Forum - View topicJason Thompson's House of 1000 Manga - Jesus
|
Goto page Previous 1, 2, 3 Next Note: this is the discussion thread for this article |
| Author | Message | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|
TatsuGero23
 Posts: 1277 Location: Sniper Island, USA (It's in your heart!) |
|
|||
|
It might just be me but I tend to hear more complaints from non-religious folks about "preaching" or "brainwashing" rather then from religious folks about "blashemy", when it comes to religious material in media like movies and comics.
As an open-minded Christian, I found the idea of depicting Jesus in a more human light sans miracle workings pretty interesting. Unforunately the review seems to suggest that's not the case. Like either the mangaka wasn't comfortable depicting Jesus in either the more cynical or realistic light or as a messiah/miracle maker he is believed to be in Christian eyes. Or from the perspective of his disciples like the majority of the new testament is. Which is kinda funny cause you think the mangaka choose the middle ground to avoid any controversy but in effect created a bit of a controversy because he didn't boldly choose one side or the other and in effect not really saying much about his opinion. I'll have to actually read it but it seems that would be what would "offend" me most. That the mangaka doesn't commit to a view point that's pretty open to interpretation depending on your stance. From the highlights it seems the artist leaned more towards the cynical side but the fact he doesn't make it clear that's the story he's trying to tell bothers me since it turn a potential interesting read to a more likely disappointing one. |
||||
|
||||
geishageek
 Posts: 571 Location: Pleasant Valley, NY |
|
|||
|
You have seen Jesus Christ: Vampire Hunter so you are OK in my book.
|
||||
|
||||
|
scrwbll19
Posts: 87 |
|
|||
|
This is my first time writing here, but I feel that it is important to address some of the issues that this manga brings up through the review and comments here(Warning! This will be somewhat long). I will admit now that I have not read the manga, but the few scans of the manga do say volumes about the research done. I will also admit that the result of the research is at least interesting, given that it is the result of Japanese culture. However, it is for that very reason that the manga reveals some very large problems in its theology, historicity, and for the reality of today. Please note that I am not necessarily trying represent or defend a specific viewpoint. I only wish to point out some basic problems with the manga as shown through the review and be part of the discussion here.
Firstly, most will agree that Jesus was Jewish, as was pointed out in the review. Yet, the pictures shown of him give the impression that he is not Jewish because he lacks several things that would be very characteristic of first century Judaism at the time such as a [i]tallit[/i] (prayer shawl) and [i]tefillin[/i] (phylacteries) and the obvious lighting fire on the Sabbath. Secondly, the addition of the character Joshua is cute but not biblically accurate. The interesting thing about this is that Joshua's name in Hebrew would be Y'hoshua; likewise, when Jesus's name is traced back to the original Hebrew, it would be Yeshua, which is another form for the name Y'hoshua. Cute, yes. Accurate, no. Thirdly, how the rest of the characters are drawn in the manga is actually important. While it might be the artist's style or liberty, it is problematic because it portrays your average Jew as the stereotypical "evil, greedy, shifty-eyed," etc. Jew. This can ultimately be anti-Semitic for those who are either untrained or would want to use it for such purposes. Such cartoons were readily available in the Middle Ages and helped promote pogroms and the deaths of thousands of Jews. Although I do not think that the manga-ka is actively trying to promote anti-Semitism, his art style seems to not help his case. Fourthly, the fact that the manga leaves a lot of questions in the open is both good and bad. The good thing about it is that it allows for discussion and debate like here. It also can help portray Jesus in a more historically perhaps, especially with the politics and culture at the time (very important). At the same time, it seems to take away from the object of the Gospels and strip them of any meaning. It also allows for views like that of a certain author to undermine what the Gospels say concerning the relationship between Mary Magdalene and Jesus. [quote="vashfanatic"][i]Saint Young Men[/i], or at least as much as I've read of it (two volumes) it utterly awesome. I say this both as a religious person and as a religious studies major. It manages to be utterly irreverent but (at least to my reading) never offensive, either to Jesus or the Buddha. And I think it's because of what you said here; it humanizes them, it makes them characters you like and whose misadventures in Japanese society you love to read. In the end, I'd rather [i]be[/i] offended while still offered a fascinating new look at something than having someone avoid all controversy and be [i]boring[/i]. If they'd wanted to depict Jesus as nothing but a fraud and use the story to examine human gullibility, fine; that has literary merit, even if it would be offensive to most Christians. From reading your description, I agree that the guy did at least some good research; the Talmudic story of the centurion Pantera being Jesus' father, the politics of the area, etc. etc. But frankly, it sounds like he might have done a research overdose, and couldn't make up his mind which theories are facts and vice versa. Makes me appreciate Tezuka's re-imagining of the Buddha's life all the more... Sorry, it's late, this is rambling. I may need to read this, even if it doesn't get your thumb's up, just because I am really interested in this sort of lit.