tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9212346.comments2021-07-20T14:05:47.042-07:00<big>q</big>uixotic infidel <sup><small><small><small>(the)</small></small></small></sup>Quixiehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/03126711689901268060noreply@blogger.comBlogger402125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9212346.post-91496272225901075502017-02-27T13:08:15.988-08:002017-02-27T13:08:15.988-08:00Thank you Snowbrush.
I empathize with your sentim...Thank you Snowbrush. <br />I empathize with your sentiments. Quixiehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/03126711689901268060noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9212346.post-48087373739691527342017-02-27T11:22:29.725-08:002017-02-27T11:22:29.725-08:00I didn’t know that Borg had died. Since I live in ...I didn’t know that Borg had died. Since I live in Eugene, Oregon, he was practically a neighbor. I did get to hear him speak once, and while I wasn’t much attracted to his books, I did believe in his goodness.<br /><br />As for Stephen’s comment, I thought your response was excellent. As for my own thoughts, when I noted his smugness in his beliefs, I just thought that, well, that’s what I grew up with (in the fundamentalist Church of Christ) and what I expect from the majority of Christians who can’t support their own beliefs but are only too ready to gleefully consign everyone else to eternal hell for not believing as they do.<br /><br />I must say that the more the dominant face of Christianity becomes one with Republican politics with all its callousnesssnf cruelty, the more I despise Christianity. When I think of Catholicism, I think of a religion that claims moral authority despite its widespread buggering of children, its subsequent cover-up of that buggering, and even the disowning of thousands of those children by their families who believed the word of priests over the word of their little ones. And when I think of evangelicals, I think of their enthusiasm for war, for “enhanced interrogation,” their disinterest in the plight of the suffering in this country and elsewhere, and their willingness to vote for a profoundly unethical man if he suits their purposes. These were the very people who used to criticize Communism because it took the position that “the end justifies the means,” yet they’re only too willing to violate their own moral precepts if it will get them what they want. Whatever openness I used to have toward Christian people—if not their religion—is gone because not only are they unwilling to do anything about our nation’s problems, I’ve come to see them as BEING our nation’s foremost problem.Snowbrushhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00436087215476479042noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9212346.post-45133693986477579572017-02-27T01:25:52.873-08:002017-02-27T01:25:52.873-08:00Hi Stephen;
Thank you for dropping by and readin...Hi Stephen; <br /><br />Thank you for dropping by and reading this post. I'd almost forgotten about it, and Mr. Borg has passed away since I wrote it, so it was nice to remember the occasion, as I was prompted to re-read it by your comment.<br /><br />A couple of thoughts on your comment:<br /><br />1) You wrote: ["So in other words, he was presenting his own atheistic religion."]<br /><br />Actually, neither is panentheism Borg's invention, nor is it "atheistic" in the sense you imply. In fact, the blog post explicitly mentions that it is an old variant of theism. In fact, it can be traced back to ancient Greece, its more contemporary forms were formulated by Spinoza and then by more modern scholars, the most notable and influential being Paul Tillich. I highly recommend the anthology <b>Alternative Concepts of God</b>— "Essays on the Metaphysics of the Divine" (Edited by Andrei Buckareff and Yujin Nagasawa - 2016 Oxford University Press) to you. It is a fairly exhaustive review of the concepts and the history of this old tradition that seems to rile you up enough to call people "blind" for some reason. <br /><br />2) You quote Luke 18:8 by itself as if it in itself were some kind of refutation of Borg's position. The irony, of course, is that that particular verse is part of a pericope which immediately continues on to depict the character Jesus as speaking a parable which to my eyes seems to be directed at one such as yourself:<br /><br />(vv 9–14)<br />To some who were confident of their own righteousness and looked down on everyone else, Jesus told this parable:<br />"Two men went up to the temple to pray, one a Pharisee and the other a tax collector. The Pharisee stood by himself and prayed: 'God, I thank you that I am not like other people--robbers, evildoers, adulterers--or even like this tax collector. I fast twice a week and give a tenth of all I get.’<br />But the tax collector stood at a distance. He would not even look up to heaven, but beat his breast and said, ‘God, have mercy on me, a sinner.’<br />I tell you that this man, rather than the other, went home justified before God. For all those who exalt themselves will be humbled, and those who humble themselves will be exalted.”