Why Jesus is God: A Response to Bart Ehrman | Catholic World Report - Global Church news and views

Besides the brief critique of Hume's reasoning on miracles (circular) Father Barron uses a wonderful term: Semiotics.

Why Jesus is God: A Response to Bart Ehrman | Catholic World Report - Global Church news and views:

...In this most recent tome, Ehrman lays out what is actually a very old thesis, going back at least to the 18th century and repeated ad nauseam in skeptical circles ever since, namely, that Jesus was a simple itinerant preacher who never claimed to be divine and whose “resurrection” was in fact an invention of his disciples who experienced hallucinations of their master after his death. Of course Ehrman, like so many of his skeptical colleagues across the centuries, breathlessly presents this thesis as though he has made a brilliant discovery. But basically, it’s the same old story. When I was a teenager, I read British Biblical scholar Hugh Schonfield’s Passover Plot, which lays out the same narrative, and just a few months ago, I read Reza Aslan’s Zealot, which pursues a very similar line, and I’m sure next Christmas or Easter I will read still another iteration of the theory.

Read the whole thing.

(Via Insight Scoop|The Ignatius Press Blog.)

The Black Legend

as it is called by some, is beginning to disintegrate, at least among the educated and disinterested. The popularity of Monty Python's send-up of it might be a marker of the ebbing of that tide. Check out the video that is in the link below from (of all sources) the BBC. It's interesting and educational:

Cosmos in the Lost offers Praise…:

…for the Inquisition.  I always enjoy it when pseudoknowledge gets spanked.

(Via Catholic and Enjoying It!.)

My Favorite City

It's true you shouldn't have favourite offspring so it might also be true that you shouldn't have a favourite city. As if that was gong to stop me. I've visited Rome four times, only once on a day trip. The others lasted from five to nine days. And still I can't get enough.

Life will probably not permit me to see her again but this article sure gave me great pleasure. You have to be a history and art buff to get the full flavour of it. Read it anyway even if you're not.

Rome’s past shows not only in her monuments and ruins, but in the very layout of the streets themselves...:

The new Mayor of the city of Rome, Ignazio Marino, just announced his intention to destroy one of the city’s central roads, the Via dei Fori Imperiali, and turn the area around the old Roman Forum into the world’s largest archaeological park. Reactions have ranged from commuters’ groans to declarations from classicists that this single act proves the nobility of the human species.

Read the whole thing.

(Via .)

Jesus as Myth: a Losing Battle

I love the analogy employed here. In any case this is the least troublesome aspect of Christianity's claims: There was a man named Jesus who was crucified under Pontius Pilate during the reign of Tiberius. I especially appreciate the criticism of Dawkins for relying on an inappropriate authority (German language?) who has since retracted his position.

A fight they can't win: The irreligious assault on the historicity of Jesus – Opinion – ABC Religion & Ethics (Australian Broadcasting Corporation):

It is time for the evangelists of unbelief to give up the nonsense that the figure at the heart of Christianity may have never even lived.

Read the whole thing.

(Via First Links.)

A Follow-up on TLRJ

*The Latest Real Jesus:

Of Gnostics and Religion Professors:

In September, Harvard Divinity School professor Karen King ignited an international controversy when she claimed to have found a piece of what she claims is a fourth-century papyrus that refers to Jesus’ “wife”.[1] (To be fair, she doesn’t claim that she believes that Jesus was married, only that whomever wrote the scroll believed He was. Of course, most of the media coverage didn’t make the fine distinction and played it up as evidence that orthodox Christianity was wrong and/or hiding the truth.) There’s been plenty of criticism of King and her claim and even the way she went public about it.

Read the whole thing.

(Via Bettnet.com - Musings of Domenico Bettinelli.)

Muhammad: Man or Myth?

Here is a more balanced and sober assessment:

Muhammad: Man or Myth?:

Muhammad: Man or Myth? | J. Mark Nicovich, Ph.D. | Catholic World Report

A review of Robert Spencer's Did Muhammad Exist? An Inquiry into Islam's Obscure Origins.

