Jump to content
Join the Unexplained Mysteries community today! It's free and setting up an account only takes a moment.
- Sign In or Create Account -

Temple Cleansing Fiction


Davros of Skaro

Recommended Posts

eight

 

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 1 month later...
 

So is the Temple Cleansing scene originated (?) in Mark an entire fiction? Sure an historical Jesus could have preached, and caused an upset in, or around the Temple which later inspired the story? But short of supernatural powers, and abundance of evidence for literary fabrication which is in Mark, the events are highly unlikely?

I never touched on the influence of Homer that's in Mark. Here's excerpts from a book review.

Review of The Homeric Epics and the Gospel of Mark

(by Dennis R. MacDonald; Yale University, 2000)

by Richard Carrier

"MacDonald begins by describing what scholars of antiquity take for granted: anyone who learned to write Greek in the ancient world learned from Homer. Homer was the textbook. Students were taught to imitate Homer, even when writing on other subjects, or to rewrite passages of Homer in prose, using different vocabulary. Thus, we can know for certain that the author of Mark's Gospel was thoroughly familiar with the works of Homer and well-trained in recasting Homeric verse into new prose tales."

"Why? In MacDonald's words, Mark "thoroughly, cleverly, and strategically emulated" stories in Homer and the Old Testament, merging two great cultural classics, in order "to depict Jesus as more compassionate, powerful, noble, and inured to suffering than Odysseus" (p. 6), and hence "the earliest evangelist was not writing a historical biography, as many interpreters suppose, but a novel, a prose anti-epic of sorts" (p. 7)."

"Of course, all throughout MacDonald points out coinciding parallels with the Old Testament and other Jewish literature, but even these parallels have been molded according to a Homeric model in every case he examines."

"The scope of genius evident in Mark's reconstruction of Homeric motifs is undeniable and has convinced me that Mark was no simpleton: he was a literary master, whose achievement is all the greater in his choice of idiom-his "poor Greek" was deliberate and artful, as was his story."

"Having read this book, I am now certain that the historicity of the Gospels and Acts is almost impossible to establish."

https://infidels.org/library/modern/richard_carrier/homerandmark.html

Keep in mind this review was several years before Carrier started research on his book "On The Historicity of Jesus" which changed his mind on the consensus. 

https://www.nobeliefs.com/Carrier.htm

Wether there was an historical Jesus, or one imagined from a supernatural realm? Why would the writer of Mark embellish a Gospel of said character? 

Perhaps it's an implementation by the author of Mark of Plato's "Noble Lie"? 

"The noble lie is a political concept originated by Plato in The Republic. Put simply, it is the idea that, if the cultivation of nobility of the soul is the purpose of the state, then it is in fact laudable to lie to the people too dumb to understand the necessity of virtue. Put even more simply, it means that false propaganda for the sake of the public welfare is totally acceptable."

https://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Noble_lie

"But Plato was not willing to go as far as Socrates did. He preferred to address the public at large through his written dialogues rather than conducting dialogues in the agora. He did not write abstruse philosophical treatises but engaging philosophical dialogues meant to appeal to a less philosophically inclined audience. The dialogues are, most of the time, prefaced by a sort of mise en scène in which the reader learns who the participants to the dialogue are, when, where and how they presently met, and what made them start their dialogue. The participants are historical and fictional characters. Whether historical or fictional, they meet in historical or plausible settings, and the prefatory mises en scène contain only some incidental anachronisms. Plato wanted his dialogues to look like genuine, spontaneous dialogues accurately preserved. How much of these stories and dialogues is fictional? It is hard to tell, but he surely invented a great deal of them. References to traditional myths and mythical characters occur throughout the dialogues. However, starting with the Protagoras and Gorgias, which are usually regarded as the last of his early writings, Plato begins to season his dialogues with self-contained, fantastical narratives that we usually label his ‘myths’. His myths are meant, among other things, to make philosophy more accessible." 

"There are also in Plato myths that are his own, such as the myth of Er (Republic 621b8) or the myth of Atlantis (Timaeus 26e4). Many of the myths Plato invented feature characters and motifs taken from traditional mythology (such as the Isles of the Blessed or the judgment after death), and sometimes it is difficult to distinguish his own mythological motifs from the traditional ones."

