I just reread an incredible book by our own @First_Warrior If you haven't read it,you should. My continuous audio book choice is The Dark Tower by Stephen King.....start with book 1-7 and start again......because Ka is a wheel
Actually got my wife to do book 1 on audiobook just today while driving to Marty's. she seemed to enjoy it.
"Cooking isn't about struggling; It's about pleasure. It's like sǝx, with a wider variety of sauces."
At any given time the urge to sing "In The Jungle" is just a whim away... A whim away... A whim away...
I just reread an incredible book by our own @First_Warrior If you haven't read it,you should. My continuous audio book choice is The Dark Tower by Stephen King.....start with book 1-7 and start again......because Ka is a wheel
Stephen King's the best, Blaine the riddle train! Have you read the Bachman books?
Wow, funny I was thinking about that last week, and I haven't read it in over 40 years.
WARNING: The above post may contain thoughts or ideas known to the State of Caliphornia to cause seething rage, confusion, distemper, nausea, perspiration, sphincter release, or cranial implosion to persons who implicitly trust only one news source, or find themselves at either the left or right political extreme. Proceed at your own risk.
"If you do not read the newspapers you're uninformed. If you do read the newspapers, you're misinformed." -- Mark Twain
The Triumph of Christianity; How a forbidden religion swept the world. Bart Ehrmann.
WARNING: The above post may contain thoughts or ideas known to the State of Caliphornia to cause seething rage, confusion, distemper, nausea, perspiration, sphincter release, or cranial implosion to persons who implicitly trust only one news source, or find themselves at either the left or right political extreme. Proceed at your own risk.
"If you do not read the newspapers you're uninformed. If you do read the newspapers, you're misinformed." -- Mark Twain
Just finished the Hornblower series. Thanks to @CalvinAndHobo Well I got one more anyway. It should be waiting for me at home. Right now I’m finishing up with Wilderness Empire by Allan W Eckert. The follow up book to The frontiersman but it actually takes place first. Both great books.
Black Cherry Blues by James Lee Burke. One of his early works, a Edgar award winner..A friend used to go to a New Orleans bar way back and said that Burke would trade copies of his first book for drinks. Next up Swift Vengeance by T. Jefferson Parker. Our local library has a new C. J. Box ready for me to pick up.
@Cigarsonist I'm a huge Vonnegut fan. I find myself referencing him a lot, but he wrote so many short stories that I can't remember which collection they're in or the name of the story most of the time. My favorite novel is Cat's Cradle. Give it a shot if you haven't read it.
@Amos_Umwhat I'm curious about that Ehrman book. He's an odd dude. Terribly smart. I respect his technical work on textual issues of the New Testament, but he's not really a historian. I find his whole "deconversion" story odd. I use him as an example of the problems of rigid fundamentalism and strict innerrancy. The things that bother him about Christian scriptures just don't bother me, I guess.
@Rhamlin I read Hornblower a couple years ago for the first time since I was 12. It aged pretty well. Try the Aubrey-Maturin books by Patrick O'Brian next if you like Napoleonic sea battles. It's Hornblower for grown-ups. He died before he could actually finish the series, though. Still, I felt satisfied by the end. Also, if you want something different but in the same vein, Naomi Novik's, Temeraire series imagines what the Napoleonic era would have been like if there were aerial combat...on dragons. Lots of Hornblower influence. Also, the Honor Harrington books by David Webber (there's a ton in the Honorverse) at least start with a feel similar to Hornblower, but set far in the future with space navies.
I know all you "degenerate" MAGA retroverts (love you!!!) won't like it, but I'm reading a really well-written look at America by historian Richard Hughes called Myths America Lives By: White Supremacy and the Stories that Give us Meaning. If you do check it out, make sure you're getting the Second Edition with this subtitle. It's a significant re-working of his first edition to the point of really being almost an entirely new book. And a far better book at that. He uses the word "Myth" in the academic sense, fairly neutrally. He then looks at what he considers some formative myths that have been used to tell the story of America, considers how another, inherently harmful myth of White Supremacy has shaped them all, and asks us to consider how we might reframe and reclaim the positive aspects of the other myths. For example, "The Myth of the Chosen Nation" suggests that the notion of Covenant was central to various European groups who settled the American colonies. Hughes argues that "chosenness" lost its tie to covenant, which demands care for others, and replaced personal care with impersonal individualism, freedom, and liberty. At any rate, it's a provocative read, meticulously researched, and remarkably nuanced. I don't think people do well with nuance, in general, so I'm afraid people on all sides of the central issue will miss some of what he has to say, unfortunately.
Intelligence is knowing that a tomato is a fruit; wisdom is knowing not to put it in a fruit salad.
