FRDB Archives

Freethought & Rationalism Archive

The archives are read only.


Go Back   FRDB Archives > Archives > Religion (Closed) > Biblical Criticism & History
Welcome, Peter Kirby.
You last visited: Today at 03:12 PM

 
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old 06-27-2006, 03:35 PM   #791
Iasion
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by No Robots
How many fictional characters would you call "wise"? Yoda, maybe?
Nestor the wise.
http://homepage.mac.com/cparada/GML/Nestor.html

Sherlock Holmes

Gandalf

Dumbledor


- Iasion
 
Old 06-27-2006, 03:40 PM   #792
Contributor
 
Join Date: Jun 2000
Location: Los Angeles area
Posts: 40,549
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by No Robots
. . .. Christ is a mystic, THE mystic, operating essentially within the realm of the will; and thus demands belief and obedience. . . .
You've lost me there. Mystics operating within the realm of the will? demanding belief and obedience? This makes no sense.
Toto is offline  
Old 06-27-2006, 03:48 PM   #793
Banned
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: Chicago, IL
Posts: 1,289
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Toto
You've lost me there. Mystics operating within the realm of the will? demanding belief and obedience? This makes no sense.
Not only that, but there's no defense, as their should be, of the claim that Jesus was a/the mystic, let alone a definition of what a mystic is and how one's being a mystic is, as "no robots" (sheesh, these monikers!) seems to think, exclusive of one's being at the same time a social critic, prophet, reformer, etc.

Jeffrey Gibson
jgibson000 is offline  
Old 06-27-2006, 03:56 PM   #794
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Edmonton
Posts: 5,679
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by jgibson000
Not only that, but there's no defense, as their should be, of the claim that Jesus was a/the mystic, let alone a definition of what a mystic is and how one's being a mystic is, as "no robots" (sheesh, these monikers!) seems to think, exclusive of one's being at the same time a social critic, prophet, reformer, etc.
My real name is Barrett Pashak. You can call me anything you like. Maybe you should call me Johnny One-note: Read Brunner's book!
No Robots is offline  
Old 06-27-2006, 07:25 PM   #795
Regular Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: California
Posts: 416
Exclamation

Quote:
Originally Posted by jakejonesiv
How do you explain the varieties of early Christianity that didn't either didn't believe Jesus was crucified or didn't mention it? It is unmentioned in GThomas or Q, if there even was such a thing.
There's not much "Christianity" in either GThomas or Q. The use of "Jesus said..." to introduce sayings does not by itself constitute Christianity! I have a hunch that Q was really just a collection of popular aphorisms that were put into Jesus' mouth by Matthew and Luke.

"Didn't believe Jesus was crucified"? Why... that's heresy!

Was it the Nestorians who believed Simon of Cyrene took Jesus' place on the cross and that he sneaked off to India? No, neither that group nor that idea figures into my scenario. I'll try to give it as little thought as possible.

(Hmmm. How does crucifixion-less Christianity fit into the German Radical scheme that you seem so fond of?)

On the other hand, I will have to think more about the roles of Q and Thomas. "VMJ" is not yet a fully formed hypothesis. It may never be one.

Quote:
What is the earliest extant image of Jesus on the cross? If it is the one definitive event that started Christianity, it should be depicted early and often right? So how many years before we see an unambiguos display of the crucifix? 500 years? more?
I dunno, to tell you the truth. Ask Dan Brown; he knows all the experts on "symbology."

In any case, crucifixion is pervasive in Paul and the climactic event in all four gospels. To non-Christians, crucifixion was considered to be a shameful form of execution, so early Christians didn't flaunt the symbol. I would guess that it entered Christian public iconography around the time of Constantine. If you recall, C's mom Helena is supposed to have searched for and found the "True Cross" during her pilgrimage to Palestine. I would guess that the image became fashionable at that point.

Surely you're not suggesting that the crucifixion didn't become important to Christianity until then Early Christian literature is full of it.

