Christmas Eve. I have very little time to blog this morning, so I'll be brief. I will blog more tonight on religion topics.
But first, I just had a near-two-hour conversation with my Dad. We began on religion, but then the conversation quickly shifted gears when I allowed my emotions in, an allowance dad was very uncomfortable with. I slowly felt myself slipping into emotions, tried to deal with it internally, but felt very non-affirmed from the outside. Goodness, the difference between feeling emotionall affirmed and rejected. My father is so uncomfortable with emotions, very closed off. I can totally understand where I got my tendencies for repression from which I'm just now recovering.
My initial reaction was to look down on him for this. To see him as nothing more than an emotionally repressed simpleton with no compassion or care he was willing to give access to. But to tell the truth, I can understand how easy it is to repress. How painful the care is when not reciprocated. This deep, burning image of God to love and be loved and care is so utterly painful when not fulfulled. I felt it. And he's terrified. Terrified if he lets his emotions in he will get out of control, things will slip, they will rule him. I understand these fears as I dealt with them for a very, very long time.
I do care for him so much. He, honestly, has so much care, so much emotion, it probably hurts. I want to fix him, but I can't. I just have to let go, to try to understand him, to try to love him for exactly who he is, knowing I don't have it all figured out.
Anyways, let's talk about The Last Temptation of Christ and Gnosticism, shall we?
There's more Gnostic facets of the novel. The first is Jesus' conception of the prophets.
In gnosticism, dealing with prophesy and the old Law for (most) of the authors is redactionary. Rather than holding to the traditional interpretation of the old testament stories and themes, they choose to rewrite it. Instead of the author holding to the straightforward, traditional interpretation of the story; rather, they alter the history or perspective to fit their theological agenda which, in the case of most gnostic, is assuredly anti-world, pro-knowledge.
Also, gnostic prophesy and revelation, rather than being from authority, is intuitive. Rather than looking to ecclesial bodies for doctrine, dogma, or authoritive teaching, all saving knowledge is "gnosis", intuitive knowledge of oneself and from onself, finding oneself in god as another spirit purposed to be rejoined with the pleroma. Once one finds oneself, then, once one knows oneself, one is rejoined with the pleroma, like with Buddhism, one is one with God.
In The Last Temptation of Christ, Jesus method of dealing with the Law and revelation is both redactionary and intuitive. In the book, Jesus' intuitive relationship with God is premeditated by Rabbi Simeon at the monastary.
But first, I just had a near-two-hour conversation with my Dad. We began on religion, but then the conversation quickly shifted gears when I allowed my emotions in, an allowance dad was very uncomfortable with. I slowly felt myself slipping into emotions, tried to deal with it internally, but felt very non-affirmed from the outside. Goodness, the difference between feeling emotionall affirmed and rejected. My father is so uncomfortable with emotions, very closed off. I can totally understand where I got my tendencies for repression from which I'm just now recovering.
My initial reaction was to look down on him for this. To see him as nothing more than an emotionally repressed simpleton with no compassion or care he was willing to give access to. But to tell the truth, I can understand how easy it is to repress. How painful the care is when not reciprocated. This deep, burning image of God to love and be loved and care is so utterly painful when not fulfulled. I felt it. And he's terrified. Terrified if he lets his emotions in he will get out of control, things will slip, they will rule him. I understand these fears as I dealt with them for a very, very long time.
I do care for him so much. He, honestly, has so much care, so much emotion, it probably hurts. I want to fix him, but I can't. I just have to let go, to try to understand him, to try to love him for exactly who he is, knowing I don't have it all figured out.
Anyways, let's talk about The Last Temptation of Christ and Gnosticism, shall we?
There's more Gnostic facets of the novel. The first is Jesus' conception of the prophets.
In gnosticism, dealing with prophesy and the old Law for (most) of the authors is redactionary. Rather than holding to the traditional interpretation of the old testament stories and themes, they choose to rewrite it. Instead of the author holding to the straightforward, traditional interpretation of the story; rather, they alter the history or perspective to fit their theological agenda which, in the case of most gnostic, is assuredly anti-world, pro-knowledge.
