{"id":74,"date":"2007-06-11T03:01:06","date_gmt":"2007-06-11T03:01:06","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/blog.beliefnet.com\/markdroberts\/2007\/06\/hitchens-wrong-about-the-census-eyewitnesses-st-paul-scholarship-gospel-truth-and-gospel-disagreements.html"},"modified":"2007-06-11T03:01:06","modified_gmt":"2007-06-11T03:01:06","slug":"hitchens-wrong-about-the-census-eyewitnesses-st-paul-scholarship-gospel-truth-and-gospel-disagreements","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.beliefnet.com\/columnists\/markdroberts\/2007\/06\/hitchens-wrong-about-the-census-eyewitnesses-st-paul-scholarship-gospel-truth-and-gospel-disagreements.html","title":{"rendered":"Hitchens Wrong About the Census, Eyewitnesses, St. Paul, Scholarship, Gospel Truth, and Gospel Disagreements"},"content":{"rendered":"

Part 5 of series: god is Not Great<\/em> by Christopher Hitchens: A Response
\n<\/em>Permalink for this post<\/a> \/ Permalink for this series<\/a>
\nSo far I’ve shown nine errors made by Christopher Hitchens in his treatment of the New Testament in god is not Great<\/em>. Today I’ll add six additional errors.
\nHitchens Wrong About the Augustan Census<\/strong>
\nHe writes:<\/p>\n

There is no mention of any Augustan census by any Roman historian . . . .” (112)<\/p><\/blockquote>\n

This comes in an argument where Hitchens is attempting to show that Luke’s account of the birth of Jesus is “quite evidently garbled.” But what Hitchens says is not true. In the Annals<\/a><\/em> of the Roman historian Tacitus<\/a> there is a reference to a document produced under Augustus that contained a description of “the number of citizens and allies under arms, of the fleets, of subject kingdoms, provinces, taxes” and so on,” in other words, a census. (Photo to the right: An obelisk in Rome that Augustus used to celebrate his greatness, including his being the son of a god.)
\nBut we don’t even need to go to a Roman historian to find evidence for the censuses of Augustus. In “The Deeds of the Divine Augustus” written by Augustus himself and published throughout the empire in 14 AD, we read of three censuses conducted under Augustus’s authority (in 28 BC, 8 BC, and 14 AD; see Acts of Augustus<\/em>, section 8<\/a>). If Augustus decreed a census in 8 BC, as he claims, it’s quite possible that this was the census described in Luke 2, which was not finished in Judea until a year or two later.
\nHitchens Wrong on the Eyewitnesses of the Crucifixion<\/strong>
\nIn his denunciation of The Passion of the Christ<\/em>, Hitchens notes that promoters said the film was based “on the reports of ‘eyewitnesses’.” (p. 111). Then he continues:<\/p>\n

At the time, I thought it extraordinary that a multimillion-dollar hit could be openly based on such a patently fraudulent claim, but nobody seemed to turn a hair. (p. 111)<\/p><\/blockquote>\n

Nobody turned a hair because even the most skeptical of scholars believes that the accounts of Jesus’s death have some connection to eyewitnesses. The vast majority of New Testament scholars and classical historians believe that Jesus was in fact crucified under Pontius Pilate around 30 AD. This is found, not only throughout the New Testament, but also in the Roman historian Tacitus (Annals<\/em> 15.44) and the first-century Jewish historian Josephus (Antiquities<\/em> 18.3.3). It’s would be incredible to believe that the reports of Jesus’s death were not based at least to some extent on eyewitness accounts. This is made even more likely by the fact that the Gospels actually show the followers of Jesus in a very bad light during the passion of Jesus. Most of them abandoned Him, not exactly the sort of thing that early Christians would have made up unless it were true. (For a recent scholarly treatment of the role of eyewitnesses in the development of the Gospel material, see Jesus and the Eyewitnesses: The Gospels as Eyewitness Testimony<\/a><\/em> by Richard Bauckham.) Even if one wishes to argue that eyewitnesses had little to do with the stories about Jesus’s death, an informed scholar would never say that the eyewitness claim is “patently fraudulent.”
\nHitchens Wrong About Paul and Women<\/strong>
\nOne of the first things Hitchens writes about the New Testament is:<\/p>\n

