NT Gateway Weblog

Geza Vermes's article from The Guardian on The Passion of the Christ (see blog entry on) has now been reproduced on the Bible and Interpretation web site as part of their section Essays from Bible and Interpretation on The Passion:

Celluloid Brutality
Mel Gibson's film about Christ is horribly gory, historically wrong - and it will inspire judeophobia
By Geza Vermes
Friday February 27, 2004
The Guardian

---

On Paleojudaica, Jim Davila has some interesting and insightful comments on The Passion of the Christ:

REVIEW of Mel Gibson's The Passion of the Christ

Jim comments that "Speaking of Greek, it's strange that the sign on the cross only had the Latin inscription and one in Aramaic", which contrasts with John 19.20 which mentions Greek too. Jim suspects "some pre-Vatican II, pro-Latin Mass agenda here". This is an interesting point -- the lack of Greek in the film as a whole is sharply focused in this context where John 19.20 is clearly the source. It has me wondering how other Jesus films deal with the titulus. One of the difficulties it presents is that it can make the titutuls pretty big. Jesus of Nazareth (dir. Franco Zeffirelli, 1977) certainly has the full Johannine titulus with Greek, Latin and Hebrew but I am struggling to think of any other Jesus films that do. Here is a link to a picture of the cross with the full titulus from Jesus of Nazareth:

Jesus of Nazareth: cross with titulus

I would imagine that the recent Gospel of John (dir. Philip Saville, 2003) must have it, but I don't specifically remembering noticing it. I'll check.

Jim also comments:

I don't believe that anyone could take that amount of flogging and then get up again and walk for any distance, let alone do so carrying a heavy cross. Jesus would have gone into shock during or just after the flogging and would not have been of much use after that. Given the level of sanitation, nutrition, and medical care at the time, he probably would have died from the flogging alone.

The one thing I wonder here is over Josephus' description of Jesus ben Ananias in War 6.5.11, someone who was whipped under the Roman procurator Albinus until his bones were laid bare and yet who still, apparently, survives this appalling torture. Of course Josephus' description might well be exaggerated, but I do not think it implausible that the scourging of Jesus could have contributed to his relatively quick death on the cross (cf. also Jim's comment to this effect). The evangelists do not agree on whether it was three hours or six, but either way this is relatively speedy by the standards of ancient crucifixions, and apparently quicker than the death of the two robbers or brigands whose legs had to be broken according to John.

I agree with Jim about the level of realism and share the feeling over the comparison with, say, the second season of 24 (which was, nevertheless, great television). The comment that "At least The Passion didn't involve that kind of cartoon violence" contrasts a bit with Paul Flesher's "Mel's Jesus: A 'Real Man' or Just a Toon?".

Jim's remarks that "The crucifixion scene in the movie is physically impossible" seem pretty well founded and are worth reading; I had not thought about the pull of the hands on the nails and the looseness of the tieing, which I had not noticed. On the latter, compare the picture of the crucifixion in Jesus of Nazareth above, also pretty loose tieing of the ropes along with crucifixion through the palms.

I thought Jim's comments on the alleged anti-Semitism fairly balanced; I have written on this in a little more detail now in an article on Bible and Interpretation. As I also comment there, I could not agree more with Jim's "wish [that] he had worked with an advisory team of specialists". And finally, I think Jim's suggestion that the Satan in the film resembled the grim reaper in Bill and Ted's Bogus Journey makes more sense than Bruce Chilton's absurd suggestion of Dr Evil and mini-me from Austin Powers (see blog entry on).

---

A new addition to the Historical Jesus: Books and Articles page:

Robert L. Webb, “Jesus' Baptism: Its Historicity and Implications”, IBR Studies (no date), Institute for Biblical Research web site.

---

David Instone-Brewer has uploaded to the web the latest of his Tyndale Tech newsletters (with thanks to Jim Davila on Paleojudaica for the alert). The topic is unicode, and especially unicode for Hebrew. As ever, it is full of useful bits and bobs:

Greek and Hebrew Fonts: Unicode and Older

I think my own experience of working with unicode is more positive than David's and for two reasons, first that I work with Greek a lot but Hebrew only a little and second that I work with PCs and not Macs. There are a few things I would add from my own experience and which may prove helpful to others:

(1) Palatino Linotype: if you are running Windows 2000 or XP you arleady have a unicode font installed called Palatino Linotype. This includes a Greek character set (not all unicode fonts do) and it looks excellent on both screen and paper. The reason that this is worth mentioning is that if you are running Windows 2000 or XP and require a really good Greek font, then you don't have to do anything.

