Freethought & Rationalism Archive

Iskander · 06-23-2010, 05:20 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by J-D

Quote:

Originally Posted by mountainman

You mean like public opinion polls on the origins of christianity? Good luck.

I don't think this is endless repetition, or even repetition at all. I've never seen a poll like this here before.

I didn’t have the poll in mind when I wrote that.

Doug Shaver · 06-23-2010, 07:00 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by J-D

If you can explain another option on this thread I will include it in a future version of this poll.

I went with "not enough information," but I would qualify that. The earliest Christianity that we know about would be "people listening to the teachings of Paul, derived from his visions produced by meditation techniques, neurological abnormality, drug use, or some combination," but Christianity's origin obviously predates his writings. We just don't have any direct evidence for what that cult was all about before he came along.

dog-on · 06-23-2010, 07:09 AM

Why does Paul have to be a drug addict?

Why not just a Hellenistic Jew that reinterpreted the LXX?

And yea, we do not know what the beliefs prior to Paul were, if Paul in fact wrote when scholarship says he did, or even if we are actually reading what was originally written.

So many questions. so little evidence...

bacht · 06-23-2010, 09:33 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by J-D

I'm interested in answers with a particular level of specificity, that's what the poll and the thread are for, and you haven't provided one. That doesn't mean there's anything wrong with what you're saying, it's just not relevant to this thread.

Let's see:

How did Christianity begin?

With people listening to the teachings of Jesus, derived from his interpretation of Jewish tradition
maybe, but we don't know who he really was or what he was teaching

With people listening to the teachings of Paul, derived from his visions produced by meditation techniques, neurological abnormality, drug use, or some combination
I don't know if there was a real Paul - if there was I don't know who he was or what he was teaching

With people listening to the teachings of Paul deliberately fabricated to attract a following
do you mean people listening to the catholicized version of Marcion's Apostolikon?

With the Emperor Constantine promulgating for political purposes a religion which he had had deliberately fabricated
hmm, no doubt EC brought new people into the churches, but did his team invent the whole thing? Who was Diocletian persecuting?

We do not have enough information to draw a conclusion
true of Christian origins generally, it's mostly speculation at this time, those who say differently are preaching imo

aa5874 · 06-23-2010, 01:58 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Doug Shaver

Quote:

Originally Posted by J-D

If you can explain another option on this thread I will include it in a future version of this poll.

I went with "not enough information," but I would qualify that. The earliest Christianity that we know about would be "people listening to the teachings of Paul, derived from his visions produced by meditation techniques, neurological abnormality, drug use, or some combination," but Christianity's origin obviously predates his writings. We just don't have any direct evidence for what that cult was all about before he came along.

What you claim about "Paul" cannot be shown to be true.

There are NO credible non-apologetic source that can show that a character called Paul persecuted Jesus believers or that there were even Jesus believers before the Fall of the Temple.

There are NO credible historical source outside the Church that identified a character called Paul who preached about a RESURRECTED Jewish man who was given a NAME above the Roman Emperors and to whom the Roman Emperors and EVERY ROMAN citizen should bow before the Fall of the Temple.

The Pauline writings do NOT reflect history.

No secular writer or historian who wrote about events during the reign of the Emperors Tiberius, Caligula, Cladius, and Nero mentioned the resurrected Jewish man who was equal to God, the Creator of heaven and earth and Messiah preached by the Pauline writers ALL over the Roman Empire.

The Pauline writings are not compatible with the history of the 1st century before the Fall of the Temple.

aa5874 · 06-23-2010, 02:26 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Iskander

Quote:

Originally Posted by aa5874

.................................................. ....
Secondly, it is mere propaganda that slaves often were scribes when it can be shown that a scribe was often a professional, of the social elite class and well-educated in antiquity.

