1/9/10

Gadpop on my posting old Atlantic article on  Jesus studies:

I’ve found myself searching out what parts of my specific beliefs are based on things that are not really in Scripture, but are projected on it, which opens me to considering things such as Steve’s comment about Christ’s understanding of his purpose. However in writings such as this article, sometimes there is an underlying assumption that, “We all know that Jesus was merely a man, and the fantastic claims the Bible makes cannot possibly be true. Therefore, having thus established the Bible’s lack of qualification, we’ll piece together what ‘really’ happened using other means.” Doesn’t make it *totally* worthless, because it could point out something that I’m inappropriately projecting on Scripture, but I think “pretty good” is quite, ummm…gracious.

My new plan is not to allow him to goad me. As in this case, my thought is ‘if you aren’t interested, fine, but no one is requiring that you participate in the dialogue.’

But he seems to be another case of the voice of the ignorant person who says, “I don’t want to know and I don’t want you to know either.”  Or the voice of the accuser, who only wants to attack. At what point has he contributed anything positive?  So I am guarding against him.  I was reading the article today, and while reading kept hearing his cynical sneering voice — like a messenger from Sparfam.