Stuff I've been reading: Religous Books
More stuff I've been reading. Next installment: religious books.
Crazy for God: How I Grew Up as One of the Elect, Helped Found the Religious Right, and Lived to Take All (or Almost All) of It Back by Frank Schaeffer:
I read this after watching this video following Dr. Tiller's murder. A pro-life advocate apologizing for his role in contributing to a climate that leads to violence? What a concept.
And, it sounds as if Schaeffer does have a lot to apologize for.... apparently he played a major role (if not THE major role) in getting the religious right interested in the issue of abortion, which prior to that was considered primarily a Catholic issue. I have to admit I'm rather annoyed by the fact that he seems to want to apologize on the one hand, but continue to talk as if Roe v. Wade gave women abortions on demand until the moment of birth. (In fact, regulating late-term abortions is perfectly legal under Roe v. Wade and in fact they are usually legal only in the event of a health risk to the mother or problems with the fetus.)
The book itself was interesting (guy had an interesting childhood, growing up in a sort of evangelical commune in Switzerland) but I do wish he'd talked more about his time with the religious right movement in America, a time that clearly made him unhappy and which he doesn't seem to want to dwell on. Though, seeing someone who knew and worked with them describe leading religious right leaders in terms like "nutjob" or "power-hungry psychopath" is interesting. Those aren't exact quotes since I've since returned the book to the library, but he uses terms as harsh as those. (IIRC, he was speaking of Pat Robertson and Jerry Falwell, respectively.)
I found it interesting, but not a must-read.
Aside: so far I've only read two first-person accounts of time in British boarding schools and both of them talked extensively about how much homosexual sex was going on. Maybe Harry Potter fandom is onto something.
The First Paul: Reclaiming the Radical Visionary Behind the Church's Conservative Icon by Marcus J. Borg and John Dominic Crossan:
This is a book on Paul. One of the authors is Marcus Borg. That should tell you most of what you need to know. :-)
Well, OK, not really. I've just read a lot of books by Marcus Borg! (Nothing by Crossan.) I'm afraid I don't have much that's exciting to say about this. It's a discussion of some of the letters of Paul taken in their historical context, and what we're to make of them, given that they were written to specific people NOT US, in a time and culture NOT OURS, to deal with specific situations and issues we no longer deal with. Interesting stuff, but not the place to start if you want to get into popular-press books on biblical scholarship.
Aside: throughout the New Testament there are references to Gentiles who "feared God." According to this book, there was a big group of Gentiles who were really interested in the Jewish God and Jewish religious and moral philosophy, who worshiped at Jewish synagogues, and who gave money to them, but who didn't fully convert. (The didn't necessarily follow various Jewish laws or keep kosher and -- importantly -- were not circumcised.)
These were a key group that Paul was trying to convert to Christianity, which makes sense: early Christianity was an obvious sell to someone who wanted to worship the Jewish God but didn't want to keep Jewish laws. Evidently this is one reason local Jewish authorities were peeved at Paul. They felt he was poaching potential converts (not to mention people who had previously been giving money to Jewish synagogues who were now giving it to Christian groups).
Jesus, Interrupted: Revealing the Hidden Contradictions in the Bible (And Why We Don't Know About Them) by Bart Ehrman:
Like Ehrman's earlier Misquoting Jesus, this book has a title that sounds a lot more controversial and dramatic than the actual contents, which are straightforward lay introduction Biblical historical criticism (just as Misquoting Jesus is a straightforward lay introduction to Biblical textual criticism).
Eherman presents the book as being what he and everyone else who went to a mainstream Protestant seminary learned about the Bible, but that somehow never gets conveyed from ministers to congregations. I obviously can't verify this personally (though I have no reason to doubt him) but nothing here is surprising if you've read other books on the subject. For that reason I didn't like this as much as I liked Misquoting Jesus: I've read a number of other books that cover historical criticism of the Bible -- how the Bible contradicts itself, who wrote the Bible, how it was assembled and what was left out, that sort of thing. But I've never read another book on textual Biblical criticism (indeed, I'm not sure any other books for the layperson exist). So Misquoting Jesus was a real eye-opener for me in a way this wasn't.
