aa5874

Perhaps, not the kind of person Solo had in mind to play chess games with oneself.

Not really. Solo's chess player must know what the left or right hand is doing, but not simultaneously.

Impossible, right?

Sheshbazzar

I kind of view the development of the NT as arising out of fervent religious convictions that lead to a type of shared self-hypnosis, somewhat like Solo's suggested chess player, the devotees become hyper-involved in the assembling of an intricately contrived theological narrative, convincing themselves even as they proceed, that each additional idea incorporated, is inspired, and is the gospel truth, at least on some level.
And I perceive that this is ongoing, in the often very contrived reasoning's employed in apologetics, where the apologist becomes absolutely certain and convinced that the "explanation" he or she may have devised or arrived at is the only right and "true" explanation, and often when this view is held strongly enough, and is presented persuasively enough, a new "Version" of the Bible needs to be produced that "corrects" terms that do not sit comfortably with their new and better interpretation and translation.
A example of this might be apparent (to some) in the thread "List of Jesus' commandments?" Where the apologists reason away, and wish to replace the NT's use of the word "hate" in Jesus' conversations with much milder expressions, in spite of the fact that almost all translations and versions still do contain the word "hate".
I do not think that this is a new form of reforming the texts and the beliefs, but rather this is just another example of a continuing evolvement that has been going on from the beginning, older readings and understandings are dropped and eventually evolved entirely out of existence in the religionists understandings and interpretations of the texts.
Then also there is the convenient "dropping" out of such verses as do not fit into modern Christian interpretations and practices, such as the NIV omitting the entire reference by Paul to keeping a Feast in Jerusalem (Acts 18:21)
Important to the few sects that do continue to keep The Feasts, but inconvenient to the orthodox majority who would now much rather downplay and forget any such a display of consideration by Paul for the keeping of The "Jewish" Feasts.
First they employed the tactic of "explaining" it away, IE. "Paul wasn't observing The Feasts, it was just a very convenient opportunity to preach", the next step is just leaving it entirely out of their Bibles, thus implying that all of those hundreds of millions of copies containing the saying, were wrong and better to be forgotten.
Lots of other examples exist in the NIV of this gradual attempt to change and cover-up the contents and thoughts held by believers in earlier ages.

Solo

The gospels in their original form were created at a time when the Holy Spirit was still the primary authority in the congregations. The writers would put themselves in a trance and write what the spirit "told" them. They were "one with the gospel" the way a Zen archer was "one with the target". They did not need to convince themselves of their theology. Their beliefs went with them into the trance. Or so it looks.

Mark seems the original narrative whose basic thematic elements were copied by the later canon. Luke and Matthew kept the basic narrative structure, John the spiritualist idiom, which he freely adapted to his own purposes. I noted some of the minute operations Matthew and Luke made to the Markan allegorical ciphers for what appears descriptions of the psi phenomena.

Ben corrected me here when I placed the (first) Markan feeding of the multitude into the evening, in a pronounced pattern of the nature miracles happening between sunset and morning. Ben looked at 6:45 and 6:47 and concluded that the feeding had to take place during the day. That would be the conventional reading. But Matthew, reading the passage with the aid of the spirit, saw that the feeding happened the evening previous (14:15) to the one when Jesus notices the boat with the disciples was stuck in the lake. Similarly, Matthew, on his own. concludes that the incident with the fig tree occured in the morning (21:18), and expunges the Markan precis that it was not the season of the figs. And, he is so confident in his grasp of the jeering in Mk 14:65 to prophesy (i.e. to predict what has already happened in the past) that he removes the mention of the men covering Jesus' eyes while insulting him. One example from Luke would be the added description of Peter and the other two as being "heavy with sleep" when Jesus transfigures before them (9:32).

This is not fiction writing: these are sustained and co-ordinated efforts to justify and describe allegorically what happens inside the heads of people with special challenges, when they experience (themselves as) God and then they are left on their own alone, among jeers, insults and physical nastiness from the uncomprehending outsiders, and tortured by self-doubt.

This I believe was the original purpose of the scripts. The collection came to be very quickly "soaked" in church politics, as the spiritual brotherhood of Jesus knowers and believers led by the spirit came to be replaced by church hierarchy relying on apostolic authority for guidance, and dismissive of any new manifestations of the supernatural and direct links to Christ through the spirit. Paul Tillich called the process the "ecclesiastical fixation of Christianity". In this process, the Acts of the Apostles was the bridging document.

The changeover put emphasis on the literalist reading of the gospels and epistles which became relics. The redaction and "fixing" the texts does not in any way reflect a spiritual need but dogmatic speculation. Tillich commented on the process of the later protestant sects that followed the pattern of development of primitive Christianity: '..in the second generation they become rational, moralistic, and legalistic; the ecstatic element disappears; not much remains that is creative...'. (in Paul Tillich, A History of Christian Thought, Simon & Schuster, 1968, p.40)

Jiri

Amaleq13

Actually, a very appropriate kind of person to help you understand what Solo has in mind.

Yes, really. Imagining what it would be like for the left hand to not know what the right hand is doding should help you understand the point.

You are being too literal and that is causing you to miss the point. The left hand/right hand saying is a metaphor for the process Solo is describing (ie the man was allegedly able to separate his thoughts sufficiently to play against himself).

aa5874

I do not think you understand Solo's point at all.

Amaleq13

:rolling:

You should generally establish that you understand a point before calling into question anyone else's understanding. It is clear that you do not.

Feel free to remain clueless but don't blame it on me.

Solo

If I may be permitted...I think Doug understands my point very well.

Jiri

Solo

FWIW, one highly accomplished chess player who claims the ability to play chess games against himself is Natan Sharansky, a former famous Soviet dissident and later an Israeli minister.

Jiri

wordy

Solo maybe give a relevant clue on how they worked out.

they lived the story, or lived within the story, acting from within it like an Actor in a role play. they made themselves one with God and name that to have the spirit or meeting with God's Angel and so on.

Something similar did happen around 2000 century in US a guy Lewis Benson lived the George Fox texts frome 1652 or so to the degree that he wrote a modern version in that spirit or in that light as he prefer maybe to refer it. 1652 George Fox did it too.

So it is a common way to write inspired texts. One dwell in God's words long enough to become one with the Word.

Dawkins would say that the Meme took over them.

delusional

I can't say that I am aware of any scholars who do think the gospels were written by committee - still less that they were "jumbled together" at the Council of Nicea. The proceedings of that council are fairly well documented:

http://midanglican.com/?p=215

At the beginning of the second century Ignatius of Antioch can be found quoting from Matthew's Gospel, which was therefore in existence at the time. There is a papyrus fragment, dating from the second century, which contains part of John's Gospel. At the end of the second century Irenaeus of Lyons can be found listing the New Testament books which had achieved canonical status by then, and that list includes all four canonical gospels (in fact it is almost identical to the modern canon). The canon was rubber stamped, and made "official", at the Council of Carthage in 397.