Jump to content


  • Posts

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won


Everything posted by Joshpantera

  1. Welcome aboard! Yes, humanism is often used as a make-shift replacement for religion. With religious attitudes going around and all. Better leave it be. The concept makes sense, but the religious attitudes of many humanist's go the direction of group think and crowd control. In short, another version of the very thing you just got out of.
  2. An all knowing god would know and realize that contemporary witnesses and historical documentation and verification would be in order, IF demonstrating to the world that his son came to earth and lived and died a human life was the objective of the plan of salvation! The fact that no such strong contemporary evidences exist speak to the unlikely nature of the believer position. And it speaks to the historicist position of simply accepting the believer position, minus anything that sounds supernatural or too theological to be real. The continuity doesn't appear to be there to support a stripped down, secular historicist position. The fact remains that Paul's Jesus isn't historical and the interpolations show the intent of later scribes to try and color in the epistles to reflect the gospel content. When originally it doesn't look to be there.
  3. I started a thread on this next video: The mystery school transmission of content to early christianity is laid out in the first few minutes. They were largely solar mysteries oriented and therefore all else involved - astrotheology, probably precession mythology, astrological symbolism, etc.,etc. That's the connection to Paul that answers the questions here. Carrier lays out how global salvation was changed to a more personal salvation through the mysteries. And that Judea was late on the scene to invent a mystery school cult like this. Paul was doing a solar mysteries cult. Focused firmly on personal salvation in lock step with the previous solar mysteries. That solar mystery cult teaching apparently involved a "celestial spheres jesus" concept as part of the presentation. It really can't be either it's a solar myth or celestial being situation, both are part of the Osirian mysteries and others. There's not a choice between is Carrier right or are you right, you both pretty much have to be right because the solar mysteries that informed the early 1st century had been both all along. So when Mark comes in after Paul and lays out the global salvation allegories, it looks as though he was merely choosing to emphasize the older global salvation theme which had shifted in the mystery school cults to personal salvation. Carrier himself is basically saying that the global salvation idea had greater antiquity. If that's the case, and Mark was emphasizing that aspect, then Mark was bringing an older concept back into focus again, much more so than Paul's focus.
  4. Here it is folks: Carrier walks his way through a very likely scenario for christian origins. This way is completely objective by way of the evidences and how the evidences appear in historical order. It paints a different picture than what most people are used to. But he makes it very understandable in this interview.
  5. Yes, it's much more dramatic coming from the fundy sector. Hopefully these two brothers continue on with their journeys and find more answers as they move on with their lives.
  6. They are closed off to anything alternate to their respective interpretations and beliefs. Probably most people on this site have come out of fundamentalist sect's.
  7. Yeah, so many factors to consider. The 2001 study seems more like hype than anything else. That's the older study that sparked the TV programs I saw years ago. With the 80' surge being worst case scenario, but very unlikely. In any event, I've alerted by family on the coast to keep an eye on the news and watch the volcano with an evacuation plan in mind because of the 8 hr window to evacuate if necessary.
  8. Yeah that happened. I remember the story. It was minor enough to where they were able to ride it out. It made mention in the surfing community.
  9. I get the feeling these guys are still a little confused about the jesus issue and how it may relate to their beliefs now. Trying to hang on to some aspect of it which is entirely unnecessary at this point. Their spiritual ideas and veganism could just as well be eastern mystical and Hindu. Some people struggle to let of go trying to make jesus into whatever they evolve into after leaving their churches. And you can pretty much make jesus into anything you wish at that point. Except there will always be contradictions involved because as we know, jesus is a hybridized mythological character that represents diverse schools of thought with very scant evidence of a fixed core. If someone focuses on just one school of thought, like "Prince of Peace," they will be contradicted by another school of thought represented: '...I do not come to bring peace on earth, but a sword.' I see this as a situation of struggling ex christians more so than authentic christians. But I'd like to hear how they respond and converse to see for sure.
  10. So, the SDA church has pushed vegetarianism since it's inception. There's no meat allowed at school or church events. Although it is allowed to eat clean meats according to Mosaic Law. Just not at any church or school functions. My mother raised us vegetarian at home. She refused to cook meat. But we could eat it when we went out. It was a half vegetarian upbringing because she wanted to stick to the "rules" and my dad ate meat. When I got to boarding academy they didn't serve meat on campus. So kids who were not vegetarian were pretty much shafted at the cafeteria. I was half vegetarian so it didn't bother me any. I just ate what they served and ate whatever else when I was off campus.
