Linking Christianity to Culture through Narrative

It interested me that both Ethiopian culture and Anglo-Saxon culture used similar strategies to link Christianity to their culture—the use of lineage and idea of cultural superiority. The second reading of the Kebra Negast notes how, “the land that is ours is the land of inheritance, which God hath given unto us according to the oath that HE swore to our fathers, and a land flowing with milk and honey…” (44) It is clear that the idea of heritage is strong in this passage. Similarly, the Anglo-Saxons note that they are “the children of Israel” and the “inheritors of the Promises of God.” This struck me as interesting because both cultures link their culture to Christianity through the idea of cultural superiority. Both cultures use narratives that combine the origins of Christianity to their culture. If the narrative is unrealistic or lacking evidence (as the Anglo-Saxons call their narrative a “great story”), this is obsolete. Through the means of propaganda (the magazine), Anglo-Saxon culture was able to spread the narrative even more. Though their narrative (at least from what the magazine said) seemed unrealistic, stating that the “Anglo-Saxons everywhere” were the children of God, the appealing ideas of the narrative (that Anglo-Saxons are God’s divine children) seems enticing, and does not need evidence to gain popularity. In hindsight, though both cultures use the idea of lineage for evidence of their link to Christianity, the ideas are so enticing for the culture it is directed at, evidence is seldom necessary.

Cross- Cultural Manipulation of Christianity

This blog is in response to an idea that was brought up in class today by Daniel-- the comparison of manifest destiny to the Kebra Negast, and more generally--how people tend to change the origins of Christianity to make them relevant to their particular culture. The Queen of Shiba is used to make a connection between Christianity and Ethiopia—“And our lord Jesus Christ, in condemning the Jewish people, the crucifiers, who lived at the time, spake, saying “The queen of the South will rise up on the Day of Judgment and shall dispute with, and condemn and overcome this generation who would not hearken unto the preaching of my word.”(16-17) This quotation illustrates how the origins of Christianity are linked to a specific individual in Ethiopian culture. More importantly, the development of early Christianity foreshadows why future cultures acted they way they did in terms of religion and economic expansion. Many cultures, including the Ethiopians, create links between their culture and Christianity to make their own culture seem divine. Similarly, Eastern Europeans developed the idea of Manifest Destiny, which gave them a reason to expand and conquer without regretting the countless American Indians they killed in the process. Egocentrism, (the idea that the norms in one culture are the same in all cultures- or ego about ones culture) tends to fuel a uniform idea in almost all Christian cultures—that their version of the Christian religion is undoubtedly correct. Even if many cultures do not express this idea forthright, the changes made in each culture in order to better mesh with the origins of Christianity illustrate how egocentrism is a driving cross-cultural force.

Metropolis, Religion and Cinematography:

I previously watched Metropolis in a film class I took senior year of high school. The specific shot that I find most interesting is the one where Rotwang rises out of the trapdoor leading down to the catacombs, and Maria scampers back against the wall in fear. The shot is an OTS (over the shoulder) from behind Rotwang (who is in a rather hunched position-close to the separation between the upper ground and underground). The lighting in the shot exemplifies the features of Maria’s face, making her the only lit object in the shot. The shot not only illustrates the dichotomy between good and evil, but also connotes an image that deals with the battle between God and the Devil. Maria, being the holy object in the picture looms above Rotwang, who is rising up from the dark ground (hell). The camera work does an excellent job of creating a visual line between the upper ground (heaven) and underground (hell). Though Rotwang initially physically overpowers Maria, her superior stance in the shot (her lofty position in the frame) foreshadows her victory over Rotwang and his evil tendencies.

Religion and Grandiose

I though the most interesting of the reading was a single line in the article. It struck me as fantastic—“What minority, even a radicalized one, isn’t generally “tolerant” of the majority for most of its career? Even avowed terrorists and revolutionaries spend most of their days just biding their time” (115) This line relates the larger picture of religion. I think religion as a whole contributes to grandiose—exaggerated belief in ones important. Particularly with the “fundamentalist” sections of each religion, I believe that the idea of a higher power is many times the driving factor that contributes to destructive behavior. If one believes that his/her actions are being carried out for a benign reason (that of god/gods or a higher deity), they may be prone to ignore “core motives” of culture-- motives that are universal cross culturally. Grandiose, becomes a problem for fundamentalists because they fail to consider that possible repercussions of their actions. The idea of egocentrism (regarding the self as the center of all things) starts to apply to fundamentalist sections of religion, and negative occurrences such as religious war can result from such delusions. I agree that there are many benefits to religion, but there can also be extreme consequences when religious extremes preside over the norms of society.

