Jesus Manifesto - Latest Comments in Manuscript Reveals Revisions in Sermon on the Mount

Re: Manuscript Reveals Revisions in Sermon on the Mount

Monk-in-Training — Thu, 06 Mar 2008 21:18:12 -0000

I loved how you gored the ox of the conservatives and liberals with the same message. Very good.

Re: Manuscript Reveals Revisions in Sermon on the Mount

SKS — Thu, 28 Feb 2008 21:02:57 -0000

Hi. Nicely done.
I didn't see that this was a satire until reading the comments - but it didn't matter. Obviously false.
Even if some ancient text was found recording this, it should be clear that the ancient chronicler would be misquoting to suit his own purpose - Because, the message is so completely inconsistent with all other texts & and any other record describing Jesus' life and teaching. Or any wise teaching.
The 'message' in the satire is what all too many people slip into anyway - hardly requires anyone to teach it.
Is the next "manuscript" going to have Jesus passing by the nasty crowd with the adulturess, and saying to them: "ok, you who has the most sins, throw the first stone!?"
Uh, God sends his Son to create a new covenant with humanity (or just an extraordinary human teacher), who says ... "if someone pushes you, push the bugger back harder." Don't think so.

Re: Manuscript Reveals Revisions in Sermon on the Mount

Mark Van Steenwyk — Wed, 20 Feb 2008 12:19:08 -0000

Thanks Jonathan.

Regarding the "satire-ishness" of this article. The satire all hinges in the responses at the end. I'm exploiting the stereotypes of liberals and conservatives by making liberals ambivalent to the discovery and making conservatives happy about it.

I guess my level of skepticism is so naturally high that I always assume my works of satire are easily distinguishable as such. I think I'll end each work of satire with an editor's note.

Re: Manuscript Reveals Revisions in Sermon on the Mount

Jonathan Brink — Wed, 20 Feb 2008 11:52:32 -0000

Mark, I love satire and think you write it well. But satire is a typically, but not always, based on making fun of something that is absurd in general. This post skirted those lines. It didn't appear to make fun of something. Although several people found the last two paragraphs funny.

I actually spent an entire day thinking about this, which was a great exercise, because I didn't get that it was satire.

Regardless, I think you'll find a good solution.

Re: Manuscript Reveals Revisions in Sermon on the Mount

Mike Cline — Wed, 20 Feb 2008 08:05:44 -0000

It's either some sort of tag line, or you are going to see some video on you tube trying to disclaim your Christianity. :) pick your poison

Re: Manuscript Reveals Revisions in Sermon on the Mount

Jordan Peacock — Wed, 20 Feb 2008 02:32:09 -0000

I use Google reader as well; a small trailer would be wise. Without it I would not be surprised to one day see some poor undiscerning news source running with one of our satirical pieces. It has happened before, just not to JM.

Re: Manuscript Reveals Revisions in Sermon on the Mount

Ryan Georgioff — Tue, 19 Feb 2008 23:33:15 -0000

Yeah I would encourage you to add that it is a work of satire at the end.

Re: Manuscript Reveals Revisions in Sermon on the Mount

Mark Van Steenwyk — Tue, 19 Feb 2008 19:36:30 -0000

I get it, Jonathan. But if someone has Jesus Manifesto in their RSS feed, you'd think they'd eventually realize that there is a 1/10 chance that it is satire. If I write "SATIRE" in bold letters at the top of every post, it will take away the power that satire has...that you don't know it is satire until the end, or until you reflect upon it.

I suppose, I could write "by the way...this was a work of satire" at the end of each post. That would be a middle ground, I suppose.

Does anyone else have an opinion on this?

Re: Manuscript Reveals Revisions in Sermon on the Mount

Jonathan Brink — Tue, 19 Feb 2008 19:22:44 -0000

Mark, I would remember that not everyone reads this on your site. Google Reader as example does not display "satire". Undiscerning readers may get pretty scared, as did Jerry. I actually didn't take it as satire until today when I read it on your blog. It's the fine line of satire.

Re: Manuscript Reveals Revisions in Sermon on the Mount

Jerry Ebner — Tue, 19 Feb 2008 09:02:54 -0000

Is this story very credible or not?

Is there a real news source for this at all.