See http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scribe

Slaves employed as scribes?, yes

Quote:

To simplify, one might say that Roman slaves were of three main kinds: those in urban households, those who worked in the fields in the country, and the chained slaves employed on great estates (latifundiae) and in the mines.'8 The lot of domestic slaves, as might be expected, was more privileged than that of their unfortunate counterparts involved in heavy manual labor, and this was not just because of the lighter duties. The more slaves a wealthy Roman possessed, the greater his prestige; some had 400 or more in their household.'9 There were thus more slaves than jobs for them to do, and to compensate a ludicrous division of labor arose, whereby one slave would buy groceries, another would cook, another put on his master's shoes, another dress him, another massage him, and another follow him around to attend to his every need. The Stoic philosopher Epictetus, the great intellectual influence on Marcus Aurelius, pointed out the absurdity of all this - and he knew, because he had been a slave himself.20

In Rome slaves could be found in a bewildering variety of occupations: as street cleaners, builders of baths and temples, factory workers, navvies on roads and aqueducts; as shop workers, cooks, barbers, hairdressers, nurses, tutors, secretaries, butlers, laundry women, house cleaners, seamstresses and schoolteachers. Roman patricians were often in a kind of competition with their wealthy neighbors to see if they could buy better-looking or more accomplished slaves, and the oversupply of labor thus generated meant that male slaves were often found doing household chores that females could easily do.:>'>It will be clear, then, how different Roman slavery was from that of the antebellum American South, quite apart from the consideration that American slaves were always black and those in the Roman Empire could be any color. Roman slaves were often talented, clever and educated, occupying positions of responsibility and with a real prospect of freedom.

Under the Roman republic, slaves were acquired largely by war and piracy. The slave population thus consisted of conquered and defeated people,

Marcus Aurelius, Warrior, philosopher, emperor (or via: amazon.co.uk)
Frank Mclynn
Vintage 2010.
ISBN 9781844135271
Pages 7-8

How incredible!!

You produce a passage that should show that slaves were scribes but NOT even the word "scribe" can be found.

These are some of the occupation of Roman slaves and "scribe" cannot be found.
1.street cleaners,
2.builders of baths and temples,
3.factory workers,
4.navvies on roads and aqueducts
5.shop workers
6.cooks
7.barbers
8.hairdressers
9.nurses
9.tutors
10.secretaries
11.butlers
12.laundry women
13.house cleaners
14.seamstresses
15.schoolteachers.

How absolutely incredible.

mountainman · 06-23-2010, 05:39 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by J-D

Quote:

Originally Posted by mountainman

Maybe you need another option that says .....

We do have enough information to draw and process hypotheses.

No, I don't think I do.

Then perhaps the option should be re-worded:

We don't have enough information -- even to draw one or more hypotheses.

Iskander · 06-24-2010, 05:52 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by aa5874

Quote:

Originally Posted by Iskander

Slaves employed as scribes?, yes

Marcus Aurelius, Warrior, philosopher, emperor (or via: amazon.co.uk)
Frank Mclynn
Vintage 2010.
ISBN 9781844135271
Pages 7-8

How incredible!!

You produce a passage that should show that slaves were scribes but NOT even the word "scribe" can be found.

.....................................
How absolutely incredible.

Oh dear! It is obvious that functioning as a secretary answers the question and that the rest of the citation gives an affirmative answer to the question.
I am sorry I have to come back to repeat the answer to the question: slaves employed as scribes? .The answer is: yes.
Oh dear, oh dear!!

Quote:

Slaves laboured in the mines and in the empire's many farms and potteries. The state's public works were largely completed and maintained by slaves. Also the government's state bureaucracy depended very much on educated slaves to keep the administration of the empire running. Even key institutions like the state's mints or the distribution of the corn dole to poor Romans depended on slaves.
Other educated slaves also kept the private industries going, by functioning as their accountants and clerks. Other vital services were provided by literate slaves who served as teachers, librarians, scribes, artists and entertainers - even doctors.
Also in the private houses of Rome, it was slaves who were the servants of their Roman masters, watching over their private lives.
From the man who cleaned the sewers to the emperor's scribe, slaves were an essential part of Roman society.
In the latter centuries of the Roman empire, slavery began gradually to decrease in importance, as the rise of Christianity demanded more benevolence, and - no less importantly - the supply of slaves began to dwindle.

http://www.roman-empire.net/society/society.html

I understand now why you keep shouting that everything is incredible...

aa5874 · 06-24-2010, 09:40 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Iskander

Quote:

Originally Posted by aa5874

How incredible!!

You produce a passage that should show that slaves were scribes but NOT even the word "scribe" can be found.

.....................................
How absolutely incredible.

Oh dear! It is obvious that functioning as a secretary answers the question and that the rest of the citation gives an affirmative answer to the question.
I am sorry I have to come back to repeat the answer to the question: slaves employed as scribes? .The answer is: yes.
Oh dear, oh dear!!

Oh dearest dear. What fallacy! All slave secretaries were scribes. Oh dear.

