One of the most controversial elements of Daniel seems to be the depiction of Jesus. To that end, I wanted to ask a couple of questions in the hopes that we can stop just exchanging ideological broadsides and actually talk about some of the issues surrounding the show.
My first question I have no real answer for myself: Is “Jesus” in “Daniel” actually supposed to be Jesus, or is he better understood as the Rev. Daniel Webster’s image of Jesus? Is Jack Kenny, the show’s creator, saying, “This is how I believe Christ to be?” Or is he saying: “This is this how my character believes Christ to be?” You can’t necessarily equate a character’s beliefs with those of the author. So is the “Jesus” in “Daniel,” Jack’s Jesus, or Daniel’s Jesus? Does it matter?
The second question is: Who gets to decide how Christ should be portrayed? You can argue that whatever else Jesus is (and I believe he is a lot else) he is an important historical figure, part of our common human heritage. From that point of view you can argue that Jesus is open to numerous interpretations and that any of these interpretations might merit a public airing. On the other hand, you can argue that Jesus is uniquely important to Christians and that our traditions and sensitivities deserve special consideration in any mass market treatment of Christ. And from that, I guess, it might follow that when we feel that something sacred to us is being debased, we have the right to attempt to supress the debasement.
Anybody care to chew on this a bit?