Reginald Finley is an internet sceptic. There are many such sceptics, who see themselves as part of a thriving community of thought, which in actuality amounts to a (virtual) crowd of usernames at internet forums who perceive themselves at the cutting edge of the genuinely critical approach to biblical studies. They are strident non-believers, they know that Jesus never existed, and they know – they are absolutely certain – that this is what the evidence shows. People who disagree are simply ignoring the evidence or are unwilling to challenge tradition.
Bart Ehrman is a New Testament critic. By that I mean that he’s a qualified, professional scholar who has expertise in textual criticism. In the past I’ve criticised Ehrman over what I take to be his rather sensationalist work, especially in the podcast episode Sexing Up Early Church History. I say that lest anyone think that I’m a fan of his. I’m not. As I explain in that episode, I think some of his theories about the way the church suppressed alternative books of the Bible are more at home in The Da Vinci code than in the classroom. Perhaps banking on the fact that a fellow non believer, and someone with a few degrees to boot, would come to the aid of the “Christ myth” theory, the fringe view that Jesus never existed, Finley broached the subject with Ehrman. You can tell from Finley’s reaction that he was unprepared for the reply.
Like a number of others tonight I have just watched Jesus: The Cold Case on TV One, presented by Bryan Bruce. Here are my thoughts on what I have seen. First off, who is Bryan Bruce?
Bryan Bruce is an award winning producer, writer & director who lives in Wellington, New Zealand. He has a MA in Sociology, Psychology & philosophy from Canterbury University. A former musician and schoolteacher, he began his television career in 1984 as front person and writer for a TVNZ arts show. Since then has won awards for Best Director and Best Factual Writer and his work has made the finals of several international festivals, including the New York Television Festival and the prestigious Banff Awards.
The overarching message that Bryan Bruce is gravitating towards in this documentary is that the biblical and subsequent Christian message on who killed Jesus, namely, “the Jews” in some broad sense, is false, and what’s more it is responsible for centuries of great evil.
Something that strikes the viewer quite early on is that Bruce quite simply doesn’t believe that the Gospels accounts are true in general terms. “Many,” he says, “now believe that the Gospels contain more fiction than fact.” Throughout the documentary we hear from a number of academics who lend their credibility to the various claims Bruce makes. Interested? Read the rest.
A short, sweet lesson: Being a morally good person involves doing your moral duty. If you don’t at least accept that, then I think you’re basically mistaken about morality in theory (I say “in theory” because I’m comforted by the fact that you probably live as though I’m right).
But how does being morally good involve doing your moral duty? Here’s is where Kant has something important to tell you. Being a moral person is not just acting in accordance with your moral duty. You might live your whole life in accordance with your moral duty and yet in some really important sense still not be a morally good person. How so? Here;s how: It could be a very unlikely coincidence that your life is lived in accordance with your moral duty. Or maybe you are doing what you do because you’re getting paid to do it, and you don’t really reflect on what your moral duty is. Or maybe you, perversely, think that what you’re doing is really contrary to your moral duty and yet you desire to do it anyway. Or maybe you have some other motivation – you might not take advantage of a woman because you fear that it will harm your reputation with women, for example.
This is what Kant tells us, and he is right: Doing the morally right thing is where you act, not just in accordance with your moral duty, but you also act out of duty. Nobody is worthy of moral esteem for doing a thing that, as it turns out, is in fact morally right. You are only worthy of moral esteem for doing the right thing, whatever that might turn out to be.
And that is the gift that Kant has given you today!
For those of you who don’t know, Say Hello to my Little Friend is an affiliate of the world’s best online bookstore, The Book Depository. In addition to having some unbeatable prices, they offer free postage worldwide on all purchases. Beat that!
Click this button over on the right:
Then when you visit The Book Depository, any purchases you make there in the next fifteen minutes will cent a few cents in my direction – for no extra cost. Alternatively, any time you’re at The Book Depository and you’re about to buy something, add the following to the end of the URL at the site: /?a_aid=shtmlf (only add the / if there’s not already a / at the end of the URL).
It couldn’t be simpler, and although what they pass on to me is pretty meagre (e.g. $0.75 for a purchase price of $15.00), every little penny helps. Spread the word!
A Godless Public Square: Do “private” religious beliefs have a place in public life?
On Wednesday the 3rd of August 2011 I’ll be taking part in a panel discussion on religion in the public square, tackling the issue from the standpoint of theology, philosophy and law. Joining me will be my good friends Matthew Flannagan (theology) and Madeleine Flannagan (law).
The kind of questions that we’ll be exploring will include:
- Is it ever right for Christians to impose their ‘private’ religious beliefs onto others?
- Is it really religiously neutral to insist the public realm be secular?
- How does the idea that religion should be private mesh with freedom of religion and expression laws?
The evening will be held at the University of Auckland. It’s free to the public, and although all three speakers will be bringing their own areas of expertise to bear on the issues, this is not an academic lecture, and it will be aimed at a broad audience. For more details (including the precise location on campus), check out the Facebook page for this event, which is HERE (at the time of writing, this page was still private, but will be public soon).
If you’ll be in the Auckland area on the 3rd of August, mark this event on your calendar. I hope to meet you there, and spread the word!
When I was a kid I always said I wanted to be an archaeologist. After a while I gave that idea up because it wasn’t realistic as a career option, so I thought. How ironic that I ended up studying music, theology and philosophy!
Anyway, this is one of the examples of why archaeology is so cool – seeing how it ties into the lives of biblical figures.
Israeli scholars have confirmed the authenticity of a 2,000-year-old burial ossuary bearing the name of a relative of the high priest Caiaphas, who is well known to Christians as a rival of Jesus. The ossuary – a stone chest for storing bones – bears an inscription with the name “Miriam daughter of Yeshua son of Caiapha, priest of Ma’azya from Beit Imri.”
The High Priest known as Caiaphas was an adversary of Jesus (Yeshua) and played a key role in his crucifixion, according to the Christian bible.
The Yeshua mentioned in the ossuary is not to be confused with the Christian bible’s Jesus, as the name was a common Jewish one at the time.
The Israel Antiquities Authority says the ossuary was seized from tomb robbers three years ago. It is believed to have been taken from a burial site in the Valley of Ela in Judea. The IAA says in Wednesday’s statement that microscopic tests have confirmed the inscription is “genuine and ancient.”
Read more about it at Arutz Sheva, Israel National News. An ossuary is a small box containing a piece of bone belonging to the deceased.