The Bible: Is the Author God, Man or Both?

Yawn.It is irrelevant what I believe since we happen to be discussing what the disciples and Apostles believed. That was one step I covered but not related to any 'cognitive dissonance'. And whether or not there was an actual resurrect is irrelevant, of course, since we are dealing with what writers said in their narratives they believed happened.And I have not seen you provide any support anywhere that there was any 'cognitive dissonance' in the first place; just where you keep asserting there was some 'cognitive dissonance'. Repeating your assertion and that you have provided evidence or support (as I often tell Buz) does not make it fact.

quote:

---

That was one step I covered but not related to any 'cognitive dissonance'. And whether or not there was an actual resurrect is irrelevant, of course, since we are dealing with what writers said in their narratives they believed happened.

---

Wrong on both points, as you would know if you had actually followed the discussion.Please don't respond to my messages unless you are prepared to discuss the issues in good faith.

Simply saying that I am wrong doesn't seem to have much value or worth unless you provide reasoning or a link to where you have shown why I am wrong.Cognitive Dissonance is when someone holds two or more mutually exclusive beliefs.According to the stories in the Gospels and the Epistles, the disciples and the Apostles believed that Jesus was resurrected. Whether or not there was an actual resurrection is irrelevant to the fact that in the Gospels and Epistles the writers have the characters believe there was a resurrection.I see no signs of cognitive dissonance there.Edited by jar, : fix subtitle

If you can't be bothered to read my posts it's a waste of time replying to you.

Possibly, but there are others, lurkers, who are reading this thread and topic and perhaps they will learn something from both of us.In the stories we call the Gospels and Epistles, the characters grow, evolve and their beliefs change. As individuals, the details of those beliefs and their interpretations vary and also evolve.As I pointed out back in [mid-664718], :

quote:

---

... the various Gospel stories (and the Epistles) show the disciples (and the Apostles), far from suffering from cognitive dissonance, were dealing with reality rather well.

​

If we begin with that classic idea of a Jewish Messiah, one who will rise up, throw out the overlords and lead Israel to an Independent status, then Jesus death would have quashed that idea.

​

But then almost immediately the disciples experience the Resurrection, and so the concept of what a Messiah would be changed to fit the new reality. No cognitive dissonance there.

​

It's pretty clear that the first generation of followers, disciples and Apostles, believed that the world would end within their lifetime. But it became clear that was not going to happen so again they revised their expectations; they moved Jesus return (the Second Coming) to an indefinite period in the future. Again, far from cognitive dissonance.

​

In each case, whether you are looking at Gospels or Epistles, what is seen is evolution. When beliefs are shown to be wrong they changed the beliefs instead of trying to hold two mutually exclusive beliefs.

---

Now their beliefs may have been wrong, but in the stories they are provided with sufficient evidence to justify those beliefs. They believed that they witnessed a resurrected Jesus.Each author tells the story from their own perspective. Matthew, Mark and John are told as though it was a first person experience. Luke is a second hand account. The Epistles are slightly different, correspondence that only occasionally addresses the material in the Life of Jesus story.

Anyone actually following this thread can see that you are just ignoring my points. Until you are prepared to honestly address my posts there is nothing more to say.

If I'm any measure, anyone following this thread is extremely bored by the petty squabbling and is waiting to see if anything more grown up is going to be said.

I admit to being a bit confused.It seems as though PaulK is referring to the disciples in the form of their actual existence; how they would really feel in the days after Jesus' death. In that moment there would be cognitive dissonance that would be resolved by their invention of the resurrection.You seem to be talking about the disciples as characters in the story, and how cognitive dissonance plays a part in the narrative. In his debate with GDR, I don't think PaulK is making literary argument.I could be wrong though, hopefully he can look past his frustration with you and let us know.To be fair, you did join the conversation with a rather weak, one line, criticism.

Note that you use the term "invention" but that is simply not supported by the stories themselves.In the stories the characters actually experience the Resurrection.

I don't see a lack of honesty or good faith in this discussion. Disagreement doesn't mean a lack of honesty or good faith concerning the discussion.Even though this debate is on the religious side, participants do need to provide reasoned argumentation or support for the arguments or counter arguments they present.If one has already provided such support or reasoning in the thread, it is courteous to provide a link back to the appropriate post.Remember, argue the position presented, not the person. Participants:
Either address the arguments presented concerning the topic or don't respond. Please direct any comments concerning this Administrative msg to the General Discussion Of Moderation Procedures (aka 'The Whine List') thread.Thank you
AdminPD

You didn't reply to the issue I posed at all.It seems as though you are coming from a literary perspective while PaulK is talking about a historical perspective.The fact that you zeroed in on my use of the word "invention" makes me believe even more that this is true.PaulK does not seem to be talking about the disciples as characters in a story. I am beginning to understand his frustration.

Well, PaulK may well have problems and I'm sorry he is frustrated. I hope he feels better soon.Did you use the word invention? It seemed as though you did.The topic though deals with the Bible and we are in a Bible study forum. If PaulK or you wish to use a scientific approach, then you are in the wrong discussion.I am not approaching this from a literary perspective but rather from a historical perspective.The people in the story believed that the resurrection happened.I believe that the resurrection happened.No cognitive dissonance needed, just belief.

Yes jar. I am aware that I typed the word "invention". You unforunatly completely missed the point of what I was trying to say by focusing on a word choice.I guess I had a false hope for salvaging the conversation. You seem to be treating me as an opponent despite the fact that I was merely trying to act as a mediator of a misunderstanding.

I certainly don't see you as an opponent and have simply been trying to outline my position.It seems so far that I have failed to do so in a manner some folk can comprehend, so I will keep trying different variations in the hope that I find one that works.From a historical perspective the stories found in the Gospels and in the Epistles describe the evolving beliefs of some of those folk that created "Christianity".Whether those beliefs were based on facts is simply irrelevant to the topic; the stories describe what they (or the authors of the stories) purport to be the beliefs at the time the stories were penned.Terms such as "invent" or "cognitive dissonance" are simply irrelevant to the topic.

Concerning the possibility that the disciples of Jesus were experiencing cognitive dissonance, let me describe a possible scenario. I'm not trying to replicate or reproduce PaulK's position. I'm just describing an example of how I think cognitive dissonance might play a role.Cognitive dissonance occurs when what we believe is contradicted by new information. The condition of cognitive dissonance seeks to preserve the original belief in various ways, such as rejecting the new information, or developing ways to explain away the new information.So one way the disciples may have been experiencing cognitive dissonance was due to the contradiction between their belief in Jesus as Lord versus the reality that Jesus was dead. So they sought to explain away the death by explaining that Jesus wasn't really dead but had returned to life and then ascended to heaven to be by his Father's side.Of course, for those who believe Jesus did actually rise from the dead the cognitive dissonance among the disciples could have lasted for only three days. The resurrection was proof of the divinity of Jesus, and the disciples would have been forced into reinterpretations, but not due to cognitive dissonance concerning Jesus's divinity.I'm not trying to get involved in the discussion, so please, no replies to this message. We seem to have a prickly group on the religious side these days, so those who feel the urge to complain about how I have only further bollixed up the discussion should just keep it to themselves. If you don't appreciate honest efforts to help, no matter how unsuccessful, then I think silence would be a welcome alternative.