DC's 'Second Coming'

I guess some of you more into the comic book scene than me will have seen this:

https://www.dccomics.com/comics/second-coming-2019/second-coming-1

It just came to my notice by way of a petition to pull it for blasphemy...

Am I the only one who thinks that would be a shame? Admittedly the initial premise of God being unhappy with Jesus' performance first time round is shaky to say the least, but to create a story like this is always going to need some bending of theology to make it possible, and it seems to me that accepting that fact and engaging with what else the story has to offer would be a much more productive use of our time than going all Fun Police on something that none of us has even read.

Personally I like the idea as an alternate history/thought experiment, and tend to think that if you can't accept the extreme premise as purely a fictional device to facilitate the story, well... it's not meant for you.

Anyway, be interested to know what comic readers think - and of course, if anyone is familiar with the writers and has some insight into how good, bad or otherwise it could be that would be worth knowing too

I'm finding myself halfway between your position and that of the people behind the petition.
Since I first learned about this, I have been thinking through what my response to this should be (and I'm still working on it). I believe we need to be very careful about how we do this. As you say, we don't just want to come across as the "Christian fun police." I think that collectively, we've made that mistake plenty of times before.

On the other hand, the premise of this story does bother me. The whole concept of Jesus being sent back to "learn his lesson on how to be a better saviour" by serving as sidekick to a superhero is pretty insulting and, yes, I think the word blasphemous does apply here.

The idea of Jesus seeing what has become of his gospel, and trying to set the record straight, is very interesting. My first reaction to that is to again be insulted. It's clearly a direct jab at Christianity. It reminds me of the Red Dwarf episode where they found Jesus and brought him into the future. That story focussed on the negatives of Christianity and saw it as a net-negative force in this world. But I'm rather curious to know what this story portrays Jesus actual gospel as. Because the truth is, we can, and we do misrepresent the gospel, and Jesus' teachings. We've all done it. Maybe a story like this asks us to face some hard truths?

I don't think I would enjoy this book. It would upset me and rub me the wrong way. But it clearly will have some very high "relevance". It could stimulate worthwhile conversation. I think some Christians need to read this book and then give an informed response. Paeter has done a great job of doing this sort of thing in the past with entertainment that pushes a worldview that is contrary to Christianity.

I'm with Adam. It's definitely blasphemous, but I think someone needs to read it to see what the author's saying about (his perception of) Christianity. That way, we can engage with those who share his views. I don't want to pay for it, though, because that would be a sign of support. And stealing is out of the question. Maybe if I ever find it at a library...

I don't think getting it banned helps anything. That reeks of Sharia blasphemy laws to me, just without the death penalty.

Well, I'm reading between the lines here. Sounds like maybe I should buy this and post a review! Lol!

I responded to a tweet about this @christian_geek saying:

"Interesting news that, sadly, is only mildly surprising. I hope DC gets critical yet civil feedback that leads them away from publishing more of what sounds like uninformed and reckless material."

I agree that petitions to pull or ban this thing are a bad idea. And I'm actually okay with the first issue selling well. I think it will, because of the controversy. But what I think needs to happen is for informed Christians to evaluate it with an even temper and graciously point out where it is "uninformed" rather than merely point to what is "offensive".

Hopefully, if it misrepresents the New Testament documents, it can be revealed for what it is so people can simply dismiss it and move on. Lack of profit, rather than controversy, is far more likely to bring its demise.

At the very least, Christians should use this as a springboard for inviting people TO read something (like the Bible itself, or some apologetics material) rather than telling them NOT to read something.

And yes, I've made a note of the date on my calendar. So stay tuned for my review of it in March!

Looks like the petition worked after all.

https://comicbook.com/dc/2019/02/13/dc-comics-cancels-second-coming/?fbclid=IwAR0pp85HbIA9CebG5uZceMg8Wpxs-AIZOk6fG4xIAXQ51mbA7bx_BBZ5h0k

Excerpt:
'Amid protests from religious groups, DC has apparently cancelled Second Coming, its planned Vertigo series that would have teamed Jesus Christ with a Superman analog.

'First announced with the rest of DC's recent Vertigo launches back in June of 2018, Second Coming attracted the attention of Christian activists and FOX News in the weeks leading up to the planned publication of its first issue in March.

'Retailers received an e-mail today indicating that orders for the first two issues of the series had been cancelled and that the title would not be resolicited.

'This comes on the heels of over 100,000 signatures gathered on a petition to kill the book on the grounds that it was "outrageous and blasphemous." They took issue with the notion that God would unfavorably compare Jesus to a superhero and give him "homework" to be a better Messiah.'

