Life, The Universe, And Everything; Continued

[BuddyFerris]

but you do seem concerned that there is no overlap - why is this? what would it mean to you if there was? I have mentioned this several times now - I'd really like to know what it is that is at issue for you here.

Me too.

 

Doc Robert Price was a Christian, but now see Christianity as an expression of faith built on other religions, and he still go to Church to experience the awe and transcendence. That's having an open mind to understanding the true contents of the Bible.

 

Oh, and Buddy, another guy you should look into: John Shelby Spong. He's "just" a retired bishop, but he helped me understand midrash. Have you looked up midrash yet in the Jewish Encyclopedia? When you start understanding that parts of the Gospel is a midrash of the stories about Abraham, Isaac, Moses and Joshua, then it all starts to make sense.

 

I'm also struck by why Buddy doesn't just ask how you could show a link doesn't exist, in order to do this you'd have to show that the various idea's had never come into contact with each other - which would be a ridiculous and impossible claim wouldn't it? Instead he does keep right on saying that it has been debunked but never says how.

 

I've looked up a couple of Robert Price's old 'sermons', (great reading BTW) I noticed that his church was called the Holy Grail. A couple of posts ago I used the expression 'Holy Grail' in an aside to Dano. Was I influenced by Robert Price? Somewhere along the line both myself and Robert Price have been exposed to the myth of the Holy Grail. We both used the expression in the course of conversations with others and life happened so that these two usages converged in this thread and happened at almost the same time.

 

Does it mean anything? No - not unless I was claiming that all my words are inspired by God and that my idea's are unique and superiour.

 

I'm also struggling with the 'demise of the golden age of Fatherhood' theme that has just emerged. I would think this is similar to Buddy's idea that there was once a time when mankind was perfect and flawless, before the fall.

 

I see my generation, if not the previous generation, as one in which society assisted Fathers in freeing themselves from the limitations placed on their role by victorian expectations that stifled relationships. Not to say that there are no struggling Fathers now nor that there were no good Fathers in previous generations but I'm much happier being the Mother of sons who won't feel obliged to take on 'headship' but who will be able to co-parent with their partners - than I would have been if we were still in a place where men and women had their roles prescribed by society. I do recognise that the transition has been hard for some however.

And they're off and running ...

HanS and Alice in the library, with the candlestick, while Col. Mustard was in the parlor with Ms. Peach....

[BuddyFerris]

Justice, however, will require an accounting of those who continue to place a stumbling block in the path of innocents, as both you and your father were innocents.

 

And its all about the messages such 'accounting' and 'justice' convey, and the stories that will be breathed into being as a consequence.

 

Buddy,

 

The thing I find bemusing about your approach is that the points you wish to argue, in for example the 'pagan origins' part of this discussion, are those of a fundamentalist but you use the language of a post modern Christian. This is currently coming across as disingenuous.

 

I can't understand why anyone other than a fundamentalist wouldn't just be saying 'ah yes there's a lot of cross fertilisation between religions, especially in the use of art and symbolic language, this is as one would expect - Christianity is a reflection of man's attempt to find God, it doesn't just exist in a vacuum and its useful to draw on previous explanations of those themes that occupy the mind of man...'

 

OK - so you are not one of those extreme fundamentalists who faced with this information spirals into a panic and starts claiming that in-between his trips to plant confusing dinosaur fossils, Satan also tripped back and forth in his time machine, to do a spot of tiling or spin an ancient myth to include idea's nicked from the gospel and so lead the non vigilant away from the truth ....

 

but you do seem concerned that there is no overlap - why is this? what would it mean to you if there was? I have mentioned this several times now - I'd really like to know what it is that is at issue for you here.

 

Alice

To be truthful, Alice, I'm not overly concerned that the detritus of various cultures and religions might be expressed within the OT narratives nor am I concerned that there might be cultural and contextual seepage into NT accounts and illustrations. The part I find annoying is that the 'Michael Moore wannabes' of anti-Christendom are either deliberately with malicious forethought or ignorantly with no thought presenting evidence and argument which are known to be false. Nice people get jerked around by bad information and scholarly pretense. As much as you (and others here) are put off by the fundamentalist presentation, I equally am put off by deliberate intellectual dishonesty. Honest persuasion is a commendable labor; persuasion through deception is not. I suspect you'll agree at least in principle.

