11-14-2007, 07:12 PM | #41 |
Senior Member
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Happy Valley, PA
Posts: 1,866
|
This is a pretty stupid discussion all around. FARMS is inadmissible in academic circles. No matter how brilliant or dull its authors and their intellects, FARMS' fundamental approach is incompatible with secular academic inquiry. Believers, however, find FARMS' work engaging and interesting (obviously depending on subject, personal taste, etc.)
Believers believe and then search for supporting data. Secular scholars demand supporting data, then they might believe. There's no happy medium. I'll beat up on FARMS in the Religious Studies category, but if their work reaffirms someone's faith, then they're probably happy with that result.
__________________
I hope for nothing. I fear nothing. I am free. - Epitaph of Nikos Kazantzakis (1883-1957) |
11-14-2007, 07:15 PM | #42 | |
Assistant to the Regional Manager
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: The Orgasmatron
Posts: 24,338
|
Quote:
I would encourage FARMS to become more academic in its approach.
__________________
Ἓν οἶδα ὅτι οὐδὲν οἶδα |
|
11-14-2007, 07:18 PM | #43 | |
Senior Member
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: NOVA
Posts: 3,005
|
Quote:
__________________
太初有道 |
|
11-14-2007, 07:27 PM | #44 |
Senior Member
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Happy Valley, PA
Posts: 1,866
|
No, but you might (and I'd guess many do) find it interesting because you believe. Few people base their testimonies on FARMS (for good reason, IMO).
__________________
I hope for nothing. I fear nothing. I am free. - Epitaph of Nikos Kazantzakis (1883-1957) |
11-14-2007, 07:29 PM | #45 | |
Assistant to the Regional Manager
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: The Orgasmatron
Posts: 24,338
|
Quote:
If I didn't, I probably wouldn't care, but I do care about a lot of historical stuff, so maybe I would.
__________________
Ἓν οἶδα ὅτι οὐδὲν οἶδα |
|
11-14-2007, 07:40 PM | #46 | |
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Seattle, WA
Posts: 10,665
|
Quote:
__________________
Interrupt all you like. We're involved in a complicated story here, and not everything is quite what it seems to be. —Paul Auster |
|
11-14-2007, 09:25 PM | #47 |
Senior Member
Join Date: Jan 2006
Posts: 6,177
|
|
11-14-2007, 09:44 PM | #48 | ||
Senior Member
Join Date: Jan 2006
Posts: 6,177
|
Quote:
What you're saying is not much of consequence and not worth arguing over. Robinson doesn't call Greek culture the great and abonimable church. In fact you repeat what he said as part of your argument against him. Quote:
|
||
11-14-2007, 09:44 PM | #49 | |
Senior Member
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Happy Valley, PA
Posts: 1,866
|
Quote:
I'm a humanist and don't put a lot of credence in religiously oriented pseudo-scientific or pseudo-academic writing. FARMS is a joke in the academic sense, but if people like it or if it sparks some interest or belief or it's fun to flip the pages, I don't really care. It's ultimately deceptive to dress up belief as knowledge, but probably not as harmful as taking a speedball. I'll read Biblical Archaeology Review in the doctor's waiting room, but I'd never cite it for a conference paper. SU has a lot of Socrates' gadfly in him, and I like that about him. He's still willing to sting the big lazy horse.
__________________
I hope for nothing. I fear nothing. I am free. - Epitaph of Nikos Kazantzakis (1883-1957) |
|
11-14-2007, 09:58 PM | #50 | |
Assistant to the Regional Manager
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: The Orgasmatron
Posts: 24,338
|
Quote:
Wherein did I say I was defending SU? I did not. I hate that excerpt as it's so oversimplified, it makes him look stupid. Marcion re-wrote scripture? Give a f..ing break. Robison should stop writing if that is the quality of his thought. So much happened but if it can be distilled in two or three sentences then believers are relieved. I do not agree that Greek philosophies created falsities. If falsities arose, it was through the intermingling of many ideas. And although one might argue how Augustine intermingled philosophical traditions with religious thought, it was an effort at reconciliation. Gnostics in unspeakables? What the hell does he seek to imply? He's trying to scare believers into rejecting and probably not to look at it, because it's "all dark and deathly." Bring it to light and let's really look at what happened. Don't create some shitty recipe for ignorance.
__________________
Ἓν οἶδα ὅτι οὐδὲν οἶδα |
|
Bookmarks |
|
|