The previous episode left us with a miracle, and this one tears it up again.
So many doubts, so many ways to fake the "walk on water". All just an illusion?
This episode firmly establishes the difference between looking at individuals and looking at societies.
Washinton D.C. is in turmoil - just like the town of Dilley was a few days ago. Everybody talks about the new Messiah, and for every believer there is a doubting Thomas or Jack or Jill.
Then we see Al-Masih in action, and he is a very sensitive man, well tuned in to his visitors, he can see them, feel them at a deep level, and when he talks to them, their lives are profoundly changed.
So... is he a charlatan? A trickster? Oh, yes. He is a magician. Is he honest? Oh, yes. Much more than anybody else. Is he good for those who come to seek help? Definitely.
Is he good for the country he is in? Hm ... probably not. Societies cannot cope with fundamental changes as easily as individuals. And even the human individuals find it very hard to change.
So, the CIA is probably right - he IS a danger. And the Imams are right, too - better remove the young men from his reach. Too dangerous. We don't see much from the Catholic Church - they have a well established procedure for finding out if someone was a saint (post mortem, of course)
Which leaves us with the uncomfortable question: is it GOOD if someone helps a few individuals while his mere presence incites riots, starts wars, brings about massive changes?
It is the same question Eva (the CIA agent) faces: you can't be indifferent. you have to make a choice. If he's GOOD, then let him live. If he's BAD, then ... eliminate.
Looking forward to the next episode. With more questions ...
This episode firmly establishes the difference between looking at individuals and looking at societies.
Washinton D.C. is in turmoil - just like the town of Dilley was a few days ago. Everybody talks about the new Messiah, and for every believer there is a doubting Thomas or Jack or Jill.
Then we see Al-Masih in action, and he is a very sensitive man, well tuned in to his visitors, he can see them, feel them at a deep level, and when he talks to them, their lives are profoundly changed.
So... is he a charlatan? A trickster? Oh, yes. He is a magician. Is he honest? Oh, yes. Much more than anybody else. Is he good for those who come to seek help? Definitely.
Is he good for the country he is in? Hm ... probably not. Societies cannot cope with fundamental changes as easily as individuals. And even the human individuals find it very hard to change.
So, the CIA is probably right - he IS a danger. And the Imams are right, too - better remove the young men from his reach. Too dangerous. We don't see much from the Catholic Church - they have a well established procedure for finding out if someone was a saint (post mortem, of course)
Which leaves us with the uncomfortable question: is it GOOD if someone helps a few individuals while his mere presence incites riots, starts wars, brings about massive changes?
It is the same question Eva (the CIA agent) faces: you can't be indifferent. you have to make a choice. If he's GOOD, then let him live. If he's BAD, then ... eliminate.
Looking forward to the next episode. With more questions ...