 

For example, the scripture doesn't mention a day or month for Jesus birth. It's earliest appearance as Dec. 25th is around 220 A.D. in a popular work. One of the popularist arguments, however, regarding pagan origins for Christianity is the common occurrence of Dec. 25th as the birthday of Horus, or another pagan king or god, and that suspicious similarity to Christianity. Therefore, they insist, Christianity must be of pagan origin. This qualifies as deliberate deception.

 

Just a couple of common sense notes render the claim false. December 25 isn't Jesus' birthday, everyone knows, but we celebrate on that day traditionally since the day was formally chosen some time in the 4th or 5th centuries. The day chosen has nothing to do with Christianity's origin. It was a Roman holiday, if I remember correctly. Further, the date of Horus' birth is announced as Dec. 25th, but that's disingenuous. The records show the tradition was that he was born on the winter solstice, as supposedly are others similarly attributed. The date of the solstice varies from year to year. December, however, isn't on the calendar when Hours is being celebrated by the Egyptians; he precedes the Julian calendar by more than a millennium. Yet the popularists insist that the similarity of facts proves syncretism. Well, sure, sort of; but logic just doesn't work for origins.

 

I've been down the path with several lists of such 'evidence' and in each case, it's proven to be deliberately misused. I could do a better job with little effort; I've even offered a few ideas to see if anyone was paying attention. No one was.

 

Again, the issue is of some small interest to me, but the offerings in the popular press seem to be uniformly a la Von Daniken (Chariots of the Gods); unimpressive and hardly worth the notice.

 

Surprisingly, a new poster whom I haven't met offered a thoughtful discussion on the composition of the mosaic; quite well done in fact. Logical, no stretching, no insistent conclusion, just reasonable observation. Worth a complimentary answer if I can figure out how, since the previous thread was closed. They're .god for a board name, post #284 on the previous thread.

 

HanS wants to beat me up with a book on the subject. What should I do?

Buddy

When you have an idle moment tell me about the messages such 'accounting' and 'justice' convey.

[Alice]

HanS wants to beat me up with a book on the subject. What should I do?

 

well you could start by saying something along the lines of ...

 

To be truthful, Alice, I'm not overly concerned that the detritus of various cultures and religions might be expressed within the OT narratives nor am I concerned that there might be cultural and contextual seepage into NT accounts and illustrations.

 

oh - I see that you have at last I do feel as though I've been jumping up and down in the background waving a big prompt sign so in the end I started to doubt what I thought I'd been reading.

 

Although you want to dismiss the arguments that have been presented (1) because they are irrelevent to you (2) because you are not comfortable with the style of their presentation and the scope of the scholarship - what you are failing to see is their relevence in the debate with fundamentalists that wants to claim that every word of the Bible is somehow unique and utterly superiour to all other religious and secular thought.

 

If you'd said to Hans something akin to your words above, I'm guessing you'd have avoided a whole load of frustrating debate and instead you'd both have been saying 'interesting... some common ground' and moving on to a topic that seemed more mutually illuminating.

 

For myself - I'm fascinated by the apparent cross fertilization in religion, much of which I believe arises from the fact that people everywhere are observing the same universe and experiencing the same range of emotions and they then create narratives to explain these events.

 

I would like to share with you that this kind of information was really important for me to have access to when I was still encased in a fundamentalist mindset (although being honest - I prefer it presented in a less 'sensational' Daily Mail style than some of the websites) Many years ago I was fortunate enough to know a liberal christian who took me through this information and helped me see christianity in context for the first time. It did not result in me loosing my christian faith at that time but it helped me break free from some of the most harmful aspects of fundamentalism.

 

The part I find annoying is that the 'Michael Moore wannabes' of anti-Christendom are either deliberately with malicious forethought or ignorantly with no thought presenting evidence and argument which are known to be false. Nice people get jerked around by bad information and scholarly pretense. As much as you (and others here) are put off by the fundamentalist presentation, I equally am put off by deliberate intellectual dishonesty.

 

See what you did here? You accepted that there were two possibilities, one in which there was a deliberate attempt to mislead, the other in which there was incomplete information ... then you focused in on deliberate intellectual dishonesty as if you know this is the case here.

 

None of us 'see' exactly what the next person 'see's'. We are all acting from the information available to us at any given time. If you'd be a little (or maybe even a lot) clearer about what you believe maybe people, myself included, would stop offering arguments against fundamentalism.

 

I agree with you on the Christmas dating bit.

 

I feel that I would be running ahead if I elaborate on my comments about the mesages behind accounting and justice at this stage. I want to give you a chance to catch up on the other issues you were wanting to return to - but in your own time

[BuddyFerris]

....unfortunately there isn't any overwhelming body of evidence as you would like suggesting Christianity is anything other than what it has been historically understood to be all along. Perhaps it's time to move on.

Buddy

Buddy,

I'd just like to suggest that perhaps this fishy discussion could be helped if you said in few sentences what it is you think Christianity has been understood historically to be all along.

 

There are a wide variety of beliefs out there as to what christianity is and I still don't know what you think it is. I'm fascinated that you think there is a single way of viewing christianity that has been historically understood all along.

Alice

Ah, good point. External observations are myriad and internal discussions and divisions are unending. I was thinking simplistically. Christianity says of itself that it is based in history, centered on the life of Christ and his few years of ministry, death and resurrection, to which eye witness testimony is given. That's 99.999% of Christianity. For it's foundations, Jesus was a Jew among Jews. Again, based in history with a relevant lineage and tradition. BF

[Japedo]

Christianity says of itself that it is based in history, centered on the life of Christ and his few years of ministry, death and resurrection, to which eye witness testimony is given.

 

Who else backs up their claim? Why does the bible contradict itself on Christ's life if its true? Who are these supposed wittiness, if there are so many who are they and did they leave any evidence as to what they witnessed outside of the bible? Why also does Christs life mirror almost point by point other pagan gods who were known to exist before christ?

 

 

 

That's 99.999% of Christianity.

 

I thought faith was a huge corner stone?

 

 

For it's foundations, Jesus was a Jew among Jews. Again, based in history with a relevant lineage and tradition. BF

 

Buddy, again no Jew would accept Christ, he was a law breaker according to the Torah in the highest form, he'd be rejected, he was rejected if he ever was..... which I doubt.

[dano]

Want to read what some of the best thinkers on the planet have to say?

 

http://www.edge.org/discourse/moral_religion.html

[Fweethawt]

I was thinking more along the lines of buttsecks...

 

 

Oops! Sorry! Wrong thread...

 

My bad.

[Ouroboros]

Don't bend over.

[Sparrow]

...

...text

...

 

Geezuz!!!

 

He's still here. I thought if I stuck my head in a project it would all go away.

 

Spatz

[Sparrow]

I was thinking more along the lines of buttsecks...

 

 

Oops! Sorry! Wrong thread...

 

My bad.

 

Yeah, right!!!

 

Wrong thread. That's ALL you were thinking .................

 

[Ouroboros]

Hi Sparrow,

 

Good to have you back.

 

I'm starting to think you were right after all.

[♦ nivek ♦]

OK folks, *Command Decision Time* here.

 

We've gone on now three pages of the practical limits of the Board threads on discussing Buddy, his life and times, along with his provisions and religious preferences.

 

I am going to gently suggest that if Buddy wishes to discuss the finite points of his preferences and possible convictions, we'll do so in the Arena.

 

One problem with the Lion's Den is that often one poster is shot at from all directions, giving him/her little chance to recoup before the next volly is lofted.

 

I am suggesting strongly that one, possibly two of the ExC regulars who would care to participate with Buddy in a discussion that will be more philosophical and theological do so in the Arena.

 

Doing so will have just these participants in thread. I will open up a *Peanut Gallery* so remarks and comments made by others will be shown and discussed AS A SIDE and NOT IN the actual give and take. Any **accidents** in their discussion area will be nuked on sight.

 

Will suggest that a topic be chosen, and that a time limit be given. I will limit the physical paging to 15 pages, approximately 300 spaces on the Board.

 

Winner? Hell if I know, the object will be for Buddy to use his eruditeness and knowledge to partake in intelligent conversations as things ebb and flow.

 

kFL

[BuddyFerris]

OK folks, *Command Decision Time* here.