However, Jesus, Interrupted is a good, readable book covering the subject from what seems to be a very mainstream standpoint, without the author's inserting his own religious beliefs into the book. In this way it differs from Reading the Bible Again for the First Time by Marcus Borg. I love Reading the Bible Again for the First Time, but it's as much or more about how to get meaning from the Bible as a religiously liberal Christian GIVEN the various historical facts about the Bible. Jesus, Interrupted is strictly about the historal facts themselves, with religious implications addressed only superficially and briefly in the last chapter.
As an aside, I'd like to plug Misquoting Jesus. Fantastic book. An excellent read for anyone who's interested in a greater understanding of the history of the actual text of the Bible and the problems with trying to figure out what the original versions of ancient texts actually said.
My "book I didn't finish" this time around -- or at least that I think I won't finish, though I haven't taken it back yet: God's Problem: How the Bible Fails to Answer Our Most Important Question--Why We Suffer by Bart Ehrman.
The book does what it says on the tin: presents various ways the Bible has addressed the problem of suffering, and how Ehrman feels they fall short. I think I ended up reading about half the book (the beginning, the end, parts in the middle).
Ehrman mentions when he teaches undergraduates they often don't see suffering as a problem, because (he feels) they haven't seen enough of it yet. So, he presents graphic illustrations of suffering to them to get them thinking about it. That seems to be his approach her,e too: repeated descriptions of instances of human suffering, again and again and again. Personally, I found that aspect of the book depressing and not really necessary. (Look, I've visited Auschwitz and seen the shoe hallway. You really don't need to reel off page after page of atrocities to convince me that the Holocaust was a Very Bad Thing.)
Unlike Jesus, Interrupted and Misquoting Jesus, this book is heavily steeped in the author's religious viewpoint (former evangelical Christian who turned atheist because of the problem of suffering). I don't share either of these viewpoints, so the book left me sort of cold. I don't know, I guess I have my own theories on why we suffer, which depend on a view of God which differers from the Judeo-Christian mainstream and which based on his writings I suspect Ehrman would reject as being not GOD -- not Godlike enough. Which is perfectly fine, but it means the book didn't really resonate with me in a way that it might have if I shared his religious views. As it is, the book is all about a problem that isn't deeply worrying to me, so having already read bunches of Ehrman books already, I think I'll wander off to other things.
Crazy for God: How I Grew Up as One of the Elect, Helped Found the Religious Right, and Lived to Take All (or Almost All) of It Back by Frank Schaeffer:
I read this after watching this video following Dr. Tiller's murder. A pro-life advocate apologizing for his role in contributing to a climate that leads to violence? What a concept.
And, it sounds as if Schaeffer does have a lot to apologize for.... apparently he played a major role (if not THE major role) in getting the religious right interested in the issue of abortion, which prior to that was considered primarily a Catholic issue. I have to admit I'm rather annoyed by the fact that he seems to want to apologize on the one hand, but continue to talk as if Roe v. Wade gave women abortions on demand until the moment of birth. (In fact, regulating late-term abortions is perfectly legal under Roe v. Wade and in fact they are usually legal only in the event of a health risk to the mother or problems with the fetus.)
The book itself was interesting (guy had an interesting childhood, growing up in a sort of evangelical commune in Switzerland) but I do wish he'd talked more about his time with the religious right movement in America, a time that clearly made him unhappy and which he doesn't seem to want to dwell on. Though, seeing someone who knew and worked with them describe leading religious right leaders in terms like "nutjob" or "power-hungry psychopath" is interesting. Those aren't exact quotes since I've since returned the book to the library, but he uses terms as harsh as those. (IIRC, he was speaking of Pat Robertson and Jerry Falwell, respectively.)
I found it interesting, but not a must-read.
Aside: so far I've only read two first-person accounts of time in British boarding schools and both of them talked extensively about how much homosexual sex was going on. Maybe Harry Potter fandom is onto something.
The First Paul: Reclaiming the Radical Visionary Behind the Church's Conservative Icon by Marcus J. Borg and John Dominic Crossan:
This is a book on Paul. One of the authors is Marcus Borg. That should tell you most of what you need to know. :-)
Well, OK, not really. I've just read a lot of books by Marcus Borg! (Nothing by Crossan.) I'm afraid I don't have much that's exciting to say about this. It's a discussion of some of the letters of Paul taken in their historical context, and what we're to make of them, given that they were written to specific people NOT US, in a time and culture NOT OURS, to deal with specific situations and issues we no longer deal with. Interesting stuff, but not the place to start if you want to get into popular-press books on biblical scholarship.