[/quote] Concerning the remark about the Talmud, most Talmudic scholars today have actually identified that the Jesus, or Yeshua as the Talmud reads, is not necessarily the Jesus of the Bible. In fact, the name Yeshua was one of the most popular names of the time in the region. Hence, the different times, which is in the hundreds, that the Talmud talks about a Yeshua is not necessarily the Yeshua or Jesus of the Bible. @AkiraKaneda: I believe you are speaking of the idea of a Q-manuscript, correct? Believe it or not, I have actually heard of such a theory about the Gospels talking about different people, but the theory comes from very liberal parts of Christianity and New Testament scholarship. I have also heard another one that I feel is very interesting to say the least. I do not know if this is helpful to your studies or not, but maybe it will help with writing some sermons  . Although it is a minority view, it theorizes that of the Synoptic Gospels, Matthew and Mark were actually written from Luke. It further states that if one takes the viewpoint that the Gospels follow the Jewish concept of [i]pardes[/i], then Luke would be the plain meaning of the story, Matthew the aggadic meaning, Mark the "hinted" meaning, and John the "hidden" meaning with at least Matthew being originally written in Hebrew, not Greek. Interesting, is it not?
|
||||
|
||||
vashfanatic
 Posts: 3489 Location: Back stateside |
|
|||
No, it's pretty explicitly the Christian Jesus, and was at least partially anti-Christian propaganda (not that Christians weren't saying even worse things about Jews at the time, of course). Also, it might not have been in the Talmud, it might've been in a separate set of midrashim, I'd have to look it up. But I did find it interesting that the young boy is named "Joshua," which is basically the same name as Jesus (alternate renderings of the same Hebrew name). In good hands, that could have been intentionally symbolic and evocative. |
||||
|
||||
|
scrwbll19
Posts: 87 |
|
|||
Wikipedia has an article on the topic at hand, which actually gives this topic a pretty thorough but basic examination: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Yeshu However, the article seems to indicate that the particular Yeshua or "Yeshu" being discussed is not the same one of the Bible but a man who held an extreme view within the camp of Judaism (a.k.a. a heretic). While the Talmud does contain some anti-Christian-ity sayings, they are mostly used as apologetics and not polemics against Christian-ity. I use "-ity" here purposefully because Jews traditionally have never had a problem with Christians themselves but rather the institution as a religion. It is important to note that, while debated, the official beginning of Christianity as an institution did not truly begin until the Council of Nicaea in 325 with Constantine. Up until this time and past it, the Jews were held in disregard by the Roman Empire and were quite powerless. Hence, they were not able to persecute Christians or the forerunners of Christianity as a religion. Rather, after the Roman Empire chose Christianity to be the official religion of Rome, Jews were persecuted, killed, had their homes and synagogues burned, tortured, brought into before Church leadership for inquisitions, etc. If polemics exist in Jewish Rabbinic literature (and they do), it is generally only out of a sense to protect what it means to be a Jew. For the millennia that they have been persecuted historically speaking, the only thing really left is for them to be born as Jews, live as Jews, and die as Jews while being the best Jews possible. Therefore, the Talmud containing "anti-Christian propaganda" is not exactly true. As for the name of Jesus, the name makes a lot of sense, given that it means "salvation." However, in the Jewish sense, this is closer to the English word for "redemption." Also, if one does some research, they will quickly find that the name has connections to the Joshua of the Old Testament as indicated by the passage in Zechariah. |
||||
|
||||
RestLessone
 Posts: 1426 Location: New York |
|
|||
|
*cough*
Uh, just about the Saint Young Men thing...Ed Chavez clarified what he meant on the Mania forums during the "Licensing Season" topic. It wasn't that Americans would be offended, but that the series relied so much on Japanese pop culture: it would mean endless notes.
