What?
-
Features
Historical Jesus
- Thread starter none
- Start date
TomC
Bless Your Heart!
- Joined
- Oct 1, 2020
- Messages
- 9,311
- Location
- Midwestern USA
- Gender
- Faggot
- Basic Beliefs
- Agnostic deist
I'm not sure who sold you this pile of ahistorical crap. But it's utterly untrue.
The modern world continues to have huge problems. But it's morally a huge improvement over the world of Christendom.
Tom
TomC
Bless Your Heart!
- Joined
- Oct 1, 2020
- Messages
- 9,311
- Location
- Midwestern USA
- Gender
- Faggot
- Basic Beliefs
- Agnostic deist
I'm not sure who sold you this pile of ahistorical crap, but it sounds like the kind of lie generally told by authoritarian Christian leaders.
Christians used the concept to put a veneer of science on their old genocidal slavery ways. But they were lying to each other about the science.
And, apparently, you're swallowing it.
Tom
blastula
Contributor
- Joined
- Apr 13, 2006
- Messages
- 9,672
- Gender
- Late for dinner
- Basic Beliefs
- Gnostic atheist
Gnostic Christian Bishop hasn't posted in almost a year. So you're arguing with people who aren't even posting here???
The theory of evolution is intended to legitimize slavery, colonialism, race war, eugenics and the commodification of the biosphere. The only way to fight this is with a Christ-centred intellectual/spiritual regeneration. This will be about the intellectual/spiritual uplifting of mankind from its current state of base materialism to a state of cosmic consciousness, a golden age of harmony for the entire biosphere. The theory of evolution envisages nothing other than the continued degradation of all life as result of human predation.
bilby
Fair dinkum thinkum
- Joined
- Mar 6, 2007
- Messages
- 34,233
- Gender
- He/Him
- Basic Beliefs
- Strong Atheist
explain the observed diversity of life on Earth.
That's it; That's all it does.
And it does it very well indeed.
Anyone who tells you otherwise is trying to sell you something.
The masses have been duped by the scholastics twice: once about Jesus Christ being god, and once about the the theory of evolution. The masses cling to the the theory of evolution because it flatters them without requiring anything of them except allegiance. It is the new opiate of the masses. And just as Marx didn't blame the masses for seeking the comfort of religion, so the masses shouldn't be blamed for seeking the comfort of evolution. Degraded and abused, the masses need to feel that they stand above the rest of nature. Even the lowliest person needs someone or something to piss on.
Scholastic lies are designed to conceal important truths. The truth of Christ is that he is a man, in fact, the model for all of mankind. The truth of evolution is that man is indeed the end object of a consciously intended evolutionary process, and that this is merely the start of the journey. The human body, stripped of all natural defences, requires the use of advanced thinking processes for survival. Now that the material conquest of nature by mankind is complete comes the difficult part, the conquest of mankind by mankind. What is required now is self-conscious evolution, the deliberate expansion of consciousness to include the whole of reality, cosmic consciousness.
Scholastic lies are designed to conceal important truths. The truth of Christ is that he is a man, in fact, the model for all of mankind. The truth of evolution is that man is indeed the end object of a consciously intended evolutionary process, and that this is merely the start of the journey. The human body, stripped of all natural defences, requires the use of advanced thinking processes for survival. Now that the material conquest of nature by mankind is complete comes the difficult part, the conquest of mankind by mankind. What is required now is self-conscious evolution, the deliberate expansion of consciousness to include the whole of reality, cosmic consciousness.
steve_bank
Diabetic retinopathy and poor eyesight. Typos ...
Now you are preaching, just lke a theist does.
If the gospels are true, and you are an atheist Christian, should we follow rte words of Jesus on fornication and divorce?
How should we determine what to follow and what not to follow of the words of Jesus?
A simple straightforward question.
bilby
Fair dinkum thinkum
- Joined
- Mar 6, 2007
- Messages
- 34,233
- Gender
- He/Him
- Basic Beliefs
- Strong Atheist
Well, those are certainly all words.
Swammerdami
Squadron Leader
Urrrr.... I waive consecutive translation?
Swammerdami
Squadron Leader
A few days ago I was in a book-store and saw Resurrection: Myth or Reality (a Bishop's Search for the Origins of Christianity) by John Shelby Spong (a recently deceased Episcopalian Bishop). The several threads on this topic on this message-board motivated me to buy and read the book, one of about two dozen Spong wrote. The following insights are based on Spong's writing, for which only a brief inadequate summary can be presented here.