Aside: throughout the New Testament there are references to Gentiles who "feared God." According to this book, there was a big group of Gentiles who were really interested in the Jewish God and Jewish religious and moral philosophy, who worshiped at Jewish synagogues, and who gave money to them, but who didn't fully convert. (The didn't necessarily follow various Jewish laws or keep kosher and -- importantly -- were not circumcised.)
These were a key group that Paul was trying to convert to Christianity, which makes sense: early Christianity was an obvious sell to someone who wanted to worship the Jewish God but didn't want to keep Jewish laws. Evidently this is one reason local Jewish authorities were peeved at Paul. They felt he was poaching potential converts (not to mention people who had previously been giving money to Jewish synagogues who were now giving it to Christian groups).
Jesus, Interrupted: Revealing the Hidden Contradictions in the Bible (And Why We Don't Know About Them) by Bart Ehrman:
Like Ehrman's earlier Misquoting Jesus, this book has a title that sounds a lot more controversial and dramatic than the actual contents, which are straightforward lay introduction Biblical historical criticism (just as Misquoting Jesus is a straightforward lay introduction to Biblical textual criticism).
Eherman presents the book as being what he and everyone else who went to a mainstream Protestant seminary learned about the Bible, but that somehow never gets conveyed from ministers to congregations. I obviously can't verify this personally (though I have no reason to doubt him) but nothing here is surprising if you've read other books on the subject. For that reason I didn't like this as much as I liked Misquoting Jesus: I've read a number of other books that cover historical criticism of the Bible -- how the Bible contradicts itself, who wrote the Bible, how it was assembled and what was left out, that sort of thing. But I've never read another book on textual Biblical criticism (indeed, I'm not sure any other books for the layperson exist). So Misquoting Jesus was a real eye-opener for me in a way this wasn't.
However, Jesus, Interrupted is a good, readable book covering the subject from what seems to be a very mainstream standpoint, without the author's inserting his own religious beliefs into the book. In this way it differs from Reading the Bible Again for the First Time by Marcus Borg. I love Reading the Bible Again for the First Time, but it's as much or more about how to get meaning from the Bible as a religiously liberal Christian GIVEN the various historical facts about the Bible. Jesus, Interrupted is strictly about the historal facts themselves, with religious implications addressed only superficially and briefly in the last chapter.
As an aside, I'd like to plug Misquoting Jesus. Fantastic book. An excellent read for anyone who's interested in a greater understanding of the history of the actual text of the Bible and the problems with trying to figure out what the original versions of ancient texts actually said.
My "book I didn't finish" this time around -- or at least that I think I won't finish, though I haven't taken it back yet: God's Problem: How the Bible Fails to Answer Our Most Important Question--Why We Suffer by Bart Ehrman.
The book does what it says on the tin: presents various ways the Bible has addressed the problem of suffering, and how Ehrman feels they fall short. I think I ended up reading about half the book (the beginning, the end, parts in the middle).
Ehrman mentions when he teaches undergraduates they often don't see suffering as a problem, because (he feels) they haven't seen enough of it yet. So, he presents graphic illustrations of suffering to them to get them thinking about it. That seems to be his approach her,e too: repeated descriptions of instances of human suffering, again and again and again. Personally, I found that aspect of the book depressing and not really necessary. (Look, I've visited Auschwitz and seen the shoe hallway. You really don't need to reel off page after page of atrocities to convince me that the Holocaust was a Very Bad Thing.)
Unlike Jesus, Interrupted and Misquoting Jesus, this book is heavily steeped in the author's religious viewpoint (former evangelical Christian who turned atheist because of the problem of suffering). I don't share either of these viewpoints, so the book left me sort of cold. I don't know, I guess I have my own theories on why we suffer, which depend on a view of God which differers from the Judeo-Christian mainstream and which based on his writings I suspect Ehrman would reject as being not GOD -- not Godlike enough. Which is perfectly fine, but it means the book didn't really resonate with me in a way that it might have if I shared his religious views. As it is, the book is all about a problem that isn't deeply worrying to me, so having already read bunches of Ehrman books already, I think I'll wander off to other things.