I like Oliva and Quesada (including Regius) a lot. I will smoke anything, though.
@Amos_Umwhat I'm curious about that Ehrman book. He's an odd dude. Terribly smart. I respect his technical work on textual issues of the New Testament, but he's not really a historian. I find his whole "deconversion" story odd. I use him as an example of the problems of rigid fundamentalism and strict innerrancy. The things that bother him about Christian scriptures just don't bother me, I guess.
@Martel , Regarding Ehrman''s other works I've read, 'Misquoting Jesus' etc., I'd have to agree with your assessment, however this book is much more historical in nature. I too find the deconversion story odd. I was bothered by many of the same questions as he, and his explanations made Christianity more valid, real and true to my way of thinking, rather than lessening my belief.
The obvious conflicts within the scriptures always nagged at me. Why do the different gospels tell different stories? I accept readily that the Romans certainly subverted, redacted, and guided the stories to their own ends. Also that the early Christian intellectuals, many of whom were former priests of the current religions, felt a need to incorporate certain cultural norms into the story so as to make it palatable to the public. Proofs of divinity, as it were.
However, at least to some extent, the conflicts could indicate validity, since no two humans memories of events are ever quite the same. Ehrman tends to use this fact to prove his point when he needs to, or to refute that which he cannot accept when that suits him. But then, he's human too.
Another author in this genre is Geza Vermes. I'm going to have to check into Hughes.
WARNING: The above post may contain thoughts or ideas known to the State of Caliphornia to cause seething rage, confusion, distemper, nausea, perspiration, sphincter release, or cranial implosion to persons who implicitly trust only one news source, or find themselves at either the left or right political extreme. Proceed at your own risk.
"If you do not read the newspapers you're uninformed. If you do read the newspapers, you're misinformed." -- Mark Twain
@Martel , Regarding Ehrman''s other works I've read, 'Misquoting Jesus' etc., I'd have to agree with your assessment, however this book is much more historical in nature. I too find the deconversion story odd. I was bothered by many of the same questions as he, and his explanations made Christianity more valid, real and true to my way of thinking, rather than lessening my belief.
The obvious conflicts within the scriptures always nagged at me. Why do the different gospels tell different stories? I accept readily that the Romans certainly subverted, redacted, and guided the stories to their own ends. Also that the early Christian intellectuals, many of whom were former priests of the current religions, felt a need to incorporate certain cultural norms into the story so as to make it palatable to the public. Proofs of divinity, as it were.
However, at least to some extent, the conflicts could indicate validity, since no two humans memories of events are ever quite the same. Ehrman tends to use this fact to prove his point when he needs to, or to refute that which he cannot accept when that suits him. But then, he's human too.
Another author in this genre is Geza Vermes. I'm going to have to check into Hughes.
Yeah, I gathered it was historical in nature; I just don't consider him to have a lot of expertise in that area. Certainly he can analyze historical texts and is probably more skilled than most "laymen" in the area.
And I'm with you on his concerns re:Christianity. I probably should have expounded more. It's not that I don't see how some of his concerns and criticisms are based in evidence, I just don't see the answers, even the ones he comes to, as denying the validity of Christianity. I also don't have the same inerrant view of Scripture that he was raised with, so a crack in consistency here or there doesn't bug me.
I think that was the case even before seminary for me, though I was raised in a pretty conservative Christian home. I was always a questioner. And since the Bible itself doesn't come out and say exactly how the process of god-breathed-inspired-composition works, well, I'm content with a little holy mystery. And manuscript errors don't bug me. Humans mess up. Even the "difficult" readings aren't that much concern to me, though I don't go around teaching much about them since lots of people aren't where I am with their faith.
I'll answer honestly when those questions come up. I'll talk cannon and ante-Nicene Christology to someone who's really in need of that. I just find it few and far between who really need that deep dive. And the idea of "errors" in the Bible really can throw people. It just doesn't throw me, especially since most of those transmission errors are understandable. In fact, there's only really one or two textual variants in the NT that might change my theology, and then not significantly.
As to conflicts or contradictions between gospels and between any parts of the Bible, really, I just don't have the same concerns. I'm a pretty smart dude, but I don't know it all. I like to say I have strong convictions loosely held. When I can't reconcile a contradiction, I am comfortable with a couple approaches: human variance in recall; a more literary/narrative/rhetorical approach concerned with the theology of the text rather than seeing it as propositional TRUTH about stuff (or it needing to be 100% accurate in all details); shrugging it off to my lack of understanding (and encouraging me to dive deeper); or just accepting what seems a contradiction and saying maybe there's some truth in the tension.
I mean, if Proverbs tells me both that I should answer or not answer a fool according to his folly, I know something is up. In that case, I think Wisdom is a process and must be applied situationally. I'm not generally a proponent of situational ethics, but I see the pursuit of Wisdom as something different that allows for contextual sensitivity.