"For Plato we should live according to what reason is able to deduce from what we regard as reliable evidence. This is what real philosophers, like Socrates, do. But the non-philosophers are reluctant to ground their lives on logic and arguments. They have to be persuaded. One means of persuasion is myth. Myth inculcates beliefs. It is efficient in making the less philosophically inclined, as well as children (cf. Republic 377a ff.), believe noble things."

https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/plato-myths/

Now Plato's myth of Atlantis was meant to humble the uppity citizens of Greece who thought themselves the height of civilization. Think of how the made up Atlantis myth endures today. Even ancient alien theorists claim that it was a giant floating on the sea spacecraft that rolled up shop, and left. This myth does not have the power, and hope associated with it as a religion does. Plato's "Noble Lie" is to correct the stubborn to see deeper truths that are stumbling blocks to the low intellect. 

The high probability of the Gospels, and the Book of Acts being entirely fiction is even greater if you can show that the core of Jesus theology is in the OT. This is what I will show, and how likely this is what Paul is actually talking about. In other words is Paul's Lord Christ Jesus a character derived from OT scripture? Is it Paul's hard to chew Meat that Mark made into Noble Lie Milk?

People (including Marcion who excised the OT from his canon) see a stark contrast in Jesus from the OT God. The thing is that Jesus's so called progressive ground breaking philosophy is in the OT itself. You can see the influence on Matthew's Mark reboot.

Matthew 5:38-39

"38 "You have heard that it was said, 'An eye for an eye and a tooth for a tooth.' 39 But I say to you, Do not resist an evildoer. But if anyone strikes you on the right cheek, turn the other also;"

Isaiah 50:5-9

"5 The Lord GOD has opened my ear, and I was not rebellious, I did not turn backward. 6 I gave my back to those who struck me, and my cheeks to those who pulled out the beard; I did not hide my face from insult and spitting. 7 The Lord GOD helps me; therefore I have not been disgraced; therefore I have set my face like flint, and I know that I shall not be put to shame; 8 he who vindicates me is near. Who will contend with me? Let us stand up together. Who are my adversaries? Let them confront me. 9 It is the Lord GOD who helps me; who will declare me guilty? All of them will wear out like a garment; the moth will eat them up."

Lamentations 3:25-31

"25 The LORD is good to those who wait for him, to the soul that seeks him. 26 It is good that one should wait quietly for the salvation of the LORD. 27 It is good for one to bear the yoke in youth, 28 to sit alone in silence when the Lord has imposed it, 29 to put one's mouth to the dust (there may yet be hope), 30 to give one's cheek to the smiter, and be filled with insults. 31 For the Lord will not reject forever."

Matthew 7:12

"12 "In everything do to others as you would have them do to you; for this is the law and the prophets."

Proverbs 20:22

"22 Do not say, "I will repay evil"; wait for the LORD, and he will help you."

Proverbs 24:17-20, :28-29

"17 Do not rejoice when your enemies fall, and do not let your heart be glad when they stumble, 18 or else the LORD will see it and be displeased, and turn away his anger from them. 19 Do not fret because of evildoers. Do not envy the wicked; 20 for the evil have no future; the lamp of the wicked will go out."

"28 Do not be a witness against your neighbor without cause, and do not deceive with your lips.
29 Do not say, "I will do to others as they have done to me; I will pay them back for what they have done.""

I'm going to create a new thread which I will link here when posted (for those that might be following just this thread?). I will lay out Paul's Lord Christ Jesus who:

Was at the beginning of creation being God's firstborn.

Has a mother.

Was tempted by Satan, and passed with flying colors.

Crucified sinful flesh on the Cross that has the power of eternal life.

Was exalted by God.

These and more is in the OT thanks in part to the polytheism interlaced into it, and Hellenistic philosophy. 

I cannot point to ancient text saying "Jesus is an entire fabrication". But I can show that the Holy Spirit is one hell of a drug, and Jesus was very unlikely an historical person.

Stay tuned...

 

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well, good to see you back, davros.

Temple cleansing? Mark's Jesus cases the joint the day before. He has a strike force of thirteen to work with (not to mention fellow travelers). He only needs to hold his position for the time it takes to get off a short speech. Overturned tables with loose money on the floor + crowd = chaos.

That's not a supernatural event, even if Mark made it up. It's a coup. If it didn't ever happen, then you'd have to wonder why not. (Which doesn't mean it happened to the same character Paul wrote about; that's a different issue.)

As you may know, I am not fully persuaded that Mark was a Christian apologist, but am fully persuaded that he was a great storyteller writing for a western-influenced Gentile audience. To convert them? Maybe. To entertain them? Definitely.