 

We've gone on now three pages of the practical limits of the Board threads on discussing Buddy, his life and times, along with his provisions and religious preferences.

 

I am going to gently suggest that if Buddy wishes to discuss the finite points of his preferences and possible convictions, we'll do so in the Arena.

Sorry for the delay in responding, Skip. Off line in thunderstorms until this morning.

I'm available for formal debate should someone care to make the challenge. Meanwhile, the Lion's Den suits. It reminds me of boot camp conversations; bunch of folks from all over with little in common thrown together. It takes time and a little blood letting to find the people behind the rhetoric.

Buddy

[BuddyFerris]

HanS wants to beat me up with a book on the subject. What should I do?

 

well you could start by saying something along the lines of ...

 

To be truthful, Alice, I'm not overly concerned that the detritus of various cultures and religions might be expressed within the OT narratives nor am I concerned that there might be cultural and contextual seepage into NT accounts and illustrations.

 

oh - I see that you have at last I do feel as though I've been jumping up and down in the background waving a big prompt sign so in the end I started to doubt what I thought I'd been reading.

 

Although you want to dismiss the arguments that have been presented (1) because they are irrelevent to you (2) because you are not comfortable with the style of their presentation and the scope of the scholarship - what you are failing to see is their relevence in the debate with fundamentalists that wants to claim that every word of the Bible is somehow unique and utterly superiour to all other religious and secular thought.

 

If you'd said to Hans something akin to your words above, I'm guessing you'd have avoided a whole load of frustrating debate and instead you'd both have been saying 'interesting... some common ground' and moving on to a topic that seemed more mutually illuminating.

You're absolutely correct.

For myself - I'm fascinated by the apparent cross fertilization in religion, much of which I believe arises from the fact that people everywhere are observing the same universe and experiencing the same range of emotions and they then create narratives to explain these events.

 

I would like to share with you that this kind of information was really important for me to have access to when I was still encased in a fundamentalist mindset (although being honest - I prefer it presented in a less 'sensational' Daily Mail style than some of the websites) Many years ago I was fortunate enough to know a liberal christian who took me through this information and helped me see christianity in context for the first time. It did not result in me loosing my christian faith at that time but it helped me break free from some of the most harmful aspects of fundamentalism.

...

I feel that I would be running ahead if I elaborate on my comments about the mesages behind accounting and justice at this stage. I want to give you a chance to catch up on the other issues you were wanting to return to - but in your own time

Ah, yes. The fall.

If I recall, you were inquiring what evidence might remain from our perfect state prior to the fall. None as far as I know, and you cited that as a significant failing. Just curious; what evidence would you expect to find? If the state of mankind were sinless at a point in history, what evidence might we find in the fossil or archaeological record?

Buddy

[BuddyFerris]

Christianity says of itself that it is based in history, centered on the life of Christ and his few years of ministry, death and resurrection, to which eye witness testimony is given.

Who else backs up their claim? Why does the bible contradict itself on Christ's life if its true? Who are these supposed wittiness, if there are so many who are they and did they leave any evidence as to what they witnessed outside of the bible? Why also does Christs life mirror almost point by point other pagan gods who were known to exist before christ?

That's 99.999% of Christianity.

I thought faith was a huge corner stone?

For it's foundations, Jesus was a Jew among Jews. Again, based in history with a relevant lineage and tradition. BF

Buddy, again no Jew would accept Christ, he was a law breaker according to the Torah in the highest form, he'd be rejected, he was rejected if he ever was..... which I doubt.

Nice to hear from you again, Japedo. I wondered if trying to answer quickly between tasks at work wouldn't generate some flack. I should have appended 'for me' to the definition. As to your questions, you'll be pleased to know that the answers are easily found. A quick google search for 'bible resources' should give you several options.

Buddy

_{Faith is only as good as the object thereof.}

[Japedo]

Nice to hear from you again, Japedo. I wondered if trying to answer quickly between tasks at work wouldn't generate some flack. I should have appended 'for me' to the definition. As to your questions, you'll be pleased to know that the answers are easily found. A quick google search for 'bible resources' should give you several options.

Buddy

_{Faith is only as good as the object thereof.}

 

 

Buddy, now now... You must know that myself being a former xtian, already know the answers xtians give. I can't accept their lies as truth, hence why I'm no longer a xtian. It was asked more so to force you into a corner to question outside of your dogma and face honest contradictions then it was my really wanting an answer.

[BuddyFerris]

Nice to hear from you again, Japedo. I wondered if trying to answer quickly between tasks at work wouldn't generate some flack. I should have appended 'for me' to the definition. As to your questions, you'll be pleased to know that the answers are easily found. A quick google search for 'bible resources' should give you several options.

Buddy

_{Faith is only as good as the object thereof.}

 

 

Buddy, now now... You must know that myself being a former xtian, already know the answers xtians give. I can't accept their lies as truth, hence why I'm no longer a xtian. It was asked more so to force you into a corner to question outside of your dogma and face honest contradictions then it was my really wanting an answer.

Yes, of course. How could I possibly have mistaken that one?

Actually, I'm pressed for time, so opted for humor. I'll be back as soon as work allows. Meanwhile, I know that you've been through the pagan origin story, but at the level of my inquiry so far, it doesn't stand up well. I've only spent a little time in the sources, but each element I've pursued has failed the test. Do me a favor if you will, and pick out your favorite single element of syncretism and let's look at the single item together. I'd like to avoid adding bricks to the structure until it has proven itself to be a brick, if you know what I mean. Have a good day.

Buddy

[Alice]

If I recall, you were inquiring what evidence might remain from our perfect state prior to the fall. None as far as I know, and you cited that as a significant failing. Just curious; what evidence would you expect to find? If the state of mankind were sinless at a point in history, what evidence might we find in the fossil or archaeological record?

Buddy

 

Again Buddy, I would think that the kind of evidence one would hope to see would depend on the belief. There are christians who believe that the story of the Fall is literally true, that two adult humans were brought into existence by a God who shaped one from the from the earth and the second from a rib of the first and breathed life into them ... if there were two perfect humans living some six thousand years ago, as some christians believe - I would think that to find any specific evidence for Adam and Eve pretty unlikely - needle in a haystack and all that.

 

If I was the kind of christian who interpreted the story as an explanation for the evolution of mankind and held a belief that at a point in the development of human consciousness mankind changed direction and began behaving in selfish and oppressive ways - I might expect to see confirmation in our nearest animal relatives that there was an absence of harming others ...

 

But you miss my point ...

 

I was pointing out that in your description of the fall, you seemed to believe as 'fact' that there had been a period of time in which mankind was flawless. I asked what evidence you had for this. You said none. Other christians might have said 'divine revelation ... the Bible tells me so' ... or something similar.

 

 

OK folks, *Command Decision Time* here.

 

We've gone on now three pages of the practical limits of the Board threads on discussing Buddy, his life and times, along with his provisions and religious preferences.

 

I am suggesting strongly that one, possibly two of the ExC regulars who would care to participate with Buddy in a discussion that will be more philosophical and theological do so in the Arena.

 

 

kFL

 

There's something about Skip N. Church that means when he strongly suggests something, I get in line fairly quickly I think he's saying we've used up too much bandwidth in these threads and that the conversation should move to the Arena.

 

Unfortunately, I don't feel equipped to step up to this mark. I hope someone does come forward though!

 

Alice

[BuddyFerris]

There's something about Skip N. Church that means when he strongly suggests something, I get in line fairly quickly ...

 

Alice

Let's find out. (PM to Skip)

BF

[Mythra]

I've only spent a little time in the sources, but each element I've pursued has failed the test.

 

What test is that, Buddy?

 

Are you asserting that all of the major elements of the gospel story (miraculous birth, performing miracles, demon possession, salvation, prophecy, hell, eternal soul, sacred meals) are original to christianity - with no precedents in pagan myths and ideologies?

 

Or are you insisting on a cut-and-paste, carbon copy facsimile - or perhaps an ancient bibliography by the writer of Mark's gospel showing his sources?

 

You're either being naive or disengenuous - or you're attacking a strawman.

[.god]

hi buddy,

 

I knew a guy named Ferris once..

