Why I'm Suspicious of Heroes

[variant]

Go on.

You basically base a very rich part of your religious life on something of the epitome of the archetypal hero story. Hence the irony that you find them suspicious, or find hero worship suspicious when presented with common, modern day, real world, examples of what a "hero" is actually like.

 

[FredVB]

There is more to Jesus Christ then what comes with attributing elements of a hero story to him. There are the scriptures preceding him that came from writing for over a thousand years that were uniquely preserved and used for study, with a great number of prophecies, with fulfillment being found otherwise, but many of them for the Messiah, which are fulfilled in Jesus.

 

[variant]

There is more to Jesus Christ then what comes with attributing elements of a hero story to him. There are the scriptures preceding him that came from writing for over a thousand years that were uniquely preserved and used for study, with a great number of prophecies, with fulfillment being found otherwise, but many of them for the Messiah, which are fulfilled in Jesus.

You mean that the Jesus hero story followed the Jewish hero story and fulfilled all their prophecies of their ultimate hero?

Yeah I'm aware.

But since I was already skeptical of the general middle eastern hero story, and the general Jewish hero story, as I am skeptical of the modern day hero story, the whole thing seems rather artificial.

In fact, if one does a bit of browsing of the various middle eastern heroes of the day you will find quite a bit of parallel story telling to those things attributed to Jesus.

 

[Constantine the Sinner]

Classically speaking, a hero is a demi-god, which indicates a hero is someone superior by nature. The conception of heroism having nothing to do with superior nature started mostly with the Christian era, and those who won such distinction were referred to as saints, as opposed to the more classical term of hero.

 

[Ana the Ist]

The only heroes I think deserve their title are those who make no claim to being heroes. You know, Jon Snow, not Daenerys Targaryen. The former doesn't make claim to his own greatness, whereas the latter has half a million titles for what ultimately came down to the most unwilled thing of all, her birth.

The hero that marinates in his own greatness takes credit for something that isn't his own. He ignores the genetic and phenotypic (intelligence, muscles, etc.), familial, upbringing, social economic status, and other variables that make him who he is. Yes, the best hero is the one who asserts his will the most, who takes the most risks. But who can really measure that given the complicated inner world of any particular person? What I see as an amazing act of will might really be an act with the highest motivation and a hidden payoff. The younger Arnold Schwarzenegger is indubitably a hero of bodybuilding, but he's also the guy who said that working out is like reaching an [bless and do not curse][bless and do not curse][bless and do not curse][bless and do not curse][bless and do not curse][bless and do not curse]. Why should he be a hero compared to the average Joe who puts in eight hours a day and gets no praise?

But there are definitely heroic acts. A man who risks death to save an anonymous child is unambiguously heroic, even if the man himself isn't a hero in the fuller characterological sense. Yet how many people consistently commit heroic acts like this, where the hero genuinely makes a risk over and over again? These types of heroes are short-lived for obvious reasons.

The hero is a flower lavished with praise without considering the garden and soil that made him possible. He as the individual may indeed put in the sweaty will-based work without which he wouldn't achieve the status he has, but this is only the tip of an iceberg, the rest of which is a collection of givens, and no outside person can truly know how hard the hero has worked to attain his status given these givens, centering on motivation, which always pushes a person and so makes willing easier.

The best hero is the one who gives away his status as hero. The hero of humility who reflects back his heroness to the family and upbringing and ultimately the very universe that placed him where he did at the time it did. He realizes like the poet Pablo Neruda that life is a borrowing of bones. You didn't create the prerequisites to becoming who you became. A hero is just someone with a lucky set of prerequisites and not even necessarily a strong will, or any will at all, to actualize them into his heroism.

Hero is a bit of a lonely title and occupation when you see it in a true sense IMO. Jonas Salk is one of the people who I think of when the term "hero" comes to mind...

People today don't really understand the devastation that Polio caused just decades ago. It would kill thousands every year and permanently cripple tens of thousands more. While the reality of the development of the Polio vaccine was a massive undertaking that included thousands of scientists and hundreds of thousands of volunteers...we recognize Salk as the inventor specifically for his contributions and dedication to the research.

