Understanding through Discussion


Welcome! You are not logged in. [ Login ]
EvC Forum active members: 107 (8805 total)
Current session began: 
Page Loaded: 12-13-2017 12:09 AM
314 online now:
DrJones*, Minnemooseus (Adminnemooseus), PaulK, Phat (AdminPhat) (4 members, 310 visitors)
Chatting now:  Chat room empty
Newest Member: jaufre
Post Volume:
Total: 824,060 Year: 28,666/21,208 Month: 732/1,847 Week: 107/475 Day: 0/17 Hour: 0/0

Announcements: Reporting debate problems OR discussing moderation actions/inactions


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Prev123
4
Author Topic:   Michael Servetus was burnt at the stake in Calvin's Geneva in 1553
jar
Member
Posts: 29758
From: Texas!!
Joined: 04-20-2004
Member Rating: 1.6


Message 46 of 58 (824289)
11-26-2017 6:36 AM
Reply to: Message 45 by PaulK
11-26-2017 5:14 AM


Re: (response to Phat post 31)
What seems really relevant is that the evidence shows that there has never been "The Christianity™" where one interpretation of what Christianity means was universal. Any consistency in interpreting what Christianity is only came about based on politics of State Dictate and changed with each power struggle.

My Sister's Website: Rose Hill Studios     My Website: My Website

This message is a reply to:
 Message 45 by PaulK, posted 11-26-2017 5:14 AM PaulK has not yet responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 48 by Phat, posted 11-26-2017 6:43 AM jar has not yet responded

  
Phat
Member
Posts: 10230
From: Denver,Colorado USA
Joined: 12-30-2003
Member Rating: 1.3


Message 47 of 58 (824291)
11-26-2017 6:40 AM
Reply to: Message 44 by NoNukes
11-26-2017 5:08 AM


Re: LNA Response to Phat post 31
In these discussions, I look at the bigger picture. For me, learning about other persons (or cultures) beliefs is secondary to learning about that person themselves. LNA has been at this forum for a couple of years now, and I only now am reading some of his posts. There does seem to be a common theme, but it is respectfully clarifying LNAs beliefs.
We can all ask questions all day about early beliefs vs latter beliefs, but to me, the age of a belief is irrelevant. What is relevant is finding common ground for a discussion regarding why one belief means more to an individual than another belief.

LNA clearly is unimpressed with the western "Early Church Fathers" so I asked myself what it is that he is trying to teach us. So far it appears to be this:
1) Respect the knowledge of other cultures. Don't assume that you or your culture or religion know it all or have the right truth.
2) Learning is a love. The excitement is in the hunt...the googling, the discovery of what historical people said about faith & belief...specifically Jesus, James the Just, and the early Jewish Christians.


Chance as a real force is a myth. It has no basis in reality and no place in scientific inquiry. For science and philosophy to continue to advance in knowledge, chance must be demythologized once and for all. –RC Sproul
"A lie can travel half way around the world while the truth is putting on its shoes." –Mark Twain "
~"If that's not sufficient for you go soak your head."~Faith
Paul was probably SO soaked in prayer nobody else has ever equaled him.~Faith :)

This message is a reply to:
 Message 44 by NoNukes, posted 11-26-2017 5:08 AM NoNukes has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 49 by NoNukes, posted 11-26-2017 4:41 PM Phat has not yet responded

  
Phat
Member
Posts: 10230
From: Denver,Colorado USA
Joined: 12-30-2003
Member Rating: 1.3


Message 48 of 58 (824294)
11-26-2017 6:43 AM
Reply to: Message 46 by jar
11-26-2017 6:36 AM


Re: (response to Phat post 31)
jar writes:

What seems really relevant is that the evidence shows that there has never been "The Christianity™" where one interpretation of what Christianity means was universal. Any consistency in interpreting what Christianity is only came about based on politics of State Dictate and changed with each power struggle.

Good point. LNA likely identifies more with the Mid East cultural interpretations of belief rather than the European model and certainly not the Biblical Christians of today.

