Freethought & Rationalism Archive

lpetrich · 03-07-2002, 01:02 PM

In this set of responses to Earl Doherty's work, http://pages.ca.inter.net/~oblio/jesus/rfset20.htm he makes a very interesting comment. After responding to someone that he believes that the Shroud of Turin had been a fake, and yet another example of medieval relic-mongering, he comments:

"One of the most peculiar, and telling, aspects of the relic business is that it failed to begin before the 4th century. There is not a word in any Christian document of the first couple of hundred years about any artifact associated with Jesus."

This would be natural if Jesus Christ had originally been a sort-of god as Earl Doherty has proposed; such a being would not be expected to have left behind artifacts of an earthly existence.

Also, it is significant that Paul had little interest in Jerusalem; he had no interest in visiting the spots where Jesus Christ had lived and died and was resurrected, at least according to the Gospels. One would expect Paul to be very happy to visit the very spot where his Lord and Savior had been crucified, but he showed no interest.

Marduk · 03-07-2002, 03:23 PM

What!? Do you mean the Official Jesus Christ's Toothbrush I spent $500 on was a Fake!?

Vorkosigan · 03-07-2002, 04:59 PM

But useful still. A Buddha Tooth recently arrived in Taiwan to great political and religious fanfare. Now, if you bring the brush over....

Michael

lpetrich · 03-07-2002, 06:22 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Vorkosigan

But useful still. A Buddha Tooth recently arrived in Taiwan to great political and religious fanfare. Now, if you bring the brush over....

That's a good one. But here's an article that discusses Jesus Christ's foreskin.Yes, that little bit of skin around the head of the penis. Which several churches claimed to have had.

They had to settle for his foreskin because the rest of Jesus Christ had risen up to Heaven; they couldn't get his head or his feet or his hair, as some churches had done of the Apostles and the Virgin Mary. And judging from the VM's hair colors, she must have been a big hair-dye addict!

But my original question was why the early Christian church had been mercifully free of this foolishness.

joedad · 03-07-2002, 08:42 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by lpetrich:
But my original question was why the early Christian church had been mercifully free of this foolishness.

Probably because any "early Christian church" never was.

Wouldn't that be like looking for the European Union in 1600, or the USA in 1400?

joe

lpetrich · 03-07-2002, 09:14 PM

Maybe "early Christian church" was a misnomer here, since if Paul's letters are any guide, those early Xtians were small groups who'd meet in people's houses and other such places, like the followers of many present-day alternative religions.

But that's a side issue -- why had they shown zero interest in relics of their founder? Why didn't they compete to see who had JC's clothes or his sandals or whatever?

David Bowden · 03-07-2002, 09:50 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by lpetrich:
Why didn't they compete to see who had JC's clothes or his sandals or whatever?

"HIS GOURD!!"

If one accepts the argument that Jesus was an entirely mythical entity, then one wouldn't expect to find any real Jesus relics, so this absence of artifacts wouldn't be surprising.

On the other hand, if the historical Jesus was just a poor itinerant preacher whose followers embellished his reputation over a period of a generation or two, then we could probably expect authentic artifacts to be minimal, because the 'orthodox' notions of his cosmic significance wouldn't have been as mature immediately after his lifetime, and anyway how many artifacts do we have of, say, Socrates, whose significance was well-known during and shortly after his life, by those with the means to preserve his belongings?

As far as why the church in its first couple of centuries didn't do much antique-hawking... maybe it wasn't until the fourth century that somebody dreamed up the idea of forging artifacts like they forged documents. Eusebius was the notorious fake-historian of the early fourth century, wasn't he? Perhaps he or somebody like him dreamed up the idea of loads of fake artifacts and pilgrimage sites to support the legends he worked so hard to embellish?

-Wanderer, plunking down his $0.02

(edited to correct grammar.)

