The Divine Conspiracy Blog

The WSJ reviews Ralph Nader’s new book, Only the Super-Rich Can Save Us!

The blog Peje Iesous (Jesus said) interviews Gospel of Thomas scholar Nicholas Perrin, Associate Professor of New Testament at Wheaton College. Part I here, and Part II here.

The Maverick Philosopher writes that “big government makes for small citizens.”

Fred von Kamecke has a new book out, Busted: Exposing Popular Myths about Christianity. You can read part of Chapter 1 here and all of Chapter 3 here.

As I mentioned here, today is Blasphemy Day. Now, columnist David Gibbon weighs in on the issue.

Today, September 30, is Blasphemy Day, and if that makes you want to curse, then the Center for Inquiry may be the place to register your epithet — or send a donation. It all depends on your point of view, and whether you want to complain about an atheist whose beliefs you can’t stand or denounce a divinity you don’t believe in.

The Center for Inquiry, or CFI, is hoping for the second option, encouraging people to declare their contempt for God (or gods) as a way of promoting freedom of expression, which the CFI sees as threatened by growing legal and social privileges for religious beliefs.

In Character is a “journal for everyday virtues.”

In Character seeks to illuminate the nature and power of the everyday virtues — and how these virtues shape our vision of the good life.

Each issue will examine a single virtue from different perspectives, bringing together scholars and journalists versed in public policy, the humanities, religion, and the sciences.

In Character aims to foster a deeper appreciation of these virtues within our communities, our families and ourselves.

Three issues are published per year.

You can read the current issue, as well as back issues, here.

Margaret E. Ramey, writing for the Society of Biblical Literature, reviews a new series of books written by Hank Hanegraaff and Sigmund Brouwer. The Last Disciple series is meant to “intentionally counter Left Behind‘s eschatology with a preterist interpretation of Revelation and other apocalyptic writings.”

Biblical interpreters have found a new arena for fighting—fiction! Because novels are easily accessible and understandable, they can function as powerful propaganda tools for swaying the masses. We need mention only The DaVinci Code as one example of the effect that fiction can have on reshaping the image of Jesus in the public square. The battle currently being waged, however, is over eschatology rather than Christology, and the two opposing groups come not from different theological parties but from the same evangelical camp.

Most are already aware of Tim LaHaye and Jerry Jenkins’ Left Behind series, which espouses a premillennial dispensationalism popular within modern American evangelicalism. The novels are set in the not-so-distant future and begin with the rapture of all the “real Christians.” The characters who have been “left behind” then experience a seven-year tribulation during which the post-rapture Christian converts rally forces against the antichrist and try to withstand various wars, plagues, and famines that take place prior to Christ’s return and his thousand-year reign of peace on the earth.

Many, however, may not have heard of the newer Last Disciple series written by Hank Hanegraaff, better known in evangelical circles as the Bible Answer Man and as the president of the Christian Research Institute, and Sigmund Brouwer to intentionally counter Left Behind‘s eschatology with a preterist interpretation of Revelation and other apocalyptic writings. Unlike futurist positions, such as the one seen in the Left Behind series, the preterist position is a historical one, which advocates that Revelation should primarily be understood as a letter written to churches in the first century C.E. Insisting that context should determine its meaning, interpreters locate Revelation’s symbols and prophecies within the first century rather than transposing them onto later time periods. In the Last Disciple series, we see this commitment to interpreting Revelation via its historical context first and foremost in the fact that the novels are historical fiction rather than futuristic fantasy as are the Left Behind novels. From the first page of the trilogy, its preterist position is made clear by the designation of its setting as “ten months after the beginning of the tribulation.”

At first glance, Hanegraaff’s novels appear to be worlds apart from their fictional, evangelical cousins (and according to their settings, they literally are). The eschatologies dramatized through these novels are vastly divergent, as we shall see through exploring the preterism of the Last Disciple series, but what turns out to be most striking about this new series is not its differences but its similarities with the Left Behind novels that arise from several hermeneutical assumptions regarding prophecy and symbols.

Read the complete article here.

Andrew Farley is a pastor, and professor of Applied Linguistics at Texas Tech University. He’s also the author of a new book, The Naked Gospel. You can read a short excerpt from the book here.

Atheist Ricky Gervais responds to opinions, like this one, that The Invention of Lying is an attack on God, and more specifically, Christianity.

A couple more web sites have picked up on a few Christians (not all – most Christians have a sense of humour) saying that The Invention of Lying is blasphemous.

Here are my seven deadly sins of jumping to conclusions:

1. No one has seen the film.

2. Even if the film suggests there is no God, it is a fictional world. One of my favourite films is ‘It’s a wonderful life’ and at no time am I offended by the suggestion in this wonderful work of fiction that there is a God.

3. If the film was not set in a fictional world and suggested there is no God then that’s fine too, as it is anyone’s right not to believe in God.

4. By suggesting there is no God you are not singling out Christianity.

5. Not believing in God cannot be blasphemous. Blasphemy is acknowledging a God to insult or offend etc.

6. Even if it was blasphemous, which it isn’t, then that’s OK too due to a little god I like called “freedom of speech.” That said, I am not trying to offend anyone. That would be a waste of such a privilege.

7. I am an atheist, but this is not atheist propaganda. When creating an imaginary world you have to make certain decisions. We decided also that there would be no surrealist art, no racism, no flattery, no fiction, no metaphor, and no supernatural. However, we decided that apart from that one “lying gene”, humans evolved with everything else as we have it today. Joy, hope, ambition, ruthlessness, greed, lust, anger, jealousy, sadness, and grief. It’s just a film. If any of the themes in it offend you or bore you, or just don’t make sense to you, you should put everything right when you make a film.

I really hope everyone enjoys the film and keeps an open mind. I believe in peace on Earth, and good will to all men. I do as I would be done by, and believe that forgiveness is one of the greatest virtues. I just don’t believe I will be rewarded for it in heaven. That’s all.

Cheers.

Mark Goodacre, from the Department of Religion at Duke University, has an excellent site New Testament Gateway, which has been linked from the Bookmarks page for several years.

Mark also has a blog, and although it’s primarily an “update” page for the main site, it’s full of interesting and useful information.