Religions > Bible > Atheist "Bible Scholar" Urges End Of Biblical Studies
| Topic: |
Religions > Bible |
| User: |
"Sound of Trumpet" |
| Date: |
15 Aug 2007 02:38:41 PM |
| Object: |
Atheist "Bible Scholar" Urges End Of Biblical Studies |
http://www.cityside.org.nz/node/300
Bible Scholar urges End of Biblical Studies - Hector Avalos
Avalos' new book, "The End of Bible Studies", is due out in July 2007.
Here's the blurb: "In this radical critique of his own academic
speciality, biblical scholar Hector Avalos calls for an end to
biblical studies as we know them. He outlines two main arguments for
this surprising conclusion. First, academic biblical scholarship has
clearly succeeded in showing that the ancient civilisation that
produced the Bible held beliefs about the origin, nature, and purpose
of the world and humanity that are fundamentally opposed to the views
of modern society. The Bible is thus largely irrelevant to the needs
and concerns of contemporary human beings. Second, Avalos criticises
his colleagues for applying a variety of flawed and specious
techniques aimed at maintaining the illusion that the Bible is still
relevant in today's world. In effect, he accuses his profession of
being more concerned about its self-preservation than about giving an
honest account of its own findings to the general public and faith
communities. Dividing his study into two parts, Avalos first examines
the principal sub-disciplines of biblical studies (textual criticism,
archaeology, historical criticism, literary criticism, biblical
theology, and translations) in order to show how these fields are
still influenced by religiously motivated agendas despite claims to
independence from religious premises. In the second part, he focuses
on the infrastructure that supports academic biblical studies to
maintain the value of the profession and the Bible. This
infrastructure includes academia (public and private universities and
colleges), churches, the media-publishing complex, and professional
organisations such as the Society of Biblical Literature. In a
controversial conclusion, Avalos argues that our world is best served
by leaving the Bible as a relic of an ancient civilisation instead of
the "living" document most religionist scholars believe it should be.
He urges his colleagues to concentrate on educating the broader
society to recognise the irrelevance and even violent effects of the
Bible in modern life."
This follows on from his article last year on SBL:
Hector Avalos on SBL
Avalos, PhD Harvard 1991, was a fundamentalist child evangelist. Now
he's a militant atheist, the faculty adviser to the Iowa State
University Atheist and Agnostic Society. He's executive director of a
group affiliated with the Council for Secular Humanism that seeks to
debunk religion. He was a fundamentalist Christian and now he's a
fundamentalist atheist. He preached and practiced faith healing from
age 7 to 17 and became an atheist in college.
.
|
|
| User: "arclein" |
|
| Title: Re: Atheist "Bible Scholar" Urges End Of Biblical Studies |
17 Aug 2007 01:34:06 AM |
|
|
On Aug 15, 12:38 pm, Sound of Trumpet <soundoftrum...@mailcan.com>
wrote:
http://www.cityside.org.nz/node/300
Bible Scholar urges End of Biblical Studies - Hector Avalos
Avalos' new book, "The End of Bible Studies", is due out in July 2007.
Here's the blurb: "In this radical critique of his own academic
speciality, biblical scholar Hector Avalos calls for an end to
biblical studies as we know them. He outlines two main arguments for
this surprising conclusion. First, academic biblical scholarship has
clearly succeeded in showing that the ancient civilisation that
produced the Bible held beliefs about the origin, nature, and purpose
of the world and humanity that are fundamentally opposed to the views
of modern society. The Bible is thus largely irrelevant to the needs
and concerns of contemporary human beings. Second, Avalos criticises
his colleagues for applying a variety of flawed and specious
techniques aimed at maintaining the illusion that the Bible is still
relevant in today's world. In effect, he accuses his profession of
being more concerned about its self-preservation than about giving an
honest account of its own findings to the general public and faith
communities. Dividing his study into two parts, Avalos first examines
the principal sub-disciplines of biblical studies (textual criticism,
archaeology, historical criticism, literary criticism, biblical
theology, and translations) in order to show how these fields are
still influenced by religiously motivated agendas despite claims to
independence from religious premises. In the second part, he focuses
on the infrastructure that supports academic biblical studies to
maintain the value of the profession and the Bible. This
infrastructure includes academia (public and private universities and
colleges), churches, the media-publishing complex, and professional
organisations such as the Society of Biblical Literature. In a
controversial conclusion, Avalos argues that our world is best served
by leaving the Bible as a relic of an ancient civilisation instead of
the "living" document most religionist scholars believe it should be.
He urges his colleagues to concentrate on educating the broader
society to recognise the irrelevance and even violent effects of the
Bible in modern life."
This follows on from his article last year on SBL:
Hector Avalos on SBL
Avalos, PhD Harvard 1991, was a fundamentalist child evangelist. Now
he's a militant atheist, the faculty adviser to the Iowa State
University Atheist and Agnostic Society. He's executive director of a
group affiliated with the Council for Secular Humanism that seeks to
debunk religion. He was a fundamentalist Christian and now he's a
fundamentalist atheist. He preached and practiced faith healing from
age 7 to 17 and became an atheist in college.
Regardless of individual belief systems, the critical value of
biblical studies is in preparing a student to interpret the entire
canon of western literature and art. It may be the final irony to
create a civilization with no deep grasp of its own culture.
They did this in China under Communism. The result is a rapid growth
of ad hoc religions and Christianity. A more appropriate course of
action is to engage in these studies not as a quote book to support a
system of belief, but as a source book to western literature, culture
and ethical system.
There is a reason that we no longer practice infanticide, or put
criminals into the bear pit.
arclein
http://globalwarming-arclein.blogspot.com
.
|
|
|
| User: "veritas" |
|
| Title: Re: Atheist "Bible Scholar" Urges End Of Biblical Studies |
18 Aug 2007 02:52:22 PM |
|
|
On Aug 17, 1:34 am, arclein <arcl...@gmail.com> wrote:
On Aug 15, 12:38 pm, Sound of Trumpet <soundoftrum...@mailcan.com>
wrote:
http://www.cityside.org.nz/node/300
Bible Scholar urges End of Biblical Studies - Hector Avalos
Avalos' new book, "The End of Bible Studies", is due out in July 2007.
Here's the blurb: "In this radical critique of his own academic
speciality, biblical scholar Hector Avalos calls for an end to
biblical studies as we know them. He outlines two main arguments for
this surprising conclusion. First, academic biblical scholarship has
clearly succeeded in showing that the ancient civilisation that
produced the Bible held beliefs about the origin, nature, and purpose
of the world and humanity that are fundamentally opposed to the views
of modern society. The Bible is thus largely irrelevant to the needs
and concerns of contemporary human beings. Second, Avalos criticises
his colleagues for applying a variety of flawed and specious
techniques aimed at maintaining the illusion that the Bible is still
relevant in today's world. In effect, he accuses his profession of
being more concerned about its self-preservation than about giving an
honest account of its own findings to the general public and faith
communities. Dividing his study into two parts, Avalos first examines
the principal sub-disciplines of biblical studies (textual criticism,
archaeology, historical criticism, literary criticism, biblical
theology, and translations) in order to show how these fields are
still influenced by religiously motivated agendas despite claims to
independence from religious premises. In the second part, he focuses
on the infrastructure that supports academic biblical studies to
maintain the value of the profession and the Bible. This
infrastructure includes academia (public and private universities and
colleges), churches, the media-publishing complex, and professional
organisations such as the Society of Biblical Literature. In a
controversial conclusion, Avalos argues that our world is best served
by leaving the Bible as a relic of an ancient civilisation instead of
the "living" document most religionist scholars believe it should be.
He urges his colleagues to concentrate on educating the broader
society to recognise the irrelevance and even violent effects of the
Bible in modern life."
This follows on from his article last year on SBL:
Hector Avalos on SBL
Avalos, PhD Harvard 1991, was a fundamentalist child evangelist. Now
he's a militant atheist, the faculty adviser to the Iowa State
University Atheist and Agnostic Society. He's executive director of a
group affiliated with the Council for Secular Humanism that seeks to
debunk religion. He was a fundamentalist Christian and now he's a
fundamentalist atheist. He preached and practiced faith healing from
age 7 to 17 and became an atheist in college.
