1

DeMatteo
Griffin DeMatteo

Instructor Jim Blynt

Comparative Religion

February 22, 2021

The Radical Messiah

Jesus Christ was born into a religious landscape that in many ways resembled the one we

see today. The religious institutions of his day were corrupted and drenched in inequality and did

not appear to represent the values they put forth. Studying Torah was not something women, the

poor, or uneducated people had access to, and praying was something to be done in public for

saving face. Much like Martin Luther, the Christian visionary 1500 his junior, Jesus’ message

was all about having a more personal relationship with God. He set out to remove the exclusive

nature of the Jewish establishment by giving the gift of faith in God to all Jews regardless of

class, as well as all gentiles who wanted in for that matter. As Garry Wills’ book, What Jesus

Meant, suggests, even by today’s standards Jesus would be considered a social radical of the

highest degree with the number one concern of making sure spirituality became completely

accessible.

The Jewish establishment which represented the dominant culture that Jesus grew up in

was an inherently exclusive one. Off the bat as a lower-class individual, Jesus was at odds with

receiving a “proper” Jewish education. As Wills postulates, Mary and Joseph were very likely

illiterate and unable to understand Hebrew. Jesus’ religious education came from his running

away from home to study with travelling mystics (Wills 10). The classism in participating in

religion in Roman Judea was evident, but not even as prevalent as other forms of persecution.

Jesus himself for much of his career as a Rabbi was homeless. He also travelled and led

1
2
DeMatteo
followers, many of whom were homeless and prostitutes (Wills XX). All of these people were

considered unclean in the eyes of the synagogue and could not be taught in the way Jesus taught

them. Furthermore, women in general were considered greatly inferior to men especially in a

religious setting at the time. Wills states, “It was a source of scandal for woman to travel openly

with a Rabbi” (49). Jesus was the only spiritual leader in that time period willing to accept and

speak to women as equals. It is said that his male followers were unable to grapple with this idea

and had trouble respecting his choice to do that. As Wills asserts on this issue, “It is clear that

women played a much more active role in Christian gathering than in Jewish synagogues of the

time” (50). Judaism, especially in a conservative context, even now struggles with this same

inequality that Jesus sought to do away with.

Most of Jesus’ teachings that distinguish his philosophy from Judaism have to do with

combatting the exclusionary nature of the Jewish establishment of his time. It would be

somewhat of a misconception to say these things distinguish modern Christianity and Judaism

because both religions presently share many qualities that Jesus was very vocal about abhorring,

such as giving to much power to the Church, religious leaders, and scriptures. All of those

addendums were designed to create power differentials within a burgeoning Christian world, and

make sure the word of Christ would not effectuate the socialist implications he imparted. Jesus

reacted to these exclusionary devices he saw in the Jewish world in a paradigmatically opposed

way to the church. His schtick was all about reaching out to the poor and travelling amongst

them. These are socially radical ideas that any church could not be more distanced from. A

church is inherently an institution, and Jesus was inherently antiestablishment. Wills wisely

states, “The churches’ later treatment of the gospels is one long effort to rescue Jesus from his

‘extremism’” (Wills 53). The philosophy espoused by the Christian messiah is unbelievably

2
3
DeMatteo
different than the lifestyles lead by many of his modern followers, begging whether or not a

religion based on his teachings has ever come to life. The modern institution that claims him as

their spokesperson appears to present a paradox, where the Christian establishment holds all of

the same practices that Jesus was unenthused with in regard to the Jewish Temples of the day.

Although Jesus’ teachings were primarily about non-violence, unconditional love, and

asceticism, the modern Christian-sphere has contorted his message drastically into a religion that

has much more to do with faith and much less to do with compassion. There are obvious

exceptions, and many Christians to come would still advocate for a more personal relationship

with God, but as long as there have been religious institutions there has been religious

corruption. Christianity in a broad sense has been extremely unsuccessful in staying true to

Jesus’ message. As Wills puts it, “It is said ‘Christianity has not failed—it has just never been

tried’” (Wills 44). This is precisely accurate. The classless nomadic group of followers that Jesus

preached to resembles a primitive form of communism much closer than it did Christianity

(Wills 51). Nothing after that has come close to replicating the type of world Jesus imagined

people should live in. In trying to live in his footsteps, the overwhelming majority of his

followers (Christians) have reverted to a religion steeped in all of the exclusionary tendencies of

the Jesus era Jewish establishment.