Source: http://www.mania.com/aodvb/showthread.php?t=100758&highlight=Hunting&page=11 |
||||
|
||||
|
ptolemy18
Manga Reviewer/Creator/Taster
Posts: 357 Location: San Francisco |
|
|||
Actually, they do address this in the text. Joshua is aware that his name is the Greek version of "Jesus," and he sees this as a cool sort of connection between himself and Jesus, although the two of them never discuss it. (In fact, Jesus never really talks to Joshua.) There isn't any immediately obvious reason why Yasuhiko chose to do it this way, though; at first I wondered if Yasuhiko was setting up some "Joshua's actions were mistakenly attributed to the real Jesus because of the similar names" thing, but if he was, it was too vague/subtle for me to notice. |
||||
|
||||
|
ptolemy18
Manga Reviewer/Creator/Taster
Posts: 357 Location: San Francisco |
|
|||
Whoops! I may have misinterpreted his remarks, then. On the whole, though, I have noticed that Japanese licensors tend to be increasingly cautious about offending non-Japanese audiences. One too many swastikas on Pokemon cards, perhaps... |
||||
|
||||
|
ptolemy18
Manga Reviewer/Creator/Taster
Posts: 357 Location: San Francisco |
|
|||
I don't think any of the characters wear phylacteries, so this may be a research error on Yasuhiko's part. As for lighting a fire on the Sabbath, though, that's done in the manga to show that Jesus is a good guy because he violates the letter of the law (no lighting fires) for the sake of the inner meaning of the law (do good to others) -- the same as the "the Sabbath was made for men, not men for the Sabbath" utterance. |
||||
|
||||
|
vashfanatic
Posts: 3489 Location: Back stateside |
|
|||
|
scrwbll19:
Ugh, wikipedia... Please do not use as source, ever. Especially on religion topics, they get edited in and out of existence all the time. It's easy to forget the history involved here; Christianity and Judaism today have a far different relationship than they did a thousand years ago or two thousand years ago. Today Jewish people are split on how to think of Jesus (whether he was a good Jew horribly misunderstood by his followers or really wrong), but yes, early on he was a "heretic," if you want to use an admittedly inaccurate term (there is no central authority to determine who is "orthodox" within Judaism, just general consensus of learned men). His wasn't the staid rabbinical Judaism that became the dominant stream of the faith, and his followers had declared him incarnate God. Trying to say that "Oh, we didn't mean that Jesus when we said he wasn't born of a virgin but actually a Roman soldier, we meant some other Jesus who is of no threat to us" is, well, reading a current state into an old situation. As to whether the story was a defense of traditional Judaism against a dominant Christian hegemony, that would depend on when it was written, wouldn't it? For the first few centuries of its existence, what we'd call Christianity was in a much worse state than what we'd call Judaism (at the time they were branches of a very broad stream). The Romans might not understand why Jews only worshiped one god, and they might hate how they constantly tried to free themselves from the empire, but they had respect for the antiquity of the tradition and save for a few madmen (Caligula, mainly) they allowed them to practice their religion in peace, so long as they didn't rebel. Christianity, on the other hand, seemed a new thing, which spread mostly among Gentiles, and was dangerous to the state, as it encouraged Gentiles to give up practicing to the very gods that protected that state. Early on the polemics were back and forth, as each tried to deflect persecution on to the other and argue their own legitimacy to an unfriendly state. Obviously affairs changed once emperors converted, etc. Then all the anti-Jewish polemicism ceased to be an inter-sectarian and alter inter-religious quarrel and gradually transformed into open persecution. It's hard to imagine nowadays that the situation might ever have been different. Perhaps "propaganda" was not the best term, but I would stick by polemic. While it would have little to no effect on a Christian reader, to a pagan governor or someone considering conversion, an accusation against a major Christian myth (the Virgin Birth) would carry much more weight. But anyways, we're getting massively sidetracked here. If Yasuhiko was going to say Pantera was his father, he should have just said that, not had people say "Well maybe." Or better yet, simply start with his adult life; that's how Mark and John both did it. |
||||
|
||||
|
whiteandnerdy
Posts: 1 |
|
|||
|
Um, okay. Well, me being a devout Catholic I have to say I find all manga mentioned in the article offensive. Why is it people have such a need to portray religious figures in belittling roles? Or, quoting the article, "humanizing" roles. You do not put your hand in the mouth of a tiger. You don't want to offend? Don't.
