Gregg

I noticed that Reader's Digest bias toward blatant conservative religious sentimentality a few years ago too. I don't read it much anymore.

Wal-Mart gives me the same feeling. They're always prominently displaying Bibles, religious books, books by conservative commentators, the "Left Behind" books, etc. And they always make sure there's some cheesy religious posters in the display rack, right next to the posters of half-naked Britney Spears.

Yet I can't seem to stop shopping at Wal-Mart. Have they brainwashed me???

Gregg

Vicar Philip

Gregg,

One of the perks of my wife working there is a 10% discount card, so I, too, shop there a lot.

One book that I'm surprised slipped by the Wal-Mart censors is George Carlin's. Though I can't recall the title off hand, he's got his (in)famous diatribe against god in it. Cracks me up every time I read it.

Vicar Philip

Ironically, it was the Discovery Channel that my two boys were totally absorbed in last night, as they were talking about the bottleneck of the human race which some scientists believe occurred as the result of a massive volcanic eruption.

I can only conclude that, as Secular Pinoy pointed out, ratings and audience share are bigger factors than intellectual integrity.

What a shame.

Dr Rick

I may be mistaken, but I believe that even most theist historians regard the references to Jesus in the writings of Josephus to have been added centuries after he died. To my knowledge, there are no contemporaneous writings documenting Jesus.

I saw that Discovery Channel special and thoght it was okay. It addressed the dating issue of his birth (6 BC), provided a rational explanation for the "Star of Bethlehem" (Jupitor was aligned along with Saturn in the constellation Aries) and mentioned other messiahs of the time and how Jesus differed, allowing his story to persist while other reserection myths died.

The low point for me was when they had the lame explanation for asexual human reproduction (the virgin birth), but they did also talk about the possibility that Jesus's conception was the result of an illicit affair or rape by a Roman.

Rick

Viti

True Rick, I also thought the facial reconstruction from a first century Jewish male's skull was fascinating.

What turned me off was the opening line "That Jesus lived is not in dispute..." or something along those lines. How objective is that?

Demosthenes

not really objective at all, personally, I think Jesus did exist, I just question if all of the things that are attributed to Jesus are true.

Secular Pinoy

Me too. My mom had a subscription on-and-off for over a decade, and I've been renewing it after she got tired of it. After awhile, I felt that they were too pro-xian for me so I didn't renew it by two years ago.

idiom

Ha. Some of us fail to renew their subscriptions because the discovery channel is blatantly anti-christian to the point of losing objectivity.

Maybe the documentaries are more balanced and objective than any of us would like?

luvluv

I think it is true that historians don't really take the possibility of Jesus' non-existance seriously. There is no scholarly dispute as to whether or not He existed, despite what II might lead you to believe.

Dr. Rick, I may be mistaken, but I believe that most theist historians believe that the mention of Jesus is authentic, but some of the embellishments (i.e. "if indeed He can be called a man") were not. Most think that the mention was in the original writing but believe it was touched up later.