Didymus
Didymus is offline  
Old 06-28-2006, 07:47 AM   #796
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Atlanta
Posts: 2,060
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by No Robots
You might as well say it was all cribbed from Plato: For Plato actually speaks of one who, without having done any wrong himself, gives the appearance of most manifest unrighteousness, in order to prove himself totally righteous. He is then put in chains, scourged, tortured, blinded, and, having endured all sufferings, is finally crucified (spitted): τελευαων παντα κακα παθον ανασχινδυλευθησεται Gorg. 58,13ff.; De Rep. 11, 65,66.
Thanks for the info!

Jake Jones IV
jakejonesiv is offline  
Old 06-28-2006, 07:53 AM   #797
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Atlanta
Posts: 2,060
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by No Robots
How many fictional characters would you call "wise"? Yoda, maybe?

King Solomon

Jake Jones IV
jakejonesiv is offline  
Old 06-28-2006, 08:04 AM   #798
Regular Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: California
Posts: 416
Default

I think we have to make a distinction between the crucifixion "event," Paul's iconic crucified savior, and the Passion narratives in the gospels.

Paul didn't give us such an account. Nonetheless, he did preach Christ crucified, a crucified savior. The idea of a rejected and humiliated savior had roots in the Wisdom tales; there seem to have been other ancient sources as well. Those legends may well have had a role in the response to the crucifixion. And, along with Hebrew scripture, they may have been used by Mark in creating the Passion narrative.

But the fact that there were such antecedents shouldn't lead us to presume that Christianity didn't have its inspiration in a contemporaneous crucifixion.

Didymus
Didymus is offline  
Old 06-28-2006, 08:31 AM   #799
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Atlanta
Posts: 2,060
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Didymus
There's not much "Christianity" in either GThomas or Q. The use of "Jesus said..." to introduce sayings does not by itself constitute Christianity!
That is special pleading.
GThomas represents a version of Christianity that does not conform to your assumption of the alleged crucifixtion as essential. Please consider that many of the sayings have parallels in the New Testament.

Many of the liberal scholars, like Burton Mac, who support an HJ do so on the basis of the alleged Kingdom preacher in Q. Now, I do not know whether Q existed or not (i tend to doubt it), but if it did, then it represents Christian communities where the crucifixtion crucifiction crucifixion was either unknown or not considered very important.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Didymus
(Hmmm. How does crucifixion-less Christianity fit into the German Radical scheme that you seem so fond of?)
The very richness and diversity of early Christian belief tells against the "one source" theory of some unknown guy getting crucified.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Didymus
On the other hand, I will have to think more about the roles of Q and Thomas. "VMJ" is not yet a fully formed hypothesis. It may never be one.
OK! That is a reasonable approach. I am interested to see where this line of inquiry leads. I like your approach of "thinking outside the box."

Jake Jones IV
jakejonesiv is offline  
Old 06-28-2006, 08:42 AM   #800
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Atlanta
Posts: 2,060
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Didymus
I think we have to make a distinction between the crucifixion "event," Paul's iconic crucified savior, and the Passion narratives in the gospels.

Paul didn't give us such an account. Nonetheless, he did preach Christ crucified, a crucified savior. The idea of a rejected and humiliated savior had roots in the Wisdom tales; there seem to have been other ancient sources as well. Those legends may well have had a role in the response to the crucifixion. And, along with Hebrew scripture, they may have been used by Mark in creating the Passion narrative.

But the fact that there were such antecedents shouldn't lead us to presume that Christianity didn't have its inspiration in a contemporaneous crucifixion.

Didymus
Hi Didymus,

If the last line were changed as below, I would agree with it.

But the fact that there were such antecedents shouldn't lead us to presume that Christianity either did or didn't have its inspiration in a contemporaneous crucifixion.

Jake Jones IV
jakejonesiv is offline  
 

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -8. The time now is 09:25 PM.

Top

This custom BB emulates vBulletin® Version 3.8.2
Copyright ©2000 - 2015, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.