It has become an unfortunate Easter tradition that the orthodox Christian faith will be questioned as to its truthfulness and authenticity while Christians celebrate the holiest of days. This Easter was no exception. What was exceptional this year was the source of the questioning. Serene Jones, the president of Union Theological Seminary in New York City, was interviewed by the New York Times and made a series of provocative tweets about the nature of the death and resurrection of Jesus Christ. Jones, who calls herself a “fierce theologian,” leads a seminary who values opposition to white privilege and patriarchy, and supports social justice and inclusion.
In Jones’ tweets opposing the United States’ policy with regard to illegal immigrants at the border she writes, that Jesus died because of His opposition to Rome. “Jesus was executed because He stood against imperial abuses; because He took action against Rome’s brutal oppression of the Jewish people.” To say that Jones is wrong does not get at the depth of the problem.
Jesus was executed by the Roman authorities, true enough. There is, however, no evidence that Jesus “took action against Rome’s brutal oppression.” In fact, the opposite is true. Jesus took no action against Rome. He even told His followers to pay taxes to Rome. He told His followers to “go the extra mile” when ordered to carry a Roman soldier’s gear. These are hardly the words and acts of a person who is determined to “take action against” brutal oppression.
In fact, as the Bible presents the story, the Roman leadership did not care about Jesus at all. Pilate found no reason to execute Jesus. Rather, Pilate wanted to let Jesus go. Pilate gave the people a choice. He would release Jesus of Nazareth or Barabbas. The people choose to have Barabbas released. Barrabas was a notorious prisoner who had taken part in a rebellion. Indeed, Barabbas was the kind of person who stood against Roman abuses and took action against Rome’s brutal oppression.
What is interesting here is that Jones has given Jesus a makeover. Instead of letting the Scriptures tell us who Jesus is, she reinvents Jesus as Barabbas. Why would she do such a thing? She does so because she can use the narrative of Barabbas to encourage her readers to take action for a political end. Jones has revised Jesus in order to make Him more useful for her politics. Essentially, Jones prefers Barabbas to Jesus.
In the interview with the New York Times, Jones finds the doctrine of the Virgin Birth to be bizarre and states that one does not need to believe in the bodily resurrection. Of course, one can believe whatever one chooses to believe. One may choose to not believe in the resurrection of Jesus because of their intellectual objections, of course. What one cannot do, however, is reject the resurrection and be Christian. Since the beginning of the faith, the claim of the followers of Jesus has been, “the Lord is Risen.” The resurrection is stated clearly and forcefully in the Bible, it has been described in our doctrines, and it has been canonized in our creeds. There is no Christianity without it. There are some who would say that they call themselves Christian because they like the teachings of Jesus but do not believe in the resurrection. Eventually, however, they have to do what Jones does. They remake the Jesus that is revealed to us in Scripture into a more useful version.
Jones’ work on sexuality and gender issues and her training at Ivy League universities may qualify her to lead an institution. Her statements on Easter, however, call into question the nature of the institution she leads. Union Theological Seminary should no longer be thought of as a Christian seminary. It is a hive of heresy.
Ad-Free & Subscriber Log-In