In recent decades it has become common in certain circles—often academic, sometimes popular—to challenge the historicity of famous figures and seminal events. The most well-known expression of this trend can be seen in those circles, skeptical and sometimes openly atheistic, that have taken the “search for the historical Jesus” to an extreme, calling into question whether a historical Jesus existed at all. The “Jesus Seminar” is a perfect example of this skeptical and even sensationalist approach. The general argumentation of this sort is centered on attacking the early Christian sources, citing the temporal distance of the Gospels and other writings from the early first century and the heavily biased nature of these texts as reasons to doubt the very existence of Jesus and to suspect he was merely a character invented to justify a particular theology, rather than the actual progenitor of it.

The skeptical cacophony has reached enough of a crescendo that Bart Ehrman, a leading New Testament scholar at UNC-Chapel Hill, recently published Did Jesus Exist? The Historical Argument for Jesus of Nazareth (HarperOne, 2012), a defense of the historical existence of Jesus. Ehrman is certainly no fundamentalist—in fact, he has publicly identified himself as an agnostic—and in this new work he is fully aware of the biases and pitfalls inherent in the early Christian sources. Yet despite these obvious issues he still demonstrates the overwhelming evidence for the historicity of Jesus, even if he does portray a rather different figure than the one depicted in the Gospels.

A similar series of works have appeared that attempt to work the same kind of radical historical revisionism on the early history of Islam, focusing on the person of Muhammad and the text of the Qu’ran, including Karl-Heinz Ohlig and Gerd-R  Puin’s The Hidden Origins of Islam, Hans Jensen’s Mohammed: Eine Biographie, and an entire body of work by Ibn Warraq. The present work under consideration, Robert Spencer’s Did Muhammad Exist? An Inquiry into Islam’s Obscure Origins (ISI, 2012) is the latest and perhaps most provocative of these books. 

Continue reading at www.CatholicWorldReport.com.

Read the whole thing.

(Via Insight Scoop | The Ignatius Press Blog.)

Did Muhammed Exist?

(subtitle: "An Inquiry into Islam's Obscure Origins") a book by Robert Spencer. A quick review with just a couple of observations.

The author's avowed aim of subjecting Muhammed and the Quran to the same sort of rigorous analysis that Jesus and the Christian and Jewish Scriptures have been experiencing for more than a century intrigued me. Given that, as a believing Catholic Christian, a lot of this so-called analysis seems tendentious and poorly grounded in reason, I was curious to see what the author would make of Islam's founder and principle scriptures based on his survey of scholarship.

To recap the classical Muslim understanding of the events: Muhammed is called by Allah from the middle of Arabia to preach a re-purified message to everyone. His locutions are given to him by the Angel Gabriel in perfect Arabic which sayings, stories and pronouncements are gathered together a few decades after his death into the Quran as we now know it. It is perfect and complete and there are no variant versions, such as Christians deal with. And it is perfectly comprehensible.

This is roughly parallel to some Protestant systems of thought that treat the Scriptures as if they were dictated by God, word for word. While Catholicism has the highest regard for the Scriptures (Inspired and, therefore, Inerrant) it doesn't regard the authors of Scripture to be mere transcriptionists. Nor does it deny the thousands of variant versions from the ancient world.

The author aims, in part, to contrast the facile view that Mohammed, the Quran and early Islam happened in the "clear light of history" with his view that, in fact, we know very little about any of them and have little reliable information to base any firm conclusions on.

I was particularly struck by the author's dismissive attitude towards oral tradition, comparing it to the children's game of telephone. First of all, scholars have been and are continuing to study oral tradition in relation to history. In cultures where oral tradition predominates, such as First Century Judea, it can be a highly developed system for reliably transmitting information from one generation to the next. If scholars were to turn their attention to the first three centuries of Islam and study the oral transmission they might come to more meaningful conclusions than the author. The Quran, the biography of Mohammed and the Hadith might all be analyzed in a sober manner. From these studies we could then talk about what we can and can't know about early Islam, its Scripture and it's founder.

Alas, the threats of violence will probably keep most scholars away from any such project. At least for raising these issues, albeit in a flawed manner, the author deserves credit.

Latest Real Jesus Discovered!

