Jesus and Oedipus

[VILLANELLE]

Yes, the Bible is great literature as well as being great theology. And the Bible was the first book printed on the newly invented printing press in 1440, setting off the march to universal literacy.

And don't forget the first European settlers in America brought the Bible with them as an inerrant guide to Truth and as a guide on how to live.

All my families names over generations are inscribed in the King James Bible.

And it would be fair to say the God we worship is the God of the Book. And notice, whatever we worship we become, and as we worship the God of the Book, we become literate individuals.

Neat way of looking at things.

 

[Mole]

In Italy humanities students often joke about your grammar schools and Shakespeare's education

I was talking to Shakespeare the other day, and he told me he had heard Italian students were joking about him. And he said, more in sorrow than anger, that he didn't know what possessed him to set any of his plays in Italy.

 

[Doctor Cringelord]

Sometimes Mole reminds me of Ash from the film Alien.

I don't mean this as an insult. Ash functioned as a seeker of truth, in his own way.

 

[senza tema]

Mole, you may be interested in a book called Oedipus and the Devil: Witchcraft, Religion and Sexuality in Early Modern Europe. It's a somewhat eccentric exploration of how people come to believe things that aren't true. If that provocative title isn't lure enough for you, let me add that its author, Lyndal Roper, is Regius Professor of History at Oxford ... and a compatriot of yours.

 

[Doctor Cringelord]

Just stopping in to say that I have a bible and in high school sometimes in the morning I'd read a bit of it. I don't necessarily believe in religion, I just.. I don't. I'm not an Atheist, or anything like that. I think some of the stories are beautiful, though.

It's a classic of literature.

 

[Obfuscate]

i find the original post to be mildly offensive, and wildly fallacious...

 

[VILLANELLE]

It's a classic of literature.

 

[Doctor Cringelord]

 

[VILLANELLE]

I thought you were making a joke.

 

[Doctor Cringelord]

I thought you were making a joke.

Nope

 

[VILLANELLE]

Nope

Not even sarcasm?

 

[Mole]

i find the original post to be mildly offensive, and wildly fallacious...

The original post is a comparison of metaphors.

Metaphors are neither true nor false, and their comparison has nothing to do with truth or wild fallacy.

It is difficult to juggle metaphors, and even more difficult to juggle their comparison, as we must find a safe passage between fancy and the literal. And unfortunately many don't seem to be able to tell the difference.

And the original post is mildly offensive because Jesus is a sacred person and Oedipus is a figure of ridicule, so to compare them would seem to be perverse, unless such a comparison sparks a light. The danger with the comparison is that it sparks more heat than light.

 

[Obfuscate]

The original post is a comparison of metaphors.

Metaphors are neither true nor false, and their comparison has nothing to do with truth or wild fallacy.

It is difficult to juggle metaphors, and even more difficult to juggle their comparison, as we must find a safe passage between fancy and the literal. And unfortunately many don't seem to be able to tell the difference.

And the original post is mildly offensive because Jesus is a sacred person and Oedipus is a figure of ridicule, so to compare them would seem to be perverse, unless such a comparison sparks a light. The danger with the comparison is that it sparks more heat than light.

Jesus is the opposite metaphor: Jesus is a metaphor for being hated by our father and loved by our mother.

there is no (biblical) comparison i can think of to support the idea that this is a proper metaphor...

given that he is a "sacred figure" and i see no evidence to support the comparison, it is mildly insulting...

 

[onemoretime]

Oedipus was wise to worldly things while being blind to spiritual things. Thus his eventual blindness.

Jesus was wise to spiritual things while rejecting worldly things. This is a fundamental difference.

 

[Mole]

there is no (biblical) comparison i can think of to support the idea that this is a proper metaphor...

Metaphors are neither true nor false nor proper, rather metaphors are plausible or implausible.

This is hard to grasp so metaphors are either treated literally or as fanciful, but all the time they are in front of us they are simply plausible or implausible.

 

[Obfuscate]

Metaphors are neither true nor false nor proper, rather metaphors are plausible or implausible.

This is hard to grasp so metaphors are either treated literally or as fanciful, but all the time they are in front of us they are simply plausible or implausible.

*shrugs* discussing the semantics is dull... you haven't addressed what i (obviously) meant... do so, or quit wasting my time...

post script:

this line of reasoning is similar to me telling you that Jesus was a man (or character if you prefer) and not a metaphor... a metaphor is what results when one compares two things... here is a definition and example:

1: a figure of speech in which a word or phrase literally denoting one kind of object or idea is used in place of another to suggest a likeness or analogy between them (as in drowning in money); broadly : figurative language — compare simile
2: an object, activity, or idea treated as a metaphor

life is a rollercoaster

need more? here are some easy ones...

in the example provided, life is being compared to something else... in your post you compare jesus to nothing at all (though you do compare the "metaphor" of jesus to well known metaphors)... that is not a metaphor, though you claim he is metaphoric... given what the metaphor is meant to mean, it seems to make no sense...

one of the Many meanings of proper is "marked by suitability, rightness, or appropriateness"... your "metaphor" is unsuitable, because it is not logical as presented... perhaps you have further reasoning that you have (as of yet) not revealed to me... i have only read the original post, and your replies to mine... i don't have time or energy to comb through this thread, when it is readily apparent to me that there is likely no basis to this beyond poor understanding of the bible...

i will cede that they are neither true nor false... that was lazy phrasing on my part, but i didn't think mentioning my annoyance necessitated effort...

 

[Doctor Cringelord]

Not even sarcasm?

No

 

[VILLANELLE]

No

Weird, but okay...

 

[Doctor Cringelord]

Weird, but okay...

What's weird about it? I saw your post about biblical stories and was agreeing the Bible makes for good literature. Sorry to weird you out.

 

[geedoenfj]

I find it too hard to ignore you,

Oh my Gosh

you have my ear. So I look forward to hearing your warm muzzle whispering in my ear. But look, just between you and me, you might like to aspire to whispering beautiful lies in my ear.

Awww dear Mole

I can't resist muzzling you with my warm whispers..

and while you are not yet a mate of Mole