  11. I'm going through it now. Sounds very similar to my upbringing in the SDA cult. We have you guys labeled here as authentic christian believers but you're dropping f bombs while slinging beers and detailing how fucked up these assholes were to you. I haven't made it through the whole video yet. But have we mislabeled your account? Are you guys ex christians?
  12. Grab a point breaking left that starts in Maine and shoulders off into the gulf off of Key West......
  13. The scenario for a mega tsunami is credible. It's supposed to fall towards the southwest as illustrated. And the estimates of 10-20 meter surge on Florida's east coast seems to check out against other estimates. If we see the volcano split in half live on tv, well, we have around 7-9 hrs to get ready. I'd need my family on the coast to haul ass over here where we're over 100' above sea level in the middle of the state. With 300' + above sea level not very far from here.
  14. The wiki link is full of attention towards the worst case scenario being the least likely. I've had my eye on this for years. I watched a show about the volcano years ago when I was younger. I've always had it in the back of my mind since. They showed an illustration of how a tidal wave would move across the Atlantic and start way up at our furthest eastern states like Main and work down the coastline. There would be warning from the point of collapse, to the wave hitting the easternmost states and working it's way down towards Florida. People would want to get off the coasts that's for sure. But the other issue discussed in the wiki link is that during the course of traveling across the north Atlantic there would likely be degrading of the wave height. And this also depends on which way the collapse takes place and how the trajectory is initiated.
  15. Such as the JW's stringing along a false prediction for the end of the world in the early 20th century. And similar. Where the alternative reality becomes a "spiritual" event. Even though it had been claimed as a physical, literal event before hand when the claims were being made. The claim became untenable. But they had to try and hold on to their misinformation as truth in some way. And kick the can down the road further.
  16. The very premise is unreasonable. How could could any of this exist (DNA and all) if a supernatural god didn't create it? That's the foundational level of the theistic presupposition. To wrongly assume that there's only one way existence could be as such, when, there's not only one way in reality. And of a given option of ways to consider, the supernatural way has the least going for it. To then double down and proclaim that you're shut off to exploring any other way is very unreasonable. If some one never considers or comprehends these points, leaves christianity, and then returns because they think there's no other alternative, then they've shot themselves in the foot. Crawling back to untruths for no good reason because the person in question is that unreasonable from the outset. People have to want it. They have to analyze the issues with an open mind. If they want to get anywhere in the process of trying to seek out truths. It requires engaging the debates. Reading and learning. Challenging claims. And intellectual honestly.
  17. Here's a debate between MacDonald and Carrier. About, "Jesus From Outer Space." This is a debate between two atheist PhD's. Something that stands out for me when going over the debate is how MacDonald, representing a traditional atheistic view of jesus as historical - is full of presuppostions, even to the extent of trying to read things into passages that are not clearly there. Such as Carrier deals with around 1:50 of the debate. This strips down the mythology to bare bones and tries to assert an historical existence despite the obvious mythology, which is the position of Ehrman as well. But it doesn't hold up very strong against someone like Carrier. And presuppositions become very apparent in the process. This is important, because most of us know and understand that theism itself is solely dependent on presuppostions to the tune of there must be a supernatural creator - how else could all of this exist if there were not one? So a creator being is presupposed without any thought as to alternative explanations. Now in atheism, we obviously recognize those presuppositions and disagree with them. But that's just one step. To look at the historicity of jesus is another step forward in this line of atheistic reasoning. What's found are more presuppositions packed into the historical jesus debates. To the point where most of the argument for history comes from presupposition. Not the best foundation to formulate a concrete history from. Carrier is furthering atheism in that way. Broadening the spectrum of healthy skepticism. Looking at it closer than what many of these now aging, older and more traditional minded atheist types are willing to do. They feel like he's gone too far with his skepticism. But I don't Carrier has gone too far at all. It's reasonable and plausible. And I think that just as is the case with scientific theories never convincing their opponents to concede, the same may be true of the myth theory. The opponents will eventually die out and new generations who are open to, and familiar with the new theory, will likely change the landscape of academia - all within time. That's where I place my bet in this game.
