recent studies

                                                             blue grey study

                                                       after Sonia D

study 1

study 2

Santo Bustelo

Jesus' Tomb, Socrates' Cave, and Walter Benjamin's State of Emergency, kind of

"The soothsayers who found out from time what it had in store
certainly did not experience time as either homogeneous or empty.
Anyone who keeps this in mind will perhaps get an idea of how past
times were experienced in remembrance--namely, in just the same way.
We know that the Jews were prohibited from investigating the future.
The Torah and the prayers instruct them in remembrance, however. This
stripped the future of its magic, to which all those succumb who turn
to the soothsayers for enlightenment. This does not imply, however,
that for the Jews the future turned into homogeneous, empty time. For
every second of time was the strait gate through which Messiah might
enter."
Walter Benjamin http://www.sfu.ca/~andrewf/CONCEPT2.html

A gentile in the first century, who was reasonably informed, literate,
and trying to understand the Jewish religion, might look for some
understanding of the messiah by comparing him to the mythical
Socratic figure in Plato's allegory of the cave. Plato's figure is
often compared to a bodhisatva. He escapes the underground prison and
its shadow world and discovers the physical world and, finally,
through dialectic, the transcendent ultimate reality. Returning to the
underground to bring the good news of a higher consciousness, he is
killed by the prisoners.

"The tradition of the oppressed teaches us that the 'state of
emergency' in which we live is not the exception but the rule. We must
attain to a conception of history that is in keeping with this
insight. Then we shall clearly realize that it is our task to bring
about a real state of emergency, and this will improve our position in
the struggle against Fascism. "
WB

The ideal city described by Plato, an attempt to find the form of a
republic harmonized with the same principles that integrate the parts
of an individual soul, could be re-imagined under the influence of the
Jewish prophets, and placed in a future, as a possible world where
humanity would commune in common with the creative source without
rituals or doctrines or laws because the utopian software would be
free and downloadable to all, etc.

"The Messiah comes not only as the redeemer, he comes as the subduer
of Antichrist. Only that historian will have the gift of fanning the
spark of hope in the past who is firmly convinced that even the dead
will not be safe from the enemy if he wins. And this enemy has not
ceased to be victorious." WB

It seems probable to me that someone named "Yeshua" taught in first
century Galilee, and had a big following, who he led to Jerusalem to
confront the establishment, which charged him with disturbing the
peace, inciting a riot, and making terrorist threats, as well as
blaphemously claiming to be the Messiah, and had him crucified. These
are plausible elements in the story of this Jesus. I think it takes an
extraordinary amount of faith to believe he didn't exist at all, given
the accounts written by people who knew people who knew him. But there
were other dead messiahs, and other failed messianic movements.


Jesus' story spread through oral teachings for decades, beginning with
the remembrances of his followers, enhanced by dreams and visions and
by selections from the Jewish scriptures. Paul's experience of Jesus
was through a vision, an altered state, in which the risen Messiah
called him to spread the teaching. His letters to churches are the
earliest writings of the Jesus movement. His ministry lasted from the
mid- 30s to the 50s. His teaching became the orthodox teaching.

The gospels were compiled out of folklore and memories and the sayings
and parables Jesus had taught his disciples to spread. The gospels are
a unique literary form. The speeches of Jesus can be compared to the
speeches of Socrates as written by Plato, not necessarily an accurate
transcription of words spoken, but as a poetic telling of
philosophical truths.

Aristotle said that poetry was more philosophical than history,
because history is a record of particular events, while poetry is
concerned with universals. The universal meaning contained by the
poetry of the gospels is the poetry of the Jewish prophets and their
faith in a possible world of a new covenant and a community annointed
with a new spirit, the new wine of the republic of heaven. The old
gods had been defeated by Caesar and were made to submit to him. The
only god not defeated was the one that could not be pictured. He was
only represented in words, and these words were of great interest to
many gentiles.

