Freethought & Rationalism Archive

aa5874 · 05-30-2011, 10:03 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ApostateAbe

By the way, nobody will hold it against you if you let aa5874 have the last word. Permanently. It is impossible to win an argument against aa5874.

But, you argue with Doherty because you think it is impossible for Doherty to win.

You can win Doherty but you just can't win me.

A GREATER that DOHERTY is here.

My position is SOLID as a ROCK and is UNDEBUNKABLE.

The Jesus story appears to have been STARTED AFTER the Fall of the Temple and in the 2nd century by an UNKNOWN Apocalyptic writer who thought that the Kingdom of heaven was at hand.

When we EXAMINE the writings of Philo, Josephus, Pliny the younger, Lucian. Tacitus, Suetonius, Justin Martyr, Municius Felix, Theophilus of Antioch, Athenagoras, Aristides, and Arnobius it becomes RATHER clear that the Jesus Cult of Christians is 2nd cult.

Many ARGUMENTS and DEBATES about the NATURE and the teachings of Jesus WERE discussed in the 2nd century and "Paul" and the Pauline Jesus ARE MISSING from MANY of the Christian writings.

For example, in the middle of the 2nd century it would appear that the Roman people, the Roman Emperor and Senate did NOT know about the Jesus cult based on Justin Martyr's "First Apology".

Also, some time later, it would appear that the BODILY NATURE of Jesus was NOT yet established and Tertullian wrote a book "On the Flesh of Christ" to resolve the bodily nature of Jesus and DECLARED Jesus did NOT have a human seed but was of the SEED of God and a woman as his mother.

1. If Jesus called Christ did NOT exist in the 1st century before the Fall of the Temple then we would EXPECT NO evidence of his existence except for FORGERIES.

That is PRECISELY the case.

2. If there were stories and books about Jesus called Christ in the 2nd century then we would EXPECT DEBATES and ARGUMENTS about the Bodily nature of Jesus and the teachings of Jesus in the very same 2nd century.

And that is PRECISELY the case.

It would appear that it was an UNKNOWN APOCALYPTIC author who INITIATED the Jesus story and thought that the Kingdom of heaven was at hand.

Now, examine Revelation, it is CLEAR THAT the author BELIEVED the Kingdom of heaven was at hand and that he wanted people to REPENT.

Re 2:16 -

Quote:

Repent, or else I will come unto thee quickly.....

The FIRST mention of Revelation is Justin Martyr in the middle of the 2nd century. See "Dialogue with Trypho" LXXXI.

It would appear that it was the BELIEF that there would be an Apocalypse sometime in the 2nd century that CAUSED People to BELIEVE the Jesus story and REPENT.

vid · 05-31-2011, 05:42 AM

Compare this:
http://motherjones.com/politics/2011...e-chris-mooney
with this:
http://www.ccel.org/ccel/schaff/anf01.viii.iii.vii.html

[I haven't read other posts in the thread, sorry if I am repeating argument or something]

Toto · 05-31-2011, 09:06 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by vid

Compare this:
Rapture Ready: The Science of Self Delusion by Chris Mooney
with this:
Justin Martyr

[I haven't read other posts in the thread, sorry if I am repeating argument or something]

From Chris Mooney:

Quote:

"A MAN WITH A CONVICTION is a hard man to change. Tell him you disagree and he turns away. Show him facts or figures and he questions your sources. Appeal to logic and he fails to see your point." So wrote the celebrated Stanford University psychologist Leon Festinger (PDF), in a passage that might have been referring to climate change denial—the persistent rejection, on the part of so many Americans today, of what we know about global warming and its human causes. But it was too early for that—this was the 1950s—and Festinger was actually describing a famous case study in psychology.

Festinger and several of his colleagues had infiltrated the Seekers, a small Chicago-area cult whose members thought they were communicating with aliens—including one, "Sananda," who they believed was the astral incarnation of Jesus Christ. The group was led by Dorothy Martin, a Dianetics devotee who transcribed the interstellar messages through automatic writing.

Through her, the aliens had given the precise date of an Earth-rending cataclysm: December 21, 1954. Some of Martin's followers quit their jobs and sold their property, expecting to be rescued by a flying saucer when the continent split asunder and a new sea swallowed much of the United States. The disciples even went so far as to remove brassieres and rip zippers out of their trousers—the metal, they believed, would pose a danger on the spacecraft.

Festinger and his team were with the cult when the prophecy failed. First, the "boys upstairs" (as the aliens were sometimes called) did not show up and rescue the Seekers. Then December 21 arrived without incident. It was the moment Festinger had been waiting for: How would people so emotionally invested in a belief system react, now that it had been soundly refuted?