[ March 07, 2002: Message edited by: wide-eyed wanderer ]

[ March 07, 2002: Message edited by: wide-eyed wanderer ]

bob_the_god · 03-09-2002, 03:57 AM

I think that here in England before the Reformation we had about 7 pieces of the Cross, in fact monastreys used to steal relics from each other so there would be more pilgrims to come and see them, some things never change!

butswana · 03-09-2002, 04:03 AM

I read somewhere that during the middle ages there were enough pieces of the cross scattered across Europe to build Noah's ark.

Marduk · 03-09-2002, 06:12 AM

An interesting question is did anyone in the first cent. collect relics of anything? or did this tradition just begin with 4th cent. Christians?
Were there ever any alleged relics of say Mithra or Ra or Isis other than the usual 'graven images' or statues, or was it understood that these types of beings existed in a realm all their own? Maybe Jesus was the first, to the middle easterners anyway, who ever entered the realm of mortals. I don't know.

[ March 09, 2002: Message edited by: marduck ]

03-07-2002, 01:02 PM	#1
lpetrich Contributor Join Date: Jul 2000 Location: Lebanon, OR, USA Posts: 16,829	Relics of Jesus Christ? In this set of responses to Earl Doherty's work, http://pages.ca.inter.net/~oblio/jesus/rfset20.htm he makes a very interesting comment. After responding to someone that he believes that the Shroud of Turin had been a fake, and yet another example of medieval relic-mongering, he comments: "One of the most peculiar, and telling, aspects of the relic business is that it failed to begin before the 4th century. There is not a word in any Christian document of the first couple of hundred years about any artifact associated with Jesus." This would be natural if Jesus Christ had originally been a sort-of god as Earl Doherty has proposed; such a being would not be expected to have left behind artifacts of an earthly existence. Also, it is significant that Paul had little interest in Jerusalem; he had no interest in visiting the spots where Jesus Christ had lived and died and was resurrected, at least according to the Gospels. One would expect Paul to be very happy to visit the very spot where his Lord and Savior had been crucified, but he showed no interest.

03-09-2002, 06:12 AM	#10
Marduk Veteran Member Join Date: Aug 2000 Location: the 10th planet Posts: 5,065	An interesting question is did anyone in the first cent. collect relics of anything? or did this tradition just begin with 4th cent. Christians? Were there ever any alleged relics of say Mithra or Ra or Isis other than the usual 'graven images' or statues, or was it understood that these types of beings existed in a realm all their own? Maybe Jesus was the first, to the middle easterners anyway, who ever entered the realm of mortals. I don't know. [ March 09, 2002: Message edited by: marduck ]</p>

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

03-07-2002, 03:23 PM	#2
Marduk Veteran Member Join Date: Aug 2000 Location: the 10th planet Posts: 5,065	What!? Do you mean the Official Jesus Christ's Toothbrush I spent $500 on was a Fake!? <img src="confused.gif" border="0">

03-07-2002, 04:59 PM	#3
Vorkosigan Contributor Join Date: Jan 2001 Location: Barrayar Posts: 11,866	But useful still. A Buddha Tooth recently arrived in Taiwan to great political and religious fanfare. Now, if you bring the brush over.... Michael

03-07-2002, 09:14 PM	#6
lpetrich Contributor Join Date: Jul 2000 Location: Lebanon, OR, USA Posts: 16,829	Maybe "early Christian church" was a misnomer here, since if Paul's letters are any guide, those early Xtians were small groups who'd meet in people's houses and other such places, like the followers of many present-day alternative religions. But that's a side issue -- why had they shown zero interest in relics of their founder? Why didn't they compete to see who had JC's clothes or his sandals or whatever?

03-09-2002, 03:57 AM	#8
bob_the_god Junior Member Join Date: Mar 2002 Location: London, England Posts: 10	I think that here in England before the Reformation we had about 7 pieces of the Cross, in fact monastreys used to steal relics from each other so there would be more pilgrims to come and see them, some things never change!

03-09-2002, 04:03 AM	#9
butswana Veteran Member Join Date: Sep 2001 Location: Indianapolis, IN Posts: 1,804	I read somewhere that during the middle ages there were enough pieces of the cross scattered across Europe to build Noah's ark.

Freethought & Rationalism Archive

The archives are read only.