Freethought & Rationalism Archive

gurugeorge · 06-18-2012, 06:48 PM

Extraordinary, still digesting ... many thanks for putting all that effort in DCH!

DCHindley · 06-18-2012, 07:50 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by gurugeorge

Extraordinary, still digesting ... many thanks for putting all that effort in DCH!

Hey, I have curiosities like anyone else. Unfortunately, all my internal circuits for the "good" ones were burned out, which left this kind of thing. :banghead:

Seriously, I decided it was time to look into this. I've always found turn of the 20th century biblical criticisms "interesting" and really admire their willingness to take criticism as far as the detail permitted.

I once said reading this kind of stuff is like watching successive episodes of the TV Series "Deadwood." My first impression of the show was to ask myself "did people in the 19th century American West really talked like that?" I can confidently now assert that "YES THEY DO!"

But pre-christian Jesus cults has to be looked at, if only to help me tackle my own analysis of the Pauline letters (I am thinking that a popular-culture understanding of Middle-Platonism had produced a Redeemer Myth which had influenced the development of High Christology. I am sure it will take me to the wild and weird world of Gnostic myths ...

I look forward to seeing with folks can add to information presented. :realitycheck:

DCH

aa5874 · 06-18-2012, 10:08 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by gurugeorge

Extraordinary, still digesting ... many thanks for putting all that effort in DCH!

Please explain what is so extraordinary when the author used Acts of the Apostles as a source of history???

Quote:

5. Primitive Christianity seems not unifocal but multifocal in origin and development. It does not emerge full-fledged at Jerusalem and encompass the Mediterranean with the flight of an eagle. The “astoundingly swift" (Heinrici) spread of the Gospel seems only apparent. In reality it seems everywhere in the air, a divine contagion. It springs up almost simultaneously in Jerusalem, in Antioch, in Damascus, in Alexandria, in Rome, in Crete, in Libya, in Ephesus, in Corinth(2) — wherever in the Dispersion the seed was sown. The book of Acts makes two attempts to explain this multifocal fact in accord with its own unifocal theory. It assembles at Pentecost "in Jerusalem, dwellers, Jews, devout men from every nation that is under heaven," who, "each one in his own dialect, heard them (the Apostles) speaking" The other is found in the mighty persecution that arose against the Church in Jerusalem after Stephanos was crowned with martyrdom. "All were dispersed except the Apostles." But these were really the only or at least the principal offenders, the very ones that would have been dispersed first of all. Immediately after, the Church had peace, was builded up and multiplied (Acts ix. 31), and, not many years after, the believers in Jerusalem number many myriads, all zealous for the law (Acts xxi. 20). The fact of multiplicity is clearly implied in these abortive at tempts to trace it back to a higher unity. The other evidences are strewn through the book of Acts; they are scattered and broken lights, but gathered up and focused by the lens of criticism they glow with surprising brightness.

Again we see a dependency on sources of fiction to explain the history of the Jesus cult of Christians.

Sheshbazzar · 06-19-2012, 05:38 AM

The author could have easily left that reference to Acts of the Apostles entirely out, as the argument presented is not dependent upon it.

The presentation explains the prescence of things related in Acts of the Apostles, thus the reference to Acts.
The Acts of the Apostles reference however is not the explanation for the presentation of all of that 'Naasseni' pre-Christian material that composes the bulk of the discussion.

.

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

06-18-2012, 06:48 PM	#41
gurugeorge Veteran Member Join Date: Apr 2004 Location: London, UK Posts: 3,210	Extraordinary, still digesting ... many thanks for putting all that effort in DCH!

06-19-2012, 05:38 AM	#44
Sheshbazzar Veteran Member Join Date: Sep 2003 Location: On the path of knowledge Posts: 8,889	The author could have easily left that reference to Acts of the Apostles entirely out, as the argument presented is not dependent upon it. The presentation explains the prescence of things related in Acts of the Apostles, thus the reference to Acts. The Acts of the Apostles reference however is not the explanation for the presentation of all of that 'Naasseni' pre-Christian material that composes the bulk of the discussion. .

Freethought & Rationalism Archive

The archives are read only.