Not religious? Then please, don't satirize what you don't understand. |
||||
|
||||
Fallen Wings
 Posts: 160 Location: Australia |
|
|||
There is a difference to writing that a religion sucks and adapting it to create a piece of fiction. And by the way, I'm pretty sure that he knows what he has got himself into. Just read several comments and you understand A LOT of research went in Jesus. Also Saint Young Men is not disrespectful at all. Just Jesus having a holiday. I'm guessing you are just having a Hissy-fit because *gasp* someone has a different opinion/take than you. Shock! Also I'm still trying to figure out how Christians could say that this is disrespectful yet say "you don't believe in what I believe, therefore you are going to hell". |
||||
|
||||
|
ptolemy18
Manga Reviewer/Creator/Taster
Posts: 357 Location: San Francisco |
|
|||
Who's the tiger supposed to be? |
||||
|
||||
BleuVII
 Posts: 672 Location: Tokorozawa, Japan |
|
|||
We created it because the main translation of the Bible in Japanese uses such archaic vocabulary that it's nigh near incomprehensible (think King James Version with its "thees" and "thous" and multiply it by 5). It IS meant to help people come to faith, but not to be the thing that calls them to make that decision. We just want them to be able to understand what the story of the Bible actually IS. Anyway, our current artist is Azumi Ryo, and you can see a preview page (textless) from 2008's Manga Mutiny HERE. Manga Mutiny and Manga Melech (both by Azumi-san) can be purchased from Amazon and MIGHT be found at your nearest Barnes and Noble or Borders, but they have a tendency to put us in the "Christian Inspiration" section instead of the manga section  , so you may have to search a place you wouldn't normally go. And I hope that doesn't sound like an advertisement, because I know we're not supposed to do that here. I just want to let you know where you can see her work.
Also, I started on the English version of the fifth book on Wednesday, so it'll be out sometime in Q1 of 2011. ...and it's a pleasure to be PART of this discussion.
|
||||
|
||||
|
BleuVII
Posts: 672 Location: Tokorozawa, Japan |
|
|||
But the manga reviewed in this article ISN'T a satire.  It's one man's depiction of a historical figure. He doesn't believe Jesus is God, but at least he's not disrespectful of Jesus. As for why people do it... it's the same reason why any manga artist does what they do... they think it'll make a good story. Jesus is not the first religious figure to be depicted in Manga form, nor will he be the last.
The question is, what are YOU going to do about it? Free speech gives them the right to create, and it gives us the right to bitch and moan, but there's only one person each of us can control (I'll give you a hint: it's not the mangaka). And I'll also say that it was not Jesus' way to hold himself high and mighty above everyone else. He literally got down into the mud with them and met them where they were at. He "humanized" and "belittled" himself in order to be the servant of all and attack the root of power schemes in this world. When Peter confronted him about this, saying that he should act more devout and kingly, he said, and I quote, "Get behind me, Satan! For you are not setting your mind on the things of God, but on the things of man." (Mark 8:33) Just some food for thought as we go sticking our hands in tiger's mouths. |
||||
|
||||
 |
All times are GMT - 5 Hours |
|
|
|
Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2005 phpBB Group