Jesus vs. Batman?

Jesus vs. Batman? October 14, 2016

Mythicism is complete and utter nonsense, especially when it thinks that there is something profound in making a comparison between Jesus and Batman. (See my earlier post on clarifying Gospel genres for a confused mythicist.)

But I must admit, the depiction of Bat-Church in the trailer above is pretty cool!

"I would be interested to know what there is in Nag Hammadi that would lend ..."

Response to Raphael Lataster
"If you use the Nag Hammadi documents as a guide, archon clearly has a negative ..."

Response to Raphael Lataster
"I also loved Archon, and you can play it for free in your web browser: ..."

Response to Raphael Lataster
""Archon" was one of my favorite games on my C64 when I was a kid. ..."

Response to Raphael Lataster

Browse Our Archives

Follow Us!


TRENDING AT PATHEOS Progressive Christian
What Are Your Thoughts?leave a comment
  • But which Batman reboots are canon?

    Does Schumacher rate as apocrypha?

    • arcseconds

      now you’ve got me wondering whether anyone out there is trying to harmonize 90s Batman with Nolan’s Batman and the 60s TV series…

  • arcseconds

    Your earlier post, while amusing, doesn’t exactly clarify the genre of the Gospels beyond “not comic books”, which doesn’t exactly narrow the field much.

    How would you characterize the genre of the Gospels? You’ve made the comparison with ancient biographies more than once to make the point that miraculous stories were by no means uncommon, but get the impression you don’t think they fit comfortably into that genre?

    I’ve googled a bit to make sure I haven’t missed a post entitled “The Genre of the Gospels According to Me, by James McGrath”, but I can’t seem to find anything that’s a precise statement…

    • That post was mostly a bit of frustrated snark, after having tried to make the more serious point in a comment thread.

      To find my blog posts on a topic, often “ReligionProf Patheos” will be more effective than my name. Here are a few links:

      http://www.patheos.com/blogs/religionprof/2013/09/the-gospels-as-biography.html

      http://www.patheos.com/blogs/religionprof/2016/02/brant-pitre-the-case-for-jesus.html

      http://www.patheos.com/blogs/religionprof/2011/07/mythicism-and-the-ancient-historians.html

      I think ancient biography is the best fit. As it covers a range from legendary and novelistic to sober and critical, and doesn’t even automatically prejudge whether it is a biography of a historical or a fictional individual, I’ve come to conclude that the Gospels fit that genre well, especially within the ancient Jewish biographical subtradition.

      • davidt

        No. That’s like saying kelp is a salmon. They both live in the ocean and both are alive.

          • davidt

            Awesomeness!! I clicked on the link to the “god of words” Webster and it gave me kelp salmon!!!. Btw I once literally stood on a 300′ cliff and tossed the god of words into the ocean!!! And low and behold as the god of words decended Into hell, the ocean parted and raised up and was held at bay by the power of the god of words! The ocean bowed to the god of words (Webster) and proclaimed “indeed you are the greatest in the kingdom of god” and then suddenly the waves turned into a monstrous lion and pounced upon the all mighty god of words and devoured it. Moments later the lion had a bowel movement and said ” ahhhh that’s what I think of your puny puny god”. So my question is, Is that historical biography? Real person real event must be. BTW I am pretty certain logos does not mean English and math although king James and Webster would absolutely disagree.

          • I’m honestly not sure what you are trying to say, or why, but it certainly does not sound like an attempt to discuss a matter of history using the generally accepted methods of historical investigation. Could you perhaps clarify what your comments are supposed to mean?

          • davidt

            Lol omg. Ok i will simplify. Is playing a 3 cord 12 bar blues on a guitar identical to playing 12 bar blues on a stereo? I mean they are both playing a twelve bar blues! Since they are both playing a 12 bars blues then we can group them together in a super class playing if you happen to notice I am talking about classes. Is classes, the same as classes at a university? Oh wait we have to also “contextualize”. But then that roles me back to my original 12 bar blues playing class. I am rather bemused that the bible is not treated with more care at the university the topic Is definitely not that easy as to be Phdededed (not in Webster so NOT REAL). But then again what is the topic? How do we understand the topic? What are perceptions? And how do we arrive at our perceptions. All truth starts in nature science and religion are prisoners to that fact.

          • davidt

            Lol. It’s like if tolkien came back in 2000 years and he stumbled upon a LOR gathering. He would recognize that he wrote the story he recognizes his own and writing and tries to explain to the LOR gathering the text. The problem is the LOR group already has an idea of what they Believe the text is about with 2000 years of creating narrative about the text. Interestingly that’s identical to buddha to Hinduism curiously. If he tried to explain it in the fashion I just have, that actually would have no idea what he was talking about because they only have 2,000 years of the narrative they have created about the text. They would “believe” that they did understand it, because they could trace their roots all the way back, but they would have no idea that the 2,000 years of narrative had radically morphed. They would even create a “theology” department as a solution without knowing its a symptom of 2,000 years of narrative about the text. I am right, because of the adaptive nature of the text coming from the middle east into pre literate aboriginal white European society being adapted to the text via literacy. Uu have learned how to read which automatically creates the academic world view you understand the text. Very little historical evidence of that, and in fact massive evidence of exactly the opposite. I might say not because of theology but inspite of theology the text still exists. Do I need to draw cartoons?

          • davidt

            I might add talking to a theologian is like talking to an architect who has no idea about foundations or gravity for that matter! You guys run the church around in complete and total nonsense. “we designed the building to best work with the color blue” so said the theologian.

  • redhatGizmo

    Yeah Jesus and Batman is not a proper comparison better would be Jesus and Moses, both stand tall and towering in their respective literature but outside of their fan-fictions they’re not even blip on historical radar.