John the Baptist & Early Christianity

[+Sherapy]

7 minutes ago, Habitat said:

You are kidding yourself. The mundane is ubiquitous, it is simply implausible that anyone would zero in on, and spend years dissecting this Jesus phenomenon, for mundane interests, without the supernatural aspect being the main game. Life is way too short for that.

I disagree with you, the supernatural is not that interesting compared to the actual history. 
 

What is incredible is how Paul built this sham. What a story. 
 

I find Batanat and Paul compelling and interesting in what they have studied. 
 

You don’t, duly noted.

Edited October 22, 2019 by Sherapy

[Habitat]

4 minutes ago, Sherapy said:

What is incredible is how Paul built this sham

It may or may not be a sham, and to what extent either way, we don't know, but if it were 100% sham, then that means there was no supernatural in play, that, and that alone, would be the determinant of whether it be a sham or not, nothing else !

[Habitat]

4 hours ago, Sherapy said:

Ahh the ole Habbies is special and has been bestowed with some special powers as a pay off for his patience, but he can’t evidence it. 
“He just knows” said every cult leader and con artist along the way.

Why should I believe you? Show me the money, 

Believe whatever you want, but I'm not impressed by insinuations that I'm akin to a cult leader or a con artist, given that nothing has been asked of you, and certainly not asked that you take what I say, on trust. And I have not claimed "special powers". So your seeming complaint, is void.

[Piney]

37 minutes ago, Habitat said:

In that case, perhaps you can posit why people would avidly study ( there are people here who claim to have been doing this for decades !) the jesus story in particular, with no reference whatsoever to the supernatural claims inherent in it. Do you think they are interested in, say, the conditions imposed by Roman rule ? Given that the area in which the Jesus business takes place was just a small, small part of the then Roman Empire, wasting decades ploughing through the minutiae of a story that isn't about the Romans, I call BS on it !

Pauline Christianity didn't grow in Palestine. It grew all over. A "easy way out", i.e. "spiritual security blanket" for the dregs of society.

It was also used for....

A excuse to hammer on other traditions.

A tool for control of the same dregs.

Why it took off is not hard to figure out. The various people and situations behind the scenes is what's interesting. 

Edited October 22, 2019 by Piney

[+Hammerclaw]

Christianity, First Century was the province of the upper classes, not the dregs. The Roman elite had a long history of fascination with Eastern Mystery Cults and Judaism was one of their favorites. Judaism First Century was evangelical and actively recruited converts, the majority of whom were well-to-do women. Millions of Jews and converts lived throughout the Empire and were Roman Citizens; "Roman" by then denoting one's nationality, not one's ethnicity.  Rome was the first Nation State. It was in this fertile and receptive ground that the seeds of Christianity first took root and flowered.

[Habitat]

4 minutes ago, Piney said:

Pauline Christianity didn't grow in Palestine. It grew all over. A "easy way out", i.e. "spiritual security blanket" for the dregs of society.

It was also used for....

A excuse to hammer on other traditions.

A tool for control of the same dregs.

Why it took off is not hard to figure out. The various people and situations behind the scenes is what's interesting. 

All of that is long after this Jesus fellow was around, little to do with John the Baptist, the living Jesus, or even the early Christianity. I quite accept that the history of the emergence of the Roman church is interesting, but Jesus is not interesting at all, unless he is mediating the supernatural. If devoid of the supernatural, he is about as interesting as who John Fromm was, in the story of the emergence of the "Cargo Cult".

[+Sherapy]

21 minutes ago, Habitat said:

Believe whatever you want, but I'm not impressed by insinuations that I'm akin to a cult leader or a con artist, given that nothing has been asked of you, and certainly not asked that you take what I say, on trust. And I have not claimed "special powers". So your seeming complaint, is void.

Oh good, I was in error about you.

I stand corrected.

[Habitat]

3 minutes ago, Sherapy said:

Oh good, I was in error about you.

I stand corrected.

What was the error ?

