bullshitdung & mydiassholes in cultural embeddings
*
"The
Continuing Allegorization
of 'The Secret/True
Jew/Christian/Muslim
a.o.!'" ...
~*~
~*~
"H.K."
is willing to grant
that PAUL's putative experience
does "not take the WHOLE range of the religion
into account"
but NOT willing, apparently,
to consider that the doctrines of Jews
that OTHER Jews referred to as "Zealots" or "Knifers"
were marginal
AND vigorously OPPOSED SUBCULTURES
of Greco-Roman
Judaism?
-
For H.K.,
despite occasional
pro-forma disclaimers,
THESE groups represent
the TRUE ESSENCE
of Judaism.
For as he says,
"I have endorsed Paul's attack
on Judaism."
To THIS
should be contrasted
Hays's SOBER & BALANCED
judgements:
ONLY
a narrowly
ethnocentric form of Judaism,
Paul insists, would claim that G D
is the G D of
the JEWS ONLY
or that Avraham is
THE progenitor
of g*d's people "according to the flesh,"
that is by virtue of natural
physical descent.
For the purposes of
this argument,
PAUL associates
these [evidently FALSE] notions
with the [disputed] claim that Gentile Christians
must come under
the Law.
{!}
PAUL,
speaking from within
the Jewish tradition,
contends that the Torah itself provides the warrant for
a more inclusive
theology that affirms that
the ONE G D is
G D of Gentiles as well as Jews
and that Avraham
is the forefather of MORE
than those
who happen to be his physical
descendents!
-
PAUL is
on THIS view
indeed a Jewish cultural critic,
calling Jews to ally themselves
with the progressive understandings
contained within their own tradition
AND to reject the practices
of certain ethnocentric
zealots?
-
In fact,
the notion that gentiles are saved
without conversion to Judaism
is a doctrine held by many within ancient Judaism;
indeed, what is NEW in PAUL
is rather the idea
that ALL
- Jews & gentiles - must be justified
in the same way,
through faith in [the message of] Yehoshua
haMashiach.
-
Paul
dreamed of a day
in which ALL human distinctions
that led to hierarchy
would be erased and not merely one
in which there was a place
in g*d's saving plan
for all ...
-
THESE
are the grounds
of his critique of - NOT "attack on" -
Judaism!
~*~
H.K.'s
account of Judaism,
as well as his account of Paul,
like all interpretation,
teaches us a great deal about
'him & his ideology.'
For the certainty of faith,
we find here substituted
a certainty borne of "the preunderstanding
we [HK] bring to the text,"
which is "well founded on the evidence
not only of the texts it interprets
but also on other evidence
from the human
sciences."
-
For HK
it is simply a fact
that the Jews killed Christ,
that their religion was a religion
of Sacred Violence,
and that G D/Paul rejected the Jews
because of the essential evil of
their "way of life":
"The Law had created a way of life
founded on sacred violence
and the crucifixion of Christ is the logical outcome
of such a way
of life"!
-
HK
does not even
present this characterization
as Paul's and criticize it
but rather produces a discourse
supported by
"the evidence of the human sciences"
which asserts its authority as a
description of
Judaism.
-
HE
interprets
Philippians 3:8,
in which Paul refers to his former achievement
as "DUNG" ['shit'],
as Paul's characterization of
"the Jewish way
of life."
-
HK
somewhat softens the translation to "refuse"
and then asserts that this is
"what the Law
really is."
-
He thus
relies ultimately
on both the authority of Paul and that of "science"
in support of his own political/theological
agenda.
-
When
we read
the Pauline passage in question, however,
we find that HK's interpretation
of it is far from
ineluctable.
-
The
passage reads:
"YEA doubtless,
and I count all things but loss
for the excellency of the knowledge of Yehoshua haMashiach my Lord:
for whom I suffered the loss of ALL things,
and do count them but "SHIT" ['dung'],
that I may win
"CHRIST"!"
~*~
I think
that a reading of this verse
much more likely than HK's is
that Paul is precisely NOT referring
to what his former life "really is,"
but rather emphasizing
that even though it WAS of value,
HE counts it NOW as 'dung' in comparison to
the excellency of
the knowledge
of YESH
"Christ."
-
In fact,
the figure works precisely ONLY
if that of which he is speaking is not
"really dung."
-
It is
NOT Paul here
who is anti-Judaic,
unless any disagreement or cultural critique
is to be defined as
anti-Judaic?!
~*~
In
fact
I give HK much more credit
than he does himself?
HE claims to have endorsed Paul's attack on Judaism;
I think he has
created
it!
-
For
example,
HK writes:
'The agent
of my action in this situation
is the sin "that dwells in me";
namely "in my flesh"
[ROM 7:18].
In the light
of my argument
this might be paraphrased,
"no good thing dwells in me, that is,
in my culturally embedded
(JEWISH)
self.'
Talking
about
'bullshit'!
~
~
"The
Continuing Allegorization
of 'The Secret/True
Jew/Christian/Muslim
a.o.!'" ...
~*~
~*~
"H.K."
is willing to grant
that PAUL's putative experience
does "not take the WHOLE range of the religion
into account"
but NOT willing, apparently,
to consider that the doctrines of Jews
that OTHER Jews referred to as "Zealots" or "Knifers"
were marginal
AND vigorously OPPOSED SUBCULTURES
of Greco-Roman
Judaism?
-
For H.K.,
despite occasional
pro-forma disclaimers,
THESE groups represent
the TRUE ESSENCE
of Judaism.
For as he says,
"I have endorsed Paul's attack
on Judaism."
