Posts Tagged james mcgrath
James McGrath – Revelation Course Blog, Needs Comments
Posted by Joel in Biblioblogging on November 30, 2010
- Image via Wikipedia
I am copying this completely:
This semester, students in my course on the Book of Revelation had as one of their assignments to evaluate a web site and post their evaluation on a blog set up for this purpose.
I’ll be reading their posts over the coming days, but I wanted to share a link to the blog so that you can do so as well.
Your comments will be welcome, both for my benefit as I seek to evaluate not only what students produced, but also the value of this sort of assignment; and also for the benefit of the students, for some of whom this represents their very first steps towards contributing to that online pool of information that is the internet.
via Exploring Our Matrix: Evaluating Online Sources Online: Revelation Course Blog.
I’ve read several of the blog posts – I think that you might find it interesting some of the takes on Revelation….
Related articles
- SBL Reflections (drjimsthinkingshop.com)
- James McGrath on responsible blog ownership (westernthm.wordpress.com)
- Is Dr. James McGrath a heretic? (thechurchofjesuschrist.us)
- Don’t Forget your Favorite Bibliobloggers on Cyber-Monday (thechurchofjesuschrist.us)
Christ or Creationism? The Church’s Pork Problem
Christ or Creationism?
First, I want to introduce you to a post from Gordon, and then we’ll discuss Ken Ham. I know, lame pun, but in all sincerity, it is a problem when one person hogs the gospel for himself, and loves to root around in the slop while hamming it up for others, fattening himself up on misdirection and anti-intellectualism.
Gordon writes,
My own faith was shipwrecked by this issue because I had been told time and again that belief in a young earth and creation of the species as they currently are without evolution was essential to being a proper, soundly converted, bible believing Christian….
And yes, Ken Ham will state that one doesn’t have to believe in YEC, but will roundly attack those who do not. Gordon goes on to note what is actually in the doctrine of Young Earth Creationism, rightly, I believe. When you view of God is based on having to accept something as literal, when we have a long history of it not being required as well as it being proven wrong… you have no real connection to God.
Next up, Ken is again attacking in a very shrewd way Dr. James McGrath. If my readers will remember, I’ve dined with the good Doctor and his family. I have a great respect for him and none for Ken Ham. Why? What fruit is found in Ken Ham? What humility? What is his gospel message? Did Paul so rebuke Reason? Intellectualism? Did Paul add to the Gospel’s message? If Ken is the Christian that he says he is, where are his answers, in season and out of season? As a matter of fact, he is on record stating that he will not be asked questions. And his staff? What credentials? And his love? Does Ken Love anyone anymore?
And to blame the collapsing of a Christian World View in the U.S. on such as Dr. McGrath is silly. Instead, I would charge that if we had a Christian World View, if we were truly a Christian nation at any point in our history, that the likes of Ken Ham is what is causing the downfall with his insistence on something more than Christ. We no longer look to Christ, but our own interpretations of Scripture, believing that they are inerrant. His notion of the authority of the word of God is bound up in his interpretation, and not reality.
I am a believe in Jesus Christ. I believe Him to be just what the Scriptures state He is. I believe in Scripture as inspired. I believe that all are lost but through Christ’s faithfulness righteousness is imputed. I believe that God is still calling through Christ, that we must respond, that Scripture is central, and that sin is real. I do not believe that creationism or evolution makes one more or less a Christian, a believer, or even sanctified. I believe instead that we must endeavor to understand the word of God as it was meant to be understood and that I don’t have to understand it all in order for it to be Truth. I further believe that my understandings and interpretations are second, third – fourth! to what the word of God actually says.
I believe that people like Ken Ham are causing undue divisions in the Body of Christ and instead of reaching towards one another in Christ, we are doing our best to fracture even more our mission. Christ asked us to believe upon Him. I do. I believe that my life has forever been changed because of my faith in Christ, because of, if you will, an unquantifiable religious experience and a continued presence by the Spirit of the Living God.
I believe that both Ken and James are brothers in Christ, but that one is rejecting the Father and in doing so, becoming a home-wrecker.
I believe in
- God the Father Almighty,
- Maker of heaven and earth:
- And in Jesus Christ his only Son our Lord,
- Who was conceived by the Holy Ghost,
- Born of the Virgin Mary,
- Suffered under Pontius Pilate,
- Was crucified, dead, and buried:
- He descended into hell;
- The third day he rose again from the dead;
- He ascended into heaven,
- And sitteth on the right hand of God the Father Almighty;
- From thence he shall come to judge the quick and the dead.
- I believe in the Holy Ghost;
- The holy Catholick Church;
- The Communion of Saints;
- The Forgiveness of sins;
- The Resurrection of the body,
- And the Life everlasting.
- Amen.
Anything else you need me to believe in to be saved?
Is Dr. James McGrath a heretic?
Now I don’t ask this question lightly… but here is the evidence
Doug Mangum has begun a contest to see who can find the most boring book title. I am not sure if I’ve thought of the best contender yet, but at the moment I’m inclined to go with this one: The Book
. But I may yet come up with something better still, and so had better wait until I check whether we can enter more than once. (here)
Now, the particular ‘book’ he is describing as, um, ‘boring’ (Tyndale be praised, Tyndale forgive) is the New Living Translation 1996 edition.
Boring?
Boring!!!!
Boring!!!!!!!!!!!
The Book is not ‘boring’… it is, and will forever be, a national treasure, and it was, until 2004 which lasted until 2007, the ONLY inspired word of God.