(2) Inputting the text. This is the big issue. I have been using this excellent facility for some time now:

Unicode Classical Greek Inputter

This is designed by James Naughton and provides a very straightforward facility for you to type in unicode and then to copy and paste into your document. You can choose your preferred font (Arial Unicode MS, Cardo, Gentium, Palatino Linotype etc.). If you prefer mouse-clicking to typing, you can do that too. An additional advantage of this web page is that you can save it onto your hard drive and access it whenever or wherever you want, without being connected to the internet. So it's worth saving now while one has the chance -- it might not be there in a year's time!

(3) Quotations from the Greek New Testament: If in a given document you are simply writing out quotations from the Greek New Testament, there is no need to type this afresh. Here there are several options:

(a) Search or browse on The Unbound Bible, choosing "NA26, Accents (Unicode)" and copy and paste the results into your document.

(b) Do the same at the Online Greek Bible, choosing either "Athena" or "Palatino Linotype".

(c) Go to James Naughton's Unicode Classical Greek page and download the complete text of the Greek New Testament in an HTML help file or PDF. The advantage of this is that you can store it locally and use off-line.

Update (19.23): Paul Nikkel comments in Deinde on the Tyndale Tech email and the comments in Paleojudaica. He comments that "Actually the current Mac OS has Unicode support and as far as I know has had it since OS 8.5 or so. Also, contrary to the Tyndale article OpenType fonts are supported on the Mac OS X as far as I know, Mac Developers Article." Read more . . . . .

Update (Saturday, 22.24): Rubén Gómez comments in Biblical Software Review Weblog.

Update (Saturday, 22.32): Jim Davila comments in Paleojudaica. Minor note: Jim comments on Deinde, "If there's a way to link to individual posts on his site, I couldn't find it". You click on the "View comments" link and that gives you an URL for that post plus any subsequent comments on it.

---

The latest addition to the Historical Jesus: Books and Articles page is this article from my former teacher John Ashton of the University of Oxford, with thanks to David Mackinder for alerting me to this:

John Ashton, “The Religious Experience of Jesus”, 2002-03 James Lecture, Harvard Divinity School, in Harvard Divinity Bulletin 32/1 (Fall/Winter 2003): 17-20. [View whole issue in PDF]

---

The media can't get enough of John Dominic Crossan at the moment. This one, alerted in Bible and Interpretation, is from the Daily News:

Crossan examination: Jesus scholar looks at 'Passion' and politics of Christ
By Alexander Stevens / CNC Staff Writer
Thursday, April 22, 2004

"I've written about 20 books and I've gone on book tours, but I don't think I've ever had this kind of media attention," he says, on the phone from his home in Florida. "It's all because of this movie." . . . . .

. . . . . "I think he gored-up the movie," says Crossan. "No scholar has any evidence that the soldiers that scourged Jesus were sadistic brutes who thoroughly enjoyed their work, as opposed to soldiers just doing their job, and wanting to get it over and have a beer." . . . .

. . . . . . "By simply taking the last 12 hours of Jesus' life, he's made it seem as if the entire crowd of Jerusalem is against Jesus," says Crossan. "So here's what you've got (in the movie): You've got non-Christian Jews, and they're all bad, and you've got Christian Jews (such as Mary Magdelene and the Virgin Mary), and they're all good.

"Everywhere else I look, Jews are bad," he adds. "They're jeering Jesus all the way to the crucifixion. I don't see why Jews who, even if they dislike Jesus, would like what the Romans are doing to him.

I think that the problem with this is that it is inaccurate -- it does not accurately describe the way that the film depicts the journey to the cross. On the comment that "No scholar has any evidence that the soldiers that scourged Jesus were sadistic brutes", I would want to point out the evidence from Josephus, War 5.11 which suggests just this, that soldiers could be brutal and sadistic ("wrath and hatred . . . . by way of jest") in the act of crucifixion. It is not a far cry from that to imagining they could be the same way in scourging a victim.

