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

Pete- all I can say is "wow!" I disagree.

You say:
" I have respect for Ehrman, but the categories by which he continues to critique the faith are carry-overs from fundamentalism. "

I don't understand how you can think that if you consider his Ph.D. work was at Princeton. That has to be the most influence on his life/theology. I can't conceive of how an intellectual like Bart would not fully consider everything you might call 'liberal Christianity' before dumping Christianity altogether. You make it sound like it has to be either fundamentalism for him, or he dumps it. If Bart had gotten his Ph.D. from Liberty University, then you'd have a point. But it doesn't make any sense to me, considering Princeton.

But I do admit I barely know Bart. My main, little, info of him, so far, is listening to his live lecture/presentation recently, which really impressed me. Also the Q&A session with him.

You say:
"Erickson is pretty conservative. If you like him so much, why all the problems with Xty?"

I dumped Christianity because I started to think about "the mind body" problem and concluded that there is no such thing as a supernatural soul. All we have is the mind. And it is emergent. This is so parsimonious with what I see in nature. If there is no supernatural soul, there is no resurrection. After dumping Christianity, and seeing life this way, the myth and superstitions of Scripture seem to jump out more vividly for me. (A Christian may say they'd rather hold on to the hope of eternal life to make life more meaningful and happy; but my position is to seek the truth first and deal with the consequences later.)

You say:
"If the only options open to me were fundamentalism and atheism, I would join the latter."

Ya, as if those were the choices that you think Bart thought he faced... even with a Ph.D. from Princeton...???

Ok- you lay out two choices, extremes: fundy Christianity and atheism. How about another middle extreme: liberal Christianity that doesn't believe the Bible. It is like the government position on gays "don't ask, don't tell." It is modified for the Bible for liberal Christians, about whether people and events recorded in the Bible are real "Don't think about it, don't care."

There are Christians called "Bible-based Christians." Since joining the ASA and dialoging, I discovered another group of Christians I call "CS Lewis based Christians." Their faith is not really based on the Bible, but on philosophy from the likes of CS Lewis. These people don't quote or care so much about Scripture as they do rely on ideas/writings from CS Lewis. It is an attempt at keeping the abstract layer of the faith high enough that it can't be falsified. Just my thoughts.

...Bernie

-----Original Message-----
From: Pete Enns [mailto:peteenns@mac.com]
Sent: Saturday, November 28, 2009 1:57 PM
To: Dehler, Bernie
Subject: Re: [asa] Gospel in the Stars WAS Star of Bethlehem presentation?

Erickson is pretty conservative. If you like him so much, why all the problems with Xty?

By the way, did I ever say you were a fundamentalist? It is clearly in your background, though.

Ehrman went to Moody and Wheaton. It was at PTS during his MDiv years that he lost his faith because he could not square the data with his fundamentalist past. I have respect for Ehrman, but the categories by which he continues to critique the faith are carry-overs from fundamentalism. He does not seem able to take a step back and consider the possibility that his exposure to the faith was a a sociological phenomenon more than a spiritual one. Do you understand the difference between what I am saying and what you describe Ehrman and Barker doing?

If the only options open to me were fundamentalism and atheism, I would join the latter.

Pete

On Nov 27, 2009, at 10:50 PM, Dehler, Bernie wrote:

> Hi Pete-
>
> My favorite theology textbook is "Christian Theology" by Millard Erickson. Do you consider him a fundamentalist? I doubt it. I most closely associated with all his opinions, over and against Thiessen and Ryrie, the other textbooks from my seminary classes.
>
> Pete said:
> "As for Ehrman, he goes to great lengths to recount his own pre-Preinceton fundamentalism."
>
> That is probably to counter his fundamentalist opposers who say that he doesn't understand their viewpoint. His counter-point is that he LIVED it at one point. I'm sure it is no "baggage" for him as he has since earned a M.Div. and Ph.D. at Princeton, a non-fundy seminary. Bart is a former Christian as I am. I know many former Christians. It is very common for evangelicals to say "he never was a Christian." They think "once saved always saved" so if someone walks away, they must never have been saved. So Bart's recounting is a demonstration of his faith he once had. Atheist debater Dan Barker also has to recount his lost faith in order to demonstrate he was once a true believer. You relayed the comment to Bart "get over your fundamentalism." What was Bart's response to that? I bet it was just as witty and tasty.
>
> ...Bernie
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Pete Enns [mailto:peteenns@mac.com]
> Sent: Friday, November 27, 2009 2:53 PM
> To: Dehler, Bernie
> Subject: Re: [asa] Gospel in the Stars WAS Star of Bethlehem presentation?
>
> Bernie,
>
> I am not being facetious. Have you considered investing in some decent commentaries?
>
> As for Ehrman, he goes to great lengths to recount his own pre-Preinceton fundamentalism.
>
> Pete
>
>
>
> On Nov 27, 2009, at 1:30 PM, Dehler, Bernie wrote:
>
>> Pete said:
>> " 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 then, if no contradiction, did Joseph and Mary travel to Egypt after Bethlehem, or did they instead go back to Nazareth? I've seen how others play this, but wondering what you answer is Pete.
>>
>> ...Bernie
>>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: Pete Enns [mailto:peteenns@mac.com]
>> Sent: Wednesday, November 25, 2009 3:02 PM
>> To: Dehler, Bernie
>> Cc: AmericanScientificAffiliation
>> 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
>>
>> On Nov 24, 2009, at 6:31 PM, Dehler, Bernie wrote:
>>
>>> Hi Pete- I say this to bring awareness. I'm sure you are aware, as a scholar, but I'm sure most aren't, even on this list. They don't teach this in either seminary (the one I attended) or in church (any of the ones I attended). I only find out these things from self-study.
>>>
>>> And when you say "differences between the Gospels" is that your gentle way of saying "contradictions," which proves that they both can't literally be correct?
>>>
>>> "I am asking because you seem to raise the Matt/Luke issue as if it were some heretofore undiscovered datum."
>>>
>>> I'm sure that for most it is. I am rather new to it myself. A watershed event was attending a lecture by Bart Ehrman recently. Do you like and respect Bart? He seemed like a nice and honest man.
>>>
>>> Pete- I think Christians like you are a good witness because they don't put their head in the sand, or twist Scripture out of shape to try to save it, instead recognizing it for what it is.
>>>
>>> ...Bernie
>>>
>>> -----Original Message-----
>>> From: Pete Enns [mailto:peteenns@mac.com]
>>> Sent: Tuesday, November 24, 2009 3:01 PM
>>> To: Dehler, Bernie
>>> Cc: AmericanScientificAffiliation
>>> Subject: Re: [asa] Gospel in the Stars WAS Star of Bethlehem presentation?
>>>
>>> Bernie,
>>>
>>> Just for clarification (and a yes or no answer would help): are you aware that the differences between the Gospels are pervasive and that the church has been aware of this since at least the 2nd century?
>>>
>>> I am asking because you seem to raise the Matt/Luke issue as if it were some heretofore undiscovered datum.
>>>
>>> Pete
>>>
>>>
>>> On Nov 24, 2009, at 5:15 PM, Dehler, Bernie wrote:
>>>
>>>> "Note, too, that the slaughter of the innocents drove Joseph to Egypt."
>>>>
>>>> Matthew says they fled to Egypt after the birth, but Luke says they went to Nazareth. People can invent another version where they do both, but it is an addition to both stories.
>>>>
>>>> ...Bernie
>>>>
>>>> -----Original Message-----
>>>> From: Pete Enns [mailto:peteenns@mac.com]
>>>> Sent: Tuesday, November 24, 2009 2:10 PM
>>>> To: David Campbell
>>>> Cc: AmericanScientificAffiliation; Dehler, Bernie
>>>> Subject: Re: [asa] Gospel in the Stars WAS Star of Bethlehem presentation?
>>>>
>>>> I think this is a both/and, folks.
>>>>
>>>> 1. Historically speaking, Herod was a mess, and a mass killing was not out of character.
>>>>
