Originally posted by tabibito
View Post
Announcement
Collapse
Apologetics 301 Guidelines
If you think this is the area where you tell everyone you are sorry for eating their lunch out of the fridge, it probably isn't the place for you
This forum is open discussion between atheists and all theists to defend and debate their views on religion or non-religion. Please respect that this is a Christian-owned forum and refrain from gratuitous blasphemy. VERY wide leeway is given in range of expression and allowable behavior as compared to other areas of the forum, and moderation is not overly involved unless necessary. Please keep this in mind. Atheists who wish to interact with theists in a way that does not seek to undermine theistic faith may participate in the World Religions Department. Non-debate question and answers and mild and less confrontational discussions can take place in General Theistics.
Forum Rules: Here
This forum is open discussion between atheists and all theists to defend and debate their views on religion or non-religion. Please respect that this is a Christian-owned forum and refrain from gratuitous blasphemy. VERY wide leeway is given in range of expression and allowable behavior as compared to other areas of the forum, and moderation is not overly involved unless necessary. Please keep this in mind. Atheists who wish to interact with theists in a way that does not seek to undermine theistic faith may participate in the World Religions Department. Non-debate question and answers and mild and less confrontational discussions can take place in General Theistics.
Forum Rules: Here
See more
See less
Alincolnism
Collapse
X
-
I'm always still in trouble again
"You're by far the worst poster on TWeb" and "TWeb's biggest liar" --starlight (the guy who says Stalin was a right-winger)
"Overall I would rate the withdrawal from Afghanistan as by far the best thing Biden's done" --Starlight
"Of course, human life begins at fertilization that’s not the argument." --Tassman
-
Originally posted by tabibito View Post
So we are to believe that Mark's immediate audience would have believed that Mark was saying the women never spoke of the events at the tomb to anyone, and would simply have accepted his statement rather than declaring it nonsense.
While I'm sure there were those who approached it like you say (the audience of the gospel was primarily Jewish and Jews of the period did tend to do that), I'm picturing how folks, full of enthusiasm (as new converts to anything tend to be), would react on an emotional level.
I'm always still in trouble again
"You're by far the worst poster on TWeb" and "TWeb's biggest liar" --starlight (the guy who says Stalin was a right-winger)
"Overall I would rate the withdrawal from Afghanistan as by far the best thing Biden's done" --Starlight
"Of course, human life begins at fertilization that’s not the argument." --Tassman
Comment
-
I'm always still in trouble again
"You're by far the worst poster on TWeb" and "TWeb's biggest liar" --starlight (the guy who says Stalin was a right-winger)
"Overall I would rate the withdrawal from Afghanistan as by far the best thing Biden's done" --Starlight
"Of course, human life begins at fertilization that’s not the argument." --Tassman
Comment
-
I think something people don't really take into account enough is the high prevalence of Gnosticism (which taught that Jesus was a spiritual being who had never had a human body) in the first and second centuries. I've seen estimates that at times in the 2nd century there were more gnostic Christians than 'orthodox' ones.
It would be like if a mid-20th century poll were to find that the majority of Americans didn't believe Lincoln was ever actually a real person. That, in and of itself, would be very interesting evidence to a historian 2000 years later studying the question of Lincoln's (non)existence.
That's the situation we're dealing with with regard to Jesus. It's not just that random people today who know nothing of the evidence shrug and say "I dunno about the historicity of any historical figure, really, how can anyone prove Jesus or anyone else existed?", it's that huge numbers of people near to Jesus's own lifetime didn't believe in a real human Jesus, and instead believed in a Jesus who was a spiritual-only being who appeared to them in visions to give teachings."I hate him passionately", he's "a demonic force" - Tucker Carlson, in private, on Donald Trump
"Every line of serious work that I have written since 1936 has been written, directly or indirectly, against totalitarianism and for democratic socialism" - George Orwell
"[Capitalism] as it exists today is, in my opinion, the real source of evils. I am convinced there is only one way to eliminate these grave evils, namely through the establishment of a socialist economy" - Albert Einstein
Comment
-
Originally posted by Starlight View PostI think something people don't really take into account enough is the high prevalence of Gnosticism (which taught that Jesus was a spiritual being who had never had a human body) in the first and second centuries. I've seen estimates that at times in the 2nd century there were more gnostic Christians than 'orthodox' ones.
