Exposing the underbelly of Armstrongism in all of its wacky glory! Nothing you read here is made up. What you read here is the up to date face of Herbert W Armstrong's legacy. It's the gritty and dirty behind the scenes look at Armstrongism as you have never seen it before!
With all the new crazy self-appointed Chief Overseers, Apostles, Prophets, Pharisees, legalists, and outright liars leading various Churches of God today, it is important to hold these agents of deception accountable.
Herbert Armstrong's Tangled Web of Corrupt Leaders
You know, religion/theology and literary criticism are perhaps the only two areas of "scholarship" I can think of where the common man's opinions are so disconnected from the professional's opinions. The critical distinction being that religion makes claims about the nature of reality which are either true or else they are in error, whereas literary criticism pretends to make no such claims. This disconnect between common notions and scholarly ones certainly does not exist with any scientific field, except insofar as scientific observations impinge upon religious dogma.
One can always find those who "take apart" others on all things theological. That's why they have debates and the take down is in the eye of the needs of the beholder.
The point is that COG ministers or wanna be's do not have the background or even know the issues enough to put together a coherent story based on realities of just where we actually got the scriptures and who did or didn't.
They will weave inaccurate tales that have a specific and literal impact on the lives of people that trust they know enough about the topic to speak with authority. They do not.
Yes, indeed. "Take downs" are very much a measure of the subjective predispositions of the ones rooting for one debater or the other.
Biblical scholarship has not yet hermetically sealed every issue of debate (and never will), so there will be things about which Bart and others can be challenged or wrong (and they do this with each other regularly). Nevertheless, he and his colleagues are light years beyond any aCOG preachers about pretty much everything of biblical studies. The aCOG lot of preachers (and that's really all they are) are a collective black hole when it comes to any actual scholarship.
That was the point and it's a point on target and well-taken.
Bart Ehrman speaks of some of the contradictions in the New Testament. There are also contradictions in the OT. One example: Compare 2Sam 24:1 with 1Chron 21:1 Who caused David to number Israel?
2Sa 24:1 And again the anger of the LORD was kindled against Israel, and he moved David against them to say, Go, number Israel and Judah.
1Ch 21:1 And Satan stood up against Israel, and provoked David to number Israel.
Also, a comparison of the following illustrates another contradiction. What was the result of the count?
2Sa 24:9 And Joab gave up the sum of the number of the people unto the king: and there were in Israel eight hundred thousand valiant men that drew the sword; and the men of Judah [were] five hundred thousand men.
1Ch 21:5 And Joab gave the sum of the number of the people unto David. And all [they of] Israel were a thousand thousand and an hundred thousand men that drew sword: and Judah [was] four hundred threescore and ten thousand men that drew sword.
Some time ago, in a discussion about the Bible being inspired by God, these were pointed out to some “church” friends. The reason given for the difference was, “The difference is because it was the interpretation of the writer.”
The question was then asked, “If those words were inspired by God, then was God confused? Or: If the writer did not interpret what God inspired, are there other inspirations of God not properly interpreted?
One of those friends then asked, “Do you believe the Bible is inspired by God?”
One can always find those who "take apart" others on all things theological. That's why they have debates and the take down is in the eye of the needs of the beholder.
Well said!
Reminds me of the upcoming Feb 4 debate between Bill Nye “The Science Guy,” and Ken Ham the Young Earth Creationist “Answers in Genesis” guy, over the origins of life.
Nary a mind will be changed as a result of the debate- and those on both sides of the fence will no doubt declare victory.
I doubt that Bill Nye should expect a fair fight, though I do give him credit for going to the Creation Museum for the debate- a place where the ultra-right's "war on reality" seems to be alive and well, complete with their anti-reality cheerleaders.
10 comments:
Dennis - Perhaps you forgot the video of the debate where Greg Boyd takes atheist Robert Price apart regarding the historical Jesus.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DNlX901lYTY
...or where Greg Boyd takes your "theologian" Bart Ehrman apart regarding the infancy narratives in the Gospels
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UJiyPU7HQNE
You know, religion/theology and literary criticism are perhaps the only two areas of "scholarship" I can think of where the common man's opinions are so disconnected from the professional's opinions. The critical distinction being that religion makes claims about the nature of reality which are either true or else they are in error, whereas literary criticism pretends to make no such claims. This disconnect between common notions and scholarly ones certainly does not exist with any scientific field, except insofar as scientific observations impinge upon religious dogma.
One can always find those who "take apart" others on all things theological. That's why they have debates and the take down is in the eye of the needs of the beholder.
The point is that COG ministers or wanna be's do not have the background or even know the issues enough to put together a coherent story based on realities of just where we actually got the scriptures and who did or didn't.
They will weave inaccurate tales that have a specific and literal impact on the lives of people that trust they know enough about the topic to speak with authority. They do not.
A PhD in theology generally represents refined navel-gazing at its apogee.
Yes, indeed. "Take downs" are very much a measure of the subjective predispositions of the ones rooting for one debater or the other.
Biblical scholarship has not yet hermetically sealed every issue of debate (and never will), so there will be things about which Bart and others can be challenged or wrong (and they do this with each other regularly). Nevertheless, he and his colleagues are light years beyond any aCOG preachers about pretty much everything of biblical studies. The aCOG lot of preachers (and that's really all they are) are a collective black hole when it comes to any actual scholarship.
That was the point and it's a point on target and well-taken.
Bart Ehrman speaks of some of the contradictions in the New Testament. There are also contradictions in the OT. One example: Compare 2Sam 24:1 with 1Chron 21:1 Who caused David to number Israel?
2Sa 24:1 And again the anger of the LORD was kindled against Israel, and he moved David against them to say, Go, number Israel and Judah.
1Ch 21:1 And Satan stood up against Israel, and provoked David to number Israel.
Also, a comparison of the following illustrates another contradiction. What was the
result of the count?
2Sa 24:9 And Joab gave up the sum of the number of the people unto the king: and there were in Israel eight hundred thousand valiant men that drew the sword; and the men of Judah [were] five hundred thousand men.
1Ch 21:5 And Joab gave the sum of the number of the people unto David. And all [they of] Israel were a thousand thousand and an hundred thousand men that drew sword: and Judah [was] four hundred threescore and ten thousand men that drew sword.
Some time ago, in a discussion about the Bible being inspired by God, these were pointed out to some “church” friends. The reason given for the difference was, “The difference is because it was the interpretation of the writer.”
The question was then asked, “If those words were inspired by God, then was God confused? Or: If the writer did not interpret what God inspired, are there other inspirations of God not properly interpreted?
One of those friends then asked, “Do you believe the Bible is inspired by God?”
The response was, “No, not as we have it.”
Was there some sort of artwork or graphics originally accompanying this that somehow never made it through?
BB
Anonymous said...
A PhD in theology generally represents refined navel-gazing at its apogee.
to you...
One can always find those who "take apart" others on all things theological. That's why they have debates and the take down is in the eye of the needs of the beholder.
Well said!
Reminds me of the upcoming Feb 4 debate between Bill Nye “The Science Guy,” and Ken Ham the Young Earth Creationist “Answers in Genesis” guy, over the origins of life.
Nary a mind will be changed as a result of the debate- and those on both sides of the fence will no doubt declare victory.
I doubt that Bill Nye should expect a fair fight, though I do give him credit for going to the Creation Museum for the debate- a place where the ultra-right's "war on reality" seems to be alive and well, complete with their anti-reality cheerleaders.
Post a Comment