Re: Is Christ Myth Theory Credible?
Posted: August 19th, 2019, 9:45 pm
A Humans-Only Club for Philosophical Debate and Discussion
https://mail.onlinephilosophyclub.com/forums/
https://mail.onlinephilosophyclub.com/forums/viewtopic.php?t=16393
dawwg wrote: ↑August 19th, 2019, 9:45 pmWhat is my objection to what?Sculptor1 wrote: ↑August 19th, 2019, 5:00 pm Catholicism can never recover from the evil it has spread, and continues to spread the world over.If we let them stew in their own shyte that'll teach 'em, allowing for reincarnation. So what's your objection?
steveb1 wrote: ↑August 17th, 2019, 2:00 amI will start off by saying that I pray to Jesus; I am gay: and I think the Church today is mainly the creation of heterosexualists who wanted to make God in their own image. I have been a strongly religious gay activist for many years and I have spent a lot of time studying philosophy and theology. I am a Platonic Realist. I love philosophical debate. Unfortunately, most atheists don’t. So if you want to strongly object to what I have to say, please do. I love a good rant.
I'm neither a scholar nor a historian, but I've been bitten by the Christ Myth "bug". I can't be a clearing house for a huge fund of Christ Myth information. My chief motive for this post is to see the issue kicked around - to see what readers think of this issue.
Felix wrote: ↑August 19th, 2019, 3:57 pmI wouldn't go so far as to say two very different things. More like the same coin just different sides of it .MAYA EL: And even then I still can't put that much credit into it because just like the Dead Sea Scrolls they were sucked up and carefully examined before we ever got our hands on them and I promise you all conflicting documentation stayed hidden or got Rewritten.We know that didn't happen because much of the information in it is considered heretical by the Catholic Church (e.g., the statement that Jesus was married), and they would have preferred it never saw the light of day.
One should not confuse the historical evidence that Jesus the man existed with evidence for the claim by the Church that the historical Jesus was literally the son of God - two very different things.
MAYA EL: Have you ever heard of the Piso family?I've heard the silly conspiracy theory about that which has no supporting evidence. What, you would accept such piffle over concrete evidence?
GaryLouisSmith: When I am receiving Communion, I am deeply moved. I eat the body of Christ and drink his blood. It is soooooo erotic. And eroticism is right at the heart of what all religions are.I think you omitted a couple of letters there, should be "neurotic" rather than "erotic." Many would say that neurosis is right at the heart of religion. I don't necessarily agree, it depends on the religion.
Felix wrote: ↑August 21st, 2019, 1:37 amNeurotic, erotic, what's the difference? There is none.MAYA EL: Have you ever heard of the Piso family?I've heard the silly conspiracy theory about that which has no supporting evidence. What, you would accept such piffle over concrete evidence?
GaryLouisSmith: When I am receiving Communion, I am deeply moved. I eat the body of Christ and drink his blood. It is soooooo erotic. And eroticism is right at the heart of what all religions are.I think you omitted a couple of letters there, should be "neurotic" rather than "erotic." Many would say that neurosis is right at the heart of religion. I don't necessarily agree, it depends on the religion.
Felix wrote: ↑August 21st, 2019, 2:01 am Well, fear is considered to be the basis of neurosis. If you are afraid or nervous about sex, than it is unlikely to be erotic. Perhaps neurosis is too weak a term for what you described but I am not a psychiatrist so will not go there....Have you ever had to try and talk to a really beautiful, sexy person? It is really scaaaaaaaary.
Felix wrote: ↑August 21st, 2019, 1:37 amI did not say "hey what do you think about the piso family conspiracy? It's what I believe in and that's why I'm not a Christian "MAYA EL: Have you ever heard of the Piso family?I've heard the silly conspiracy theory about that which has no supporting evidence. What, you would accept such piffle over concrete evidence?
GaryLouisSmith: When I am receiving Communion, I am deeply moved. I eat the body of Christ and drink his blood. It is soooooo erotic. And eroticism is right at the heart of what all religions are.I think you omitted a couple of letters there, should be "neurotic" rather than "erotic." Many would say that neurosis is right at the heart of religion. I don't necessarily agree, it depends on the religion.
Have you ever had to try and talk to a really beautiful, sexy person?I can't honestly say I ever found that to be frightening, if I did, I'd want to take a good look at myself to find the source of that neurotic tendency.
