Freethought & Rationalism Archive

Solo · 04-24-2009, 07:51 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Clivedurdle

Paul writes of "glass darkly" a clear reference to the Platonic and gnostic idea of the cave and coming out into the light.

But then again if Paul had the same illuminating experience as Plato (and assume the experience is intensely physical) you would expect its allegorical rendering to show some overlap, or even a close overlap, without Paul necessarily deriving his ideas from what was available to him intellectually in his milieu. Paul would be drawn into the gnostic circles by virtue of his own 'revelations', and make his own conclusions about the meaning of the bi-polar experience that is classically rendered as the contrast of darkness and light. So, for example, Mohammed camping on Mount Hira and sheltering in a cave (and certainly without intellectual access to Plato) would later report to Aisha that the archangel came to him as 'falaq-as-subh', a sudden tearing asunder of the night by the blinding desert sun.
According to your theory, this imagery would not have been available to Mohammed without his knowing the tale of Jesus' ambush of Paul on the road to Damascus.

Quote:

Paul makes sense as a gnostic modernising non circumcising pharisee classically into equality - in annointing there is no greek etc tying together his lord, his visions, his study of the septaguint and creating someone who does dstroy death - death where is thy sting!

But what is his lord ? Why does he tie his experience to the idol of the Nazarene sect (or a part of it at any rate) he previously rejected and persecuted ?

Quote:

Later on "Mark" writes a play about it and the rest is mythology!

If it is not a real person that Mark's multitudes are following, what is his Jesus about ? Paul said he would not have anything among his church but Christ and him crucified ? How does Mark get the pre-crucified Jesus out of Paul alone and how does he tie his experience (if any) to Paul's Spirit in the Sky ?

See what I am getting at ?

Jiri

DCHindley · 04-24-2009, 08:33 AM

Perhaps a bit of class snobbery to boot. Tacitus was of the Senatorial class while Pilate was merely of (ugh!) Equestrian class. Even his buddy Pliny the younger, though born into the Equestrian class, was related to a Senator and then elected as Quaestor in his late 20's, raising him to Senatorial rank. Pilate never rose beyond Equestrian rank, and was banished around 37 CE for being a crummy prefect.

DCH

Quote:

Originally Posted by ripley

Quote:

Originally Posted by DCHindley

Another possibility is that he knew Pilate was a prefect but deliberately used "procurator" (financial agent) as a kind of put-down of the Jewish homeland, equating it with a backwater good only for revenue extraction.

It certainly is a possibility, and not one I'd thought about before. But the reference is made so passingly, I can't imagine Tacitus would have put in the effort. From what I gather, Judea was held in low esteem regardless of what Tacitus might say about the place. And to call Pilate a procurator would surely have been more of a slur on Pilate than on the region he administered, and an entirely undeserved slur at that.

ripley · 04-24-2009, 09:06 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by DCHindley

Perhaps a bit of class snobbery to boot. Tacitus was of the Senatorial class while Pilate was merely of (ugh!) Equestrian class.

Well okay, you've got me now. That would be a perfect excuse for a slur.

Quote:

Originally Posted by DCHindley

Pilate never rose beyond Equestrian rank, and was banished around 37 CE for being a crummy prefect.

His rank would unlikely have changed regardless of his competence. And I can't say I agree at all that he was a crummy prefect. Judea was a difficult province, and Pilate managed to keep the peace enough that his auxiliary troops were sufficient to cope. He minted coins with pagan imagery on one side, and Jewish on the other. He was hardly the bluntest tool in the shed.

aa5874 · 04-24-2009, 02:21 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Clivedurdle

Paul writes of "glass darkly" a clear reference to the Platonic and gnostic idea of the cave and coming out into the light.

Paul makes sense as a gnostic modernising non circumcising pharisee classically into equality - in annointing there is no greek etc tying together his lord, his visions, his study of the septaguint and creating someone who does dstroy death - death where is thy sting!

Later on "Mark" writes a play about it and the rest is mythology!

Later on an emperor's mum get's this oriental cult.

To understand "Paul", Acts of the Apostles must not be ignored. The author of Acts was the inseparable companion of Paul, and Acts is regarded as sacred scriptures.

There is nothing mystic about Paul at all. He simply produced a fraudulent account of his OWN whereabouts.

