The Way I need Jesus
Here is the quote of the day from a genre of music that I don’t particularly like by an artist I most certainly don’t like.
I ain’t here to argue about his facial features
Or here to convert atheists into believers
I’m just trying to say the way school need teachers
The way Kathie Lee needed Regis that’s the way I need Jesus
From Jesus Walks by Kanye West
I find that particularly instructive.
I am very happy to hear that Mr. West needs Jesus Christ (I assume as his savior). Likewise, I need Jesus Christ as my savior too. And yes, it is true that Jesus’ facial features are trivial matters that are in no need of debate.
However, I feel that this quote by Mr. West seems to trivialize that Jesus did in space and time. I do not want to take this out of context from the rest of the song, but I am assuming that what he saying is that what matters isn’t who Jesus really is, but who he is to “me.” (i.e. Kanye West). That’s nice, but who cares? I do, because if it is true, that makes Mr. West my brother in Christ, and I will get to fellowship with him for all eternity. But to that why would he/she care? I wouldn’t care if I were an atheist.
What is important, or more paramount, is not what Jesus did for me on the cross and in his life, but what he did for humanity on the cross and in his life (which yes, necesssarily includes you and I). If you leave that out, the gospel just becomes another self-help book that can be placed on the shelf between the Deepok Chopra and the Dr. Phil.
Take a look at the whole context of the song and I think that you will change your mind. Just because he is not explicitly setting out on a missionary campaign in the rap song does not regulate his views here to self-help books. What he is saying is that he absolutely needs Jesus – he must have Him – without Him he is as useless as a teacher-less school. That is a powerful and absolutely true message. Later on in the song he hopes that the effect of what he is singing is that more people will realize that they too need Jesus. Its argumentation through exposition of experience rather than argumentation on the basis of showing flaws in logic. Also, take into account the genre of at what we are looking. It is not Kanye’s Systematic theology, instead it is a song about his personal need for Jesus.
If I am reading Honzo right, I would agree with the statement that I need Jesus like a school needs teachers. Kanye’s idea of Jesus may or may not square up to who the Bible says Jesus us. Jesus has been a fad in recent years and this song may reflect that sentiment, I don’t know. But the idea that I need Jesus like a wife needs her husband is absolutely true–especially in light of Scripture. We should desire Christ like he is our husband (weird as a guy but still the biblical language). We should desire him like a school desires its teachers. I find the statement very instructive when I apply it to the biblical Jesus–not necessarily Kanye West’s idea of Jesus.
I find your comments malestream. A. That is not present in the song. B. I need Jesus so much more than I need my husband. I should desire Jesus much more than my husband. Your metaphor does not work here.
I too agree and disagree with Hank. I can see how we need Jesus the way a Roman wife needed their husband, but given the evolution of the concept of marriage (shaped in large part by the concepts found in the undisputed Pauline letters – e.g. equality before God) to where it stands today, I am appalled by that statement. I am nothing apart from Christ. I depend on Christ – Meredith and I have a co-dependence on each other. Christ does not depend on me in the same way in which I depend upon him.
I assumed that the biblical notion of husband and wife (i.e. in the 1st century AD) was understood as well as the Bible’s use of the metaphor of marriage in describing our relationship to Christ. Shame on me. I would absolutely agree that we should desire Christ as the ultimate delight in the universe, anything else is idolatry and makes Christ a cuckold–a husband who has been cheated on. In fact, I preach that every time I preach.
edited.
Hank said:
Thank you for clarifying what you mean by “biblical notion of husband and wife.”
So many sarcastic comments are coming to my head…too many…POP
I enjoy you guys.
casey
I find the statement very instructive when I apply it to the biblical Jesus–not necessarily Kanye West’s idea of Jesus.
Let’s be fair here…you are simply using "biblical" as a veiled way of saying your Jesus. Biblically, Jesus is quite multiform…teaching often times very different messages in the different gospels. Then we have the different way that Paul portrays (uses) Jesus. Then there’s the pastorals epistles and on to Revelation…all with unique (and often somewhat contradictory) understandings of Jesus. If Mark’s idea of who Jesus is was "good enough," we wouldn’t have Matthew, Luke, and John (and the many dozens of other excluded texts).
Fact is, people have been coming to very different conclusions about Jesus since the earliest days of Christianity, and our Bible documents some of this (contested) dialogue. The term "biblical Jesus" in this case seems to be more a device of saying "my Jesus" than to accurately assess the biblical representation(s) of Jesus.
the Bible’s use of the metaphor of marriage in describing our relationship to Christ.