As to the Homeric "resemblances," a lot depends upon the level at which you think the influence operates. Jesus is a solar figure, as is Odysseus. Solar figures are human or otherwsie anthro- characters who enact the descent into the realm of the dead and return, parallel to the sun's daily round. Orpheus is another solar figure. In some versions, Simon of Samaria supposedly did something like that just about when Jesus was said to have done it.

This is archetypal stuff. There is no evidence that Homer invented the solar figure, and every reason to believe that it existed before him. Your buddy Inanna is a solar figure.

Jesus, if he was a real human being, wouldn't be the first to identify with an archetype, or to have others identify him with an archetype, or both. If Mark read Paul, particularly 1 Corinthians 15:1-8, then Mark could identify the solar figure archetype, and so he had the framework for his story.

So, once again, it all comes back to whether Paul was writing a ghost story about a departed human being or instead writing a celestial myth with no earthly characters or action.

Yes, a thread on the theory that Paul wasn't writing about a human being who had a Jewish mother, etc. would be a good thing for S vs. S. Looking forward to it.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Quote

 

Cleansing the Temple

173:1.1

A huge commercial traffic had grown up in association with the services and ceremonies of the temple worship. There was the business of providing suitable animals for the various sacrifices. Though it was permissible for a worshiper to provide his own sacrifice, the fact remained that this animal must be free from all “blemish” in the meaning of the Levitical law and as interpreted by official inspectors of the temple. Many a worshiper had experienced the humiliation of having his supposedly perfect animal rejected by the temple examiners. It therefore became the more general practice to purchase sacrificial animals at the temple, and although there were several stations on near-by Olivet where they could be bought, it had become the vogue to buy these animals directly from the temple pens. Gradually there had grown up this custom of selling all kinds of sacrificial animals in the temple courts. An extensive business, in which enormous profits were made, had thus been brought into existence. Part of these gains was reserved for the temple treasury, but the larger part went indirectly into the hands of the ruling high-priestly families.

173:1.2

This sale of animals in the temple prospered because, when the worshiper purchased such an animal, although the price might be somewhat high, no more fees had to be paid, and he could be sure the intended sacrifice would not be rejected on the ground of possessing real or technical blemishes. At one time or another systems of exorbitant overcharge were practiced upon the common people, especially during the great national feasts. At one time the greedy priests went so far as to demand the equivalent of the value of a week’s labor for a pair of doves which should have been sold to the poor for a few pennies. The “sons of Annas” had already begun to establish their bazaars in the temple precincts, those very merchandise marts which persisted to the time of their final overthrow by a mob three years before the destruction of the temple itself.

1,889

But traffic in sacrificial animals and sundry merchandise was not the only way in which the courts of the temple were profaned. At this time there was fostered an extensive system of banking and commercial exchange which was carried on right within the temple precincts. And this all came about in the following manner: During the Asmonean dynasty the Jews coined their own silver money, and it had become the practice to require the temple dues of one-half shekel and all other temple fees to be paid with this Jewish coin. This regulation necessitated that money-changers be licensed to exchange the many sorts of currency in circulation throughout Palestine and other provinces of the Roman Empire for this orthodox shekel of Jewish coining. The temple head tax, payable by all except women, slaves, and minors, was one-half shekel, a coin about the size of a ten-cent piece but twice as thick. By the times of Jesus the priests had also been exempted from the payment of temple dues. Accordingly, from the 15th to the 25th of the month preceding the Passover, accredited money-changers erected their booths in the principal cities of Palestine for the purpose of providing the Jewish people with proper money to meet the temple dues after they had reached Jerusalem. After this ten-day period these money-changers moved on to Jerusalem and proceeded to set up their exchange tables in the courts of the temple. They were permitted to charge the equivalent of from three to four cents commission for the exchange of a coin valued at about ten cents, and in case a coin of larger value was offered for exchange, they were allowed to collect double. Likewise did these temple bankers profit from the exchange of all money intended for the purchase of sacrificial animals and for the payment of vows and the making of offerings.

173:1.4

These temple money-changers not only conducted a regular banking business for profit in the exchange of more than twenty sorts of money which the visiting pilgrims would periodically bring to Jerusalem, but they also engaged in all other kinds of transactions pertaining to the banking business. Both the temple treasury and the temple rulers profited tremendously from these commercial activities. It was not uncommon for the temple treasury to hold upwards of ten million dollars while the common people languished in poverty and continued to pay these unjust levies.