It would be like if a mid-20th century poll were to find that the majority of Americans didn't believe Lincoln was ever actually a real person. That, in and of itself, would be very interesting evidence to a historian 2000 years later studying the question of Lincoln's (non)existence.
That's the situation we're dealing with with regard to Jesus. It's not just that random people today who know nothing of the evidence shrug and say "I dunno about the historicity of any historical figure, really, how can anyone prove Jesus or anyone else existed?", it's that huge numbers of people near to Jesus's own lifetime didn't believe in a real human Jesus, and instead believed in a Jesus who was a spiritual-only being who appeared to them in visions to give teachings.
Origen rejected some parts of the written record (not that the process began with him) and as time went on, even more (e.g. by Athanasius) was rejected. By the fifth century, supporters of competing rationalisations were at war, and the final victors declared themselves orthodox. Meanwhile, primitive Christianity continued to plod along unnoticed by the world at large.1Cor 15:34 Come to your senses as you ought and stop sinning; for I say to your shame, there are some who know not God.
.⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛
Scripture before Tradition:
but that won't prevent others from
taking it upon themselves to deprive you
of the right to call yourself Christian.
⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛
Comment
-
Originally posted by tabibito View PostA circumstance that resulted from attempts to rationalise earlier witness with observable reality and with Greek philosophy. Such things were impossible in the real world, therefore ...
From what I can tell, the driving idea was that "the material world is evil, and the spiritual reality is good". It was them really believing that strongly which in turn caused them to think things like:
a. The creator of the evil material reality must themselves be evil. (e.g. Marcion's view that the Old Testament Jewish creator-god was evil, and that Jesus was a good spiritual being from the True spiritual God)
b. That Jesus, being pure, must have been a spiritual being, and cannot have had a material body.
I would point to Zoroastrianism as being a major source for these ideas in the Ancient Near East.
It's possible to see this matter-is-evil thinking in Paul's writings also - "I am of the flesh, sold into slavery under sin... nothing good dwells within me, that is, in my flesh" and by contrast he speaks of the spirit with glowing praise, and for this reason many scholars label Paul as 'proto-gnostic'. He also, famously, doesn't say much at all about Jesus' life. And he talks about church services involving believers bringing new revelations from God and interpreting each other's revelations (1 Cor 14:23) and it seems like the only limiting factor he places on the creativity of such revelations was that they had to endorse Jesus as Lord (1 Cor 12:3). That seems very strongly of the same flavor as the gnostic visions critiqued by 'orthodox' writers in the 2nd century, where the gnostics would have spiritual visions of beings in the spiritual world (e.g. Jesus) and receive new revelations from them.
It's not exactly hard to see overenthusiastic believers gradually inventing for themselves whole hosts of new teachings that they received from the spiritual Jesus in such an environment, and gradually consolidating them into 'gospels'. This, after all, is exactly what orthodox Christians tend to believe happened with the various non-canonical gospels! The question then becomes was it also the process that led to the creation of the 4 canonical gospels as well as the non-canonical ones? Occam's razor would tend to say that single explanation for both the canonical and non-canonical gospels is the simplest solution, and this sort of hypothesis would explain the parts in common among the canonical gospels, seeing them as gradually built up from ideas circulating about the teachings of the spiritual Jesus and and events in his 'life', with some people a century later then misunderstanding them as indicating a real human Jesus had actually physically existed.Last edited by Starlight; 08-22-2021, 09:01 PM."I hate him passionately", he's "a demonic force" - Tucker Carlson, in private, on Donald Trump
"Every line of serious work that I have written since 1936 has been written, directly or indirectly, against totalitarianism and for democratic socialism" - George Orwell
"[Capitalism] as it exists today is, in my opinion, the real source of evils. I am convinced there is only one way to eliminate these grave evils, namely through the establishment of a socialist economy" - Albert Einstein
Comment
-
Originally posted by Starlight View PostI don't think that was the angle they were coming from.
