Came across this statement by Jacques Ellul this (Sunday) morning:

What constantly marked the life of Jesus was not nonviolence but in every situation the choice not to use power. This is infinitely different.

andrew L
what reading brings you to ellul?
I have followed his english works these last years and think him very interesting.
gramsci
lets have a calm talk about the evidence for your frakenstein jesus theory.
maybe you could put a few paragraphs together on the process of the mythmaking in such a short time given 1st century palestinian realities.

andteater wrote:but in the same sense that you can applaud the authors of the bible for creating this amazing character, Jesus...

how much can you dislike them for being responsible for the church, encouraging anti-semitism and the like...

The writers of the New Testament are not one and the same as some of the nitwits that followed. I would hesitate before holding them responsible for others' later actions.

i've mentioned the book before , but its called "the mythmaker - paul and the invention of christianity"....

basically - the theory exists that paul took what he learned of the historical anti-roman occupater message and mixed it with the myths of his early life as a pagan (mentioned in the thread - the many god's who were born of a virgin, resurrected after three days, etc).

From my understanding, Paul was Greek, but Jewish. Was he pagan before? (I can't completely remember but I don't think so.) I do remember his being a mystic/ecstatic sort of religious person.

(EDIT: Yup, he was never pagan.)

For a long time, the anti-Paul stance has held strong ground. Geez, I've been bitching about Paul since I was 18 or so.

There are some new books out about Paul that look really interesting. One is In Search of Paul: How Jesus' Apostle Opposed Rome's Empire with God's Kingdom by John Dominic Crossan. I heard an interview with him, and he definitely feels like Paul has been misunderstood. I found Crossan warm and smart as a whip. As a linguist, he challenges a lot of what has been attributed to Paul.

I haven't had time to read his book (schoolwork before fun); has anyone else? I think challenging bad feelings about Paul can only be worthwhile.

What constantly marked the life of Jesus was not nonviolence but in every situation the choice not to use power. This is infinitely different.

Well, unless you were a fig tree, sure. What about Jesus going for figs after fun at the temple, finding none on the tree, being told rationally by his apostles "You know, man, figs ain't in season yet" and then going into a rage, making the fig tree wither and die?
That's a total Seagal moment if I ever saw one.

vilna43 wrote:andrew L
what reading brings you to ellul?
I have followed his english works these last years and think him very interesting.

I skim-read The Technological Society (years ago). I came across this specific quote by following a link from one of my favourite blogs, wood s lot.

ellul was an interesting cat: Christian; Marxist; fought in the French Resistance; Anti-Communist; critic of Liberation Theology; anarchist, etc. Bu then, the cross-pollination of theology and radical social theory is characteristic of a lot of radical French philosophy (Derrida's via negativa, Alan badiou's appeal to Paul, de Certeau's Jesuit foundations, etc).

Though a pervert, Jesus was great in The Big Lebowski.

So Supporting Cast: Jesus, gets a Not Crap in my book.

Zombies eat people.
Jesus didn't eat people.
Jesus was not a zombie.

Christopher_Dragon wrote:Zombies eat people.
Jesus didn't eat people.
Jesus was not a zombie.

Yeah, but people eat Jesus!

Every time they take communion they believe they are literally eating his flesh and drinking his blood!

Ironic eh?

Gramsci wrote:

Christopher_Dragon wrote:Zombies eat people.
Jesus didn't eat people.
Jesus was not a zombie.

Yeah, but people eat Jesus!

Every time they take communion they believe they are literally eating his flesh and drinking his blood!

Ironic eh?

No.
It's not ironic.
It's called symbolism.

Christopher_Dragon wrote:

Gramsci wrote:

Christopher_Dragon wrote:Zombies eat people.
Jesus didn't eat people.
Jesus was not a zombie.

Yeah, but people eat Jesus!

Every time they take communion they believe they are literally eating his flesh and drinking his blood!

Ironic eh?

No.
It's not ironic.
It's called symbolism.

For some it is symbolism. Others believe that they are literally eating his flesh and drinking his blood.