Regardless of individual belief systems, the critical value of
biblical studies is in preparing a student to interpret the entire
canon of western literature and art. It may be the final irony to
create a civilization with no deep grasp of its own culture.
They did this in China under Communism. The result is a rapid growth
of ad hoc religions and Christianity. A more appropriate course of
action is to engage in these studies not as a quote book to support a
system of belief, but as a source book to western literature, culture
and ethical system.
There is a reason that we no longer practice infanticide, or put
criminals into the bear pit.
arcleinhttp://globalwarming-arclein.blogspot.com- Hide quoted text -
- Show quoted text -
We still practice infanticde, it's called abortion. And who says we
no longer put criminals into the bear pit? What part of the U.S. do
you live in anyway? Ken
.
|
|
|
| User: "Budikka666" |
|
| Title: Re: Atheist "Bible Scholar" Urges End Of Biblical Studies |
19 Aug 2007 05:36:41 PM |
|
|
On Aug 18, 2:52 pm, veritas <khogan...@yahoo.com> wrote:
On Aug 17, 1:34 am, arclein <arcl...@gmail.com> wrote:
On Aug 15, 12:38 pm, Sound of Trumpet <soundoftrum...@mailcan.com>
wrote:
http://www.cityside.org.nz/node/300
Bible Scholar urges End of Biblical Studies - Hector Avalos
Avalos' new book, "The End of Bible Studies", is due out in July 2007.
Here's the blurb: "In this radical critique of his own academic
speciality, biblical scholar Hector Avalos calls for an end to
biblical studies as we know them. He outlines two main arguments for
this surprising conclusion. First, academic biblical scholarship has
clearly succeeded in showing that the ancient civilisation that
produced the Bible held beliefs about the origin, nature, and purpose
of the world and humanity that are fundamentally opposed to the views
of modern society. The Bible is thus largely irrelevant to the needs
and concerns of contemporary human beings. Second, Avalos criticises
his colleagues for applying a variety of flawed and specious
techniques aimed at maintaining the illusion that the Bible is still
relevant in today's world. In effect, he accuses his profession of
being more concerned about its self-preservation than about giving an
honest account of its own findings to the general public and faith
communities. Dividing his study into two parts, Avalos first examines
the principal sub-disciplines of biblical studies (textual criticism,
archaeology, historical criticism, literary criticism, biblical
theology, and translations) in order to show how these fields are
still influenced by religiously motivated agendas despite claims to
independence from religious premises. In the second part, he focuses
on the infrastructure that supports academic biblical studies to
maintain the value of the profession and the Bible. This
infrastructure includes academia (public and private universities and
colleges), churches, the media-publishing complex, and professional
organisations such as the Society of Biblical Literature. In a
controversial conclusion, Avalos argues that our world is best served
by leaving the Bible as a relic of an ancient civilisation instead of
the "living" document most religionist scholars believe it should be.
He urges his colleagues to concentrate on educating the broader
society to recognise the irrelevance and even violent effects of the
Bible in modern life."
This follows on from his article last year on SBL:
Hector Avalos on SBL
Avalos, PhD Harvard 1991, was a fundamentalist child evangelist. Now
he's a militant atheist, the faculty adviser to the Iowa State
University Atheist and Agnostic Society. He's executive director of a
group affiliated with the Council for Secular Humanism that seeks to
debunk religion. He was a fundamentalist Christian and now he's a
fundamentalist atheist. He preached and practiced faith healing from
age 7 to 17 and became an atheist in college.
Regardless of individual belief systems, the critical value of
biblical studies is in preparing a student to interpret the entire
canon of western literature and art. It may be the final irony to
create a civilization with no deep grasp of its own culture.
They did this in China under Communism. The result is a rapid growth
of ad hoc religions and Christianity. A more appropriate course of
action is to engage in these studies not as a quote book to support a
system of belief, but as a source book to western literature, culture
and ethical system.
There is a reason that we no longer practice infanticide, or put
criminals into the bear pit.
arcleinhttp://globalwarming-arclein.blogspot.com-Hide quoted text -
- Show quoted text -
We still practice infanticde, it's called abortion. And who says we
no longer put criminals into the bear pit? What part of the U.S. do
you live in anyway? Ken
No, infanticide would be murder. No one aborts an infant. There are
*embryos* which are terminated, however. But that's not infanticide.
The only bare pit is the basis for running society as a theocracy.
Budikka
.
|
|
|
| User: "veritas" |
|
| Title: Re: Atheist "Bible Scholar" Urges End Of Biblical Studies |
19 Aug 2007 09:59:45 PM |
|
|
On Aug 19, 5:36 pm, Budikka666 <budik...@netscape.net> wrote:
On Aug 18, 2:52 pm, veritas <khogan...@yahoo.com> wrote:
On Aug 17, 1:34 am, arclein <arcl...@gmail.com> wrote:
On Aug 15, 12:38 pm, Sound of Trumpet <soundoftrum...@mailcan.com>
wrote:
http://www.cityside.org.nz/node/300
Bible Scholar urges End of Biblical Studies - Hector Avalos
Avalos' new book, "The End of Bible Studies", is due out in July 2007.
Here's the blurb: "In this radical critique of his own academic
speciality, biblical scholar Hector Avalos calls for an end to
biblical studies as we know them. He outlines two main arguments for
this surprising conclusion. First, academic biblical scholarship has
clearly succeeded in showing that the ancient civilisation that
produced the Bible held beliefs about the origin, nature, and purpose
of the world and humanity that are fundamentally opposed to the views
of modern society. The Bible is thus largely irrelevant to the needs
and concerns of contemporary human beings. Second, Avalos criticises
his colleagues for applying a variety of flawed and specious
techniques aimed at maintaining the illusion that the Bible is still
relevant in today's world. In effect, he accuses his profession of
being more concerned about its self-preservation than about giving an
honest account of its own findings to the general public and faith
communities. Dividing his study into two parts, Avalos first examines
the principal sub-disciplines of biblical studies (textual criticism,
archaeology, historical criticism, literary criticism, biblical
theology, and translations) in order to show how these fields are
still influenced by religiously motivated agendas despite claims to
independence from religious premises. In the second part, he focuses
on the infrastructure that supports academic biblical studies to
maintain the value of the profession and the Bible. This
infrastructure includes academia (public and private universities and
colleges), churches, the media-publishing complex, and professional
organisations such as the Society of Biblical Literature. In a
controversial conclusion, Avalos argues that our world is best served
by leaving the Bible as a relic of an ancient civilisation instead of
the "living" document most religionist scholars believe it should be.
He urges his colleagues to concentrate on educating the broader
society to recognise the irrelevance and even violent effects of the
Bible in modern life."
This follows on from his article last year on SBL:
Hector Avalos on SBL
Avalos, PhD Harvard 1991, was a fundamentalist child evangelist. Now
he's a militant atheist, the faculty adviser to the Iowa State
University Atheist and Agnostic Society. He's executive director of a
group affiliated with the Council for Secular Humanism that seeks to
debunk religion. He was a fundamentalist Christian and now he's a
fundamentalist atheist. He preached and practiced faith healing from
age 7 to 17 and became an atheist in college.
Regardless of individual belief systems, the critical value of
biblical studies is in preparing a student to interpret the entire
canon of western literature and art. It may be the final irony to
create a civilization with no deep grasp of its own culture.
They did this in China under Communism. The result is a rapid growth
of ad hoc religions and Christianity. A more appropriate course of
action is to engage in these studies not as a quote book to support a
system of belief, but as a source book to western literature, culture
and ethical system.
There is a reason that we no longer practice infanticide, or put
criminals into the bear pit.
arcleinhttp://globalwarming-arclein.blogspot.com-Hidequoted text -
- Show quoted text -
We still practice infanticde, it's called abortion. And who says we
no longer put criminals into the bear pit? What part of the U.S. do
you live in anyway? Ken
No, infanticide would be murder. No one aborts an infant. There are
*embryos* which are terminated, however. But that's not infanticide.