173:1.5

In the midst of this noisy aggregation of money-changers, merchandisers, and cattle sellers, Jesus, on this Monday morning, attempted to teach the gospel of the heavenly kingdom. He was not alone in resenting this profanation of the temple; the common people, especially the Jewish visitors from foreign provinces, also heartily resented this profiteering desecration of their national house of worship. At this time the Sanhedrin itself held its regular meetings in a chamber surrounded by all this babble and confusion of trade and barter.

1,890

As Jesus was about to begin his address, two things happened to arrest his attention. At the money table of a near-by exchanger a violent and heated argument had arisen over the alleged overcharging of a Jew from Alexandria, while at the same moment the air was rent by the bellowing of a drove of some one hundred bullocks which was being driven from one section of the animal pens to another. As Jesus paused, silently but thoughtfully contemplating this scene of commerce and confusion, close by he beheld a simple-minded Galilean, a man he had once talked with in Iron, being ridiculed and jostled about by supercilious and would-be superior Judeans; and all of this combined to produce one of those strange and periodic uprisings of indignant emotion in the soul of Jesus.

173:1.7

To the amazement of his apostles, standing near at hand, who refrained from participation in what so soon followed, Jesus stepped down from the teaching platform and, going over to the lad who was driving the cattle through the court, took from him his whip of cords and swiftly drove the animals from the temple. But that was not all; he strode majestically before the wondering gaze of the thousands assembled in the temple court to the farthest cattle pen and proceeded to open the gates of every stall and to drive out the imprisoned animals. By this time the assembled pilgrims were electrified, and with uproarious shouting they moved toward the bazaars and began to overturn the tables of the money-changers. In less than five minutes all commerce had been swept from the temple. By the time the near-by Roman guards had appeared on the scene, all was quiet, and the crowds had become orderly; Jesus, returning to the speaker’s stand, spoke to the multitude: “You have this day witnessed that which is written in the Scriptures: ‘My house shall be called a house of prayer for all nations, but you have made it a den of robbers.’”

173:1.8

But before he could utter other words, the great assembly broke out in hosannas of praise, and presently a throng of youths stepped out from the crowd to sing grateful hymns of appreciation that the profane and profiteering merchandisers had been ejected from the sacred temple. By this time certain of the priests had arrived on the scene, and one of them said to Jesus, “Do you not hear what the children of the Levites say?” And the Master replied, “Have you never read, ‘Out of the mouths of babes and sucklings has praise been perfected’?” And all the rest of that day while Jesus taught, guards set by the people stood watch at every archway, and they would not permit anyone to carry even an empty vessel across the temple courts.

173:1.9

When the chief priests and the scribes heard about these happenings, they were dumfounded. All the more they feared the Master, and all the more they determined to destroy him. But they were nonplused. They did not know how to accomplish his death, for they greatly feared the multitudes, who were now so outspoken in their approval of his overthrow of the profane profiteers. And all this day, a day of quiet and peace in the temple courts, the people heard Jesus’ teaching and literally hung on his words.

173:1.10

This surprising act of Jesus was beyond the comprehension of his apostles. They were so taken aback by this sudden and unexpected move of their Master that they remained throughout the whole episode huddled together near the speaker’s stand; they never lifted a hand to further this cleansing of the temple. If this spectacular event had occurred the day before, at the time of Jesus’ triumphal arrival at the temple at the termination of his tumultuous procession through the gates of the city, all the while loudly acclaimed by the multitude, they would have been ready for it, but coming as it did, they were wholly unprepared to participate.

1,891

This cleansing of the temple discloses the Master’s attitude toward commercializing the practices of religion as well as his detestation of all forms of unfairness and profiteering at the expense of the poor and the unlearned. This episode also demonstrates that Jesus did not look with approval upon the refusal to employ force to protect the majority of any given human group against the unfair and enslaving practices of unjust minorities who may be able to entrench themselves behind political, financial, or ecclesiastical power. Shrewd, wicked, and designing men are not to be permitted to organize themselves for the exploitation and oppression of those who, because of their idealism, are not disposed to resort to force for self-protection or for the furtherance of their laudable life projects.

 

 

http://bigbluebook.org/173/1/

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

14 hours ago, eight bits said:

Well, good to see you back, davros.

Thanks

14 hours ago, eight bits said:

Temple cleansing? Mark's Jesus cases the joint the day before. He has a strike force of thirteen to work with (not to mention fellow travelers). He only needs to hold his position for the time it takes to get off a short speech. Overturned tables with loose money on the floor + crowd = chaos.

