Loading...
Frank Herbert’s Dune is inspired by themes from the history of Islam that are both direct and subtle. Carl Ernst and Michael Muhammad Knight will discuss the new film and the book it is based on and explore how Islam is part of its foundation on November 13, 2021 on Zoom and YouTube Live.
Register here. The webinar is free. $10 suggested donation: https://go.unc.edu/PeckFundDonation
Carl Ernst is a leading scholar of Islamic Studies and Sufism and William R. Kenan, Jr., Distinguished Professor in the Department of Religious Studies at UNC Chapel Hill. Michael Muhammad Knight is Assistant Professor of Religion and Cultural Studies at the University of Central Florida and the author of several books, most recently Muhammad’s Body: Baraka Networks and the Prophetic Assemblage.
The live webinar is a fundraiser to benefit the Peck Fund for Teaching Excellence, which is devoted to supporting and recognizing teaching among graduate students in the Department of Religious Studies at UNC-Chapel Hill.
This is very fascinating. I have been a fan of Dune since I was a kid in the early 90s. I used to play two PC games based on Dune (Dune and Dune 2), which were instrumental in getting me hooked on science fiction!
What I actually wanted to mention has nothing to do with Dune, though, but rather the concept of memory. Dr. Ehrman, I have been watching a lot of your videos pertaining to memory, and I wanted to share something that adds to the idea of how memories can change over time.
When I was a teenager, I had a very scary encounter with some thieves who had hopped over our fence late at night and started stealing stuff off our porch. I heard them and went out to confront them. Fortunately, I startled them and they ran away and jumped back over the fence. I immediately went back into the house and went into the living room where my dad was watching TV, and I told him what had happened. I was holding a baseball bat, because I had grabbed it when I saw people on our front porch.
One more post to follow!
So I told this story over and over to people in my family, and then my dad started telling other people about it. Then I moved out of the house and about two decades went by in which we never discussed that event.
My dad told the story again recently, and he got the details completely wrong. In his account, HE heard me talking to the thieves, grabbed a baseball bat, and ran out to chase them away. This is NOT how things went down, but over the course of 20+ years, the account morphed, and he put himself in the center of it.
He is only one person removed from this event, he knew the person to whom this event occurred, AND he was in close proximity to the event itself. Most people would consider him a reliable source, but even after hearing the correct details of the account repeatedly, the account changed in his mind over a very short period of time.
My point is that even someone considered a reliable source can misremember events! It was very interesting to see this played out in my own life around a time when I was watching your videos on memory!
Googled “Philo of Alexandria, patriarchs, virgin birth” and found this: https://www.thetorah.com/article/isaacs-divine-conception
The author claims not only that Philo of Alexandria believed Isaac was the result of divine conception, but that *Paul* did so too! (Galatians 4:23 “one… was born according to flesh; the other… was born *of the promise*.”)
What do you think of this?
I’d have to see which passages of Philo the author is referring to.
Philo’s really only interested in the allegorical meaning. He doesn’t seem to explicitly believe that Isaac was born of divine, virginal conception.
Legum Allegoriae 3,219 For, also, when happiness, that is Isaac, was born, she says, in the pious exaltation, “The Lord has caused me laughter, and whoever shall hear of it shall rejoice with me.”111 Open your ears, therefore, O ye initiated, and receive the most sacred mysteries. Laughter is joy; and the expression, “has caused,” is equivalent to “has begotten.” So that what is here said has some such meaning as this, “The Lord has begotten Isaac.” For he is the father of perfect nature, sowing and begetting happiness in the soul.
Legum Allegoriae 3,219 λυπείσθω τοιγαροῦν αἴσθησις, ἀρετὴ δ’ αἰεὶ χαιρέτω· καὶ γὰρ γεννηθέντος τοῦ εὐδαιμονεῖν φησι σεμνυνομένη· “γέλωτα ἐποίησέ μοι ὁ κύριος· ὃς γὰρ ἂν ἀκούσῃ, συγχαρεῖταί μοι.” ἀναπετάσαντες οὖν ὦτα, ὦ μύσται, παραδέξασθε τελετὰς ἱερωτάτας· ὁ γέλως ἐστὶν ἡ χαρά, τὸ δὲ “ἐποίησεν” ἴσον τῷ ἐγέννησεν, ὥστ’ εἶναι τὸ λεγόμενον τοιοῦτον· Ἰσαὰκ ἐγέννησεν ὁ κύριος· αὐτὸς γὰρ πατήρ ἐστι τῆς τελείας φύσεως, σπείρων ἐν ταῖς ψυχαῖς καὶ γεννῶν τὸ εὐδαιμονεῖν.
did jesus peace be upon him prophacy about roman empire to fall and a kingdom to emerge with revelation from god delivered by the holyspirit that will be with us
Yes, that was a large part of his proclamation.
