June 23, 2009

The apostles were a bit thick (Matthew 16)

6 Then Jesus said unto them, Take heed and beware of the leaven of the Pharisees and of the Sadducees.
7 And they reasoned among themselves, saying, It is because we have taken no bread.
8 Which when Jesus perceived, he said unto them, O ye of little faith, why reason ye among yourselves, because ye have brought no bread?
9 Do ye not yet understand, neither remember the five loaves of the five thousand, and how many baskets ye took up?
10 Neither the seven loaves of the four thousand, and how many baskets ye took up?
11 How is it that ye do not understand that I spake it not to you concerning bread, that ye should beware of the leaven of the Pharisees and of the Sadducees?
12 Then understood they how that he bade them not beware of the leaven of bread, but of the doctrine of the Pharisees and of the Sadducees.

Duh.

*****

11 Not that which goeth into the mouth defileth a man; but that which cometh out of the mouth, this defileth a man.
12 Then came his disciples, and said unto him, Knowest thou that the Pharisees were offended, after they heard this saying?
13 But he answered and said, Every plant, which my heavenly Father hath not planted, shall be rooted up.
14 Let them alone: they be blind leaders of the blind. And if the blind lead the blind, both shall fall into the ditch.
15 Then answered Peter and said unto him, Declare unto us this parable.
16 And Jesus said, Are ye also yet without understanding?

*****

Which makes me think that if these were the people closest to him and were supposed to spread his word they can't have done that a good a job, can they?

I understand parables are a helpful rhetoric device but you have to know your audience better than that.

Posted by claudia Permalink | Comments (0)

March 04, 2009

Sarcasm

(Paul talking to philosophers in Athens)

When they heard about a resurrection of the dead, some began joking about it, while others said, "We will hear you again about this." - Acts 17:32

As in, "Let's talk about it when you resurrect"?

Posted by claudia Permalink | Comments (0)

January 08, 2006

The modernity of Lent

Disclaimer: I am faith impaired and have the spiritual depth of a soup plate. And I'm also tremendously envious of those who can find comfort in religion.

++++

I have a hard time dealing with religious rituals and traditions because most of them are outdated and its meaning is lost in the dust of Time. And I hate doing anything just because I'm supposed to (I'm the nagging person in the last row of chairs in the church that keeps repeating "Why???"). Rituals shouldn't be followed like a superstition - as "if you don't go to mass you'll be punished" - but its original meaning should be acknowledged - "I attend mass because I'm celebrating my faith in God with fellow believers".

Once in a while I come across some clever interpretation of a religious ritual. Being able to get into the spirit of an action - rather than obeying mindlessly to some prescription - and coming up with new solutions fascinates me.

And this is what I found browsing through the very interesting, high brow blog The Penkill Papers. Yes, Anne, I'm fascinated! :-) And cheese....the supreme sacrifice!

"After the excesses of Christmas it's good to know that Lent will soon enough be here again (begins on Ash Wednesday, March 1). I've decided to keep it again this year in my own way by giving up sugar, cheese, wine and other alcohol. The wine and alcohol will be easy for me to live without, but life without sugar and cheese will present a real challenge. Especially the cheese. Oh, the cheese!

A forgotten benefit of fasting in our time is that what we don't consume ourselves becomes available to others. This is perhaps no longer true in our global economy, or at least not with quite the same directness as in the Middle Ages. In any small community long ago, the local population would be more or less dependent on whatever food was raised by local farmers. As Carolyn Walker Bynum documented in Holy Feast and Holy Fast: The Religious Significance of Food to Medieval Women, women who fasted for religious reasons (giving up much more than sweets and cheese, needless to say — Catherine of Siena was reported to have survived for extended periods on a diet of nothing more than consecrated hosts, an extreme dietary fetish that the Church frowned on) saw the direct results of their sacrifice in the distribution of surplus food to the poor.

In this spirit, I've decided to donate all the money I save on wine and other drinks and treats during Lent to charity. After seeing this World Society for the Protection of Animals commercial about bear farming in Asia (where thousands of wild bears are held captive in tiny cages to have the bile from their gall bladders painfully extracted daily), I've decided to give my 'Lent money' to the WSPA. (If anyone objects that my donation will benefit animals rather than people, let me assure them that my Lent donation is not made in isolation.)"

I just hope more people who were considering fasting will be inspired by this.

Posted by claudia Permalink

December 06, 2005

Why Dan Brown should pursue the "Jesus Lived In India" Theory

I read the DaVinci code last year. I was at New Delhi's airport facing a long flight to Frankfurt without anything to read. I rushed to an airport bookshop and bought it. I tend to avoid popular books - it's my intellectual pretentiousness, you see :-) - but it seemed an easy read for a flight and I wanted to see what everyone was talking about.

I enjoyed it immensely. Like I enjoy popcorn-eating-hollywood movies when I'm in the mood for it.

When some friends and colleagues started talking to me about it I was amazed to discover how everyone took it rather seriously ("Dan Brown did a lot of research for it", "There are several historians who say it's a very well written book with solid proof", "maybe it's all true", etc.,etc.)