That's not a supernatural event, even if Mark made it up. It's a coup. If it didn't ever happen, then you'd have to wonder why not. (Which doesn't mean it happened to the same character Paul wrote about; that's a different issue.)

No need to rehash the point I have already made.

14 hours ago, eight bits said:

As you may know, I am not fully persuaded that Mark was a Christian apologist, but am fully persuaded that he was a great storyteller writing for a western-influenced Gentile audience. To convert them? Maybe. To entertain them? Definitely.

A form of Plato's Noble Lie makes a lot of sense given the underlying symbolism in Mark.

14 hours ago, eight bits said:

As to the Homeric "resemblances," a lot depends upon the level at which you think the influence operates.

Here's parts of a video series that a Youtuber that read Dennis McDonald's book put together (if anyone is interested).

14 hours ago, eight bits said:

Jesus is a solar figure, as is Odysseus. Solar figures are human or otherwsie anthro- characters who enact the descent into the realm of the dead and return, parallel to the sun's daily round. Orpheus is another solar figure. In some versions, Simon of Samaria supposedly did something like that just about when Jesus was said to have done it.

Jesus a solar figure? Come on eight, you know better than this.

Jews worshipping what's created instead of the creator is blasphemous. The 12 disciples is a nod to the 12 tribes of Isreal. Moses shining face after communing with God is a spiritual light, and 12 does not necessarily mean the Zodiac, but 12 moon cycles per year. A later painting in the catacombs of Jesus looking like Apollo is a non sequitur. It's like finding graffiti of Mickey Mouse with a joint in his mouth and saying he was a hippie.

14 hours ago, eight bits said:

 Your buddy Inanna is a solar figure.

She's Venus.

14 hours ago, eight bits said:

Jesus, if he was a real human being, wouldn't be the first to identify with an archetype, or to have others identify him with an archetype, or both. If Mark read Paul, particularly 1 Corinthians 15:1-8, then Mark could identify the solar figure archetype, and so he had the framework for his story.

So, once again, it all comes back to whether Paul was writing a ghost story about a departed human being or instead writing a celestial myth with no earthly characters or action.

Yes, a thread on the theory that Paul wasn't writing about a human being who had a Jewish mother, etc. would be a good thing for S vs. S. Looking forward to it.

LORD Christ Jesus is God's subordinate power in the OT. You'll see.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

17 hours ago, Will Due said:

The case is settled.

You cannot argue against the facts that are spiritually channeled from a council of space entities. The account is just like they were there because they were there.

latest?cb=20170326044555

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

davros

Quote

A form of Plato's Noble Lie makes a lot of sense given the underlying symbolism in Mark.

Except that it imputes a motive to Mark for which there is little or no evidence.

The trick is not "to make a lot of sense" if a hypothesis is true, but to make a lot less sense if the hypothesis is false. Mark's use of symbolism makes sense, full stop. It is thus uninformative about the uncertainties that concern us.

Quote

Jesus a solar figure? Come on eight, you know better than this.

How not? Recall that you are the one who put a resemblance to Odysseus in play. Odysseus is a solar figure par excellence.  Jesus isn't, but he's a knock-off of Odysseus? How's that supposed to work?

Lots of things come in dozens, which explains why that amount has its very own word, dozens. We even have a special English word for a dozen dozens, a gross.

We moderns have our little "just so" story about counting by tens (fingers or toes, don't you know) as the basis of our numbering system, despite that system not being widepsread until relatively recently, and then imposed in part by force of arms. An odd history for "what comes naturally," eh? Go back farther, and to the region in question, and you see counting by 12's and 60's. There are practical reasons for that preference. There is no magic here.

(BTW, it's more like 13 lunar months per solar year. So, somebody imposed whatever calendar system might be based on 12, with some adjustment required now and then.)

Shining flesh is nothing unique either. We have a current thread on the dream boards about somebody who saw his dream hands glow blue. The dreamer thinks that's significant... yeah, it is, in the sense that it's an old image, and an ever-new image, too.

I'll give you that Mark wasn't an idiot. Having chosen to write about a Jewish Bible preacher, Mark used whatever cool stuff he found in the Jewish Bible that fit. So what?

Quote

A later painting in the catacombs of Jesus looking like Apollo is a non sequitur.

A catacomb painting is some artist's reaction to the story as he or she received it centuries after Mark. It doesn't much help us with the earliest development of the story and the character as Mark understood him. I'm unsure why you brought it up (or Mickey as hippie... you are aware that one of the marketing campaigns for a re-release of the Disney movie Fantasia, which includes Mickey material, used the catchphrase "Walt was one of us," based on Fantasia's benefitting greatly from a toke or two while watching.)

