Freethought & Rationalism Archive

Toto · 05-03-2010, 01:05 AM

Hector Avalos: "In Praise of Biblical Illiteracy"

Quote:

Surveys repeatedly show that Christian populations, when left to their own devices, do not seem too interested in Bible reading unless convinced otherwise by their authorities. As it is, note the paradox of publishers citing inflated sales figures for Bibles as proof that the Bible matters, and religion professors complaining that few people are actually reading the Bibles being sold.

...

I don’t think biblical studies programs in the United States will survive easily in public universities precisely because biblical studies has been successful in showing how little relevance biblical history, values, and ethics have for our world.

PhilosopherJay · 05-03-2010, 04:16 AM

Hi Toto,

Yes, Hector Avalos is quite on the money:

Quote:

We must adjust to the fact that the Bible should be no more important than Homer (cf. Lowth’s time). Unlike Homeric studies, however, we should emphasize the dangers of relying on the Bible as an authority in the modern world. Promoting interest in biblical studies paradoxically entails equalizing the Bible’s ethical and aesthetic value with other ancient texts.

I think the current Biblical illiteracy is a sad thing. Our ancestors left us a great record of their savagery, madness, ignorance of the world and wretchedness. It is a great guide to how we must not act and what we must not become. We should not miss these great lessons.

Warmly,

Philosopher Jay

Quote:

Originally Posted by Toto

Hector Avalos: "In Praise of Biblical Illiteracy"

Quote:

Surveys repeatedly show that Christian populations, when left to their own devices, do not seem too interested in Bible reading unless convinced otherwise by their authorities. As it is, note the paradox of publishers citing inflated sales figures for Bibles as proof that the Bible matters, and religion professors complaining that few people are actually reading the Bibles being sold.

...

I don’t think biblical studies programs in the United States will survive easily in public universities precisely because biblical studies has been successful in showing how little relevance biblical history, values, and ethics have for our world.

andrewcriddle · 05-03-2010, 04:32 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Toto

Hector Avalos: "In Praise of Biblical Illiteracy"

Quote:

Surveys repeatedly show that Christian populations, when left to their own devices, do not seem too interested in Bible reading unless convinced otherwise by their authorities. As it is, note the paradox of publishers citing inflated sales figures for Bibles as proof that the Bible matters, and religion professors complaining that few people are actually reading the Bibles being sold.

...

I don’t think biblical studies programs in the United States will survive easily in public universities precisely because biblical studies has been successful in showing how little relevance biblical history, values, and ethics have for our world.

Hector Avalos presents an interesting, (and from my point of view worrying), argument as to why modern cultural trends discourage study and knowledge of the Bible.

I hope that he does not regard these trends, (such as the increasingly crudely utilitarian nature of modern University courses), as wholeheartedly to be applauded.

Andrew Criddle

James Brown · 05-03-2010, 08:26 AM

I'd argue that Americans have the same attitude regarding the founding documents (Constitution, Bill of Rights, etc.) Ask any American if these documents are important, they'll universally say yes, and yet so few of them actually know the document's contents.

Much like Daniel Dennet's idea of "Belief in Belief," it seems as though certain concepts are to be esteemed regardless of your level of knowledge simply because everyone else esteems them.

Toto · 10-29-2010, 03:43 PM

The latest from Avalos on the End of Biblical Studies

Quote:

. . . The sole purpose of biblical studies, under this option, would be to help people move toward a postscriptural society. The third option is also the most logical position, given the Bible’s alien and unethical character. Any text that at any time endorses genocide, infanticide, slavery and other practices the world consensus deems unethical today should forfeit its right to serve as an ethical authority in the modern world.

No amount of theologizing and whitewashing will make those biblical practices or ideas redeemable any more than Mein Kampf is redeemable by using some of analogous apologetic techniques we witness in biblical studies (e.g., appeals to the ethics of the time, “greater good” theodicies, focus on supposed anti-imperialist impulses, socio-rhetorical contextualizations, etc.).

In addition, I don’t think that my proposal would result in surrendering the study of the Bible to seminaries or to religious fundamentalists. Rather, my third option entails an obligation upon secular academia to assume a more active role in challenging the theological approaches one sees in seminaries.

Minimalist · 10-29-2010, 03:48 PM

Quote:

Our ancestors left us a great record of their savagery, madness, ignorance of the world and wretchedness.

