Saturday, April 04, 2009

A FACEBOOK PASSION OF THE CHRIST




I am not a particular fan of Facebook, but recently one of my former students sent me the following link---

http://canter.s437.sureserver.com/fbp/facebookpassion.pdf

In a surprising end run manuever, apparently Jesus interrupts Bart Ehrman during Passion week, knocking on his office door (check out his most recent title). BW3

18 comments:

Krissi said...

This is hilarious.

CarlAxel said...

That is very funny. Any thoughts on Ehrman's latest book?

Ben Witherington said...

Haven't read it yet, but its in the mail to me.

BW3

Banuel said...

this is so funny! thank you so much for this. i want to share this with the kids in my youth group (grades 6-12).

and the inclusion of erhman will be a great lead in to apologetics.

any cues on how best to go about discussing the issues that erhman brings up with my teens?

thanks!

Nate Bostian said...

Banuel,

I am glad you caught on to the apologetic / evangelistic vibe of the joke.

The intention in the Facebook Passion is three fold:

(a) To express all the funny stuff we have thought about regarding the Passion, but were afraid to talk about;

(b) For those who may be "bored" or "jaded" with the Passion story to look at it in a new way, and thus to think about it again from a different angle;

(c) As a subversive form of evangelism. There are people who may read that who would never read the actual Biblical narratives. And the mockery of Bart Ehrman is a ploy to show how that kind of Enlightenment-Empirical reading of the text just misses the point entirely...

If I was going to use it with a youth group, I would point out how Ehrman's reading of the text(s) just misses the point entirely. Are there divergences of viewpoint in the Gospels? Yes. Are the viewpoints divergent enough to cause questions? Some of them.

But, is it clear that there is core Reality of the Risen Christ that all four point to? Yes. Is it clear that this Risen Christ radically transformed the disciples in a way not accountable by merely psychological or sociological means? Yes. Does this Risen Christ still transform people in the same way? Yes.

Some people think that because the resurrection is BEYOND words to fully explain (i.e. mystical and miraculous) then it is somehow LESS than historical (i.e. mythical and magical). That's a confusion of categories. It is only BEYOND words because it is FULLY historical. In CS Lewis' words, Christ is the "MYTH become FACT".

Dizma said...

Thank you, Ben. :)

Manuel Rojas said...

¡QuĂ© divertido! Thank you Dr. Ben.

Jack O'Sullivan said...

LMFAO! That is funny


Jack O'Sullivan
Bedroom Sets

Rob Suggs said...

Nicest parody I've seen in a while. Would have been perfect for the Wittenburg Door back in the day.

Rob
(a former Keeper of the Door)

Wayne said...

I thought this was pretty funny too and enjoyed it. But I couldn't help noticing that I sort of stopped laughing at the point of the crucifixion (mind you, I wasn't offended at all - that's not my point). It seemed that the narrative substance overwhelmed it's humorous intent. Perhaps it's just me, but that's what struck me as I read it. Thanks for sharing this.

Coming and Going said...

Very funny! Do you know if the website "Ship of Fools" has picked up on this?

CarlAxel said...

Nate,

Used it with our youth group - the only thing I could not explain well was Jude. Maybe when it needs to be explained, it loses the humor, but I just didn't get the references.
BTW - checked out your website and FB page and notice that we have some common friends - I served 2 years at Redeemer Covenant in Carrollton.
Blessings to you.

Nate Bostian said...

Carl,

Yeah, explaining the joke can mess things up. But at the risk of messing up the joke: I think the Jude angle was first devised by my co-author as a take off on the whole davinci code nonsense. But, traditional iconography has usually pictured John as the only unshaven apostle, and a lot of his icons are strangely androgynous. I thought we would run with it, and we needed to cast one of the apostles in the role of a creepy "mountain man" (think of the movie deliverance). Jude drew the short straw for no particular reason. It's not making any statements about sexuality, just making fun of the irony of davinci code and John's iconography...

Heavens said...

If all that you Xan intellectuals can come up with for an argument against Bart Ehrman is that he's an idiot or an ass and then pat each other on the back, saying "Spot on!", I would encourage you to take a course in remedial logic. By the way, your slip is showing, Ben.

Ben Witherington said...

Hi Heavens. Christians have every right to have a little fun from time to time. If you honestly think there is no answer to what Bart Ehrman is saying, you have not been paying attention. He is a popularizer of tired old arguments which most scholars today, of whatever strip, recognize as not valid from a historical or literary point of view, never mind from a theological or philosophical point of view. But I will have more to say about this shortly when I review Bart's new book.

Easter blessings on one and all,

BW3

Nate Bostian said...

Heavens, you must not write satire much...

Watch Monty Pythons Life of Bryan. It will soothe all of those serious feelings...

CarlAxel said...

Nate,
I got the connection, irony and the jokes about John, the Da Vinci code, and even the androgynous thing (did you mean to say "picture John as the only shaven apostle?") I just wondered if there was some significance to having Jude say these things. Thanks for the answer.

Ari said...

That was excellent!