---

The Light House in Wolverhampton (U.K.) has an event on next Tuesday following one of its screenings of The Passion of the Christ and I'll be taking part along with several others:

PANEL DISCUSSION: THE PASSION OF THE CHRIST (18)
Tues 27 April, 6.45pm
Mel Gibson’s film has caused a great deal of interest, from Christians and from people of other faiths and none. There have been comments about the role of cinema in evangelism, the search for authenticity by the use of Latin and Aramaic and accusations of anti-Semitism. An opportunity to hear a variety of views about the film and to express your own opinions. The panel will include: The Rt. Rev’d Michael Bourke Anglican Bishop of Wolverhampton, Dr George Chryssides and Dr Deirdre Burke Religious Studies Lecturers at the University of Wolverhampton, Len Brandes former President of the Jewish Congregation in Wolverhampton and Dr Mark Goodacre from the Graduate Institute for Theology & Religion at Birmingham University.
Cost: free. All welcome.

Further details available here.

---

Both Rubén Gómez on Bible Software Review Weblog and Jim West on Biblical Theology refer to this list:

Top Ten Bible News sites

It's located on Theology.me.uk, a site devoted to Theology discussion and resources. It's a useful site, currently anonymous, though I do happen to know the person who runs it. It is nice to see this blog in the list above, but there are noticeable absentees, most particularly Paleojudaica, which was the inspiration for me to get going in the first place and is without doubt one of the top biblioblogs. Although the list is at the moment effectively limited to blogs, I'd also want to reference at the top Bible and Interpretation. Although new on the scene, Deinde certainly looks like it is going to be a very useful resource too.

---

Bible and Interpretation link to a short but interesting article on John Dominic Crossan in Wisconsin's Capital Times:

Author stresses 4 different Gospels
By Phil Haslanger
April 20, 2004

There are one or two great lines, including ""I would define a fundamentalist as one who doesn't like the way that God organized the Gospels". He also claims that "It's the multiplicity of the Gospel that crowns my work".

---

Robert Gundry has a very interesting letter in the current SBL Forum:

Letters to the Editor

The letter (more of a short article) is headed The Burden of the Passion and you will need to scroll down a little to read it. Although it is not mentioned by name, he is responding directly to Paula Fredriksen's article in the previous month's SBL Forum entitled History, Hollywood, and the Bible: Some Thoughts on Gibson's Passion. This much is clear from his reference to "scholars [who] accuse Gibson of reading the Gospels through the contra Iudaeos tradition". It is all worth reading, but a couple of excerpts anyway. On Pilate:

. . . . we also know from outside the New Testament that he yielded to Jewish pressure on at least one occasion earlier than Jesus' trial (Josephus, Antiquities 18.55-59; War 2.169-74). Pilate's position was precarious . . . . and Pilate himself had complaints lodged against him (Philo, Embassy 299-305; Josephus, Antiquities 18.85-89), the latter of which led to his own deposition. So he had reason to get the jitters and cave in. And since he did cave in despite his belief in Jesus' innocence . . . . he himself does not look innocent in the least.

On the violence:

In this light, the nearly interminable beating of Jesus does not have the look of gratuitous violence in the sadomasochistic mode. Not at all! Its very length and brutality are designed to test the ability of Jesus to carry "the whole burden of sin" and prove Satan wrong. Unbelievers may not like this theology. It may disgust them. But believers or not, reviewers only expose their theological insensitivity to call the violence inflicted on Jesus "gratuitous."

On Satan:

Satan has a comeuppance too. When Jesus dies having successfully borne the weight of the whole world's sin, Satan collapses on the site of Jesus' death-and shrieks. Why? Because that is what demons do when exorcised, when cast out. Shortly before his passion Jesus said, "Now is the prince of this world cast out." Exorcistic language if there ever was such! Satan has had his/her day; but thanks to Jesus' burden-bearing, that day is over.

I didn't think it was "the site of Jesus' death"; but I will have another look when I see it again next week. Also interesting is Gundry's interpretation of the portrayal of the effeminate Herod Antipas. Someone should encourage Gundry to write a full article developing some of his fascinating insights on the film, if they have not already done so.

Incidentally, on reading Fredriksen's article again, it looks like it was written before she saw the film. She refers explicitly only to material she viewed in the earlier version of the script that was read by the "ad hoc committee" and (twice) to the film's trailer. There is nothing in this article that would require knowledge of the film itself.