Since the vast majority of that stuff never happened what they have actually left us is a stylized and idealized version of what they think their 'god' and their society should actually be.

I find that troubling.

If they meant their god to be a 'scarecrow' it didn't work anyway. Everyone who wanted it overran Palestine.

avi · 10-29-2010, 04:16 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by JamesABrown

Ask any American if these documents are important, they'll universally say yes, and yet so few of them actually know the document's contents.

When I chat, on occasion, away from the church, with a couple of different Protestant ministers, on subjects discussed here on the forum, I am surprised by their relative lack of awareness of various topics from the synoptic gospels. They seem more attuned to Paul's letters, though I have yet to find a man of the cloth to explain to me why Paul visited Arabia....

avi

Russellonius · 10-29-2010, 05:44 PM

Quote:

Atheists and agnostics, Jews and Mormons are the most knowledgeable about matters of faith, according to the results of a new study released last week by the Pew Forum on Religion and Public Life.

The results come from a survey by the Pew Forum, which consisted of 32 questions about religion, said senior researcher Greg Smith.

On average, Americans correctly answered 16 of the 32 questions. A third of the questions focused on the Bible, a third on world religions other than Christianity and a third on knowledge of religion in public schools, religious terms, Mormonism and other issues, Smith said.

Atheists and agnostics averaged 20.9 correct answers. Jews averaged 20.5 correct answers, and Mormons averaged 20.3. Protestants averaged 16 correct answers; Catholics, 14.7, Smith said.

Atheists and agnostics are the best!

Quote:

The fact that atheists scored well is no mystery, said a University of Tennessee Martin professor and atheist who declined to be named out of his concern for his family's safety.

"Most of them — including myself — were believers at one time who decided to critically examine the belief system in which we were raised," he said.

link to article: http://www.jacksonsun.com/article/20...-on-faith-test

The Full Story: http://pewforum.org/U-S-Religious-Kn...-Religion.aspx

Tidbit: 94% of self-described atheists know that an atheist is someone who does not believe in God (85% overall). 86% of self-described agnostics know that an agnostic is someone who is unsure whether God exists (62% overall).

neilgodfrey · 10-31-2010, 11:49 PM

The Bible has always been playing catch-up with modern values, while keeping huge chunks of society behind the eight ball. It is modern values, like women's rights, anti-slavery, etc that have forced most to reinterpret the Bible to "make it relevant".

What's important is to replace the Bible with a true understanding of evolution. I don't see how anyone can really "believe" in both. That's like believing that yes, my computer works by chips and bytes but there's still a little man in there making sure it all turns out right.

Scientific thought should not compromise with ignorance. The dividing lines need to be clearly marked.

dog-on · 11-01-2010, 01:29 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by avi

Quote:

Originally Posted by JamesABrown

Ask any American if these documents are important, they'll universally say yes, and yet so few of them actually know the document's contents.

When I chat, on occasion, away from the church, with a couple of different Protestant ministers, on subjects discussed here on the forum, I am surprised by their relative lack of awareness of various topics from the synoptic gospels. They seem more attuned to Paul's letters, though I have yet to find a man of the cloth to explain to me why Paul visited Arabia....

avi

The Haj??? :wave:

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

05-03-2010, 08:26 AM	#4
James Brown Veteran Member Join Date: Dec 2005 Location: Texas, U.S. Posts: 5,844	I'd argue that Americans have the same attitude regarding the founding documents (Constitution, Bill of Rights, etc.) Ask any American if these documents are important, they'll universally say yes, and yet so few of them actually know the document's contents. Much like Daniel Dennet's idea of "Belief in Belief," it seems as though certain concepts are to be esteemed regardless of your level of knowledge simply because everyone else esteems them.

10-31-2010, 11:49 PM	#9
neilgodfrey Senior Member Join Date: Mar 2005 Location: Darwin, Australia Posts: 874	The Bible has always been playing catch-up with modern values, while keeping huge chunks of society behind the eight ball. It is modern values, like women's rights, anti-slavery, etc that have forced most to reinterpret the Bible to "make it relevant". What's important is to replace the Bible with a true understanding of evolution. I don't see how anyone can really "believe" in both. That's like believing that yes, my computer works by chips and bytes but there's still a little man in there making sure it all turns out right. Scientific thought should not compromise with ignorance. The dividing lines need to be clearly marked.

Freethought & Rationalism Archive

The archives are read only.