<br /><br />Though I am not really a Christian of any kind (neither "progressive" nor otherwise), this is one of my favorite parables of Jesus. I'm sure that you will probably be insulted to be told that it is addressed to you, specifically (it says explicitly that he said it to those who were "confident of their own righteousness and looking down on everyone else"). Jesus equates these people to the Pharisee and the serene humble penitent (e.g. Borg) to the tax collector. <br /><br />It astounds me that here we are, almost two thousand years since this narrative was written, and the point of the parable flies right over the head of someone who fancies himself an adherent of Jesus' teachings.<br /><br />Jesus is talking to you. You should maybe pay attention. <br /><br />If this angers you, i suggest you meditate on why that may be. <br /><br />i wish you peace <br /><br />ÓQuixiehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/03126711689901268060noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9212346.post-83636438064928794652017-02-26T18:09:53.379-08:002017-02-26T18:09:53.379-08:00So in other words, he was presenting his own athei...So in other words, he was presenting his own atheistic religion. So many people are so blind these days...Jesus was right: "nevertheless, when the Son of Man returns will He find 'The Faith" on Earth."...right now from posts like this and seeing the so-called 'Progressive' Christinaity feed...his answer will be a complete baffle to only Those who Know HimStephenhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01980724753973410660noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9212346.post-8069923019404741752015-08-21T08:01:57.955-07:002015-08-21T08:01:57.955-07:00I would like to talk with you about the gospel of ...I would like to talk with you about the gospel of Matthew which seems to be the least favorite of Christians except for the "Sermon on the Mount". I'm a former Christian who spent many years studying scripture to find out if it could answer my questions about my faith. Eventually all my questions led me straight out of the religion. I appreciate your comments for the most part but your comments are vaguely like how Christians see the scripture---read word for word to a literal understanding. Most, except scholars dismiss the fact that Jesus was a Jew speaking to Jews. For Christians, this Jesus may have been born a Jew but he came to found a new religion. So only the few Jews listed as his disciples understood his message. Anyway, I'm sure I'm boring you but I did appreciate you analysis.Joyhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14662989908617152659noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9212346.post-26956193591056912702014-11-26T10:19:39.329-08:002014-11-26T10:19:39.329-08:00I have one of my feet and most toes of the other p...I have one of my feet and most toes of the other planted in the mythicist camp pioneered by Dutch Radicals, Doherty, Price, et al. I liked the way you laid this review all out on the line.Dave Mackhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00557526273345721705noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9212346.post-89615487735729806962014-09-08T21:39:55.326-07:002014-09-08T21:39:55.326-07:00"Because I have no reason to." Best answ..."Because I have no reason to." Best answer ever. Terse, yes. Wrong. ..? I don't think so. Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9212346.post-9268986344369967252014-08-03T21:29:15.375-07:002014-08-03T21:29:15.375-07:00I enjoyed your post, but it's not clear whethe...I enjoyed your post, but it's not clear whether Borg was relatively unengaging because he got you point or because he didn't want to get into an involved discussion. I think your presentation of why the New Atheists don't take on panantheism was well put.Snowbrushhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00436087215476479042noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9212346.post-85286292031734255692013-08-06T09:31:38.704-07:002013-08-06T09:31:38.704-07:00You are welcome. Anytime.
What are the chances, ...You are welcome. Anytime. <br /><br />What are the chances, now that you know that imprinting in water of the sort you posit is essentially nonsense, that you will retract your persistent defense of it?Quixiehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/03126711689901268060noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9212346.post-30098447968180395152013-08-06T08:28:26.929-07:002013-08-06T08:28:26.929-07:00Thank youThank youChandran Nambiarhttp://dialecticalhomeopathy.comnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9212346.post-1776301158885740392013-05-07T01:30:25.603-07:002013-05-07T01:30:25.603-07:00This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.Anonymoushttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11730926212084970680noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9212346.post-35405148130874789082013-03-24T19:43:49.361-07:002013-03-24T19:43:49.361-07:00i like your posted
i like your posted <br />judi bolahttp://www.indobookies.comnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9212346.post-86348094350567522172012-12-10T21:47:47.222-08:002012-12-10T21:47:47.222-08:00There is a spot-on review of Ehrman's book by ...There is a spot-on review of Ehrman's book by Ken Humphreys here: <br /><br />http://www.freeratio.org/showthread.php?t=313610<br /><br />It's quite specific and accurate. Quixiehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/03126711689901268060noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9212346.post-47868582025355845312012-09-15T15:06:10.594-07:002012-09-15T15:06:10.594-07:00Thank you Harbinger.
Actually . . . there may ev...Thank you Harbinger. <br /><br />Actually . . . there may even be evidence for yet another burial story. <br /><br />This post was first published a few years ago (i just republished it because I had trouble accessing the original — malware warning).<br /><br />In a comment under the original, a gentleman named Joeph Codsi wrote the following:<br /><br /><b>— "Good discussion. One suggestion, if I may.<br /><br />• Fact 1, e : “No competing burial story exists.”<br /><br />This is what appears to be. But, on close examination, there are traces of another tradition in the Gospel according to John. This is found in chapter 19:31-34. This first account is interrupted by the theological remarks of verses 35-37. Then comes the second and final tradition, which features Joseph of Arimathea (38-42).<br />What is common to the two traditions is the fact that Pilate received delegations requesting the removal of the bodies. The two stories follow the same pattern. A request is made to Pilate, and then the request is executed. The story of the second and later tradition is complete. It goes from the removal of the body of Jesus to its burial in a well identified tomb. The first story shows the beginning of the execution of the request. The soldiers come and break the legs of the two bandits to hasten their death, but find Jesus dead, so they did not have to break his legs. At this point, a theological interlude comes in and interrupts the natural flow of events. The theological interlude is based on post-pascal theology, which recognizes in Jesus the fulfillment of the scriptures. The post-pascal theology is clearly stated in John 20:9, where it is said that, before the resurrection the disciples had not understood the scripture, that he must rise from the dead. The theological remarks are to be attributed to the evangelist.<br />Let us remove the theological interlude and follow the natural flow of events. <br />The soldiers break the legs of the two bandits and wait for them to die. Then they remove the bodies and bury them in an unmarked common grave in a cemetery reserved for criminals.<br />The women who had been watching the events saw the soldiers come and break the legs of the bandits. But the sun was about to set down, so they had to leave the scene before the bodies were taken down. On Sunday morning, they went back to the crucifixion site to see what had happened. No traces of the crucifixion were left. So they go and tell the disciples: “They have taken the Lord […], and we do not know where they have laid him.” (John 20:2). What is meant here is that the soldiers had removed the bodies and disposed of them in an unknown place.<br />This is what is likely to have happened. But with the passing of time, the faith in the resurrection needed something more acceptable. So the original story was transformed. Instead of having the Jewish leadership request the removal of the three bodies, we have one of them go to Pilate and request the body of Jesus. The focus is now centered on Jesus alone. The fate of the other two is forgotten as immaterial. Jesus is now buried in a tomb for the rich - a monument hewn in the rock and easily identifiable, perfect for the scene of the empty tomb.<br />This shows that there was a time when the first tradition was the only known one, and that the faith in the resurrection was not based on an empty tomb, but on a mystical experience through which Jesus was felt to be present and spiritually active.<br />Peace,<br />Joseph" </b><br /><br />So you are not alone in seeing a different tradition.<br /><br />I appreciate your reading and commenting here.<br /><br />ÓQuixiehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/03126711689901268060noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9212346.post-73743963146583870402012-09-15T09:50:36.926-07:002012-09-15T09:50:36.926-07:00Excwllent post, Quixie.
'e - No competing bur...Excwllent post, Quixie.<br /><br />'e - No competing burial story exists.'<br /><br />Actually, one does, in Acts 13:28-29, which has Paul implying that Jesus' opponents buried him.<br /><br />"Though they [the Jews]found no proper ground for a death sentence, they asked Pilate to have him executed. When they had carried out all that was written about him, they took him down from the cross and laid him in a tomb."<br /><br />Can he be talking about JoA here? Seems doubtful.The Harbinger of Nothinghttps://www.blogger.com/profile/15201739377923582222noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9212346.post-43342595915534955452012-09-10T18:08:59.082-07:002012-09-10T18:08:59.082-07:00This comment has been removed by the author.Quixiehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/03126711689901268060noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9212346.post-15660715383759263522012-09-10T14:26:37.524-07:002012-09-10T14:26:37.524-07:00This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.Samphirehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00327984071854007032noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9212346.post-27818539978070387712012-09-06T14:36:34.034-07:002012-09-06T14:36:34.034-07:00This comment has been hidden from the blog.Quixiehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/03126711689901268060noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9212346.post-18806642811545645512012-09-06T14:34:41.656-07:002012-09-06T14:34:41.656-07:00This comment has been hidden from the blog.Quixiehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/03126711689901268060noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9212346.post-68432299640365336572012-09-06T07:16:34.543-07:002012-09-06T07:16:34.543-07:00This comment has been hidden from the blog.James F. McGrathhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/02561146722461747647noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9212346.post-56897885662755724022012-05-19T04:00:04.928-07:002012-05-19T04:00:04.928-07:00This comment has been hidden from the blog.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9212346.post-38497016823540970232012-05-14T12:50:55.899-07:002012-05-14T12:50:55.899-07:00It's been pointed out that John has the money ...It's been pointed out that John has the money changers 'sitting' at tables, no mention of chairs, while Mark retains them, tables and 'seats'. Ehrman seems to still think John is independent.Robert Wahlerhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/13263735736178779472noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9212346.post-87488961305706364722012-05-14T00:41:15.840-07:002012-05-14T00:41:15.840-07:00"Why has Bart Ehrman done such an irresponsib..."Why has Bart Ehrman done such an irresponsible hack job at this stage in his career?"<br /><br />Someone else (Thomas Verenna?) said that this seemed to be a book Ehrman didn't really want to write.<br /><br />It's too bad. Ehrman could have written a smashing book on the subject, but if he'd put his usual thoroughness and skepticism into his research, I think he would have come espousing a position of agnosticism, closer to that of Robert Price. Especially if his debates, in which he constantly emphasizes how the Gospels are not remotely a reliable historical source, are anything to go by.Paul D.https://www.blogger.com/profile/13483419817200339955noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9212346.post-85114098664033930452012-01-11T16:53:30.286-08:002012-01-11T16:53:30.286-08:00He's very pity .. grieving in everything.. the...He's very pity .. grieving in everything.. the sufferings wrapped into the fogs and darkness. T.TAnonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9212346.post-38948514675401054662011-09-18T22:29:05.908-07:002011-09-18T22:29:05.908-07:00This comment has been hidden from the blog.Kalpana Subramanianhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01177330100942123604noreply@blogger.com