Clivedurdle · 04-24-2009, 11:49 PM

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Gnostic_Paul

Quote:

The Gnostic Paul is a book by Elaine Pagels, a scholar of gnosticism and professor of religion at Princeton University. In the work, Pagels considers each of the non-pastoral Pauline Epistles, and questions about their authorship. The core of the book examines how the Pauline epistles were read by 2nd century Valentinian gnostics and demonstrates that Paul could be considered a proto-gnostic as well as a proto-Catholic.
Her treatment involves reading the Pauline corpus as being dual layered between a Pneumatic, esoteric Christianity and a Psychic, exoteric Christianity.

Go to the link and see her table of this - which is actually evidence of dual authorship.

Clivedurdle · 04-24-2009, 11:51 PM

If anyone is able to format the table in the link and post it it is very interesting.

ripley · 04-25-2009, 12:49 AM

What epic BB-ninja skillz I has.

Pneumatic, esoteric christianity	Psychic, exoteric christianity
"Greeks"	"Jews"
The religion of Heresy	The Orthodox religion
Early Paul	Peter, The Church Fathers and their forged later Paul
The Truth, wisdom, enlightenment	The Lie, error, darkness, foolishness
The initiated, adults	The uninitiated, children
A secret mystery is revealed to some apostles, but not to other apostles	No secret mystery; all apostles have authority through simple ordinary seeing of miraculous resurrection
The sacrament of apolytrosis (apo- can mean after-, post-, and separate redemption) in addition to common eucharist	The common eucharist, only
Redemption	Salvation, baptism
Spiritual freedom from moral codes -- but metaphysical determinism/fatedness, predestined election	Spiritual enslavement to morality -- with delusion of free will and choosing faith oneself
Reject idea of responsible moral agency and idea of our culpability of sin/guilt	Belief in responsible moral agency and our culpability for sin/guilt
The apple was a gift of gnosis	The apple was bad
All blame is placed on the Ground, not us	All blame is placed on us
No death on the Cross (it was mythic and could be seen as a pseudo-death)	Jesus died on the Cross
Sacrifice is mythic, mental, conceptual, a mental experience	Sacrifice is bodily, bloody, magically effective, physical
No bodily resurrection	Bodily resurrection
Mythic Christ	Supernaturalist Jesus
Belief in higher and lower Christians (with a principled respect for the lower)	Disbelief in higher level of Christianity -- to obtain unity and harmony of the Church
No point in moral-reward heaven or moral-punishment hell	Moral-reward heaven and moral-punishment hell exist, for the responsible agent/soul
We are spirits, controlled by God	We are souls, controlled by ourselves

Clivedurdle · 04-25-2009, 12:58 AM

Superb!

Clivedurdle · 04-25-2009, 01:07 AM

http://www.asiasociety.org/speeches/palmer.html

Quote:

"It was the misfortune, perhaps a judicial one, of southern and eastern Asia to be visited in early ages by false apostles, deeply tainted with heresy; and to this fact has been attributed a large share of the multiplied disasters which have marked the course of religion in these ill-fated countries." [Pg 61, Vol I, 'Christian Missions', Longman, Green, Longman, Roberts and Green, London 1863]

From now on, therefore, I shall refer to the Early Church in China as the Church of the East, or occasionally use the formal title, bestowed upon it by the Emperor in 638, of the Religion of the Light.

andrewcriddle · 04-25-2009, 03:23 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Clivedurdle

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Gnostic_Paul

................................
Go to the link and see her table of this - which is actually evidence of dual authorship.

I have serious doubts how far the table in the wiki article accurately represents her [Elaine Pagels] views.

It appears to represent the interpretation of her work by Michael Hoffman See Amazon/Gnostic-Paul/customer-reviews and pagels gnostic paul

Andrew Criddle

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

04-24-2009, 11:51 PM	#56
Clivedurdle Contributor Join Date: Mar 2003 Location: London UK Posts: 16,024	If anyone is able to format the table in the link and post it it is very interesting.

04-25-2009, 12:58 AM	#58
Clivedurdle Contributor Join Date: Mar 2003 Location: London UK Posts: 16,024	Superb!

Freethought & Rationalism Archive

The archives are read only.