Philosophy Discussion Forums | A Humans-Only Club for Open-Minded Discussion & Debate

[Felix]

That was pretty much the only thing I liked about church (Roman Catholic) when I was a child: the priest's Latin incantations. Enjoying the sounds and rhythm of the words without knowing or even caring about their meaning. Later on they went to reciting the mass in English, and it lost it's sound and fury and no longer signified Nothing.

[Sculptor1]

That was pretty much the only thing I liked about church (Roman Catholic) when I was a child: the priest's Latin incantations. Enjoying the sounds and rhythm of the words without knowing or even caring about their meaning. Later on they went to reciting the mass in English, and it lost it's sound and fury and no longer signified Nothing.

By such mystical device was a thousand years of medieval Europe kept in thrall and ignorance of the mysteries and falsehoods of this incredible story.

[Sy Borg]

The myth is no more credible than the Rainbow Serpent of Aboriginal legend. There is nothing credible about the Christ myths, nor is there supposed to be. That's the difference between history and mythology.

Most people are well aware that religious myths aren't supposed to be taken literally, that they represent the dynamics of a belief system. The ancients would be amazed and perhaps also amused to see modern people naively taking the legends literally.

[h_k_s]

I AM THAT I AM is explained in Exodus. In Hebrew it is transliterated and pronounced as Ha Ya Ho Veh Yah Yeh. This phrase is too sacred to speak of in public.

Do you really believe anything symbol (ie: word/s) is too sacred to speak of openly? What does “sacred” mean to you in this context?

If God is a God of Truth, why hide it?

Rules iz rules.

You iz not supposed to say what JHVH means out loud in public.

It may only be whispered by a rabbi to an apprentice rabbi.

And you ain't no apprentice rabbi.

And I ain't yo' rabbi neither.

[h_k_s]

Everybody ass-u-me's that St's. Matthew wrote first, Mark second, Luke third, John fourth, then Luke again with Acts, then Paul with his various letters.

Truth is none of them wrote anything down at all until St. Paul first began writing epistles.

This must have made St. Peter jealous, or maybe he thought Paul's letters were a good idea (unlikely -- Peter and Paul did not get along very well ever). At any rate Peter's step son St. Mark then wrote Peter's version of what we call his Gospel (an Anglo-Saxon word meaning "good news" -- in Greek the word is effagellion and is probably a mistranslation of the Greek).

After Peter wrote, then Matthew wrote his version. After Matthew, Luke wrote his, meaning his to be a most correct version of the others, which he mentions early on.

The last book written in what we call the New Testament is John's version of his gospel, sometime after all the other apostles and evangelists had died or been killed, circa 105 A.D.

Eusebius tells us that the Revelation of John is fake news.

It's good to know all these facts. The source is Eusebius. You can google him to find out who he is and when he lived.

Never ass-u-me. They teach you never to assume in Army, Navy, USMC, Coast Guard, and USAF boot camps aka basic training. But civilians never get taught never to assume, so civilians with no military training ass-u-me out the wazoo all the time, which is unfortunate. Ergo civilians are usually arguing from ignorance (a classic fallacy) anytime they assume.

Sound advise - which also applies to the cognitive distortion or fallacy of jumping to conclusions. OTOH, Being paralyzed with indecision or skepticism doesn’t work either.

The bottom line seems to be to take the symbolic, spiritual truth and don’t insist on literal historical truth - of scripture etc.

Google "Eusebius" and try to find a copy of his classic book dating to the 4th Century C.E. (A.D.).

This pretty much explains everything about the early Christian/catholic church leading up to Constantine.

[Sy Borg]

Consider the five loaves and two fishes multiplied to feed five thousand people.

Did the fish appear in reality as already prepared for eating or did they arrive in reality suffocating on dry land?

Consider the resurrection.

Was Christ smelly when he arose? Did he have severe clotting due to three days of inactivity? How did his brain survive without oxygen?

Seriously, the Christ myth is no more credible than Harry Potter, basically a magic show with moral overtones.

[Sculptor1]

Consider the five loaves and two fishes multiplied to feed five thousand people.

Did the fish appear in reality as already prepared for eating or did they arrive in reality suffocating on dry land?

Consider the resurrection.

Was Christ smelly when he arose? Did he have severe clotting due to three days of inactivity? How did his brain survive without oxygen?

Seriously, the Christ myth is no more credible than Harry Potter, basically a magic show with moral overtones.

If only the god botherers would stop and THINK.

[GaryLouisSmith]

Consider the five loaves and two fishes multiplied to feed five thousand people.

Did the fish appear in reality as already prepared for eating or did they arrive in reality suffocating on dry land?

Consider the resurrection.

Was Christ smelly when he arose? Did he have severe clotting due to three days of inactivity? How did his brain survive without oxygen?

Seriously, the Christ myth is no more credible than Harry Potter, basically a magic show with moral overtones.

If only the god botherers would stop and THINK.

I am proud to be a god botherer and I THINK.

[Jklint]

There is nothing new in the Jesus story. It's just given a Judaic formulation.

Common knowledge by now!

[GaryLouisSmith]

There is nothing new in the Jesus story. It's just given a Judaic formulation.

Common knowledge by now!

What do you mean "the Jesus story"?

[Jklint]

There is nothing new in the Jesus story. It's just given a Judaic formulation.

Common knowledge by now!

What do you mean "the Jesus story"?

The story of Jesus as told in the New Testament. What else could I have meant!

[Sculptor1]

If only the god botherers would stop and THINK.

I am proud to be a god botherer and I THINK.

You think you are a god botherer?

[Sculptor1]

What do you mean "the Jesus story"?

The story of Jesus as told in the New Testament. What else could I have meant!

But its a list of fantasies and contradictions.
That's why the OP calls it a "myth theory".
SO what parts have you discarded and what parts would you like to keep, to make it seem real to you?

[GaryLouisSmith]

What do you mean "the Jesus story"?

The story of Jesus as told in the New Testament. What else could I have meant!

There isn't much story there. Jesus comes across as argumentative and a complainer. The only thing one can say about Christianity that everyone will agree on is that it, right from the beginning, because of all the arguing, quickly broke up into a lot of different sects. In that it was/is no different from Hinduism and Buddhism and Islam. That's where I got my love of philosophical argument.

[Jklint]

The story of Jesus as told in the New Testament. What else could I have meant!

SO what parts have you discarded and what parts would you like to keep, to make it seem real to you?

There's hardly anything real about it. What's real are its consequences which when applied to the story or myth has no relation. If Christ had been alive when Christianity became transcendent he wouldn't have recognized any part of it. That much is for certain.