Jabir reported Allah’s Messenger (ﷺ) as saying:
The similitude of mine and that of the Apostles is like that of a person who built a house and he completed it and made it perfect but for the space of a brick. People entered therein and they were surprised at it and said: Had there been a brick (it would have been complete in all respects). Allah’s Messenger (ﷺ) said: I am that place where the brick (completing the building is to be placed), and I have come to finalise the chain of Apostles.
the kingdom of God that jesus peace be upon him foretold about and prayed for its coming is currently on earth
the sign of its appearance is the fall of the roman empire
Dr Ehrman,
OFF TOPIC: Did Paul believe that it was possible to live a sinless life by faith in Christ?
Reading Romans, it appears from chapters 1 to 4 that Paul seems to conclude that everyone has sinned or is “under the power of sin”(ch3, v9).
He spends some time explaining that everyone is a slave to sin but through Christ becomes a slave to righteousness.
He uses chapters 7 and 8 to contrast life under the law and life in Christ. For example, in Chapter 7 v15-23, he talks about how he is unable to avoid sin(while he uses the present tense in these verses, I get the sense that he is talking about the life of the unbeliever). He summarizes his predicament as being a “prisoner of the law of sin”-NIV. Then in chapter 8, he says that Christ sets one free from this law of sin and that now “the righteous requirement of the law is fully met in us.”
I’m getting the sense here that Paul believes that one can now uphold the law(i.e live sin-free) because of Christ’s sacrifice whereas this was not possible before.
What do you think Paul would have thought of my question?
Yes, the key is actually chapter 6. Everyone is under the power of sin, but it is broken for those baptized and so “united” with Christ in his death, since when he died he put sin to death. After that, people no longer were under its sway and so didn’t have to sin.
Since Paul believed it was now possible to avoid sin. Did he believe that those who had faith and still sinned would not be saved? I get the sense that he thinks so since he says “Don’t you know that when you offer yourselves to someone as obedient slaves, you are slaves of the one you obey —whether you are slaves to sin, which leads to death, or to obedience, which leads to righteousness?” in chapter 6. Could you also give me the Bible reference that leads you to whatever conclusion you might make?
He appears to think that if baptized believers willfully choose to commit sins, they are endangered of falling under the power of sin once more and then, yes, being lost. The key passage is Romans 6:1-6.
Sometimes I feel like the nearly 2000 years of Christian struggle and division can be boiled down to sincere individuals encountering these seemingly clear Pauline certainties and asking themselves in frustration: “why isn’t this working?” (from Paul, himself, in dealing with the Corinthians, to the founders of monasticism, to the “orthodox” and “heterodox” arguing over the nature of the Trinity and the nature of Christ possibly thinking that perfect theology would finally “make it work”, to, of course Luther, who moved the issue in the Western Church from the back burner to the front burner and only made matters worse! And 500 years later, here we still are!)
Does he have a blog on Islam like this one ? It would be interesting to understand the origins and theological development of Islam.
I don’t know! Not a large one, I don’t think.
Hi Dr. Ehrman. New member of your blog here. Do you think the book The Passover Plot by Hugh J. Schonfield has any redeeming scholarly value?
Besides New Testament scholarship, I enjoy reading about the Beatles in my spare time. I recently read that John Lennon was affected by Schonfield’s book, leading to his infamous 1966 comment that the Beatles had become “more popular than Jesus”. I was interested to hear how a serious scholar would assess the book. Thanks.
No scholarly volume, but it’s endelessly fascinating. I’m a big Beatle guy too, but didn’t know that about Lennon. I don’t think that’s what led to his comment though. (Did he say so? If so, that would be interesting; but I’ve heard him interviewed about it and didn’t hear anything like that)
I have always been curious for an explanation of the bhuddist muslim fusion in Dune and, in particular, its prequels.
If you get to book 6 (Chapterhouse Dune), Herbert brings Judaism into the plot. I find it interesting how he weaves religion throughout all of the books, both explicitly and implicitly.
dr bart i heard adulterous woman was added somewhat 400 years later amd only recognize by scholars many centuries later, now what is the other example of this kind of change that its added somewhere hundred years later in time and recognized centuries after poeple recognize different manuscript and more learned
The only one of comparabl size would be teh loner ending of mark.