Chance as a real force is a myth. It has no basis in reality and no place in scientific inquiry. For science and philosophy to continue to advance in knowledge, chance must be demythologized once and for all. –RC Sproul
"A lie can travel half way around the world while the truth is putting on its shoes." –Mark Twain "
~"If that's not sufficient for you go soak your head."~Faith
Paul was probably SO soaked in prayer nobody else has ever equaled him.~Faith :)

This message is a reply to:
 Message 46 by jar, posted 11-26-2017 6:36 AM jar has not yet responded

  
NoNukes
Member
Posts: 10116
From: Central NC USA
Joined: 08-13-2010
Member Rating: 1.7


Message 49 of 58 (824323)
11-26-2017 4:41 PM
Reply to: Message 47 by Phat
11-26-2017 6:40 AM


Re: LNA Response to Phat post 31
Respect the knowledge of other cultures. Don't assume that you or your culture or religion know it all or have the right truth.

I don't see much respect, but your mileage may vary.


Under a government which imprisons any unjustly, the true place for a just man is also in prison. Thoreau: Civil Disobedience (1846)

I was thinking as long as I have my hands up … they’re not going to shoot me. This is what I’m thinking — they’re not going to shoot me. Wow, was I wrong. -- Charles Kinsey

We got a thousand points of light for the homeless man. We've got a kinder, gentler, machine gun hand. Neil Young, Rockin' in the Free World.

Worrying about the "browning of America" is not racism. -- Faith

I hate you all, you hate me -- Faith


This message is a reply to:
 Message 47 by Phat, posted 11-26-2017 6:40 AM Phat has not yet responded

    
LamarkNewAge
Member
Posts: 1024
Joined: 12-22-2015
Member Rating: 1.1


Message 50 of 58 (824326)
11-26-2017 9:10 PM


Sorry for General Reply (site is running slow)
I was going to respond to several posters, but I don't think the computer will make it though. I'm amazed I logged in.

The issue of the views of the Jewish Christians came up, and how old they were.

Here is the situation in the 70s (of the 4th century).

Via Epiphanius

quote:

Panarion 30
Ebionites are very like the Cerinthians and Nazoraeans; the sect of the Sampsaeans and Elkasaites was associated with them to a degree. They say that Christ has been created in heaven, also the Holy Spirit. But Christ lodged in Adam at first, and from time to time takes Adam himself off and puts him back on-for this is what they say he did during his visit in the flesh. Although they are Jews they have Gospels, abhor the eating of flesh, take water for God, and, as I said, hold that Christ clothed himself with a man when he became incarnate. They continually immerse themselves in water, summer and winter, if you please for purification like the Samaritans.

It seems to fit in with the older evidence.

The Gospel of the Hebrews (the one that seemed to be from Egypt, and was quoted by Clement of Alexandria AND IS NOT the same thing as the Gospel of the Ebionites and Gospel of the Nazarenes, though Jerome and Epiphanius called the latter "2" Gospels the Gospel or the Hebrews (single!) or the Hebrew Gospel of Matthew, and Jerome & Epiphanius said the Nazarenes and Ebionites used the same single Hebrew Gospel) is dated to around 100-120 AD, and it seems to have the Holy Spirit coming into Jesus's body in a possession/ (not incarnational?) Adoptionist kind of way.

The Kerygma Petri (or Kerygmata Petrou) had reincarnation/possession themes, and it is dated variously from 80-140 or 100-120. Clement of Alexandria quoted it much. I will find a source from a book I have in a while.

Here is Wikipedia, showing everything we know about this Gospel of the Hebrews.

quote:

There is wide agreement about seven quotations cited by Philipp Vielhauer in the critical 3rd German edition of Wilhelm Schneemelcher's New Testament Apocrypha, translated by George Ogg.[19] The translations below follow Vielhauer's order:[n 3][n 4]

(verse)
1. When Christ wished to come upon the earth to men, the good Father summoned a mighty power in heaven, which was called Michael, and entrusted Christ to the care thereof. And the power came into the world and was called Mary, and Christ was in her womb seven months. (Cyril of Jerusalem, Discourse on Mary Theotokos 12)

(Wikipedia comment)
Fragment 1 identifies Jesus as the son of the Holy Spirit; this idea is found also in the Egyptian Coptic Epistle of James, another indication of the Egyptian origin of the gospel.[n 5]

(next verse)
2. And it came to pass when the Lord was come up out of the water, the whole fount of the Holy Spirit descended upon him and rested on him and said to him: My Son, in all the prophets was I waiting for thee that thou shouldest come and I might rest in thee. For thou art my rest; thou art my first-begotten Son that reignest for ever. (Jerome, Commentary on Isaiah 4)

(comment)
Fragment 2 uses the language of Jewish Wisdom literature,[n 6] but applies it to the Holy Spirit: the Spirit has waited in vain through all the prophets for the Son. The "rest" that the Holy Spirit finds in the Son belongs to the Christian gnostic idea of the pre-existent Redeemer who finally becomes incarnate in Jesus.[20]

