Freethought & Rationalism Archive

butswana · 03-23-2005, 10:34 AM

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/7244999/site/newsweek/

It's a pretty shitty piece of apologetic "journalism". Using Josephus quotes, making a bunch of lame assertions and stupid pleas, dismissing any criticism.... You know the drill.

Vivisector · 03-23-2005, 11:02 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by butswana

You know the drill.

Yep, we know the drill, and Newsweek knows their clientele: 82% believe in the resurrection vs. 12% who do not, according to their poll as of now.

V.

Toto · 03-23-2005, 11:35 AM

Quote:

In a new NEWSWEEK Poll, 78 percent of Americans believe Jesus rose from the dead; 75 percent say that he was sent to Earth to absolve mankind of its sins. Eighty-one percent say they are Christians;

3% - 6% of the population are Christians who reject the central tenet of their faith. Is this sampling error? I wonder how the question was worded.

This is good:

Quote:

From the Passion to the Resurrection to the nature of salvation, the basic tenets of Christianity were in flux from generation to generation as believers struggled to understand the meaning of Jesus' mission.

This has been refuted time and time again but won't stay down, like that wack-a-mole:

Quote:

Without the Resurrection, it is virtually impossible to imagine that the Jesus movement of the first decades of the first century would have long endured. A small band of devotees might have kept his name alive for a time, even insisting on his messianic identity by calling him Christ, but the group would have been just one of many sects in first-century Judaism, a world roiled and crushed by the cataclysmic war with Rome from 66 to 73, a conflict that resulted in the destruction of Jerusalem.

And what committee wrote this?

Quote:

. . . yet in this culturally divisive American moment, a time when believers feel besieged and skeptics think themselves surrounded, a reconstruction of Jesus' journey from Jewish prophet to Christian savior suggests that faith, like history, is nearly always more complicated than it seems. For the religious, the lesson is that those closest to Jesus accepted little blindly, and, in the words of Origen of Alexandria, an early church father, "It is far better to accept teachings with reason and wisdom than with mere faith." For the secular, the reminder that Christianity is the product of two millennia of creative intellectual thought and innovation, a blend of history and considered theological debate, should slow the occasional rush to dismiss the faithful as superstitious or simple.

Origen, was, or course, condemned as a heretic. And there is no conflict between seeing the "creative" intellectual thought and innovation that went into Christianity and the marketing of Christianity, and the superstitious or incredulous stance of the flock.

And this is wacko:

Quote:

As a matter of history, however, scholars agree that the two oldest pieces of New Testament tradition speak to Jesus' rising from the dead. First, the tomb in which Jesus' corpse was placed after his execution was empty; if it were not, then Christianity's opponents could have produced his bones. (Matthew also says the temple priests tried to bribe Roman guards at the tomb, saying, "Tell people, 'His disciples came by night and stole him away while we were asleep'"—implying the body was in fact gone.)

The empty tomb is not among the oldest pieces of NT tradition. There is no indication of a tomb, empty or otherwise, before Mark, written somewhere between 70 CE and 150 CE.

The second oldest piece of NT tradition is the list of witnesses to the risen Jesus in Corinthians, much debated as to whether it is a later interpolation.

And this is pure apologetic special pleading:

Quote:

Though many scholars rightly raise compelling questions about the historical value of the portraits of Jesus in the Gospels, the apostles had to arrive at their definition of his messianic mission somehow, and it is possible that Jesus may have spoken of these things during his lifetime—words that came flooding back to his followers once the shock of his resurrection had sunk in. On historical grounds, then, Christianity appears less a fable than a faith derived in part from oral or written traditions dating from the time of Jesus' ministry and that of his disciples.

That the apostles would have created such words and ideas out of thin air seems unlikely,. . .

(emph added)

Finally we find the source of this: Dr. R. Albert Mohler Jr., president of the Southern Baptist Theological Seminary in Louisville, Ky.

And, of course, NT Wright is quoted on the next page to show that the Resurrection was unique and unexpected, so it must have really happened!

If you try to argue with this, you will get a lot of complaints about disrespect for trying to undermine Christian faith during holy week.

doubtingt · 03-23-2005, 12:35 PM

Grotesque,

The author is a managing editor of Newsweek overseeing editorials and political coverage. He is an office holder and communicant member of St. Thomas Episcopal Church Fifth Avenue. If you got to the Q&A link (“live-talk�?) you’ll see he is not just reporting the state of the field as a journalist but speaking as though he himself is a qualified expert in the area.

While some of his answers in the Q&A are reasonable responses, others are outrageous.
He tells one reader that there is no debate among scholars that Jesus Christ of the Bible lived as a man. He agrees with another that early Xtians believing in the resurrection and dying for their beliefs is convincing argument for the truth of these ideas since people would not believe or die for things that were not true.

WoW!!!!! How much more ignorant of basic human psychology could one be.
It really highlights the psychological assumptions that inherently lie underneath interpretive historical scholarship, especially something like Biblical scholarship where the speculations are many and data points so few. No one without a serious grounding in psychological science is really in a position to provide any reliable analysis on such issues. What is this author’s background besides being a deeply devout Xtian with an a priori bias towards confirming his faith?
He has a BA in English Lit.

openeyes · 03-23-2005, 02:31 PM

I get Newsweek and went "bleh" when I saw the cover. I tried to read the article, but could see from a quick skimming that it wasn't going to be balanced. So much time is wasted trying to make the "story" work and to get people to buy in to it.