The New Testament has Saint Paul expressing both fear and contempt for the female. (p. 54)<\/p><\/blockquote>\n

This is one reason among many Hitchens brings forth as part of his “consistent proof that religion is man-made” (p. 54).
\nConveniently, Hitchens offers no references for his claim about Paul’s “fear and contempt” for the female. He offers no references because there are none. Indeed, there are four places in Paul’s letters where he says something about women that we might find uncomfortable, especially if we fail to consider the context in which Paul was writing and thus read him anachronistically (1 Corinthians 11, 14, 1 Timothy 2, Ephesians 5). But in none of these chapters is there anything vaguely resembling fear or contempt. Elsewhere in his writings, Paul strongly affirms the value of women, their role as his co-workers (Romans 16), their empowerment for ministry along with men (1 Corinthians 11-14), their extraordinary right to remain single, apart from male authority (1 Corinthians 7), and even their authority over their husbands’ bodies, along with the husbands’ authority over their bodies (1 Corinthians 7:4). In Paul’s light of Paul’s own culture, his view of women was shockingly progressive. This helps to explain why women, even powerful and wealthy women, we’re drawn to the early Christian movement (Acts 17:1-12; Romans 16:1-2).
\nHitchens Wrong About New Testament Scholarship<\/strong>
\nHe writes:<\/p>\n

The contradictions and illiteracies of the New Testament have filled up many books by eminent scholars, and have never been explained by any Christian authority except in the feeblest terms of “metaphor” and “a Christ of faith.” (115)<\/p><\/blockquote>\n

Christopher Hitchens appears to have read a bit of what is sometimes called “liberal” New Testament scholarship. Here you find an effort to hang onto some measure of Christian faith while rejecting the historical core of the Gospel (the ministry, death, resurrection of Jesus). Marcus Borg provides a popular example of such an approach.
\nBut Hitchens, once again, writes confidently about that which he does not know. For one thing, it rather begs the question to refer to the “contradictions and illiteracies of the New Testament.” But if we interpret Hitchens as referring, for example, to diverse treatments of Jesus among the four Gospels, then he is simply wrong to say that no “Christian authority” has explained these except in terms of “metaphor” and “a Christ of faith.” Some of the finest biblical scholars of recent times have done this with academic rigor and care, including F.F. Bruce, Martin Hengel, Ben Witherington III, Craig Evans, N.T. Wright, Richard Bauckham, and Craig Blomberg, just to name a few. Now it’s certainly possible to argue that these scholars are wrong. But it’s certainly wrong to reject their efforts as non-existent.
\nHitchens Wrong on the Nature of the Gospels<\/strong>
\nHe writes:<\/p>\n

Either the Gospels are in some sense literal truth, or the whole thing is essentially a fraud and perhaps an immoral one at that. Well, it can be stated with certainty, and on their own evidence, that the Gospels are most certainly not literal truth. This means that many of the “sayings” and teachings of Jesus are hearsay upon hearsay upon hearsay, which helps explain their garbled and contradictory nature.” (120)<\/p><\/blockquote>\n

