Fran, thanks for the apparently divergent views of faith. Quite
cogent!
On Oct 27, 11:50 am, frantheman <[email protected]> wrote:
> In general, Alan, I have major problems with "miracles", seen from a
> literal, scientific point of view - given the way we see and describe
> our world today. From a "faith" point of view, miracles become
> unproblematic, because they are seen within a particular context of
> meaning in which the world and life is perceived. For the believer,
> all kinds of events can be infused with miraculous meanings - the most
> potent being "conversions of heart" - the working of God's grace.
> Evelyn Waugh's "Brideshead Revisited" is an excellent example of this
> kind of world view. The same themes are also present in many of Graham
> Greene's works - and, indeed, it is no coincidence here that both
> Waugh and Greene were converts to Catholicism who struggled with their
> new religion.
>
> The baptism of Jesus by John is generally accepted as having a good
> claim to historicity.
> Seehttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Baptism_of_Jesus#Historicityas a brief
> summary.
>
> My problems begin with verses 10 and 11. How are we to understand the
> phrases "the heavens being torn"
> (σχιζομένους τούς ούρανούς) and "the Spirit, like a dove" (τό Πνεΰμα
> ώσεί περιστεράν)? Not to mention the saying of the voice from the
> heavens. This is, for me, not the language of objective observation,
> but of faith-inspired interpretation of significance. A common (and
> sincerely believed) literary descriptive device of the sort used in
> countless descriptions of what the authors saw as significant events,
> not only Christian ones, up to (and in many cases beyond) the
> beginning of the scientific era.
>
> Francis
>
> On 27 Okt., 15:53, Alan Wostenberg <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>
>
> > You say "Approached from a serious academic point of view there is
> > little evidence for the facutal truth of the nativity accounts ". I'm
> > afraid not what the writers I follow are saying. They claim those who
> > interpret the New Testament gospel accounts as "faith documents" are
> > applying an exegetical principal that all miraculous accounts are to
> > be read as a story and not literal history. Let me ask you: is this
> > true?
>
> > For example, in the first dozen verses of Mark's gospel, which verses
> > those academics say is an historical record, and which not:
> > v4 John (the) Baptist appeared in the desert proclaiming a baptism
> > of repentance for the forgiveness of sins
> > v6. John was clothed in camel's hair, with a leather belt around his
> > waist. He fed on locusts and wild honey.
> > v9. It happened in those days that Jesus came from Nazareth of
> > Galilee and was baptized in the Jordan by John.
> > v10. On coming up out of the water he saw the heavens being torn
> > open and the Spirit, like a dove, descending upon him.
> > v11. And a voice came from the heavens, "You are my beloved Son;
> > with you I am well pleased"
>
> > On Oct 26, 11:01 am, frantheman <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> > > Thanks for the Clarke link, Alan. It's a couple of decades ago since I
> > > first read the story and it was good to read it again - even if the
> > > basic story line isn't one that you'd forget!
>
> > > Speaking as a now ex-Catholic (ex-Christian), while studying theology
> > > full-time as a Dominican, I didn't think that the basic truth of the
> > > Christian message was dependent on the literal veracity of the
> > > scriptural accounts of the Jesus event. Approached from a serious
> > > academic point of view there is little evidence for the facutal truth
> > > of the nativity accounts - Mark, the earliest account of Jesus' life,
> > > works and sayings, seems to know nothing of the Bethlehem origins of
> > > Jesus and even this gospel, on analysis, shows so many signs of
> > > careful literary construction that it's impossible to see it as an
> > > "objective" historical record, the same being even more true for the
> > > other synoptics and especially the gospel of John, probably written 60
> > > to 70 years after the events it describes.
>
> > > The records the New Testament leaves us are meditations on the meaning
> > > of the Jesus event for the authors and the communities for which they
> > > were writing. As such, they are ineluctably "faith documents." which
> > > is just fine for believers. A more recent example of such things would
> > > be Parson Weems biography of George Washington which includes the
> > > completely historically unsupported cherry tree story. What I take
> > > issue with is the line of argument followed by people like Wesley, who
> > > try to (mis)use Christian scripture as "proof" of "facts." There is a
> > > branch of Christian theology called apologetics (going back to
> > > Tertullian in the 2nd. Century C.E. - C.S. Lewis is a name many will
> > > recognise), but very few serious practitioners of this field would
> > > even dream of using the bible in this fashion.
>
> > > I think the key phrase you use is "People can tell stories." And
> > > stories can be powerful means for communicating deeply felt insights
> > > and beliefs. But they can only fully unfold their potential when the
> > > narrators and audiences share the same language. In a Wittgensteinian
> > > sense, I would argue that the languages of believers and non-believers
> > > (even if they use a common everyday language) have large areas where
> > > there is no overlapping, or where the ostensibly same words/phrases/
> > > memes have quite different meanings and ring different bells in their
> > > hearers.
