Search results

I'm currently reading "Touching the gods : physical interaction with cult statues in the Roman world" by Polly Weddle. It's a PhD theiis: I check the British Library's list every so often for interesting (and free!) items.

I did not say no professional historian ever questioned the historical reality of Jesus: I said that Grant made that claim. Can some-one point to such a historian? Bart Ehrman studied at a college training fundamentalist Protestant ministers, then (wanting a proper degree, as he put it) took...

The historian Michael Grant, who I don't think was a Christian, wrote a book about what could be reconstructed of the life of Jesus. He remarked that there were no professional historians who questioned the existence of Jesus, and the arguments of the amateurs who did would dispose of a lot of...

I've always had a gut belief in God, long before I studied any of the philosophical arguments. I was brought up an Anglican Christian of the baptisms, marriages, and funerals variety. Eventually I started thinking seriously about religion — perhaps advancing age, perhaps a series of vivid dreams...

If you posted this in the belief that the lingam used as a symbol of Shiva is a phallic symbol, that's a Western misconception. The Sanskrit term originally just meant a distinguishing mark or sign. Of course, for some (Wendy Doniger!) a cigar is never just a cigar… Stones used as symbols of...

I read a review by an Egyptologist — charlottesegypt.com — which said his history was rubbish. There's no evidence that the ancient Egyptians believed in reincarnation that I know of. As for the pharaoh being a god, this is something that the Egyptologists have long debated about. The...

The canon of the Old Testament, if I remember rightly, was basically a matter of keeping the Hebrew books and excluding the Aramaic, keeping the old and excluding the very new. The majority of Christians (i.e. non-Protestants) keep many Aramaic books, that the Protestants call apocryphal. The...

The argument form causation has a respectable history in philosophy from ancient times to the present: if you wish to argue against it, maybe you should study the subject rather than hanging out on-line (or even reading popularised physics)! The belief that events don't just happen for no...

The world could have been created in two ways: by setting up a complete, working system, or by launching an evolutionary process. The Creator choses the latter: if you want to know why, one day you may get the chance to ask!

Remember that it is very doubtful that the gospels attributed to Matthew, Luke, and John were written by them, or that they were in existence much before 150 AD. As for Mark, we have Origen's testimony that the text originally ended with the discovery of the empty tomb. Paul spoke of people...

Gods are also vast. We only encounter aspects of them which we can comprehend, and this may change with time, according to our needs and their wisdom.

If reincarnation is normal, or even common, then most of us will have been around quite a few times. I have a gut dislike of this sort of thesophical / newage (rhyme with sewage) belief that some are more "evolved" than others, but I suppose its defenders would say that's just a sign that I'm a...

A survey in China a couple of years ago showed that possibly as many as 80% of Chinese prayed regularly: that doesn't seem reflected here! So many of these published figures are dubious. The Encyclopedia Britannica used to get all its statistics for communist countries from official sources, for...

Why this assumption that the only choice is between unbelief and an Abrahamic religion? People believed in God long before the Bible existed. As for the good, culture, and civilisation, they are surely outweighed by the bigotry, persecutions, and killings inspired by Judaism, Christianity, and...

The passage that Wil has quoted is taken from the translation by William Whiston, made in 1732 from the editio princeps of 1544 — in other words, of no scholarly value. I've just checked the Wikipedia article "Josephus on Jesus", which I'd not seen before. It seems a reliable presentation of...

The philosopher Thomas Reid (who was also a cleric) said that revelation was meant to be a supplement to reason, not a replacement. Pray that your reasoning may be strengthened, and then use it. It can be a long and confusing business, sorting out ones beliefs, but it's worth it in the end.

Says who? And what about Tacitus? And what's wrong with a Biblical reference, if it's subjected to sensible scrutiny like any other document? I'm reminded of Charles II's comment on an eccentric cleric, that he was the sort of man who'd believe anything so long as it wasn't in the Bible. How...

The historian Michael Grant remarked that not only had no reputable historian ever denied the existence of Jesus of Nazareth, but the arguments deployed by the disreputable ones would be equally effective against Alexander the Great. It's not a question of faith, but of understanding the nature...

Hubbard was always a con artist: read about him and Jack Parsons at Wikipedia. I've never read his SF, but I do remember a funny review (well, it's an insider joke) that just said he displayed the characterisation skills of Doc Smith, the plotting ability of A. E. Van Vogt, and the moral...

and so on.