  18. Good responses again. But there's still the issue of Paul not mapping out very explicit references to precession in the way that the Mark allegory lays out later on the timeline. One could grant that the Osirian cult probably echoed precession mythology filtering down in mystery form from ancient Egypt. There's enough there to reasonably conclude that the idea of the age of Leo, Zep Tepi, orientation to the northern circumpolar stars, Nabta Playa, and many other sites point to astronomical sophistication. Even if it's too difficult or impossible to hammer down in a concrete way. I used to quarrel with Carrier about poo pooing the astrotheological thesis, but I've laid back on that now. He's been saying all along that he wants to focus on what can be argued in black and white terms from a scholarly perspective. Even if true, he ventures off into academic hostility if trying to argue from a precession basis for origins. And he clearly doesn't want to get mixed up in prejudices and hostility that comes with it. So when he argues for this cosmic jesus origin, it sort of goes without saying that the precession material goes along with the same said material, even if not focused on by Carrier. What was in ancient Egypt likely filtered down the mystery cults like the Osirian. The age of Aries was the end of the old Great Year. When Carrier notes the frequency and commonality of the savior cults arising during what would have been that time period, one obvious reason could be the fact that it was an important time where astronomer priestly types would have been concerned. These cults likely have elements of salvation because of the astrological timeline and changing over into a new cycle. Personal salvation and earthly salvation sort of go hand in hand. As to why Paul focused more on the personal and Mark more on the planetary, it's hard to say. But Paul must have known about these things if he was modeling behind the Osirian and similar cults. The other issue is where Manly P Hall used to lecture and write about the degrading of the mystery schools going into the common era. To where much of the knowledge was lost. But not entirely lost. It could be that Mark wanted to add to the mythology to include a fuller emphasis on the astrotheological precession theme. Whereas that feature wasn't as important to Paul? It's hard to say.
  19. Not to reproduce too much of the above and get lengthy, I'll just say that your responses sound reasonable. But that's because I understand the antiquity arguments and the various evidences for the existence of sophisticated astronomical knowledge, dating way back to before they're given credit by most academics. But these are treated as speculative avenues and not hard facts. If that is correct, however, then you have your antiquity arguments holding firm against Carrier's skepticism. There would have been a deep antiquity, there would have been astronomer priest types looking forward to the end of the Great Year and beginning of the new. Which would be leading into the first century of the common era when the Great Year changed over. Carrier's savior cult thesis, with this in mind, creates a scenario where if it can be proven or demonstrated that the prior savior cult's were concerned with precession of the equinox and the Vedic Yuga's, then it would have been integrated in some way at the 'christian origins' level, IF, christianity simply started out as another rendition of these same said savior cults of the near east. Yes it came late. But late in this sense meant coming after the age of pisces turned over, as opposed to coming before the age of pisces looking forward to it's arrival as the older cults would have been. This involves several things, however. 1) Proving that precession was known in antiquity before it's credited discovery by Hippocrates in the 2nd century BCE. In order to date back into antiquity. This has been alleged by some, but is it proven by of hard fact and credible evidence? 2) If not proven conclusively, then conservatively speaking, precession is discovered in the 2nd century BCE. When do the savior cults begin? If they predate what can be proven for the discovery of precession, then proving that the Osirian cult and others were based on precession would prove difficult to impossible to argue. There's no way of proving that knew anything about precession in that scenario. 3) Savior cults in the 1st century BCE could be argued to have origin level precession mythologizing involved, as a response to something discovered during the previous century, but a demonstration of their scriptures, iconography, and writings showing where the astrotheological allegory is located is in order to make the case. It has to come in the form of credible evidence that substantiates the claim. Or else Carrier is justified in dismissing it. 4) Some people do point out the placement of astrotheological allegory in the NT myths, but it's also hotly debated by both christian apologists as well as certain agnostic and atheist skeptics. And I know from experience arguing these points that all of the astrological symbolism content is subject to interpretation, which, simply can't be hammered down as hard factual. It's intuitive. It involves a lot of opinion. I think there's something there to be recognized. But not everyone shares that opinion. And I'm not aware of any knock out arguments that lay all of the skeptics to waste. This is a taste of the some of the popular objections that can arise to the claims. To which you then respond with?
  20. As I'm going through the pod cast, Carrier around the 20 - 30 minute mark gets into how popular savior cults were at the time. And how christianity was a late arrival on the savior cult spectrum. All that emotional appeal from the savior cults and personal salvation had been long afoot by the time of christianity. So likely not an after thought or late addition in consideration of the religious landscape of the time. So I think origination as another savior cult following all of these previous one's is on the table for origins, to which, the late written gospel add the planetary salvation through precession theme. We don't see it laid out in the earliest writings of Paul. Not like it is in Mark, which, is likely a work of the second century with the bandwagon gospels following behind that. Savior Cults popular ---- Paul's authentic letters ---- Gospel of Mark (astrotheological allegory) ---- Synoptics (bandwagon material) ---- John (following the bandwagon) Carrier seems to have strong footing for his thesis. And if he's correct on this, you only need to make a few adjustments to your thesis to account for what could be seen as a few inconsistencies in the time line and evolution of the myths. I don't doubt that the astronomer priests purposely colored the myths with astrotheological allegory and also presented the planetary salvation idea that we see plainly by the time of revelation. The earth is made new. That completely spells out the idea that planet is being saved as well the people seeking salvation on a personal level. To put this all together on a whim, it looks to me as though christianity being late on the personal savior cult timeline may have added the planetary salvation theme which built on top of what the previous personal salvation cults had been doing. Just some quick guessing. But I'd have to look specifically at the Osirian cults and other examples to see if that correctly works out or not. But at first glance it makes against the time line of appearances where these myths entered the historical records. In the same 20 - 30 minute mark of the pod cast, Carrier made references to the Osirian cult and similar cults, pre-existing christianity, which had the hero coming down through the celestial spheres and taking on a flesh appearance as part of the myth. They had a public level. It was emotional. And it was apparently promoted as really taking place in history. So the exoteric view of the savior cult format envisioned an emotional, personal salvation format, where the common joe believed that everything from the myths really happened. All of this prior to the emergence of christianity late on the scene, doing the very same things. But possibly adding deeper precession narrative when the gospel of Mark eventually came out. Paul's work more resembles these older savior cults with emotional appeal to personal salvation from a figure up in the cosmos who, like the others, was believed to be real, but real in the sense of an entity existing up above in the heavens. Carrier also mentions that the educated and initiated of the past make mention of how with the Osirian cult, for example, the common man believing the literal and exoteric dimension of the myths was missing the real point. And the same is true of christianity as we know. The literal storyline isn't the main line of thinking of the writers. They were making concealed references in the texts. So all of these things are completely mixed in together. Sophisticated allegory, personal salvation, planetary salvation, 'theistic belief' regardless of which direction, and so on. The whole thing is supernatural myth which involved some references that can, from today's perspective, be stripped down to only what's natural about it. But none of these religious writers were atheists or agnostics like today. Not even the founding fathers of the US were technically agnostic atheists either. It wasn't a thing yet. It took centuries and centuries to get to straightforward agnostic atheism in the world. Post Darwin mainly. We can't very well look back at christian origins and decided that because they referred to precession, and precession is a natural phenomenon, the early christians were naturalists like we are today, here and now. That's something that doesn't look likely or within the scheme of proving. Why not just admit that they were all supernaturalists, who didn't realize it at the time, but their supernatural visions could be reinterpreted now in a different way. Which is the way you are currently interpreting it? Then you're outside of having to argue something that doesn't look like something you can win.
  21. These were all beliefs in the early church. The Doherty model shows that many different beliefs were afoot. The personal salvation and planetary salvation are both there. The idea in revelation that earth will be "made new" reflects the same idea as John and Matthew. No one goes anywhere. Not off and away to the 7th heaven. They remain on the earth transformed and made new. Praising YHWH for ever and ever from here. But the idea of a 7 layered heavens also appears to remain into revelation. Carrier is picking up on beliefs that did exist. They apparently thought in terms of a 7 layered universe where for whatever reason they envisioned, precession was part of the 7 layered cosmos. They likely thought that jesus was a figure who could travel up and down through the 7 layered cosmos and that precession was a way of mapping out long timelines. If there's going to be a TOE for christian origins, it will have to answer everything. Carrier is neglecting precession, you're neglecting the 7 layered cosmos. It looks like both have to factor in if a TOE is ever to be achieved by anyone. Thoughts????
  22. I'm going to leave this pod cast with Carrier about the new book:
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Guidelines.