FYI, Time's cover story is about Mary, and how some Protestants are beginning to revere her more along the lines of Catholicism. Oh, goody.

Toto · 03-23-2005, 02:59 PM

When I first looked at the article, I couldn't get to page 6. Now that I have read it, I notice that the article actually quotes Rodney Stark's Birth of Christianity, even though Stark refutes the point about no other way to explain the explosive growth of Christianity. Is this dishonest or what?

The last paragraph of the article:

Quote:

As the search goes on for so many along so many different paths, Paul offers some reassuring words for the journey: "Be at peace among yourselves ... encourage the faint-hearted, help the weak, be patient with them all. See that none of you repays evil for evil, but always seek to do good to one another and to all. Rejoice always, pray constantly, give thanks ... hold fast what is good, abstain from every form of evil"—wise words for all of us, whatever our doubts, whatever our faith.

quoting 1 Thess. 5, but leaving out something (text from here):

Quote:

5:12 But we appeal to you, brothers and sisters, to respect those who labor among you, and have charge of you in the Lord and admonish you; 5:13 esteem them very highly in love because of their work. Be at peace among yourselves. 5:14 And we urge you, beloved, to admonish the idlers, encourage the faint hearted, help the weak, be patient with all of them. 5:15 See that none of you repays evil for evil, but always seek to do good to one another and to all. 5:16 Rejoice always, 5:17 pray without ceasing, 5:18 give thanks in all circumstances; for this is the will of God in Christ Jesus for you. 5:19 Do not quench the Spirit. 5:20 Do not despise the words of prophets, 5:21 but test everything; hold fast to what is good; 5:22 abstain from every form of evil.

Meacham has tried to spin Christianity as a wisdom tradition that is admirable in all ways and compatible with humanistic values that religious skeptics share. But look at what is left out - respect for the religious masters, and admonishing the idlers. Necessary attitudes for running a hierarchical church that will take over the Roman Empire, but which now make it sound like Paul was running an abusive cult.

butswana · 03-24-2005, 05:35 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by openeyes

FYI, Time's cover story is about Mary, and how some Protestants are beginning to revere her more along the lines of Catholicism. Oh, goody.

I saw that one laying on the couch. My wife has gone a bit over board with this shit since she read The DaVinci Code a few months ago. I wasn't expecting much, if anything, from a skeptics point of view so I didn't bother to pick it up.
All of these shit magazines come out this time of year. The DaVinci Code has just raised the stink a bit more.

spacedOut · 03-24-2005, 11:00 AM

Quote:

The uniqueness—one could say oddity, or implausibility—of the story of Jesus' resurrection argues that the tradition is more likely historical than theological...

Oh, so instead of "Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence", the author is saying "Extraordinary claims imply historical accuracy".

Yeah, right.

03-23-2005, 10:34 AM	#1
butswana Veteran Member Join Date: Sep 2001 Location: Indianapolis, IN Posts: 1,804	Historical Jesus Newsweek article on MSNBC http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/7244999/site/newsweek/ It's a pretty shitty piece of apologetic "journalism". Using Josephus quotes, making a bunch of lame assertions and stupid pleas, dismissing any criticism.... You know the drill.

Thread Tools	Search this Thread
Show Printable Version	Search this Thread: Advanced Search

03-23-2005, 12:35 PM	#4
doubtingt Veteran Member Join Date: Feb 2002 Location: USA Posts: 4,635	Grotesque, The author is a managing editor of Newsweek overseeing editorials and political coverage. He is an office holder and communicant member of St. Thomas Episcopal Church Fifth Avenue. If you got to the Q&A link (“live-talk�?) you’ll see he is not just reporting the state of the field as a journalist but speaking as though he himself is a qualified expert in the area. While some of his answers in the Q&A are reasonable responses, others are outrageous. He tells one reader that there is no debate among scholars that Jesus Christ of the Bible lived as a man. He agrees with another that early Xtians believing in the resurrection and dying for their beliefs is convincing argument for the truth of these ideas since people would not believe or die for things that were not true. WoW!!!!! How much more ignorant of basic human psychology could one be. It really highlights the psychological assumptions that inherently lie underneath interpretive historical scholarship, especially something like Biblical scholarship where the speculations are many and data points so few. No one without a serious grounding in psychological science is really in a position to provide any reliable analysis on such issues. What is this author’s background besides being a deeply devout Xtian with an a priori bias towards confirming his faith? He has a BA in English Lit.

03-23-2005, 02:31 PM	#5
openeyes Veteran Member Join Date: Sep 2002 Location: Minnesota Posts: 4,215	I get Newsweek and went "bleh" when I saw the cover. I tried to read the article, but could see from a quick skimming that it wasn't going to be balanced. So much time is wasted trying to make the "story" work and to get people to buy in to it. FYI, Time's cover story is about Mary, and how some Protestants are beginning to revere her more along the lines of Catholicism. Oh, goody.

Freethought & Rationalism Archive

The archives are read only.