Also, gnostic prophesy and revelation, rather than being from authority, is intuitive. Rather than looking to ecclesial bodies for doctrine, dogma, or authoritive teaching, all saving knowledge is "gnosis", intuitive knowledge of oneself and from onself, finding oneself in god as another spirit purposed to be rejoined with the pleroma. Once one finds oneself, then, once one knows oneself, one is rejoined with the pleroma, like with Buddhism, one is one with God.
In The Last Temptation of Christ, Jesus method of dealing with the Law and revelation is both redactionary and intuitive. In the book, Jesus' intuitive relationship with God is premeditated by Rabbi Simeon at the monastary.
God, I heard his voice, not from outside or above, but from within me. God's true voice always comes to us from within. (Kazantazakis 56)
The Rabbi, who functions as a sort of mediary between Jesus and the Jewish church, tells Jesus that the most powerful voice of God he hears comes not from the church or some distant entity, but from within himself. This foreshadows Jesus' continued experiences with God inside himself in the rest of the book and film. In the film, when confronted at the wedding at Cana that the universal invitation to heaven's wedding is blasphemous and "against the Law", he replies that the "Law is against his heart." Here we see that Jesus' final authority, rather than the authoritative Jewish church and doctrine, is his heart oriented toward Love. When in Nazareth after his stay in the desert, he tells the rabbis that he has "a secret" that God gave him and that He wants Jesus to tell it to them. Essentially, Jesus has special knowledge (gnosis) for those in the governing ecclesiastic body, the exact ideology underlying gnostic epistemology, the idea that while the church has some conceptions of God and partial knowledge of Him, there is a deeper, more intuitive and secret knowledge which is given to them to guard and steward and (sometimes) evangelize.
Similarly, Jesus' wrestling with his conception of God turns out to be wrestling with a conception of Himself. In Scorsese's film, at the temple in Jerusalem he tells the Sadduces that "when I say God, I mean me." Clearly by this point in the story Jesus considers himself and God to be One. It's very clear that he is still man in his own conception. But he also considers himself God. So Jesus' God is ultimately not in the church but rather inside him as is his source of revelation and knowledge, a view much closer to Gnosticism than traditional Christianity where the final authority surely resides in the authoritative body at the time and the scriptures are, in fact, still taken at face value.
But then again, now I'm second guessing myself. Paul's view of the Old Testament was for sure redactinoary and Jesus' source of revelation and knowledge was intuitive. Jesus certainly took liberties with the Old Testament prophets, as did both Paul and the gospel writers. Is redaction only limited to the gnostic writers? Are all new spiritual movements stemming from other, solidified ecclesiastic authority tinged with elements of gnosticism, only to later harden into another form of conservative, ecclesiastic and traditional church? It seems that way. It does go to show, as Staley and Walsh note, the close proximity between traditional Christianity and gnosticim, though, unlike these authors, I do think that many elements of these two works of art do tip the scale toward gnostic Christ rather than a traditional one.
Okay, well dinner's on. Whew, what a long day. I'll return to this tomorrow morning. I have a long way to go!
Similarly, Jesus' wrestling with his conception of God turns out to be wrestling with a conception of Himself. In Scorsese's film, at the temple in Jerusalem he tells the Sadduces that "when I say God, I mean me." Clearly by this point in the story Jesus considers himself and God to be One. It's very clear that he is still man in his own conception. But he also considers himself God. So Jesus' God is ultimately not in the church but rather inside him as is his source of revelation and knowledge, a view much closer to Gnosticism than traditional Christianity where the final authority surely resides in the authoritative body at the time and the scriptures are, in fact, still taken at face value.
But then again, now I'm second guessing myself. Paul's view of the Old Testament was for sure redactinoary and Jesus' source of revelation and knowledge was intuitive. Jesus certainly took liberties with the Old Testament prophets, as did both Paul and the gospel writers. Is redaction only limited to the gnostic writers? Are all new spiritual movements stemming from other, solidified ecclesiastic authority tinged with elements of gnosticism, only to later harden into another form of conservative, ecclesiastic and traditional church? It seems that way. It does go to show, as Staley and Walsh note, the close proximity between traditional Christianity and gnosticim, though, unlike these authors, I do think that many elements of these two works of art do tip the scale toward gnostic Christ rather than a traditional one.
Okay, well dinner's on. Whew, what a long day. I'll return to this tomorrow morning. I have a long way to go!