So, is Dr. James McGrath a heretic? Until he offers public penance in the way for proclaiming that The Book was from 1996 to 2004, the eternally ONLY inspired word of God and that currently, the ONLY inspired word of God which we will ever have is the New Living Translation… oh, and withdraw his entry from Doug’s contest, and demand that I win, well then… the issue is unresolved.
Oh… and buy his book:
The Only True God: Early Christian Monotheism in Its Jewish Context
Quote of the Day: Penance
One reason I engage in some of the conversations I do is as penance for having previously been on the other side – Dr. James McGrath.
Yup, and amen.
Dr. James McGrath, again, on the Resemblance Between Mythicism And Creationism
Posted by Joel in Debate/Discussion on July 7, 2010
In responding to a rather juvenile post by Neil G., Dr. McGrath again steps into the water and wades out a little bit deeper. This is Neils bailiwick, in which he insults someone who he disagrees with, and then proceeds to spit out nothing by lies, misinformation, and logical fallacies about them and their positions along with the notion that Christ is nothing more than a myth. I would encourage you to read the posts in the series (click the tags at the bottom of this post, or the labels at Dr. McGrath’s site) for a better understanding of the issues and how it is academically handled.
This is, in my opinion, a non-issue based on the historical facts, but from time to time, someone wishing to make his or her mark, decides to take this up.
And to note, a commentator there writes,
I am a scientist, and I also believe in Jesus as my savior. I do not see any conflict between my religion and my science. I think the main problem is that creationists take the bible as “word for word” literally. But then do they take even prophetic writing like the beasts in Revelation literally? The bible is not a science book. Would God try to explain to a rather limited scientific person like Moses basic physics, chemistry, or biology? I view Genesis as an allegory given to a “science-challenged” group of people. Maybe that is still true today. If God could use Babylonians and Romans as His instrument to carry out justice upon an unrighteous Israel (in 600 BC and again in 70 AD), He could certainly use evolution to carry out His plan for creation. To the people who take the bible “word for word” literally correct – could you please tell me about Leviticus 14. Does an animal’s blood on you right ear, right thumb, and right big toe, help you in your cleansing? Can I mention “priestly source” without being barbecued?
(I kinda had to throw that in)
But, read the posts in question.
James McGrath, Holiness Preacher
This has to be one of the best sermons on holiness, as I understand it, that I’ve read in a long time.
…..The assumption here is that, just as purity seemed to be more powerful than holiness, evil seems to be more powerful than goodness.
In the symbolism of the purity language in the New Testament, I find a powerful challenge to strive for infectious goodness. A goodness that can easily be corrupted is fairly weak and superficial – it probably means that one doesn’t desire that which is good, and so can only imagine people choosing the good if other choices have been hidden from view…..
Exploring Our Matrix: Contagious Holiness.
I came from a holiness, supposedly, congregation so these ideas interest me. Read the entire post as it is a powerfully good one.
The Mandaean Book of John, New Blog and Great News
Posted by Joel in Religious News on June 19, 2010
Dr. James McGrath, and a collaborator, has been awarded a grant to translated the Book of John (the Baptist, not the other one),
Butler Religion Professor Awarded Federal Funding
Butler University Associate Professor of Religion James McGrath has been awarded a $130,000 National Endowment for the Humanities grant for a project to translate the Mandaean Book of John from Mandaic into English. The Mandaeans are a Gnostic group, the only one to have survived continuously from the ancient world to the present day.
McGrath’s main collaborator will be Charles Häberl of Rutgers University, an expert in ancient and modern Semitic languages, whose first book is on a modern spoken dialect of Mandaic. April DeConick of Rice University, well known for her work on Gnostic texts such as the Gospel of Thomas and the Gospel of Judas, will also be involved as a consultant.
“The Mandaeans’ sacred texts are in a dialect of Aramaic,” McGrath said. “Some of them mention John the Baptist and Jesus. John the Baptist gets a positive mention; Jesus, not so much. Two of their most important sacred texts have never been translated into English in their entirety. One, the Ginza Rba, or Great Treasure, several people are working on that. But the second most important text is the Book of John. To my knowledge, no one was working on a translation of the whole thing into English. It caught my interest and I said, ‘Let me see if I can get some funding to remedy this.’”
McGrath and his collaborators plan to spend the next two years on the first stage of this project: producing a typed version of the text in the original language and translating the more than 200 pages of handwritten text. In addition to previously published copies of the Mandaic text and manuscripts in libraries, they will also make use of scans of privately owned copies of the Book of John.
Some such manuscripts have already been identified. McGrath said he hopes the publicity the NEH grant award creates will draw this project to the attention of others who may have manuscripts among their family’s possessions and be willing to allow them to be scanned or photographed.
The long-term goal is to publish the text and translation together with a commentary.
“The discovery, translation, and publication of manuscripts like the Nag Hammadi texts and the Dead Sea Scrolls has certainly helped us understand that period of several centuries in history that gave rise to early Christianity, rabbinic Judaism, and Gnosticism, among other religious movements,” McGrath said. “Yet we have these texts that have been known for far longer and yet have never been translated into English. I’m glad that the time has come to remedy this situation.”
The money from the NEH will cover numerous research expenses and free those involved in the project from certain teaching and other responsibilities, allowing them to devote the necessary time to working on the translation.
“I’m delighted to get this grant,” McGrath said. “I feel very privileged to have the opportunity to be involved in such an important project.”
You can find the blog dedicated to the project here:
