews rejected. Basically it was far too subtle for most Jews living under occupation, just as the message is too subtle for Christians living in the modern day frenzy, which calls them out to form communities which offer a true alternative. Much of Christian community that we witness today is conform, conventional and plays the game according to other rules than those of Christ.
The churches of early Christianity were, of course, told by Paul to not be too prominent. However, they didn’t play according to the rules of those people around them. Their standards of community were higher, their spirit was loving and humble, and they experienced the Grace of God in their midst. It was the occasional collision with radical Jews, Roman Governors and unfortunately other radical elements amongst them that caused their problems, causing factions and loosing their coherence.
The simplification of the message was an answer to a question that we do not openly have in the modern day. Sacrifice was a part of everyday religious life which took on proportions that endangered anybody who rejected it. The teaching that Christ had made the last sacrifice, redeeming all of mankind, overcoming the guilty consciousness that was typical for the Greek piety of the time, is an argument that we do not identify with today. There are, however, modern equivalents of things and values sacrificed for superficial reasons. Christ leads us to transcend this kind of religion, entering into a new Covenant of the Spirit, of Intuition and Prophecy, and helps us realise the futility of religious ambition and of clinging to people, ideas and buildings etc.
Shalom
