Who’s Right?

Nan Bible, Christianity, Religion, , , ,

question-mark-2110767_640

Earlier today, in response to a post on Steve’s blog, Arnold (a Christian and occasional contributor to this blog), included the following statement within one of his comments:

 To me there are infinite interpretations to the bible, unique to each person.

I responded thus:

Arnold, IF the Christian god exists and is the behind-the-scenes author of the bible … wouldn’t it seem sensible/logical/natural that there would NOT be “infinite interpretations, unique to each person”??? Even the bible says that God is not the author of confusion, yet that’s exactly what we see today within the God-worshipping religions.

And I ask that question of ANY believer …

The plethora of denominations indicates to me that either God mumbles — or perhaps believers prefer to “hear” what makes them feel the most comfortable.

Physical indications of the latter are plentiful and can be seen in the number of churches within any given location. In fact, one could easily say there is “a church on every corner.” Granted, some of them share the same core beliefs, but I would venture to say only 10% (or less) in any area are “duplications.”

When presented with this perspective, Christians will generally respond that it’s much ado about nothing because all of them believe in Jesus’ saving power. But do they? It seems to me if that were the case, there would be no need for the very wide variety of biblical interpretations, worship styles, and even requirements among various denominations.

Moreover, since there is this (rather obvious) lack of agreement about the bible’s contents and meanings, along come untold numbers of “apologists” to explain, interpret, and decipher (and make beaucoup bucks via books and videos) what the bible really means.

Bottom line … considering all the many facets that enter into one’s belief related to the Christian religion, how can anyone answer the question of  “Who’s right?”

86 thoughts on “Who’s Right?”

  1. I’ve been using that argument for 50 years, but no one is willing to take it on (with me)! They just ignore me and go back to cherrypicking the bible to suit their needs.

    Liked by 3 people

    Reply

  2. For one thing, the bible is so vague in many instances it can be interpreted by anyone who chooses to interpret it. The original bible, if there even be such a thing, has been blotted and oopsied-with-an-inkblot and reworded and rewritten in every language and in every country, and yet believers insist it’s the original book. Right down to the copyright. i suspect much of it was written by someone who was trying to keep a relatively violent and uncivilized group of people from slaughtering themselves before they ever had a chance to evolve into something saner…

    One thing I did learn about it, and it makes a deep amount of sense: much of it was written apparently as a way to keep a nomad people from killing themselves by eating the wrong plants, the wrong animals, the wrong milks and liquids. You have to wonder who actually did that, and got it right, as well. Beyond that it’s a history of a people, genetically, counting moons instead of years, much the way Indian tribes have done.

    since then it has become a hash of ‘miracles’ and prophecy (and one has to wonder how long before the actual prophecy did the event actually take place…)

    In the Catholic church there is a ritual where the priest imitates the ‘water into wine” bit. We all know it’s water, but that’s okay. So did he. We were also, as kids, warned sternly to never watch magic shows, especially on television. Annnd of course we could hardly wait to see them. Suddenly one night I was watching a magician turning water into milk and I thought, AHA. Jesus turning water into wine. And close on that, the loaves and fishes. and walking on water. Jesus, if he existed, was a conjurer and a hypnotist, as skilled as any fakir climbing up the rope and disappearing…applause, applause.

    Liked by 5 people

    Reply

  3. The esrimated number od Christian denominationsrange from 2,000 ro over 40,000. This was sufficien for mer to cut myself loose from them long ago. and you are right about a church on every corner, not literally, because only one of the two on my my street is on a corner.

    I think that according to the NT, Paul warned that the Apostoles.teach the same thing.

    The infallable word of God is nothing but the musings of men.

    Liked by 1 person

    Reply

  4. I think you nailed it with, “believers prefer to “hear” what makes them feel the most comfortable.”
    To me each and every believer tweaks life to his or her advantage. I do. My only hope is that God’s working from the inside out because I’m no angel.

    Liked by 2 people

    Reply

  5. The Muslims are right. In their great book, The Quran, it states, “This book is NOT to be doubted.” Therefor, anyone who doubts it is an ass who is incapable of the ability to read. I mean, WHY would ANYONE make up something like this in a Holy Book?? Thusly, anyone who is not a Muslim is a sinning piece of poop. Period. Mic drop. End of friggin’ discussion.

