Show summary
Penn says at the start of the show that people who believe all the Bible is literally true simply because of faith are unassailable. They've no problem with that. Their beef is with people who claim its stories are literally true and who then try to invoke science to prove it (which is the path I thought they would take).
Then they addressed several Bible stories in particular: the creation stories, Noah, Exodus, and the ressurection. Their two experts were Michael Shermer (editor of Skeptic magazine) and Paul Meyer (ancient history professor at Western Michigan).
First they pointed out that there are actually two creation stories and that they differ considerably in how they order events -- which is a bit of a knot for someone claiming literal inerrancy. Shermer noted that this is only a problem if you believe these stories are factual. But, as he said several times, to interpret these stories literally is to miss their point.
The segment on the Noah story was amusing. They showed a Cecil B. DeMille film clip with the label "Actual Footage." Shermer said it's just nuts to think two representatives from all of Earth's 10 billion species could be fit into a giant boat, and that there is no physical evidence of any kind the story is literally true. Penn pointed out that there is, however, geological and archaeological evidence for a large localized flood in the Euphrates river valley around 2900 BC. In that story a local king saves some of his property and animals by jumping on a barge to ride out the flood (and this fits the timeframe of the Epic of Gilgamesh upon which the Noah story is based).
In the Exodus segment they point out that there is no historical evidence outside of the Bible and no archaeological evidence at all that Hebrews ever lived in Eygpt in any significant numbers. Also, there's no evidence that they ever wandered the Siani for 40 years (surely, a large wandering mob of people would leave some trash). Meyer countered that the Egyptians did not record defeats, so the Hebrews could have escaped captivity and the pharoh would have censored any mention of it for posterity (of course, the ancient Egyptians never mentioned their defeat at the hands of time travelling Nazis, either.). However, Meyer agreed with Shermer that the crossing of the Red Sea was almost certainly meant to be a crossing of the Reed Sea, which was nothing more than a swamp dried out by a strong wind -- hardly unusual and hardly a miracle. Penn pointed out that the signs God gave to pharoh were a cruel and inefficient way to get his point across to the Egyptian king, especially the bit about the killing of the first born Egyptians, many of whom would have been innocent children and infants. As Penn talked, Teller was reproducing some the "miracles" on camera.
On the resurrection, they argued that there were lots of messiahs running around in the first century. One in particular was said to have worked lots of miracles, raised a guy from the dead, was arrested by the Romans, tried, and executed, and then later rose from the dead. Nope, not the Jesus story but about a different guy all together. But regarding Jesus, Shermer noted that again there is no historical or physical evidence for the resurrection outside the Bible (and even there the stories conflict. Mark's is the earliest gospel, and in the earliest versions of Mark, the gospel ends when they find an empty tomb. No mention of any appearances or a ressurrection at all). Meyer noted that the best evidence was the empty tomb, but Shermer said an empty tomb won't even come close to cutting it as evidence in science.
Penn made an interesting modern day analogy of the Jesus story by talking about the legend of Elvis. We're only 27 years after the King's death, we have photos of his body in the morgue, and lots of people who knew him personally are still alive and who can confirm his drug use and death. Yet, there are still people who really believe he is still alive and who insist he never did drugs. Heck, we even have conflicting accounts of his favorite fried chicken recipe. The point of Penn's analogy is that if in the age of mass communication, high literacy, and a presumably more intelligent population we have trouble convincing people Elvis is really dead and we can't figure out how to prepare Elvis' favorite food, then it seems logical and appropriate to assume that 2000 years ago in a highly superstitious and scientifically ignorant age the devoted inner circle of Jesus' followers might have also been a little less than objective about the reality and basic facts of Jesus' life.
There was a good bit more, but that's the meat of it. Again, let me restate that they (and I) have no problem with people who believe these stories are literally true simply because they have faith. That sort of reasoning is untouchable by science because it's in the world of faith. But once a person claims he has historical or physcial evidence the stories are true, then the game changes. Now the game is in the world of science and it has to be played by science's rules. Any claim of historical veracity of the stories must meet science's standard of evidence. Many Bible stories do not and cannot meet that standard. Restating Shermer, trying to make the stories meet that standard is to miss the whole point of the stories in the first place.
Penn says at the start of the show that people who believe all the Bible is literally true simply because of faith are unassailable. They've no problem with that. Their beef is with people who claim its stories are literally true and who then try to invoke science to prove it (which is the path I thought they would take).
Then they addressed several Bible stories in particular: the creation stories, Noah, Exodus, and the ressurection. Their two experts were Michael Shermer (editor of Skeptic magazine) and Paul Meyer (ancient history professor at Western Michigan).
First they pointed out that there are actually two creation stories and that they differ considerably in how they order events -- which is a bit of a knot for someone claiming literal inerrancy. Shermer noted that this is only a problem if you believe these stories are factual. But, as he said several times, to interpret these stories literally is to miss their point.
The segment on the Noah story was amusing. They showed a Cecil B. DeMille film clip with the label "Actual Footage." Shermer said it's just nuts to think two representatives from all of Earth's 10 billion species could be fit into a giant boat, and that there is no physical evidence of any kind the story is literally true. Penn pointed out that there is, however, geological and archaeological evidence for a large localized flood in the Euphrates river valley around 2900 BC. In that story a local king saves some of his property and animals by jumping on a barge to ride out the flood (and this fits the timeframe of the Epic of Gilgamesh upon which the Noah story is based).
