Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.
 

Re: [gthomas] Wine Tasting.

Expand Messages
  • Rick Hubbard
    ... Perhaps I should explain my use use of the term Messiah Marketing. Even though you may remain unconvinced by the entire arguement, R. Funk uses this same
    Message 1 of 7 , Jun 1, 2000
      Robert Tessman wrote:
      >
      > >Message: 4
      > > Date: Tue, 30 May 2000 12:22:15 -0400
      > > From: Rick Hubbard <rhubbard@...>
      > >Subject: Re: The Heavy Tongue.
      > >
      > >Robert Tessman wrote:
      > >>
      > >
      > >> >It is messiah marketing, pure and simple.
      > >>
      > >> That is rather simple. And I don't find much evidence to support this.
      > >> Although to a certain extent there is a bit of marketing but not, as i
      > >> presume you are saying, to simply 'prove' anything in particular.

      > Okay I am wondering why you think they were evangelizing. To evangelize?
      > Well that's circular logic. What's the intent of a business man...to do
      > business. What's the intent of a prostitue...to prostitue herself. What's
      > the intent of a logician...to do logic. Well THAT certainly says alot. Of
      > course the evangelists were intending to evangelize, that's what they do.
      > Of course I couldn't argue against this, and I never intended to. But my
      > question is what were they selling. It is here that I disagree with you
      > that the package one had to buy was simply that Jesus was the Messiah.
      > There are stories of lunatics approaching Jesus and calling him this, with
      > the result that he turned them away. Why not 'resurection' marketing, or
      > 'new wine/covenant' marketing, or 'Holy Spirit' marketing etc., why only
      > 'Messiah' marketing?

      Perhaps I should explain my use use of the term "Messiah Marketing."
      Even though you may remain unconvinced by the entire arguement, R. Funk
      uses this same concept to describe the way in which he believes the
      "Jesus movement" transitioned into what eventually became Christianity.
      He writes, "...the believing community wanted to propagate its faith by
      making it appealing to others. They wanted to market the messiah. They
      did that by making Jesus do all the things other charismatic miracle
      workers did. In addition, they certified his stature, validated his
      standing, with a series of epiphanies, including his appearances to
      themselves after his death. Finally, they set Jesus in a mythical
      narrative frame in which the Christ figure replaced Jesus the Galilean
      sage. All of this was in the interest of missionary propaganda." (Honest
      to Jesus, Polebridge Press, 1996, p241).

      The epsisode in Acts which we are discussing, it seems to me, takes on a
      different hue if it is read against the context of the preceeding
      statement.

      Hopefully this clarifies what I meant by my original remark.

      Rick Hubbard.
    • TmWestbury@aol.com
      Message 2 of 7 , Jun 1, 2000
        << R. Funk uses this same concept to describe the way in which he believes the
        "Jesus movement" transitioned into what eventually became Christianity.
        He writes, "...the believing community wanted to propagate its faith by
        making it appealing to others. They wanted to market the messiah. They
        did that by making Jesus do all the things other charismatic miracle
        workers did. In addition, they certified his stature, validated his
        standing, with a series of epiphanies, including his appearances to
        themselves after his death. Finally, they set Jesus in a mythical
        narrative frame in which the Christ figure replaced Jesus the Galilean
        sage. All of this was in the interest of missionary propaganda." (Honest
        to Jesus, Polebridge Press, 1996, p241). >>

        As just a lay person, not a scholar, who has a keen interest in history I
        find this quite perceptive and it clears up so much of what is in the New
        Testament that otherwise is so confusing. Another enlightening aspect was put
        forth a couple of weeks ago on 60 Minutes when they did a story on the
        Episcopal bishop (can't remember his name) who has really raised a fuss in
        his church. To paraphrase him, he said that for some reason the Christian God
        found it necessary to send his son here as a human sacrifice in order for us
        to be forgiven. If he is in fact all good and all powerful why didn't he just
        say: "You are forgiven." Why was it necessary to spill blood? I suppose,
        being a lay person in all this, I am naive but I had never seen the death of
        Christ as a form of human sacrifice. Yet, in that time and for all earlier
        history sacrificing animals was common and even at the time of Christ the
        Romans were doing it all the time. By asserting that Jesus was a God/human
        who was 'sacrificed' on the cross weren't they just taking this ritual of
        sacrifice that everyone could easily relate to one step further and thus
        making it much more appealing?

        Tom Westbury
      • Michael Grondin
        ... John Shelby Spong - now retired and teaching at Harvard. In addition to his books, which are widely available, there s a nice online essay at
        Message 3 of 7 , Jun 1, 2000
          Tom Westbury wrote:
          >... the Episcopal bishop (can't remember his name) ...

          John Shelby Spong - now retired and teaching at Harvard. In addition to his
          books, which are widely available, there's a nice online essay at
          http://www.globe.net.nz/~gweir/spongth.htm, titled "A Call for a New
          Reformation". (This is on someone's personal site. I don't know whether
          there's a site devoted to Spong or not.) What's unique about Spong is that
          he's taken current historical Jesus research to heart. Many other clerics
          are familiar with it, but don't attempt to integrate it into their faith.

          Mike
        • Jacob Knee
          Just as an aside it seems to me that the logics of Israelite animal sacrifice are widely misunderstood, indeed caricatured, in the christian tradition. The
          Message 4 of 7 , Jun 1, 2000
            Just as an aside it seems to me that the 'logics' of Israelite animal
            sacrifice are widely misunderstood, indeed caricatured, in the christian
            tradition. The recent seminal work (AFAIK) is Jacob Milgrom's commentary on
            Leviticus 1-16 (in the Anchor Bible series).