The only bare pit is the basis for running society as a theocracy.
Budikka- Hide quoted text -
- Show quoted text -
The names are changed to protect the guilty or innocent, but the
result is the same. No baby to raise. Shoot someone, or blow them up
in their car, they still are not here anymore. His rape statement is
invalid, my statement is a logical statement, as I showed below. Ken
.
|
|
|
| User: "veritas" |
|
| Title: Re: Atheist "Bible Scholar" Urges End Of Biblical Studies |
19 Aug 2007 10:07:31 PM |
|
|
On Aug 19, 9:59 pm, veritas <khogan...@yahoo.com> wrote:
On Aug 19, 5:36 pm, Budikka666 <budik...@netscape.net> wrote:
On Aug 18, 2:52 pm, veritas <khogan...@yahoo.com> wrote:
On Aug 17, 1:34 am, arclein <arcl...@gmail.com> wrote:
On Aug 15, 12:38 pm, Sound of Trumpet <soundoftrum...@mailcan.com>
wrote:
http://www.cityside.org.nz/node/300
Bible Scholar urges End of Biblical Studies - Hector Avalos
Avalos' new book, "The End of Bible Studies", is due out in July 2007.
Here's the blurb: "In this radical critique of his own academic
speciality, biblical scholar Hector Avalos calls for an end to
biblical studies as we know them. He outlines two main arguments for
this surprising conclusion. First, academic biblical scholarship has
clearly succeeded in showing that the ancient civilisation that
produced the Bible held beliefs about the origin, nature, and purpose
of the world and humanity that are fundamentally opposed to the views
of modern society. The Bible is thus largely irrelevant to the needs
and concerns of contemporary human beings. Second, Avalos criticises
his colleagues for applying a variety of flawed and specious
techniques aimed at maintaining the illusion that the Bible is still
relevant in today's world. In effect, he accuses his profession of
being more concerned about its self-preservation than about giving an
honest account of its own findings to the general public and faith
communities. Dividing his study into two parts, Avalos first examines
the principal sub-disciplines of biblical studies (textual criticism,
archaeology, historical criticism, literary criticism, biblical
theology, and translations) in order to show how these fields are
still influenced by religiously motivated agendas despite claims to
independence from religious premises. In the second part, he focuses
on the infrastructure that supports academic biblical studies to
maintain the value of the profession and the Bible. This
infrastructure includes academia (public and private universities and
colleges), churches, the media-publishing complex, and professional
organisations such as the Society of Biblical Literature. In a
controversial conclusion, Avalos argues that our world is best served
by leaving the Bible as a relic of an ancient civilisation instead of
the "living" document most religionist scholars believe it should be.
He urges his colleagues to concentrate on educating the broader
society to recognise the irrelevance and even violent effects of the
Bible in modern life."
This follows on from his article last year on SBL:
Hector Avalos on SBL
Avalos, PhD Harvard 1991, was a fundamentalist child evangelist. Now
he's a militant atheist, the faculty adviser to the Iowa State
University Atheist and Agnostic Society. He's executive director of a
group affiliated with the Council for Secular Humanism that seeks to
debunk religion. He was a fundamentalist Christian and now he's a
fundamentalist atheist. He preached and practiced faith healing from
age 7 to 17 and became an atheist in college.
Regardless of individual belief systems, the critical value of
biblical studies is in preparing a student to interpret the entire
canon of western literature and art. It may be the final irony to
create a civilization with no deep grasp of its own culture.
They did this in China under Communism. The result is a rapid growth
of ad hoc religions and Christianity. A more appropriate course of
action is to engage in these studies not as a quote book to support a
system of belief, but as a source book to western literature, culture
and ethical system.
There is a reason that we no longer practice infanticide, or put
criminals into the bear pit.
arcleinhttp://globalwarming-arclein.blogspot.com-Hidequotedtext -
- Show quoted text -
We still practice infanticde, it's called abortion. And who says we
no longer put criminals into the bear pit? What part of the U.S. do
you live in anyway? Ken
No, infanticide would be murder. No one aborts an infant. There are
*embryos* which are terminated, however. But that's not infanticide.
The only bare pit is the basis for running society as a theocracy.
Budikka- Hide quoted text -
- Show quoted text -
The names are changed to protect the guilty or innocent, but the
result is the same. No baby to raise. Shoot someone, or blow them up
in their car, they still are not here anymore. His rape statement is
invalid, my statement is a logical statement, as I showed below. Ken- Hide quoted text -
- Show quoted text -
Or I guess above. Somewhere on here. Ken
.
|
|
|
| User: "brique" |
|
| Title: Re: Atheist "Bible Scholar" Urges End Of Biblical Studies |
19 Aug 2007 11:34:58 PM |
|
|
veritas <khogantwo@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:1187579251.110735.95440@x35g2000prf.googlegroups.com...
On Aug 19, 9:59 pm, veritas <khogan...@yahoo.com> wrote:
On Aug 19, 5:36 pm, Budikka666 <budik...@netscape.net> wrote:
On Aug 18, 2:52 pm, veritas <khogan...@yahoo.com> wrote:
On Aug 17, 1:34 am, arclein <arcl...@gmail.com> wrote:
On Aug 15, 12:38 pm, Sound of Trumpet <soundoftrum...@mailcan.com>
wrote:
http://www.cityside.org.nz/node/300
Bible Scholar urges End of Biblical Studies - Hector Avalos
Avalos' new book, "The End of Bible Studies", is due out in July
2007.
Here's the blurb: "In this radical critique of his own academic
speciality, biblical scholar Hector Avalos calls for an end to
biblical studies as we know them. He outlines two main arguments
for
this surprising conclusion. First, academic biblical scholarship
has
clearly succeeded in showing that the ancient civilisation that
produced the Bible held beliefs about the origin, nature, and
purpose
of the world and humanity that are fundamentally opposed to the
views
of modern society. The Bible is thus largely irrelevant to the
needs
and concerns of contemporary human beings. Second, Avalos
criticises
his colleagues for applying a variety of flawed and specious
techniques aimed at maintaining the illusion that the Bible is
still
relevant in today's world. In effect, he accuses his profession
of
being more concerned about its self-preservation than about
giving an
honest account of its own findings to the general public and
faith
communities. Dividing his study into two parts, Avalos first
examines
the principal sub-disciplines of biblical studies (textual
criticism,
archaeology, historical criticism, literary criticism, biblical
theology, and translations) in order to show how these fields
are
still influenced by religiously motivated agendas despite claims
to
independence from religious premises. In the second part, he
focuses
on the infrastructure that supports academic biblical studies to
maintain the value of the profession and the Bible. This
infrastructure includes academia (public and private
universities and
colleges), churches, the media-publishing complex, and
professional
organisations such as the Society of Biblical Literature. In a
controversial conclusion, Avalos argues that our world is best
served
by leaving the Bible as a relic of an ancient civilisation
instead of
the "living" document most religionist scholars believe it
should be.
He urges his colleagues to concentrate on educating the broader
society to recognise the irrelevance and even violent effects of
the
Bible in modern life."
This follows on from his article last year on SBL:
Hector Avalos on SBL
Avalos, PhD Harvard 1991, was a fundamentalist child evangelist.
Now
he's a militant atheist, the faculty adviser to the Iowa State
University Atheist and Agnostic Society. He's executive director
of a
group affiliated with the Council for Secular Humanism that
seeks to
debunk religion. He was a fundamentalist Christian and now he's
a
fundamentalist atheist. He preached and practiced faith healing
from
age 7 to 17 and became an atheist in college.
Regardless of individual belief systems, the critical value of
biblical studies is in preparing a student to interpret the entire
canon of western literature and art. It may be the final irony to
create a civilization with no deep grasp of its own culture.
They did this in China under Communism. The result is a rapid
growth
of ad hoc religions and Christianity. A more appropriate course
of
action is to engage in these studies not as a quote book to
support a
system of belief, but as a source book to western literature,
culture
and ethical system.