Okay, well now I'm just rambling. I can talk this stuff all day and into next year. If you're interested in another book recommendation, let me suggest Michael J. Gorman's Scripture and Its Interpretation: A Global, Ecumenical Introduction to the Bible. It looks like a textbook (and it could be) but it's a very different "intro to the Bible" from a lot of books out there. It does deal with some backgrounds and such, but also looks at how different traditions approach the text without giving much of a primer on the individual books. As such, it's useful as a beginning to breaking "us" out of our own contexts to understand that the Bible isn't a product of our culture specifically to our culture. And while it's not wrong, per se, to read it through a cultural lens, if we don't also listen to those who read it through a different lens we might be faulty in our approach and limited in our understanding.
Intelligence is knowing that a tomato is a fruit; wisdom is knowing not to put it in a fruit salad.
I like Oliva and Quesada (including Regius) a lot. I will smoke anything, though.
@Martel, it seems you and I are very close in our theology. I really get not discussing certain things with some people. There are many good people who cannot tolerate the slightest inquiry concerning the rigid dogma they've been taught. Their conviction is fragile and I wouldn't want to shake them off their foundation. I can see it in their eyes when I say things like "I don't see a conflict between science and creation. Genesis and Science tell the exact same story, just in different terms." There seem to be many who cannot believe in any God that's smarter than they are. Just my observation.
WARNING: The above post may contain thoughts or ideas known to the State of Caliphornia to cause seething rage, confusion, distemper, nausea, perspiration, sphincter release, or cranial implosion to persons who implicitly trust only one news source, or find themselves at either the left or right political extreme. Proceed at your own risk.
"If you do not read the newspapers you're uninformed. If you do read the newspapers, you're misinformed." -- Mark Twain
Comments
At any given time the urge to sing "In The Jungle" is just a whim away... A whim away... A whim away...
Roland
The flat Eathers won't like it.
I like Oliva and Quesada (including Regius) a lot. I will smoke anything, though.
The untold story of Red Cloud.
It was ok, but I would reccomend Empire of the Summer Moon.
"If you do not read the newspapers you're uninformed. If you do read the newspapers, you're misinformed." -- Mark Twain
http://www.abct.org/docs/PastIssue/42n2.pdf?fbclid=IwAR3Fx42TXkHi-0GdaJrBDn_mM5HoRfASw7hm2rrZ5wgKDjrGwfya0iRi92M
wish I had known this thread existed. You guys just added a lot to my list
"If you do not read the newspapers you're uninformed. If you do read the newspapers, you're misinformed." -- Mark Twain
Well I got one more anyway. It should be waiting for me at home. Right now I’m finishing up with Wilderness Empire by Allan W Eckert.
The follow up book to The frontiersman but it actually takes place first. Both great books.
Next up Swift Vengeance by T. Jefferson Parker. Our local library has a new C.
J. Box ready for me to pick up.
@Amos_Umwhat I'm curious about that Ehrman book. He's an odd dude. Terribly smart. I respect his technical work on textual issues of the New Testament, but he's not really a historian. I find his whole "deconversion" story odd. I use him as an example of the problems of rigid fundamentalism and strict innerrancy. The things that bother him about Christian scriptures just don't bother me, I guess.
@Rhamlin I read Hornblower a couple years ago for the first time since I was 12. It aged pretty well. Try the Aubrey-Maturin books by Patrick O'Brian next if you like Napoleonic sea battles. It's Hornblower for grown-ups. He died before he could actually finish the series, though. Still, I felt satisfied by the end. Also, if you want something different but in the same vein, Naomi Novik's, Temeraire series imagines what the Napoleonic era would have been like if there were aerial combat...on dragons. Lots of Hornblower influence. Also, the Honor Harrington books by David Webber (there's a ton in the Honorverse) at least start with a feel similar to Hornblower, but set far in the future with space navies.
I know all you "degenerate" MAGA retroverts (love you!!!) won't like it, but I'm reading a really well-written look at America by historian Richard Hughes called Myths America Lives By: White Supremacy and the Stories that Give us Meaning. If you do check it out, make sure you're getting the Second Edition with this subtitle. It's a significant re-working of his first edition to the point of really being almost an entirely new book. And a far better book at that. He uses the word "Myth" in the academic sense, fairly neutrally. He then looks at what he considers some formative myths that have been used to tell the story of America, considers how another, inherently harmful myth of White Supremacy has shaped them all, and asks us to consider how we might reframe and reclaim the positive aspects of the other myths. For example, "The Myth of the Chosen Nation" suggests that the notion of Covenant was central to various European groups who settled the American colonies. Hughes argues that "chosenness" lost its tie to covenant, which demands care for others, and replaced personal care with impersonal individualism, freedom, and liberty. At any rate, it's a provocative read, meticulously researched, and remarkably nuanced. I don't think people do well with nuance, in general, so I'm afraid people on all sides of the central issue will miss some of what he has to say, unfortunately.