---

Also on Deinde, news of a response to the AAR Joint Meetings Petition headed by Karen King and Elaine Pagels. It seems that the petition has been unsuccessful. Deinde references Ryan's Lair for a copy of the announcement, which has it under the heading Excellent news from the AAR. The gist of it is that there is no change about the fundamental decision to discontinue joint meetings with the Society of Biblical Literature from 2008, but that a "task force" will be set up to look at the "implementation" of the decision. Additionally, "the Board instructed the executive director to begin exploring the possibility of holding periodic concurrent meetings with other relevant associations" including the SBL.

There is no report from this meeting yet on the AAR Web Site, though I was interested to read the AAR's FAQ about the decision, including answers to the questions "What was the AAR Board's process for making this decision, and why didn't you seek the opinions of members?" and "Is it accurate that the AAR did not consult with the SBL before making this decision?". Both of these FAQs date back to last July. Effectively their answer to the second question is "No".

Update: Jim Davila comments in Paleojudaica and concludes that "The response of the Board of Directors is not satisfactory. With respect, this is not over yet." It certainly seems extraordinary to me that the membership of AAR were not consulted about this major decision.

---

On Deinde "Tsar" makes some useful comments on Harold Scanlin's The Myth of the Paperless Church: Codex, Cognition and Christianity (mentioned here yesterday):

The Myth of Paper

I agree with the characterisation of the article:

While the majority of his article considers the codex and its effect on canon, he starts off by writing about the myth of the paperless office, which comes from the identically titled book by Sellen and Harper. Unfortunately, although he starts with this paragraph and names his article in line with it he doesn't dwell on this issue as it is relevant now.

Yes. Although the article is interesting, the title leads one to expect something slightly different. Scanlin begins by talking about paper's affordances as a reason for the unlikelihood that it will decline in importance. Tsar comments:

It is true that the electronic medium we have today is a poor substitute for the affordances of paper, but to be fair it is only recently that the affordances of this media have started to be realized. The trend since the 70's has been to recreate the properties of paper in an electronic format. Recently though the trend has shifted to understanding and applying the advantages of the electronic medium, such as XML format documents, wikis, dynamically generated pages among others. The important point here is that the strengths of electronic medium are not in the end user/content interaction but in the creation and transmission of the texts, precisely the areas that are of interest to Scanlin in his article but which he leaves unexplored.

One comment on the format of Deinde: it is a great deal easier to read on its blog-style main page than it is on its forum-style subpages. I wonder if all of the forum-style material could also be brought in to the main page with a permalink? Also, my own preference is to know who is writing what. The comments are intelligent and it would be nice to know who "Tsar" is.

---

Part 2 of Stephen Carlson's reflections on The Passion of the Christ is now available on Hypotyposeis. The topic is the question of the film's historical inaccuracies:

My Thoughts on The Passion of the Christ (2 of 3)

---

This notice is posted on behalf of Dapo Asaju. Please correspond with him at the address below.

17th Annual Conference of Nabis
--------------------------------------------------------------------
THEME: DECOLONIZING BIBLICAL STUDIES IN AFRICA
Place- Lagos State University, Ojoo, Lagos State, Nigeria.
Date- July 6-9th 2004

Full details available at:
http://www.nabis.8m.com

This is for the Nigerian Association for Biblical Studies. Dr Asaju is
hosting the conference in his University and enquiries, correspondences,
topics of proposed papers etc should be sent to

Dr. Dapo Asaju
Department of Religions,
Lagos State University, Nigeria
dapoasaju@yahoo.co.uk

I have also added a link to the Nigerian Association for Biblical Studies on the Societies page of the NT Gateway.

---

Thanks to Gail Dawson for the link to this article from The Tower Online, the newsletter for the Catholic University of America (free registration required):

Moloney: 'Scene After Scene is Just Wrong' in Passion Film
Portrayal of Jews is 'So Massively Negative,' Says TRS Dean
By Ryan Schanberger
Published: Friday, March 26, 2004

The themes of the critique will be familiar to most by now, the depiction of Pontius Pilate, the harmonizing of the Gospels, Jesus' carrying the whole cross while the thieves carry the crossbeams and so on:

I didn't like it as a movie," he said, criticizing the violence that "goes on, and on, and on." According to Moloney, the film lacked "narrative tension," and seemed the same all the way through. "In fact, I nearly fell asleep during the way of the cross."

