• Welcome to the new Internet Infidels Discussion Board, formerly Talk Freethought.

Creating Christ

I'm not interested in buying or reading another book on the subject.
But if you'd like to discuss the concepts I'd be happy to do so.

Perhaps the general religion forum would be appropriate?
Tom
 
TomC said:
I'm not interested in buying or reading another book on the subject.
But if you'd like to discuss the concepts I'd be happy to do so.

Perhaps the general religion forum would be appropriate?
Tom
Click to expand...
Thanks for the suggestion. As I am new here and not yet totally familiar with all aspects of the forum, I appreciate any pointers.
 
JemStone said:
TomC said:
I'm not interested in buying or reading another book on the subject.
But if you'd like to discuss the concepts I'd be happy to do so.

Perhaps the general religion forum would be appropriate?
Tom
Click to expand...
Thanks for the suggestion. As I am new here and not yet totally familiar with all aspects of the forum, I appreciate any pointers.
Click to expand...
Welcome to the forum. Make sure your helmet and seatbelt are firmly attached.
 
  • Like
Reactions: DBT
Most of us are familiar with that claim. Rome certainly institutionalized the new religion. In that sense it certainly was in on the invention and normalization process but it didn't invent it whole cloth. Neither did the gospel protagonist or Paul or any other single individual. The "new" religion was already around. The case can be made that if not for socioeconomic reasons having to do with the empire it would have likely come and gone or been reabsorbed into other practices popular at the time.

Christianity, like all religions, is an evolved hybrid. There isn't an evidentiary demarcation between it and what came before. There are lots of liturgical demarcations that came well after the fact. And the religion isn't done changing, same as any other social movement.
 
JemStone said:
TomC said:
I'm not interested in buying or reading another book on the subject.
But if you'd like to discuss the concepts I'd be happy to do so.

Perhaps the general religion forum would be appropriate?
Tom
Click to expand...
Thanks for the suggestion. As I am new here and not yet totally familiar with all aspects of the forum, I appreciate any pointers.
Click to expand...
No problem. Glad you joined us.

I tried following your link, but I couldn't even get a review of the book without joining something I wasn't interested in joining. So, I'll just ask.

What is your opinion on the subject?

I have mine, obviously Emperor Constantine had a huge impact on what is now called True Christianity. But he certainly didn't invent it. By the early 4th century there were quite a number of Christianities. He offered access to the wealth and power of Rome, if the Roman Christian hierarchy could hammer out an "Official" version of Christian doctrine. So they did.

All other versions became somewhere between "unimportant" and "dangerous heresy". They were marginalized into oblivion. So the Hellenistic version, with a demigod and water into wine and a trinitarian pantheon, became a dominant power in the Greco-Roman world.

Ironically, The Roman Church became exactly what Jesus fought against! A bunch of rich and ruthless Romans, starting wars and presiding over the over the oppression of the little people and building palaces.
Tom
 
"I tried following your link, but I couldn't even get a review of the book without joining something" I wasn't interested in joining.
You don't have to join anything.
For the review click http://volumesofvalue.com/2022/09/18/creating-christ/

I recommend
A Brief History of the Doctrine of the Trinity in the Early Church by Franz Dunzl
It gives an in depth history of Emperor Constantine's through Emperor Theodosius's needs to unify the
people through a new unified state religion.
Theirs was a program of psychological control of the populace.
 
JemStone said:
"I tried following your link, but I couldn't even get a review of the book without joining something" I wasn't interested in joining.
You don't have to join anything.
For the review click http://volumesofvalue.com/2022/09/18/creating-christ/

I recommend
A Brief History of the Doctrine of the Trinity in the Early Church by Franz Dunzl
It gives an in depth history of Emperor Constantine's through Emperor Theodosius's needs to unify the
people through a new unified state religion.
Theirs was a program of psychological control of the populace.
Click to expand...
This time the link took me to a review.

Still not impressive. There was no such cataclysm, except for the Jews.

But I don't care about the author's opinions. I'm asking you for your opinions on the subject.

What do you think? That's what I'd like to discuss.
Tom
 
T.G.G. Moogly said:
Most of us are familiar with that claim. Rome certainly institutionalized the new religion. In that sense it certainly was in on the invention and normalization process but it didn't invent it whole cloth. Neither did the gospel protagonist or Paul or any other single individual. The "new" religion was already around. The case can be made that if not for socioeconomic reasons having to do with the empire it would have likely come and gone or been reabsorbed into other practices popular at the time.

Christianity, like all religions, is an evolved hybrid. There isn't an evidentiary demarcation between it and what came before. There are lots of liturgical demarcations that came well after the fact. And the religion isn't done changing, same as any other social movement.
Click to expand...
"Most of us are familiar with that claim"
What? MOST of us - who do you speak for Kimosabeh?
 
JemStone said:
"There was no such cataclysm, except for the Jews."

Can you clarify that?
Click to expand...
Judea was a small and unimportant province of the Roman Empire. Few people in the world outside of Judea noticed much of anything.


ETA ~I'm still interested in your opinions. ~
Tom
 
TomC said:
JemStone said:
"There was no such cataclysm, except for the Jews."

Can you clarify that?
Click to expand...
Judea was a small and unimportant province of the Roman Empire. Few people in the world outside of Judea noticed much of anything.


ETA ~I'm still interested in your opinions. ~
Tom
Click to expand...
If unimportant why?
"general Vespasian was given the task, by Nero, of crushing the rebellion in Judaea province. Given four legions and assisted by forces of King Agrippa II, Vespasian invaded Galilee in 67."
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/First_Jewish–Roman_War
 
JemStone said:
TomC said:
JemStone said:
"There was no such cataclysm, except for the Jews."

Can you clarify that?
Click to expand...
Judea was a small and unimportant province of the Roman Empire. Few people in the world outside of Judea noticed much of anything.


ETA ~I'm still interested in your opinions. ~
Tom
Click to expand...
If unimportant why?
"general Vespasian was given the task, by Nero, of crushing the rebellion in Judaea province. Given four legions and assisted by forces of King Agrippa II, Vespasian invaded Galilee in 67."
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/First_Jewish–Roman_War
Click to expand...
Have you an opinion of your own on the subject? So far I'm not seeing any.

Vague questions aren't the same thing.
Tom
 
My opinion: the thesis of the book "Creating Christianity" is correct.
What do you you think of the book;s thesis?
 
We are going in circles with this conversation.
You have a link to the review.
Educate yourself with its contents.
 
JemStone said:
Yes - front to back.
I recommend reading "Creating Christ"
Click to expand...
That's not what I asked.

What is your opinion on the claims made?

If you don't want to discuss the topic just say so.

It seems like that's where our discussion has gone. The book isn't worth discussing because even people who have read it don't remember what it said.
That's the circular part of our discussion. You can't explain what about the book makes it worth reading, you just think I should.
Sorry, no. The book is clearly not worth reading, much less buying.
Tom
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom