RE: [asa] Gospel in the Stars WAS Star of Bethlehem presentation?

Cameron said:
"I would add that the pendulum swing from fundamentalism to atheism is not restricted to Bart and Bernie."

This fallacy keeps getting repeated over and over again. I was not a fundamentalist when I left Christianity. I was a well-informed evolutionary creationist. I see it repeated so much. I also doubt that Bart went from "fundamentalist to atheist." I see from Wikipedia that he got his Ph.D and M.Div. from Princeton Theological Seminary. Ya, sure, what a fundamentalist seminary.

Thinking that we go from one extreme to another is a convenient way to write us off. Why don't you instead engage in content?

In the example from Pete, someone says to Bart "get over your fundamentalism." If it was me, I'd reply "I did long ago. Why don't you admit that what I'm saying is what non-fundamentalist evangelicals also believe, and they are wrong?" Instead, you want to make this impression "You are arguing a faulty position from fundamentalism, so you can be dismissed." Wrong. And if you think you are correct, you need to provide evidence and details (content), rather than just try a brush-off.

...Bernie

-----Original Message-----
From: asa-owner@lists.calvin.edu [mailto:asa-owner@lists.calvin.edu] On Behalf Of Cameron Wybrow
Sent: Thursday, November 26, 2009 10:32 AM
To: asa
Subject: Re: [asa] Gospel in the Stars WAS Star of Bethlehem presentation?

Pete:

I agree with your point about the varied intentions of the Gospel writers,
and also with your point about Ehrman. I would add that the pendulum swing
from fundamentalism to atheism is not restricted to Bart and Bernie. I've
noticed it over and over again. In secular Religious Studies departments,
student after student, coming from a very conservative background (ranging
from Pentecostal through Baptist and everywhere in between) comes in and
after a few years of study "throws the baby out with the bathwater". It
happens less often with traditions which place less emphasis on Biblical
literalism (Anglican, Catholic, etc.). Ironically, then, fundamentalism is
a great breeding-ground for future atheists.

I always recommend to former fundamentalists who are losing their faith that
they read more widely and deeply in the Christian tradition, so that they
can see that there are more options than fundamentalism and atheism. But it
rarely works. The fundamentalism has generally so shaped their souls that
they cannot envision any other form of spirituality, and it seems they have
to "bottom out" as atheists before they can begin a long climb upward to
recover a warmer and more balanced form of spirituality. But unfortunately,
many of them never make the climb.

Thus, my biggest beef against fundamentalism is not its hostility to science
or its terrible grasp of history. It is its stifling spirituality, which
drives so many toward atheism, as the only escape route. Rigid intellectual
assent to the bare words of a book, taken literally, is not what
Christianity or any religion is about. Yet people like Bart Ehrman (and a
good number of Ph.D.s in Biblical studies, especially New Testament studies)
appear to have been permanently spiritually damaged by this conception of
Christianity, and this conception of religion. And when people in Bernie's
position look up to people like Ehrman, they just repeat the mistake,
instead of learning from it. An atheism that is built upon railing against
the religion one used to hold is not liberating, but imprisoning. It keeps
one within the thrall of the religion that one is seeking to escape.

Happy Thanksgiving to all.

Cameron.

----- Original Message -----
From: "Pete Enns" <peteenns@mac.com>
To: "Dehler, Bernie" <bernie.dehler@intel.com>
Cc: "AmericanScientificAffiliation" <asa@calvin.edu>
Sent: Wednesday, November 25, 2009 6:01 PM
Subject: Re: [asa] Gospel in the Stars WAS Star of Bethlehem presentation?

> From what I have heard from everyone who knows him (Ii.e., works with him,
> was a student), Ehrman is a genuinely nice guy. I've only heard him speak
> and it is clear that his fundamentalist background is still a burden he
> carries.
>
> I am aware of a debate between BE and Richard Hays of Duke. Throughout his
> presentations and Q&A, Ehrman would preface many of his comments by
> recounting his time at Moody, etc. FInally, Hays got tired of it and
> walked over to Ehrman, looked him in the eye and said, "Bart, you need to
> get over that."
>
> That is my advice to you, Bernie.
>
> Although I am comfortable with contradiction as a function of varied
> historical settings, I do not think that differences between the Gospels
> should be equated with contradiction since they are often driven by
> theological and and other issues. So, the differences between the four re:
> the cleansing of the temple reflects the desire on the part of John to
> write, very intentionally, a different Gospel.
>
> Pete

To unsubscribe, send a message to majordomo@calvin.edu with
"unsubscribe asa" (no quotes) as the body of the message.

To unsubscribe, send a message to majordomo@calvin.edu with
"unsubscribe asa" (no quotes) as the body of the message.
Received on Fri Nov 27 13:08:42 2009