>>>> 2. Matthew's Gospel is prone to some midrashic embellishments, geared as it was to a Jewish audience. Note, too, that the slaughter of the innocents drove Joseph to Egypt. They returned when all those who sought to kill him were dead (Matt 2:19-20), which certainly reflects the same command given to Moses in Exod 4:19. Matthew's Jesus is the new Moses (complete with his own Mt. Sinai experience, i.e., Sermon on the Mount, as we have discussed in this list several weeks ago, etc., etc).
>>>>
>>>> Pete Enns
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> On Nov 24, 2009, at 4:49 PM, David Campbell wrote:
>>>>
>>>>>> I don't agree that Matthew made up the story of the slaughter of the
>>>>>> innocents. Herod was a very nasty boy; I wouldn't put something like that
>>>>>> past him, not at all.
>>>>>
>>>>> A popular joke (with better alliteration in the original) was that it
>>>>> was better to be Herod 's swine than his son as the former were less
>>>>> likely to be killed. Several family members were executed by him on
>>>>> suspicion of political plotting, sometimes on good evidence, sometimes
>>>>> on rumors fomented by a rival heir, etc. It would be out of character
>>>>> if Herod didn't try to wipe out a possible rival. If I recall
>>>>> correctly, he proposed having some mass killing when he died to ensure
>>>>> that the populace would be in mourning, though in a rare display of
>>>>> sense his heirs did not carry this out. [This is Herod the Great-not
>>>>> to be confused with all his Herod and Herodias descendants who inbred
>>>>> to make things more confusing.]
>>>>>
>>>>> On the other hand, it is true that the popular concept of the
>>>>> slaughter of the innocents is rather exaggerated relative to what
>>>>> Matthew records. Bethlehem was a small town, and the number of young
>>>>> children at any one time would not be large.
>>>>>
>>>>> "I think there's something wrong with the supposed conservative view
>>>>> that God spoke to astrologers (a false religion), with them
>>>>> functioning as prophets (either directly learning from God or getting
>>>>> info from God as a seer) to give them a sign for the Christ-child."
>>>>>
>>>>> Not sure what's wrong with that. There is a theological problem with
>>>>> claiming that going out and doing astrology will lead you to Christ.
>>>>> However, given that Christianity holds that we're all by nature
>>>>> looking for God in the wrong places, He has to reach us where we are
>>>>> in some fashion.
>>>>>
>>>>> A different question is how a star could guide someone to a house.
>>>>> Given the vast distance from the Earth to things in space, pretty much
>>>>> any astronomical object will appear to be overhead from anywhere in
>>>>> entire village at the same time. One possible solution is an
>>>>> alignment of the rising or setting of the star. From the Magi's
>>>>> position, it could appear to indicate a specific building.
>>>>>
>>>>> "It does seem suspicious, I think, that such a traumatic experience
>>>>> (Herod's killing the children) wasn't recorded in Luke, and Luke gives
>>>>> details about the birth of Christ. Likewise, Matthew mentions nothing
>>>>> of the census as Luke records. They each have their own answer to "If
>>>>> Jesus is the Messiah, how come he's not from Bethlehem, as
>>>>> prophesied?" His parents traveled to Bethlehem for the birth, that's
>>>>> why. Why did his parents have to go there? Luke and Matthew give
>>>>> different reasons."
>>>>>
>>>>> It does seem suspicious when any failure to mention something in every
>>>>> account is regarded as evidence against veracity, especially if
>>>>> agreement between accounts gets invoked as proof of copying rather
>>>>> than of accuracy. Matthew and Luke have somewhat different audiences
>>>>> in view-Matthew is aimed more at a Jewish audience, who would be very
>>>>> interested in OT fulfillment; Luke writes to an educated Gentile
>>>>> audience, probably acquainted with the LXX but lacking the personal
>>>>> interest in how Jesus fulfills the calling of Israel. There's no need
>>>>> to record everything, and, as John points out, no space to do so,
>>>>> either. One might as well infer that Jesus wasn't born because Mark
>>>>> and John don't record it.
>>>>>
>>>>> --
>>>>> Dr. David Campbell
>>>>> 425 Scientific Collections
>>>>> University of Alabama
>>>>> "I think of my happy condition, surrounded by acres of clams"
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> 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.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> 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.
>
>
>
> 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 Sat Nov 28 19:19:09 2009