Virtually every scholar I’ve read, including the most skeptical, would agree that the Gospels are “in some sense literal truth.” The proof is that virtually every scholar who says anything about Jesus of Nazareth bases his or her history on the “facts” of the Gospels. So when a scholar states that Jesus was crucified under the authority of Pontius Pilate, this scholar takes at least that part of the Gospel account as literal truth.
\nIt’s hard to know what Hitchens means by saying that the Gospels, “on their own evidence . . . are most certainly not literal truth.” But whatever he means, this cannot be sustained by a close reading of the Gospels. Now, let me add, that very few scholars, including conservative Christians, would argue that the Gospels are merely literal truth. They believe there is something more in the text. They are literal truth shaped in light of theological conviction. This isn’t a new idea. The Gospel writers say this very thing (see Luke 1:1-4, for example).
\nThe “hearsay upon hearsay upon hearsay” claim shows ignorance of the oral culture in which the Gospel traditions were passed down. It’s an anachronistic mistake. I would point Hitchens to Bauckham’s book, Jesus and the Eyewitness<\/a><\/em>, and to Kenneth Bailey, Poet and Peasant Through Peasant Eyes<\/a><\/em>.
\nFinally, I’d be the first to admit that the sayings of Jesus are sometimes hard to understand. But one who refers to them as “garbled and contradictory” has simply not taken the time to understand them. One can certainly reject Jesus’s teaching as untrue, but to criticize them as “garbled and contradictory” says more about the critic than about the teaching itself.
\nHitchens Invents or Exaggerates Gospel Disagreements<\/strong>
\nHe writes:<\/p>\n

The scribes cannot even agree on the mythical elements: they disagree wildly about the Sermon on the Mount, the anointing of Jesus, the treachery of Judas, and Peter’s haunting “denial.” (112)<\/p><\/blockquote>\n

One wonders in what sense the items Hitchens mentions should be included among the so-called “mythical elements.” Usually “mythical” is reserved for things like the miraculous birth, the miracles, etc. Be that as it may, Hitchens invents or exaggerates Gospel disagreements.
\nFor example, the Gospel writers don’t disagree at all about the Sermon on the Mount because that “sermon” only appears in the Gospel of Matthew. Luke has a similar “sermon,” sometimes called “The Sermon on the Plain” but it’s not the same discourse. Furthermore, if you look closely at the different Gospel accounts of the anointing of Jesus, the treachery of Judas, and Peter’s denial, you will see some differences. The story of Peter’s denial, for example, is found in Matthew 26:69-75, Mark 14:66-72, and Luke 22:54-62. The three accounts are very similar, both in English and in the original Greek. The major difference has to do with whether the rooster crowed once or twice. But this could hardly be an example of the Gospel writers disagreeing wildly.
\nIs Hitchens a Reliable Witness?<\/strong>
\nI have now shown fifteen errors in Christopher Hitchens’s treatment of the New Testament. (A stickler would note that I’ve actually identified more than fifteen if I count every single mistake in a an excerpt.) These errors fall within relatively few pages of the overall book, only about 6% of the total. As I explained earlier, I’m not an expert in many of the areas about which Hitchens writes, so I’ll leave it to others to assess his accuracy there. But fifteen mistakes in relatively few pages doesn’t impress me positively.
\nBut if Hitchens were a witness in a trial, a trial to determine whether God is great or not, and whether religion poisons everything or not, and if, after testifying for the prosecution, the defense was able to show that a small part of his testimony was filled with errors, then this would surely discredit him as a reliable witness. Some mistakes show up in the best of books, no doubt. But 15 mistakes in so few pages is unusually bad. Thus, ironically, I find myself with no option other than to treat Hitchens’s claims about “facts” with the sort of skepticism that he applies to the New Testament Gospels. He has not shown himself to be the kind of careful writer whom I can trust to be truthful.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