So why is he a hero in my eyes? He didn't do this for profit. He never patented the vaccine specifically because he wanted to help as many people as possible all around the world. His words according to Wikipedia...

"His sole focus had been to develop a safe and effective vaccine as rapidly as possible, with no interest in personal profit. When asked who owned the patent to it, Salk said, "There is no patent. Could you patent the sun?"

There you have it...a man who used his intellect solely for the betterment of all mankind. His ideals and hard work saved untold numbers of lives and even more were spared a life of disablement and pain.

I don't know who we could even compare him to today. Sure, there are lots of scientists and researchers working on treating and curing many illnesses...but that work is done for gain. It's done so a pharmaceutical company can reap the profits.

 

[Armoured]

I couldn't agree more. Why call a person a "hero" for simply doing their job and doing it well? Professional athletes come to mind here.

I cringe every time someone refers to an athlete as a "hero". The Olympics are a hard time for my shoulders.

 

[bhsmte]

I cringe every time someone refers to an athlete as a "hero". The Olympics are a hard time for my shoulders.

I tend to think many people need heroes and athletes and those in the public eye are an easy target.

Myself, I can be amazed by the feats of athletes, without putting the person on a pedestal.

 

[JackRT]

I think that there is a difference between "heros" and "idols".

 

[brainstormer]

I think this is an age where we have to be suspect of what is seen as "right." Those who really care about their own state of being really should become book collectors, specializing in books written before the 1960s. Thomas Carlyle wrote a book called "On Heroes, Hero-Worship, and The Heroic in History," in which he defines heroes as a good thing.

Be a hero, or be a coward, it's your choice today. Jesus called us to be intelligent heroes for the Gospel, and ultimately risk our lives for that if need be.

 

[keith99]

The problem is not heroes it is how we treat them offsetting their crimes against their heroism. Not that this is a new thing, Machiavelli speaks of it in Chapter XXIV of The Discourses.

All praise to the quarterback who throws the winning touchdown. A hero's welcome at the victory party. But if he rapes one of his admirers later that night treat him no differently than anyone else.

This is decidedly not what we do, we either let him off or crucify him because so many before him have been let off.

I also am suspicious of those claiming to be heroes. I have known 2 men with legitimate claims to that title. My brother's wife's father received a bronze star in WW II (well before medal inflation). What he did I do not know, my sister-in-law did not even know of the medal until her father had dies. The other is was slightly older than I am. He won a silver star in Vietnam. He refused the medal because he felt someone else in his unit was more deserving and had not received the same award. He also seemed to suffer because some others never came home. Based on this and other bits and pieces I'm inclined to think he was a Lt. his sgt. was not nominated for the medal and that at least some of those who did not come home died in the same action.

Generally speaking when the chance for heroism occurs some still die and those with the character of a hero find they find little joy in having saved some but not all.

 

[FredVB]

You mean that the Jesus hero story followed the Jewish hero story and fulfilled all their prophecies of their ultimate hero?
But since I was already skeptical of the general middle eastern hero story, and the general Jewish hero story, as I am skeptical of the modern day hero story, the whole thing seems rather artificial.
In fact, if one does a bit of browsing of the various middle eastern heroes of the day you will find quite a bit of parallel story telling to those things attributed to Jesus.

Actually I say that the writings of the Bible show a really great reliability, including with prophecies written that were fulfilled afterward, and with accounts written with realism that has no parallel found any other of such ancient writing. There isn't compelling reason for me to doubt it, even if others convince themselves that what is depicted is doubtful.

 

[JackRT]

Actually I say that the writings of the Bible show a really great reliability, including with prophecies written that were fulfilled afterward, and with accounts written with realism that has no parallel found any other of such ancient writing. There isn't compelling reason for me to doubt it, even if others convince themselves that what is depicted is doubtful.

So you don't understand haggadic midrash?