The Jewish scriptures, and the scriptures of the early christians, and
the literature of hellenic civilization, are the foundational texts of
the Western canon, and therefore foundational to how we think. We need
to change how we think, but we need to understand what we are
changing. The universal part of the poetry of scripture include a view
of history as headed somewhere. Historical materialism was a moment in
messianic thought. Walter Benjamin's evocative theses on history are
concerned with this metanarrative at a time of crisis, and are what
got me thinking about reading through Matthew's gospel. Now I'm going
to take up Paul's letter to the Romans, although I'm not going to blog
about it. At Paul D'Agostino's suggestion I've been reading Giorgio
Agamben's The Time That Remains, in which he comments on both the
apostle Paul and Benjamin.
http://www.sup.org/books/title/?id=3189

Thanks for reading

They were afraid

The death of a particular man shook the world to the extent that, centuries later, a new calendar was devised, for "the Year of Our Lord," based on the estimated year of his birth, and a civilization was named after his title, the blasphemous title of "Anointed," and all over the world the image of his corpse nailed to a cross hangs on walls and around necks. Why is that? Countless Jews, and countless others, were crucified by the Roman Empire, why does our common era begin with this man?

There was darkness at noon, the synoptic gospels agree. All four gospels say he was offered sour wine on some cloth at the end of a stick, and that he cried out loud and was dead. The synoptic gospels say that the veil in the Temple was torn in two, symbolizing direct access to the divine presence. Matthew tells of a zombie apocalypse -- the bodies of some saints were raised and walked around and were seen by many. He died sooner than normal for a crucified man. The Romans liked to torture the crucified for a long time, to prolong the work of Justice on the criminal, so Pilate was surprised to hear of his death already. All four gospels mention a wealthy man named Joseph of Arimithea taking the corpse and placing it in a tomb he had.

There are significant differences in the four versions of the story. John's gospel gives Peter and John more central roles in the discovery of the empty tomb. I prefer Mark's account, and I prefer the shorter version of Mark, which ends at 16:8.

The crucifixion was watched by many women who had followed Jesus since Galilee, and who had taken care of him. The men had run away and were apparently still hiding, but these women stayed and watched and came forward to prepare his body. It would be worthwhile to collect the various times this gospel mentions women serving Jesus and the various times Jesus says that those who are greatest  will serve the others. The arrival of the women ready to anoint the absent body recalls the earlier incident in Bethany where an unnamed woman anointed Jesus "before burial."

Mark 16: 1 When the sabbath was over, Mary Magdalene, and Mary the mother of James, and Salome bought spices, so that they might go and anoint him. ² And very early on the first day of the week, when the sun had risen, they went to the tomb. ³ They had been saying to one another, “Who will roll away the stone for us from the entrance to the tomb?” ⁴ When they looked up, they saw that the stone, which was very large, had already been rolled back. ⁵ As they entered the tomb, they saw a young man, dressed in a white robe, sitting on the right side; and they were alarmed.⁶ But he said to them, “Do not be alarmed; you are looking for Jesus of Nazareth, who was crucified. He has been raised; he is not here. Look, there is the place they laid him. ⁷ But go, tell his disciples and Peter that he is going ahead of you to Galilee; there you will see him, just as he told you.” ⁸ So they went out and fled from the tomb, for terror and amazement had seized them; and they said nothing to anyone, for they were afraid.

This is where some of the oldest versions of Mark's gospel end, and I like this ending for poetic reasons, I guess. Matthew cut Peter's name from the ending. I suggest you read the footnotes at the bottom of this Mark 16, about the shorter and longer endings appended to verse 8. 

Matthew 28 embellishes Mark's story. The young man in white is there described as "like lightning." He is described in terms similar to those used to describe the transfiguration in Matthew 17:
² And he was transfigured before them, and his face shone like the sun, and his clothes became dazzling white. 


and the angelic figures in Daniel 10:
⁵ I looked up and saw a man clothed in linen, with a belt of gold from Uphaz around his waist. ⁶ His body was like beryl, his face like lightning, his eyes like flaming torches, his arms and legs like the gleam of burnished bronze, and the sound of his words like the roar of a multitude.


Rumors that Jesus was still alive, or returned to life, spread.