From what I can tell, the driving idea was that "the material world is evil, and the spiritual reality is good". It was them really believing that strongly which in turn caused them to think things like:
a. The creator of the evil material reality must themselves be evil. (e.g. Marcion's view that the Old Testament Jewish creator-god was evil, and that Jesus was a good spiritual being from the True spiritual God)
b. That Jesus, being pure, must have been a spiritual being, and cannot have had a material body.
I would point to Zoroastrianism as being a major source for these ideas in the Ancient Near East.
It's possible to see this matter-is-evil thinking in Paul's writings also - "I am of the flesh, sold into slavery under sin... nothing good dwells within me, that is, in my flesh" and by contrast he speaks of the spirit with glowing praise, and for this reason many scholars label Paul as 'proto-gnostic'.
He also, famously, doesn't say much at all about Jesus' life.
And he talks about church services involving believers bringing new revelations from God and interpreting each other's revelations (1 Cor 14:23)
and it seems like the only limiting factor he places on the creativity of such revelations was that they had to endorse Jesus as Lord (1 Cor 12:3). That seems very strongly of the same flavor as the gnostic visions critiqued by 'orthodox' writers in the 2nd century, where the gnostics would have spiritual visions of beings in the spiritual world (e.g. Jesus) and receive new revelations from them.
It's not exactly hard to see overenthusiastic believers gradually inventing for themselves whole hosts of new teachings that they received from the spiritual Jesus in such an environment, and gradually consolidating them into 'gospels'.
The flow seems to be in the opposite direction. Celsus wrote (disparagingly) that Christians of his time were teaching that Logos had transformed to become flesh. 75(?) years later, Origen claims that Celsus didn't know what he was talking about - Christians had never taught that nonsense (the gospel of John notwithstanding.) Origin did, however, state that Logos had stripped himself of equality with the Father. (Philippians 2:7). Late 4th/early fifth century Athanasius denies that Logos had stripped himself of equality with the Father, and rebukes a fellow bishop for teaching that Christ was Logos transformed to flesh. While I've heard mention of gnostic involvement (but without any details being provided), consensus seems to be that Early teaching declared that Christ was Logos become human, a man attested by God. That he was a man is easy to understand - "Christ means anointed." The Biblical record shows that Jesus of Nazareth was the Lord's anointed, not the Lord.
This, after all, is exactly what orthodox Christians tend to believe happened with the various non-canonical gospels! The question then becomes was it also the process that led to the creation of the 4 canonical gospels as well as the non-canonical ones? Occam's razor would tend to say that single explanation for both the canonical and non-canonical gospels is the simplest solution, and this sort of hypothesis would explain the parts in common among the canonical gospels, seeing them as gradually built up from ideas circulating about the teachings of the spiritual Jesus and and events in his 'life', with some people a century later then misunderstanding them as indicating a real human Jesus had actually physically existed.Last edited by tabibito; 08-22-2021, 11:01 PM.1Cor 15:34 Come to your senses as you ought and stop sinning; for I say to your shame, there are some who know not God.
.⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛
Scripture before Tradition:
but that won't prevent others from
taking it upon themselves to deprive you
of the right to call yourself Christian.
⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛
Comment
-
Forgot to mention: prior to Origen, the concept was that the Trinity was a hierarchy.1Cor 15:34 Come to your senses as you ought and stop sinning; for I say to your shame, there are some who know not God.
.⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛
Scripture before Tradition:
but that won't prevent others from
taking it upon themselves to deprive you
of the right to call yourself Christian.
⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛
Comment
-
Originally posted by Starlight View PostAnd he talks about church services involving believers bringing new revelations from God and interpreting each other's revelations (1 Cor 14:23)"I hate him passionately", he's "a demonic force" - Tucker Carlson, in private, on Donald Trump
"Every line of serious work that I have written since 1936 has been written, directly or indirectly, against totalitarianism and for democratic socialism" - George Orwell
"[Capitalism] as it exists today is, in my opinion, the real source of evils. I am convinced there is only one way to eliminate these grave evils, namely through the establishment of a socialist economy" - Albert Einstein
Comment
-
Originally posted by Starlight View PostSorry typo in the verse number there, should have been 1 Cor 14:26.1Cor 15:34 Come to your senses as you ought and stop sinning; for I say to your shame, there are some who know not God.
.⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛
Scripture before Tradition:
but that won't prevent others from
taking it upon themselves to deprive you
of the right to call yourself Christian.
⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛
Comment
-
I recently read something where the author presented a good case that Gnosticism arose a later than traditional Christianity as evidenced by all their writings, most of which show evidence of a familiarity with or even rely on traditional Christian writings including the Bible.
I'm always still in trouble again
"You're by far the worst poster on TWeb" and "TWeb's biggest liar" --starlight (the guy who says Stalin was a right-winger)
"Overall I would rate the withdrawal from Afghanistan as by far the best thing Biden's done" --Starlight
"Of course, human life begins at fertilization that’s not the argument." --Tassman
Comment
-
Originally posted by rogue06 View PostI recently read something where the author presented a good case that Gnosticism arose a later than traditional Christianity as evidenced by all their writings, most of which show evidence of a familiarity with or even rely on traditional Christian writings including the Bible.1Cor 15:34 Come to your senses as you ought and stop sinning; for I say to your shame, there are some who know not God.
.⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛
Scripture before Tradition:
but that won't prevent others from
taking it upon themselves to deprive you
of the right to call yourself Christian.
⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛
Comment
-
Originally posted by tabibito View Post
Yes. That is the feel I got from my own reading, but gnosticism has been very much a peripheral matter - much along the lines of "there were also gnostic groups in the area around the same time as ..."
I'm always still in trouble again
"You're by far the worst poster on TWeb" and "TWeb's biggest liar" --starlight (the guy who says Stalin was a right-winger)
"Overall I would rate the withdrawal from Afghanistan as by far the best thing Biden's done" --Starlight
"Of course, human life begins at fertilization that’s not the argument." --Tassman
Comment
-
Originally posted by rogue06 View PostI recently read something where the author presented a good case that Gnosticism arose a later than traditional Christianity as evidenced by all their writings, most of which show evidence of a familiarity with or even rely on traditional Christian writings including the Bible."I hate him passionately", he's "a demonic force" - Tucker Carlson, in private, on Donald Trump
"Every line of serious work that I have written since 1936 has been written, directly or indirectly, against totalitarianism and for democratic socialism" - George Orwell
"[Capitalism] as it exists today is, in my opinion, the real source of evils. I am convinced there is only one way to eliminate these grave evils, namely through the establishment of a socialist economy" - Albert Einstein
Comment
-
Originally posted by rogue06 View PostThe point being that the available evidence indicates that these competitors like Gnosticism largely grew out of and thus were latter than the traditional church.1Cor 15:34 Come to your senses as you ought and stop sinning; for I say to your shame, there are some who know not God.
.⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛
Scripture before Tradition:
but that won't prevent others from
taking it upon themselves to deprive you
of the right to call yourself Christian.
⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛
Comment
Related Threads
Collapse
Topics | Statistics | Last Post | ||
---|---|---|---|---|
Started by whag, 03-27-2024, 03:01 PM
|
39 responses
186 views
0 likes
|
Last Post
by whag
Yesterday, 03:32 PM
|
||
Started by whag, 03-17-2024, 04:55 PM
|
21 responses
132 views
0 likes
|
Last Post 03-21-2024, 12:15 PM | ||
Started by whag, 03-14-2024, 06:04 PM
|
80 responses
428 views
0 likes
|
Last Post
by tabibito
Yesterday, 12:33 PM
|
||
Started by whag, 03-13-2024, 12:06 PM
|
45 responses
305 views
1 like
|
Last Post 03-17-2024, 07:19 AM | ||
Started by rogue06, 12-26-2023, 11:05 AM
|
406 responses
2,518 views
2 likes
|
Last Post
by tabibito
Yesterday, 05:49 PM
|
Comment