Part 5 of series: god is Not Great by Christopher Hitchens: A Response Permalink for this post \/ Permalink for this series So far I’ve shown nine errors made by Christopher Hitchens in his treatment of the New Testament in god is not Great. Today I’ll add six additional errors. Hitchens Wrong About the Augustan…<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":214,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"closed","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[10],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-74","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-hitchens-god-is-not-great"],"yoast_head":"\nHitchens Wrong About the Census, Eyewitnesses, St. Paul, Scholarship, Gospel Truth, and Gospel Disagreements - Mark D. Roberts<\/title>\n<meta name=\"robots\" content=\"index, follow, max-snippet:-1, max-image-preview:large, max-video-preview:-1\" \/>\n<link rel=\"canonical\" href=\"https:\/\/www.beliefnet.com\/columnists\/markdroberts\/2007\/06\/hitchens-wrong-about-the-census-eyewitnesses-st-paul-scholarship-gospel-truth-and-gospel-disagreements.html\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"Hitchens Wrong About the Census, Eyewitnesses, St. Paul, Scholarship, Gospel Truth, and Gospel Disagreements - Mark D. Roberts\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:description\" content=\"Part 5 of series: god is Not Great by Christopher Hitchens: A Response Permalink for this post \/ Permalink for this series So far I’ve shown nine errors made by Christopher Hitchens in his treatment of the New Testament in god is not Great. Today I’ll add six additional errors. Hitchens Wrong About the Augustan…\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/www.beliefnet.com\/columnists\/markdroberts\/2007\/06\/hitchens-wrong-about-the-census-eyewitnesses-st-paul-scholarship-gospel-truth-and-gospel-disagreements.html\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:site_name\" content=\"Mark D. Roberts\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:published_time\" content=\"2007-06-11T03:01:06+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:image\" content=\"http:\/\/www.markdroberts.com\/images\/Augustus-obelisk-t.jpg\" \/>\n<meta name=\"author\" content=\"Mark D. Roberts\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:card\" content=\"summary_large_image\" \/>\n<!-- \/ Yoast SEO plugin. -->","yoast_head_json":{"title":"Hitchens Wrong About the Census, Eyewitnesses, St. Paul, Scholarship, Gospel Truth, and Gospel Disagreements - Mark D. Roberts","robots":{"index":"index","follow":"follow","max-snippet":"max-snippet:-1","max-image-preview":"max-image-preview:large","max-video-preview":"max-video-preview:-1"},"canonical":"https:\/\/www.beliefnet.com\/columnists\/markdroberts\/2007\/06\/hitchens-wrong-about-the-census-eyewitnesses-st-paul-scholarship-gospel-truth-and-gospel-disagreements.html","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"Hitchens Wrong About the Census, Eyewitnesses, St. Paul, Scholarship, Gospel Truth, and Gospel Disagreements - Mark D. Roberts","og_description":"Part 5 of series: god is Not Great by Christopher Hitchens: A Response Permalink for this post \/ Permalink for this series So far I’ve shown nine errors made by Christopher Hitchens in his treatment of the New Testament in god is not Great. Today I’ll add six additional errors. Hitchens Wrong About the Augustan…","og_url":"https:\/\/www.beliefnet.com\/columnists\/markdroberts\/2007\/06\/hitchens-wrong-about-the-census-eyewitnesses-st-paul-scholarship-gospel-truth-and-gospel-disagreements.html","og_site_name":"Mark D. Roberts","article_published_time":"2007-06-11T03:01:06+00:00","og_image":[{"url":"http:\/\/www.markdroberts.com\/images\/Augustus-obelisk-t.jpg"}],"author":"Mark D. Roberts","twitter_card":"summary_large_image","schema":{"@context":"https:\/\/schema.org","@graph":[{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/www.beliefnet.com\/columnists\/markdroberts\/2007\/06\/hitchens-wrong-about-the-census-eyewitnesses-st-paul-scholarship-gospel-truth-and-gospel-disagreements.html","url":"https:\/\/www.beliefnet.com\/columnists\/markdroberts\/2007\/06\/hitchens-wrong-about-the-census-eyewitnesses-st-paul-scholarship-gospel-truth-and-gospel-disagreements.html","name":"Hitchens