Quote

She's Venus.

Later. If you mean the planet, then yes, the planet's course (either the brightest companion of the low-horizon sun or else invisible, a counterpoint to the sun's own cycle) is something a solar figure might enact. What's the problem?

Quote

LORD Christ Jesus is God's subordinate power in the OT. You'll see.

Well, I sort of agree. Paul's Jesus is now a deputy of the Jewish God, and has been granted plenipotentiary or vice regal authority (vice divine, but we don't have that phrase in English). The historical question, though, is what he was before that. I suspect we're going to hear all about two powers in heaven. But maybe I'll be pleasantly surprised. We'll see.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, davros of skaro said:

The account is just like they were there because they were there.

 

Yes that's right.

 

And they're still here, making an acount, recording everything

 

"I declare to you that there is nothing covered up that is not going to be revealed; there is nothing hidden that shall not be known."

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

21 hours ago, eight bits said:

davros

Except that it imputes a motive to Mark for which there is little or no evidence.

The trick is not "to make a lot of sense" if a hypothesis is true, but to make a lot less sense if the hypothesis is false. Mark's use of symbolism makes sense, full stop. It is thus uninformative about the uncertainties that concern us.

My hypothesis:

1) Paul's Jesus is a character hidden throughout OT scripture.

2) Mark is an entire literary fabrication created for convenient initiation into this mystery cult which deeper spiritual truths are revealed later to the initiate. 

3) The initiation story grew much popular, the original theology swept aside, and we have the filtered version of Christianity we have today.

Null, or my working against hypothesis:

1) Paul's Jesus was a real person.

2) The Gospels are embellished accounts of said Jesus.

3) We have a hard time today fishing out the factual Jesus from the fictional.

Christian fact:

1) It's all true, and harmonious. 

I still have to create thread for "1)" in my hypothesis. How would I go about "but to make a lot less sense if the hypothesis is false"?

Quote

How not? Recall that you are the one who put a resemblance to Odysseus in play. Odysseus is a solar figure par excellence.  Jesus isn't, but he's a knock-off of Odysseus? How's that supposed to work?

I'm not saying Jesus is Odysseus. Mark used Homeric epics to color his OT narratives retooling in some cases. Watch the videos, or see my link "New Testament Narratives as Old Testament Midrash.

Quote

(BTW, it's more like 13 lunar months per solar year. So, somebody imposed whatever calendar system might be based on 12, with some adjustment required now and then.)

12.36

We add a couple days to certain months to compensate. 

 

Quote

Shining flesh is nothing unique either. We have a current thread on the dream boards about somebody who saw his dream hands glow blue. The dreamer thinks that's significant... yeah, it is, in the sense that it's an old image, and an ever-new image, too.

It's a spiritual light.

Quote

I'll give you that Mark wasn't an idiot. Having chosen to write about a Jewish Bible preacher, Mark used whatever cool stuff he found in the Jewish Bible that fit. So what?

He was making stuff up.

Quote

A catacomb painting is some artist's reaction to the story as he or she received it centuries after Mark.

Bingo!

Quote

I'm unsure why you brought it up (or Mickey as hippie... you are aware that one of the marketing campaigns for a re-release of the Disney movie Fantasia, which includes Mickey material, used the catchphrase "Walt was one of us," based on Fantasia's benefitting greatly from a toke or two while watching.)

I was not aware.

Quote

Well, I sort of agree. Paul's Jesus is now a deputy of the Jewish God, and has been granted plenipotentiary or vice regal authority (vice divine, but we don't have that phrase in English). The historical question, though, is what he was before that. I suspect we're going to hear all about two powers in heaven. But maybe I'll be pleasantly surprised. We'll see.

Maybe it will be like Scott Baio in Zapped?

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

17 hours ago, Will Due said:

 

Yes that's right.

 

And they're still here, making an acount, recording everything

 

"I declare to you that there is nothing covered up that is not going to be revealed; there is nothing hidden that shall not be known."

I had an uncle that was an alcoholic. He did not see he had a problem. When the whites of his eyes turned yellow from urea built up in his system from organ failure, he was still adamant that he did not have a problem. He died two months later.

An anorexic sees themselves as fat when in fact they are skin, and bones. When asked to outline a profile of themselves they can lay the drawing on the floor, lay inside it, and still not see how exaggerated their impression of themselves are.