    Liked by 2 people

    Reply

    • Everybody’s right & nobody’s right. Being right only matters to people who care about being in control.

      I get tired of these control issues. I just do not care who’s right. (I don’t care about a lot of things nowadays). Anyone who claims to be right, to have the right view, to have all the right information … because of their so-called sacred book … 0r because of their spiritual ritual … or whatever … I think they’re spiritual jackasses.

      When you are truly spiritual, you don’t claim to be right nor do you claim to have all the answers or wish to impose your so-called sacred book on everyone else. You go about your business & you mind your own business. That’s how I see it anyway.

      Liked by 3 people

      Reply

      • Yeah ..but…but… I’m sorry….but the Quran says it’s not to be doubted, sooooo unless this kinda stuff is…..well… just kinda made up by people…..welp, the Quran is right and all others are wrong. So. There ya go!!

        Like

        Reply

        • Yeah, I had more than one abusive man tell me that, too. Just because that’s what it says doesn’t make it true & doesn’t mean anyone has to believe it.

          There’s an easy way to deal with that kind of thing. IGNORE IT. WALK AWAY. SAY: FUCK THIS NOISE.

          Like

          Reply

      • but but but…you better get it right! Otherwise our loving Gawd will burn you for eternity!!! Isn’t Christian religion such good news?🤪🤪🤪

        Like

        Reply

  6. …how can anyone answer the question of “Who’s right?”

    I think it is obvious: No one! Nobody is right, especially when it comes to the hermeneutics and eschatology of the GRECO-ROMAN New Testament. Period.

    Until religious-leaning Christian people learn, realize, and ACCEPT the historical fact that Yeshua bar Yosef was merely a Late Second Temple/Messianic-participant and Judaic Rabbinical reformist of the time—none of the Hellenistic mumbo-jumbo that came centuries later, the American, Western-hemisphere, and Catholics/Protestants of the world will NEVER be able to agree on Jesus’/Yeshua’s Tainnaitic Period teachings, wishes, and reforms for his Homeland Jews!

    End of confusing story, because the Romans f*cked it all up, then hijacked it and turned it all into THEIR OWN sort of newish religion. Simple. 🙂

    Liked by 4 people

    Reply

  8. When I was a kid I had the blazes scared out of me when I first discovered Grimm’s Fairy Tales. They were cautionary tales about greed, cupidity, arrogance, pride, all the good stuff in life. Sometimes if you were lucky in the stories you got off with a Lesson Learned. Sometimes, as in “The Little Girl Who Trod on a Loaf” you end up confronting your worst nightmares and I’ll tell you this, I’ve never been a fan of red shoes, to this day…
    And it has just now dawned on me that the Bible is just that. It’s a collection, by and large, of explanatory and/or cautionary tales (David and Goliath, Adam and Eve, Noah and the Ark, even the Tower of Babel) … stories told around campfires, told and retold, until someone invented writing and reading and began collecting them.

    Liked by 4 people

    Reply

  9. What has interested me most about The Bible is that the most common version that modern-day western Christianity is based on was printed in 1611, and known as the King James Bible. That was a time when public literacy was rare, and reserved for a few scholars and rich people.
    So how do we know what those ‘translators’ really tranlated? We only have their word for it
    Best wishes, Pete.

    Liked by 2 people

    Reply

  10. Writing and reading were originally the province of the monks, and they were responsible for much of the transcribing of documents. During the Dark Ages they were the ones who stored knowledge against a better, safer time.
    And occasionally a pen would slip, or a letter would be misplaced, turning the ” Reed Sea” into the “Red Sea” and lo, a miracle happens.

    Liked by 2 people

    Reply

  11. Nan, this is one reason there are so many inconsistencies in the bible or any religious text for that matter. Even if divinely inspired, the worshiped supreme being did not dictate the words. They were written mostly by imperfect men, edited and interpreted by imperfect men and translated numerous times by imperfect men. Both words – imperfect men – are important. Some translations did not even have words that translated well from one language to another.

    The Christian gospels were written between 30 plus and seventy plus years after Jesus died. They were based on lore passed down and some written in different languages by four different men. And, gospels means good news, so they are more like a news account.

    So, I can see how people would have different understandings as the authors did. I have found a Pew Research finding of interest. About 45% of Christians do not believe the bible should be viewed as word for word factual. I would be in this category.