            Jacob Knee
            (Boston, England)

            > -----Original Message-----
            > From: TmWestbury@... [mailto:TmWestbury@...]
            > Sent: 01 June 2000 15:43
            > To: gthomas@egroups.com
            > Subject: Re: [gthomas] Wine Tasting.
            >
            >
            >
            > As just a lay person, not a scholar, who has a keen interest in history I
            > find this quite perceptive and it clears up so much of what is in the New
            > Testament that otherwise is so confusing. Another enlightening
            > aspect was put
            > forth a couple of weeks ago on 60 Minutes when they did a story on the
            > Episcopal bishop (can't remember his name) who has really raised
            > a fuss in
            > his church. To paraphrase him, he said that for some reason the
            > Christian God
            > found it necessary to send his son here as a human sacrifice in
            > order for us
            > to be forgiven. If he is in fact all good and all powerful why
            > didn't he just
            > say: "You are forgiven." Why was it necessary to spill blood? I suppose,
            > being a lay person in all this, I am naive but I had never seen
            > the death of
            > Christ as a form of human sacrifice. Yet, in that time and for
            > all earlier
            > history sacrificing animals was common and even at the time of Christ the
            > Romans were doing it all the time. By asserting that Jesus was a
            > God/human
            > who was 'sacrificed' on the cross weren't they just taking this ritual of
            > sacrifice that everyone could easily relate to one step further and thus
            > making it much more appealing?
            >
            > Tom Westbury
            >
            >
            >
            > -------------------------------------------------
            > To post to gthomas, send email to gthomas@egroups.com
            > To unsubscribe, send a blank email to gthomas-unsubscribe@egroups.com
            >
            >
          • Jacob Knee
            My own view is that Spong is slightly cranky. A gifted intellectual populariser (which is no mean thing in itself), an idealist, with a penchant for vividly
            Message 5 of 7 , Jun 1, 2000
              My own view is that Spong is slightly cranky. A gifted intellectual
              populariser (which is no mean thing in itself), an idealist, with a penchant
              for vividly promoting slightly eccentric ideas (eg |Goulder's book on
              midrash).

              Jacob Knee
              (Boston, England)

              > -----Original Message-----
              > From: Michael Grondin [mailto:mgrondin@...]
              > Sent: 01 June 2000 16:21
              > To: gthomas@egroups.com
              > Subject: Re: [gthomas] Wine Tasting (Spong)
              >
              >
              > Tom Westbury wrote:
              > >... the Episcopal bishop (can't remember his name) ...
              >
              > John Shelby Spong - now retired and teaching at Harvard. In
              > addition to his
              > books, which are widely available, there's a nice online essay at
              > http://www.globe.net.nz/~gweir/spongth.htm, titled "A Call for a New
              > Reformation". (This is on someone's personal site. I don't know whether
              > there's a site devoted to Spong or not.) What's unique about Spong is that
              > he's taken current historical Jesus research to heart. Many other clerics
              > are familiar with it, but don't attempt to integrate it into their faith.
              >
              > Mike
              >
              >
              > -------------------------------------------------
              > To post to gthomas, send email to gthomas@egroups.com
              > To unsubscribe, send a blank email to gthomas-unsubscribe@egroups.com
              >
              >
            • TmWestbury@aol.com
              Message 6 of 7 , Jun 2, 2000
                << John Shelby Spong - now retired and teaching at Harvard. In addition to his
                books, which are widely available, there's a nice online essay at
                http://www.globe.net.nz/~gweir/spongth.htm, titled "A Call for a New
                Reformation". (This is on someone's personal site. I don't know whether
                there's a site devoted to Spong or not.) What's unique about Spong is that
                he's taken current historical Jesus research to heart. Many other clerics
                are familiar with it, but don't attempt to integrate it into their faith.
                >>
                Thanks Mike for referring this site. His new "theses" are great but I don't
                think he's going to get them debated in the mainstream anytime soon. As a lay
                person I don't understand much of the debate here but I still read everything
                because the subject is so fascinating. I just read Elaine Pagels' book 'The
                Gnostic Gospels' and I'm going to reread it after listening to the debate
                here. The nice thing too about this site is that you all don't allow it to
                degenerate into circus.

                Tom Westbury
              • Kanefer@aol.com
                I found a copy of Spong s book, Liberating the Gospels, today at the used bookstore. From the notes on the back: Bishop John Shelby Spong offers a
                Message 7 of 7 , Jun 2, 2000
                  I found a copy of Spong's book, "Liberating the Gospels," today at the used
                  bookstore. From the notes on the back:

                  "Bishop John Shelby Spong offers a compelling view of the Gospels as
                  thoroughly Jewish texts. Spong powerfully argues that many of the key Gospel
                  accounts of events in the life of Jesus - from the stories of his birth to
                  his physical resurrection - are not literally true. He offers convincing
                  evidence that the Gospels are a collection of Jewish midrashic stories
                  written to convey the significance of Jesus. This remarkable discovery
                  brings us closer to how Jesus was really understood in his day and should be
                  in ours."

                  Spong writes, "Most deeply of all, I am led by my study to move away
                  from the dying theological structures of the Christian past because I am
                  convinced that they do not capture the ultimate truth of either God or
                  Christ. So I now am convinced that I can abandon dying traditions without
                  abandoning the living God. Indeed, once I have scraped the barnacles of the
                  past from the God I worship, this God is seen with a far more compelling
                  insight...." (pg 330, HarperCollins Paperback Edition, 1997).

                  Patti Morey
                Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.