There is a reason that we no longer practice infanticide, or put
criminals into the bear pit.
arcleinhttp://globalwarming-arclein.blogspot.com-Hidequotedtext -
- Show quoted text -
We still practice infanticde, it's called abortion. And who says we
no longer put criminals into the bear pit? What part of the U.S. do
you live in anyway? Ken
No, infanticide would be murder. No one aborts an infant. There are
*embryos* which are terminated, however. But that's not infanticide.
The only bare pit is the basis for running society as a theocracy.
Budikka- Hide quoted text -
- Show quoted text -
The names are changed to protect the guilty or innocent, but the
result is the same. No baby to raise. Shoot someone, or blow them up
in their car, they still are not here anymore. His rape statement is
invalid, my statement is a logical statement, as I showed below. Ken-
Hide quoted text -
- Show quoted text -
Or I guess above. Somewhere on here. Ken
So, baby dying from some illness is 'infanticide'...... right..... is that
the same logic?
.
|
|
|
| User: "veritas" |
|
| Title: Re: Atheist "Bible Scholar" Urges End Of Biblical Studies |
20 Aug 2007 12:06:53 PM |
|
|
On Aug 19, 11:34 pm, "brique" <briquen...@freeuk.c0m> wrote:
veritas <khogan...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:1187579251.110735.95440@x35g2000prf.googlegroups.com...
On Aug 19, 9:59 pm, veritas <khogan...@yahoo.com> wrote:
On Aug 19, 5:36 pm, Budikka666 <budik...@netscape.net> wrote:
On Aug 18, 2:52 pm, veritas <khogan...@yahoo.com> wrote:
On Aug 17, 1:34 am, arclein <arcl...@gmail.com> wrote:
On Aug 15, 12:38 pm, Sound of Trumpet <soundoftrum...@mailcan.com>
wrote:
http://www.cityside.org.nz/node/300
Bible Scholar urges End of Biblical Studies - Hector Avalos
Avalos' new book, "The End of Bible Studies", is due out in July
2007.
Here's the blurb: "In this radical critique of his own academic
speciality, biblical scholar Hector Avalos calls for an end to
biblical studies as we know them. He outlines two main arguments
for
this surprising conclusion. First, academic biblical scholarship
has
clearly succeeded in showing that the ancient civilisation that
produced the Bible held beliefs about the origin, nature, and
purpose
of the world and humanity that are fundamentally opposed to the
views
of modern society. The Bible is thus largely irrelevant to the
needs
and concerns of contemporary human beings. Second, Avalos
criticises
his colleagues for applying a variety of flawed and specious
techniques aimed at maintaining the illusion that the Bible is
still
relevant in today's world. In effect, he accuses his profession
of
being more concerned about its self-preservation than about
giving an
honest account of its own findings to the general public and
faith
communities. Dividing his study into two parts, Avalos first
examines
the principal sub-disciplines of biblical studies (textual
criticism,
archaeology, historical criticism, literary criticism, biblical
theology, and translations) in order to show how these fields
are
still influenced by religiously motivated agendas despite claims
to
independence from religious premises. In the second part, he
focuses
on the infrastructure that supports academic biblical studies to
maintain the value of the profession and the Bible. This
infrastructure includes academia (public and private
universities and
colleges), churches, the media-publishing complex, and
professional
organisations such as the Society of Biblical Literature. In a
controversial conclusion, Avalos argues that our world is best
served
by leaving the Bible as a relic of an ancient civilisation
instead of
the "living" document most religionist scholars believe it
should be.
He urges his colleagues to concentrate on educating the broader
society to recognise the irrelevance and even violent effects of
the
Bible in modern life."
This follows on from his article last year on SBL:
Hector Avalos on SBL
Avalos, PhD Harvard 1991, was a fundamentalist child evangelist.
Now
he's a militant atheist, the faculty adviser to the Iowa State
University Atheist and Agnostic Society. He's executive director
of a
group affiliated with the Council for Secular Humanism that
seeks to
debunk religion. He was a fundamentalist Christian and now he's
a
fundamentalist atheist. He preached and practiced faith healing
from
age 7 to 17 and became an atheist in college.
Regardless of individual belief systems, the critical value of
biblical studies is in preparing a student to interpret the entire
canon of western literature and art. It may be the final irony to
create a civilization with no deep grasp of its own culture.
They did this in China under Communism. The result is a rapid
growth
of ad hoc religions and Christianity. A more appropriate course
of
action is to engage in these studies not as a quote book to
support a
system of belief, but as a source book to western literature,
culture
and ethical system.
There is a reason that we no longer practice infanticide, or put
criminals into the bear pit.
arcleinhttp://globalwarming-arclein.blogspot.com-Hidequotedtext-
- Show quoted text -
We still practice infanticde, it's called abortion. And who says we
no longer put criminals into the bear pit? What part of the U.S. do
you live in anyway? Ken
No, infanticide would be murder. No one aborts an infant. There are
*embryos* which are terminated, however. But that's not infanticide.
The only bare pit is the basis for running society as a theocracy.
Budikka- Hide quoted text -
- Show quoted text -
The names are changed to protect the guilty or innocent, but the
result is the same. No baby to raise. Shoot someone, or blow them up
in their car, they still are not here anymore. His rape statement is
invalid, my statement is a logical statement, as I showed below. Ken-
Hide quoted text -
- Show quoted text -
Or I guess above. Somewhere on here. Ken
So, baby dying from some illness is 'infanticide'...... right..... is that
the same logic?
- Hide quoted text -
- Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -
- Show quoted text -
Only if you hold a pillow over it's face so that it can't breath. But
then the cause of death is not illness. People have been sentenced to
jail in this country for letting babies die because their religion
doesn't allow them to go to doctors. So, if you allow a baby to die
like that, it's 'infanticide'. Ken
.
|
|
|
| User: "Budikka666" |
|
| Title: Re: Atheist "Bible Scholar" Urges End Of Biblical Studies |
20 Aug 2007 06:34:40 PM |
|
|
On Aug 20, 12:06 pm, veritas <khogan...@yahoo.com> wrote:
On Aug 19, 11:34 pm, "brique" <briquen...@freeuk.c0m> wrote:
veritas <khogan...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:1187579251.110735.95440@x35g2000prf.googlegroups.com...
On Aug 19, 9:59 pm, veritas <khogan...@yahoo.com> wrote:
On Aug 19, 5:36 pm, Budikka666 <budik...@netscape.net> wrote:
On Aug 18, 2:52 pm, veritas <khogan...@yahoo.com> wrote:
On Aug 17, 1:34 am, arclein <arcl...@gmail.com> wrote:
On Aug 15, 12:38 pm, Sound of Trumpet <soundoftrum...@mailcan.com>
wrote:
http://www.cityside.org.nz/node/300
Bible Scholar urges End of Biblical Studies - Hector Avalos
Avalos' new book, "The End of Bible Studies", is due out in July
2007.
Here's the blurb: "In this radical critique of his own academic
speciality, biblical scholar Hector Avalos calls for an end to
biblical studies as we know them. He outlines two main arguments
for
this surprising conclusion. First, academic biblical scholarship
has
clearly succeeded in showing that the ancient civilisation that
produced the Bible held beliefs about the origin, nature, and
purpose
of the world and humanity that are fundamentally opposed to the
views
of modern society. The Bible is thus largely irrelevant to the
needs
and concerns of contemporary human beings. Second, Avalos
criticises
his colleagues for applying a variety of flawed and specious
techniques aimed at maintaining the illusion that the Bible is
still
relevant in today's world. In effect, he accuses his profession
of
being more concerned about its self-preservation than about
giving an
honest account of its own findings to the general public and
faith
communities. Dividing his study into two parts, Avalos first
examines
the principal sub-disciplines of biblical studies (textual
criticism,
archaeology, historical criticism, literary criticism, biblical
theology, and translations) in order to show how these fields
are
still influenced by religiously motivated agendas despite claims
to
independence from religious premises. In the second part, he
focuses
on the infrastructure that supports academic biblical studies to
maintain the value of the profession and the Bible. This
infrastructure includes academia (public and private
universities and
colleges), churches, the media-publishing complex, and
professional
organisations such as the Society of Biblical Literature. In a
controversial conclusion, Avalos argues that our world is best
served
by leaving the Bible as a relic of an ancient civilisation
instead of
the "living" document most religionist scholars believe it
should be.