    There is an old adage which is of interest, as well. The adage goes if you want to create an atheist, have them read the bible, especially the Old Testament.

    Keith

    Liked by 3 people

    Reply

    • Worked for me, Keith, along with a few not-so-pleasant experiences. I’ve been an atheist for over 50 years now, and I am happy I flund my home.

      Like

      Reply

  12. Good overview Keith. While this “good news” speaks to a vast majority of us life’s grind and distractions lead to its reassessment, dismissal, and even militant criticism.

    Liked by 1 person

    Reply

    • Arnold, good points. Too many of us fall into a trap that if we don’t agree or believe everything someone or something says or types we must disagree with everything. But, I think it is quite difficult to find someone we agree with 100%, even religious text.

      I think we should hang our hat on overarching statements from religious texts such as treat others like you want to be treated and help the “least of us” when needed. I love the statement from Gandhi which goes a community’s greatness is defined by how it takes care of its least fortunate. If we could do these things, we could set aside all religious texts. Of course, we could listen to the words of Bill and Ted and “be excellent to one another and party on dude.” Keith

      Liked by 3 people

      Reply

    • Yes exactly why the advice given to Christians by their so called God inside their heads is no better or advantageous than any non-Christians advice from within their heads.

      Liked by 2 people

      Reply

    • Personally I believe God’s in us from the get-go, at the least on the threshold. Jesus said the kingdom of God is “within you/among you,” translators/scribers differ. Seems we go with what we got.

      Like

      Reply

      • If no one had ever told you about God, or Jrsus, Arnold, you would not be a Christian right now. I say this not to be mean, but as fact. Religion is not something a person can come up with in a vacuum.

        Liked by 1 person

        Reply

          • My point is, Arnold, believers tell me god is everywhere, in the clouds, in the flowers, in the thunderstorms, and in people’s hearts and minds. But that is obviously fallacious because you needed to be told god is everywhere. You should have known god a priori to being told, but you did not. Nobody knows that.
            Of course you can say that about anything in this world, that you would not know something without being educated, but nothing else in the world is making a claim that it exists before everything else.
            I personally do not care if you are Christian or not, I am not trying to convince you to stop believing. I am only asking that you understand your belief. God is nowhere until you are told he is everywhere!

            Liked by 2 people

  14. I think you’re BOTH right. I consider the Bible a literary work first (I seem to be partially on the same page as Judy above in her comments about fairy tales) and the best works of literature are inexhaustible. At the same time, the lack of a clear message at least suggests God probably wasn’t the author of the Bible.

    Liked by 1 person

    Reply

  15. I think the trap we fall into with the bible is huge and many faceted; one, it’s origins, while fog-bound, are obviously written over an extended period of time, by different people, probably covering hundreds of years of progress. Two, it’s part cautionary tales, (don’t mix meat and milk or you die) stories of magical deeds and great events, and part explanatory “this is how it happened” as an explanation of how things came to be, whether they came to be or not. And most importantly it was a history of the Jewish people, who were at one time (as far as I can tell) a nomadic culture. The irony of that is hard to miss.

    I notice that in the last few decades Jesus has become blonder, lighter skinned, and I expect any year now to see him shunning the toga and appearing in jeans and a t-shirt that says, “Kiss me, I’m Irish”…

    Liked by 2 people

    Reply

  16. That Jesus admonished his followers to keep it on the low-down, don’t make a spectacle of it, keep it secret – put it in the closet* … is a pretty good indication of what he thought of it all. Busting up the usurers and insurers and throwing the indolent priests out of the temple. The way I read it: I put on my best Old Logger/Biker/VFW face and tell the noisy bastards ‘what’s between me and god is between me and god and ain’t nobody’s business but me and god’s.’ Usually shuts ’em up, not smart enough to understand anything more complicated

    Ain’t much I’m afraid of … I’m afraid of what they’re doin’ in the name of their god

    Mt 6:5 – 6

    Liked by 2 people

    Reply

        • gud nooz! Thomas Aquinass*opened that watching the damned burn is part of the entertainment in that blessed hereafter

          not a typo!!!

          Like

          Reply

      • maybe it’s been said before, but when you think about it, if there were a God, there would be one religion (if any at all), and we would all be attached to it, no matter our culture, our language, any of it. God would be pulling the strings, and there would be no need for arguefication over who said what and who wrote the words wrong, there would be no need for words. Or churches. We would also have little say over our behavior, too.

