A Mopologetic Version of Jesus?

The catch-all forum for general topics and debates. Minimal moderation. Rated PG to PG-13.
_Doctor Scratch
_Emeritus
Posts: 8025
Joined: Sat Apr 18, 2009 4:44 pm

A Mopologetic Version of Jesus?

Post by _Doctor Scratch »

Friends and Colleagues:

It would seem that, in 2019, the Mopologists are treating us to a new level of openness and candor. First, Dr. Midgley very generously filled in mountains of backstory concerning (among other things) Mopologetic finances and tactics: a watershed moment if there has ever been one, to be sure! Even more recently, though, Dr. Peterson treated us to an important insight on the way that the Mopologists view Jesus:

Sic et Non wrote:I was the founder and, for years, the editor-in-chief of Brigham Young University’s former Middle Eastern Texts Initiative, which was recently transferred by the Maxwell Institute to E. J. Brill Publishing in the Netherlands. The Middle Eastern Texts Initiative (METI) produced bilingual editions of books (mostly Islamic, but also sometimes Eastern Christian and Jewish) from the classical Islamic world. The books were printed at Brigham Young University Press and distributed by the University of Chicago Press.

Anyway, one of the volumes features what I still consider the best single line that we ever published.

Al-Ghazālī (d. AD 1111), who was one of the most significant figures in the history of Islamic thought, a legendarily brilliant philosophical theologian and legal thinker who spent most of his life in Iran and Iraq but also sojourned for a significant period in Jerusalem, is talking about extremely poor students, and, in that context, attributes the following remark to Jesus:

“Even though I managed to raise the dead, I have never been able to cure an idiot!”

(See al-Ghazālī, “O Son!,” trans. David C. Reisman, in Classical Foundations of Islamic Educational Thought, ed. Bradley J. Cook [Provo, UT: Brigham Young University Press, 2010], 103.)

Now, I’ll admit that my first inclination was to say that this alleged statement can’t possibly be authentic. And that’s still probably correct. But al-Ghazālī is entirely serious, and plainly regards the statement as genuine. Furthermore, his citation of it takes us back fully a thousand years or more, halfway to the time of Jesus. So . . .

I have to confess that I rather like the idea that the Savior might have said such a thing. It humanizes him a bit. Surely, with all those long walks from Nazareth to Capernaum, and from Capernaum to Jericho, and from Jericho to Jerusalem, and from Jerusalem back up to Capernaum or Nazareth, it can’t all have been immortal sermons and solemn earnestness. (Can it? Maybe I’m just not fit for heaven.) There must have been some small talk. And the image of Jesus trudging along with the disciples down those dusty paths and confiding, at the end of a tough day, “You know, Peter? I can raise the dead, but I just can’t cure idiots” is oddly appealing to me.


No, actually: there's nothing "odd" about it at all: of course the Mopologists would long for a meaner, snarkier Jesus! There is nothing at all odd about the fact that Dr. Peterson is contemptuous of people he considers "idiots" (or that he wishes the Savior felt the same way), nor is there anything particularly strange about the Mopologists feeling critical about the kind, loving, generous version of Jesus Christ that actual, legitimate Christians view as the cornerstone of their belief-system (a belief-system which--lets face it--is almost totally foreign to the Mopologists).

I have to say: I am enjoying this new era of Mopologetic openness!
"[I]f, while hoping that everybody else will be honest and so forth, I can personally prosper through unethical and immoral acts without being detected and without risk, why should I not?." --Daniel Peterson, 6/4/14
_Mormonicious
_Emeritus
Posts: 1523
Joined: Mon Jul 14, 2014 3:59 am

Re: A Mopologetic Version of Jesus?

Post by _Mormonicious »

It is scary how parallel Trumpism and Mormonism are. Say it is so therefore it is so.
Revelation 2:17 . . give him a white stone, and in the stone a new name written, which no man knoweth saving he that receiveth it. Thank Google GOD for her son eBay, you can now have life eternal with laser engraving. . oh, and a seer stone and save 10% of your life's earning as a bonus. See you in Mormon man god Heaven Bitches!!. Bring on the Virgins
_Maksutov
_Emeritus
Posts: 12480
Joined: Thu Mar 07, 2013 8:19 pm

Re: A Mopologetic Version of Jesus?

Post by _Maksutov »

Image
"God" is the original deus ex machina. --Maksutov
_Everybody Wang Chung
_Emeritus
Posts: 4056
Joined: Sun Apr 10, 2011 2:53 am

Re: A Mopologetic Version of Jesus?

Post by _Everybody Wang Chung »

This was a very insightful post into the mind of a Mopologist. Thanks Dr. Scratch.

Mopologists are definitely more comfortable molding Jesus into something that reflects their behavior. DCP would definitely feel more comfortable with a Jesus that frequently called people idiots and who was bitter and hostile when dealing with others.

Folks, DCP is a grown man who just publicly called a well-respected professor a “Doofus.” One can only imagine how vulgar, angry and rude his behavior is in private.
"I'm on paid sabbatical from BYU in exchange for my promise to use this time to finish two books."

Daniel C. Peterson, 2014
_Dr Exiled
_Emeritus
Posts: 3616
Joined: Wed Sep 30, 2015 3:48 am

Re: A Mopologetic Version of Jesus?

Post by _Dr Exiled »

Image

Mopologist Jesus is coming quickly to get some payback.
"Religion is about providing human community in the guise of solving problems that don’t exist or failing to solve problems that do and seeking to reconcile these contradictions and conceal the failures in bogus explanations otherwise known as theology." - Kishkumen 
_Gadianton
_Emeritus
Posts: 9947
Joined: Sat Jul 07, 2007 5:12 am

Re: A Mopologetic Version of Jesus?

