Fruitful Inquiry

As many of these essays came about through friends and acquaintances asking about certain topics and periods in history and faith, I encourage you, the anonymous internet, to suggest subjects for discussion. If they fall within the confines of my knowledge and research abilities, I will endeavour to explain the issues in the manner in which you, the faithful reader, have become accustomed.

Any comments not related specifically to my various ramblings may be posted here also.

I would like to point out that the historical ramblings are my own. As a student of History I have researched many of these topics in detail, but my entries are humorous interpretations distilling the key elements of each topic; please do not mistake these efforts for academic quality essays.  And some of my notions are a bit odd anyway. I will happily provide any who ask with reference material on a given subject if they so wish. The entries concerning atheism are my own opinions, largely a collection and compression of various arguments and discussions I have had with various religious and non-religious folk.

Advertisements

6 responses to “Fruitful Inquiry

  1. What a lovely blog to discover, and so wonderfully devilish. I think I’m in love, platonic of course, and I’m only old enough to probably be your grandmother. The whole thing makes me smilish ( an old Gaelic term, y’know).

  2. Excellent endeavour you have undertaken here ! Thank you. Your presentation is a refreshing change from most of the other history/religion writings I’ve come across the last few years. When I first became interested in the history of Christianity, the bible, 2ND temple Judaism etc., I started with the archaeologists ( Israel Finkelstein, William Dever, Albright, Kenyon,Mazar). Then the historians ( Eisenman, Meyer, Tabor, Pagels, Crossan). The minimalists, the maximilists, the fundamentalists, the atheists,the apologists, the pious liars, Mack, Doherty, Price, Acharya S, translations of the Nag Hammadi scriptures, the Dead Sea Scrolls,etc. , etc. You see where I’m coming from with this. The good news is that it has given me a great foundation to be able to read works like yours and enjoy them, but some (no, most), were dry, monotonous and wandering in their presentations. I swear that Robert Eisenman and William Dever have more footnotes and citations than text. I enjoy your site immensely. Please keep up your great work. OH, by the way, I found you by dismissing the first ten search results that tried to steer me to the 6500 year old history of metal forging in response to the search term, FORGED HISTORY. Joe Green

    • Thank you, Joe Green, for such positive feedback. I have read and recognise some of the authors you refer to, though I am curious as to who the ‘pious liars’ are; could you give me a reference? As to the footnotes… well… you should see my theses. Footnotes are a very useful resource if used appropriately, and are often ignored in popular works. It contrast to this, it would seem to me that in some popular works on history they are used to lend an air of credibility to the work, which it may not otherwise have; Gavin Menzies is a prime example. There is a balance to be found. In any event, I’m glad you enjoy the Endeavour!

      • I came across the “pious liars” term when reading about very early church fathers and historians. Knowing that the poor, ignorant,illiterate flock would never find out, these bishops freely exchanged lies and methods of deceit amongst themselves. Irenaeus of Lyon (140?-202?), Clement of Alexandria, John Chrysostom among many others. My favorite is Bishop Eusebius, the propagandist stooge for Constantine. In his 12th Book of Evangelical Preparation, he titled the 32nd chapter, “How It May Be Lawful and Fitting to Use Falsehood as a Medicine, and for the Benefit of Those Who Want to Be Deceived”. Yes indeed! Laying the foundation for the next two thousand years. Kenneth Humphries may have been where I saw it first. Good stuff. Joe Green

      • Ah, I have you now. I thought you were referring to modern writers as ‘pious liars’, academics with agendas if you will. I have come across those writers; in fact Wallace-Hadrill’s ‘Eusebius of Caesarea’ is sitting on my shelf, taunting me to be read…

Comments are welcome, nay, encouraged!

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s