        Do you get the creeps just thinking about what that would be like?

        Liked by 1 person

        Reply

        • That would be like Ai micromanaging robots. To me, “Let us make man in our image, after our likeness,” means God made us as his children and invites us to have emotions, change our minds, and become elusive and vague. With the freedom to come and share it all with him/her; to ‘have say.’ Instead we are rebellious, independent children who choose to do without our father/mother God.

          Liked by 1 person

          Reply

        • Those are nice (predetermined by faith) thoughts, Arnold. But it’s simply religious rhetoric that has been passed down through the ages. Of course, it obviously works for you so the facts behind it all don’t really matter, do they?

          Like

          Reply

          • What! facts don’t matter?! Jesus Christ is a fact of life, and I base my life on his life and death and life; HE works for me.

            Like

  18. By their deeds shall they be known – gods, just like people. Any person speaking, or writing on behalf of their gods may claim their god is not about confusion, but if there are any gods, then these are either unable, or unwilling to put things straight. Explain in any coherent way even to their followers wether they want heretics to be burned alive, or gays to be married. Meanwhile chaos reigns and suffering continues and nature looks like formed by physical and chemical processes, not like created by anything we would call benevolent by any sane meaning of the word.

    The conclusion for the free will argument is, that for some reason the freedom of the assailant, rapist and the murderer to do violence is more valuable, than the free will of their victims, not to be abused and killed.

    Liked by 1 person

    Reply

  19. Asks the lady who wrote a book about the bible. 🙂 Many of us agree that many (if not most) Christians have NOT read the Bible, which is a collection of different books and writings by different people. Of course it conflicts.

    Is this the same Arnold? He’s Catholic, right? In discussion of religion and scripture, that matters (as I realized reading your book). I feel safe saying that very few Catholics have read the Bible. But I don’t know that for certain.

    I once wrote an email to a former acquaintance that I no longer considered myself Catholic, practicing or otherwise. I can add, I am not Christian, Jewish, Muslim, or any other religion.

    I am convinced that there is no God, nor any of the other Religious beings/thing: devils, evil spirits, angels (but I use the word, as I do ‘saints,’ regarding humans), heavens, or hell. Therefore, scripture is (mostly, but not all) as meaningless as religion.

    However, I do align myself with those who suggest reading the Bible (and what you nasty Protestants’ refer to as “apocrypha.”) For people like Arnold (Roman Catholics), I suggest also reading the “Catechism of the Catholic Church.” It is very enlightening.

    Liked by 3 people

    Reply

    • Bill, the reason Catholics (which is where I hail from) do not read the Bible in its entirety, is because for them, it’s not encouraged. Our “bible” begins with the birth of Jesus, the way Charlie Brown’s Christmas does.
      We are taught to totally ignore the Old Testament, possibly because it was the history of the Jews. When we graduated from highschool we also had a graduation from our Confraternity classes at the church. The priest handed out bibles all around, nice shiny leather bound books. I was devastated to realize that when he said Bible he meant the New Testament only.

      In a way, teaching religion that way is like only paddling with one oar. It’s doable, but hardly worth the effort.

      Liked by 4 people

      Reply

      • Protestantism is the product of Roman Catholicism. Both Roman Catholic Church and the Orthodox Greek Catholic Church emphasise the mystery element of the myth in support of faith, because their long history has taught them, that to study and scrutany of the Bible leads to questions, moral hangover, atheism, but at worse case scenario, to division, heresy and schism, that eats away the political and economic power of the institution. Protestantism was born as a byproduct of awaking rennessaince within Roman Catholic universities in a time when only latin speakers could read and interprit the Bible and variable interpretations led to crusades. Most crusades were infact ever organized against other Christians. For example the Northern Crusades were as much against the Orthodox Christians as they were against the pagans. Then there were the crusades against the Cathars and the Hussites, that affected the Christendom and application of religion much more deeply, than the crusades into the faraway Outreamer. Protestants simply were heretics, that could not be beaten in war, so the raction was to prevent more such heresy from emerging with emphasis on indoctrination, rather than react with war after the fact. Apologetics is the attempted rationalization product of Protestantism and enlightenment, as a rehash of all the silly answers the Catholic theologians gave to each other for the inconsistansies and contradictions in the Bible, that were debunked already when they were given, by those same Catholic theologians.

