One of the books that I have read a couple of times and found both inspiring and challenging is Saving Jesus from the Church: How to Stop Worshiping Christ and Start Following Jesus by Robin Meyers (2009) — hereafter, referred to as Saving Jesus.  The book is very progressive in its message, which can make the Christians among us a little (or a lot) defensive.  But in this post, I want to suggest two very different ways of receiving Meyers’ message.  Hopefully, one or both of those ways will resonate with you.

Please note that I am going to talk a lot about Jesus in this post.  That said, whether you are mainstream Christian, a non-church-goer with strong Christian convictions, an atheist, an agnostic, or someone from another faith, I think that you will find some significant value and inspiration in Meyers’ book. It may be helpful for you to know that Meyers is a minister. He wants us to be closer to Jesus, not further, and more authentically faithful in our following, not less.

Saving Jesus From the Church — Audio Book, Author (Robin Meyers), and Printed Book

The basic premise behind Saving Jesus is that the Church has made Jesus all about salvation from sin through belief with little or no attention to Jesus’ message of how we should live.  For Meyers, there is much more truth and value in Jesus’ message than in salvation through belief.  As a scholar, Meyers makes his argument by drawing our attention to the evidence, including:

• Jesus’ most powerful message, the Sermon on the Mount, describes a challenging way of living that is valued by God, but it says not one thing about belief.
• Jesus’ parables challenge us to behave and feel in ways that are uncomfortable to us, but they don’t talk at all about belief.
• The so-called red-letter test — reading only the things that Jesus said in the New Testament — one sees nothing about requirements for salvation.
• The earliest account of Jesus — the Gospel of Thomas — has nothing in it about belief.  It also says nothing of miracles, crucifixion, or resurrection.
• None of the above say anything about the divinity of Jesus or the divine trinity.
• Of the four canonized gospels, only the Gospel of John, the latest written gospel, portrays Jesus as the exclusive way to salvation.
• The whole notion of the blood atonement in relation to Christ — that Jesus died to save our souls — is a doctrine that developed many years after Jesus died, and it is based upon ancient rituals of animal sacrifice that are not observed today.  (But keep this point in mind when you read my epilogue.)

In investing so much in belief in salvation and worship of Jesus as a divine figure, the Church loses what was truly valuable about the life of the “Galilean sage.” In line with other prophets of his era, Jesus was an outspoken proponent of social reform.  He respected women, children, and outcasts.  He challenged religion leaders to focus their efforts on transforming hearts, rather than upholding purity laws in the Torah.  He challenged everyone to love one another, give up treasures on earth, and to be humble.

Saving Jesus is full of inspiring, quotable sentiments. My summary doesn’t do the book justice.  Most memorable to me is Meyers’ suggested message that Jesus is the Assignment, rather than Jesus is the Answer.  (And yes, he can be both.  But we’ll get to that in a bit.)

I like to dabble in digital images.  Below is my attempt to capture Meyers’ message visually.  On the left hand, you have a religious institution that heralds obedience to 613 religious laws, many of which seem arbitrary through our modern lenses.  On the right hand, you have a religious institution that heralds simple belief in Jesus as the ticket to paradise (my graphic, but Meyers’ metaphor).  In the middle, you have the Galilean sage (or a disciple) who advocates for an active life with few possessions and a commitment to compassion.

The itinerant, love- and wisdom-spreading Galilean, on the move beyond Jewish laws and before Christian beliefs in salvation.

The first time that I started reading Saving Jesus, I was quite inspired and intrigued by so many things that Meyers’ was saying; however, eventually I felt like my beliefs about salvation were being challenged unnecessarily.  Feeling a bit ambivalent and a little defensive, I set the book aside for several years.

It was only recently that I again picked up the book, re-read it with fresh eyes, and felt more receptive to its message.  What changed?  Well, for one thing my wife and I became committed viewers of the television series The Chosen.  The Chosen depicts the life and character of Jesus in a way that is much more accessible, engaging, and relatable than they have been presented before.  No, The Chosen didn’t provide me with the armor that I needed to withstand the liberal leanings of Saving Jesus.  Instead, it helped me to see that both The Chosen and Saving Jesus are after the same goal — giving additional life, character, and importance to the message of Jesus.

The second time through Saving Jesus, I asked myself whether Meyers’ really needed to challenge beliefs regarding salvation, the Trinity, and other aspects of Christianity.  Could his message be as compelling if he instead just challenged our priorities?

So, let’s try to receive the underlying message in Saving Jesus as not about truth, but about priorities.  Let’s assume that some amount of believing in Christ as our Savior can or should be part of the intended Christian experience. Then, regarding time and effort as limited resources, let’s consider how much time and effort should be invested in belief and how much in behavior?  