Does your miraculous book explain why some people come to such great error in judgment wether chemical induced, or just through thoughts?

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

davros

Quote

I still have to create thread for "1)" in my hypothesis. How would I go about "but to make a lot less sense if the hypothesis is false"?

where "1)" was

- Paul's Jesus is a character hidden throughout OT scripture,  

versus

- Paul's Jesus was a real person

So, you've pretty much already set up two hypotheses to compare. You might want to make the "real person" one more specific. For example, include one plausible way that Paul learned about this real person, to parallel that the first version says where Paul found about the hidden character. (The plausible way also has to be specific; wild cards like "he had a vision" or "he made it up" don't help you much, since he could make up anything - it'd always match perfectly.)

All you have to do then is for each point you bring forward where something in Paul matches something in the Jewish scriptures, add something about why it doesn't match or isn't likely to match something a real person would do, or something Paul's source might have told him (not necessarily the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth - sources have their own agendas) about what was some real guy.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 hours ago, davros of skaro said:

I had an uncle that was an alcoholic. He did not see he had a problem. When the whites of his eyes turned yellow from urea built up in his system from organ failure, he was still adamant that he did not have a problem. He died two months later.

An anorexic sees themselves as fat when in fact they are skin, and bones. When asked to outline a profile of themselves they can lay the drawing on the floor, lay inside it, and still not see how exaggerated their impression of themselves are.

Does your miraculous book explain why some people come to such great error in judgment wether chemical induced, or just through thoughts?

 

The Urantia Book has a lot to say about thinking and how our thinking is paramount when it comes to making correct choices. But no, the UB says nothing about any circumstance related to chemical induced error of judgement, except to say this in regard to how we can make things very difficult for the indwelling divine presence (the Adjuster) to properly guide and help us adjust our thoughts.

 

Quote

 

The Adjuster remains with you in all disaster and through every sickness which does not wholly destroy the mentality. But how unkind knowingly to defile or otherwise deliberately to pollute the physical body, which must serve as the earthly tabernacle of this marvelous gift from God. All physical poisons greatly retard the efforts of the Adjuster to exalt the material mind, while the mental poisons of fear, anger, envy, jealousy, suspicion, and intolerance likewise tremendously interfere with the spiritual progress of the evolving soul.

 

 

In another section of the book entitled "The Planetary Series of Mortals" it says this about what we refer to these days as "hormonal balance" and how it might affect how we think:

 

Quote

 

3. Spirit-reception series. There are three groups of mind design as related to contact with spirit affairs. This classification does not refer to the one-, two-, and three-brained orders of mortals; it refers primarily to gland chemistry, more particularly to the organization of certain glands comparable to the pituitary bodies. The races on some worlds have one gland, on others two, as do Urantians, while on still other spheres the races have three of these unique bodies. The inherent imagination and spiritual receptivity is definitely influenced by this differential chemical endowment.

Of the spirit-reception types, sixty-five per cent are of the second group, like the Urantia races. Twelve per cent are of the first type, naturally less receptive, while twenty-three per cent are more spiritually inclined during terrestrial life. But such distinctions do not survive natural death; all of these racial differences pertain only to the life in the flesh.

 

 

In case you're interested, here's the link to the Paper (as the book's chapters are denoted) where the preceding excerpt is quoted from.

The title of this Paper is "The Inhabited Worlds" and it narrates a summary of all the various types of mortal beings that exist in our universe. Beings in most regards, just like us.

This Paper lays out a lot of things about us humans, and it's a pretty interesting read; if you can get past certain things it says about the system our world belongs to. Particularly, its name.

http://bigbluebook.org/49/

 

Very sorry to hear about your uncle davros.

 

 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

 
11 hours ago, eight bits said:

davros

where "1)" was

- Paul's Jesus is a character hidden throughout OT scripture,  

versus

- Paul's Jesus was a real person

So, you've pretty much already set up two hypotheses to compare. You might want to make the "real person" one more specific. For example, include one plausible way that Paul learned about this real person, to parallel that the first version says where Paul found about the hidden character. (The plausible way also has to be specific; wild cards like "he had a vision" or "he made it up" don't help you much, since he could make up anything - it'd always match perfectly.)

All you have to do then is for each point you bring forward where something in Paul matches something in the Jewish scriptures, add something about why it doesn't match or isn't likely to match something a real person would do, or something Paul's source might have told him (not necessarily the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth - sources have their own agendas) about what was some real guy.

Thanks

I will try to keep this in mind for the next thread. 

