Ehrman's latest...Love Thy Stranger

[Batt Boy]

Wow. Just finished. As usual, really good and causes a lot of thinking. It will not make some of his biggest fans happy, but I think one of his best works.

"The sense that we should help strangers in need did not come from our prehistorical ancestors, nor from our Greek and Roman worlds at the foundation of our civilization. It came from social pressures asserted on the Western world by the moral instruction of early Christians based principally on the teaching of Jesus. Eventually, it came to be simply how people thought and felt, part of our psyche. Jesus, in the end, transformed the moral conscience of the West."

Love Thy Stranger Resources

www.bartehrman.com

 

[sunnyheel]

Very interesting. The thesis coincides with my own (I consider myself a Christian atheist).

Wondering how the author explains the current *ahem* backsliding.

 

[farce©]

Very interesting. The thesis coincides with my own (I consider myself a Christian atheist).

Wondering how the author explains the current *ahem* backsliding.

Because they ain't real Christians anymore than they are real American Patriots. They cosplay at everything.

 

[sunnyheel]

Because they ain't real Christians anymore than they are real American Patriots. They cosplay at everything.

No doubt. I’m curious how Ehrman attributes the shift and expects future trends to play out. Anyone know?

 

[Batt Boy]

Very interesting. The thesis coincides with my own (I consider myself a Christian atheist).

Wondering how the author explains the current *ahem* backsliding.

We are close. I consider myself a Christian Agnostic.

Your question is tough and he touches on the edges.

"I often get asked, usually by my non-Christian friends, whether I think, on balance, the Christian faith has done more good or evil in the world. I always reply that the question is unanswerable. There are no cosmic scales or AI-generated algorithms to provide an approximate, let alone decisive, answer. History is long, religion is complex, and good and evil are variable, coming in shades and degrees. What I will say, even to my non-Christian friends, is that even if we were preternaturally able to look at ll the specific effects of the Christian faith in just about every time and place, we would find the same generalized answer: in addition to the terrible suffering that the Christian faith and those who follow it have and are still creating, there is also a lot of good. We are remiss if we fail to notice it."

 

[finesse]

Basically it's the inherent egocentricity of monotheism. The majority of the world worship some god who they consider all wise, all powerful and everywhere. Somehow one of these factions has figured out the true nature of god and what and why you should do as they say. Just ignore the coincidence that it seems to favor them at the time.

At least, if they were decent polytheists, they allow for the existence of other religions and frequently adopted new gods and goddesses or even worshipped different aspects of the same divinities. Wouldn't it be much better if the Abrahamic religions just agreed to disagree and moved on.

 

[Ddseddse]

I loved a stranger once.

 

[Batt Boy]

The first commandant wasn't really about monotheism. Ancient Israelites living amongst lots of "gods". I mean how could God be jealous if there weren't other gods?

Sure, it may have evolved to that but most OT scholars don't see that shift until the influences of the exile while in Babylon.

 

[rodoheel]

"I often get asked, usually by my non-Christian friends, whether I think, on balance, the Christian faith has done more good or evil in the world. I always reply that the question is unanswerable. There are no cosmic scales or AI-generated algorithms to provide an approximate, let alone decisive, answer. History is long, religion is complex, and good and evil are variable, coming in shades and degrees. What I will say, even to my non-Christian friends, is that even if we were preternaturally able to look at ll the specific effects of the Christian faith in just about every time and place, we would find the same generalized answer: in addition to the terrible suffering that the Christian faith and those who follow it have and are still creating, there is also a lot of good. We are remiss if we fail to notice it."

I think all organized religion is a lot like a gun in some ways. It can be used for good and in the service of justice when wielded carefully and by people of good conscience. It can also be an instrument of terrible destruction and misery when used for the wrong purposes or by people with malice, greed, and/or selfishness in their hearts.

The big difference that the analogy doesn't really capture, IMO, is that guns were inescapably created to cause violence (even if in the service of justice) while organized religion was created to find meaning and solace - at least originally. Although some people may take issue with that latter characterization and suggest that organized religion has, from the beginning, been a tool of those who seek to control or manipulate others.

