Freethought & Rationalism Archive

Elijah · 09-18-2008, 12:47 AM

Here I'll try a Matrix analogy since it's comparable to Plato's cave and see if that helps you out. The daemon in this guy's world view are lines of code in the matrix that are the cause of particular things and actions in the simulation which represents the material world and the gods are the letters of code themselves.

Toto · 09-18-2008, 12:48 AM

Kooks and Quacks

Quote:

We all have read the tales told of Jesus in the Gospels, but few people really have a good idea of their context. Yet it is quite enlightening to examine them against the background of the time and place in which they were written, and my goal here is to help you do just that. There is abundant evidence that these were times replete with kooks and quacks of all varieties, from sincere lunatics to ingenious frauds, even innocent men mistaken for divine, and there was no end to the fools and loons who would follow and praise them.

...

Miracles were also a dime a dozen in this era. The biographer Plutarch, a contemporary of Josephus, engages in a lengthy digression to prove that a statue of Tyche did not really speak in the early Republic (Life of Coriolanus 37.3). He claims it must have been a hallucination inspired by the deep religious faith of the onlookers, since there were, he says, too many reliable witnesses to dismiss the story as an invention (38.1-3). He even digresses further to explain why other miracles such as weeping or bleeding--even moaning--statues could be explained as natural phenomena, showing a modest but refreshing degree of skeptical reasoning that would make the Amazing Randi proud. What is notable is not that Plutarch proves himself to have some good sense, but that he felt it was necessary to make such an argument at all. Clearly, such miracles were still reported and believed in his own time. I find this to be a particularly interesting passage, since we have thousands of believers flocking to weeping and bleeding statues even today. Certainly the pagan gods must also exist if they could make their statues weep and bleed as well!

Miraculous healings were also commonplace. Suetonius, another biographer writing a generation after Plutarch, reports that even the emperor Vespasian once cured the blind and lame (Life of Vespasian 7.13; this "power" being attributed to the god Serapis--incidentally the Egyptian counterpart to Asclepius; cf. also Tacitus, Histories 4.81). Likewise, statues with healing powers were common attractions for sick people of this era. Lucian mentions the famous healing powers of a statue of Polydamas, an athlete, at Olympia, as well as the statue of Theagenes at Thasos (Council of the Gods 12). Both are again mentioned by Pausanias, in his "tour guide" of the Roman world (6.5.4-9, 11.2-9). Lucian also mentions the curative powers of the statue of a certain General Pellichos (Philopseudes 18-20). And Athenagoras, in his Legatio pro Christianis (26), polemicizes against the commonplace belief in the healing powers of statues, mentioning, in addition to the statue of a certain Neryllinus, the statues of Proteus and Alexander, the same two men I discuss in detail below.

Toto · 09-18-2008, 12:51 AM

From the same article

Quote:

Even Eusebius, in his Treatise against Apollonius, does not question his existence, or the reality of many of his miracles--rather, he usually tries to attribute them to trickery or demons. This shows the credulity of the times, even among educated defenders of the Christian faith, but it also shows how easy it was to deceive. Since they readily believed in demons and magical powers, it should not surprise us that they believed in resurrections and transmutations of water to wine

Elijah · 09-18-2008, 01:01 AM

Again believing in mind over matter or faith healing is compatible with a natural world view, (maybe not correctly) but it doesn't necessarily mean a supernatural world view. And I've talked about daemons at length now.

bacht · 09-18-2008, 06:54 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Elijah

Quote:

Originally Posted by GakuseiDon

Is this not "case closed"?

No, daemon to a Platonist represents the whole dominion between god and man. It's the whole spiritual side... still constant.

Cite some texts you want me to look at.

Edit

As far as the supernatural view, it's the assumed view of the skeptic so ask them for evidence not me.

No, the assumed view of the skeptic is that there are no supernatural phenomena, either now or at any time in the past.

I used to be a Bible-believing prayer meeting-attending Evangelical, with almost total confidence in the existence of the supernatural. I abandoned that perspective many years ago. But many people then and now do believe in such things.

I have had to learn to read the Old and New Testament with the cold eye of academic analysis, which also assumes that there is no such thing as the supernatural. I've had an epiphany after finding the mythic analysis of Earl Doherty, who opened a new perspective on the New Testament for me. I can't see ever going back to anything like the traditional orthodox interpretation of these writings.

Just because you don't like what you read in the NT material doesn't mean it's not there. You must realize by now that your interpretation is eccentric, and not supported by anyone with a skeptical approach. You seem to be committing classic fallacies (anachronism, projection) tried by novice scholars since the beginning of philosophy.