>
> > > That said, as a non-believer, I admit cheerfully to loving Advent and
> > > Christmas, the idea of spitting in the face of winter, affirming new
> > > life in the midst of darkness, finding deep truth in the meme of the
> > > most important, wonderful, significant things in life being found in
> > > areas which the great and powerful completely miss. Stars and
> > > shepherds and angels and wise men and difficult journeys and jealous
> > > kings - and a baby sleeping securely, yet surrounded by uncertainty
> > > and mortal peril. And Christmas trees and carols and celebrating
> > > family and friendship, giving and receiving gifts. And my own special
> > > ritual of making the living-room warm and comfy (especially when it's
> > > cold, dark and uncomfortable outside), lighting candles to make a nice
> > > subdued, flickering light, making a pot of roibusch tea with extra
> > > winter-herbal additions and listening to Händel's Messiah! Repeatedly
> > > in Advent - and, if I'm alone, even singing along!
>
> > > Francis
>
> > > On 26 Okt., 16:13, Alan Wostenberg <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> > > > Astronomy club sure sounds fun! Have you read Arthur C Clarke's
> > > > corking good short story called The Star, about the Star of Bethlehem,
> > > > a future astronomer, and a discovery regarding an alien race?
> > > > Seehttp://lucis.net/stuff/clarke/star_clarke.html
>
> > > > Most people who think the resurrection and nativity are stories do so
> > > > from a prior commitment to naturalism -- that miracles don't happen,
> > > > therefore, we are constrained to interpret every miraculous report as
> > > > a story. Like myself, you seem to reject naturalism. Miracles can
> > > > happen. People can tell stories. Which is it in the case of the
> > > > nativity and resurrection? How to tell?
>
> > > > On Oct 25, 2:01 am, iam deheretic <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> > > > > I used to belong to an astronomy club in Bozeman Montana.. and
> > > > > several o the
> > > > > members ran the planetarium that is there so we would look at a lot
> > > > > of
> > > > > different ideas, and there was a solar eclipse happening at the time
> > > > > so the
> > > > > idea came up to find out whre they had occured.. and i believe it was
> > > > > 33 CE
> > > > > and there was one right over jersulem around the time of his
> > > > > crucifiction.
> > > > > That was how they were able to date? it.
>
> > > > > The nativity scene great short story,, but there would have no real
> > > > > reason
> > > > > to record it and .. just can not buy it..
>
> > > > > Miricales I am not totally ready to dismiss to many native american
> > > > > medicine men and things I don't understand I have seen and feltr to
> > > > > much
> > > > > and I can not explain it.. then there is my ex and that I can
> > > > > partially
> > > > > medically document it was weird.
>
> > > > > As for the reserection thing when my father died I was with him..
> > > > > very
> > > > > tamatic for me as I loved him much more than I realized.. What
> > > > > evolved is
> > > > > the idea what if our life here is a form of death of the soul or
> > > > > maybe a
> > > > > proving ground for morality.. and upon death one given accounting
> > > > > of ones
> > > > > life and choices(God does not provide it) rather it is a record we
> > > > > create of
> > > > > our own memories. If death is really the rebirth into a totally
> > > > > spiritual
> > > > > existance which I think the soul is designed for what you have is
> > > > > the true
> > > > > definition of a reserection.. the rebirth back into the spiritual
> > > > > life.
> > > > > Allan
>
> > > > > , Alan Wosterberg <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> > > > > > Hey, Allan -- I didn't know there was "an event astronomically that
> > > > > > can be dated like a total solar eclipse over Jerusalem in 33 CE.".
> > > > > > Cool!
>
> > > > > > You have "often wondered what the new testament of the bible would
> > > > > > be like if you removed the parts that are in reality are made up
> > > > > > short stories used to sell a bill of goods. ". It seems most others
> > > > > > here agree with your premise.
>
> > > > > > But I don't see how one could know "in realitiy" the resurrection
> > > > > > and
> > > > > > nativity are stories, unless it is just deduction from an a-priori
> > > > > > principle such as "miracles don't happen", in which case every
> > > > > > report
> > > > > > of a miracle must be interpreted as a story. Very well, but one who
> > > > > > does not accept this principle is not obliged to dismiss the
> > > > > > miracles
> > > > > > as stories.
>
> > > > > > But assuming they are stories, this raises a second question.
> > > > > > What's a
> > > > > > good
>
> ...
>
> read more »- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -
--~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
""Minds Eye"" group.
To post to this group, send email to [email protected]
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
[email protected]
For more options, visit this group at
http://groups.google.com/group/minds-eye?hl=en
-~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