Felix wrote: ↑August 22nd, 2019, 12:35 amTrembling in the presence of Beauty appears to be one of the great pleasures in life that you seem to have missed.Have you ever had to try and talk to a really beautiful, sexy person?I can't honestly say I ever found that to be frightening, if I did, I'd want to take a good look at myself to find the source of that neurotic tendency.
h_k_s wrote: ↑August 19th, 2019, 4:25 pmHave you ever read anything by or about Don Cupitt? He's an Anglican priest and someone who calls himself a "Christian non-realist". He thinks that we humans made up the idea of God, and believes that Jesus was a man who introduced a radical new humanistic philosophy. I'm also interested in Christian Atheism- I understand Christian Atheists to be people who like the humanistic traditions and teachings of Christianity- they just also happen to lack a belief in deities.anonymous66 wrote: ↑August 18th, 2019, 5:24 pmOk then that's a slightly different issue.
You don't have to convince me that the Bible says that Jesus said he was the Son of God. You have to convince me that Jesus actually said those words.
Since it has been around 20 centuries since all that happened, and since the Gospel authors (Matthew, Mark, Luke, John) and Paul do not agree in their narratives exactly, we will never know exactly what happened back in those days long ago.
During those 20 centuries Christianity has undergone many changes that make it unrecognizable from its original form. Today it is just another organized religion used as a vehicle to control the masses.
Religion itself is a black box and a dead end. It is very good for brainwashing children, but once these children grow up then they themselves are caught in a trap that they most often do not have the tools to escape from.
Pure philosophy provides those tools.
Philosophy provides rationalism for those who are thinking, stoicism for those who are suffering, and epicureanism for those who are most fortunate.
And if you want to believe in a philosophy-God, then Aristotle, Aquinas, and Leibniz provide proofs of God which will give anyone seeking God individually and independently of organized religion a way to do so.
anonymous66 wrote: ↑August 22nd, 2019, 9:34 amThe various atheistic theories simply do not interest me.h_k_s wrote: ↑August 19th, 2019, 4:25 pmHave you ever read anything by or about Don Cupitt? He's an Anglican priest and someone who calls himself a "Christian non-realist". He thinks that we humans made up the idea of God, and believes that Jesus was a man who introduced a radical new humanistic philosophy. I'm also interested in Christian Atheism- I understand Christian Atheists to be people who like the humanistic traditions and teachings of Christianity- they just also happen to lack a belief in deities.
Ok then that's a slightly different issue.
Since it has been around 20 centuries since all that happened, and since the Gospel authors (Matthew, Mark, Luke, John) and Paul do not agree in their narratives exactly, we will never know exactly what happened back in those days long ago.
During those 20 centuries Christianity has undergone many changes that make it unrecognizable from its original form. Today it is just another organized religion used as a vehicle to control the masses.
Religion itself is a black box and a dead end. It is very good for brainwashing children, but once these children grow up then they themselves are caught in a trap that they most often do not have the tools to escape from.
Pure philosophy provides those tools.
Philosophy provides rationalism for those who are thinking, stoicism for those who are suffering, and epicureanism for those who are most fortunate.
And if you want to believe in a philosophy-God, then Aristotle, Aquinas, and Leibniz provide proofs of God which will give anyone seeking God individually and independently of organized religion a way to do so.
h_k_s wrote: ↑August 22nd, 2019, 2:41 pmTo be clear- Don Cupitt is not an atheist- he is a Christian non-realist. https://www.churchtimes.co.uk/articles/ ... es-dawkinsanonymous66 wrote: ↑August 22nd, 2019, 9:34 amThe various atheistic theories...
Have you ever read anything by or about Don Cupitt? He's an Anglican priest and someone who calls himself a "Christian non-realist". He thinks that we humans made up the idea of God, and believes that Jesus was a man who introduced a radical new humanistic philosophy. I'm also interested in Christian Atheism- I understand Christian Atheists to be people who like the humanistic traditions and teachings of Christianity- they just also happen to lack a belief in deities.
I am one of the now-unfashionable and increasingly beleaguered Church of England liberals who will be raising a glass next year to toast the 30th anniversary of the publication of the Revd Don Cupitt’s Taking Leave of God. Theological conservatives may not think there is much to learn from Cupitt’s arch-liberal classic, but they should think again.
The book’s provocative title appeared to say that we could dispense with God altogether, and many jumped to this conclusion, calling Cupitt a “Christian atheist”. In fact, Cupitt was trying to make theology more truthful: he wanted to purify our ideas of God rather than dispense with them.
The book’s title came from the Christian mystic Meister Eckhart: “Man’s last and highest parting comes when, for God’s sake, he takes leave of God.” In other words, it is only when we let go of our inadequate concepts of God that we can finally grasp divinity in its truth and purity.