HJ and somatic experience (was JS)
- On August 23, Michael Ducey wrote:
>I wasn't at the O'Hare Terminal, Michael, but I did just as you when I saw
>I happened to be in O'Hare terminal on Easter week-end of April 9, 1996,
>and while I was waiting for my plane to San Francisco, I noticed the
>editions of Time, Newsweek and U.S. News and World Report side by side on
>the magazine rack. They all featured cover pictures of the risen Jesus. So
>I bought all three of them.
those covers. I guess we share the same somatic responses.
>The cover stories of these "secular" journalsThese seems to be a semi-annual event for these mags. Christmas and Easter
>were all on the same subject: the impact on christianity of a group of
>theologians who gather periodically in a format called The Jesus Seminar.
is time to write about HJ. What bothers me, Michael, is the fact that the
mags talk about Jesus, and don't mention the man Yeshu. So there is no there
is no there there. And, yes, as you point out, "the people who write about
Christianity for Newsweek do not really have any existential inwardness.
They are pure Cartesian rationalists. (Time and U.S.News were the same.)
This is a bit distressing. It says that the literate secular culture of today is
>The members of the Jesus Seminar -- who teach theology at divinity schoolsLudermann apparently didn't understand the science of the relationship
>or departments of religion in various places in the U.S. and Europe -- hold
>the opinion that after all is said and done, the resurrection of Jesus as a
>bodily, historical event, simply did not happen. They agree with the pithy
>pronouncement of the German theologian Gerd Ludemann that the resurrection
>is "an empty formula" that must be rejected by anyone holding "a scientific
>world view." The Newsweek article made the following observation about the
>approach of the Jesus Seminar without further comment: "According to this
>elaborate academic protocol, the Resurrection is ruled a priori out of
>court because it transcends time and space." (p. 65)
between the body and the universe; he was probably too much into his head.
Probably constipated as hell. As for transcending time and space, who can
explain from whence we came? And yet we do not doubt our own existence. All
birth and all death is beyond time and space.
Still, are you creating a JS straw man? The NT is hopelessly contradictory
about the resurrection. The HJ movement brings us face to face with
contradictions, and possibly leads us to the deeper waters.
>The trappings of the minority view today are perhaps more elaborate thanThis is a little obscure. If I understand you at all, I think you mean to
>they were in the distant past. The members of the Jesus Seminar write large
>books and scholarly papers with hundreds of footnotes. And those who
>disagree with them also write extensive tracts on the other side. It seems
>to me that the books are actually a smoke screen that conceals the true
>foundation of the difference of opinion.
>For it seems that the opinion as to whether Jesus rose from the dead or not
>was originally a bodily perception that preceded all thinking.
say something like: we can only know Being through our whole being, and not
simply through thought. And since we have bodies, the sensation of our whole
being includes the body.
>Perhaps no event in human history is so critically and essentiallyYou are getting a little carried away with the romance, perhaps. Yeshu is
not the only saint who ever lived. To put some perspective on things, it
must be remembered that there always have been, and there always will be
living beings just like him. It's a little one-sided to make a religion out
of one man.
> So, the way some one has to know that the resurrection is "real"I think you are right up to a point. To know anything whatsoever about God
>or not is the same way that some one knows that the food is good or the air
>is bad. There is a bodily way of knowing things to which the story of the
>resurrection makes either a valid or an invalid appeal.
>But the books are just devices to make the decision look more rational than
>it really is. They are most powerful for those who live in their heads, not
>in their whole bodies. They are currency for a head-tripping sub-culture,
>and it should come as no surprise that in this culture at this time a
>head-tripping sub-culture should have a considerable following.
> Real assent to the resurrection of Jesus requires a somatic experience.
requires your whole being, and not just your head. And yes, your chi.
These folks, however, are not necessarily trying to find out about God, but
are instead trying to find out about a man. In a way, they are keeping us
honest. Because thinking about God too much is also not good. Two thousand
years of thinking about the resurrection wasn't enough to create a very
profound form of Christianity for the masses. Indeed, much of Christianity
is a fairly absurd and close-minded juvenile religion.
So these HJ folks are pruning the tree for us. In a way, it's kind of like
what Buddhism did for Hinduism. It removed all the fantasy, all the thought
about God, and sought only that which was most noble. While many HJ
researchers may not be at that point, some are.
Even so, you are right. The mind is a trap. Unless a man practices some
relationship to being (as the Buddhists most certainly do) there can be no
real development. Thus I see Buddhist Christianity as the logical
development of Christianity as it exists today.