A) Paul did believe Adam was real, and that Jesus was preexisting to Adam. 

Compared to:

B ) Paul used scripture, and visions to make his points so he would appear to be a genuine Apostle in  communication with Jesus. Otherwise he would not hold authority as those that knew Jesus.

I don't know..... I would have to retrain my brain for this method. I'm more of a Joe Friday type.

joe_friday.jpg

 

Edited by davros of skaro
B)
  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 hours ago, Will Due said:

 

The Urantia Book has a lot to say about thinking and how our thinking is paramount when it comes to making correct choices. But no, the UB says nothing about any circumstance related to chemical induced error of judgement, except to say this in regard to how we can make things very difficult for the indwelling divine presence (the Adjuster) to properly guide and help us adjust our thoughts.

 

 

In another section of the book entitled "The Planetary Series of Mortals" it says this about what we refer to these days as "hormonal balance" and how it might affect how we think:

 

 

In case you're interested, here's the link to the Paper (as the book's chapters are denoted) where the preceding excerpt is quoted from.

The title of this Paper is "The Inhabited Worlds" and it narrates a summary of all the various types of mortal beings that exist in our universe. Beings in most regards, just like us.

This Paper lays out a lot of things about us humans, and it's a pretty interesting read; if you can get past certain things it says about the system our world belongs to. Particularly, its name.

http://bigbluebook.org/49/

Fascinating! You have been guided for 35 years by this book? Do you teach your children this knowledge? 

9 hours ago, Will Due said:

Very sorry to hear about your uncle davros.

Thanks. I wish I knew then what I know now. Not that it would have definitely helped, but an interesting chance to try.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, davros of skaro said:

Fascinating! You have been guided for 35 years by this book? Do you teach your children this knowledge? 

 

Lol. Tell my kids about the details in the UB? Hell no! 

It's up to every individual to have it in them to go searching for the truth, the facts about God, and if you're inner guide leads you to the UB then it's there for the taking, sort of speak.

 

My dad indoctrinated me with a major dose of atheism growing up. He's one of those Catholics that had some very  terrible experiences with it as a kid. It's almost all he talked about, how it was all a lie. So I vowed, that even having discovered the facts, I would never push them on my kids.

However, I did tell them one thing. That God is real and that a part of him, a fragment, an individual piece of the Universal Father, as the UB refers to the Thought Adjuster, dwells within them and that they should look to him there where he is 24/7 for the answer to any question they might have to ask as to what to do, if they weren't sure. That was it.

I told them, because their dad couldn't be there all the time to be available for them to ask me questions, they should inquire with their heavenly Father, their true dad, because he is always with them, right there within.

 

I was 24 yers old when I discovered the Urantia Book and had three young children (I'll be 60 in two months). But I was a mess.

I had a severe drug and alcohol problem then, and it took years to overcome it. But I just devoted myself to being for my kids the best representation of the Father in heaven as I could. 

I grew up spiritually, thanks to them, as they grew up materially. And I'm still growing. Still lots to do. 

 

6 hours ago, davros of skaro said:

I wish I knew then what I know now. Not that it would have definitely helped, but an interesting chance to try.

 

Just keep it in mind that the overwhelming message of the UB is that it doesn't matter what one knows. It doesn't matter what one believes. It only matters what one wants to be. In what direction we're going.

I've read your posts and you are very perceptive with the truth of the "facts" contained in the Bible.

With the appearance of the UB the lights have come on. And they're getting brighter every day, because in addition to the indwelling of the presence of the Father there is also the presence of the Creator Son, his personal spiritual presence, the Spirit of Truth, who is there also, to comforts us and encourage the doing of what's right.

We live on a very unique world, one of ten million, and the opportunities are well nigh infinite.This is only the beginning.

 

Many blessings to you my friend.

 

 

Edited by Will Due
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

16 hours ago, Will Due said:

However, I did tell them one thing. That God is real and that a part of him, a fragment, an individual piece of the Universal Father, as the UB refers to the Thought Adjuster, dwells within them and that they should look to him there where he is 24/7 for the answer to any question they might have to ask as to what to do, if they weren't sure. That was it.

There's a Thought Adjuster alright. 

16 hours ago, Will Due said:

Many blessings to you my friend.

Thanks.

Good luck on your Paradise Ascension. 

 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 hours ago, davros of skaro said:

There's a Thought Adjuster alright. 

Thanks.

Good luck on your Paradise Ascension. 

 

Amen Brother!

Likewise!

I'll see you in the next world.

 

 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.