At first, the group struggled for an explanation. But then rationalization set in. A new message arrived, announcing that they'd all been spared at the last minute. Festinger summarized the extraterrestrials' new pronouncement: "The little group, sitting all night long, had spread so much light that God had saved the world from destruction." Their willingness to believe in the prophecy had saved Earth from the prophecy!

From that day forward, the Seekers, previously shy of the press and indifferent toward evangelizing, began to proselytize. "Their sense of urgency was enormous," wrote Festinger. The devastation of all they had believed had made them even more certain of their beliefs.

In the annals of denial, it doesn't get much more extreme than the Seekers. They lost their jobs, the press mocked them, and there were efforts to keep them away from impressionable young minds. But while Martin's space cult might lie at on the far end of the spectrum of human self-delusion, there's plenty to go around. And since Festinger's day, an array of new discoveries in psychology and neuroscience has further demonstrated how our preexisting beliefs, far more than any new facts, can skew our thoughts and even color what we consider our most dispassionate and logical conclusions. This tendency toward so-called "motivated reasoning" helps explain why we find groups so polarized over matters where the evidence is so unequivocal: climate change, vaccines, "death panels," the birthplace and religion of the president (PDF), and much else. ....

From Justin Martyr:

Quote:

Wherefore God delays causing the confusion and destruction of the whole world, by which the wicked angels and demons and men shall cease to exist, because of the seed of the Christians, who know that they are the cause of preservation in nature. Since, if it were not so, it would not have been possible for you to do these things, and to be impelled by evil spirits; but the fire of judgment would descend and utterly dissolve all things, even as formerly the flood left no one but him only with his family who is by us called Noah, and by you Deucalion, from whom again such vast numbers have sprung, some of them evil and others good.

jgoodguy · 05-31-2011, 10:43 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Toto

Quote:

Originally Posted by vid

Compare this:
Rapture Ready: The Science of Self Delusion by Chris Mooney
with this:
Justin Martyr

[I haven't read other posts in the thread, sorry if I am repeating argument or something]

From Chris Mooney:

Quote:

"A MAN WITH A CONVICTION is a hard man to change. Tell him you disagree and he turns away. Show him facts or figures and he questions your sources. Appeal to logic and he fails to see your point." So wrote the celebrated Stanford University psychologist Leon Festinger (PDF), in a passage that might have been referring to climate change denial—the persistent rejection, on the part of so many Americans today, of what we know about global warming and its human causes. But it was too early for that—this was the 1950s—and Festinger was actually describing a famous case study in psychology.

Festinger and several of his colleagues had infiltrated the Seekers, a small Chicago-area cult whose members thought they were communicating with aliens—including one, "Sananda," who they believed was the astral incarnation of Jesus Christ. The group was led by Dorothy Martin, a Dianetics devotee who transcribed the interstellar messages through automatic writing.

Through her, the aliens had given the precise date of an Earth-rending cataclysm: December 21, 1954. Some of Martin's followers quit their jobs and sold their property, expecting to be rescued by a flying saucer when the continent split asunder and a new sea swallowed much of the United States. The disciples even went so far as to remove brassieres and rip zippers out of their trousers—the metal, they believed, would pose a danger on the spacecraft.

Festinger and his team were with the cult when the prophecy failed. First, the "boys upstairs" (as the aliens were sometimes called) did not show up and rescue the Seekers. Then December 21 arrived without incident. It was the moment Festinger had been waiting for: How would people so emotionally invested in a belief system react, now that it had been soundly refuted?

At first, the group struggled for an explanation. But then rationalization set in. A new message arrived, announcing that they'd all been spared at the last minute. Festinger summarized the extraterrestrials' new pronouncement: "The little group, sitting all night long, had spread so much light that God had saved the world from destruction." Their willingness to believe in the prophecy had saved Earth from the prophecy!

From that day forward, the Seekers, previously shy of the press and indifferent toward evangelizing, began to proselytize. "Their sense of urgency was enormous," wrote Festinger. The devastation of all they had believed had made them even more certain of their beliefs.

In the annals of denial, it doesn't get much more extreme than the Seekers. They lost their jobs, the press mocked them, and there were efforts to keep them away from impressionable young minds. But while Martin's space cult might lie at on the far end of the spectrum of human self-delusion, there's plenty to go around. And since Festinger's day, an array of new discoveries in psychology and neuroscience has further demonstrated how our preexisting beliefs, far more than any new facts, can skew our thoughts and even color what we consider our most dispassionate and logical conclusions. This tendency toward so-called "motivated reasoning" helps explain why we find groups so polarized over matters where the evidence is so unequivocal: climate change, vaccines, "death panels," the birthplace and religion of the president (PDF), and much else. ....

