In Reply to: My fave is Mordecai and Esther... posted by John Marks on February 5, 2015 at 06:48:53:
I'll defer to you on all matters relating to the Avingnon Papacy, and on all matters vineal.
I agree on Marduk and Ishtar, and on the Saducees ( Freidman talks a lot about the competition among the various priestly lines leading to different scriptural traditions ), but I doubt that Pharisee is related to Persian, but it is possible. I have no doubt that Jesus was a Pharisee, or if not a card-carrying member, a sympathizer, or at least is portrayed that way in Matthew, as he follows all the laws as the Pharisees would. I think that he criticizes "Pharisees" the same way the Tea Party criticizes the Republicans; they don't bother complaining about Obama, as their antipathy to him goes without saying.
The five areas of conflict that you mention are interesting. I hadn't considered that they date from the Babylonian captivity, although that seems reasonable. They are still unclear in Judaism ( although not all would agree ). For example, there's no mention of a future reward in the Bible; all rewards are promised in this world. There's also no heaven or hell in the Hebrew bible, just a mention of "Sheol" which is not clearly defined. I also believe ( not positive) that the Saducees used a solar calendar, and the Pharisees lunar.
Back to the book of Esther: It's the only biblical book that doesn't mention god, and also the only one for which there is documentary evidence showing that it is NOT historical ( there are extensive lists of Babylonian queens, and Esther isn't one of them, and no record of domestic uprisings. Also, the plot depends on the king not being able to rescind orders, which was not the case ). It is, however, an action-adventure comedy, with plot elements that have been seen in many a recent movie (e.g. the beauty contest plot, in which the heroine with the heart of gold wins the affections of the avuncular supervisor, ( the eunuch, in this case )and wins the contest ( see Sandra Bullock in Miss Congeniality, for example). Also, Esther asks the king to dinner, to ask him a favor, and at the dinner, askes him to another dinner. I think most readers miss the point here. This is a comedic scene: she is too nervous to ask for what she wants, so she asks him to another dinner. ( like the boy too afraid to ask the girl out, so he stumbles and asks for the time ). Later, after Esther finally accuses Haman, he faints, falls on the Esther, just as the king returns, and the king accuses Haman of attempted rape. There are many other examples. The whole book is a classic comedy.
RE: Lois:
Lois was forever trying to expose Superman's identity, just as Delilah was trying to uncover Samson's weakness. And she never teased Clark, she just ignored him; it was Superman she wanted. But was Superman real, or just Clark's "Walter Mitty" projection? And Batman and Robin are definitely closer than a guardian and ward ought to be, as Robin is a minor.
This post is made possible by the generous support of people like you and our sponsors:
Follow Ups
- Mordecai and Esther... - Alan A 10:34:03 02/05/15 (2)
- Some famous American literary critic called Batman and Robin - John Marks 18:55:10 02/05/15 (1)
- RE: Some famous American literary critic called Batman and Robin - Alan A 17:31:21 02/06/15 (0)