Expanding "How to look at Torah" into the Context of our Classroom Philosophy

In the section “How to look at Torah” there were a few lines that I thought were particularly relevant to our technique of studying religion—in relevance to the “big picture.” The lines “look only at the soul, root of all, real Torah! In the time to come they are destined to look the soul of the soul of Torah!” I found particularly interesting because they illustrate the importance of studying the historical context of religion. The “soul of the soul of the Torah” seems to emphasize viewing the Torah from a historical perspective- a perspective similar to the one we have adopted in order to examine religion. The Zohar also notes, “The soul of the doul is the Holy Ancient One. All is connected, this one to that one.” (44) This line struck me as even more important because of the phrase “all is connected, this one to that one.” The articles we have been discussing seem to build upon one another--each new article contained certain elements that were prevalent in previous articles. The study of Neolithic, Paleolithic and Holecene art is a good example. Along with each cultures evolution of artwork, spirituality seemed to evolve along with it. When the Zohar notes that “all is connected, this one to that one,” it make me realize that despite the stark differences among religious cultures and denominations, it seems that religion has stemmed from a common background- a background that took place over thousands of years and was built by hundreds of different cultures. To me, that is the big picture.

Plato and Augustine

At first, Saint Augustine seems Platonic when he discusses bible interpretation, but eventually alludes to a less Platonic philosophy. Augustine notes that to achieve inner knowledge a person must have “spiritual freedom.” (75) He also mentions how people “judge sins not by the strength of actual lust, but by the standard of their own practices.” He seems to look condescendingly upon those who manipulate the bible based on their own cultural norms. Just as Plato lays out a well defined path to achieve an ideal society, Augustine voices his view on how to properly address and interpret the scriptures in the bible. For instance, he notes that the phrase, “Behold today I have established you over nations and kingdoms to uproot and destroy to lat waste and scatter” is “entirely figurative” which illustrates how Augustine has a specific philosophy that everyone should apply when interpreting scripture. (78) This specificity is also seen in Plato’s Republic as he argues for and attempts to define what aspects make up a harmonious society.

Augustine seems to become less Platonic, and more liberal as the article proceeds. Eventually, he notes how there are “sometimes not just one meaning but two or more meanings that are perceived from the same words of the scripture” (86) Plato would most likely disagree about the idea of multiple interpretations (not in the bible, but rather as a philosophy in general). In Plato’s ideas society, interpretation would seemingly disrupt the duties that each member must execute with orderly precision. Perfection, the underlying motive that drives Plato’s argument, would be undermined by Augustine’s idea that things have multiple interpretations.

Plato and Augustine

At first, Saint Augustine seems Platonic when he discusses bible interpretation, but eventually alludes to a less Platonic philosophy. Augustine notes that to achieve inner knowledge a person must have “spiritual freedom.” (75) He also mentions how people “judge sins not by the strength of actual lust, but by the standard of their own practices.” He seems to look condescendingly upon those who manipulate the bible based on their own cultural norms. Just as Plato lays out a well defined path to achieve an ideal society, Augustine voices his view on how to properly address and interpret the scriptures in the bible. For instance, he notes that the phrase, “Behold today I have established you over nations and kingdoms to uproot and destroy to lat waste and scatter” is “entirely figurative” which illustrates how Augustine has a specific philosophy that everyone should apply when interpreting scripture. (78) This specificity is also seen in Plato’s Republic as he argues for and attempts to define what aspects make up a harmonious society.

Augustine seems to become less Platonic, and more liberal as the article proceeds. Eventually, he notes how there are “sometimes not just one meaning but two or more meanings that are perceived from the same words of the scripture” (86) Plato would most likely disagree about the idea of multiple interpretations (not in the bible, but rather as a philosophy in general). In Plato’s ideas society, interpretation would seemingly disrupt the duties that each member must execute with orderly precision. Perfection, the underlying motive that drives Plato’s argument, would be undermined by Augustine’s idea that things have multiple interpretations.