 

[Milk and Cookies]

Good people will do good and evil people will do evil. But to make a good person do evil -- that takes religion.
Hitchens

 

[finesse]

The first commandant wasn't really about monotheism. Ancient Israelites living amongst lots of "gods". I mean how could God be jealous if there weren't other gods?

Sure, it may have evolved to that but most OT scholars don't see that shift until the influences of the exile while in Babylon.

Lots of odd things happened to Judaism in Babylon.

 

[Calheel]

Good people will do good and evil people will do evil. But to make a good person do evil -- that takes religion.
Hitchens

Hitch was wrong about that. There are a lot of ways to brainwash a good person aside from religion. Unless you define religion so broadly as to make the term meaningless.

 

[Bobfripp]

Hitch was wrong about that. There are a lot of ways to brainwash a good person aside from religion. Unless you define religion so broadly as to make the term meaningless.

I think that quote was actually from Steven Weinberg, not Hitchens. Hitch was right though that religion poisons everything.

 

[Milk and Cookies]

Been that way since one monkey looked at the sun and told the other monkey, he said for you to give me your fucking share
Rust Cohle

 

[sunnyheel]

Basically it's the inherent egocentricity of monotheism. The majority of the world worship some god who they consider all wise, all powerful and everywhere. Somehow one of these factions has figured out the true nature of god and what and why you should do as they say. Just ignore the coincidence that it seems to favor them at the time.

At least, if they were decent polytheists, they allow for the existence of other religions and frequently adopted new gods and goddesses or even worshipped different aspects of the same divinities. Wouldn't it be much better if the Abrahamic religions just agreed to disagree and moved on.

That’s a valuable perspective and it points to the underlying flaw in most religions: they are ultimately used as a tool toward tribalism and hierarchy that easily can morph into religious wars and corresponding atrocities.

The great question is how can we nurture the good and marginalize the bad?

The only way to do that, in my studied opinion, is governments that protect equal rights and promote cultural integration. And we’ve seen how even the best intentions can be usurped by ethno-nationalism.

Any other ideas?

 

[Milk and Cookies]

Hitch was wrong about that. There are a lot of ways to brainwash a good person aside from religion. Unless you define religion so broadly as to make the term meaningless.

True true. His list was incomplete.

 

[sunnyheel]

Hitch was wrong about that. There are a lot of ways to brainwash a good person aside from religion. Unless you define religion so broadly as to make the term meaningless.

Yeah. Replace religion with any other demanding dogma and you can get the same result.

 

[Batt Boy]

That’s a valuable perspective and it points to the underlying flaw in most religions: they are ultimately used as a tool toward tribalism and hierarchy that easily can morph into religious wars and corresponding atrocities.

The great question is how can we nurture the good and marginalize the bad?

The only way to do that, in my studied opinion, is governments that protect equal rights and promote cultural integration. And we’ve seen how even the best intentions can be usurped by ethno-nationalism.

Any other ideas?

And those are the things under most assualt by this administration. I'd also say not limited to ethno-nationalism. Long before that and long after, it's wealth vs non wealth, regardless of color. It's class.

 

[heelinhell]

Wow. Just finished. As usual, really good and causes a lot of thinking. It will not make some of his biggest fans happy, but I think one of his best works.

"The sense that we should help strangers in need did not come from our prehistorical ancestors, nor from our Greek and Roman worlds at the foundation of our civilization. It came from social pressures asserted on the Western world by the moral instruction of early Christians based principally on the teaching of Jesus. Eventually, it came to be simply how people thought and felt, part of our psyche. Jesus, in the end, transformed the moral conscience of the West."

Love Thy Stranger Resources

www.bartehrman.com

Thank you for that.

I have read and own a dozen books written by Ehrman and have several DVDs of his courses from the great teaching courses. I have attended several of his seminars at UNC.

So I have ordered his new book his new book !

 

[sunnyheel]

And those are the things under most assualt by this administration. I'd also say not limited to ethno-nationalism. Long before that and long after, it's wealth vs non wealth, regardless of color. It's class.

Good point but that hasn’t applied in the US - so far. I would add that “class warfare” doesn’t seem to have the durability or zeal of religion.