A slave cook could have been a scribe too. Oh my dear.

You have NOT shown from a source of ANTIQUITY that a slave secretary was a scribe.

You have provided an OPINION.

Please provide a source of antiquity that show that a slave secretary was a scribe.

Name a SLAVE secretary that was a scribe to any Emperor in the 1st century in any source of antiquity only then you will have credibility.

Quote:

Slaves laboured in the mines and in the empire's many farms and potteries. The state's public works were largely completed and maintained by slaves. Also the government's state bureaucracy depended very much on educated slaves to keep the administration of the empire running. Even key institutions like the state's mints or the distribution of the corn dole to poor Romans depended on slaves.
Other educated slaves also kept the private industries going, by functioning as their accountants and clerks. Other vital services were provided by literate slaves who served as teachers, librarians, scribes, artists and entertainers - even doctors.
Also in the private houses of Rome, it was slaves who were the servants of their Roman masters, watching over their private lives.
From the man who cleaned the sewers to the emperor's scribe, slaves were an essential part of Roman society.
In the latter centuries of the Roman empire, slavery began gradually to decrease in importance, as the rise of Christianity demanded more benevolence, and - no less importantly - the supply of slaves began to dwindle.

http://www.roman-empire.net/society/society.html

Quote:

Originally Posted by Iskander

I understand now why you keep shouting that everything is incredible...

You really don't understand. People here are promoting propaganda, rumors and "Chinese whispers" and are merely regurgitating OPINION as Evidence.

Somebody has got to expose the false rumors.

You produce a passage that did not mention that slaves were scribes and in order to hide your failure you have NOW produced a passage which merely gives an opinion.

I can ONLY deal with EVIDENCE. I can only deal with sources of antiquity.

Please provide a passage from a source of antiquity that state that slaves were scribes to any Roman Emperor.

Iskander · 06-24-2010, 09:51 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by aa5874

Quote:

Originally Posted by Iskander

Oh dear! It is obvious that functioning as a secretary answers the question and that the rest of the citation gives an affirmative answer to the question.
I am sorry I have to come back to repeat the answer to the question: slaves employed as scribes? .The answer is: yes.
Oh dear, oh dear!!

Oh dearest dear. What fallacy! All slave secretaries were scribes. Oh dear.

A slave cook could have been a scribe too. Oh my dear.

You have NOT shown from a source of ANTIQUITY that a slave secretary was a scribe.

You have provided an OPINION.

Please provide a source of antiquity that show that a slave secretary was a scribe.

Name a SLAVE secretary that was a scribe to any Emperor in the 1st century in any source of antiquity only then you will have credibility.

http://www.roman-empire.net/society/society.html

Quote:

Originally Posted by Iskander

I understand now why you keep shouting that everything is incredible...

You really don't understand. People here are promoting propaganda, rumors and "Chinese whispers" and are merely regurgitating OPINION as Evidence.

Somebody has got to expose the false rumors.

You produce a passage that did not mention that slaves were scribes and in order to hide your failure you have NOW produced a passage which merely gives an opinion.

I can ONLY deal with EVIDENCE. I can only deal with sources of antiquity.

Please provide a passage from a source of antiquity that state that slaves were scribes to any Roman Emperor.

A most senseless proposal.

View Poll Results: How did Christianity begin?
With people listening to the teachings of Jesus, derived from his interpretation of Jewish tradition	9	18.37%
With people listening to the teachings of Paul, derived from his visions produced by meditation techniques, neurological abnormality, drug use, or some combination	7	14.29%
With people listening to the teachings of Paul deliberately fabricated to attract a following	3	6.12%
With the Emperor Constantine promulgating for political purposes a religion which he had had deliberately fabricated	4	8.16%
We do not have enough information to draw a conclusion	26	53.06%
Voters: 49. You may not vote on this poll

Thread Tools	Search this Thread
Show Printable Version	Search this Thread: Advanced Search

06-23-2010, 07:09 AM	#33
dog-on Veteran Member Join Date: Jun 2006 Location: The Netherlands Posts: 3,397	Why does Paul have to be a drug addict? Why not just a Hellenistic Jew that reinterpreted the LXX? And yea, we do not know what the beliefs prior to Paul were, if Paul in fact wrote when scholarship says he did, or even if we are actually reading what was originally written. So many questions. so little evidence...

Freethought & Rationalism Archive

The archives are read only.