In the Exodus segment they point out that there is no historical evidence outside of the Bible and no archaeological evidence at all that Hebrews ever lived in Eygpt in any significant numbers. Also, there's no evidence that they ever wandered the Siani for 40 years (surely, a large wandering mob of people would leave some trash). Meyer countered that the Egyptians did not record defeats, so the Hebrews could have escaped captivity and the pharoh would have censored any mention of it for posterity (of course, the ancient Egyptians never mentioned their defeat at the hands of time travelling Nazis, either.). However, Meyer agreed with Shermer that the crossing of the Red Sea was almost certainly meant to be a crossing of the Reed Sea, which was nothing more than a swamp dried out by a strong wind -- hardly unusual and hardly a miracle. Penn pointed out that the signs God gave to pharoh were a cruel and inefficient way to get his point across to the Egyptian king, especially the bit about the killing of the first born Egyptians, many of whom would have been innocent children and infants. As Penn talked, Teller was reproducing some the "miracles" on camera.
On the resurrection, they argued that there were lots of messiahs running around in the first century. One in particular was said to have worked lots of miracles, raised a guy from the dead, was arrested by the Romans, tried, and executed, and then later rose from the dead. Nope, not the Jesus story but about a different guy all together. But regarding Jesus, Shermer noted that again there is no historical or physical evidence for the resurrection outside the Bible (and even there the stories conflict. Mark's is the earliest gospel, and in the earliest versions of Mark, the gospel ends when they find an empty tomb. No mention of any appearances or a ressurrection at all). Meyer noted that the best evidence was the empty tomb, but Shermer said an empty tomb won't even come close to cutting it as evidence in science.
Penn made an interesting modern day analogy of the Jesus story by talking about the legend of Elvis. We're only 27 years after the King's death, we have photos of his body in the morgue, and lots of people who knew him personally are still alive and who can confirm his drug use and death. Yet, there are still people who really believe he is still alive and who insist he never did drugs. Heck, we even have conflicting accounts of his favorite fried chicken recipe. The point of Penn's analogy is that if in the age of mass communication, high literacy, and a presumably more intelligent population we have trouble convincing people Elvis is really dead and we can't figure out how to prepare Elvis' favorite food, then it seems logical and appropriate to assume that 2000 years ago in a highly superstitious and scientifically ignorant age the devoted inner circle of Jesus' followers might have also been a little less than objective about the reality and basic facts of Jesus' life.
There was a good bit more, but that's the meat of it. Again, let me restate that they (and I) have no problem with people who believe these stories are literally true simply because they have faith. That sort of reasoning is untouchable by science because it's in the world of faith. But once a person claims he has historical or physcial evidence the stories are true, then the game changes. Now the game is in the world of science and it has to be played by science's rules. Any claim of historical veracity of the stories must meet science's standard of evidence. Many Bible stories do not and cannot meet that standard. Restating Shermer, trying to make the stories meet that standard is to miss the whole point of the stories in the first place.
This is one subject where they would need a lot more time to cover properly. Like an hour show for each section covered, and another hour for the 'morality' of the bible. Liked how they included in stoning disobedient children, selling your daughter into slavery and the like.
kuroyume0161
Graduate Poster
- Joined
- Oct 26, 2001
- Messages
- 1,628
Re: Thanks!
Luckily, just like the first P&T series, this one should be out in DVD eventually. I'll have to check out the DVDs to see if there is added material (or outtakes).
Kuroyume
Edited to add: Yes, they have extra material and outtakes!!!
Gestahl said:
Luckily, just like the first P&T series, this one should be out in DVD eventually. I'll have to check out the DVDs to see if there is added material (or outtakes).
Kuroyume
Edited to add: Yes, they have extra material and outtakes!!!
kuroyume0161
Graduate Poster
- Joined
- Oct 26, 2001
- Messages
- 1,628
Marc said:
We should take all of these 'guidelines' from the Bible (and there are plenty) and trot them on over to websites like "God Hates Fags" .com and ask them whether, in their fervent, nearly homicidal, hatred of homosexuals, they adhere to the other ones with as much ferver.
Let the stonings begin!!!
Kuroyume
kuroyume0161 said:
They'll say that the would, but the godless secular humanist atheist conspirators that govern this country won't let them. Otherwise, there would be mass beatings, fag stonings, and lots of animal sacrifices to create a sweet savor unto the Lord.
chrisberez
Thinker
- Joined
- Apr 9, 2004
- Messages
- 234
Marc said:
I agree fully. Actually, I think this applies to many of the topics they cover.
And I too want to thank you, Flaherty, for your summery. I do have cable, but I don't have showtime. Which sucks a little, because I really like P&T. I'll just have to wait (impatiently) for the second set to hit DVD, and until then I'll just obsessively rewatch the first set.
Checkmite
Skepticifimisticalationist
Riddick said:
Your mistake here is equating the method of "science" with the body of knowledge gained via that method. If it weren't for science, we would be unaware of the very existence of electrons to begin with.
DarkMagician
Graduate Poster
- Joined
- Nov 25, 2003
- Messages
- 1,532
I thought it was because nerds that couldn't get a date flocked around fan bases.HTmonkey said:To me, reading a bible is like watching Star Wars.
The stories are very good and unbelievable. But unoriginal.
All hail Kurosawa (and others before him).