Back in Galilee, the risen Messiah appeared to the eleven remaining disciples -- in a vision? hallucination? dreams? tall tale? --  and commissioned them to continue his teaching, and promised his continuing presence within the messianic community, until "the end of the age."
Matthew 28: 
¹⁸ And Jesus came and said to them, “All authority in heaven and on earth has been given to me. ¹⁹ Go therefore and make disciples of all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit, ²⁰ and teaching them to obey everything that I have commanded you. And remember, I am with you always, to the end of the age.”

Lost in the logos 2

Mocking him for his bizarre and grandiose claims, the police beat the terrorist suspect before he was put to death by executive order.

This project of blogging Matthew's gospel will conclude with questions. 
When I began this study I had a modest goal, which was to read and comment 
on the text in the manner of contemporary recaps of TV shows like Breaking 
Bad or Mad Men. When I was watching those shows I liked to read some of the 
online discussions and reviews. I thought I could have a similarly 
informal, even vulgar, discussion of the first book in the New Testament. I 
planned to read a chapter or two and then write what came to mind. 

Although I was raised on the Christian Bible, and was taught in Sunday School for 
two decades before I took up my own study (from a new perspective) I soon 
found myself lost in what one would suppose to be familiar territory. When 
I saw that I was lost in the text I knew I was on the right path.

Matthew 24:1 As Jesus came out of the temple and was going away, his 
disciples came to point out to him the buildings of the temple. 2 Then he 
asked them, "You see all these, do you not? Truly I tell you, not one stone 
will be left here upon another; all will be thrown down."

Matthew 27:59 Now the chief priests and the whole council were looking for 
false testimony against Jesus so that they might put him to death, 60 but 
they found none, though many false witnesses came forward. At last two came 
forward 61 and said, "This fellow said, 'I am able to destroy the temple of 
God and to build it in three days.'" 62 The high priest stood up and said, 
"Have you no answer? What is it that they testify against you?" 63 But 
Jesus was silent.

This bit about rebuilding the temple in three days wasn't mentioned in 
Matthew before this testimony, and in 24:2 Jesus didn't say he would throw 
down the stones, so the witnesses seem to be distorting the truth.
Does Matthew want us to identify Jesus' body with the 
temple, "rebuilt" or resurrected in three days? Is he suggesting that the 
temple priests are somehow responsible for  the destruction of Temple?


Matthew 27:63 Then the high priest said to him, "I put you under oath 
before the living God, tell us if you are the Messiah, the Son of God." 64 Jesus 
said to him, "You have said so. But I tell you,
From now on you will see the Son of Man
    seated at the right hand of Power
    and coming on the clouds of heaven."
65 Then the high priest tore his clothes and said, "He has blasphemed! Why 
do we still need witnesses? You have now heard his blasphemy.

Did Jesus answer Caiaphus' question? "You have said so" was Jesus' reply to 
Judas'  "Surely not I, Rabbi?" in 26: 25. The implication in both cases is 
that the questions are really statements. Jesus then says something that 
the high priest declares blasphemous:

 But I tell you, From now on you will see the Human Being
    seated at the right hand of Power
    and coming on the clouds of heaven."

Maybe Jesus was being ironic?

Why  did Jesus say "son of man" in reply to the high priest's "son of God?" 
"Son of man" means human being, but Jesus also seemed to use it in a 
specific way to refer to himself as the messiah. I would have to go back to find the other times he used that term.

The human being seated at the right hand of power, as in the first verse of 
Psalm 110 (which Jesus brought up earlier, as a puzzle of interpretation, when he was teaching in the temple), interpreted to mean the messiah, is here identified with the "one 
like a human being coming with the clouds of heaven" from one of Daniel's 
terrifying dreams, and Jesus said the high priest will see this, "from now 
on." 
He seems to be saying that the messianic time has begun. What did he mean?

Before the Roman authority he again answers "You say so," this time to 
Pilate's asking if he is the King of the Jews. Pilate knew that Herod 
Antipas was the king, of course, so he was either asking if Jesus intended 
to overthrow Herod  or if he was crazy.

Mark's version says that Barabbus was in prison for his part in an 
insurrection in which a murder took place. Matthew only says he was a 
notorious criminal. 

Matthew adds the part about Pilate washing his hands before the mob and 
declaring his innocence, while the crowd (led by the priests) reply, "Let 
his blood be on our children." Christian Anti-semites continue to take this to be a curse on all Jews, and a rationale for persecution and genocide.