He urges his colleagues to concentrate on educating the broader
society to recognise the irrelevance and even violent effects of
the
Bible in modern life."
This follows on from his article last year on SBL:
Hector Avalos on SBL
Avalos, PhD Harvard 1991, was a fundamentalist child evangelist.
Now
he's a militant atheist, the faculty adviser to the Iowa State
University Atheist and Agnostic Society. He's executive director
of a
group affiliated with the Council for Secular Humanism that
seeks to
debunk religion. He was a fundamentalist Christian and now he's
a
fundamentalist atheist. He preached and practiced faith healing
from
age 7 to 17 and became an atheist in college.
Regardless of individual belief systems, the critical value of
biblical studies is in preparing a student to interpret the entire
canon of western literature and art. It may be the final irony to
create a civilization with no deep grasp of its own culture.
They did this in China under Communism. The result is a rapid
growth
of ad hoc religions and Christianity. A more appropriate course
of
action is to engage in these studies not as a quote book to
support a
system of belief, but as a source book to western literature,
culture
and ethical system.
There is a reason that we no longer practice infanticide, or put
criminals into the bear pit.
arcleinhttp://globalwarming-arclein.blogspot.com-Hidequotedtext-
- Show quoted text -
We still practice infanticde, it's called abortion. And who says we
no longer put criminals into the bear pit? What part of the U.S. do
you live in anyway? Ken
No, infanticide would be murder. No one aborts an infant. There are
*embryos* which are terminated, however. But that's not infanticide.
The only bare pit is the basis for running society as a theocracy.
Budikka- Hide quoted text -
- Show quoted text -
The names are changed to protect the guilty or innocent, but the
result is the same. No baby to raise. Shoot someone, or blow them up
in their car, they still are not here anymore. His rape statement is
invalid, my statement is a logical statement, as I showed below. Ken-
Hide quoted text -
- Show quoted text -
Or I guess above. Somewhere on here. Ken
So, baby dying from some illness is 'infanticide'...... right..... is that
the same logic?
- Hide quoted text -
- Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -
- Show quoted text -
Only if you hold a pillow over it's face so that it can't breath. But
then the cause of death is not illness. People have been sentenced to
jail in this country for letting babies die because their religion
doesn't allow them to go to doctors. So, if you allow a baby to die
like that, it's 'infanticide'. Ken
Only if it's a child between birth and 18 years of age (or whatever
the age of majority is). Again, you're hell-bent on persisting in
using terms as loosley as you can on a topic that is highly
controversial.
I wonder why that is?
Budikka
.
|
|
|
| User: "veritas" |
|
| Title: Re: Atheist "Bible Scholar" Urges End Of Biblical Studies |
20 Aug 2007 11:48:54 PM |
|
|
On Aug 20, 6:34 pm, Budikka666 <budik...@netscape.net> wrote:
On Aug 20, 12:06 pm, veritas <khogan...@yahoo.com> wrote:
On Aug 19, 11:34 pm, "brique" <briquen...@freeuk.c0m> wrote:
veritas <khogan...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:1187579251.110735.95440@x35g2000prf.googlegroups.com...
On Aug 19, 9:59 pm, veritas <khogan...@yahoo.com> wrote:
On Aug 19, 5:36 pm, Budikka666 <budik...@netscape.net> wrote:
On Aug 18, 2:52 pm, veritas <khogan...@yahoo.com> wrote:
On Aug 17, 1:34 am, arclein <arcl...@gmail.com> wrote:
On Aug 15, 12:38 pm, Sound of Trumpet <soundoftrum...@mailcan.com>
wrote:
http://www.cityside.org.nz/node/300
Bible Scholar urges End of Biblical Studies - Hector Avalos
Avalos' new book, "The End of Bible Studies", is due out in July
2007.
Here's the blurb: "In this radical critique of his own academic
speciality, biblical scholar Hector Avalos calls for an end to
biblical studies as we know them. He outlines two main arguments
for
this surprising conclusion. First, academic biblical scholarship
has
clearly succeeded in showing that the ancient civilisation that
produced the Bible held beliefs about the origin, nature, and
purpose
of the world and humanity that are fundamentally opposed to the
views
of modern society. The Bible is thus largely irrelevant to the
needs
and concerns of contemporary human beings. Second, Avalos
criticises
his colleagues for applying a variety of flawed and specious
techniques aimed at maintaining the illusion that the Bible is
still
relevant in today's world. In effect, he accuses his profession
of
being more concerned about its self-preservation than about
giving an
honest account of its own findings to the general public and
faith
communities. Dividing his study into two parts, Avalos first
examines
the principal sub-disciplines of biblical studies (textual
criticism,
archaeology, historical criticism, literary criticism, biblical
theology, and translations) in order to show how these fields
are
still influenced by religiously motivated agendas despite claims
to
independence from religious premises. In the second part, he
focuses
on the infrastructure that supports academic biblical studies to
maintain the value of the profession and the Bible. This
infrastructure includes academia (public and private
universities and
colleges), churches, the media-publishing complex, and
professional
organisations such as the Society of Biblical Literature. In a
controversial conclusion, Avalos argues that our world is best
served
by leaving the Bible as a relic of an ancient civilisation
instead of
the "living" document most religionist scholars believe it
should be.
He urges his colleagues to concentrate on educating the broader
society to recognise the irrelevance and even violent effects of
the
Bible in modern life."
This follows on from his article last year on SBL:
Hector Avalos on SBL
Avalos, PhD Harvard 1991, was a fundamentalist child evangelist.
Now
he's a militant atheist, the faculty adviser to the Iowa State
University Atheist and Agnostic Society. He's executive director
of a
group affiliated with the Council for Secular Humanism that
seeks to
debunk religion. He was a fundamentalist Christian and now he's
a
fundamentalist atheist. He preached and practiced faith healing
from
age 7 to 17 and became an atheist in college.
Regardless of individual belief systems, the critical value of
biblical studies is in preparing a student to interpret the entire
canon of western literature and art. It may be the final irony to
create a civilization with no deep grasp of its own culture.
They did this in China under Communism. The result is a rapid
growth
of ad hoc religions and Christianity. A more appropriate course
of
action is to engage in these studies not as a quote book to
support a
system of belief, but as a source book to western literature,
culture
and ethical system.
There is a reason that we no longer practice infanticide, or put
criminals into the bear pit.
arcleinhttp://globalwarming-arclein.blogspot.com-Hidequotedtext-
- Show quoted text -
We still practice infanticde, it's called abortion. And who says we
no longer put criminals into the bear pit? What part of the U.S. do
you live in anyway? Ken
No, infanticide would be murder. No one aborts an infant. There are
*embryos* which are terminated, however. But that's not infanticide.
The only bare pit is the basis for running society as a theocracy.
Budikka- Hide quoted text -
- Show quoted text -
The names are changed to protect the guilty or innocent, but the
result is the same. No baby to raise. Shoot someone, or blow them up
in their car, they still are not here anymore. His rape statement is
invalid, my statement is a logical statement, as I showed below. Ken-
Hide quoted text -
- Show quoted text -
Or I guess above. Somewhere on here. Ken
So, baby dying from some illness is 'infanticide'...... right..... is that
the same logic?
- Hide quoted text -
- Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -
- Show quoted text -
Only if you hold a pillow over it's face so that it can't breath. But
then the cause of death is not illness. People have been sentenced to
jail in this country for letting babies die because their religion
doesn't allow them to go to doctors. So, if you allow a baby to die
like that, it's 'infanticide'. Ken
Only if it's a child between birth and 18 years of age (or whatever
the age of majority is). Again, you're hell-bent on persisting in
using terms as loosley as you can on a topic that is highly
controversial.
I wonder why that is?