[Batanat]

7 minutes ago, Habitat said:

You are kidding yourself. The mundane is ubiquitous, it is simply implausible that anyone would zero in on, and spend years dissecting this Jesus phenomenon, for mundane interests, without the supernatural aspect being the main game. Life is way too short for that.

You're acting like Jesus without the supernatural would just be some absolute footnote that nobody's ever heard of. The guy is the central figure of the most prevalent religion in the history of the world, for crying out loud. Even if he was actually just a mundane average joe (or, perhaps, didn't even exist at all), that's why there's interest in him. There are minimalist versions of Jesus (like the Jefferson Bible, for instance; or read practically any modern "biography" of Jesus by historians) that dispense with the magical bells-and-whistles, yet are still interested. Sure, the transmundane claims in the story are certainly a part of its prevalence and intrigue. Personally I have no interest in cars or how they work; to me, their functioning might as well be a miracle. Certainly if I were someone living in a pre-Enlightenment era, I'd likely identify it as magic. But there are people who not only don't see it that way, but are passionate about trying to understand the mundanity behind it. Its inner workings. The thunder and lightning and rain were once considered the doings of magical supermen in the sky. But there were people who wanted to actually understand how such phenomena worked, and it turned out they were mundane, not magical sky people. And as much as the first people to become interested in trying to understand the clouds might have been drawn in partly by the allure of the "weird", the "mysterious" and "magical", the fact remains that the clouds were always mundane. They were only "supernatural" because people didn't yet understand them as what they really are. It's likely that behind the Jesus story there's a mundane truth that doesn't involve magic. The magic, like an awe-inspiring natural phenomenon such as lightning, surely foments interest, of course. But some folks are just interested in knowing how the rain falls sans magical sky people.

[Piney]

24 minutes ago, Habitat said:

All of that is long after this Jesus fellow was around, little to do with John the Baptist, the living Jesus, or even the early Christianity. I quite accept that the history of the emergence of the Roman church is interesting, but Jesus is not interesting at all, unless he is mediating the supernatural. If devoid of the supernatural, he is about as interesting as who John Fromm was, in the story of the emergence of the "Cargo Cult".

Well I found the historical Jesus a fascinating character even if he was nuts. 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jesus_ben_Ananias

[Batanat]

51 minutes ago, Habitat said:

It may or may not be a sham, and to what extent either way, we don't know, but if it were 100% sham, then that means there was no supernatural in play, that, and that alone, would be the determinant of whether it be a sham or not, nothing else !

You seem to have a fairly limited imagination. I can conceive a thousand scenarios in which the supernatural is at play and the beliefs of the apostle Paul were a sham. Maybe the supernatural does exist but Paul was just crazy and the real supernatural is nothing like what he professed. Who's to say?  

[Batanat]

34 minutes ago, Habitat said:

If devoid of the supernatural, he is about as interesting as who John Fromm was, in the story of the emergence of the "Cargo Cult".

And the emergence of the cargo cults is an absolutely fascinating subject 

Edited October 22, 2019 by Batanat

[SHaYap]

Maybe we should all focus a little bit more on that cult status magical Rock Opera ...

~

[Will Due]

34 minutes ago, Batanat said:

I mean, that's only even kind of coherent if one already presupposes all of its premises. I do not. 

 

I hope you don't think I'm being disrespectful.

I just find it irresistible to know why (or how) a person like yourself, who's obviously spent a lot of time exploring religious text, can do so without finding something that compells one towards faith. If that's where you're at.

 

34 minutes ago, Batanat said:

I don't assume the existence of Jesus. I don't assume the existence of G-d. I don't assume that if there is a higher power, that it would have to be anything resembling what we humans call "loving" (it could just as easily be an incomprehensible Lovecraftian being whose character would be totally alien from human notions of morality; or it could be evil, who knows?). 

 

It's everyone's prerogative to make assumptions. When it comes to God, I avoid it myself. Being reliant on the experiences as a result of faith instead is much more interesting and reciprocal. 

