Freethought & Rationalism Archive

Clouseau · 05-24-2007, 06:44 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Solo

Clouseau, please consider it possible that what appears to you as "deceit" was not that at all to the gospellers. Jesus was not coming back. They were convinced in the rightness of the apostolic tradition, and as I indicated in previous posts, I believe the Matthean and Lucan Sermon shows their own psychic "pneumatic" experience (or acute awareness thereof) which ties them to the earlier traditions. When they created Jesus as a dead man alive they knew they were creating a mystic paradox, whose true meaning would be available only to a few but that could touch everyone.

What was the paradox, and who did it benefit? I find it difficult to see how a good but dead man could inspire the movement that actually transpired.

Solo · 05-24-2007, 07:12 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Clouseau

I find it difficult to see how a good but dead man could inspire the movement that actually transpired.

You have my heartfelt sympathy.

Jiri

Clouseau · 05-24-2007, 08:12 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Solo

You have my heartfelt sympathy.

Jiri

That's very kind, but is sympathy any substitute for answers to the questions?

What was the paradox, and who did it benefit?

Or do we assume 'heartfelt sympathy' is synonymous with 'white flag'?

Solo · 05-24-2007, 09:33 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Clouseau

That's very kind, but is sympathy any substitute for answers to the questions?

What was the paradox, and who did it benefit?

Or do we assume 'heartfelt sympathy' is synonymous with 'white flag'?

Excellent questions, all, but perhaps not as challenging to me as you imagine.

Jiri

Clouseau · 05-24-2007, 09:38 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Solo

Excellent questions, all, but perhaps not as challenging to me as you imagine.

Jiri

spin · 05-24-2007, 09:39 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Clouseau

What was the motivation for this deceit? Who was responsible for it?

Why did you have to assume deceit?

Different times and circumstances bring about different needs and understandings.

Amaleq13 · 05-24-2007, 10:55 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Clouseau

What was the paradox, and who did it benefit?

I'll field that one for Solo (who I'm sure will correct me if I go astray

). The paradox is exactly what he wrote in the post (ie "a dead man alive") and the benefit goes to anyone who believes in what that paradox represents (ie salvation).

Quote:

I find it difficult to see how a good but dead man could inspire the movement that actually transpired.

You know of no other good dead men who inspired strong beliefs in others? I don't think you're trying hard enough.

Clouseau · 05-24-2007, 12:15 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Amaleq13

I'll field that one for Solo (who I'm sure will correct me if I go astray

). The paradox is exactly what he wrote in the post (ie "a dead man alive")

But according to this hypothesis he was an alive man dead, as far as they were concerned. How could a dead man inspire the religion named after him?

Quote:

You know of no other good dead men who inspired strong beliefs in others?

I can't think of too many good men, dead or otherwise. Any suggestions?

Quote:

I don't think you're trying hard enough.

Then let's have your list. I've got no ideas.

Amaleq13 · 05-24-2007, 03:16 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Clouseau

But according to this hypothesis he was an alive man dead, as far as they were concerned.

Yes, and that is a paradox (ie "any person, thing, or situation exhibiting an apparently contradictory nature"). It is always a good idea to look up the meaning of a word you don't understand.

Quote:

How could a dead man inspire the religion named after him?

I would guess that he was inspirational while alive.

Quote:

I can't think of too many good men, dead or otherwise. Any suggestions?

Studying history should help for both your questions as they indicate a significant lack of necessary background knowledge.

Clouseau · 05-24-2007, 03:53 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Amaleq13

Yes, and that is a paradox (ie "any person, thing, or situation exhibiting an apparently contradictory nature"). It is always a good idea to look up the meaning of a word you don't understand.

There is no paradox. All living things die (unless there are miracles). The scenario that we are examining is that Jesus died, as everyone does, and that his followers invented his resurrection, for some reason that I have yet to understand.

Quote:

I would guess that he was inspirational while alive.

Of course- but what did he inspire after he died?

Quote:

Studying history should help for both your questions as they indicate a significant lack of necessary background knowledge.

Can we have the benefit of your education, then, if you can spare the time?

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

Freethought & Rationalism Archive

The archives are read only.