"It's just historically wrong -- it's not what actually happened," Moloney said . . .

There are also some comments from an event at the Catholic University of America featuring Timothy Friedrichsen, William Loewe, William Dinges and Rabbi Jack Moline.

---

I have had a look around and have found a web page for Paul Flesher (see Flesher lecture on The Passion of the Christ):

Introducing Paul Flesher

A couple of the links are dead; for one the correct link can be found here: Wyoming Web Lectures on Religion. This is a project to provide full on-line lectures in real-media from key figures like Jacob Neusner and Rosemary Radford Ruether. This is a great idea and has obviously inspired the provision of Flesher's lecture on The Passion of the Christ.

Thanks to those who have informed me that standing to lecture is the norm among able-bodied Americans. Note that his web page provides a picture of Flesher standing to teach too.

---

On Scholars: M I have added a link to the following:

Troy W. Martin
St Xavier University, Chicago, Illinois, U.S.A.

The page includes a full list of publications.

One of Troy Martin's articles is available on-line in BSW's electronic version of Filología Neotestamentaria:

Troy W. Martin, "The ambiguities of a 'baffling expression'" (Gal 4:12), Filología Neotestamentaria 12 (1999): 123-138

---

On Paleojudaica Jim Davila draws attention to The Journal of Religion and Society 6 (2004), a special edition on The Passion of the Christ. It may be worth adding that the same material also features in the Journal of Religion and Film 8 Special Issue no. 1 (February 2004). The Journal of Religion and Society version has the advantage of some PDF versions of the articles. The Journal of Religion and Film version has added five articles reproduced from the SBL Forum for March, by Nicola Denzey, Paula Fredriksen, John Dart, Frances Flannery-Dailey and Paul Flesher and Robert Torry. Unfortunately, there are a couple of articles from that edition of the SBL Forum not there reproduced, those by Gregory Allen Robbins and W. Barnes Tatum. Having said that, the useful thing about the addition of the SBL articles is that it provides some material written after the film has been viewed. The disappointing thing with the material from the Creighton symposium is that it is all from before the film has been viewed by any of the contributors. Perhaps they will have a follow-up featuring responses to the film?

---

When commenting on Waco earlier today, I noticed that James Tabor has flagged up a new entry on his Jewish Roman World of Jesus:

Personal Reflections on My Viewing of Mel Gibson's "The Passion of the Christ"
James Tabor

One or two comments, though these will be familiar already to regular readers of this blog:

Jesus carried this unbelievably huge full cross, just like in all the traditional paintings, and at times that part of the film bordered on the ridiculous. This portrait, however appealing to tradition, is unsupported in either the Gospels (Greek word stauros means stake) or what we know of Roman history. It is worth noting that the two “thieves,’ crucified with Jesus, as this film portrayed things, had only to carry the “cross beam” to which the arms would be tied or nailed, not the entire cross. This would be in keeping with Roman practice, so why have Jesus bend and break for nearly 30 minutes of the film, carrying a “cross” that surely would have weighed over 100 lbs. Here, as in other places, presumably Gibson read his English Bible where the term “cross” is used, and guided by Sister Emmerich’s visions and Church tradition, decided that this was the way things were.

The source for Jesus carrying the whole cross rather than the cross beam is the report in the Synoptics that Simon of Cyrene helped with carrying Jesus' cross, something that has informed the traditional Christian depiction.

Tabor also writes, with reference to the article by Joe Zias:

Gibson also had Jesus’ nailed to the cross in the hands and feet, rather than through the wrists and the heel bones, as we know was actually the case.

But do we "know" this? The Zias article suggests that this particular victim's arms were tied -- he was not nailed through the wrists or hands. And we do not know, of course, how typical this one victim was. Josephus' evidence in War 5.11 is that victims were crucified in a variety of poses. In fact that passage is interesting also for another element in The Passion of the Christ:

So the soldiers, out of the wrath and hatred they bore the Jews, nailed those they caught, one after one way, and another after another, to the crosses, by way of jest, when their multitude was so great, that room was wanting for the crosses, and crosses wanting for the bodies. [Courtesy of James Tabor, Josephus' References to Crucifixion]

I am interested here in that phrase "by way of jest", something that shows that the horrifying depiction of Roman soldiers deriving pleasure from torturing Jesus may not be far off the mark. It is a truly chilling thought.