        Liked by 1 person

        Reply

      • Your experience was different than mine, Judy.

        As a Catholic, I was taught comprehensive “Bible History” beginning with Genesis and Creation.

        Much Catholicism (such as Purgation and praying for the dead) are based upon something in the 46 books of the OT (1 or 2 Maccabees, for example, which is in neither Protectant or Jewish scripture, except as apocrypha).

        According to the apologist group, Catholic Answers, “The Old Testament is very important for Christians. The Catechism of the Catholic Church explains (which is why I said it is important): The Old Testament is an indispensable part of Sacred Scripture. Its books are divinely inspired and retain a permanent value, for the Old Covenant has never been revoked.”

        Yours would not have been the first errant priest to mislead congregants.
        Proper Roman Catholic liturgical celebration of the Mass includes a reading from the OT, every time (along with NT and Gospels, which was a time when we stood). No exceptions (maybe Good Friday).

        I do agree that Catholic tradition did not encourage personal Bible readings and historically it was discouraged. Today, that is not the case, but the quality of priests running things is no better, if not worse.

        Liked by 2 people

        Reply

    • I feel most at home anywhere Jesus Christ is honored. Not so much with well-designed commentaries, catechisms, sacraments etc. I think God meets us upfront, in our conscience, where we choose in varying degrees to either welcome or dissolve God.

      On average I read 4 bible chapters daily, progressively, 2 from the OT and 2 from the New. Yet to me, life’s everyday grind and personal interactions illuminate God’s ways the same as bible stories. Understanding and knowing God takes mistakes, and time; perhaps eternity.

      Liked by 1 person

      Reply

      • Thank you, Arnold.

        I am sure you are as wonderful as you claim. If you have an eternity to figure it out, I wish you all the best since time does not matter.

        So you are not claiming the Pope and the Sacraments? Good luck. Are you saying you are not Catholic?

        Liked by 2 people

        Reply

          • As God and the Son are part of the trinity they are explained in John 17:20–21 into the oneness of the divine Godhead, so what makes you believe the cruel God will take anyone into Heaven, and not simply wipe out the world again, after all he has killed over 2 million people and Satan killed only 10. How can you not consider that you are worshipping for nothing, God gives Christians no advantage on this planet, you simply live in hope relying on the voice in your head.

            Liked by 1 person

          • That’s certainly one way to see it. My view is that God took responsibility for old testament death and destruction (and Jesus didn’t deny it) in the cross of Christ.

            Like

          • I think the initial attraction to God is fear-based, as a child with a stranger. A wary curiosity. So a fragile connection is made- not much to build on, nevertheless a start. Later, maybe a further commitment- to a cause, denomination, minister etc. Usually accompanied by a wide range in beliefs, with God often landing a secondary role, or even dismissed and rejected. I did all of the above.

            It seems the watershed time for me was putting God front and center personal, in the person of Jesus Christ. (Maybe explaining attraction and devotion to a Hitler or Trump.) And I matured- not expecting miracles or signs to justify my decision. I developed trust from a waiting-on-God life full of trials and errors. Trust from the inside out because I’m born of his Spirit, devoted to his Person.

            Like

      • Ha! In recent elections the Conservative party here run on a slogan, that said:”The heart is on the right side.” It just about summarized their understanding of biology, ecology, economy, social morals and reality in general. Including religious values. (Their old motto being:”home, religion and fatherland” – yes, I know, it sounds like something straight out of Nazi-Germany.)

        Unfortunately, they are not even near to the furthest to the right on political spectrum here today, nor the most religious. It seems religiosity and fascism rear their ugly heads whenever people get scared and who is right stops to be measured with reason, but instead is evaluated through sheer volume of emotion and noise.

        Liked by 1 person

        Reply

  21. Something I had jotted down a few years back, and it does seem appropriate for this.

    It has been said by people far more cognizant than I, that about every 2000 years the cards all go up in the air and we have a mess with countries melting down, entire cultures coming apart, and general chaos. It has also been said that the last time was right around the time that the Romans began to adopt a new religion, and a spell of several hundred years of utter chaos and destruction happened.
    The old religions disappeared, or, rather, morphed, new leaders appeared, and by the early middle ages things had settled down into a newly creative era. Music, art, sculpture, writing. Great strides forward. And it has been predicted for over 1/2 a century that it’s about to happen again.
    The anti Christ, which was commonly believed to be the next Pope (whenever the next pope appeared) but I am wondering if we didn’t elect him as President a few years ago.