I respect your willingness to defend an unpopular view, but it's a lost cause imo.

Elijah · 09-18-2008, 10:50 AM

You're just proving my point when you assume a supernatural position towards religion. Just because you no longer believe in supernatural phenomenon doesn't mean you don't believe religion is based in the supernatural.

It's not a lost cause, just wasted on people who don't understand the philosophy of the time but I was curious on what evidence would be offered in defense of the supernatural assumption.

bacht · 09-18-2008, 11:13 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Elijah

You're just proving my point when you assume a supernatural position towards religion. Just because you no longer believe in supernatural phenomenon doesn't mean you don't believe religion is based in the supernatural.

It's not a lost cause, just wasted on people who don't understand the philosophy of the time but I was curious on what evidence would be offered in defense of the supernatural assumption.

Well, religion by definition is supernatural isn't it? God is a supernatural being, unmeasurable and unprovable by scientific means. Or do see religion as really being philosophy? Is this a semantic issue again?

There is no assumption required when approaching the Bible. They tell us what they are thinking, which is ubiquitously supernatural from Genesis to Revelation. It's got nothing to do with my attitude towards such things, I'm simply listening to their reports.

I only mentioned my own experience to show that I have looked at this material from both sides.

Elijah · 09-18-2008, 11:23 AM

No just theistic understandings of God are supernatural a philosophical understanding should correspond to reason and nature.

You haven't looked at all the sides of this conversation. You've believed in the supernatural and you haven't believed in the supernatural but you haven't tried to understand religion rationally/philosophically yet.

But you are right that a lot of the difficulty in communication in this conversation is caused by semantic issues.

Toto · 09-18-2008, 11:50 AM

Why do you think none of us has tried to understand religion as rational/philosophical? Why do you think that we have not moved beyond that?

Elijah · 09-18-2008, 11:54 AM

Because you would be able to converse more proficiently on the subjects being discussed. If you moved beyond it you could still go back and summarize what I'm overlooking. I'm sure there may be someone out in IIDB that has but they haven't joined in on the conversation yet.

Edit: NoRobots excluded.

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

09-18-2008, 12:47 AM	#211
Elijah Veteran Member Join Date: Mar 2005 Location: MidWest Posts: 1,894	Here I'll try a Matrix analogy since it's comparable to Plato's cave and see if that helps you out. The daemon in this guy's world view are lines of code in the matrix that are the cause of particular things and actions in the simulation which represents the material world and the gods are the letters of code themselves.

09-18-2008, 01:01 AM	#214
Elijah Veteran Member Join Date: Mar 2005 Location: MidWest Posts: 1,894	Again believing in mind over matter or faith healing is compatible with a natural world view, (maybe not correctly) but it doesn't necessarily mean a supernatural world view. And I've talked about daemons at length now.

09-18-2008, 10:50 AM	#216
Elijah Veteran Member Join Date: Mar 2005 Location: MidWest Posts: 1,894	You're just proving my point when you assume a supernatural position towards religion. Just because you no longer believe in supernatural phenomenon doesn't mean you don't believe religion is based in the supernatural. It's not a lost cause, just wasted on people who don't understand the philosophy of the time but I was curious on what evidence would be offered in defense of the supernatural assumption.

09-18-2008, 11:23 AM	#218
Elijah Veteran Member Join Date: Mar 2005 Location: MidWest Posts: 1,894	No just theistic understandings of God are supernatural a philosophical understanding should correspond to reason and nature. You haven't looked at all the sides of this conversation. You've believed in the supernatural and you haven't believed in the supernatural but you haven't tried to understand religion rationally/philosophically yet. But you are right that a lot of the difficulty in communication in this conversation is caused by semantic issues.

09-18-2008, 11:50 AM	#219
Toto Contributor Join Date: Jun 2000 Location: Los Angeles area Posts: 40,549	Why do you think none of us has tried to understand religion as rational/philosophical? Why do you think that we have not moved beyond that?

09-18-2008, 11:54 AM	#220
Elijah Veteran Member Join Date: Mar 2005 Location: MidWest Posts: 1,894	Because you would be able to converse more proficiently on the subjects being discussed. If you moved beyond it you could still go back and summarize what I'm overlooking. I'm sure there may be someone out in IIDB that has but they haven't joined in on the conversation yet. Edit: NoRobots excluded.

Freethought & Rationalism Archive

The archives are read only.