Scribes
saurabh is a manic- depressive graduate student with delusions of
overturning well- established social hierarchies through sheer weight of cynicism. in his spare time he writes self-effacing auto- biographical blurbs.
dan makes things up casually, effortlessly, and often. Never believe a
word he says.
hedgehog burrows between San Francisco and other areas rich in roots and nuts. His father says he is a literalist and his mother says he is very smart. Neither of them say aloud that he should spend less time with blegs and more time out of doors.
Pollocrisy
Blegs
- scrofulous
- wax banks
- a tiny revolution
- under the same sun
- alt hippo
- isthatlegal?
- informed comment
- abu aardvark
- crooked timber
- bob harris
- saheli: the gathering
- john & belle have a blog
- red state son
- pharyngula
- critical montages
- living the scientific life
- pass the roti
- attitude adjustor
- pandagon
- this modern world
- orcinus
- a lovely promise
- ufo breakfast
- sabdariffa
- to do: 1. get hobby, 2. floss
Links
Archives
- 11.2003
- 04.2004
- 05.2004
- 06.2004
- 07.2004
- 08.2004
- 09.2004
- 10.2004
- 11.2004
- 12.2004
- 01.2005
- 02.2005
- 03.2005
- 04.2005
- 05.2005
- 06.2005
- 07.2005
- 08.2005
- 09.2005
- 10.2005
- 11.2005
- 12.2005
- 01.2006
- 02.2006
- 03.2006
- 04.2006
- 05.2006
- 06.2006
- 07.2006
- 08.2006
- 09.2006
- 10.2006
- 11.2006
- 12.2006
- 01.2007
- 02.2007
Search
Site Feed
12 January, 2006
Judas gets a makeover
Woah! After 2000 years, the Vatican is apparently softening its view on Judas.
Two things to think about here:
One is the simple theological question, which is a major one for Christianity. It's remarkable that such important questions should still be open questions after so many years. You'd think God would have made his perfect plan a little less ambiguous.
Anyway, my favorite statement of the problem of Judas comes from Borges, who wrote a little "short story" about it called "Three Versions of Judas", which are:
(Via CT)
Two things to think about here:
One is the simple theological question, which is a major one for Christianity. It's remarkable that such important questions should still be open questions after so many years. You'd think God would have made his perfect plan a little less ambiguous.
Anyway, my favorite statement of the problem of Judas comes from Borges, who wrote a little "short story" about it called "Three Versions of Judas", which are:
- Judas is the tool of Satan. This has backing in the Gospel according to Luke, which says "Satan entered him", and John, which says the same. Problematic, since it means Satan was doing what God wanted after all.
- Judas was only fulfilling God's plan; Christ had to die and thus had to be betrayed. This is an oft-favored viewpoint, popular amongst liberal types. See "Jesus Christ Superstar" or "The Last Temptation of Christ". Problematic, since the Bible clearly has Judas being punished and makes him out as a villain.
- Finally, Borges farcically proposes that since Christ's suffering was brief, and mankind's sin is endless, surely it was not enough to redeem us. Therefore the true messiah should be someone who is still suffering in Hell on our behalf, viz., Judas.
(Via CT)
Comments
Probably a matter of interpretation, but you'll have to clarify how those three aren't mutually exclusive to you. Either Judas is God's instrument or he is Satan's. Or Satan isn't really the Enemy, opposing God's plan. (I find such absolutes absurd anyway, but never mind that.)
Posted by saurabh
Posted by saurabh
it seems easy to describe satan as either a facet of god or as having independence for the specific purpose of foiling plans - there's just no way that satan couldn't be stopped cold if desired. this world today seems good evidence that god engages in contradictory behavior. it's very egotistical to assume that divine thinking runs along only one track.
Posted by david
Posted by david
it seems easy to describe satan as either a facet of god or as having independence for the specific purpose of foiling plans
there's the whole ineffability bit, as described by gaiman and pratchett.
Posted by Saheli
there's the whole ineffability bit, as described by gaiman and pratchett.
Posted by Saheli