(verse)
3. Even so did my mother, the Holy Spirit, take me by one of my hairs and carry me away on to the great mountain Tabor. (Origen, Commentary on John 2.12.87)

(comment)
Fragments 2 and 3, giving accounts of Jesus' baptism and temptation or transfiguration, spring from the widespread Greco-Roman myth of the descent of divine Wisdom; this underlies the parallel passages in the gospels of Matthew (11.25–30), Luke (7.18–35 and 11.49–51) and John (1.1–18), as well as the Gospel of Thomas.[16] The differences between fragment 3 and the orthodox canonical gospels are considerable: their third-person narrative has become an account by Jesus himself, Satan is replaced by the Holy Spirit, and the Holy Spirit is identified as Jesus' mother.[21]

(verses)
4a. He that marvels shall reign, and he that has reigned shall rest. (Clement, Stromateis 2.9.45.5)

4b. He that seeks will not rest till he finds; and he that has found shall marvel; and he that has marveled shall reign; and he that has reigned shall rest. (Clement, Stromateis 5.14.96.3)

(comments)
Fragment 4 is a "chain-saying", seek–find–marvel–reign–rest, describing the steps towards salvation, where "rest" equals the state of salvation.[20] The saying is similar to themes found in Jewish Wisdom literature,[n 7] and the similarity to a saying in the Gospel of Thomas suggests that the text may have been influenced by gnostic Wisdom teaching.[7][n 8]
5. And never be ye joyful, save when ye behold your brother with love. (Jerome, Commentary on Ephesians 3)

(verse)
6. In the Gospel according to the Hebrews ...there is counted among the most grievous offenses: He that has grieved the spirit of his brother. (Jerome, Commentary on Ezekiel 6)

(comments)
Fragments 5 (on Ephesians 5.4) and 6 (on Ezekiel 18.7) are ethical saying of Jesus, suggesting that such teachings formed a significant part of the gospel.[16]

(verse)
7. The Gospel according to the Hebrews ...records after the resurrection of the Savior: And when the Lord had given the linen cloth to the servant of the priest, he went to James and appeared to him. For James had sworn that he would not eat bread from that hour in which he had drunk the cup of the Lord until he should see him risen from among them that sleep. And shortly thereafter the Lord said: Bring a table and bread! And immediately it is added: He took the bread, blessed it and brake it and gave it to James the Just and said to him: My brother, eat thy bread, for the Son of man is risen from among them that sleep. (Jerome, De viris inlustribus 2)

(comments)
Fragment 7 emphasizes the importance of James, the brother of Jesus and head of the Jewish–Christian movement in Jerusalem after Jesus' death, thereby testifying to the Jewish character of the community of the gospel.[17]

In addition to direct quotations, other gospel stories were summarized or cited by the Church Fathers. The translations below are from Vielhauer & Strecker (1991), except "b2" which is from Klauck (2003):[n 9]

(quote of DIDYMUS)
a. (Scripture) seems to call Matthew "Levi" in the Gospel of Luke. Yet it is not a question of one and the same person. Rather Matthias, who was installed (as apostle) in place of Judas, and Levi are the same person with a double name. This is clear from the Gospel of the Hebrews. (Didymus the Blind, Commentary on the Psalms 184.9–10)

(Wikipedia comment)
The summary of a gospel passage identifies Mattias, rather than Matthew, as the name of the tax-collector who was called to follow Jesus.[22][n 10]

(quote of Eusebius)
b1. And he (Papias) has adduced another story of a woman who was accused of many sins before the Lord, which is contained in the Gospel according to the Hebrews. (Eusebius, Historia ecclesiastica 3.39.17)

(Wikipedia comments)
The citation by Eusebius of a story he found in the writings of Papias is believed to refer to an alternate version of the account in John's gospel of Jesus and the woman taken in adultery.[23][24]
b2. It is related in some gospels that a woman was condemned by the Jews because of a sin and was taken to the customary place of stoning, in order that she might be stoned. We are told that when the Savior caught sight of her and saw that they were ready to stone her, he said to those who wanted to throw stones at her: Let the one who has not sinned, lift a stone and throw it. If someone is certain that he has not sinned, let him take a stone and hit her. And no one dared to do so. When they examined themselves and they recognized that they too bore responsibility for certain actions, they did not dare to stone her. (Didymus the Blind, Commentary on Ecclesiastes 4.223.6–13)