From Justin Martyr:

Quote:

Wherefore God delays causing the confusion and destruction of the whole world, by which the wicked angels and demons and men shall cease to exist, because of the seed of the Christians, who know that they are the cause of preservation in nature. Since, if it were not so, it would not have been possible for you to do these things, and to be impelled by evil spirits; but the fire of judgment would descend and utterly dissolve all things, even as formerly the flood left no one but him only with his family who is by us called Noah, and by you Deucalion, from whom again such vast numbers have sprung, some of them evil and others good.

A paper on this subject is here. Dawson-When-Prophecy-Fails-and-Faith-Persists.pdf (application/pdf Object). It references Festinger

DCHindley · 05-31-2011, 10:34 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by jgoodguy

A paper on this subject is here. Dawson-When-Prophecy-Fails-and-Faith-Persists.pdf (application/pdf Object). It references Festinger

"Holy mackeral, Andy!"

I can't make heads or tails of his incredibly dense and jargon filled writing style. He's even worse than me! :lalala:

It seems to me that he has made some misrepresentations about Leon Festinger and his influence. For instance, he says:

From the study of ... one ["very small"] group, Festinger and his colleagues developed the theory of cognitive dissonance: when people with strongly held beliefs are confronted by evidence clearly at odds with their beliefs, they will seek to resolve the discomfort caused by the discrepancy by convincing others to support their views rather than abandoning their commitments. [Nova Religio (1999) Volume: 3, Issue: 1, pp 60-82, pg 60]

This is hardly the gist of Festinger's theory of cognitive dissonance. I sense ... an agenda.

Further reading:

L Festinger, H W Reicken & S Schacter, When Prophecy Fails (or via: amazon.co.uk) (1956, link is to 2011 reprint) This case study includes speculation, based on Dissonance theory, seeking explanation for why this particular group began to proselytize after the founder's prediction failed. The theory was not derived from this case study, but had already been formulated and tested under experimental conditions. The theory is given in a nutshell on pages 25-26.

L Festinger, A Theory of Cognitive Dissonance (or via: amazon.co.uk) (1957) The theory of Cognitive Dissonance is formally set out.

E Harmon-Jones & J Mills, editors, Cognitive Dissonance: Progress on a pivotal theory in social psychology (or via: amazon.co.uk) (1999) A collection of essays on research into and criticisms of the theory.

DCH

jgoodguy · 06-01-2011, 06:42 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by DCHindley

Quote:

Originally Posted by jgoodguy

A paper on this subject is here. Dawson-When-Prophecy-Fails-and-Faith-Persists.pdf (application/pdf Object). It references Festinger

"Holy mackeral, Andy!"

I can't make heads or tails of his incredibly dense and jargon filled writing style. He's even worse than me! :lalala:

It seems to me that he has made some misrepresentations about Leon Festinger and his influence. For instance, he says:

From the study of ... one ["very small"] group, Festinger and his colleagues developed the theory of cognitive dissonance: when people with strongly held beliefs are confronted by evidence clearly at odds with their beliefs, they will seek to resolve the discomfort caused by the discrepancy by convincing others to support their views rather than abandoning their commitments. [Nova Religio (1999) Volume: 3, Issue: 1, pp 60-82, pg 60]

This is hardly the gist of Festinger's theory of cognitive dissonance. I sense ... an agenda.

Further reading:

L Festinger, H W Reicken & S Schacter, When Prophecy Fails (or via: amazon.co.uk) (1956, link is to 2011 reprint) This case study includes speculation, based on Dissonance theory, seeking explanation for why this particular group began to proselytize after the founder's prediction failed. The theory was not derived from this case study, but had already been formulated and tested under experimental conditions. The theory is given in a nutshell on pages 25-26.

L Festinger, A Theory of Cognitive Dissonance (or via: amazon.co.uk) (1957) The theory of Cognitive Dissonance is formally set out.

E Harmon-Jones & J Mills, editors, Cognitive Dissonance: Progress on a pivotal theory in social psychology (or via: amazon.co.uk) (1999) A collection of essays on research into and criticisms of the theory.

DCH

The price was reasonable.

davidstarlingm · 06-01-2011, 01:25 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by DCHindley

Are you then familiar with the works of Mark Nanos wrt Paul? Mark Nanos has come closest to being able to use the letters just as they have come to us to explain Paul as a Torah observant Jew of the Diaspora. Both he and I see him as recommending that non-Jews did not have to become circumcised (and thus subject to the law of Moses) to be considered children of Abraham, as they are justified before God on the basis of their faith in God's promise to Abraham, just as Abram was before he circumcised himself to secure the covenant.

