tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5759844.post115833612536954313..comments2024-03-21T14:59:20.729-04:00Comments on NT Blog: The Pope on Harnack and the New Testament -- and MuslimsMark Goodacrehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/05115370166754797529noreply@blogger.comBlogger4125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5759844.post-1158958672885635572006-09-22T16:57:00.000-04:002006-09-22T16:57:00.000-04:00For some reason, the Pope's speech is not being vi...For some reason, the Pope's speech is not being viewed very objectively. I might wish it were! First he makes a polite joke about atheists, how they are a little puzzled by his eminent University, how it has two faculties for something that never exists: God.<BR/>Then he jokes about a Byzantine Emperor, how harshly he speaks, "makes an astoundingly harsh statemnent."<BR/> HH Benedict XVI is walking on egg shells, but the Muslims aren't critiqued, an Emperor and his ideas are.<BR/> Here is a suggestion: the Greek nation should riot and say their King is being slandered. In addition, Regensberg should pass a law that no Pope can ever come within its municipality because all Popes are slanderous Italians. <BR/> While we are busy enjoying ourselves doing that, let's read the text and see whether the Pope hurt anyone. Like Pilate, I find no crime in him.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5759844.post-1158882234677250412006-09-21T19:43:00.000-04:002006-09-21T19:43:00.000-04:00Anon: The pope didn't base his argument on the par...Anon: The pope didn't base his argument on the part of the text that was irrelevant to his point, so it's a little strange to call it a red herring. He was trying to be historically accurate to the view he was quoting, so he put it in its full context with all the irrelevant issues that were in the original context. But he never asserted any view about Islam, never mind claiming that it used the sword to spread religion.<BR/><BR/>What he did was point out that a debate was occurring in the medieval time over whether God is subject to reason or over it, and the players in the debate are irrelevant to his point. He wants to be clear that the idea of a rational God is not merely a Greek philosophical idea. He used this medieval debate as a place where this was being discussed long before the Enlightenment, but it was this emperor's view of God and reason that he was citing favorably, and his comments that he was saying his views too strongly and so on show that he wasn't entirely happy with everything he was saying aside from that main point.Jeremy Piercehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/03441308872350317672noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5759844.post-1158735100502110182006-09-20T02:51:00.000-04:002006-09-20T02:51:00.000-04:00That is because the Popes comments simply imply th...That is because the Popes comments simply imply that Protestants are turning away from the reason that is inherent to God; where in regard to Islam the Pope suggest that it is inherently illogical and hence Godless. The worst part his whole argument being that it is based on a quote of propaganda from the time of the Crusades; that quote falsely claims that Islam commands Muslims to spread their faith 'by the sword', while you simply won't find no such command to quote within the text of the Koran. The Pope quite simply built his argument off a putrid red herring and tried to pass it off as reason.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5759844.post-1158341471974949132006-09-15T13:31:00.000-04:002006-09-15T13:31:00.000-04:00"Harnack's central idea was to return simply to th..."Harnack's central idea was to return simply to the man Jesus and to his simple message" - We need more of this. Jesus' message about the soon coming, literal, physical, political coming Kingdom is so simple - even Harnack destroyed it when he declares Jesus a moral teacher.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.com