Alan,
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.
Edward
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 -
Best, Alan
On Sun, Aug 4, 2019 at 9:02 AM Edward Picot via NetBehaviour
<netbehaviour@lists.netbehaviour.org
<mailto:netbehaviour@lists.netbehaviour.org>> wrote:
Dear all,
'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)
Edward
_______________________________________________
NetBehaviour mailing list
NetBehaviour@lists.netbehaviour.org
<mailto:NetBehaviour@lists.netbehaviour.org>
https://lists.netbehaviour.org/mailman/listinfo/netbehaviour
--
/=====================================================/
/directory http://www.alansondheim.org tel 718-813-3285
//email sondheim ut panix.com <http://panix.com>, sondheim ut
gmail.com <http://gmail.com>/
/=====================================================/
_______________________________________________
NetBehaviour mailing list
NetBehaviour@lists.netbehaviour.org
https://lists.netbehaviour.org/mailman/listinfo/netbehaviour
_______________________________________________
NetBehaviour mailing list
NetBehaviour@lists.netbehaviour.org
https://lists.netbehaviour.org/mailman/listinfo/netbehaviour