Spong rejects everything supernatural in the Gospels, and even much of what seems like routine biography. For example, Palm Sunday, the cleansing of the Temple, and the fig-tree story did NOT occur during Passover week (in Spong's speculative construction), but during the Feast of Tabernacles six months later. In Spong's reconstruction Mark 14:50 summarizes the immediate aftermath of the Crucifixion: "And they all forsook him, and fled." There was no tomb, empty or otherwise, no appearances; Simon (not yet called Peter) returned to Galilee with 2 or 3 other disciples and grieved for months. Then Simon had an epiphany, a new conception of Jesus and God; it was Simon's sudden insight which was the "Resurrection." Paul endorses this: "And that he was seen of Cephas, then of the twelve."
Spong views the Gospels through the Jewish tradition of midrash, in which time is not linear. The triumphal entry of Jesus into Jerusalem (Palm Sunday) took place not a few days BEFORE the Crucifixion, but six months AFTER.
(Recently there were questions here about the Star of Bethlehem and three Mages. It is of course absolutely pointless to try to connect the Star to real astronomy, but what about the three Mages and their gifts? Myrrh was an ointment used to embalm the dead: could it presage Jesus' death? Is it coincidence that there were three mages who visited the baby Jesus and three disciples (Simon Peter, James the Greater, John the Beloved) who attended the Transfiguration? — These are my musings; the one Spong book I've read deals almost exclusively with the Resurrection.)
Is Spong also a "Christian atheist"? He writes that he spent five years pondering life after death and reached only very vague conclusions.
Spong rejects everything supernatural in the Gospels, and even much of what seems like routine biography. For example, Palm Sunday, the cleansing of the Temple, and the fig-tree story did NOT occur during Passover week (in Spong's speculative construction), but during the Feast of Tabernacles six months later. In Spong's reconstruction Mark 14:50 summarizes the immediate aftermath of the Crucifixion: "And they all forsook him, and fled." There was no tomb, empty or otherwise, no appearances; Simon (not yet called Peter) returned to Galilee with 2 or 3 other disciples and grieved for months. Then Simon had an epiphany, a new conception of Jesus and God; it was Simon's sudden insight which was the "Resurrection." Paul endorses this: "And that he was seen of Cephas, then of the twelve."
Spong views the Gospels through the Jewish tradition of midrash, in which time is not linear. The triumphal entry of Jesus into Jerusalem (Palm Sunday) took place not a few days BEFORE the Crucifixion, but six months AFTER.
(Recently there were questions here about the Star of Bethlehem and three Mages. It is of course absolutely pointless to try to connect the Star to real astronomy, but what about the three Mages and their gifts? Myrrh was an ointment used to embalm the dead: could it presage Jesus' death? Is it coincidence that there were three mages who visited the baby Jesus and three disciples (Simon Peter, James the Greater, John the Beloved) who attended the Transfiguration? — These are my musings; the one Spong book I've read deals almost exclusively with the Resurrection.)
Is Spong also a "Christian atheist"? He writes that he spent five years pondering life after death and reached only very vague conclusions.
You like those? I'm sure you prefer these: "fitness", "competition", "deep time", "advantageous mutation", "descent", "favoured races", "selection". Pure fantasy.
If you require a lesson on sexual ethics, I will provide it on a private basis.
Spong is a typical scholastic, moving from "Christ is god" to "Christ is myth."
Swammerdami
Squadron Leader
Let's be clear. Spong believes in the historic Jesus, just not a miracle-working one.
He's on the path to absolute reduction and know-nothingness. There is little difference between a reductive Christ and a mythical Christ. Both seek to minimize and ultimately dismiss Christ and replace him with scholastic preening.
James Brown
Veteran Member
The plan is to establish the New World Order on the basis of a fractal democracy. Where there is dissent, members are free to establish their own sub-orders.
bilby
Fair dinkum thinkum
- Joined
- Mar 6, 2007
- Messages
- 34,233
- Gender
- He/Him
- Basic Beliefs
- Strong Atheist
Individual words are meaningless.
So are entire paragraphs, when those are made up of words that don't belong together.
I am not expressing opposition to your position; I am advising you that you haven't expressed a coherent position at all.
Maybe it all fits together in your head, but your audience doesn't have a clue what you are trying to say.
You are "not even wrong"; It seems that you are vehemently opposed to something that you are conflating with the theory of evolution; But it's apparent that you don't have any clue what sort of thing a theory is, much less what the theory of evolution, specifically, has to say about anything - or, indeed, what the theory of evolution even has as its topic.
Literally the only thing your post has going for it is that you used real words, albeit not with any particular care for their conventional meanings.