I sometimes wonder if these endlessly invented Jesus' aren't celebrated because they offer yet another excuse to ignore the Jesus of Christianity. He is, after all, a very discomforting Person who requires us to surrender our ego and comfort for His Love. The Gospel of no suffering and self-affirmation can't hold a candle to Him.

Aa Mark Shea says in the article he links to at the bottom of this post:

Every Latest Real Jesus at variance with the constant tradition of the Church is always a reflection of the obsessions of the discoverer, not a revelation of who Jesus really was.

Latest Real Jesus Discovered!:

Turns out that in addition to being a robust heterosexual who married Mary Magdalene, he was also gay.

Read the whole thing.

(Via Catholic and Enjoying It!.)

Logical Inconsistency

is a common human condition. We are apt to entertain two quite inconsistent ideas without ever realizing it. Do read the entire article below for an illuminating exploration of one such situation, involving a brilliant man. Intelligence is guarantor of consistency it seems:

The Delusions of Liberal Humanism:

The link between intelligence and correct interpretation of reality is unfortunately weak. That is one of the reason why someone like cognitive scientist Stephen Pinker can be very smart and yet be consistently wrong. Pinker champions his latest wrong idea in his new book, The Better Angels of Our Nature: the Decline of Violence in History and Its Causes, which posits that humans are evolving to become less violent.

The fact that you can publish a book making a claim so easily debunked by both empirical evidence and common sense says a lot about the publishing industry. But the idea that Pinker believes it to to be true—and so many people are willing to entertain the notion—says even more about the delusions of liberal humanism. As philosopher John Grey says in his devastating review,

The idea that a new world can be constructed through the rational application of force is peculiarly modern, animating ideas of revolutionary war and pedagogic terror that feature in an influential tradition of radical Enlightenment thinking. Downplaying this tradition is extremely important for Pinker. Along with liberal humanists everywhere, he regards the core of the Enlightenment as a commitment to rationality. The fact that prominent Enlightenment figures have favoured violence as an instrument of social transformation is—to put it mildly—inconvenient.

There is a deeper difficulty. Like so many contemporary evangelists for humanism, Pinker takes for granted that science endorses an Enlightenment account of human reason. Since science is a human creation, how could humans not be rational? Surely science and humanism are one and the same. Actually it’s extremely curious—though entirely typical of current thinking—that science should be linked with humanism in this way. A method of inquiry rather than a settled view of the world, there can be no guarantee that science will vindicate Enlightenment ideals of human rationality. Science could just as well end up showing them to be unrealisable.

Read more . . .

Read the whole thing.

(Via First Thoughts.)

Realsim and the Resurrection

Oswald Sobrino has some interesting things to say on these subjects vis-a-vis an atheist friend of his:

Who Is the Realist?:

One of my favorite friends and conversation partners is the "village atheist" where I live. He is an eminently decent and pleasant man. One of his main concerns is not to live under the allegedly false illusion of religious belief.

Read the whole thing.

(Via Catholic Analysis.)

Atheism

is apparently suffering from a serious brain drain of late. Professor Richard Dawkins, a leading biologist, periodically wades into philosophy, theology and history in order to confirm this thesis:

Oh my, I do love the cool, calm, and rational thinking...:

Mercy! The man is a wit wrapped in a genius outfit, swaddled in sassy, deep-fried in searing sarcasm, and smothered in spicy polemics. Throw in a 20 oz. lemonade and a Charles Darwin action figure and you have a super-duper Man of Science value meal that kids ages 6 to 12 can enjoy—well, at least until they throw up and grow up.

Read the whole thing.

(Via Insight Scoop | The Ignatius Press Blog.)

Obama

seems to define himself by his perceived enemies. He becomes President and starts identifying the Republican party with Rush Limbaugh. Now he's using his bully pulpit to try to isolate Fox News. Who's the last President to focus so much attention on his "enemies"?

Quote of the Day (So Far!):

It comes from today's classic Krauthammer column on the White House's war on Fox:

Defend Fox from the likes of Anita Dunn? She's been attacked for extolling Mao's political philosophy in a speech at a high school graduation. But the critics miss the surpassing stupidity of her larger point: She was invoking Mao as support and authority for her impassioned plea for individuality and trusting one's own choices. Mao as champion of individuality? Mao, the greatest imposer of mass uniformity in modern history, creator of a slave society of a near-billion worker bees wearing Mao suits and waving the Little Red Book?