The account of the death of Jesus seems to mix eye witness accounts with 
bits from Psalm 22, starting with, "they divide my clothes among 
themselves, and for my clothing they cast lots," and finishing with, "My 
God, my God, why have you forsaken me?"

Tomorrow I'll write about the events after his death, but for now note that

Matthew 28: 11 adds an alternate explanation for the empty tomb:

...some of the guard went into the city and told the chief 
priests everything that had happened. 12 After the priests had assembled 
with the elders, they devised a plan to give a large sum of money to the 
soldiers, 13 telling them, "You must say, 'His disciples came by night and 
stole him away while we were asleep.'14 If this comes to the governor's 
ears, we will satisfy him and keep you out of trouble." 15 So they took the 
money and did as they were directed. And this story is still told among the 
Jews to this day.

-- and not only "the Jews," certainly, to this day.

In October I wrote:
So much of this gospel is uninspiring, and even depressing, because of its anti- Pharisee propaganda, but it reflects the situation of Matthew's community soon after the destruction of the temple, and decades after Jesus' crucifixion, when his followers were accused of heresy and spreading propaganda about their dead messiah. I wonder if the real point of Matthew's attacks on the Pharisees is to discredit their claim that Jesus' disciples had stolen Jesus' body and lied about the resurrection. The Jesus movement was based on a small group of followers  who claimed to have witnessed the resurrected Jesus and to have been called by him to spread his message until the messiah returns and the messianic age is realized, utopia now.

The scripture Jesus quotes that causes Caiaphas to tear his garment is Daniel'saccount of a dream, a night vision, and the "one like a human being" was, according to a footnote in the NRSV, traditionally thought to be the Messiah, but was more likely the figure elsewhere in Daniel identified as the angel Michael, who  I will mention in tomorrow's post.

Daniel 7: 

I saw one like a human being
    coming with the clouds of heaven.
And he came to the Ancient One
    and was presented before him.
14 To him was given dominion
    and glory and kingship,
that all peoples, nations, and languages
    should serve him.
His dominion is an everlasting dominion
    that shall not pass away,
and his kingship is one
    that shall never be destroyed.

Lost in the logos

Mocking him for his bizarre and grandiose claims, the police beat the terrorist suspect before he was put to death by executive order.

This project of blogging Matthew's gospel will conclude with questions. 
When I began this study I had a modest goal, which was to read and comment 
on the text in the manner of contemporary recaps of TV shows like Breaking 
Bad or Mad Men. When I was watching those shows I liked to read some of the 
online discussions and reviews. I thought I could have a similarly 
informal, even vulgar, discussion of the first book in the New Testament. I 
planned to read a chapter or two and then write what came to mind. 

Although I was raised on the Christian Bible, and was taught in Sunday School for 
two decades before I took up my own study (from a new perspective) I soon 
found myself lost in what one would suppose to be familiar territory. When 
I saw that I was lost in the text I knew I was on the right path.

Matthew 24:1 As Jesus came out of the temple and was going away, his 
disciples came to point out to him the buildings of the temple. 2 Then he 
asked them, “You see all these, do you not? Truly I tell you, not one stone 
will be left here upon another; all will be thrown down.”

Matthew 27:59 Now the chief priests and the whole council were looking for 
false testimony against Jesus so that they might put him to death, 60 but 
they found none, though many false witnesses came forward. At last two came 
forward 61 and said, “This fellow said, ‘I am able to destroy the temple of 
God and to build it in three days.’” 62 The high priest stood up and said, 
“Have you no answer? What is it that they testify against you?” 63 But 
Jesus was silent.

This bit about rebuilding the temple in three days wasn't mentioned in 
Matthew before this testimony, and in 24:2 Jesus didn't say he would throw 
down the stones, so the witnesses seem to be distorting the truth.
Does Matthew want us to identify Jesus' body with the 
temple, "rebuilt" or resurrected in three days? Is he suggesting that the 
temple priests are somehow responsible for  the destruction of Temple?