Wrong About the Census, Eyewitnesses, St. Paul, Scholarship, Gospel Truth, and Gospel Disagreements - Mark D. Roberts","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.beliefnet.com\/columnists\/markdroberts\/#website"},"primaryImageOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.beliefnet.com\/columnists\/markdroberts\/2007\/06\/hitchens-wrong-about-the-census-eyewitnesses-st-paul-scholarship-gospel-truth-and-gospel-disagreements.html#primaryimage"},"image":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.beliefnet.com\/columnists\/markdroberts\/2007\/06\/hitchens-wrong-about-the-census-eyewitnesses-st-paul-scholarship-gospel-truth-and-gospel-disagreements.html#primaryimage"},"thumbnailUrl":"http:\/\/www.markdroberts.com\/images\/Augustus-obelisk-t.jpg","datePublished":"2007-06-11T03:01:06+00:00","dateModified":"2007-06-11T03:01:06+00:00","author":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.beliefnet.com\/columnists\/markdroberts\/#\/schema\/person\/1ff094a57b7e41f534434b1723df3d73"},"breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.beliefnet.com\/columnists\/markdroberts\/2007\/06\/hitchens-wrong-about-the-census-eyewitnesses-st-paul-scholarship-gospel-truth-and-gospel-disagreements.html#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/www.beliefnet.com\/columnists\/markdroberts\/2007\/06\/hitchens-wrong-about-the-census-eyewitnesses-st-paul-scholarship-gospel-truth-and-gospel-disagreements.html"]}]},{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-US","@id":"https:\/\/www.beliefnet.com\/columnists\/markdroberts\/2007\/06\/hitchens-wrong-about-the-census-eyewitnesses-st-paul-scholarship-gospel-truth-and-gospel-disagreements.html#primaryimage","url":"http:\/\/www.markdroberts.com\/images\/Augustus-obelisk-t.jpg","contentUrl":"http:\/\/www.markdroberts.com\/images\/Augustus-obelisk-t.jpg"},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/www.beliefnet.com\/columnists\/markdroberts\/2007\/06\/hitchens-wrong-about-the-census-eyewitnesses-st-paul-scholarship-gospel-truth-and-gospel-disagreements.html#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/www.beliefnet.com\/columnists\/markdroberts"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"Hitchens Wrong About the Census, Eyewitnesses, St. Paul, Scholarship, Gospel Truth, and Gospel Disagreements"}]},{"@type":"WebSite","@id":"https:\/\/www.beliefnet.com\/columnists\/markdroberts\/#website","url":"https:\/\/www.beliefnet.com\/columnists\/markdroberts\/","name":"Mark D. Roberts","description":"Mark D. Roberts: Thoughtfully Christian Reflections on Jesus, the Church, and the World","potentialAction":[{"@type":"SearchAction","target":{"@type":"EntryPoint","urlTemplate":"https:\/\/www.beliefnet.com\/columnists\/markdroberts\/?s={search_term_string}"},"query-input":{"@type":"PropertyValueSpecification","valueRequired":true,"valueName":"search_term_string"}}],"inLanguage":"en-US"},{"@type":"Person","@id":"https:\/\/www.beliefnet.com\/columnists\/markdroberts\/#\/schema\/person\/1ff094a57b7e41f534434b1723df3d73","name":"Mark D. Roberts","image":{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-US","@id":"https:\/\/www.beliefnet.com\/columnists\/markdroberts\/#\/schema\/person\/image\/","url":"https:\/\/www.beliefnet.com\/columnists\/markdroberts\/wp-content\/wphb-cache\/gravatar\/f2d\/f2ddf5f080861f66ea230384f9d1bab2x96.jpg","contentUrl":"https:\/\/www.beliefnet.com\/columnists\/markdroberts\/wp-content\/wphb-cache\/gravatar\/f2d\/f2ddf5f080861f66ea230384f9d1bab2x96.jpg","caption":"Mark D. Roberts"},"description":"The Rev. Dr. Mark D. Roberts is a pastor, author, retreat leader, speaker, and blogger. Since October 2007 he has been the Senior Director and Scholar-in-Residence for Laity Lodge, a multifaceted ministry in the Hill Country of Texas. Before coming to Laity Lodge, he was for sixteen years the Senior Pastor of Irvine Presbyterian Church in Irvine, California (a city in Orange County about forty miles south of Los Angeles). Before his time at Irvine Pres, Mark served on the staff of the First Presbyterian Church of Hollywood as Associate Pastor of Education. (Thanks to Janel Pahl for taking the photo to the right.) Mark studied at Harvard University, receiving a B.A. in Philosophy, an M.A. in the Study of Religion, and a Ph.D. in New