George Hunsinger:
[W]hen the more grandiose and romantic flourishes in Girard are placed to one side, regardless of how pervasive they may be, along with many claims that are incautious and ill conceived, much that is worth retrieving still seems to remain. Consider, for example, this comment on the Sermon on the Mount:
Jesus invites all men to devote themselves to the project of getting rid of violence, a project conceived with reference to the true nature of violence, taking into account the illusions it fosters, the methods by which it gains ground, and all the laws that we have verified in the course of these discussions. Violence is the enslavement of a pervasive lie; it imposes upon men a falsified vision not only of God but also of everything else.
The acuity of an insight like this seems largely to transcend the inadequacies that may otherwise attend it. The question I wish to pursue is this: How might the essence of such an insight be upheld within a richer and more complex biblical framework? How can Girard’s theological deficiencies be avoided while some of his deepest insights and suggestions are retained?