I can't say that I've come across his works before. It sounds like an interesting perspective that I would very much like to hear more about. What do you mean by "Torah observant Jew of the Diaspora" -- what time period does he place Paul in? Isn't the basic historicity of Paul fairly well-established?

Quote:

Originally Posted by DCHindley

Although I have my own unique idea as to who Paul was and how his letters came down to us (letters from a non-christian Paul were edited for use by early Christians, adding the christological statements)....

You are absolutely correct; that is definitely a unique idea.

I have never heard anyone propose something like that before. What, then, is your view of the historicity of Paul? If Paul was not a Christian, then who were his letters addressed to -- synagogues? Paul is not necessarily a great writer, but I can't see his narratives having any cogent direction whatsoever without the christological elements. Perhaps I'm missing something here.

mountainman · 06-01-2011, 04:30 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by davidstarlingm

If Paul was not a Christian, then who were his letters addressed to -- synagogues?

Seneca ?

davidstarlingm · 06-01-2011, 05:11 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by mountainman

Quote:

Originally Posted by davidstarlingm

If Paul was not a Christian, then who were his letters addressed to -- synagogues?

Seneca ?

Brilliant.

DCHindley · 06-01-2011, 06:34 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by davidstarlingm

Quote:

Originally Posted by DCHindley

Are you then familiar with the works of Mark Nanos wrt Paul? Mark Nanos has come closest to being able to use the letters just as they have come to us to explain Paul as a Torah observant Jew of the Diaspora. Both he and I see him as recommending that non-Jews did not have to become circumcised (and thus subject to the law of Moses) to be considered children of Abraham, as they are justified before God on the basis of their faith in God's promise to Abraham, just as Abram was before he circumcised himself to secure the covenant.

I can't say that I've come across his works before. It sounds like an interesting perspective that I would very much like to hear more about. What do you mean by "Torah observant Jew of the Diaspora" -- what time period does he place Paul in? Isn't the basic historicity of Paul fairly well-established?

He places him in the traditional period - mid 1st century CE. Basically, he offers an explanation for the meaning of the Christ language using them as they currently sit in the received text. As a non-Christian, Nanos considers himself a "respectful guest" when it comes to Christian scriptures, and makes no attempt to radically reconsider their structure or origins. What he means by "Torah observant Jew" can be found by clicking the link to his personal web page, which includes links to several of his papers that are available online.

Quote:

Originally Posted by DCHindley

Although I have my own unique idea as to who Paul was and how his letters came down to us (letters from a non-christian Paul were edited for use by early Christians, adding the christological statements)....

You are absolutely correct; that is definitely a unique idea.

I have never heard anyone propose something like that before. What, then, is your view of the historicity of Paul? If Paul was not a Christian, then who were his letters addressed to -- synagogues? Paul is not necessarily a great writer, but I can't see his narratives having any cogent direction whatsoever without the christological elements. Perhaps I'm missing something here.

Pretty much everyone agrees with the author of 2nd Peter that "[t]here are some things in them [i.e. the letters] hard to understand" (2Pe 3:16 RSV). Every single attempt to make sense of them I can think of has done so assuming that the key is in the Christology. When I first read the Paulines myself as a 16 yr old high school student, I remember thinking that they were "choppy" (i.e., jumped around in subject matter a lot). I couldn't seem to make any sense of his arguments.

A couple years after graduating from college I began to try and follow arguments through, ignoring digressions or what seemed to be off topic, and quickly realized that the only connected ones were about justification of gentiles before God, and that the Christological statements were all digressions and not integral with those justification arguments.

I think the "real" Paul was writing to slaves and clients of wealthy Jewish households. A summary of the theory is on this page of Ben Smith's Text Excavation website. I had taken a year each of NT and Classical Greek in college, and the breakout is based on the Greek text, although I wouldn't call myself a Greek expert. I reserve the right to tweak the breakouts a bit, and have already done so with parallel Greek-English tables for Galatians and Romans, with the rest to come as I find the time.

DCH

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

05-31-2011, 05:42 AM	#42
vid Regular Member Join Date: Jan 2008 Location: Myjava, Slovakia Posts: 384	Compare this: http://motherjones.com/politics/2011...e-chris-mooney with this: http://www.ccel.org/ccel/schaff/anf01.viii.iii.vii.html [I haven't read other posts in the thread, sorry if I am repeating argument or something]

Freethought & Rationalism Archive

The archives are read only.