Tabor also comments on the fact that it would normally take days for the victims to die and that crucifying victims involved making sure that the death was prolonged and agonising. But there is one thing here that is interesting in Jesus' case -- that the Gospels record that Jesus' death was relatively quick (six hours in the Synoptics and three in John). In John, the two other men needed to have their legs broken to bring about a speedier death.

Tabor also comments that "Not a single Jew is presented with any kind of character development". I think that this is incorrect, as regular readers will know. Simon of Cyrene, the only character whose Jewish identity is explicitly commented upon in the film, shows real character development, from reluctance to get involved with a random criminal to exhorting the soldiers to stop the violence.

---

A new addition on the SBL Forum and continuing its digital technologies theme:

The Myth of the Paperless Church: Codex, Cognition, and Christianity
Harold P. Scanlin

---

Bible and Interpretation point to this article in the Texas Catholic Newspaper:

'The Passion of the Christ'
WAS IT AS IT WAS?
Biblical scholars discern fact from artistic license
By BILL HOWARD

The article features the views of Carolyn Osiek (Texas Christian University’s Brite Divinity School); Brian Schmisek (Director of the University of Dallas’ Institute for Religious and Pastoral Studies in Irving); and Dr. Mark A. Chancey (Southern Methodist University). Chancey's views can be read in full in his Bible and Interpretation article An Unacknowledged Passion. In this newspaper review there are some enjoyable comments, especially Osiek's summary:

“Artistically, it gets an ‘A,’ historically a ‘B+’ and theologically a ‘C.’ I recommend it, as long as one keeps a balanced theological mind. If one has never taken seriously the brutality of a Roman crucifixion, this is a good learning experience. . . . If the film will help us understand Jesus’ great act of love and his solidarity with the victims of torture, it is well worthwhile.”

Given many scholars' overreactions to the film, this article overall is quite refreshing, especially the acknowledgement of the artistic value of the film:

“If you want to portray it in cinema, there’s a lot that you want to fill in,” Schmisek said. “I’m not watching the movie thinking that’s the way it really happened. This was an artistic portrayal of (Gibson’s) interpretation. I would think most people know that it’s not a literal portrayal.”

There is also the frequently mentioned criticism about Jesus carrying his own cross:

Osiek and Chancey had difficulty with the carrying of the cross and crucifixion scenes. One of the inconsistencies, according to Osiek, was Jesus carrying the entire cross, whereas the two prisoners carried just the crossbeam. Jesus would likely have carried the crossbeam, she said.

But, as I have pointed out here before, the source for Jesus carrying the entire cross is the role played by Simon of Cyrene who can then carry the cross for Jesus. That is why in the Gospel of John film, with no Simon, one can have Jesus too carrying the crossbeam only.

---

I am a bit late on the latest from the Review of Biblical Literature. Some New Testament reviews:

Gathercole, Simon J.
Where Is Boasting?: Early Jewish Soteriology and Paul's Response in Romans 1-5
Reviewed by James P. Sweeney

Lapham, F.
Peter: The Myth, the Man, and the Writings
Reviewed by Tobias Nicklas

Lüdemann, Gerd
Paul: The Founder of Christianity
Reviewed by Michael Kaler

Reinhartz, Adele
Befriending the Beloved Disciple: A Jewish Reading of the Gospel of John
Reviewed by Jeffrey S. Siker

Witherington, Ben III, and Laura M. Ice
The Shadow of the Almighty: Father, Son, and Spirit in Biblical Perspective
Reviewed by Ronald R. Clark

---

This new web site is available:

Deinde: Discussion and Resources for Biblical Scholars

It is run by Paul Nikkel (graduate student at the University of Sheffield), Rafael Rodriguez (graduate student at University of Sheffield) and Danny Zacharias (graduate student at Acadia University under Craig Evans). Paul Nikkel describes it in this way: "The purpose of the site is to provide news and commentary relevant to biblical scholars as well as resources and a place for discussion." Its main layout is in blog style so it would be useful to have an RSS feed. Looks like it could be a valuable web site.

