RE: The Gospels

Bravo, Daniel, well said.
Also, kudos to Jim for the Nemo/Hulk article, I enjoyed it muchly.
tina

>From: Yocum Daniel GS 21 CES/CEOE <daniel.yocum@Peterson.af.mil>
>Reply-To: bananafish@roughdraft.org
>To: "'bananafish@roughdraft.org'" <bananafish@roughdraft.org>
>Subject: RE: The Gospels
>Date: Mon, 28 Jul 2003 16:40:36 -0000
>
>Tina, I have read some of the same things you have mentioned, I have also
>studied the Nag Hammadi library as well as the pseudagraphia. Concerning
>power structure than/now, there/here, and one thing I have learned about
>people is that there is never one all controlling political group. One of
>the dangers about looking at Judaica is assuming that the modern Rabbinical
>views were extant then. Also, within Judaica now, there are quite a few
>power struggles going on which some are willing to quite literally stone
>others if they could. I am a Sephardi marrano who was raised in the Roman
>Catholic Church in public but practiced our Judaism in secret for at least
>14 generations in New Mexico and have since become a Christian (some call
>it
>Messianic) but one thing is sure, not all your friends share your beliefs
>not all your enemies believe a different faith. I have attended synagogue
>and stayed for the debates after the meal (oneg) and have had the
>congregation on the verge of stoning me (no hyperbole) and when the
>discussion is over some of these same adversaries are keen on having me
>attend the next oneg, go figure. To assume that the Pharisees and
>Sadducees
>did not try to power play Jesus against each other and the people at large
>not to mention misc sects is dangerous. If I remember right, there were
>Jesus sympathizers in the Sanhedrin and even in the Roman occupying forces,
>so the order of the day was challenged. But from Rome's perspective they
>wanted complete strategic control but minimal tactical control (read costs)
>and the Jewish leaders wanted local control but appreciated the convenience
>of the 'scapegoatedness' of Rome's presence for their shortcomings not to
>mention the lucrative benefits of providing local expertise to an empire
>with a nice wallet (or purse); this all means that the situation on the
>ground is a lot more complex than the one you are portraying.
>Surprisingly,
>the New Testament portrays much of the complexity of what is going on
>between the whole list of groups; Herod, Rome, Pharisees, Sadducees,
>Scribes, Zealots, the down trodden masses, hellenized Jews, Hebracized
>gentiles etc. It seems that Jesus message cut across this entire morass of
>conflicting agendas or their lack there of.
>
>Robbie, I appreciate your discussions of the linguistic subtleties.
>
>Scottie, I am surprised that your head is so easily turned by a
>transliterated Greek without all its native curves and wiggles.
>
>Jim, I am laughing out loud, I read your "Finding Hulk" juxtaposed with
>your
>Gospels comments and like an all star Line Backer, you are all over the
>field.
>
>Daniel
>
>
>
>I don't think we need to apologize for our prejudices so much as just
>understand them and how they work in our thinking -- it's too easy to
>let the slimmest pretext for what we want to think obscure evidence
>supporting what we don't want to think. Me too. If your feelings were
>really so strong from the start (why? what difference does it make to
>you personally? how can you be that certain either way about events
>that happened or didn't happen 2000 years ago?) this is probably part of
>what's happening. Most scholarship I've read assumes different
>audiences for each of the Gospels, different community needs, thus a
>different emphasis. I'd also say John's gospel seems more personal to
>me -- there are passages (such as when the women go to the apostles
>after seeing Christ resurrected) that seem to reflect a specific
>physical location -- a particular physical point of view -- from which
>the events are being told. This doesn't support apostolic authorship in
>itself, of course, but does explain differences in writing style and
>emphasis.
>
>What I emphasize in my thinking is that the actual physical evidence
>tends to lean toward traditional interpretations of the events and
>authorship, while rejections of these usually require, at best, good
>reading between the lines and at worst fundamentally dishonest
>intellectual sleight of hand.
>
>I've just read two biographies of William Blake and started a third
>(along with biographical essays), and it's amazing how even a relatively
>recent character can be described so differently by these different
>writers. There are facts and ideas in common, of course, but also
>serious differences. I think that's just what happens when you try to
>describe a real human being. What would descriptions of you look like
>coming from your family, your friends, and your co-workers (assuming
>they went into detail)?
>
>Jim
>
>tina carson wrote:
>
> > Hello Everyone,
> >
> > I spent the last two days redecorating. I was inspired by House
> > Invaders on BBC, and just went through my house in a hurry. This left
> > a lot of time for thinking during the manual labor.
> >
> > So, I though I owe you an explanation. First, let me say that I have
> > been speaking from an EXTREME prejudice I have regarding Christian
> > mythology and the politics that formed it. I began research over a
> > decade ago out of anger towards Christianity and now continue out of
> > curiosity.
> >
> > My problem with John is that he sees Jesus as God, not a man, whereas
> > the synoptics are at least an attempt at relaying a story, laying out
> > the facts. I have far more confidence in some of the Nag Hammadi
> > scrolls than in the 4 canonical gospels.
> >
> > I suggest a very interesting book called The Jesus Mysteries, the
> > author escapes me at the moment. Although it doesn't;'t address
> > problems with John specifically, it does explain where many of the
> > mythos come from, and makes an excellent case for Jesus being a
> > Gnostic, the fish symbol being a prime example.
> >
> > I realized that we were bogging ourselves down in unbelievably long
> > reply-replies, and thought I'd start out fresh. So, if anyone would
> > care to start at me, I'd be glad to address point-by-point instead of
> > taking on the entire new testament in a single email.
> >
> > Again, my apologies for my knee-jerk replies based on my own prejudices.
> > Namaste,
> > tina
>-
>* Unsubscribing? Mail majordomo@roughdraft.org with the message
>* UNSUBSCRIBE BANANAFISH

_________________________________________________________________
MSN 8 helps eliminate e-mail viruses. Get 2 months FREE*.
http://join.msn.com/?page=features/virus

-
* Unsubscribing? Mail majordomo@roughdraft.org with the message
* UNSUBSCRIBE BANANAFISH
Received on Mon Jul 28 23:59:49 2003