Is this just somebody's idea of a joke?

Please send to me reliable credible news sourses.

Thanks, Jerry Ebner cwomaha@gmail.com

Re: Manuscript Reveals Revisions in Sermon on the Mount

Jason Barr — Tue, 19 Feb 2008 02:35:10 -0000

Err, by the way, nice job with the satire - I thought it did a good job of highlighting problems with some styles of both conservatives and liberals.

Re: Manuscript Reveals Revisions in Sermon on the Mount

Jason Barr — Tue, 19 Feb 2008 02:34:21 -0000

We read from an image of it in my Greek class, so I thought I recognized it. That was pretty cool, but not nearly as cool as when we got to go to London and actually read from Codices Sinaiticus and Alexandrinus in their display case (we were already in England at the time, so it's not like we flew across the ocean just to read from the two manuscripts).

Re: Manuscript Reveals Revisions in Sermon on the Mount

Mark Van Steenwyk — Tue, 19 Feb 2008 01:23:53 -0000

It is indeed p52! Good eye.

Re: Manuscript Reveals Revisions in Sermon on the Mount

ryan — Mon, 18 Feb 2008 23:10:03 -0000

Wow... on one hand i think you are a jerk for not putting the "satire" tag in bigger letters. On the other hand I think you are a genius for this hilarious satire.

Re: Manuscript Reveals Revisions in Sermon on the Mount

tripp fuller — Mon, 18 Feb 2008 22:41:11 -0000

hilarious!

Re: Manuscript Reveals Revisions in Sermon on the Mount

Ryan Georgioff — Mon, 18 Feb 2008 21:28:16 -0000

That had me at first. I was seriously reeling. Good play, sir. Genuinely terrific satire.

Re: Manuscript Reveals Revisions in Sermon on the Mount

mountainguy — Mon, 18 Feb 2008 21:08:20 -0000

Well, both conservatives and liberals support capitalism (actually known as neoliberalism)

greetings

Re: Manuscript Reveals Revisions in Sermon on the Mount

mountainguy — Mon, 18 Feb 2008 21:07:53 -0000

Well, both conservatives and liberals support capitalism.

greetings

Re: Manuscript Reveals Revisions in Sermon on the Mount

Jason Barr — Mon, 18 Feb 2008 20:50:30 -0000

Is the accompanying image the Ryland papyrus, p52?

Re: Manuscript Reveals Revisions in Sermon on the Mount

wezlo — Mon, 18 Feb 2008 20:11:49 -0000

Wow, that would give the onion a run for it's money.

Re: Manuscript Reveals Revisions in Sermon on the Mount

Luke — Mon, 18 Feb 2008 19:47:04 -0000

That was hilarious. The last two paragraphs are priceless.

Re: Manuscript Reveals Revisions in Sermon on the Mount

Jordan Peacock — Mon, 18 Feb 2008 19:31:37 -0000

It's not the 'conservatives' that were as weird for me as the people who said that who Jesus is/was does not affect their plans of action whatsoever.

If I could reasonably put together a gospel sans Jesus I would - it would be so much easier to work with. Nevertheless to do so is remove the very heart of the faith. You end up with a shell of behaviour patterns without the strength to live them or the faith to rest on.

Re: Manuscript Reveals Revisions in Sermon on the Mount

Rick — Mon, 18 Feb 2008 19:29:50 -0000

Didn't see "satire" either, but the different responses were just stereotypical enough to be wrong. Or right - and tight, that's a good descriptor, too.

Re: Manuscript Reveals Revisions in Sermon on the Mount

Erik Pasco — Mon, 18 Feb 2008 17:55:38 -0000

I was reading that in Google reader and didn't see the satire tag. I thought it was legit until the last part. Thank God that was satire.

Man I love the Sermon on the Mount. Our picture of Jesus could be very different without this defining passage. Luckily, we have 3 other gospels ;)

Re: Manuscript Reveals Revisions in Sermon on the Mount

Mark Van Steenwyk — Mon, 18 Feb 2008 17:53:18 -0000

mountainguy: To be fair, I rip on liberals too. :)

Ok. This will be interesting. Most of the satires I've written have ended up confusing at least one person who thinks it is real. I wonder if that will happen this time.