Freethought & Rationalism Archive

Toto · 07-12-2011, 06:51 PM

From a new online magazine, Relegere: Studies in Religion and Reception, Vol 1, No 1 (2011)

Life of Brian or Life of Jesus? Uses of Critical Biblical Scholarship and Non-orthodox Views of Jesus in Monty Python’s Life of Brian by James G. Crossley

Quote:

Abstract

It is often argued that Monty Python’s Life of Brian should not be regarded as blasphemous or offensive, largely because Brian and Jesus are two distinct characters in the film. Many religious opponents have claimed otherwise. This article argues that to some degree these pious opponents have a point: Brian does in someway represent Jesus. What Life of Brian does, through interaction with scholarly literature and ideas, is to attribute to Brian a whole host of mildly subversive and critical views about Jesus and effectively create a critical life of Jesus.

DCHindley · 07-12-2011, 07:08 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Toto

From a new online magazine, Relegere: Studies in Religion and Reception, Vol 1, No 1 (2011)

Life of Brian or Life of Jesus? Uses of Critical Biblical Scholarship and Non-orthodox Views of Jesus in Monty Python’s Life of Brian by James G. Crossley

Quote:

Abstract

It is often argued that Monty Python’s Life of Brian should not be regarded as blasphemous or offensive, largely because Brian and Jesus are two distinct characters in the film. Many religious opponents have claimed otherwise. This article argues that to some degree these pious opponents have a point: Brian does in someway represent Jesus. What Life of Brian does, through interaction with scholarly literature and ideas, is to attribute to Brian a whole host of mildly subversive and critical views about Jesus and effectively create a critical life of Jesus.

Hopefully as well as I subjected the song "Spill Wine" by Eric Burdon and War to thorough critical analysis.

DCH

yalla · 07-12-2011, 07:11 PM

"Blasphemer!"

I reckon the Monty Python crew got at least one bit more correct than some christian commentators I have read who claim blasphemy is something else other than speaking the name of God.

In LoB the bloke who is about to be stoned for blasphemy compalins that all he said to his wife was that "that was a fine piece of halibut suitable for Jehovah".

mountainman · 07-12-2011, 07:32 PM

Conclusion ....

Quote:

The physical Jesus in the film may be the Christ of faith who is never directly challenged but this Christ of faith is undermined by the portrayal of Brian who is, in effect, the historical Jesus of more mildly subversive imaginations.

braces_for_impact · 07-12-2011, 07:48 PM

Interesting.

Quote:

Abstract

It is often argued that Monty Python’s Life of Brian should not be regarded as blasphemous or offensive, largely because Brian and Jesus are two distinct characters in the film. Many religious opponents have claimed otherwise. This article argues that to some degree these pious opponents have a point: Brian does in someway represent Jesus. What Life of Brian does, through interaction with scholarly literature and ideas, is to attribute to Brian a whole host of mildly subversive and critical views about Jesus and effectively create a critical life of Jesus.

I think instead of arguing that the movie isn't blasphemous, we should be arguing that the entire concept of blasphemy is stupid.

Rusty Venture · 07-12-2011, 08:39 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by braces_for_impact

I think instead of arguing that the movie isn't blasphemous, we should be arguing that the entire concept of blasphemy is stupid.

You.. you.. Splitter!

mountainman · 07-12-2011, 09:16 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by braces_for_impact

Interesting.

Quote:

Abstract

It is often argued that Monty Python’s Life of Brian should not be regarded as blasphemous or offensive, largely because Brian and Jesus are two distinct characters in the film. Many religious opponents have claimed otherwise. This article argues that to some degree these pious opponents have a point: Brian does in someway represent Jesus. What Life of Brian does, through interaction with scholarly literature and ideas, is to attribute to Brian a whole host of mildly subversive and critical views about Jesus and effectively create a critical life of Jesus.

I think instead of arguing that the movie isn't blasphemous, we should be arguing that the entire concept of blasphemy is stupid.

And yet the entire concept of blasphemy is an historical fact. The church historian and master heresiologist Eusebius expresses it like this:

Quote:

Originally Posted by Big E

Eusebius' report of The Pagan Acts of Pilate
Nicene and Post-Nicene Fathers: Series II/Volume I
Church History of Eusebius/Book IX/Chapter 5 & 7
Chapter V.—The Forged Acts.

Having forged, to be sure, Memoirs of Pilate [2731] and Our Saviour,
full of every kind of blasphemy against Christ,
with the approval of their chief they sent them round
to every part of his dominions, with edicts
that they should be exhibited openly for everyone to see
in every place, both town and country, and that
the primary teachers should give them to the children,
instead of lessons, for study and committal to memory.

My own opinion is that the new testament religion was one designed to be taken in all seriousness, and without an iota of humor. The new testament is an entirely humorless exposition.

On the other hand, most alternative expositions, such as the "Life of Brian" and "The Acts of Pilate", introduce elements of humor to the audience, and it is my opinion that it is this humor which is deemed blasphemous, since the matters in the new testament are, to use Roman term, supposed to be gravitas. ("serious").

yalla · 07-13-2011, 04:22 AM

PETE
edited to add Oops -something went wrong, see post below.

yalla · 07-13-2011, 04:28 AM

PETE
To explain waht I was on about.

"Blasphemy" according to Jewish law, at the alleged time of JC, was speaking the name of god.

Yet in the gospels, somewhere [which if necessary someone can find, I'm a bit too lazy at the moment] JC is accused of being blasphemous for something else.
Something which was not blasphemous according to those who defined such at that time.

So the gospels got it wrong and I have read apologists who have twisted and turned in an attempt to cover that up.

"Life of Brian" got it right.

Atheos · 07-13-2011, 05:51 AM

According to GMatt and GMark the accusation of blasphemy came when Jesus implied he was the "son of God." GLuke asserts that the people slapping Jesus in the face were blaspheming. GJohn is a blasphemy free zone.

Thread Tools	Search this Thread
Show Printable Version	Search this Thread: Advanced Search

07-12-2011, 07:11 PM	#3
yalla Veteran Member Join Date: May 2002 Location: oz Posts: 1,848	"Blasphemer!" I reckon the Monty Python crew got at least one bit more correct than some christian commentators I have read who claim blasphemy is something else other than speaking the name of God. In LoB the bloke who is about to be stoned for blasphemy compalins that all he said to his wife was that "that was a fine piece of halibut suitable for Jehovah".

07-13-2011, 04:22 AM	#8
yalla Veteran Member Join Date: May 2002 Location: oz Posts: 1,848	PETE edited to add Oops -something went wrong, see post below.

07-13-2011, 04:28 AM	#9
yalla Veteran Member Join Date: May 2002 Location: oz Posts: 1,848	PETE To explain waht I was on about. "Blasphemy" according to Jewish law, at the alleged time of JC, was speaking the name of god. Yet in the gospels, somewhere [which if necessary someone can find, I'm a bit too lazy at the moment] JC is accused of being blasphemous for something else. Something which was not blasphemous according to those who defined such at that time. So the gospels got it wrong and I have read apologists who have twisted and turned in an attempt to cover that up. "Life of Brian" got it right.

07-13-2011, 05:51 AM	#10
Atheos Talk Freethought Staff Join Date: Sep 2004 Location: Heart of the Bible Belt Posts: 5,807	According to GMatt and GMark the accusation of blasphemy came when Jesus implied he was the "son of God." GLuke asserts that the people slapping Jesus in the face were blaspheming. GJohn is a blasphemy free zone.

Freethought & Rationalism Archive

The archives are read only.