    The signs enumerated were: a falling off of the arts (when was the last great symphony? (Somewhere at the end of the 19th century) Name me a famous current sculptor, painter, classical musician. about 100 years before the end, last time, roman sculptors were turning out unfinished work; beautiful, but abandoned, since no one was supporting them. In the next century what passes for sculpture was a shaped blob with two pencil holes for eyes. I keep thinking of Jackson Pollock, and elephant dung painted in vibrant colors… We call it art, because they do. It also suggests that a new religion will arise (the world will always need a religion, whether or not we want it), and a new “Savior”.

    And people are speaking of ‘the end times” quite seriously, now. So am I. It does seem that what was once a slow glacier moving down a shallow valley has become a serious piece of destruction, hurtling straight at everyone.
    I always said it would be interesting to live to see the start of it, but I could do without the fallout firther down the line.

    I hope someone is saving all the important stuff somewhere in a deep cave, for later, when we will need it…

    Liked by 1 person

    Reply

    • It took 400+ years for the western part of Rome to fall after the introduction of Christianity and about the same amount of time before it became popular & politically meaningfull in the Roman Empire. So, it has only been some 1600 years from the fall of Rome and the onset of the so called “dark ages”.. The same first 4 centuries is also the equivivalent period, that the Roman Empire existed. The “years of our lord” originally referred to the first emperor, Augustus reign having started. After the fall of Western Rome it took about a 1000 more years for the eastern part of the Roman Empire – Byzantium, as we today a bit unfairly call it. None of the dynasties of the pharaos lasted for 2000 years, but the Egypt of the Pharaos and their relation lasted for much longer than that. The Chinese empire was far more older than 2000 years, when it ended, even if you count it having ended to the Mongol invasion and not to the Japanese invasion. The WWII was the biggest conflict ever seen by mankind, but the civilization outlasted it. Now we face new threats, like the global warming and possible nuclear holocaust. We need to act to prevent them.

      Good part of Roman art was pompous statues of their dictators, not unlike statues of Saddam in quality, or artistic value, while most of the Roman art was just copies of the Classical Greek art, already hundreds of years old when Romans copied it. In Greece, there were people who hated the “modern” classical style when it was introduced hundreds of years before Jesus, or the Roman Empire, as they wanted to retain to the traditional archaic style, even though it was stiff and rough. Wether you or I like Jackson Pollock is a matter of taste. The classical music of today is not older than a couple of centuries. The great composers of our time have moved on from symphonies and opera to pop and rock music. I like Wagner, Sibelius and Shostakovich, but I also like Paul McCartney, Lemmy Killmister and Jimi Hendrix, there are younger composers, that I like, but I am a geezer and they are perhaps yet to show their mettle.

      Culture changes constantly and as part of it so does art. It has to, because if we try to stop it, like Brezhnev, it becomes stagnant and stands to collapse, like the Soviet Union and the Roman Empire did.

      I do not think it is fair to say history happens in 2000 year cyckles, as we Westerners hardly have much longer written history behind us. What would be the cause of such a long cyckle?

      Liked by 1 person

      Reply

    • If you want to hear contemporary classical style music, I recommend John Williams and Hans Zimmer. They compose for symphonic orchestras, but for the movies – the “opera” of our time. Pollock is already old news. If you are interrested in art, take a look at deviantart.com for what a yonger generation of artists is doing. It is mostly not abstract (that the Nazies labelled as “corrupt”) at all. Our time has seen some new art forms appear, like movies and like the graphic novel. Hugo Pratt, Moebius and Herge have influenced greatly the culture of today in ways even Jules Verne could not dream of.

      Besides there is more order in the world today, than there has ever been. It is because of that order we learn of any chatic development on a nother side of the globe faster and more reliably than ever before. There have always been people who seriously think and speak of how the end is nigh. If there are more of those today, it is just because there are more people and more opportunities for them for self expression.