Testament and Christian Origins. He has taught classes in New Testament for Fuller Theological Seminary and San Francisco Theological Seminary. Mark has written several books, including No Holds Barred: Wrestling with God in Prayer (WaterBrook, 2005), Dare to Be True (WaterBrook, 2003), Jesus Revealed (WaterBrook, 2002), After \"I Believe\" (Baker, 2002), and Ezra, Nehemiah, Esther (Word, 1993). His most recent book is Can We Trust the Gospels? Investigating the Reliability of Matthew, Mark, Luke, and John (Crossway, 2007). He is currently working on a commentary on Ephesians that will be published by Zondervan in 2014. Mark writes a devotional for The High Calling of Our Daily Work, a website associated with Laity Lodge. His \"Daily Reflections\" can be viewed online or sent as a daily email. If you wish to receive this email, just visit TheHighCalling.org and sign up. Mark serves on the editorial board of Worship Leader magazine, where he publishes articles and reviews, including his regular column \"Lyrical Poetry.\" Additionally, he has published dozens of articles in leading magazines and journals. He often speaks for churches and other Christian groups, and has been interviewed on over seventy-five radio programs nationwide. Mark is married to Linda, who is a Marriage and Family Therapist, a Spiritual Director, and a retreat speaker. They have two children, Nathan and Kara.For Publicity Photos and Bio Statements for Mark, please check here. Mark's Dossier Professional History: Senior Director and Scholar-in Residence, Laity Lodge, October 2007 to present. Senior Pastor Irvine Presbyterian Church, June 1991 to September 2007 Adjunct Assistant Professor Fuller Theological Seminary, 1994 to 2007. Courses: New Testament Theology and Exegesis. Adjunct Instructor San Francisco Theological Seminary, 1995 to 2001. Courses: New Testament Greek and Exegesis Associate Pastor of Education First Presbyterian Church of Hollywood, 1987-1991 Teaching Fellow Harvard University, 1980-1983 Education: Ph.D. in the Study of Religion. Harvard University, 1992. Area: New Testament and Christian Origins M.A. in the Study of Religion Harvard University, 1984. A.B. magna cum laude in Philosophy Harvard University, 1979. Phi Beta Kappa; Danforth Fellowship Books: Can We Trust the Gospels? Investigating the Reliability of Matthew, Mark, Luke, and John. Crossway, 2007 No Holds Barred: Wrestling with God in Prayer. WaterBrook, 2005 Dare to Be True: Living in the Freedom of Complete Honesty. WaterBrook, 2003. Jesus Revealed: Know Him Better to Love Him Better. WaterBrook, 2002. After \"I Believe\": Experiencing Authentic Christian Living. Baker, 2002. Ezra, Nehemiah, Esther in the Communicator's Commentary Series. Word, 1993. Contacting Mark: You can reach Mark at: E-mail: mark@markdroberts.com mroberts@laitylodge.org Phone: Laity Lodge: (830) 792-1216 Address: Laity Lodge 719 Earl Garrett Kerrville, TX 78028","url":"https:\/\/www.beliefnet.com\/columnists\/markdroberts\/author\/mroberts"}]}},"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.beliefnet.com\/columnists\/markdroberts\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/74","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.beliefnet.com\/columnists\/markdroberts\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.beliefnet.com\/columnists\/markdroberts\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.beliefnet.com\/columnists\/markdroberts\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/214"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.beliefnet.com\/columnists\/markdroberts\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=74"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.beliefnet.com\/columnists\/markdroberts\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/74\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.beliefnet.com\/columnists\/markdroberts\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=74"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.beliefnet.com\/columnists\/markdroberts\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=74"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.beliefnet.com\/columnists\/markdroberts\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=74"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}