Although Didymus does not name his source, he found this independent tradition of the story of the sinful woman in a non-canonical gospel in Alexandria which may have been the Gospel of the Hebrews.[25][n 11]

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gospel_of_the_Hebrews


Here is a reference to the Kerygma Petri or Proclamation of Peter.

quote:

Vielhauer & Strecker 1991, pp. 174–6; p. 174 – "This is also the objective of the pre-existent Redeemer who, according to the Jewish–Christian–gnostic Kerygmata Petrou, after endless change in form becomes the incarnate in Jesus: 'From the beginning of the world he runs through the ages, changing his form at the same time as his name, until in his time, anointed of God's mercy for his toil, he shall find his rest forever.' (ps.Clem. Hom. 3.20.2) To the circle of such gnostic speculations belongs the Christology of the baptism pericope of the GH."

Graham Stanton (rip), mentioned the Kerygma Petri in his book, Jesus and Gospel, as a book that showed conscious awareness of the "Law of Christ" (nomos Christou) mentioned in in Galatians 6:3 (nomou Christou or "of the law of Christ" in the verse). He pointed out that 2nd century authors, like Clement of Alexandria used the term, and quoted works that used the term. He said the Kerygma Petri is to be dated from the first few decades of the 2nd century.

The Elkesaites are dated either 100 AD (in the 3rd year of Trajan) or 116-117 (3rd year of campaigns in Persia), and they clearly have this Christology. (and the vegetarian views)

The New Testament book of Hebrews was quoted by Clement of Rome (wrote in the 90s AD) and it seems to be responding to these themes.

The Pastoral Letters, Acts of the Apostles, and Gospel of John seem to be responding to various views that Epiphanius (writing around 375) describes in his Panarion.

All Jewish Christians seemed to have similar views.

vegetarianism

Christology that is an incarnational adoptionism.

(and the ELKESAITES have vegetarian views described in 3 diverse sources. The long extant Panarion by Bishop Epiphanius of Salamis (Cyprus), then the Cologne Mani Codex essentially supports the vegetarianism(found in Egypt and it describes the vegetarian Mani rebelling against the Jewish Christian Elkesaite community he, a Persian, was born into) , and then a 10th century Arabic encyclopedia describes the Elkesaites as vegetarian. Many scholars try to say that early Ebionites, Nazarenes, and Elkesaites might not have been vegetarian but they have zero evidence for the assertion. Hegesippius and Clement of Alexandria were clearly vegetarians and they clearly described the Apostles as vegetarian. They were alive from the mid second century, and had better access to Jewish Christians AND ALL CHRISTIANS than modern scholars.

All ancient sources agree that the diverse sects of Jewish Christians were ALL vegetarian! Any attempt to deny that the early 2nd century Jewish Christians were vegetarian has fallen completely apart. It is amazing how many diverse arguments I have seen, from historians, that attempt to discredit the sources. The doubting scholars say that Epiphanius was confusing the views of the Manicheans with the Elkesaites! The scholars admit that some of the 4th century Jewish Christians were vegetarian, but will say that not all would necessarily been, and then will say that "The 4th century vegetarian Ebionites of Epiphanius shouldn't be evidence that the 2nd century Ebionites of Irenaeus were so. They ignore the Elkesaite evidence plus Clement of Alexandria and Hegesippius. )

Hegesippius is as credible a source as there can possibly be.

Listen to what Steve Mason said, in his Early Christian Reader.

quote:

p.693

By the middle of the second century, some individuals were visiting churches to learn about the local history. One, Hegesippus, tried to establish lists of bishops from his day back to the apostles, based on records and memory of the various churches. His five-volume work is now lost, but brief passages from it have been preserved in Eusebius’s Ecclesiastical History. It is believed that the full works of Hegesippus had been preserved in some libraries until the sixteenth or seventeenth century. The discovery of his complete works would probably be more significant than the discovery of the Dead Sea Scrolls or the Nag Hammadi library for our understanding of early Christianity.


I often hear a lot of people talk about the Vatican supposedly hiding texts from people. I mention Hegesippus as the only REAL POSSIBILITY (fairly often when the issue of conspiracy comes up), but when people find out that my only concession is also hand-in-glove with the making of an argument that vegetarianism was a fundamental part of REAL CHRISTIANITY, the conspiracy theorists end up not liking Hegesippus and don't pursue the issue any further.

