Somewhat random irritation
Oct. 25th, 2006 01:38 pm![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
beccaelizabethEssay says in passing the comparison with "the parable of Luke 16 is obvious".
It is not obvious. It is part of a code shared by Christians who pay attention to the Bible. I haven't identified as Christian for at least a dozen years now, and haven't paid that much attention to the Bible for about that long. Therefore a chapter and verse reference is going to mean bugger all to me.
Lazarus I recognise. Cain and Abel I recognise. But *how* I recognise them has 12 years of watching horror films layered over the top of whatever the original Biblical references were, and has therefore transformed rather. I'm fairly sure I remember the Sandman or Vampire versions of Cain and Abel's story better than I do what I read when I was in primary school.
Further, not all readers ever were Christian, and while we live in a culture much influenced by Christianity, we no longer have *any* story entirely held in common. It is canon from a different fandom, is all, and therefore not 'obvious' to those outside.
So if it is important enough to mention, its important enough to summarise.
/rant
I don't think they meant to be in any way offensive, but, irritated I am anyway.
Also, I just looked it up, and there's more than one story in Luke 16, and do they really mean to refer to all of them?
And also: Huh, guess I didn't know Lazarus entirely then. Wiki points out "Lazarus is the name of two separate characters in the New Testament." And I only knew the back from the dead one.
It is not obvious. It is part of a code shared by Christians who pay attention to the Bible. I haven't identified as Christian for at least a dozen years now, and haven't paid that much attention to the Bible for about that long. Therefore a chapter and verse reference is going to mean bugger all to me.
Lazarus I recognise. Cain and Abel I recognise. But *how* I recognise them has 12 years of watching horror films layered over the top of whatever the original Biblical references were, and has therefore transformed rather. I'm fairly sure I remember the Sandman or Vampire versions of Cain and Abel's story better than I do what I read when I was in primary school.
Further, not all readers ever were Christian, and while we live in a culture much influenced by Christianity, we no longer have *any* story entirely held in common. It is canon from a different fandom, is all, and therefore not 'obvious' to those outside.
So if it is important enough to mention, its important enough to summarise.
/rant
I don't think they meant to be in any way offensive, but, irritated I am anyway.
Also, I just looked it up, and there's more than one story in Luke 16, and do they really mean to refer to all of them?
And also: Huh, guess I didn't know Lazarus entirely then. Wiki points out "Lazarus is the name of two separate characters in the New Testament." And I only knew the back from the dead one.