Dammit, this is why I should not have left 20 boxes of books in Ohio. While I do have 4 bookcases worth of books with me, I do not have a single Bible in Chicago, not even one in Spanish or Hebrew. Nor do I have my copies of the apocryphal gospels (books that didn't make it in the final cut of the Bible). I can't possibly intelligently discuss this whole Passion thing without re-reading all of the Gospels (in every translation I can get my hands on). Hmph.

And it doesn't seem like the issue is going away anytime soon. In my job interview today, the interviewer noticed that I studied religion and wanted my thoughts on the controversy. The thing is that to really tell you how I feel, it would require a whole bunch of background. I'd have to explain the history of Biblical criticism and hermeneutics (Spikey's favorite word). Then I could point out that Mel Gibson is once again showing his ignorance by accepting a "literal" version of the Bible (though of which version, I know not) and by believing that the Gospels were written almost immediately after the crucifixion. So untrue. In any case, I'd really like to discuss the movie with other religious scholars who speak the same language. Guess I should have stayed in grad school :)

I may try to thing through this a little more and give a more nuanced reaction. We'll see. What I would like to say though is that if I say that the Gospels were written 20-70 years after the death of Jesus, or that they were written for political reasons, etc, I am not saying that Christianity is false. Nor am I saying it's true. Religious studies scholars, at least in the tradition in which I studied, do not make truth claims-- we simply analyze the "facts," strange as that may sound. So, for instance, I may be able to show historically that one of the Gospels was written for a particular purpose, but that doesn't necessarily make the religion any less valid or true. Just thought I should clear that up because when I start speaking as an academic, my own personal feelings are less important than what I think can be seen historically.