People pursue what tickles their ears, not what is plausible.


Replies to this message:
 Message 51 by Phat, posted 11-27-2017 8:43 AM LamarkNewAge has not yet responded
 Message 55 by Phat, posted 11-28-2017 1:10 PM LamarkNewAge has responded

    
Phat
Member
Posts: 10230
From: Denver,Colorado USA
Joined: 12-30-2003
Member Rating: 1.3


Message 51 of 58 (824347)
11-27-2017 8:43 AM
Reply to: Message 50 by LamarkNewAge
11-26-2017 9:10 PM


Re: Sorry for General Reply (site is running slow)
I don't believe the reincarnation stuff. Looks as if many did, but I think that is distracting. Ultimately, my beliefs or your beliefs will be uniquely our own, not those of someone who lived 1800 years ago. I'm reading some of your cut n paste pasta, but it is still too overwhelming. Cant you just provide the links and skip the pasting? Makes for shorter tidier posts.

Chance as a real force is a myth. It has no basis in reality and no place in scientific inquiry. For science and philosophy to continue to advance in knowledge, chance must be demythologized once and for all. –RC Sproul
"A lie can travel half way around the world while the truth is putting on its shoes." –Mark Twain "
~"If that's not sufficient for you go soak your head."~Faith
Paul was probably SO soaked in prayer nobody else has ever equaled him.~Faith :)

This message is a reply to:
 Message 50 by LamarkNewAge, posted 11-26-2017 9:10 PM LamarkNewAge has not yet responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 52 by ringo, posted 11-27-2017 11:07 AM Phat has acknowledged this reply

  
ringo
Member
Posts: 13965
From: frozen wasteland
Joined: 03-23-2005
Member Rating: 1.7


Message 52 of 58 (824358)
11-27-2017 11:07 AM
Reply to: Message 51 by Phat
11-27-2017 8:43 AM


Re: Sorry for General Reply (site is running slow)
Phat writes:

I don't believe the reincarnation stuff. Looks as if many did, but I think that is distracting.


The whole life-after-death thing is a distraction. It's been around as long as there have been con-men. Distract the rubes from things that they could change by telling them to accept the bad things with serenity. It has as much to do with politics as anything else.
This message is a reply to:
 Message 51 by Phat, posted 11-27-2017 8:43 AM Phat has acknowledged this reply

Replies to this message:
 Message 53 by jar, posted 11-27-2017 11:32 AM ringo has acknowledged this reply

  
jar
Member
Posts: 29758
From: Texas!!
Joined: 04-20-2004
Member Rating: 1.6


(1)
Message 53 of 58 (824363)
11-27-2017 11:32 AM
Reply to: Message 52 by ringo
11-27-2017 11:07 AM


Re: Sorry for General Reply (site is running slow)
Ringo writes:

It has as much to do with politics as anything else.

Most Christians are unaware of just how much of the basic dogma and even resources are definitely political in nature. The Book of Common Prayer was one recent (relatively recent) example that was created to control and mandate uniformity within the State Religion (Church of England) and replace the existing RCC Missal of the time and the Authorized (that often gets left out) King James Version of the Bible was yet a more recent example, a purely political document from James I & VI meant to provide support for the concept of Divine Right of Kings and to tone down the anti-Roman Catholic/anti-Papist rhetoric of the period and to heal the division between the COE and the Roman Catholic Church.


My Sister's Website: Rose Hill Studios     My Website: My Website

This message is a reply to:
 Message 52 by ringo, posted 11-27-2017 11:07 AM ringo has acknowledged this reply

Replies to this message:
 Message 54 by Phat, posted 11-28-2017 1:01 PM jar has responded

  
Phat
Member
Posts: 10230
From: Denver,Colorado USA
Joined: 12-30-2003
Member Rating: 1.3


Message 54 of 58 (824426)
11-28-2017 1:01 PM
Reply to: Message 53 by jar
11-27-2017 11:32 AM


Re: Sorry for General Reply (site is running slow)
jar writes:

Most Christians are unaware of just how much of the basic dogma and even resources are definitely political in nature. The Book of Common Prayer was one recent (relatively recent) example that was created to control and mandate uniformity within the State Religion (Church of England) and replace the existing RCC Missal of the time

Which brings up the question that if the BCP was simply thrown together for a political purpose, how much value can it have?

Same with any Bible or religious philosophy.

And this gets back to my argument regarding the motives of redactors, editors, and Canon committees.