 

I\'ve never read the bible and I don\'t really know any of the nitty-gritty that everyone else on these forums know like the back of their hand, so unfortunately you won\'t get any of that from me, for better or worse. but that\'s why i\'m here, mostly lurking in the shadows

 

so i\'m curious, is there an overarching reason why do you find your religion so compelling to you, and why do you find you \"need\" it (regardless of whether or not you believe it\\\'s true or not). I\'m assuming that you will be telling me you don\'t see any link between the mosaic and the symbol of pisces. I was unable any ancient images of pisces that were dated on the net w/ a quick search, so I don\'t know if in fact the symbol of pisces has had the same configuration and composition throughout the ages - I would say if it didn\'t then the argument is weakened. If it has been the same, then on what basis would you deny the link.

[dano]

Where do I sit?

 

I am here, to continue to add legitimacy to your being.

 

Without me, to tell you that you aren't playing with a full deck, you are just wafting around out there in cyber space, never, never land, all by your self.

P. Nut

[BuddyFerris]

hi buddy,

 

I knew a guy named Ferris once..

 

I\'ve never read the bible and I don\'t really know any of the nitty-gritty that everyone else on these forums know like the back of their hand, so unfortunately you won\'t get any of that from me, for better or worse. but that\'s why i\'m here, mostly lurking in the shadows

 

so i\'m curious, is there an overarching reason why do you find your religion so compelling to you, and why do you find you \"need\" it (regardless of whether or not you believe it\\\'s true or not). I\'m assuming that you will be telling me you don\'t see any link between the mosaic and the symbol of pisces. I was unable any ancient images of pisces that were dated on the net w/ a quick search, so I don\'t know if in fact the symbol of pisces has had the same configuration and composition throughout the ages - I would say if it didn\'t then the argument is weakened. If it has been the same, then on what basis would you deny the link.

Frankly, dot, you don't need an in depth knowledge of the Bible to understand, but it's dangerous ground. You might want to ask someone other than a Christian.

 

On the issue of the old church floor mosaic, of course there is a visual similarity to the modern Pieces symbology with which we're familiar today. The obvious composition elements suggest the 4th century church artist may well have been influenced by similar artwork. Let's presume for the moment that the artist's preparatory work was precisely as suggested by the anti-Christian crowd. What might we logically make of that?

 

1. Can we assume the artist was a Christian? It's not required from or supported by the evidence. The inscription says the money for the floor was donated, suggesting the artisan was hired.

2. Can we assume the artist was a participant in the use of the Church? No evidence supports the assumption.

3. Can we assume the art work suggests some similarity in teaching between the Roman astrologers and early Christianity? I've not seen any historical evidence that Christianity ever included astrological practices, particularly in light of the causal implications of astrology; i.e. the positions and movements of the stars cause events on earth.

4. Does it suggest that astrologers were users of the church? Again, I've not seen any historical records suggesting Christianity mixed with astrological practitioners.

5. Does the mosaic therefore provide compelling evidence linking astrology and the Zodiac to the teachings of Jesus or the doctrine and practice of the early church? No, I don't think so.

6. Does the mosaic suggest astrological influences in the formation of Christian doctrine at the time of Christ and of the writing of the NT records.? No; but it might easily be suggested that it illustrates the influence of surrounding culture on the church of the 4th century, or at least on church artwork.

 

There are common examples in the world of art where a composition may be used by more than one artist separated by centuries. The Madonna and Child motif was quite popular up through the middle ages, but the art was commissioned work, not often representative of Biblical narrative. The similarities with similar pre-Christian artwork is more a function of the art medium and subject matter (a mother and child) than of the doctrines and practices of Christianity.

 

It's popular to suggest that such similarities are strongly suggestive of common origin. It's more reasonable to evaluate each such claim for reasonableness and validity before adding it as an element of proof.

 

A more interesting piece of information from the discovery of the church than the subject matter of the floor tiles is that they were building churches at all. There had been a fairly serious attempt to put an end to the followers of Christ and their beliefs in the area and elsewhere.

Buddy

[BuddyFerris]

Where do I sit?

 

I am here, to continue to add legitimacy to your being.

 

Without me, to tell you that you aren't playing with a full deck, you are just wafting around out there in cyber space, never, never land, all by your self.

P. Nut

Never let it be said that Dano would leave a fellow human being wafting awound wondewing which way was wight.

[Ouroboros]

And Buddy keeps on going round-and-round-and-round on the Ferris wheel...