---

Bible and Interpretation's Essays From Bible and Interpretation on the Passion adds a link to a video presentation by Paul Flesher:

“The Passion” as an Icon
By Paul Flesher, Video Presentation, Real Player plug-in
(University of Wyoming: April 2004)

It's a 45 minute lecture. It is an accessible piece; it does not assume any major knowledge of the Bible, and takes one steadily through one Biblical scholar's reflections on the film. At about 20 minutes in he discusses some of the images that come from other Jesus films, citing Jesus Christ Superstar (for Herod Antipas), Last Temptation of Christ and Jesus of Montreal (for the cross falling on Jesus). As far as one can tell it is a recording of some kind of public lecture, with Flesher sitting down to address his audience. (Is this usual among American lecturers?) At about 27 minutes in the lecture finishes and there are some quite interesting questions.

Update (20 April): there is a web page linking to this talk here:

The Passion of the Christ discussion

---

On Hypotyposeis Stephen Carlson has published the first part of his thoughts on The Passion of the Christ:

My thoughts on The Passion of the Christ (1 of 3)

This entry is not showing up in my bloglines subscription, perhaps because it is before Stephen changed the feed, so you may need to go to the link above if you have not already read it. Stephen writes, ""Passion" is not an intellectual understanding but a powerful emotional feeling, and Gibson deftly exploits the medium of film to evoke just such a response in his audience" and he speculates that "It is probably the intensity of viewer's unavoidable emotional reaction that is responsible for stridency of some of the reviews to the film", something I have often wondered myself. He explores the inappropriate use of the term "pornography" in reviews of the film and compares the violence here with the violence in Pulp Fiction and Fargo. I am looking forward very much to Parts 2 and 3.

---

It is good to see Stephen Carlson's Hypotyposeis blog back with a vengeance. If, like me, you read all your blogs via Bloglines, you might have missed several entries. You will need to adjust the feed for Hypotyposeis -- unsubscribe from the old feed and then enter http://www.mindspring.com/~scarlson/hypotyposeis/atomfeed.xml.

---

Also well worth mentioning is James Tabor and Eugene Gallagher, Why Waco?
Cults and the Battle for Religious Freedom in America (California: University of California Press, 1995). Chapter 1 is available on-line:

What might have been

. . . . A person familiar with the biblical texts could have perceived the situation in wholly different terms from the government's "hostage rescue." For the Branch Davidians, no one was a hostage. The only "rescue" they needed was from the government itself. In their view, the federal agents represented an evil government system, referred to in the book of Revelation as "Babylon." The idea of "surrendering to proper authority," as the government demanded throughout the next seven weeks, was absolutely out of the question for these believers unless or until they became convinced it was what God willed. As they saw it, their group had been wantonly attacked and slaughtered by government agents whom they understood to be in opposition to both God and his anointed prophet David Koresh. Their fate was now in God's hands.

The Waco situation could have been handled differently and possibly resolved peacefully. This is not unfounded speculation or wishful thinking. It is the considered opinion of the lawyers who spent the most time with the Davidians during the siege and of various scholars of religion who understand biblical apocalyptic belief systems such as that of the Branch Davidians. There was a way to communicate with these biblically oriented people, but it had nothing to do with hostage rescue or counterterrorist tactics. Indeed, such a strategy was being pursued, with FBI cooperation, by Phillip Arnold of the Reunion Institute in Houston and James Tabor of the University of North Carolina at Charlotte, one of the authors of this book. Arnold and Tabor worked in concert with the lawyers Dick DeGuerin and Jack Zimmerman, who spent a total of twenty hours inside the Mount Carmel center between March 29 and April 4, communicating directly with Koresh and his main spokesperson, Steve Schneider. Unfortunately, these attempts came too late. By the time they began to bear positive results, decisions had already been made in Washington to convince Attorney General Janet Reno to end the siege by force . . . .

Update: See comments from Jim Davila in Paleojudaica.

---

On this day when in 1993 77 cult members died in a fire at their compound in Waco. This morning's Guardian publishes an article from its archive, Funeral pyre at Waco : Two Britons among cult's survivors. Not long ago, Kenneth Newport published a fine book called Apocalypse and Millennium : Studies in Biblical Eisegesis (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2000), Chapter 9 of which is "Waco apocalypse: the Book of Revelation in the Branch Davidian tradition".

More on Waco later.

---