Re: The Gospels

This is a pretty naive version of the "facts," Tina, and how they can be
read -- not just about the Bible in particular, but about any ancient
text, really. Or any modern one, for that matter. Real facts (as
opposed to the pretend facts you've been offering) are few and far
between, and when we do find them, we find they can be understood in
more than one way. The farther back in time the texts are located, the
more and more this becomes true.

To me, the facts are ambiguous, so to adhere to any one position as "the
truth" is to make a faith statement of some sort -- either for or
against. I think it'd be interesting to examine the real sources you
used, and the criteria by which you evaluated them. Somehow I think
if you were really being honest you'd admit you evaluated those sources
that reinforced what you really wanted to hear as "objective" while
those who spoke what you didn't want to hear were "fanatical."

The fact is, Tina, many of the facts I've been giving you to refute your
thesis would be supported by many non-Christian scholars as well as
Christian.

You gotta wonder what that means, and why you think you have any reason
at all to assume those who question your assertions are religious
fanatics of some sort.

I honestly think the fanaticism in this conversation lies elsewhere.

Jim

tina carson wrote:

> You want honesty? All right, here it is: Years ago, as a child, my
> mother took me to see a movie at church. It was Ephram Zimbalist Jr
> talking about why he has faith. It seems that in his youth, he took
> umbrage against Christianity and began doing research to disprove
> Christ. The opposite happened. As he dredged on, he found more and
> more reason to believe, giving him a faith that he had never had before.
> Years later, when I lost my faith, I remembered this film and how it
> moved me, so I decided to follow in his steps and find the faith as he
> had. I was looking, as the song goes, for "something to believe in".
> Only I had the opposite result. The more I looked, the less real the
> Christian teachings became, the more fanciful, the more bizarre. As I
> tried, year after year to refute attacks against Christianity, I found
> it to be an argument of faith vs facts. No one could have been more
> disappointed than I.
> We can argue until our fingers are blue, and I will be glad to unpack
> my library and quote sources if you like, but the fact is, as far as
> I'm concerned, the facts speak for themselves, just as, I know, you
> can quote from countless of the devoted who believe as you do.
> "agreeing to disagree" tina

-
* Unsubscribing? Mail majordomo@roughdraft.org with the message
* UNSUBSCRIBE BANANAFISH
Received on Thu Aug 7 09:06:07 2003