Interesting. I have a hard time outright saying something is blasphemous without knowing more about it, but it definitely sounds like this is. I'm surprised they canceled it considering Vertigo published Preacher. I haven't read Preacher but the show is pretty openly blasphemous, so assuming it's in line with the comics, then they don't have a problem releasing this kind of content. I suppose they just wanted to get away from the controversy. Honestly though, it may have helped the book sell better.

Also interesting to note, the writer, Mark Russell said, "DC/Vertigo’s cancellation of the orders for Second Coming, just so you know, DC did not do anything untoward to me, I asked for the rights back and they gracefully agreed. They’ve been a pleasure to work with and it will still be released, albeit with a different publisher."
So it sounds like the comic will still come out, just not from Vertigo and not right now.

Personally I just think it sounds dumb and the fact that it sounds blasphemous too makes me even less interested to check it out, so I'm not going to buy it, but I would listen to a review if you do one Paeter!

Thanks for the updates, guys! I don't think I'll go out of my way to keep track of when it's published, since it will likely be from a smaller publisher and less relevant on a popular level. (Small/indie publishers do crazy stuff all the time that most people miss.) But if I happen to hear about it's publishing date, or if someone let's me know when they find out when it is, I'll still be happy to purchase the first issue for a review.

Ahoy Comics has picked it up.

https://www.superherohype.com/comics/439147-jesus-christ-superhero-satire-second-coming-finds-a-new-home

Thanks for the info!

Some interesting quotables from the co-creator and publisher on that write-up:

“We want to thank DC Comics for letting us find the right home for Second Coming,” said Pace. “After all the manufactured outrage, we’re looking forward to seeing what the intended audience for this book thinks when they read the first issue this summer.”

AND

“We understand that the publication of Second Coming will get a strong reaction and we support Mark and Richard’s satiric vision,” added Ahoy Comics Editor-in-Chief Tom Peyer. “There are going to be people who don’t want to read Second Coming, and that’s fine. It’s not for everyone. But I don’t think it should be controversial to maintain that the rest of us have every right to enjoy it.”



So my big question, for the creators in particular: Who is this for? Describe that person for me. I think that could say a lot about the intent of the work.

Anyway, I've made a note of the date and will pop into a comic shop then if I can. If it's on the stands, I'll get a copy. If not, that will be my signal that not many will be reading/talking about it and it's not worth the review.

https://www.cbr.com/mark-russell-second-coming-jesus-christ-approach/

Creator Mark Russell: '"I think the religious fundamentalists and critics who are trying to stop Second Coming aren't interested in protecting Christ so much as their ability to control his narrative," he said. "Mega-churches, Fox News pundits, and YouTube outrage merchants see Christianity as their product and view anyone else talking about Christ as a form of copyright infringement... They probably (correctly) suspect that it's not Christ who's being parodied, but themselves and how they've twisted his teachings of mercy for the powerless into a self-serving tool of the powerful."'

Russell: "He also feels like this is maybe where he went wrong the first time he came to Earth, That once he started performing miracles... changing water into wine, bringing the dead back to life, etc... that sort of became all people cared about. They stopped listening to his words and just started doing whatever they thought would land them on the right side of a magic trick or two."

Jesus: Destroy this temple, and in three days I will raise it up. (John 2:19)  just as Jonah was three days and three nights in the belly of the great fish, so will the Son of Man be three days and three nights in the heart of the earth. (Matthew 12:40)

Paul: And if Christ has not been raised, then our preaching is in vain and your faith is in vain.(1 Corinthians 15:14)

So yeah, Jesus doing miracles, including his most important one, to authenticate his claims and give people a REASON to listen to him... that was just the wrong way to go.

Wow. My reaction isn't "outrage", it's bewilderment.

Did Russell just "skim" the New Testament as research? Or maybe just googled "Jesus quotes everyone likes".

I'm baffled.

I've seen this sort of argument before, though I can't remember the proper name for it.

It begins with the premise that even if Jesus was a divine being of some sort, that his purpose on Earth was to show people a better way of life and not to actually deal with their sin for them. In this way, Jesus is much the same as the Buddha or any other religious leader.

Remember the rest of the passage from Matthew:

Matthew 12:38-40 (NKJV)

38 Then some of the scribes and Pharisees answered, saying, “Teacher, we want to see a sign from You.”

39 But He answered and said to them, “An evil and adulterous generation seeks after a sign, and no sign will be given to it except the sign of the prophet Jonah.

40 For as Jonah was three days and three nights in the belly of the great fish, so will the Son of Man be three days and three nights in the heart of the earth.

The "miracles on demand" criticism has been raised many times against the church, most recently against the wave of faith healers in the 80s, I think.