To THIS
should be contrasted
Hays's SOBER & BALANCED
judgements:
ONLY
a narrowly
ethnocentric form of Judaism,
Paul insists, would claim that G D
is the G D of
the JEWS ONLY
or that Avraham is
THE progenitor
of g*d's people "according to the flesh,"
that is by virtue of natural
physical descent.
For the purposes of
this argument,
PAUL associates
these [evidently FALSE] notions
with the [disputed] claim that Gentile Christians
must come under
the Law.
{!}
PAUL,
speaking from within
the Jewish tradition,
contends that the Torah itself provides the warrant for
a more inclusive
theology that affirms that
the ONE G D is
G D of Gentiles as well as Jews
and that Avraham
is the forefather of MORE
than those
who happen to be his physical
descendents!
-
PAUL is
on THIS view
indeed a Jewish cultural critic,
calling Jews to ally themselves
with the progressive understandings
contained within their own tradition
AND to reject the practices
of certain ethnocentric
zealots?
-
In fact,
the notion that gentiles are saved
without conversion to Judaism
is a doctrine held by many within ancient Judaism;
indeed, what is NEW in PAUL
is rather the idea
that ALL
- Jews & gentiles - must be justified
in the same way,
through faith in [the message of] Yehoshua
haMashiach.
-
Paul
dreamed of a day
in which ALL human distinctions
that led to hierarchy
would be erased and not merely one
in which there was a place
in g*d's saving plan
for all ...
-
THESE
are the grounds
of his critique of - NOT "attack on" -
Judaism!
~*~
H.K.'s
account of Judaism,
as well as his account of Paul,
like all interpretation,
teaches us a great deal about
'him & his ideology.'
For the certainty of faith,
we find here substituted
a certainty borne of "the preunderstanding
we [HK] bring to the text,"
which is "well founded on the evidence
not only of the texts it interprets
but also on other evidence
from the human
sciences."
-
For HK
it is simply a fact
that the Jews killed Christ,
that their religion was a religion
of Sacred Violence,
and that G D/Paul rejected the Jews
because of the essential evil of
their "way of life":
"The Law had created a way of life
founded on sacred violence
and the crucifixion of Christ is the logical outcome
of such a way
of life"!
-
HK
does not even
present this characterization
as Paul's and criticize it
but rather produces a discourse
supported by
"the evidence of the human sciences"
which asserts its authority as a
description of
Judaism.
-
HE
interprets
Philippians 3:8,
in which Paul refers to his former achievement
as "DUNG" ['shit'],
as Paul's characterization of
"the Jewish way
of life."
-
HK
somewhat softens the translation to "refuse"
and then asserts that this is
"what the Law
really is."
-
He thus
relies ultimately
on both the authority of Paul and that of "science"
in support of his own political/theological
agenda.
-
When
we read
the Pauline passage in question, however,
we find that HK's interpretation
of it is far from
ineluctable.
-
The
passage reads:
"YEA doubtless,
and I count all things but loss
for the excellency of the knowledge of Yehoshua haMashiach my Lord:
for whom I suffered the loss of ALL things,
and do count them but "SHIT" ['dung'],
that I may win
"CHRIST"!"
~*~
I think
that a reading of this verse
much more likely than HK's is
that Paul is precisely NOT referring
to what his former life "really is,"
but rather emphasizing
that even though it WAS of value,
HE counts it NOW as 'dung' in comparison to
the excellency of
the knowledge
of YESH
"Christ."
-
In fact,
the figure works precisely ONLY
if that of which he is speaking is not
"really dung."
-
It is
NOT Paul here
who is anti-Judaic,
unless any disagreement or cultural critique
is to be defined as
anti-Judaic?!
~*~
In
fact
I give HK much more credit
than he does himself?
HE claims to have endorsed Paul's attack on Judaism;
I think he has
created
it!
-
For
example,
HK writes:
'The agent
of my action in this situation
is the sin "that dwells in me";
namely "in my flesh"
[ROM 7:18].
In the light
of my argument
this might be paraphrased,
"no good thing dwells in me, that is,
in my culturally embedded
(JEWISH)
self.'
Talking
about
'bullshit'!
~
~
22 aug 2005 - bewerkt op 21 mrt 2008
- meld ongepast verhaal
Log in om een reactie te plaatsen.
- O 10 jun 2026 Alweer Donkere Wolken Boven Europa:
- O 09 jun 2026 De OKTOBERREVOLUTIE van 1917 & de Eerste W.O. met
- O 09 jun 2026 De klassieken werden in ‘t Jiddisch vertaald & er
- O 09 jun 2026 Op 3 juli 1904 stierf Theodor Herzl reeds 44-jarig
- O 08 jun 2026 In 1891 werd HERZL de Parijse correspondent van de
- O 08 jun 2026 58 Herzl & ‘t politieke zionisme: doordat de Joden
- O 07 jun 2026 In 1894 werd de Franse kapitein Alfred DREYFUS, de
- O 07 jun 2026 Rare Chinezen: wie kent ze niet? Zie ook de proto-
- O 07 jun 2026 Bij de vijanden van de joden kwamen die successen
- O 06 jun 2026 Hfdst.11; blz. 56 ‘antisjemitisme’ nieuwe woorden?
- O 05 jun 2026 In 1865 eindigde die bloedige burgeroorlog i/d USA
- O 05 jun 2026 57 Afkomstig uit de hechte gemeen-
- O 05 jun 2026 56 Toch was ‘t juist de vrijheid in Amerika die ‘t
- O 05 jun 2026 55 In sommige kolonies was de verdraagzaamheid nog
- O 04 jun 2026 54 De Fundering van de Amerikaanse natie was zo nu