Post by _Gadianton »

at the end of a tough day, “You know, Peter?


Quite revealing. But perhaps aggressive apologetics has something to learn from "human" Jesus? The implication here is that Jesus and the disciples spent an entire day teaching the gospel in humility first, and only at the end of the day, and in private did Jesus lose his cool. Has anyone ever seen any of the senior tier at SeN get through a single post at 6:35 AM without laying on the sarcasm and thinly veiled insults immediately?

I mean, these guys are like 2-liter bottles of diet Dr. Pepper hauled in a jeep over a back country mountain pass, just waiting for someone to give the cap a quarter turn -- always, literally 24/7.
Lou Midgley 08/20/2020: "...meat wad," and "cockroach" are pithy descriptions of human beings used by gemli? They were not fashioned by Professor Peterson.

LM 11/23/2018: one can explain away the soul of human beings...as...a Meat Unit, to use Professor Peterson's clever derogatory description of gemli's ideology.
_MsJack
_Emeritus
Posts: 4375
Joined: Sun Jul 27, 2008 5:06 am

Re: A Mopologetic Version of Jesus?

Post by _MsJack »

Jesus was pretty aggressive at times in the gospels, especially the gospel of Mark. The question is, whom was that aggression directed against?

(1) The false religious leaders of his day
(2) The moneychangers at the temple
(3) His own disciples

In other words, the powerful, the greedy, and the privileged.

He wasn't aggressive with the poor, the downtrodden, and the sinners. He wasn't aggressive with his female disciples, even when they accused him of failing them (Mary and Martha), in contrast to the men. He wasn't aggressive with people who were burned out with the hypocritical religious elite of their day.

But apologists have often relished attacking the least capable of critics while avoiding the more capable, more intelligent ones. (How many times did MrStak challenge Dan Peterson, and how many times was he ignored? Yet "Kristi" gets a lengthy email exchange?)

So, Mormon apologists attacking low-hanging anti-Mormon fruit is not an analog for Jesus' aggression.
"It seems to me that these women were the head (κεφάλαιον) of the church which was at Philippi." ~ John Chrysostom, Homilies on Philippians 13

My Blogs: Weighted Glory | Worlds Without End: A Mormon Studies Roundtable | Twitter
_Doctor Scratch
_Emeritus
Posts: 8025
Joined: Sat Apr 18, 2009 4:44 pm

Re: A Mopologetic Version of Jesus?

Post by _Doctor Scratch »

Gadianton wrote:
at the end of a tough day, “You know, Peter?


Quite revealing. But perhaps aggressive apologetics has something to learn from "human" Jesus? The implication here is that Jesus and the disciples spent an entire day teaching the gospel in humility first, and only at the end of the day, and in private did Jesus lose his cool. Has anyone ever seen any of the senior tier at SeN get through a single post at 6:35 AM without laying on the sarcasm and thinly veiled insults immediately?

I mean, these guys are like 2-liter bottles of diet Dr. Pepper hauled in a jeep over a back country mountain pass, just waiting for someone to give the cap a quarter turn -- always, literally 24/7.


Just imagine if they were able to hunt down some old text that had Jesus allegedly saying, "No more uncontested slam dunks!"
"[I]f, while hoping that everybody else will be honest and so forth, I can personally prosper through unethical and immoral acts without being detected and without risk, why should I not?." --Daniel Peterson, 6/4/14
_DrW
_Emeritus
Posts: 7222
Joined: Thu Apr 02, 2009 2:57 am

Re: A Mopologetic Version of Jesus?

Post by _DrW »

Two thousand page views in 24 hours with only 7 comments must be some kind of record. Looks as though the good Doctor Scratch has hit a nerve (and revealed a truth, depending on one's POV).
David Hume: "---Mistakes in philosophy are merely ridiculous, those in religion are dangerous."

DrW: "Mistakes in science are learning opportunities and are eventually corrected."
_Symmachus
_Emeritus
Posts: 1520
Joined: Mon Feb 25, 2013 10:32 pm

Re: A Mopologetic Version of Jesus?

Post by _Symmachus »

I have to confess that I rather like the idea that the Savior might have said such a thing. It humanizes him a bit. Surely, with all those long walks from Nazareth to Capernaum, and from Capernaum to Jericho, and from Jericho to Jerusalem, and from Jerusalem back up to Capernaum or Nazareth, it can’t all have been immortal sermons and solemn earnestness. (Can it? Maybe I’m just not fit for heaven.) There must have been some small talk. And the image of Jesus trudging along with the disciples down those dusty paths and confiding, at the end of a tough day, “You know, Peter? I can raise the dead, but I just can’t cure idiots” is oddly appealing to me.


It's hard to know whether Jesus was a dick to people he might have considered to be intellectually inferior. Peterson certainly displays that quality to certain commenters on his blog (e.g. Gemli), even when the substance of his comments really makes you wonder on what basis that sense of intellectual superiority rests.

I don't know why that line about "humanizing" Jesus jumps out to me. Perhaps it's because it seems to negate the direction of classical Christianity, which is to divinize, not humanize Jesus. But Mormons...er, uh, Latter-day Saints are Christians, too!

Lastly, one of the gospel writers claims that Jesus said: "and whosoever shall say to his brother, Raca, shall be in danger of the council: but whosoever shall say, Thou fool, shall be in danger of hell fire."

But I agree; the 11th century Muslim philosopher's exhortation to his students is much more entertaining.

Latter-day Saints are Muslims...er,uh, Christians, too!
"As to any slivers of light or any particles of darkness of the past, we forget about them."

—B. Redd McConkie
Post Reply