Chance as a real force is a myth. It has no basis in reality and no place in scientific inquiry. For science and philosophy to continue to advance in knowledge, chance must be demythologized once and for all. –RC Sproul
"A lie can travel half way around the world while the truth is putting on its shoes." –Mark Twain "
~"If that's not sufficient for you go soak your head."~Faith
Paul was probably SO soaked in prayer nobody else has ever equaled him.~Faith :)

This message is a reply to:
 Message 53 by jar, posted 11-27-2017 11:32 AM jar has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 56 by jar, posted 11-28-2017 3:25 PM Phat has acknowledged this reply

  
Phat
Member
Posts: 10230
From: Denver,Colorado USA
Joined: 12-30-2003
Member Rating: 1.3


Message 55 of 58 (824428)
11-28-2017 1:10 PM
Reply to: Message 50 by LamarkNewAge
11-26-2017 9:10 PM


The Plausibility Of Belief
LNA writes:

People pursue what tickles their ears, not what is plausible.

There is that word again. Ringo said it earlier in another topic:
ringo writes:

I'm just saying there isn't enough evidence to make the case for God, etc. plausible. Bigfoot is more plausible than God but I don't believe he exists. Even leprechauns are more plausible than God.

Websters writes:

Definition of plausible

1 : superficially fair, reasonable, or valuable but often specious a plausible pretext
2 : superficially pleasing or persuasive
a swindler … , then a quack, then a smooth, plausible gentleman —R. W. Emerson
3 : appearing worthy of belief the argument was both powerful and plausible

So lets go with #3.

Why is reincarnation more plausible than resurrection? Is incarnation plausible?
Are you aware of the differences between Eastern and Western belief systems?
Is one group more plausible than the other?

jar has a logical argument in that much of what shaped doctrine was political. You also have an argument that the dominant European culture called the shots on doctrine more than the minority cultures and their Christian (or Jewish Christian) communities.

Edited by Phat, : No reason given.


Chance as a real force is a myth. It has no basis in reality and no place in scientific inquiry. For science and philosophy to continue to advance in knowledge, chance must be demythologized once and for all. –RC Sproul
"A lie can travel half way around the world while the truth is putting on its shoes." –Mark Twain "
~"If that's not sufficient for you go soak your head."~Faith
Paul was probably SO soaked in prayer nobody else has ever equaled him.~Faith :)

This message is a reply to:
 Message 50 by LamarkNewAge, posted 11-26-2017 9:10 PM LamarkNewAge has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 57 by LamarkNewAge, posted 11-29-2017 12:17 AM Phat has not yet responded
 Message 58 by LamarkNewAge, posted 11-29-2017 11:35 PM Phat has not yet responded

  
jar
Member
Posts: 29758
From: Texas!!
Joined: 04-20-2004
Member Rating: 1.6


Message 56 of 58 (824432)
11-28-2017 3:25 PM
Reply to: Message 54 by Phat
11-28-2017 1:01 PM


Re: Sorry for General Reply (site is running slow)
Phat writes:

Which brings up the question that if the BCP was simply thrown together for a political purpose, how much value can it have?

It has whatever value humans give it. Do the Gettysburg Address or US Constitution or Magna Carta or Authorized King James Version of the Bible have any value?

Phat writes:

And this gets back to my argument regarding the motives of redactors, editors, and Canon committees.

LOL

Sorry but you have never made any argument related to those issues.


My Sister's Website: Rose Hill Studios     My Website: My Website

This message is a reply to:
 Message 54 by Phat, posted 11-28-2017 1:01 PM Phat has acknowledged this reply

  
LamarkNewAge
Member
Posts: 1024
Joined: 12-22-2015
Member Rating: 1.1


Message 57 of 58 (824445)
11-29-2017 12:17 AM
Reply to: Message 55 by Phat
11-28-2017 1:10 PM


Re: The Plausibility Of Belief
quote:

Why is reincarnation more plausible than resurrection? Is incarnation plausible?
Are you aware of the differences between Eastern and Western belief systems?
Is one group more plausible than the other?

jar has a logical argument in that much of what shaped doctrine was political. You also have an argument that the dominant European culture called the shots on doctrine more than the minority cultures and their Christian (or Jewish Christian) communities.


Most of the Alexandrian Church Fathers EVENTUALLY were denounces as heretics over something very similar to reincarnation this issue. (a bunch of related issues to your 2 options in the plausibility question)

Clement of Alexandria was about the only was that avoided (by the skin of some teeth?) the official stigma.

See:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Didymus_the_Blind

It is a monumental loss indeed that we lost so many works from Origin and Didymus (not to mention Clement of Alexandria), and it seems to be tied to this 2nd Council of Constantinople anathema load they got condemned with.

Had their works been preserved, then we would surely have a much more complete Gospel of the Hebrews. (The Egyptian one that dates from 100-120 or I think earlier)

Though we should never forget that Jerome considered all 3 Gospel of the Hebrews (that scholars now divide up in a Gospel of The Ebionites, Gospel of the Hebrews, and Gospel of the Nazarenes) to be a single Gospel of the Hebrews book and it was Matthew.

quote:

In the Gospel, which the Nazarenes and Ebionites use, and which I lately translated into Greek from the Hebrew tongue, and which is called by most the authentic Gospel of Matthew

The Catholic church wouldn't let Jerome use the authentic Gospel of Matthew in the Vulgate translation. (very vegetarian "Gospel" - singular! - and it could have Jesus sort of reincarnated or something at Baptism)

And a really amazing thing is that Catholics and Protestants make a big deal about how Papias is now dated at about 110 A.D., and the excitement is over Irenaeus saying he knew John the Apostle (as they say about Polycarp a supposed Disciple of Apostle John)

Google searches:

papias eyewitness

papias eyewitness john

https://www.michaeljkruger.com/...pias-know-the-apostle-john

But Papias also knew a "Hebrew Gospel" that had the oldest type of story that was later known as Pericope Adulterae (much later put into the John Gospel: John 7:53-8:11 in KJV).

https://en.wikipedia.org/..._and_the_woman_taken_in_adultery

Papias and Didymus are sources (what little we have of them anyway).

I suppose the biggest thing about the Papias re-dating is that it could very well place the Gospel of the Hebrews in the first century!

You won't hear a peep from fundamentalists on that one!

(They are more likely to try to use the Papias reference to prove that the Gospel of John was what was referred to when he mentioned the sinful woman/Jesus issue. Though the impossibility of John chapter 3 making any sense in any language other than Greek would prevent too many from even going there, thus it will, again, simply be ignored.)

EDIT: see my Gospel of the Hebrews paste several posts above for the adultery periscope issues (it isn't one of the extant quotes, but is a reference chain of piece by piece evidence)

Edited by LamarkNewAge, : No reason given.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 55 by Phat, posted 11-28-2017 1:10 PM Phat has not yet responded

    
LamarkNewAge
Member
Posts: 1024
Joined: 12-22-2015
Member Rating: 1.1


Message 58 of 58 (824521)
11-29-2017 11:35 PM
Reply to: Message 55 by Phat
11-28-2017 1:10 PM


The Plausibility Of Belief: "Additions" or "subtractions" to authentic Gospel of Matt
quote:

Why is reincarnation more plausible than resurrection? Is incarnation plausible?
Are you aware of the differences between Eastern and Western belief systems?
Is one group more plausible than the other?

jar has a logical argument in that much of what shaped doctrine was political. You also have an argument that the dominant European culture called the shots on doctrine more than the minority cultures and their Christian (or Jewish Christian) communities.


A related topic to the reincarnation ( or at least the pre existence of the soul issue) is the difference between the eastern and western "church" on the Gospel of Matthew.

The Hebrew Gospel of Matthew of Jerome seemed to support the idea that the Holy Spirit (and thus Jesus?) was incarnated into humans before. (the idea of reincarnation for all humans seems to have been a Jewish Christian view).

But were certain things added to the Hebrew Gospel as is conventionally said?

quote:

Whether the Greek version of Matthew was a translation of this Semitic text, as Jerome and eastern Christian authors assumed, or vice versa is also a matter of scholarly debate. For citations of this "Hebrew" gospel by Origen, Eusebius and Jerome himself include material that seems to have been added to the canonical gospel of Matthew.

Jerome's claim that Matthew did not rely on the standard Greek Septuagint translation of Jewish scripture is of little use for deciding the issue of the original language of this gospel. For while it is true that the citation of Hosea 6:1 in Matthew 2:15 is not based on the Septuagint, there is no clearly identifiable source for Matt 2:23 ("He shall be called a Nazarene") in the Hebrew Bible. Moreover, contrary to Jerome's assertion, the canonical gospel of Matthew is sometimes clearly based on the Greek Septuagint translation of Jewish scripture rather than the Hebrew text; for example, the citation of Isa 7:14 in Matt 1:23 ("Behold a virgin shall conceive...") and Jesus' citations from Deuteronomy in the temptation story (Matt 4:1-11).

http://virtualreligion.net/primer/jerome.html


Jerome had to submit to the Pope, despite his own personal views, on numerous Bible book (versions) selection issues.

