BuddyO | Posted on April 17th, 2009 in Faith, Humor, Jesus.
Man, I’ve been busy…
anyway, I thought this was great:
Don’t you think that Colbert’s defense was satirical? Or did you see that and are just pulling our chains?
No I didn’t get that it was satirical. I would say possibly post modern… and really funny. He did well defending the faith (intentional or not, I don’t know). I think rather than give this book any legitimacy, his interview deliberately brought the level down to the ridiculous where it belonged.
It’s probably how I would mount such a defense…
I can’t get excited about Colbert’s “defense”. It was funny, but I, too, think he was being satirical. It seemed to me, as I watched, that Mr. Ehrman was playing straight-man to Colbert. I get the idea that Mr. Ehrman is a respected biblical scholar…his CV is pretty impressive though I haven’t read any of his works (Bill has and I think James mentioned having read one of his books). Try http://www.bartdehrman.com to see his CV. I guess I should step back and take a more broad look at his works before declaring his work ridiculous or without legitimacy.
Ehrman makes some pretty good (and accurate) points in his books but at times (IMHO) he tends to take things a bit farther than the evidence would support and more in line with his own speculations.
He’s been on Colbert before. I think Catherine’s right – he was playing Colbert’s straight man. Now, why would you think Ehrman’s book belongs in the category of the ridiculous? That’s precisely what an atheist would say about Christianity.
I think it’s perfectly reasonable for an atheist to think Christianity is ridiculous. If you don’t believe in God, then it would all seem a bit silly wouldn’t it?
BTW, check out Colbert last night interviewing Elizabeth Bintliff of Heifer International. Is he being satirical here too? Or am I just that naive?
BTW, Ehrman’s bio says plenty (not positive) about the credence of his works…
It depends. Colbert’s show (even if it was serious and not comedy) is entirely secular. In that framework it isn’t fair to claim that Ehrman’s work is ‘ridiculous’. You have to first accept the divine inspiration of scriptures and their innerancy and infallibility, in order to come to that conclusion. Most of the responses Colbert made to Ehrman were pulled from the toolkit that a lot of conservative Christians use when confronting uncomfortable ideas, responses that are meant to cut the conversation short; “End of Story” kinds of statements. I think Colbert was using them to point out how ridiculous these responses are, especially in a reasonable debate.
I recommend that everyone who comes to this blog go to their local library and take out a book by Mr. Ehrman…start with “Lost Christianities”- and, (a wild concept here)- Uh, actually READ IT. Then, tell us what you think and I’ll give you another half dozen books to read by scholars of early BELIEF systems, like Elaine Pagels (look her up on Wiki). Ehrman’s an astute marketer, but does have important things to say.
Email (will not be published) (required)
Feedjit Live Website Statistics
© 2008 Rev22.org
Rev22: Whoever Is Thirsty, Let Him Come is using WP-Gravatar