      Who are the people who have suggested there is this cultural cyckle of 2000 years

      Like

      Reply

      • Will and Ariel Durant, “History of Civilization” Eleven volumes.
        I’ve seen “Deviant Art”, I’ve been staring at it for ages. It may be nice, but who buys it? Who hangs it on their walls? The artwork is there, but no one is spending money on it–and after awhile, the talent disappears. You need encouragement, but you also need money to continue.
        If there is order in the world, explain Putin and his invasion shenanigans. Explain one man doing a dandy job of trying to destroy our own government. People would still vote for him, even though he might have to govern us from behind bars…

        Movies are not art. Graphic novels are not art. Don’t confuse good movies and really good graphic novels with great literature and painting.

        Even Andrew Wyeth, who is probably the best we’ve had in this or the last century, is good but if you hold him up beside Renoir or any of the Dutch painters…

        And take into account the miasma of teaching in this country, where Johnny can’t even read, he can’t even spel gud. Or add. it’s all connected, darlin’, and it’s here.

        Like

        Reply

        • I have not read the works of the Durands, so I can not evaluate their historical interpretation as such. However, I do not see any 2000 year cyckles and I think it is not even a suggestion, that could have enough evidence to back it up, simply because we do not have enough written history to make the claim. What we do have, does not support it. A bit like with the claims about a god, when evidence for the claims is too little and obscure. A bit like in the topic post about the Bible. One can obviously read into history all sorts of events and stuff, that supposedly seem to support either claim, but neither god, or this 2000 year cyckle stand the scrutany, if all the evidence for, against and missing are counted for. The 2000 year cyckle is just too long. Too many major changes take place within it, for anything to have happened precisely at that interval to be big enough to stand out. Besides, what could be the underlying reason for it?

          What was the big change 2000 years ago, that took place, if we now are living in the next turning point? Caesar conquered Gaul? Rome changed from a republic to an empire? Egypt lost indipendence? These are THE major historical events, that we know happened 2000 years ago, but none of them is as significant as the fall of western Rome 1600 years ago. So, if there is a 2000 year cyckle, we need to await for it a nother 400 years. Christianity emerging is not a major historical event. It only became a major religious movement and a political force during the centuries after the alledged and frankly a bit obscure events in Palestine. For the first couple of hundred years, it was a fringe group and a cult and was treated as such.

          Putin’s attack on Ukraine is just a nother war and not even a very big one. After 9 years of fighting in Ukraine they have merely reached the same number of fallen as in the Soviet attack on Finland in the Winter War that only lasted three months and that was not considered a major conflict at the time, even though the WWII had not really yet started. Human history does not know many years, when there was no war somewhere, or other. The scale of wars has come down though, at least in comparrison to the amount of population of the world and the power of modern weaponry. We have today organizations like the UN, Interpol and various others, the like of wich were mere dreams just a little over 100 years ago. It is not good enough, but the situation is far better, than it was in the 19th century.

          Movies, photography and graphic novels are recognized art forms. Some of them far surpass much of opera, painting and literature in artistic expression and quality, if you can measure such anyway. There have always been great painters. The Ductch masters may have been a class of their own, but their style evolved changed and passed centuries ago. Renoir was totally different from them. If you prefer realistic painting style over others, there are great painters in realistic style today. I recommend a highly succesfull, skilled and talented Polish artist Mariusz Kozik, whose work I love (and have bought in print for myself).

          In sculpture, the Romans mostly copied the ancient Greeks, but already in the 11th century sculpture art even in the “fallen” western part of the former Roman empire had arisen in new peaks. Look at all the medieval effigies. Skill and beauty is sometimes breathtaking.

          Art is not measured in patronage. The Dutch masters, much like their predecessors in the Italian reneissance, Byzantine iconographic art before that and Roman painting tradition before that, and their successors in the 19th century French art had mesenats, of overtly rich people and organizations, who paid for their work and told them what to paint and what not to paint. Not an ideal situation for artistic expression. Hieronymus Bosch would have wanted to paint little birdies, but had to paint scary depictions of Hell…

          Like

          Reply

    • Provocative (and a bit unnerving) thoughts to ponder, Judy. I’m not sure that any of us “old folks” will be around to see the crumble of society, but I do tend to think we’re “living it” and watching it as it happens. (And in case anyone is wondering, this goes far beyond “politics.”)

      In any case, your comment is struggling to stay on-topic (as is rautakyy’s) so I’m not going to add anything more.

      Like

      Reply

Don't Be Shy -- Tell Us What You Think!

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.