Freethought & Rationalism ArchiveThe archives are read only. |
|
|
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
10-23-2006, 08:57 PM | #161 | |
Banned
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: Alaska
Posts: 9,159
|
Quote:
That they are simultaneous is straightforward. Even the pseudo-letters are liturgical devices merely masquerading as letters. Or, if one wishes to believe in the letters as "genuine", then they were clearly written for a much wider purpose. |
|
10-23-2006, 08:57 PM | #162 | |
Contributor
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: Dallas, TX
Posts: 11,525
|
Quote:
My first impression, is that if Paul's works are a second century creation, that takes the wind out of the sails of the mythicist position substantially, since in my mind, one of the strongest arguments for it is the mystical presentation of Christ as given by Paul at such an early time (under the standard assumptions of mid 50s). Without that, I might find myself siding with the SHT based not on anything in the NT, but rather, based on the Gospel of the Hebrews. There are no known surviving copies of this, but we do have criticisms of it early in the church history. Supposedly, it was very similar to Matthew, but without the birth story, the magical aspects, and without the redemption by crucfixion message. This book supposedly depicted Jesus as nothing but an extraordinarily wise and moral man and was supposedly written in Hebrew (or Aramaic). The counter argument to this is that the Gospel of the Hebrews was a redaction written by someone who liked aspects of Christianity but found the god man business offensive and so rewrote the story without those aspects. Such a person would probably have actually been Jewish rather than Greek, as the writers of the NT were. |
|
10-24-2006, 03:50 AM | #163 |
Senior Member
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Rockford, IL
Posts: 740
|
|
10-24-2006, 04:08 AM | #164 | |
Veteran Member
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: N/A
Posts: 4,370
|
Quote:
All the best, Roger Pearse |
|
10-24-2006, 05:56 AM | #165 | |
Contributor
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: nowhere
Posts: 15,747
|
Quote:
spin |
|
10-24-2006, 06:25 AM | #166 | |
Veteran Member
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: London, UK
Posts: 3,210
|
Quote:
I've posted my theory (which is mine - Python reference ) before, but I think it's worth considering for someone like yourself who's starting to think along these lines, and I haven't seen anybody else put it quite like this :- If you put Walter Bauer's "Orthodoxy and Heresy" together with Detering's essay on Paul, what you have is the image of a Christianity kicked off to a mythicist, proto-gnostic start with "Simon Magus" aka "Atomos" (later to be dubbed "Paulus", which duplicates his Greek nickname in Latin), and a few others (the "Brothers of the Lord"). This is a novel, Jewish version of the pagan Saviour myth, using the Jewish Messiah as a pagan Dying and Rising god (instead of a martial/political superman). Some (obviously proto-gnostic) version of "Simon Magus'" "letters" are part of the literature that goes with the spread of the movement. As time goes on, inspired "gospels" appear, fleshing out the details of the myth for this or that doctrinal purpose; some "gospels" provide more concrete pseudo-historical details than others. At this stage, the religion is partly exoteric (the "stories" providing an emotionally engaging entry point), partly esoteric (a "secret" teaching of inducement of astral visions and non-dual mystical insight). Through "Simon Magus'" many students, and students of his students and of other "brothers" (e.g. Marcion, Theudas -> Valentinus), this Jewish/pagan proto-gnosticism spreads fairly quickly to a few key points in the ancient world. It is popular with gentiles because Judaism is sort of "cool", yet this new version of Judaism has enough recognisably familiar elements from paganism and Platonism to attract them. (At this point it's worth remembering that the pre-130 CE Judaism wasn't nearly as coherent as it later became, and in fact the anachronistic imposition of a fully-formed Mishnaic Judaism onto "Jesus"' supposed milieu in the Gospels is a dead giveaway. At that time, Judaism would have been much more of a patchwork, some Jews being pretty much "pagan" themselves - and quite familiar with dying/rising gods like Baal.) Meanwhile, a more literalist "Catholic" version of the myth which concretises "Jesus Christ" into fairly recent times in Palestine develops, and the missionaries of this zealous sect lament the fact that "heretical" (i.e. proto-gnostic and gnostic Jewish/pagan) Christianity is already well established wherever they try to spread their message. This literalist version of the religion is purely faith based (requiring only belief in a doctrine), and doesn't have much of an esoteric side to it (much less emphasis on attainment of visions and mystical expereince). By the time of Constantine, "a number of bishops" (Tertullian, after his rejection of Catholicism) of this literalist sub-sect of Christianity (probably especially including Eusebius) present their version of Christianity to Constantine as a suitable religion for uniting an Empire in which Christianity in its proto-gnostic and gnostic forms is already modestly widespread (their version being more suitable for the masses because it requires only faith, only belief in some supposed facts and philosophical doctrines, and not much in the way of spiritual exercises, or the attainment of spiritual or mystical experience). They create a "backstory" involving "apostolic succession" going back to their imagined incarnation (the purpose of which was to give them psychological ascendancy and political power). Because versions of his "letters" were already so widespread and revered, they had to co-opt "Simon Magus" as one of their own, so they bowdlerized the letters and called him "Paul", called "Simon Magus" a heretic, and rewrote the history of the movement, magnifying themselves and their role, by means of the con-job of "apostolic succession". To me, this is the "cleanest" explanation for all the facts and texts (including their interpolations). |
|
10-24-2006, 07:48 AM | #167 | |
Veteran Member
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: San Bernardino, Calif.
Posts: 5,435
|
Quote:
|
|
10-24-2006, 07:59 AM | #168 | |
Veteran Member
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: Colorado
Posts: 8,674
|
Quote:
|
|
10-24-2006, 10:38 AM | #169 | |
Veteran Member
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Atlanta
Posts: 2,060
|
Quote:
Thanks, that is good information. I have a question about Tacitus, Annals 15:44, but I will put it in a new thread. Jake Jones IV |
|
10-24-2006, 10:47 AM | #170 | |
Veteran Member
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: N/A
Posts: 4,370
|
Quote:
All the best, Roger Pearse |
|
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
|