With some small (perhaps mustard-seed-like) Believing in Christ as a given, we could imagine two extremes for the remainder of our time and effort. At one extreme, there is complete surrender of ourselves to Jesus as a way of living. At another extreme, there is a very strong investment of time and effort in worldly and self-focused concerns. Of course, some questions may arise from these two scenarios. Is it possible to completely surrender with no worldly concerns?  Is complete surrender a divine expectation? Is it acceptable (if not preferrable) to just believe and do nothing more? 

Two extremes for how Christians might prioritize their time/effort, with a small amount of believing as a given

Now let’s consider two more possibilities.  In one scenario, while Other Concerns dominate, there is substantial attention to Following Jesus and a small amount of Believing in Christ.  In the other scenario, we dispense with believing altogether, but invest even more effort in Following Jesus.  

Two additional prioritization scenarios

It seems to me that there must be a best choice among those four prioritization options, even though I don’t know what it is. (Do you agree that these options are worth thinking and praying about?) Clearly, Believing in Christ doesn’t have to be discarded for a person to prioritize Following Jesus a lot more.  For me, it would have been easier to digest Saving Jesus if the book had pushed that point.

Also, Believing in Christ can happen with little or no Following Jesus.  Saving Jesus underscores this, but the criticism might have been more powerful, not less, if there is truth in Jesus’ sacrifice.  When we just believe in Christ and do nothing more, are we taking advantage of Jesus’ sacrifice for our own (selfish) salvation?  Do we see Jesus standing at the end of our lives with a divine eraser, ready to eliminate all the erasable stuff, and so it’s OK to live a life completely for the self?  Do we see the simple belief in Jesus as a personal Savior as a kind of spiritual easy button (or J-easy button), which allows us to accumulate wealth; exploit the world’s resources; have as much fun as possible; and think, feel, and act mostly for ourselves?

One can treat belief in salvation as a J-easy button.  Is that OK?  Sure, the “yoke is easy” and the “burden is light.” And yet there is a yoke, a burden, and an invitation to take up the cross.

When you receive Meyers’ message this second way — as concern over skewed priorities, where living and being like Jesus is greatly overshadowed by belief in Christ and salvation (and both of these things can be greatly overshadowed by worldly and self-focused concerns) — then Meyers’ message may strike a different chord.  You might not become defensive about your beliefs, but you may become defensive or uncomfortable (or inspired?) about your behavior.

In recent years, the United Church of Christ has adopted the comma as an icon and symbol for their ministry.  Inspired by a Gracie Allen quote (“Don’t put a period where God has put a comma.”) and a sermon delivered by a Chicago minister in 2006, the message is that God is still revealing divine truth to us and that we should still be listening.

But the UCC doesn’t suggest that Christians should be passive listeners. For example, through their “Be the Church” initiative, the UCC emphasizes a call to action that includes, among other things: protecting the environment, taking care of the poor, forgiving others, rejecting racism, protecting the powerless, sharing resources, and embracing diversity.  Clearly, their mission is about Jesus-like behavior, not just believing.

In Saving Jesus, Meyers draws our attention to another comma, in the Apostles’ Creed:

So, perhaps there is another comma for us to call out — the comma that represents Jesus’ life in the Apostles’ Creed.  For illustration purposes, I’ve reformatted the Apostles’ Creed with a stylized heart-comma to symbolize the overarching importance of Jesus’ life and message (while at the same time not challenging any beliefs that Christians may hold dear).

The Apostles’ Creed with a stylized heart-comma to draw attention to the what’s missing — the life of Jesus, where he challenged our notions, changed our hearts, and showed us how to live.

I haven’t been blogging very long.  And I am often uncertain about my material. Because of that, I typically pray that I am saying what God would want me to say (or at least not saying something really wrong). And I do feel that God is listening.  As I was putting the finishing touches on this blog post and as I was powering down my computer, I saw that I had to save one last file – an image of Robin Meyers.  But when I pressed CTRL-S (the keyboard shortcut for saving), something felt sticky.  I looked down at my hand, and I saw that my ring finger was bleeding near the tip.  I don’t know how that happened.  Perhaps, in a rush to get my shower done between blogging and work, I cut my finger with my razor.  Or maybe it was a paper cut.  (I really don’t know.)  At any rate, I looked down at my keyboard.  While saving the file, I had stained the “S” key with my blood.

My computer keys that I use for saving files.  Somehow I had cut my finger.  I took the pictures when I got home from work. (It was only on my way to work that it sunk in.)

Now, just the day before, I had been listening to the Bible Project’s podcast series on the “Leviticus Scroll,” where among other things the podcasters do a deep dive into ritual sacrifices and blood atonement.  So, yes, it is entirely possible that my subconscious somehow maneuvered me into cutting my left ring finger in the right place so that when I pressed CTRL-S to save the as-yet-unsaved Meyers file, I would be saving it with blood.  And yes, this sounds utterly contrived.  If I were you, I wouldn’t believe it either.  But then again, perhaps belief isn’t everything.