I had fun reading it. The scholarly, conspiratory tone only made it more fun. Accurate or not, it doesn't matter. Like reading a magazine horoscope. Or it's like reading a much poorer version of some of Arturo Pérez-Reverte entertaining adventure novels.

And I'm not even a religious person, I'm not offended by some of the assumptions the book makes, I was quite amused by them.

So, I was relieved to read this article by Umberto Eco:

"G K Chesterton is often credited with observing: "When a man ceases to believe in God, he doesn't believe in nothing. He believes in anything." Whoever said it - he was right. We are supposed to live in a sceptical age. In fact, we live in an age of outrageous credulity.

The "death of God", or at least the dying of the Christian God, has been accompanied by the birth of a plethora of new idols. They have multiplied like bacteria on the corpse of the Christian Church -- from strange pagan cults and sects to the silly, sub-Christian superstitions of The Da Vinci Code.

It is amazing how many people take that book literally, and think it is true. Admittedly, Dan Brown, its author, has created a legion of zealous followers who believe that Jesus wasn't crucified: he married Mary Magdalene, became the King of France, and started his own version of the order of Freemasons. Many of the people who now go to the Louvre are there only to look at the Mona Lisa, solely and simply because it is at the centre of Dan Brown's book.

The pianist Arthur Rubinstein was once asked if he believed in God. He said: "No. I don't believe in God. I believe in something greater." Our culture suffers from the same inflationary tendency. The existing religions just aren't big enough: we demand something more from God than the existing depictions in the Christian faith can provide. So we revert to the occult. The so-called occult sciences do not ever reveal any genuine secret: they only promise that there is something secret that explains and justifies everything. The great advantage of this is that it allows each person to fill up the empty secret "container" with his or her own fears and hopes."

+-+-+-+

In the same aiport bookshop I bought another popular book in India: "Jesus lived in India" (synopsis here). It's even more outrageous which makes it even more fun than Dan Brown's fantasies. It's so far fetched I swear I wish it was true :-)

I had read Catherine Clément's "Jesus at the stake" in which she writes about these jesus-lived-in-India theories in fictional terms. I found it very interesting and amusing that Jesus had had tibetan buddhist teachings, survived the crucifixion by practising yoga and fled to Kashmir, dying there of old age. As a secular humanist, it seemed as good explanation as the Vatican's :-). When I went to India I had the chance to ask some Indians about this theory. All of them said: "Of course he lived and died here! Everyone knows that! His tomb is up there in Srinagar...go see it for yourself!" - rather mockingly. Too bad that Srinagar is in Kashmir and that I'm rather cowardly or else I would have gone there.

"Ahmadi Muslims believe that the physical ascension of Jesus to Heaven is a later interpolation. The term "heaven" is used for spiritual bliss which the righteous enjoy after a mortal life.

Jesus was sent to the lost sheep of the house of Israel (Matt. 15:24). Out of twelve tribes of Israel, only two were in the region where Jesus preached. The other ten tribes, as a result of exile, were domiciled in the eastern countries, especially in Afghanistan and Kashmir. It was imperative for Jesus to migrate eastwards to complete his mission.

There is overwhelming evidence that the people of Afghanistan, Kashmir and neighbouring regions are of Israelite ancestry. Their physical features, languages, folklore, customs, and festivals attest to their Israelite heritage. Evidence also comes from the names they give to their villages, their monuments, and ancient historical works and inscriptions.

The presence of Jesus in India is recorded in the ancient Indian literature, and records of Kashmir. Jesus came to Kashmir from the Holy Land during the reign of Raja Gopadatta (49-109 AD) to proclaim his prophethood to the Israelites. He was known as Yusu (Jesus) of the children of Israel. It is recorded that great number of people recognized his holiness and piety and became his disciples. " - more here.

They're making a documentary on it in India.

"According to legend Jesus Christ's tomb lies at Rozabal in Srinagar's old town . "Rozabal" is an abbreviation of Rauza Bal, meaning "tomb of a prophet". Isa (the Islamic name for Christ) was in fact also known as Yuz Asaf (Leader of the Healed). At the entrance there is an inscription explaining that Yuz Asaf is buried along with another Moslem saint. Both have gravestones which are oriented in North-South direction, according to Moslem tradition. However, through a small opening the true burial chamber can be seen, in which there is the Sarcophagus of Yuz Asaf in East-West (Jewish) orientation.

According to advocates of this theory there are carved footprints on the grave stones and when closely examined, carved images of a crucifix and a rosary. The footprints of Yuz Asaf have what appear to be scars represented on both feet, if one assumes that they are crucifixion scars, then their position is consistent with the scars shown in the Turin Shroud (left foot nailed over right). Crucifixion was not practised in Asia, so it is quite possible that they were inflicted elsewhere, such as the Middle East. The tomb is called by some as "Hazrat Issa Sahib" or "Tomb of the Lord Master Jesus". Ancient records acknowledge the existence of the tomb as long ago as 112AD.

Thus the legend that Jesus Christ Himself is buried in Kashmir!"

More books about it here.

Posted by claudia Permalink

May 01, 2005

San Martin de Porres

Posted by claudia Permalink