|
Source: (consider it)
|
Thread: Kerygmania: What do we do with the cursing psalms?
|
BWSmith
Shipmate
# 2981
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Cusanus:
Spot the contradiction here. Surely the 'liberal' (in the sense of 19th century liberal Protestantism) project was to attempt to recover the "Jesus of history" from the "Christ of faith". Similar attempts by the Jesus Seminar seem inspired by the same impetus. Where you get the notion of a 'demythologised Christ of faith' from is beyond me.
Yes, but that 19th-century effort came to an end with Schweitzer's "Quest for the Historical Jesus". For the first half of the 20th century, there appeared to be no way to approach the historical Jesus without dealing with Schweitzer's unpleasant questions about an "apocalytic prophet" who wrongly predicted that the world would come to a shuddering end.
It is in that context that Bultmann went in the other direction (emphasizing sayings over history & demythologizing the gospels as form-critical statements about the early church) and this "New Quest" has formed the context of the sayings-based work of the Jesus Seminar.
So while the original liberal effort was to recover a "reasonable" historical figure living in an "unreasonable" setting of "superstitions", Schweitzer gave the theological left every reason to believe that the Jesus of history was just as unpleasant a subject as those OT writers who wrote of "miracles" and "Deuteronomistic theology" of a God who punishes his people when they break their Law.
To summarize, this "New Quest" still represents the sum of the consequences of consistently-applied 19th-century liberal ideology to the study of Jesus: The Jesus of the gospels defies rationality so completely that if one searches for a "rational" and "reasonable" kernel to the figure behind the gospels, one will end up throwing out the historical Jesus altogether in favor of a "sayings-based Christ of faith".
Of course, today we live in a "postmodern" age where the conservative and liberal labels of a former age do not apply neatly to the "Third Quest of the Historical Jesus" led by scholars such as NT Wright. It is within the approach of the Third Quest that scholars on the left and right can begin to approach a Jesus on the cross historically. (But my backsliding friend Karl has not demonstrated any interest in classical perspectives within this thread, except to suggest that those perspectives are morally inferior to his own contemporary western perspective, and as such he has much more in common with the Bultmannian perspective than that of Wright.)
Posts: 722 | From: North Carolina, USA | Registered: Jul 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
BWSmith
Shipmate
# 2981
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Karl: Liberal Backslider:
quote:
Originally posted by BWSmith:
quote:
Originally posted by Karl: Liberal Backslider:
What the hell has Hitler's invasion of France and those children's deaths got to do with justice or punishment? Absolutely fuck all, unless you're painting Hitler as an agent of justice. Which is totally fucked up.
No, the point is that "dead French children happen". Given that, what is the proper punishment if the underlying principle is "eye for an eye"?
It sure as hell isn't the killing of German children. That's just murder on top of murder.
If "eye for an eye" dictates the killing of innocent German children, then "eye for an eye" is fundamentally unjust and should be opposed.
No, there's not anything wrong with "eye for an eye" as far as punishment goes. If the punishment fits the crime, there's nothing more balanced and just than "eye for an eye".
However, because the effects of crime never reduce down to individual actions and payments, but are corporate, "eye for an eye" always leads to never-ending cycles of vengeance.
(And that's where Jesus comes in, not as the patron saint for not punishing evildoers, but as the LORD who recognizes the insufficiency of the Law for bringing reconciliation and healing from evil, and in response gives the ultimate sacrifice for sin.)
But getting back to the OP about dashing babies against the rock - the task of understanding this passage within its context is different from the task of deciding what we do with it today (and I probably wasn't clear on that point earlier - I guess that's why Karl is so angry, perhaps he assumes that I'm advocating Achan-justice in our legal systems today?). There's nothing wrong with the Psalm passage within the literary themes and integrity of the OT, as long as one recognizes that the application for us Christians today comes from nailing that Psalm to the cross (which is not the same as just "throwing it out" as barbaric).
Posts: 722 | From: North Carolina, USA | Registered: Jul 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
|
BWSmith
Shipmate
# 2981
|
Posted
It's a shame that you'll miss out on my exegesis of the apocryphal narrative of "Elisha Clubs the Baby Seals at Gilgal"...
Posts: 722 | From: North Carolina, USA | Registered: Jul 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
TubaMirum
Shipmate
# 8282
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Karl: Liberal Backslider:
If "eye for an eye" dictates the killing of innocent German children, then "eye for an eye" is fundamentally unjust and should be opposed.
I think you're quite right about this. Matter of fact, "an eye for an eye" was itself a correction of an injustice: corporate guilt. Prior to the giving of this Law, an entire family, or village, could be punished for what one member of the family did. An "eye for an eye" was itself an attempt to do justice - to say that no punishment harsher than the crime should be meted out.
So you're absolutely right that injustice should be opposed; it's the Biblical point of view, matter of fact.
[ 27. June 2007, 18:37: Message edited by: TubaMirum ]
Posts: 4719 | From: Right Coast USA | Registered: Aug 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
Bullfrog.
Prophetic Amphibian
# 11014
|
Posted
Perhaps a verbal expression of fantasized revenge is safer than a physical act of real revenge?
Could this be the ancient equivalent to kids blowing off steam by shooting each other via video games?
Hmmm...
--------------------
Some say that man is the root of all evil
Others say God's a drunkard for pain
Me, I believe that the Garden of Eden
Was burned to make way for a train. --Josh Ritter, Harrisburg
Posts: 7522 | From: Chicago | Registered: Feb 2006
| IP: Logged
|
|
pimple
Ship's Irruption
# 10635
|
Posted
Why not? Isn't that what clasical (and modern)tragedy, and films like The Passion of the Christ are all about?
--------------------
In other words, just because I made it all up, doesn't mean it isn't true (Reginald Hill)
Posts: 8018 | From: Wonderland | Registered: Nov 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
Moo
Ship's tough old bird
# 107
|
Posted
bump
--------------------
Kerygmania host
---------------------
See you later, alligator.
Posts: 20365 | From: Alleghany Mountains of Virginia | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
Printer-friendly view