 

34 minutes ago, Batanat said:

You believe in these things because you learned them in a book and have chosen to accept them as factual. Why should I?

 

Books are fine. Obviously you like them. But to me the important things aren't written in them. Like I noticed you said, it's what's written in between the lines that matters most.

 

34 minutes ago, Batanat said:

Yes. Most of them, in fact.

 

Really?

Most if not all Christians I know who I've told Jesus didn't die for their sins have given me that "you're going to hell" look lol.

 

34 minutes ago, Batanat said:

Again, such a statement is only cogent if one already shares your presuppositions. I'm unconvinced that Jesus was even a historical person. Whether he was or wasn't: the Jesus found in the gospels doesn't hugely impress me. Not philosophically and not spiritually. As for Paul, I'd probably chew his head off if I ever got the chance to somehow meet him in person. But his biography is interesting, his ideology is interesting, etc. I don't believe his ideology was right, and I don't believe that the ideology expressed in the gospels is right either. But they're fascinating to study.

 

I agree with you there.

What do you think isn't right about Paul's ideology?

 

34 minutes ago, Batanat said:

According to whom? Certainly the Torah disagrees with you.

 

Honestly, to me it's basic common sense that the creator isn't a monster, that there's been a terrible campaign going on for millennia to disparage him. And that also religion evolves and progresses from its birthplace among primitive people. I'm not talking about Jews. I'm talking about all people. Even today there are those who drive Bentleys who are no more evolved spiritually than a Neanderthal. Not that there weren't Neanderthals who might have been more spiritually accomplished than a lot of modern day so-called religious people.

 

34 minutes ago, Batanat said:

And what if I don't believe "salvation" is a real thing?

 

I don't believe salvation is a real thing either. But I do have faith that it is. 

Compared to faith in my opinion, belief is a waste of time.

 

 

[Habitat]

5 minutes ago, Batanat said:

You're acting like Jesus without the supernatural would just be some absolute footnote that nobody's ever heard of. The guy is the central figure of the most prevalent religion in the history of the world, for crying out loud. Even if he was actually just a mundane average joe (or, perhaps, didn't even exist at all), that's why there's interest in him. There are minimalist versions of Jesus (like the Jefferson Bible, for instance; or read practically any modern "biography" of Jesus by historians) that dispense with the magical bells-and-whistles, yet are still interested. Sure, the transmundane claims in the story are certainly a part of its prevalence and intrigue. Personally I have no interest in cars or how they work; to me, their functioning might as well be a miracle. Certainly if I were someone living in a pre-Enlightenment era, I'd likely identify it as magic. But there are people who not only don't see it that way, but are passionate about trying to understand the mundanity behind it. Its inner workings. The thunder and lightning and rain were once considered the doings of magical supermen in the sky. But there were people who wanted to actually understand how such phenomena worked, and it turned out they were mundane, not magical sky people. And as much as the first people to become interested in trying to understand the clouds might have been drawn in partly by the allure of the "weird", the "mysterious" and "magical", the fact remains that the clouds were always mundane. They were only "supernatural" because people didn't yet understand them as what they really are. It's likely that behind the Jesus story there's a mundane truth that doesn't involve magic. The magic, like an awe-inspiring natural phenomenon such as lightning, surely foments interest, of course. But some folks are just interested in knowing how the rain falls sans magical sky people.

This is nonsense. This simply is a story of a man posited as a mediator between God, and man. He is the lynch-pin. Saying otherwise, is like saying you are a coffee enthusiast, but would still be interested in the hot water drink without the coffee in it !

[Habitat]

9 minutes ago, Batanat said:

You seem to have a fairly limited imagination. I can conceive a thousand scenarios in which the supernatural is at play and the beliefs of the apostle Paul were a sham. Maybe the supernatural does exist but Paul was just crazy and the real supernatural is nothing like what he professed. Who's to say?  