Budikka- Hide quoted text -
- Show quoted text -
I don't care if it's a baby or a fetus. The both actions are taken
for the same reason. To be rid of a child. What does that have to do
with forcing someone to have intercourse or have consenual sex with a
person? It is not even in the same ballpark. What is so hard to
understand about that? Ken
.
|
|
|
| User: "Budikka666" |
|
| Title: Re: Atheist "Bible Scholar" Urges End Of Biblical Studies |
21 Aug 2007 05:02:20 AM |
|
|
On Aug 20, 11:48 pm, veritas <khogan...@yahoo.com> wrote:
On Aug 20, 6:34 pm, Budikka666 <budik...@netscape.net> wrote:
On Aug 20, 12:06 pm, veritas <khogan...@yahoo.com> wrote:
On Aug 19, 11:34 pm, "brique" <briquen...@freeuk.c0m> wrote:
veritas <khogan...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:1187579251.110735.95440@x35g2000prf.googlegroups.com...
On Aug 19, 9:59 pm, veritas <khogan...@yahoo.com> wrote:
On Aug 19, 5:36 pm, Budikka666 <budik...@netscape.net> wrote:
On Aug 18, 2:52 pm, veritas <khogan...@yahoo.com> wrote:
On Aug 17, 1:34 am, arclein <arcl...@gmail.com> wrote:
On Aug 15, 12:38 pm, Sound of Trumpet <soundoftrum...@mailcan.com>
wrote:
http://www.cityside.org.nz/node/300
Bible Scholar urges End of Biblical Studies - Hector Avalos
Avalos' new book, "The End of Bible Studies", is due out in July
2007.
Here's the blurb: "In this radical critique of his own academic
speciality, biblical scholar Hector Avalos calls for an end to
biblical studies as we know them. He outlines two main arguments
for
this surprising conclusion. First, academic biblical scholarship
has
clearly succeeded in showing that the ancient civilisation that
produced the Bible held beliefs about the origin, nature, and
purpose
of the world and humanity that are fundamentally opposed to the
views
of modern society. The Bible is thus largely irrelevant to the
needs
and concerns of contemporary human beings. Second, Avalos
criticises
his colleagues for applying a variety of flawed and specious
techniques aimed at maintaining the illusion that the Bible is
still
relevant in today's world. In effect, he accuses his profession
of
being more concerned about its self-preservation than about
giving an
honest account of its own findings to the general public and
faith
communities. Dividing his study into two parts, Avalos first
examines
the principal sub-disciplines of biblical studies (textual
criticism,
archaeology, historical criticism, literary criticism, biblical
theology, and translations) in order to show how these fields
are
still influenced by religiously motivated agendas despite claims
to
independence from religious premises. In the second part, he
focuses
on the infrastructure that supports academic biblical studies to
maintain the value of the profession and the Bible. This
infrastructure includes academia (public and private
universities and
colleges), churches, the media-publishing complex, and
professional
organisations such as the Society of Biblical Literature. In a
controversial conclusion, Avalos argues that our world is best
served
by leaving the Bible as a relic of an ancient civilisation
instead of
the "living" document most religionist scholars believe it
should be.
He urges his colleagues to concentrate on educating the broader
society to recognise the irrelevance and even violent effects of
the
Bible in modern life."
This follows on from his article last year on SBL:
Hector Avalos on SBL
Avalos, PhD Harvard 1991, was a fundamentalist child evangelist.
Now
he's a militant atheist, the faculty adviser to the Iowa State
University Atheist and Agnostic Society. He's executive director
of a
group affiliated with the Council for Secular Humanism that
seeks to
debunk religion. He was a fundamentalist Christian and now he's
a
fundamentalist atheist. He preached and practiced faith healing
from
age 7 to 17 and became an atheist in college.
Regardless of individual belief systems, the critical value of
biblical studies is in preparing a student to interpret the entire
canon of western literature and art. It may be the final irony to
create a civilization with no deep grasp of its own culture.
They did this in China under Communism. The result is a rapid
growth
of ad hoc religions and Christianity. A more appropriate course
of
action is to engage in these studies not as a quote book to
support a
system of belief, but as a source book to western literature,
culture
and ethical system.
There is a reason that we no longer practice infanticide, or put
criminals into the bear pit.
arcleinhttp://globalwarming-arclein.blogspot.com-Hidequotedtext-
- Show quoted text -
We still practice infanticde, it's called abortion. And who says we
no longer put criminals into the bear pit? What part of the U.S. do
you live in anyway? Ken
No, infanticide would be murder. No one aborts an infant. There are
*embryos* which are terminated, however. But that's not infanticide.
The only bare pit is the basis for running society as a theocracy.
Budikka- Hide quoted text -
- Show quoted text -
The names are changed to protect the guilty or innocent, but the
result is the same. No baby to raise. Shoot someone, or blow them up
in their car, they still are not here anymore. His rape statement is
invalid, my statement is a logical statement, as I showed below. Ken-
Hide quoted text -
- Show quoted text -
Or I guess above. Somewhere on here. Ken
So, baby dying from some illness is 'infanticide'...... right..... is that
the same logic?
- Hide quoted text -
- Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -
- Show quoted text -
Only if you hold a pillow over it's face so that it can't breath. But
then the cause of death is not illness. People have been sentenced to
jail in this country for letting babies die because their religion
doesn't allow them to go to doctors. So, if you allow a baby to die
like that, it's 'infanticide'. Ken
Only if it's a child between birth and 18 years of age (or whatever
the age of majority is). Again, you're hell-bent on persisting in
using terms as loosley as you can on a topic that is highly
controversial.
I wonder why that is?
Budikka- Hide quoted text -
- Show quoted text -
I don't care if it's a baby or a fetus. The both actions are taken
for the same reason. To be rid of a child. What does that have to do
with forcing someone to have intercourse or have consenual sex with a
person? It is not even in the same ballpark. What is so hard to
understand about that? Ken
The fact is that you are now deliberately misusing words rather than
having the honesty to admit that you were wrong in your choice of
words regarding abortion. Rather than address that, you're now making
an issue out of a comparison you evidently completely misunderstood
and are determined to continue to misunderstand rather than find the
honesty to actually address the situation.
I'd compare your behavior here with George Bush's behavior over his
Iraq blunder, but then you would deliberately misunderstand that and
use it to make more excuses.
The facts are these:
1. You've been misusing terms when talking about abortion.
2. Your misuse of terms in describing stages of development in human
growth is as culpable as someone who conflated the terms for rape and
lovemaking.
3. This has been explained to you now in the simplest possible way.
4. If you continue your dishonesty without even acknowledging the
problem, you will deserve whatever you get and my patience with you
will terminate. I fell sorry for you.
Budikka
.
|
|
|
| User: "veritas" |
|
| Title: Re: Atheist "Bible Scholar" Urges End Of Biblical Studies |
22 Aug 2007 05:11:42 PM |
|
|
On Aug 21, 5:02 am, Budikka666 <budik...@netscape.net> wrote:
On Aug 20, 11:48 pm, veritas <khogan...@yahoo.com> wrote:
On Aug 20, 6:34 pm, Budikka666 <budik...@netscape.net> wrote:
On Aug 20, 12:06 pm, veritas <khogan...@yahoo.com> wrote:
On Aug 19, 11:34 pm, "brique" <briquen...@freeuk.c0m> wrote:
veritas <khogan...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:1187579251.110735.95440@x35g2000prf.googlegroups.com...
On Aug 19, 9:59 pm, veritas <khogan...@yahoo.com> wrote:
On Aug 19, 5:36 pm, Budikka666 <budik...@netscape.net> wrote:
On Aug 18, 2:52 pm, veritas <khogan...@yahoo.com> wrote:
On Aug 17, 1:34 am, arclein <arcl...@gmail.com> wrote:
On Aug 15, 12:38 pm, Sound of Trumpet <soundoftrum...@mailcan.com>
wrote:
http://www.cityside.org.nz/node/300
Bible Scholar urges End of Biblical Studies - Hector Avalos
Avalos' new book, "The End of Bible Studies", is due out in July
2007.
