jesus christ superhero?

[duke_aldhein]

On tomorrow morning's Radio Sheffield Breakfast, we have a local RE-teacher-turned-academic who apparently 'sees many parallels between Jesus and Superman'. This, the Daily Torygraph informs me, is her idea for making RE relevant to kids who've never been to Sunday School

Comments

[blackcurrants]

I'm currently reading Tyndale's account of trying to get the new testament translated into English

[duke_aldhein]

That's a brilliant story! Thank you.

I've been thinking a lot about story-telling - how much more effective I'd be in all areas of life if I told more stories - instead of clambering on to my soapbox-cum-pulpit. In what sense, "effective"? I think I mean what my new friend Anthony calls "gentle power", power without control.

So I'll remember your friend's daughter next time I want to explain why Jesus is nothing like a superhero.

[blackcurrants]

i'm not very knowledgeable about the scripture and all that but what about all those miracles?

[blackcurrants]

oh the miracles are good, I'm not dissing them at all - I'm just saying that.. well, using your spit and some mud to cure a man of blindness is not as exciting/superpowery as flying or lifting up mountains, which some of the hindu pantheon do. Jesus touched people to cure them, or just spoke to them. not so superman-ish, more.. believable? maybe? I mean - he broke bread to feed the 5,000 - he didn't zap it with his laser-eyes.
oooh, now there's a thought...

[duke_aldhein]

Yeah, it's interesting how Jesus's "miracles" tend to be based on the power of relationship, the ability of human interaction to alter people's (experience of) reality, rather than the power of control. (My friend Anthony, himself no Christian, writes about the dynamics of these different kinds of power.)

It's not just the temptation in the desert where Jesus refuses to exercise that kind of (super-) power. There's his response to the people who want him to show them "a sign" (some spectacular demonstration of power): he teases them that they can recognize the significance of a "red sky at night..." but are blind to the signs of what's happening in their own society. On the Cross, he is taunted by people who challenge him to display his power. Even the Resurrection isn't a triumphant jack-in-the-box act, but the strangeness of the empty tomb, followed by that series of healing encounters with strangers in which Christ returns to his friends.

[blackcurrants]

You could see the miracle stories of all religions as a kind of propaganda, whose purpose varies according to who's telling the story. (I make no comment as to the worthiness of this propaganda or those who propagate it) The miracles draw you into the story, titillate your imagination, just as the amazing feats of superheroes do. At least Superman's derring-do is never claimed to be more than fiction, so our reaction to the story is less confused. When people are in difficulty they never entertain the hope that Superman will come along and help them out. Perhaps the fact that Jesus' miracles are relatively low-key just means that it's less of a leap to imagine something similar happening to you. And maybe that thought is just what the herd needs. Who am I to say?

[duke_aldhein]

Plenty of people - most of whom have given its history little thought and less study - have insinuated that religion (as a phenomenon) can be described adequately in terms of a manoeuvre by an elite of opportunists to dupe a docile populus. So you introduce the notion of 'the herd', implying - despite your ironic refusal to comment - that this is how the pastoral hierarchy treats its flock. (Yes, of course, the metaphor is already present in the historical mix

[blackcurrants]

I agree absolutely that the evil done by over-powerful religious figures or hierarchies can't be used as a general argument against religion in all its shapes and forms. And I wouldn't for a moment suggest that organized religions are conspiracies conceived in order to dupe and manipulate docile herds of believers

[blackcurrants]

No comment, Duke?

[duke_aldhein]

In the past three weeks, I've moved house, worked 14 days for the BBC and made three trips to London on other projects, so I haven't had much time to take up theological disputes with anonymous disputants. I will do my best to respond to your comment in the next few days.

[blackcurrants]

Sorry Duke. I really didn't mean to be rude. It's just that my last reply was so delayed I wasn't sure if you had noticed it. I thought perhaps a revised comment count would draw your attention to it. But I wouldn't presume any great claim to your time, seeing as you're clearly a busy fellow.
It's an interesting question, though, so I look forward to seeing anything that you do get round to posting. As for the "anonymous disputant" - I don't keep a blog, I'm more of a trawler and temporary resident of other people's sites, so I don't have a web identity to use. You can call me JJ if you like.
JJ

[duke_aldhein]

Apologies for my bluntness earlier - I'll look forward to trying to explain how I see these things. As you say, an interesting question.

[duke_aldhein]

JJ - I have, finally, attempted to answer your question. I hope you'll forgive the delay, and my tendency to verbal pugilism. And I hope what I have written makes some sense to you.