Nope, without the supernatural, and Paul did himself make supernatural claims, the whole business is wall-to-wall sham. No one is interested in ancient BS, if indeed that is what the Jesus story is, there is plenty of contemporary BS to meet the market ! My feeling about you, is that you want it to be BS. My feeling about me, is that I don't really care if some individual claimed manifestations of the divine are BS, but I certainly don't believe they all are.

[Batanat]

1 minute ago, Habitat said:

This is nonsense. This simply is a story of a man posited as a mediator between God, and man. He is the lynch-pin. Saying otherwise, is like saying you are a coffee enthusiast, but would still be interested in the hot water drink without the coffee in it !

There are those who suppose that the wizard Merlin is based on a real historical man, some kind of seer or druid. Yes, the fact that in the stories in which he appears he's a wizard — he's "transmundane" — does set him apart from, say, a quite uninteresting cupbearer, or businessman. The nature of his character in the stories is indeed alluring. But there is intrigue also in the mundane: in trying to suss out who the real Merlin was. Or perhaps he didn't exist at all! Whence then cometh the tales? There's intrigue in that question too.    

[Batanat]

2 minutes ago, Habitat said:

Nope, without the supernatural, and Paul did himself make supernatural claims, the whole business is wall-to-wall sham. No one is interested in ancient BS, if indeed that is what the Jesus story is, there is plenty of contemporary BS to meet the market ! My feeling about you, is that you want it to be BS. My feeling about me, is that I don't really care if some individual claimed manifestations of the divine are BS, but I certainly don't believe they all are.

"No one is interested in ancient BS" — no, you aren't interested in ancient BS. And besides which, it's only "BS" if you can't find anything worthwhile in it if it isn't literally true. That's like the thinking of fundamentalists who think the Bible is void if it's not word-for-word literally true. Some people do find interest in it outside of the confines of such narrow thinking.

[Will Due]

 

Oh if we could all only know the truth about the facts that are hidden. 

 

 

[Habitat]

Just now, Batanat said:

"No one is interested in ancient BS" — no, you aren't interested in ancient BS. And besides which, it's only "BS" if you can't find anything worthwhile in it if it isn't literally true. That's like the thinking of fundamentalists who think the Bible is void if it's not word-for-word literally true. Some people do find interest in it outside of the confines of such narrow thinking.

What other ancient BS have you spent years poring over, that had no supernatural element ? I'm tipping none !

[SHaYap]

Ooooh, now we're finally on to splitting wood and splinters in the eye... This is gonna be good... 

~

[Habitat]

6 minutes ago, Batanat said:

There are those who suppose that the wizard Merlin is based on a real historical man, some kind of seer or druid. Yes, the fact that in the stories in which he appears he's a wizard — he's "transmundane" — does set him apart from, say, a quite uninteresting cupbearer, or businessman. The nature of his character in the stories is indeed alluring. But there is intrigue also in the mundane: in trying to suss out who the real Merlin was. Or perhaps he didn't exist at all! Whence then cometh the tales? There's intrigue in that question too.    

You are inadvertently supporting my case. No "magic", and no-one could care less about Merlin ! The novelty is gone, nothing to see here ! Ditto the historical Jesus, no supernatural, he is just Neville Nobody. And you are still interested in him and those around him at the time ? Turn it up !

[Will Due]

1 minute ago, Habitat said:

You are inadvertently supporting my case. No "magic", and no-one could care less about Merlin ! The novelty is gone, nothing to see here ! Ditto the historical Jesus, no supernatural, he is just Neville Nobody. And you are still interested in him and those around him at the time ? Turn it up !

 

Calm down Hab.

 

 

[Habitat]

Just now, Will Due said:

 

Calm down Hab.

 

 

All good here Will.

[Habitat]

what we seem to have here Will, is a newcomer with the 8 bits "dream" of debunking the Jesus "myth". At least he admits it. I'm not sure our new friend even realises she nurses the ambition. The idea that she is engaged in some scholarly enquiry for years, and the supernatural Jesus isn't really integral to the subject, I can't credit, and I am not saying that idly.