(no subject)

[sophiaserpentia]

Why do I even bother to look in christianity anymore? Half of what I see there literally makes me sick.

Edit. What disturbs me this morning in particular are (a) ignorant comments about homosexuality which never fails to upset me, and (b) willful ignorance regarding anti-Semitism.

For example, it's being discussed that Gibson has taken a scene out of his movie that shows a Jew lamenting that Jesus' blood will be on their heads forever. Comments such as, "But that's in the Bible, so it's historically true and COULDN'T POSSIBLY be anti-Semitic" are what has riled me.

Comments

Re: John's fictions

[yahvah.livejournal.com]

Enough to know that anyone who claims that the gospel of John isn't Jewish is full of shit.

Re: John's fictions

[publius-aelius.livejournal.com]

Sorry, but it's full of GREEK ideas about the nature of God. Some have even argued that PLATO is the greatest influence on it.

Re: John's fictions

[badsede.livejournal.com]

Many have also argued that it is simultaneously the most hellenistic *and* the most Jewish of the Gospels. Miller et al (The Complete Gospels) argue that it shows that greatest level of intimacy with first century Judaic theology of any of the canonical Gospels. However, at the same time, it shows the highest level of the use of Hellenistic equivalencies to relate Christ - the whole ode to the logos in John 1:1. Interestingly enough, it bears many marks of measures taken to stem the tide of hellenization of Christianity already occuring in the late 1st c. (Pagels goes into this quite a bit).

What it comes down to is that it is the most theological of the 4 canoncial Gospels and that it draws heavily on both Judaic theology and Hellenistic philosophy/theology.

Re: John's fictions

[publius-aelius.livejournal.com]

You know, I have too much respect for your admirable--and at times, fiery--interest in this subject which is so important to you, to try to be tendentious or "brainwashing" in any kind of reply to you, Scott. So I'm just going to give you two citations, to show you how much DEEPER into this subject you could go, if YOU'D GET THE RIGHT, BALANCED KIND OF EDUCATION. But here's the kind of course you should be taking, in some non-Fundamentalist theology school:

http://www.milligan.edu/Administrative/MMatson/johnesr.htm

Re: John's fictions

[publius-aelius.livejournal.com]

And here is something that seems to be arguing precisely what you believe:

http://www.religion-online.org/cgi-bin/relsearchd.dll/showchapter?chapter_id=1214

How can we KNOW these things, though? Ultimately, it IS a question of "faith," and my "faith" (largely formed by my liberal Catholic education, I'll admit) is that these people who reduce Jesus's teachings to a series of intellectual tricks, involving a great deal of rationality, and little existential CHOICE and ACTION are failing to be anything but hypocritical and tepid in their religion. What I admire most about Judaism--and you--is the passion for following God's "ways."

Re: John's fictions

[yahvah.livejournal.com]

If I were to go deeper, I'd actually rather take the time to study the Aramaic versions of the gospels that the 4th century church father Epiphanius mentioned in this (http://www.nazarene.net/nazareneh.htm?) quotation. New Testament scholarship in this day and age should absolutely be understood from a Hebraic perspective, not a Hellenistic Greek perspective.

Incidentally, I've before said that I see the remnant of which Epiphanius speaks in that quote as being the very same remnant mentioned in Revelation 12:17.

Re: John's fictions

[publius-aelius.livejournal.com]

That is beautiful and fascinating. Thank you!