Matthew 27:63 Then the high priest said to him, “I put you under oath 
before the living God, tell us if you are the Messiah, the Son of God.” 64 Jesus 
said to him, “You have said so. But I tell you,
From now on you will see the Son of Man
    seated at the right hand of Power
    and coming on the clouds of heaven.”
65 Then the high priest tore his clothes and said, “He has blasphemed! Why 
do we still need witnesses? You have now heard his blasphemy.

Did Jesus answer Caiaphus' question? "You have said so" was Jesus' reply to 
Judas'  "Surely not I, Rabbi?" in 26: 25. The implication in both cases is 
that the questions are really statements. Jesus then says something that 
the high priest declares blasphemous:

 But I tell you, From now on you will see the Human Being
    seated at the right hand of Power
    and coming on the clouds of heaven.”

Maybe Jesus was being ironic?

Why  did Jesus say "son of man" in reply to the high priest's "son of God?" 
"Son of man" means human being, but Jesus also seemed to use it in a 
specific way to refer to himself as the messiah. I would have to go back to find the other times he used that term.

The human being seated at the right hand of power, as in the first verse of 
Psalm 110 (which Jesus brought up earlier, as a puzzle of interpretation, when he was teaching in the temple), interpreted to mean the messiah, is here identified with the "one 
like a human being coming with the clouds of heaven" from one of Daniel's 
terrifying dreams, and Jesus said the high priest will see this, "from now 
on." 
He seems to be saying that the messianic time has begun. What did he mean?

Before the Roman authority he again answers "You say so," this time to 
Pilate's asking if he is the King of the Jews. Pilate knew that Herod 
Antipas was the king, of course, so he was either asking if Jesus intended 
to overthrow Herod  or if he was crazy.

Mark's version says that Barabbus was in prison for his part in an 
insurrection in which a murder took place. Matthew only says he was a 
notorious criminal. 

Matthew adds the part about Pilate washing his hands before the mob and 
declaring his innocence, while the crowd (led by the priests) reply, "Let 
his blood be on our children." Christian Anti-semites continue to take this to be a curse on all Jews, and a rationale for persecution and genocide.

The account of the death of Jesus seems to mix eye witness accounts with 
bits from Psalm 22, starting with, "they divide my clothes among 
themselves, and for my clothing they cast lots," and finishing with, "My 
God, my God, why have you forsaken me?"

Tomorrow I'll write about the events after his death, but for now note that

Matthew 28: 11 adds an alternate explanation for the empty tomb:

...some of the guard went into the city and told the chief 
priests everything that had happened. 12 After the priests had assembled 
with the elders, they devised a plan to give a large sum of money to the 
soldiers, 13 telling them, “You must say, ‘His disciples came by night and 
stole him away while we were asleep.’14 If this comes to the governor’s 
ears, we will satisfy him and keep you out of trouble.” 15 So they took the 
money and did as they were directed. And this story is still told among the 
Jews to this day.

-- and not only "the Jews," certainly, to this day.

In October I wrote:
So much of this gospel is uninspiring, and even depressing, because of its anti- Pharisee propaganda, but it reflects the situation of Matthew's community soon after the destruction of the temple, and decades after Jesus' crucifixion, when his followers were accused of heresy and spreading propaganda about their dead messiah. I wonder if the real point of Matthew's attacks on the Pharisees is to discredit their claim that Jesus' disciples had stolen Jesus' body and lied about the resurrection. The Jesus movement was based on a small group of followers  who claimed to have witnessed the resurrected Jesus and to have been called by him to spread his message until the messiah returns and the messianic age is realized, utopia now.

The scripture Jesus quotes that causes Caiaphas to tear his garment is Daniel'saccount of a dream, a night vision, and the "one like a human being" was, according to a footnote in the NRSV, traditionally thought to be the Messiah, but was more likely the figure elsewhere in Daniel identified as the angel Michael, who  I will mention in tomorrow's post.

Daniel 7: 

I saw one like a human being
    coming with the clouds of heaven.
And he came to the Ancient One
    and was presented before him.
14 To him was given dominion
    and glory and kingship,
that all peoples, nations, and languages
    should serve him.
His dominion is an everlasting dominion
    that shall not pass away,
and his kingship is one
    that shall never be destroyed.