Here's the blurb: "In this radical critique of his own academic
speciality, biblical scholar Hector Avalos calls for an end to
biblical studies as we know them. He outlines two main arguments
for
this surprising conclusion. First, academic biblical scholarship
has
clearly succeeded in showing that the ancient civilisation that
produced the Bible held beliefs about the origin, nature, and
purpose
of the world and humanity that are fundamentally opposed to the
views
of modern society. The Bible is thus largely irrelevant to the
needs
and concerns of contemporary human beings. Second, Avalos
criticises
his colleagues for applying a variety of flawed and specious
techniques aimed at maintaining the illusion that the Bible is
still
relevant in today's world. In effect, he accuses his profession
of
being more concerned about its self-preservation than about
giving an
honest account of its own findings to the general public and
faith
communities. Dividing his study into two parts, Avalos first
examines
the principal sub-disciplines of biblical studies (textual
criticism,
archaeology, historical criticism, literary criticism, biblical
theology, and translations) in order to show how these fields
are
still influenced by religiously motivated agendas despite claims
to
independence from religious premises. In the second part, he
focuses
on the infrastructure that supports academic biblical studies to
maintain the value of the profession and the Bible. This
infrastructure includes academia (public and private
universities and
colleges), churches, the media-publishing complex, and
professional
organisations such as the Society of Biblical Literature. In a
controversial conclusion, Avalos argues that our world is best
served
by leaving the Bible as a relic of an ancient civilisation
instead of
the "living" document most religionist scholars believe it
should be.
He urges his colleagues to concentrate on educating the broader
society to recognise the irrelevance and even violent effects of
the
Bible in modern life."
This follows on from his article last year on SBL:
Hector Avalos on SBL
Avalos, PhD Harvard 1991, was a fundamentalist child evangelist.
Now
he's a militant atheist, the faculty adviser to the Iowa State
University Atheist and Agnostic Society. He's executive director
of a
group affiliated with the Council for Secular Humanism that
seeks to
debunk religion. He was a fundamentalist Christian and now he's
a
fundamentalist atheist. He preached and practiced faith healing
from
age 7 to 17 and became an atheist in college.
Regardless of individual belief systems, the critical value of
biblical studies is in preparing a student to interpret the entire
canon of western literature and art. It may be the final irony to
create a civilization with no deep grasp of its own culture.
They did this in China under Communism. The result is a rapid
growth
of ad hoc religions and Christianity. A more appropriate course
of
action is to engage in these studies not as a quote book to
support a
system of belief, but as a source book to western literature,
culture
and ethical system.
There is a reason that we no longer practice infanticide, or put
criminals into the bear pit.
arcleinhttp://globalwarming-arclein.blogspot.com-Hidequotedtext-
- Show quoted text -
We still practice infanticde, it's called abortion. And who says we
no longer put criminals into the bear pit? What part of the U.S. do
you live in anyway? Ken
No, infanticide would be murder. No one aborts an infant. There are
*embryos* which are terminated, however. But that's not infanticide.
The only bare pit is the basis for running society as a theocracy.
Budikka- Hide quoted text -
- Show quoted text -
The names are changed to protect the guilty or innocent, but the
result is the same. No baby to raise. Shoot someone, or blow them up
in their car, they still are not here anymore. His rape statement is
invalid, my statement is a logical statement, as I showed below. Ken-
Hide quoted text -
- Show quoted text -
Or I guess above. Somewhere on here. Ken
So, baby dying from some illness is 'infanticide'...... right..... is that
the same logic?
- Hide quoted text -
- Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -
- Show quoted text -
Only if you hold a pillow over it's face so that it can't breath. But
then the cause of death is not illness. People have been sentenced to
jail in this country for letting babies die because their religion
doesn't allow them to go to doctors. So, if you allow a baby to die
like that, it's 'infanticide'. Ken
Only if it's a child between birth and 18 years of age (or whatever
the age of majority is). Again, you're hell-bent on persisting in
using terms as loosley as you can on a topic that is highly
controversial.
I wonder why that is?
Budikka- Hide quoted text -
- Show quoted text -
I don't care if it's a baby or a fetus. The both actions are taken
for the same reason. To be rid of a child. What does that have to do
with forcing someone to have intercourse or have consenual sex with a
person? It is not even in the same ballpark. What is so hard to
understand about that? Ken
The fact is that you are now deliberately misusing words rather than
having the honesty to admit that you were wrong in your choice of
words regarding abortion. Rather than address that, you're now making
an issue out of a comparison you evidently completely misunderstood
and are determined to continue to misunderstand rather than find the
honesty to actually address the situation.
I'd compare your behavior here with George Bush's behavior over his
Iraq blunder, but then you would deliberately misunderstand that and
use it to make more excuses.
The facts are these:
1. You've been misusing terms when talking about abortion.
2. Your misuse of terms in describing stages of development in human
growth is as culpable as someone who conflated the terms for rape and
lovemaking.
3. This has been explained to you now in the simplest possible way.
4. If you continue your dishonesty without even acknowledging the
problem, you will deserve whatever you get and my patience with you
will terminate. I fell sorry for you.
Budikka- Hide quoted text -
- Show quoted text -
I would try and believe you but you wouldn't know the truth or a
logical statement if it slapped you in the face. Its been explained
to me and explained to me. I have explained to you and explained to
you why and how you are wrong. There is no dishonesty here, you are
simply mistaken in your beliefs. My patience with you has already
left me. You simply don't get it, even when I go over and over it.
However, I am sorry that you fell sorry for me. I hope you didn't hurt
yourself badly.
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "brique" |
|
| Title: Re: Atheist "Bible Scholar" Urges End Of Biblical Studies |
21 Aug 2007 02:50:31 AM |
|
|
veritas <khogantwo@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:1187629613.524496.133310@r23g2000prd.googlegroups.com...
On Aug 19, 11:34 pm, "brique" <briquen...@freeuk.c0m> wrote:
veritas <khogan...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:1187579251.110735.95440@x35g2000prf.googlegroups.com...
On Aug 19, 9:59 pm, veritas <khogan...@yahoo.com> wrote:
On Aug 19, 5:36 pm, Budikka666 <budik...@netscape.net> wrote:
On Aug 18, 2:52 pm, veritas <khogan...@yahoo.com> wrote:
On Aug 17, 1:34 am, arclein <arcl...@gmail.com> wrote:
On Aug 15, 12:38 pm, Sound of Trumpet
<soundoftrum...@mailcan.com>
wrote:
http://www.cityside.org.nz/node/300
Bible Scholar urges End of Biblical Studies - Hector Avalos
Avalos' new book, "The End of Bible Studies", is due out in
July
2007.
Here's the blurb: "In this radical critique of his own
academic
speciality, biblical scholar Hector Avalos calls for an end
to
biblical studies as we know them. He outlines two main
arguments
for
this surprising conclusion. First, academic biblical
scholarship
has
clearly succeeded in showing that the ancient civilisation
that
produced the Bible held beliefs about the origin, nature,
and
purpose
of the world and humanity that are fundamentally opposed to
the
views
of modern society. The Bible is thus largely irrelevant to
the
needs
and concerns of contemporary human beings. Second, Avalos
criticises
his colleagues for applying a variety of flawed and specious
techniques aimed at maintaining the illusion that the Bible
is
still
relevant in today's world. In effect, he accuses his
profession
of
being more concerned about its self-preservation than about
giving an
honest account of its own findings to the general public and
faith
communities. Dividing his study into two parts, Avalos first
examines
the principal sub-disciplines of biblical studies (textual
criticism,
archaeology, historical criticism, literary criticism,
biblical
theology, and translations) in order to show how these
fields
are
still influenced by religiously motivated agendas despite
claims
to
independence from religious premises. In the second part, he
focuses
on the infrastructure that supports academic biblical
studies to
maintain the value of the profession and the Bible. This
infrastructure includes academia (public and private
universities and
colleges), churches, the media-publishing complex, and
professional
organisations such as the Society of Biblical Literature. In
a
controversial conclusion, Avalos argues that our world is
best
served
by leaving the Bible as a relic of an ancient civilisation
instead of
the "living" document most religionist scholars believe it
should be.
He urges his colleagues to concentrate on educating the
broader
society to recognise the irrelevance and even violent
effects of
the
Bible in modern life."
