As always, thanks for the response. I've never seen 'Good Omens' - probably just as well, or it might have influenced me. I agree with you about the differences between Old Testament and New Testament, though. To me the Old Testament is more mythic/poetic, whereas the New Testament is more of a direct challenge, it makes me feel more anxious, and I think that's because in many ways it feeds straight into the modern era. It's asking us at every turn whether we believe it or not - and I find myself constantly going through a process of thinking 'Okay, I can believe in this bit (eg. the Sermon on the Mount), but I can't buy into that bit (eg. the resurrection)'. But the magnificent thing, which it shares with the Old Testament, is that it's prepared to acknowledge other points of view - Doubting Thomas being a case in point. 'I won't believe it until I see it with my own eyes.' It seems to me that the Jewish tradition of writing is quite different from other ancient traditions in that respect.
On 09/08/2019 22:05, Alan Sondheim via NetBehaviour wrote:
Hi, just 'got' to this, it reminds me of the tv show Good Omens. Like the play, I've never gotten with the 'Son of God' in any form, why not Children of God, let it go at that? I don't think J. made any such claims himself, everything was the craziness years later. Meanwhile on the darker side of things I keep thinking also of Mel Gibson's passion film - which is anti-semitic, ugly. The New T. reminds me of something sutured, confimed; the Old T. is all over the place, contradictory, a collocation of texts from everywhere. The New is kinder. For me the Old is more interesting because more alien on one hand, then thanks to trump etc., all too familiar. I've often wondered where the resurrection came from, the cave, rising from the dead, etc. etc. - very strange. And then why Joseph's sperm set aside? And Joseph? All this melds uncomfortably for me because of its current ramifications in the U.S. People hold onto their beliefs w/ their teeth bared - look at Kashmir now ... Anyway, thank you! These are some of the thoughts that came to mind, roiling out and confused of course - your text here is great - the weaving of the strands of memory and future-text, already the hardening of positions. Mary M. is by far the most interesting of anyone - forget which gospel - her sexual relationship w/ Jesus - looked it up - Gospel of Philip - etc. - from my viewpoint, at least they're human -
On Sun, Aug 4, 2019 at 9:02 AM Edward Picot via NetBehaviour <email@example.com> wrote:
'The Doubter's Mysteries' are an attempt to write a short cycle of
Mystery Plays - ie. plays based on Bible stories, like the Medieval
Mystery Plays of York, Chester and Wakefield - from the point of view of
a sceptical modern audience; an audience which either doesn't believe in
God, or can't work out what he's playing at.
There are fourteen of these plays, and the eleventh is now online: 'The
Trial of Jesus'.
http://edwardpicot.com/mysteries/12theresurrectionofjesus.html (or for
the full series so far, visit http://edwardpicot.com/mysteries)
NetBehaviour mailing list
_______________________________________________ NetBehaviour mailing list NetBehaviour@lists.netbehaviour.org https://lists.netbehaviour.org/mailman/listinfo/netbehaviour
NetBehaviour mailing list