Even that metaphor is pluriform. The gospels and Revelation portray the relationship with us being guests to Christ’s wedding. Even so, the marriage metaphor which you refer to (IMO) illustrates much more ideas of love, sacrifice, and above all covenant (which incurs responsibilities for both parties)…I’m not familiar with ideas of need being involved.
Cheapham,
I think it is unfair to Hank to refer to the way he uses “Biblical Jesus” as being “his Jesus.” The whole point to his post was that to render Jesus to a subjective state-of-mind/teacher disregards the objective and real Jesus of space and time. The fact of the matter is there is only one Jesus. Sure, there can be an infinite number of ways of representing him, but the way that God wants us to see him is the way he actually was. And it is this objectively true Jesus that we see in the Bible.
Of course the Jesus of space and time was a very simple and yet very complex man. I mean, he was God and Man. So the correct representation of him is going to be paradoxical, but of course, not formally contradictory.
the way that God wants us to see him is the way he actually was. And it is this objectively true Jesus that we see in the Bible.
Is that really the case though? I don’t see how there’s anything objective about the portrayal of Jesus in the Bible (and I don’t see this as a bad thing at all!). Mark, Matthew, Luke, and John portray Jesus very differently. Jesus’s mission is different, his teachings to his disciples differs, and questions of the very nature of his existence are approached differently. Each author composed their text with their own personal motivations and presuppositions based on unique contexts and communities. There is indeed a good deal of continuity among the biblical accounts of Jesus (thanks in large part to the politically selective canonization process), yet the diversity is quite astounding (and important!), especially when you compare the Synoptic gospels (Matthew, Mark, Luke) with John.
The whole point to his post was that to render Jesus to a subjective state-of-mind/teacher disregards the objective and real Jesus of space and time.
I’d say that the only "real Jesus" is the Jesus we experience here and now. Jesus is found in the space and time of our communion with God, with fellow Christians in the present, and with those who have passed before us by means of the texts and teachings they leave behind.
The Bible isn’t a history textbook, and it is inappropriate to treat it as such. Even more, trying to establish some "objective" historical Jesus more often than not is a bankrupt enterprise IMO, and reveals far more about the author than about whatever the "real Jesus" of "history" was. This notion of "objectivity" in large part is a fallacy that is really only a rhetorical tool to try and say "I’m right and you’re wrong" under false pretenses.
P.S. – Sorry if I’m being overly combative…I’ve had a long day and this is a somewhat theraputic outlet. I love you people. :)
Travis,
I don’t see how any of what is in the post takes away from the “real jesus in time and space.” Like ‘ham says, we don’t have objective modern historical accounts of JC’s life. We have (in the canonical gospels) four interpretations of his ministry. Furthermore, if you want a historical, historical account (i.e. what was most likely to happen, playing the historical game) get in line with the Jesus Seminar Folks, Crossan et.al. What I am trying to say is that we simply don’t have direct access to the historical Jesus. We do have four interpretations of his life and ministry that I absolutely accept (on faith). If you wanna play the real historical game, know what you are getting into.
By "biblical Jesus" I was not referring to "My Jesus." I was referring an understanding of Jesus found within the Bible. There are people who believe that Jesus is a mushroom (there is actually a cult in San Diego that believes that Jesus is a mushroom). I do acknowledge and revel in the fact that the portrayal of Jesus is multifaceted. It is one of the beauties of Jesus, he didn’t just do and say one thing. He was complex and that to me is glorious. He is bigger than myself and I take great delight in that. But that doesn’t mean I am to just have my own vision of Jesus that completely contradicts what his earliest followers knew him to be just because it suits me. As objective or non-objective as the Bible might be (depending on your own views of the Bible), it is the best place to get a picture of Jesus, not a 21st century rapper.
As far as need goes, I think of the Psalms where we read how as a deer pants for water so the soul longs for God. I think of Jesus in John 4 and John 6 where he says we are thirsty and in need for the water that he gives for it only can satify; he says we hunger and are in need of the food that only he can be.
I guess I am not getting the problem for you folks. I just like the metaphors (or whatever figures of speech – its late) that are employed by West. They echo and give voice to the way that I too need Jesus. I don’t get the issue of “his Jesus” vs any other Jesus. I am not getting a picture of Jesus from West (and he is not putting forth a particular interpretation of Jesus, save that “only [He] can save us.” The post has nothing to do with any particular interpretation of Jesus (and I think that the interpretation that the Bible offers is the one to which people here would adhere).
Maybe you are being overly literal with the song lyrics or something, I am just not seeing the problem. Help me out.
[...] comment by Hank on The Way I need Jesus got me thinking. Is there such a thing as a “biblical notion of husband and wife?” What [...]
[...] comment by Hank on The Way I need Jesus got me thinking. Is there such a thing as a “biblical notion of husband and wife?” What [...]