Wednesday, January 27, 2016
MY PERIODIC APPEAL TO TV WRITERS OF DETECTIVE SHOWS
This
may get boring to people and somewhat humiliating for myself (what would my
life be without a lot of humiliation?), but every so often I have to repeat my
appeal to TV writers of crime dramas. They understand scientific method better
than anyone else. They know what it means to speak truth to power which is what
their detective creations are often called upon to do. Could we please pay
attention to the evidence and not go after someone for ideological reasons or
emotional reasons? That is scientific method in a nutshell.
All
the TV detectives I have seen know that a fundamental rule of science is that
if a theory is not explaining the evidence very well, then for pity’s sake, TRY
ANOTHER THEORY!
In
historical Jesus studies, no one does that. Everyone knows that “Jewish leaders
prosecuting Jesus or helping Rome to prosecute Jesus” does not explain the
evidence in the Gospels. Never mind that it also does not fit the Jewish historical context. Nothing in the Gospel accounts (of what happened on
Jesus’ last night) resembles a Jewish trial. But instead of trying a different
theory, scholars just try spinning the old theory in new ways. So they will
try: Well, maybe Jewish leaders held a hearing, not a trial, and maybe it was a
preliminary hearing for the Roman trial. But this is the same old idea of a
Jewish procedure hostile to Jesus, dressed up to sound new. This does not
explain the evidence any better BECAUSE IT IS JUST THE SAME THEORY of hostility
and persecution by Jewish leaders. It does not work any better than the
previous spin on this ancient idea.
Never mind that ancient Jewish culture did not hold hearings and never, ever helped Rome prosecute Jews. It seems to be too much to ask scholars to pay very close to Jewish context.
Maybe
try a truly different theory. Like: Jewish leaders trying to help Jesus and save
him from a Roman execution. That would explain why the details in the Gospels
resemble an informal hearing more than a trial. And it explains a whole lot
more, like the details concerning Judas. His story is so ambiguous. No one would
tell the story of a traitor that way. The ambiguities can more easily be
explained if he was helping Jesus.
I
realize I am laying down only broad hints here.
The full case for everything is presented in my two books. True Jew is more recent and shorter.
Think of me as Brenda Leigh Johnson or Adrian Monk or any of the CSI detectives
or the new Sherlock Holmes. I am just going after the most reasonable theory
that will explain all the evidence without mental acrobatics.
There
is another way to look at this. And I am hoping that some TV writer will be
intrigued enough to take a look at either one of my books. Links are at the right.
Thanks
so much, and have a lovely, crime-free day.
© 2016
Leon Zitzer
