Christopher Rhoades Dÿkema
Gregory Geboski wrote:
> Kelley wrote:
>
> << christianity, like anything, is quite varied. one might be able to find
> some common thread that weaves throughout the various manifestations of it
> in various times and places. i don't know; >>
>
> Well, all Christians believe that Jesus rose from the dead. (Don't believe
> it? Then you're not a Christian.) That "common thread" should be enough to
> give pause to any thinking person; most cultures treat the idea of the risen
> dead as an object of horror. Most Christians do, too, but seem to give a
> pass to Jesus. Believers of my acquaintance (and this included me for many
> years) tend to address the Resurrection in abstract and metaphorical terms,
> almost reflexively avoiding the idea of the actual risen body.
> Paradoxically, the people I've found who are most comfortable with it are
> left-leaning clergy who understand that a literal belief in the Resurrection
> is necessary. They can question some of the other stuff but forefront this
> core of their faith and their Christian identity.
>
> << but, in this case, to claim that what happened in this incident can be
> chalked up to the s-m tendencies of christianity just doesn't stand up to
> scrutiny. >>
>
> And I agree. It's too much like other abuses of authority to be singled out
> as particularly "Christian."
>
> Anything more on the ties to Ashcroft? That's what got my attention in the
> original article.
>
> ----Original Message Follows----
> From: Kelley Walker <kwalker2 at gte.net>
> Reply-To: lbo-talk at lists.panix.com
> To: lbo-talk at lists.panix.com, lbo-talk at lists.panix.com
> Subject: Re: Christian love
> Date: Fri, 06 Jul 2001 12:03:19 -0400
>
> At 11:41 AM 7/6/01 -0400, Doug Henwood wrote:
> >Kelley Walker wrote:
> >
> >>that's not what was said. what was said that it wasn't surprising that X
> >>happened and that's because christianity is sado-masochistic. that's
> >>making one big grand stereotyping explanatory statment that has little
> >>evidence to support the assertion.
> >>
> >>i call that bigoted thinking. worse, it's bigoted because it authorized
> >>itself by appeal to a discourse that is supposed to be taken seriously
> >>because it calls itself scholarship.
> >
> >So there's no consistency to the various doctrines that have called
> >themselves Christian over the centuries? There are only many plural
> >Christianities?
> >
> >Doug
>
> this from the man who likes to pull quotes from scripture to contradict the
> quotes offered up by true believers and other sorts.
>
> christianity, like anything, is quite varied. one might be able to find
> some common thread that weaves throughout the various manifestations of it
> in various times and places. i don't know; it's not my area of
> specialization. i know enough about it to know that to claim it's
> inherently sadomascohistic would be ignoring a lot of other evidence.
>
> i do think that the claim that it is sado-masochistic is lame for the very
> reasons chip maintains. the psychoanalytic thesis re: history and culture,
> like the psychoanalytic thesis about the human psyche and our ability to
> make claims about the operation of the pysche on extreme cases, lacks
> explanatory power.
>
> i find it a fascinating and compelling set of tools to talk about how
> humans behave and why. and i maintain that even the neuropsychologist end
> up using psychoanalysis to explain individual level behavior. or rather, to
> conceptualize it.
>
> but, in this case, to claim that what happened in this incident can be
> chalked up to the s-m tendencies of christianity just doesn't stand up to
> scrutiny.
>
> kelley
>
> _________________________________________________________________
> Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com