Alan,
I know you've been on the road and we all await your next point in the Gospels as history argument; that of the political and cultural environment in which the books were written.
But allow me, please, to answer a few comments that have been made thus far. Several people have queried about this:
"Jace, you question the historical veracity of the Gospels and the quality of the transcription of the books as they've passed through history. What about the transcription of Plato, Socrates, the Iliad, and other lionized works from antiquity? Why do you give them credence over the Gospels?"
(This is a compilation of three questions that all lead to the following answer).
I don't believe that ANY books from antiquity are error free. Hell, I don't think any books from this morning are error free. The difference between these other pieces of literature and the scripture of Judaism, Christianity, and Islam is simple: the believers of these scriptures generally ascribe to them the quality of being the Word of God. Therefore, they are necessarily REQUIRED to be powerfully scrutinized.
If Shakespeare didn't write Shakespeare and Plato really believed in flying monkeys from space, it doesn't determine if the majority of the human race will burn in Hell for eternity. With the scripture, it does.
That is all...carry on.....
J
I think I see what you're saying Jace, and even agree to a point. Of course - documents claimed to be divinely inspired and, by extension, authoritative, are in a different category than other works of antiquity, and are therefore subject to added scrutiny.
ReplyDeleteI think a balancing point is needed. To evaluate their inspiration, one of the things that must be examined is their historical reliability. This piece of the overall examination must use the same methodology that any historical inquiry would use. And, concerning the issue of historical content, comparison with other ancient works is valid. The same rules of textual criticism apply. The examination of internal evidence and external evidence applies.
Another note (for our readers: Not every ancient work fits within the genre of history. Plato wrote philosophy. Homer wrote literature. Comparing the gospels with ancient literature is not an apples to apples comparison.
Hey Jace,
ReplyDeleteHope you're doing well. I've been following you guys from the beginning of this little effort. Glad to hear you've been so successful with your music. I have to admit I beamed with a little bit of pride the night you were on Leno. I also appreciate the thought and reflection you give to your posts.
I want to offer a little push back to your contention that the works of Plato, Socrates, and such is not as significant. While I give none of those the weight that I give to Scripture (and with that agree that Scripture deserves scrutiny), those works are the source of extensive literature instruction within education. None of my Lit courses ever scrutinized the veracity or historicity of these works; there was an implied a priori assumption. We simply dove into the lit analysis.
My point is that education teaches these works to be from the original author, rather than a set of collaborators/copyists/scholars over the centuries.
The difference being that analyzing a piece of literature from a set of collaborators/copyists requires a unique set of lenses than what is necessary in the analysis from a single author. If that historicity is not offered, how do we know we're getting those original thoughts?
Quite frankly, I've met a bunch of people who base their life decisions over these works; but more importantly, more recent philosophers stand on the shoulders of such ancient writings. Many of those modern philosophies have woven their tenants into our everyday life--government, education, and of course, religion.
We all stand on somebody's shoulders, whether Christian, Muslim, Agnostic or Athiest. Plenty of writers have come before.
I think the question at hand is not so much that Scripture should be more scrutinized because it speaks to the eternal destiny of man, but that all of these documents--Paul, Plato, Socrates, Arianna Huffingto--are the basis on which our fellow men make decisions as to how they should live. I think that deserves a scrutiny across the board.
Anyway, Love you, man. Take care!
Robb
Hey Rob,
ReplyDeleteFirst off congrats on being the first comment I've published. Sadly, there's no prize....
Thanks for following along on this blog and for the kind words. You and Jill are special folks and I enjoy hearing from you!
To your comment:
The historicity of philosophy is certainly circumspect when you look at Plato, Aristotle, Socrates and the like. In fact, I think most serious scholars would readily admit we have little to no evidence supporting those works as verifiably authored by those individuals.
However, these aren't presented as historical documents. They are literature, pure and simple. They present ideas and concepts, like democracy, but that is all. They don't say that if you disagree with them you will spend eternity in Hell. They don't say that the laws of science are forfeit in the presence of the supernatural, for they don't claim supernatural causes or effects.
It is absolutely true that we ALL stand on the shoulders of those who go before us. To which, it is indeed important to take ALL information in with as much knowledge of the source as possible. But the Bible sets itself apart within itself. It claims to be the absolute authority over the entirety of Creation. I don't think Plato, Socrates, or the Huffington Post make these claims.
If a book is to be accepted as the Word and Will of the Creator of the Universe then I think it sets itself up for the greatest of scrutiny. I can read, study, and even understand Greek philosophy. Then I can choose to accept it or reject it. At no point will that philosophy promise me life eternal or eternal damnation.
Also, I don't know of a single non-religious person who bases their entire world view on a book. Actually, as this blog has caused me to read the Bible again, I don't know a single Christian who bases their whole life on a single book.
Thanks for the comment and thanks for reading,
Jace