Read the whole thing, as they say.

Read the whole thing.

(Via Campaign Standard.)

Bold, Benedetto, and Bello

More thoughts on the big news from Monday:

Bold, Benedetto, and Bello:

As the Second Vatican Council developed, traditional Catholics in England were distressed because they saw Rome giving up the Old Latin Mass for a vernacular both shallow and shabby. Further, as Evelyn Waugh put it, "This was the Mass for whose restoration the Elizabethan martyrs had gone to the scaffold. St. Augustine, St. Thomas à Becket...

Read the whole thing.

(Via New Advent World Watch.)

Reason and Faith

intersect somewhere and that somewhere

On the integrity of the New Testament manuscript evidence:

Let's question the "common-sense" double-standard. Folks, I was reading this article published today in Time Magazine online, entitled, The Burial Box of Jesus' Brother: A Case Against Fraud, because the controversy has been around for a while and of course...

Read the whole thing.

(Via New Advent World Watch.)

Lies, Damned Lies

and Statistics, in that order. I blame today's outburst on Mark Shea's particularly excellent output today.

Persistent Myths in Feminist Scholarship - ChronicleReview.com:

By CHRISTINA HOFF SOMMERS

"Harder to kill than a vampire." That is what the sociologist Joel Best calls a bad statistic. But, as I have discovered over the years, among false statistics the hardest of all to slay are those promoted by feminist professors. Consider what happened recently when I sent an e-mail message to the Berkeley law professor Nancy K.D. Lemon pointing out that the highly praised textbook that she edited, Domestic Violence Law (second edition, Thomson/West, 2005), contained errors.

Read the whole thing.

(Via Catholic and Enjoying It.)

Lepanto

is a ballad by G.K. Chesterton. Dale Ahlquist edited a small book
with this, some notes and several related essays. This would be most profitably read on the feast of Our Lady of the Rosary, whose feast day is set on the anniversary of the battle in 1571.

This is a rousing, humorous and heroic poem and shows GKC's talent off well.

Things I Didn't Need to Know

There are some things that appeal to the romantic instinct, and Scotsmen proudly wearing plaid kilts is one of them. But this definitely ruins that image for me:

Do Scots Need Kilts?:

Yet it is worth remembering that the kilt was a skirt invented by an Englishman in the 1720s.

Read the whole thing.

(Via OUPblog.)

Do Not Read This Post

If you don't like mean humour:

(Via †Ad Majorem Dei Gloriam†.)

Lepanto

How could I forget that today is that great day?

Lepanto:

Today is the anniversary of the Battle of Lepanto. In this battle, allied Christian nations destroyed a vastly larger Turkish fleet. This battle inspired G.K. Chesterton to write one of his best poems. Here is the rousing first stanza:

White founts falling in the Courts of the sun,

And the Soldan of Byzantium is smiling as they run;

There is laughter like the fountains in that face of all men feared,

It stirs the forest darkness, the darkness of his beard;

It curls the blood-red crescent, the crescent of his lips;

For the inmost sea of all the earth is shaken with his ships.

They have dared the white republics up the capes of Italy,

They have dashed the Adriatic round the Lion of the Sea,

And the Pope has cast his arms abroad for agony and loss,

And called the kings of Christendom for swords about the Cross.

The cold queen of England is looking in the glass;

The shadow of the Valois is yawning at the Mass;

From evening isles fantastical rings faint the Spanish gun,

And the Lord upon the Golden Horn is laughing in the sun.

(Via First Things.)

Thank You America

for having such a good sense of humour. I just returned from a whirl-wind visit with my kith and kin in the USA. A week to recover and back to work. In the meantime here is a reference to one of our family's favourite indie bands:

1812: "Pro Ecclesia reminds us how important this date in history is...

For a uniquely Canadian perspective we have the 'Arrogant Worms'






DISCLAIMER: OBNOXIOUS BUT HARMLESS"

(Via island breezes.)