I like Oliva and Quesada (including Regius) a lot. I will smoke anything, though.
Brave New World - Aldous Huxley (Audiobook)
Thirteen Reasons Why - Jay Asher (Audiobook)
At any given time the urge to sing "In The Jungle" is just a whim away... A whim away... A whim away...
@Martel , Regarding Ehrman''s other works I've read, 'Misquoting Jesus' etc., I'd have to agree with your assessment, however this book is much more historical in nature. I too find the deconversion story odd. I was bothered by many of the same questions as he, and his explanations made Christianity more valid, real and true to my way of thinking, rather than lessening my belief.
The obvious conflicts within the scriptures always nagged at me. Why do the different gospels tell different stories? I accept readily that the Romans certainly subverted, redacted, and guided the stories to their own ends. Also that the early Christian intellectuals, many of whom were former priests of the current religions, felt a need to incorporate certain cultural norms into the story so as to make it palatable to the public. Proofs of divinity, as it were.
However, at least to some extent, the conflicts could indicate validity, since no two humans memories of events are ever quite the same. Ehrman tends to use this fact to prove his point when he needs to, or to refute that which he cannot accept when that suits him. But then, he's human too.
Another author in this genre is Geza Vermes. I'm going to have to check into Hughes.
"If you do not read the newspapers you're uninformed. If you do read the newspapers, you're misinformed." -- Mark Twain
At any given time the urge to sing "In The Jungle" is just a whim away... A whim away... A whim away...
At any given time the urge to sing "In The Jungle" is just a whim away... A whim away... A whim away...
And I'm with you on his concerns re:Christianity. I probably should have expounded more. It's not that I don't see how some of his concerns and criticisms are based in evidence, I just don't see the answers, even the ones he comes to, as denying the validity of Christianity. I also don't have the same inerrant view of Scripture that he was raised with, so a crack in consistency here or there doesn't bug me.
I think that was the case even before seminary for me, though I was raised in a pretty conservative Christian home. I was always a questioner. And since the Bible itself doesn't come out and say exactly how the process of god-breathed-inspired-composition works, well, I'm content with a little holy mystery. And manuscript errors don't bug me. Humans mess up. Even the "difficult" readings aren't that much concern to me, though I don't go around teaching much about them since lots of people aren't where I am with their faith.
I'll answer honestly when those questions come up. I'll talk cannon and ante-Nicene Christology to someone who's really in need of that. I just find it few and far between who really need that deep dive. And the idea of "errors" in the Bible really can throw people. It just doesn't throw me, especially since most of those transmission errors are understandable. In fact, there's only really one or two textual variants in the NT that might change my theology, and then not significantly.
As to conflicts or contradictions between gospels and between any parts of the Bible, really, I just don't have the same concerns. I'm a pretty smart dude, but I don't know it all. I like to say I have strong convictions loosely held. When I can't reconcile a contradiction, I am comfortable with a couple approaches: human variance in recall; a more literary/narrative/rhetorical approach concerned with the theology of the text rather than seeing it as propositional TRUTH about stuff (or it needing to be 100% accurate in all details); shrugging it off to my lack of understanding (and encouraging me to dive deeper); or just accepting what seems a contradiction and saying maybe there's some truth in the tension.
I mean, if Proverbs tells me both that I should answer or not answer a fool according to his folly, I know something is up. In that case, I think Wisdom is a process and must be applied situationally. I'm not generally a proponent of situational ethics, but I see the pursuit of Wisdom as something different that allows for contextual sensitivity.
Okay, well now I'm just rambling. I can talk this stuff all day and into next year. If you're interested in another book recommendation, let me suggest Michael J. Gorman's Scripture and Its Interpretation: A Global, Ecumenical Introduction to the Bible. It looks like a textbook (and it could be) but it's a very different "intro to the Bible" from a lot of books out there. It does deal with some backgrounds and such, but also looks at how different traditions approach the text without giving much of a primer on the individual books. As such, it's useful as a beginning to breaking "us" out of our own contexts to understand that the Bible isn't a product of our culture specifically to our culture. And while it's not wrong, per se, to read it through a cultural lens, if we don't also listen to those who read it through a different lens we might be faulty in our approach and limited in our understanding.
I like Oliva and Quesada (including Regius) a lot. I will smoke anything, though.
"If you do not read the newspapers you're uninformed. If you do read the newspapers, you're misinformed." -- Mark Twain