That’s right not content with plugging Channel 4 stuff last night I’m now ‘bigging up’ a new radio 4 series “Who Killed Christianity?” which looks like it could be very interesting, atleast that’s the impression I get from the radio times blurb:
Radio Times wrote: Don't be fooled by the simple format of this series. Over the next five weeks David Starkey cross-examines two defenders of major figures in the development of Christianity. And as anyone who has followed his broadcasting career will know, there's no such thing as a nice, gentle discussion in Starkey world. The historian is starting out from the controversial point of view that the five figures he has selected - St Paul, the emperor Constantine, Martin Luther, Isaac Newton and Pope John Paul II - have not so much transformed as deformed Christianity. His encounters with their brave defenders are robust, to say the least. This morning, for example, he asks whether St Paul invented Christianity in the image of Christ or of himself.
Whilst I’m no fan of many of his political views or his views on teaching history, Starkey is a damned good debater and no fan of religion (I believe he’s involved in the Secular Society) so especially with editorial control on his side we can look forward to some amusing, scrupulously researched, maulings of Christianity & it’s major figures.
Unlike with the Channel 4’s Dawkin’s thing non-UK residents should be able to listen through the BBC website radio4. If you miss it you will most likely be able to access it on demand via the excellent ‘listen again’service, though that’s by no means guaranteed so if you can catch it live.
I can understand (and may even agree with) Paul and Luther, maybe even JP2, and I don't know enough about Constantine to say either way. But why Newton? Did he really have that much of an effect on Christianity in the first place?
Should any political party attempt to abolish social security, unemployment insurance, and eliminate labor laws and farm programs, you would not hear of that party again in our political history. There is a tiny splinter group, of course, that believes you can do these things... their number is negligible and they are stupid. --Dwight D. Eisenhower
Discombobulated wrote:I can understand (and may even agree with) Paul and Luther, maybe even JP2, and I don't know enough about Constantine to say either way. But why Newton? Did he really have that much of an effect on Christianity in the first place?
i guess you'll have to listen and be enlightened. Though iirc Newton aside from being one of the greatest scientists ever was something of a religious nutter & once he came to prominence promoted the idea that the smoothly running universe, whirring away to all those precise laws was evidence of what a great & clever bloke god was. I could very easily be wrong though it's a long time since I read anything on Newton.
I heard that Newton wrote more about religion than about science. However he is obviously more well known in regards to his scientific discourse.
Never apologise for being a geek, because they won't apologise to you for being an arsehole. John Barrowman - 22 June 2014 Perth Supernova.
Countries I have been to - 14.
Australia, Canada, China, Colombia, Denmark, Ecuador, Finland, Germany, Malaysia, Netherlands, Norway, Singapore, Sweden, USA.
Always on the lookout for more nice places to visit.
It was on at 9:30 am not pm incase anybody is still waiting, no need to worry though if you missed as it's available on demand through BBC's listen again service, just click this link (real player).
Must confess it wasn't as good as I hoped but was still quite interesting & I expect the episodes on non-biblical figures will be somewhat better, still well worth 1/4 of an hour
"Remember, being materialistic means never having to acknowledge your feelings"-Brent Sienna, PVP
"In the unlikely event of losing Pascal's Wager, I intend to saunter in to Judgement Day with a bookshelf full of grievances, a flaming sword of my own devising, and a serious attitude problem."- Rick Moen