This follows on from his article last year on SBL:
Hector Avalos on SBL
Avalos, PhD Harvard 1991, was a fundamentalist child
evangelist.
Now
he's a militant atheist, the faculty adviser to the Iowa
State
University Atheist and Agnostic Society. He's executive
director
of a
group affiliated with the Council for Secular Humanism that
seeks to
debunk religion. He was a fundamentalist Christian and now
he's
a
fundamentalist atheist. He preached and practiced faith
healing
from
age 7 to 17 and became an atheist in college.
Regardless of individual belief systems, the critical value of
biblical studies is in preparing a student to interpret the
entire
canon of western literature and art. It may be the final
irony to
create a civilization with no deep grasp of its own culture.
They did this in China under Communism. The result is a rapid
growth
of ad hoc religions and Christianity. A more appropriate
course
of
action is to engage in these studies not as a quote book to
support a
system of belief, but as a source book to western literature,
culture
and ethical system.
There is a reason that we no longer practice infanticide, or
put
criminals into the bear pit.
arcleinhttp://globalwarming-arclein.blogspot.com-Hidequotedtext-
- Show quoted text -
We still practice infanticde, it's called abortion. And who
says we
no longer put criminals into the bear pit? What part of the
U.S. do
you live in anyway? Ken
No, infanticide would be murder. No one aborts an infant. There
are
*embryos* which are terminated, however. But that's not
infanticide.
The only bare pit is the basis for running society as a theocracy.
Budikka- Hide quoted text -
- Show quoted text -
The names are changed to protect the guilty or innocent, but the
result is the same. No baby to raise. Shoot someone, or blow them
up
in their car, they still are not here anymore. His rape statement
is
invalid, my statement is a logical statement, as I showed below.
Ken-
Hide quoted text -
- Show quoted text -
Or I guess above. Somewhere on here. Ken
So, baby dying from some illness is 'infanticide'...... right..... is
that
the same logic?
- Hide quoted text -
- Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -
- Show quoted text -
Only if you hold a pillow over it's face so that it can't breath. But
then the cause of death is not illness. People have been sentenced to
jail in this country for letting babies die because their religion
doesn't allow them to go to doctors. So, if you allow a baby to die
like that, it's 'infanticide'. Ken
You misunderstand your own comment, which was:
"The names are changed to protect the guilty or innocent, but the
result is the same. No baby to raise. Shoot someone, or blow them up
in their car, they still are not here anymore."
baby dies of illness, its not there anymore...... and according to your
formula, that makes it the same as shooting them or blowing them up.
.
|
|
|
| User: "veritas" |
|
| Title: Re: Atheist "Bible Scholar" Urges End Of Biblical Studies |
22 Aug 2007 02:47:43 AM |
|
|
On Aug 21, 2:50 am, "brique" <briquen...@freeuk.c0m> wrote:
veritas <khogan...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:1187629613.524496.133310@r23g2000prd.googlegroups.com...
On Aug 19, 11:34 pm, "brique" <briquen...@freeuk.c0m> wrote:
veritas <khogan...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:1187579251.110735.95440@x35g2000prf.googlegroups.com...
On Aug 19, 9:59 pm, veritas <khogan...@yahoo.com> wrote:
On Aug 19, 5:36 pm, Budikka666 <budik...@netscape.net> wrote:
On Aug 18, 2:52 pm, veritas <khogan...@yahoo.com> wrote:
On Aug 17, 1:34 am, arclein <arcl...@gmail.com> wrote:
On Aug 15, 12:38 pm, Sound of Trumpet
<soundoftrum...@mailcan.com>
wrote:
http://www.cityside.org.nz/node/300
Bible Scholar urges End of Biblical Studies - Hector Avalos
Avalos' new book, "The End of Bible Studies", is due out in
July
2007.
Here's the blurb: "In this radical critique of his own
academic
speciality, biblical scholar Hector Avalos calls for an end
to
biblical studies as we know them. He outlines two main
arguments
for
this surprising conclusion. First, academic biblical
scholarship
has
clearly succeeded in showing that the ancient civilisation
that
produced the Bible held beliefs about the origin, nature,
and
purpose
of the world and humanity that are fundamentally opposed to
the
views
of modern society. The Bible is thus largely irrelevant to
the
needs
and concerns of contemporary human beings. Second, Avalos
criticises
his colleagues for applying a variety of flawed and specious
techniques aimed at maintaining the illusion that the Bible
is
still
relevant in today's world. In effect, he accuses his
profession
of
being more concerned about its self-preservation than about
giving an
honest account of its own findings to the general public and
faith
communities. Dividing his study into two parts, Avalos first
examines
the principal sub-disciplines of biblical studies (textual
criticism,
archaeology, historical criticism, literary criticism,
biblical
theology, and translations) in order to show how these
fields
are
still influenced by religiously motivated agendas despite
claims
to
independence from religious premises. In the second part, he
focuses
on the infrastructure that supports academic biblical
studies to
maintain the value of the profession and the Bible. This
infrastructure includes academia (public and private
universities and
colleges), churches, the media-publishing complex, and
professional
organisations such as the Society of Biblical Literature. In
a
controversial conclusion, Avalos argues that our world is
best
served
by leaving the Bible as a relic of an ancient civilisation
instead of
the "living" document most religionist scholars believe it
should be.
He urges his colleagues to concentrate on educating the
broader
society to recognise the irrelevance and even violent
effects of
the
Bible in modern life."
This follows on from his article last year on SBL:
Hector Avalos on SBL
Avalos, PhD Harvard 1991, was a fundamentalist child
evangelist.
Now
he's a militant atheist, the faculty adviser to the Iowa
State
University Atheist and Agnostic Society. He's executive
director
of a
group affiliated with the Council for Secular Humanism that
seeks to
debunk religion. He was a fundamentalist Christian and now
he's
a
fundamentalist atheist. He preached and practiced faith
healing
from
age 7 to 17 and became an atheist in college.
Regardless of individual belief systems, the critical value of
biblical studies is in preparing a student to interpret the
entire
canon of western literature and art. It may be the final
irony to
create a civilization with no deep grasp of its own culture.
They did this in China under Communism. The result is a rapid
growth
of ad hoc religions and Christianity. A more appropriate
course
of
action is to engage in these studies not as a quote book to
support a
system of belief, but as a source book to western literature,
culture
and ethical system.
There is a reason that we no longer practice infanticide, or
put
criminals into the bear pit.
arcleinhttp://globalwarming-arclein.blogspot.com-Hidequotedtext-
- Show quoted text -
We still practice infanticde, it's called abortion. And who
says we
no longer put criminals into the bear pit? What part of the
U.S. do
you live in anyway? Ken
No, infanticide would be murder. No one aborts an infant. There
are
*embryos* which are terminated, however. But that's not
infanticide.
The only bare pit is the basis for running society as a theocracy.
Budikka- Hide quoted text -
- Show quoted text -
The names are changed to protect the guilty or innocent, but the
result is the same. No baby to raise. Shoot someone, or blow them
up
in their car, they still are not here anymore. His rape statement
is
invalid, my statement is a logical statement, as I showed below.
Ken-
Hide quoted text -
- Show quoted text -
Or I guess above. Somewhere on here. Ken
So, baby dying from some illness is 'infanticide'...... right..... is
that
the same logic?
- Hide quoted text -
- Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -
- Show quoted text -
Only if you hold a pillow over it's face so that it can't breath. But
then the cause of death is not illness. People have been sentenced to
jail in this country for letting babies die because their religion
doesn't allow them to go to doctors. So, if you allow a baby to die
like that, it's 'infanticide'. Ken
You misunderstand your own comment, which was:
"The names are changed to protect the guilty or innocent, but the
result is the same. No baby to raise. Shoot someone, or blow them up
in their car, they still are not here anymore."
baby dies of illness, its not there anymore...... and according to your
formula, that makes it the same as shooting them or blowing them up.- Hide quoted text -
- Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -
- Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -
- Show quoted text -
Did you kill them with the illness? If you didn't then you didn't do
anything. Keep thinking, use logic. Ken
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| | |
