freediver wrote on Apr 1^st, 2008 at 8:24am:


I suppose it would help to understand Schweitzer's background ideas. Schweitzer was a believer in the moral and ethical teachings of Jesus, and was heavily swayed by these. He believed Jesus was an eschatological prophet who believed in the imminent end of the world. However, as a historian and theologian looking for the "Jesus of History" (ie, the "real Jesus"), he concluded that Jesus was basically a "failed messiah", pretty much deluded in this sense, and his end of world predictions never came true. This was also evident in Paul, who taught that the end was near, and even advised people not to marry or invest (I can give scriptural references if required), because the "rapture" would soon occur. (For much more detail on this see Damien Thompson's The End of Time: Faith and Fear in the Shadow of the Millennium) In this sense Schweitzer felt this "quest" to discover Jesus was painful, and for a 100 years before him German scholars like Strauss had come to similar conclusions, by studying the "Jesus of History", in contrast to the "Jesus of Faith".  Schweitzer also believed that much of the New Testament was myth and contained the religious views of the writers, who expanded on the teachings of Jesus, Paul probably being the best example, and he is sometimes referred to as the "real" founder of modern Christianity.

Edit to add: Both Strauss and Schweitzer denied the divinity of Jesus. Schweitzer believed he was a radical prophet.

muso wrote on Apr 1^st, 2008 at 11:28am:


It's always worthwhile being reminded of this. In my humble hunching opinion, every atheist has a little bit of believer in them, and every believer has a little bit of atheism in them. Maybe that's why they hate each other so much?  

muso wrote on Apr 1^st, 2008 at 11:51am:


Maybe you didn't understand what I was referring to, or maybe I was too brief. When I said "believer", I'm not necessarily referring to a belief in God. I'm using it in the sense Eric Hoffer used it, as in "true believer". He considered militant atheists as "true believers" (in their cause).

However, there are atheists who flirt with the idea of God (even if you're not one - no stereotyping, now). I don't know of anyone more hardcore atheist than Phillip Adams, yet some years ago, after reading Darryl Reanney's book The Death of Forever, he agreed to write the Introduction, and he admitted that he was prepared to revise his opinions about everything, "even God". His friend made him think about his stand on atheism. He hasn't recanted atheism (as far as I know), but he did pause for a while.

muso wrote on Apr 2^nd, 2008 at 6:07am:


I used to be a big fan of LNL years ago, but I don't even listen to radio anymore. I engaged in personal correspondence, both snail and email, with Phillip over quite a few years, sporadically, and even in private correspondence his humour was always present. We shared different views, which kept the correspondence going, off and on, but he always encouraged me to "come and enjoy the fruits of atheism".

muso wrote on Apr 2^nd, 2008 at 9:10am:


I'm not actually involved with any religion. I'm theist, don't go to Church, and even my concept of God wouldn't fit into any religious orthodoxy.

muso wrote on Apr 2^nd, 2008 at 9:10am:


I didn't know that. Explains why he can devote so much time to programs like LNL?  

muso wrote on Apr 2^nd, 2008 at 9:10am:


I drive about 300 klms a night, four days a week, but it's hard to listen to radio when you often have to deal with drunks, or be entertaining people all the time. But I think I learn a lot more from them than I do from radio though.  Fact, I better get moving as "the show" starts back this afternoon.