SEE "Against Rufinius" by Jerome.

www.bing.com
Against Rufinius jerome canon

The Papias evidence shows that there were SUBTRACTIONS from the Hebrew Gospel (and it should be seen as a first century Gospel. The story that later made it into the Gospel of John was already in the Hebrew Gospel (Matthew?).

There were differences.

quote:

The New Testament: A Historical Introduction to the Early Christian Writings (3rd edition)

by Bart Ehrman
p.197

The Gospel of the Ebionites. This Gospel appears to have been a combination of the Synoptic Gospels, a kind of "Gospel harmony" in which the three accounts were merged to form one longer and fuller version of Jesus' life. It was evidently written in Greek and was possibly used among Jewish Christians living in Transjordan. One of its striking features is that it recorded words of Jesus to the effect that Jews no longer needed to participate in animal sacrifices in the Temple. Connected with this abolition of sacrifice was an insistence that Jesus's followers be vegetarian.


Then the same Gospel (according to Jerome) did have certain stories out (like the virgin birth?)

quote:

Bart Ehrman

p.197
The Gospel of the Nazareans. ....written in Aramaic... It may have been produced in Palestine near the end of the first century, that is, about the time of the gospel of John. The church fathers who refer to it sometimes claim that it was an Aramaic translation of the Gospel according to Matthew, minus the first two chapters


Was there an original without the Virgin Birth but with pre existence of the soul (which came to get Alexandrian Chruch Fathers labeled as heretics)?

quote:

In 553 the Second Council of Constantinople condemned his works, along with those of Origen and Evagrius, but not his person. In the Third Council of Constantinople in 680, and in the 787 Second Council of Nicaea, Didymus was again linked with and condemned with Origen.[10] Many unconventional views became associated with Origen, and the 15 anathemas attributed to the council condemn a form of apocatastasis along with the pre-existence of the soul, animism (in this context, a heterodox Christology), and a denial of real and lasting resurrection of the body.[11]

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Didymus_the_Blind


also said

quote:

He was a student of Origen, and, after the Second Counsel in Constantinople condemned Origen, Didymus's works were not copied

Why were certain views seen as threatening?

Reincarnation or (a related heresy) pre existence of the soul?

Do you have any ideas why there would be hatred directed at those who hold to the pre existence of the soul?

I do know that history has taught us that those who hold to the pre existence of the soul seem to have religious views that predispose them to vegetarianism. (though a massive amount of atheists hate to see suffering for sure)

There is a clear difference, when compared to today's Christians, in the respect for life and suffering in Early Christianity. We know that the Roman Catholic side won the Empire, and decided what was "true Christianity".

Is it the fact that the ability to kill (for whatever reason) is severely hamstrung if one holds reincarnation or preexistence views?

The Bhagavad Gita can perhaps be seen as reflecting that concern (Ahisma seemed to be winning the day and the old religion of India was changing and Dharma needed to be invoked and described as including THE REQUIRMENT TO "FIGHT!" WARS)

The Pythagoreans did fight wars, though they wouldn't cut through bean fields (because beans reproduce in a way that seems parallel to a sperm fertilization relationship). They fought to defend their society's ability to exist in an intolerant world.

The threat of a pacifism among people might be a concern. The ability to eat meat (something rich Catholics valued highly) is a major concern. You can't beat a trusting pet pig over the head with a hammer if you have a Christian population that opposes it (that majority population doesn't seem to have ever quite existed in the Roman Empire, though we don't really know what the majority was from 325 to 380 AD).

The hatred the Roman Government "Church" had for various peoples ( Jewish Christians and related original Christian communities, Hindus, Pythagoreans, etc.) would have been compounded by all sorts of power factors.

We know that the original Gospel of Matthew has been lost forever, and it must have been due to threatening concepts. (assuming there was a Hebrew/Aramaic original, it must have been lost forever. Papias indicated a 1st century Hebrew Gospel that had the story with a sinful woman in it.)

Edited by LamarkNewAge, : No reason given.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 55 by Phat, posted 11-28-2017 1:10 PM Phat has not yet responded

    
Prev123
4
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2015 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.0 Beta
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2017