Newsweek's Bible article ties panties in knots

Abrahamic religion, you know, the one with the cross...

Moderators: Blip, DarthHelmet86

Re: Newsweek's Bible article ties panties in knots

#21  Postby laklak » Dec 31, 2014 4:21 am

Ooooo, the comments on Starnes' article on Fox are getting a bit heated.
A man who carries a cat by the tail learns something he can learn in no other way. - Mark Twain
The sky is falling! The sky is falling! - Chicken Little
I never go without my dinner. No one ever does, except vegetarians and people like that - Oscar Wilde
User avatar
laklak
RS Donator
 
Name: Florida Man
Posts: 20719
Age: 66
Male

Country: The Great Satan
Swaziland (sz)
Print view this post

Ads by Google


Re: Newsweek's Bible article ties panties in knots

#22  Postby willhud9 » Dec 31, 2014 4:46 am

Animavore wrote:I also like Carrier, as much as I can't stand any other myther. I presume Ehrman also has serious works beyond his lay ones? I did once listen to a 24-part lecture on historical Jesus by him by The Teaching Company, but I feel that that was, as incredibly informative as it was compared to his books, also for the layman.


I never read anything of Ehrman's aside from his books which are not bad but like I told Onyx I don't agree with everything he says. Like Carrier I believe Ehrman makes valid points like on dating a certain text, but then comes to the wrong conclusion.

I also disagree with a lot of Forged!. Ehrman gives his reasoning as to why Peter and John are forgeries using the example that the author of Acts said they were "unschooled" which meant illiterate therefore they could not possibly write their books. Well aside from the fact that that to reach that definition you have to exclude context and simply go off of the parsing of the word it doesn't follow. As I told Onyx it is ad hoc. That is a plausible definition but he cites it as conclusively the definition.

In the context of Acts Peter and John were talking to a large crowd of Jews. The Sanhedrin saw that Peter and John spoke with confidence despite being unschooled and untrained. That can mean what Ehrman says or it can mean that Peter and John are not knowledgable in Rabbinic teachings or it can mean that the author of Acts was trying to get a point across that God was changing them, etc.

Ehrman does a lot of things like that. I personally see no reason to believe the authorship of 1 Peter to be authentic to Peter. 2 Peter there is reasonable doubt.

I guess the thing about Ehrman that just bothers me the most is he writes as if the material he presents is new material. It's not. We knew about a lot of what he writes about at the turn of the 20th century. Just many non-historians are now just finding out about it.
Fear is a choice you embrace
Your only truth
Tribal poetry
Witchcraft filling your void
Lust for fantasy
Male necrocracy
Every child worthy of a better tale
User avatar
willhud9
 
Name: William
Posts: 19333
Age: 29
Male

Country: United States
United States (us)
Print view this post

Re: Newsweek's Bible article ties panties in knots

#23  Postby SafeAsMilk » Dec 31, 2014 5:25 am

Admittedly I haven't read any of his books, but I do remember in the lecture on the Historical Jesus (and one other I can't remember the name of) he's very clear that the material is not at all new, rather that it's been scholarly consensus for a very long time and that non-historians are generally unaware of this.
"They call it the American dream, because you have to be asleep to believe it." -- George Carlin
User avatar
SafeAsMilk
 
Name: Makes Fails
Posts: 14227
Age: 40
Male

United States (us)
Print view this post

Re: Newsweek's Bible article ties panties in knots

#24  Postby willhud9 » Dec 31, 2014 5:27 am

Well he also admitted that in his book on the Historical Jesus as well.
Fear is a choice you embrace
Your only truth
Tribal poetry
Witchcraft filling your void
Lust for fantasy
Male necrocracy
Every child worthy of a better tale
User avatar
willhud9
 
Name: William
Posts: 19333
Age: 29
Male

Country: United States
United States (us)
Print view this post

Re: Newsweek's Bible article ties panties in knots

#25  Postby SafeAsMilk » Dec 31, 2014 5:32 am

So how does that bother you? It sounds like you just disagree with his conclusions, which he himself is only drawing from the broad consensus? (I'm honestly not sure how much agreement you need to have for something to be qualified as a consensus :teef:)
"They call it the American dream, because you have to be asleep to believe it." -- George Carlin
User avatar
SafeAsMilk
 
Name: Makes Fails
Posts: 14227
Age: 40
Male

United States (us)
Print view this post

Re: Newsweek's Bible article ties panties in knots

#26  Postby willhud9 » Dec 31, 2014 5:35 am

SafeAsMilk wrote:So how does that bother you? It sounds like you just disagree with his conclusions, which he himself is only drawing from the broad consensus? (I'm honestly not sure how much agreement you need to have for something to be qualified as a consensus :teef:)


Well Historical Jesus is his more recent work, I was mainly referring back to his older material.

But you are right I generally disagree with his conclusions on a few issues or I am not satisfied with his conclusion on a lot of issues. But the same is true with a lot of other scholars in the field so lol.
Fear is a choice you embrace
Your only truth
Tribal poetry
Witchcraft filling your void
Lust for fantasy
Male necrocracy
Every child worthy of a better tale
User avatar
willhud9
 
Name: William
Posts: 19333
Age: 29
Male

Country: United States
United States (us)
Print view this post

Re: Newsweek's Bible article ties panties in knots

#27  Postby Scot Dutchy » Dec 31, 2014 8:59 am

Did not cut much ice on the thread we cannot name.
Myths in islam Women and islam Musilm opinion polls


"Religion is excellent stuff for keeping common people quiet.” — Napoleon Bonaparte
User avatar
Scot Dutchy
 
Posts: 43118
Age: 71
Male

Country: Nederland
European Union (eur)
Print view this post

Ads by Google


Re: Newsweek's Bible article ties panties in knots

#28  Postby proudfootz » Dec 31, 2014 7:04 pm

ElDiablo wrote:Newsweek published an article criticizing shallow Christians...
http://www.newsweek.com/2015/01/02/thats-not-what-bible-says-294018.html

The Bible is not the book many American fundamentalists and political opportunists think it is, or more precisely, what they want it to be. Their lack of knowledge about the Bible is well established.


No. This examination is not an attack on the Bible or Christianity. Instead, Christians seeking greater understanding of their religion should view it as an attempt to save the Bible from the ignorance, hatred and bias that has been heaped upon it. If Christians truly want to treat the New Testament as the foundation of the religion, they have to know it. Too many of them seem to read John Grisham novels with greater care than they apply to the book they consider to be the most important document in the world.


Why doesn't Newsweek just change its name to Christianweek and get it over with?

It is absurd to see a purportedly journalistic enterprise engage is such 'let's get back to that old time religion' boosterism.

The bible doesn't so much get hatred and bias heaped upon it as it is a sourcebook for bias and hatred - the old testament god fomenting genocide and the new testament as the ur-text for anti-semitism.
"Truth is stranger than fiction, but it is because Fiction is obliged to stick to possibilities; Truth isn't." - Mark Twain
User avatar
proudfootz
 
Posts: 10968

Country: USA
United States (us)
Print view this post

Previous

Return to Christianity

Who is online

Users viewing this topic: No registered users and 1 guest