The Best "Non-Divine" Explanation of Christianity

Argue for and against Christianity

Moderator: Moderators

User avatar
OnceConvinced
Savant
Posts: 8922
Joined: Tue Aug 07, 2007 10:22 pm
Location: New Zealand
Contact:

Post #31

Post by OnceConvinced »

liamconnor wrote:
And yet you will not take me on in real historical work (I have presented numerous opportunities).

You show you are unwilling (unable?) to engage me on historical matters. I still don't understand why you engage historical threads. I have written elsewhere (countless times) about skeptics like yourself who pretend to do historical work when really you are just sitting idly in your philosophical ASSUMPTIONS. From here on out, I see no reason to read your responses. If you want to PM me, or challenge me to a one-on-one, that is fine; or even start a Philosophical Thread.

But what we are doing, is a waste of intellectual energy.

I scanned through this. My point was not that this was a "good" hypothesis, but it was the best based on common sense.

Your explanations are so liberal they are just short of allegories. Worse, they betray appalling ignorance of 1st c. Judaism.


:warning: Moderator Warning


Yet more posts which are nothing more than a personal gripe/attack on another member. You have already received warnings about this recently. Please leave your personal opinions of other posters off our forums and stick to the topic being discussed.

Please review our Rules.

______________

Moderator warnings count as a strike against users. Additional violations in the future may warrant a final warning. Any challenges or replies to moderator postings should be made via Private Message to avoid derailing topics.

Society and its morals evolve and will continue to evolve. The bible however remains the same and just requires more and more apologetics and claims of "metaphors" and "symbolism" to justify it.

Prayer is like rubbing an old bottle and hoping that a genie will pop out and grant you three wishes.

There is much about this world that is mind boggling and impressive, but I see no need whatsoever to put it down to magical super powered beings.


Check out my website: Recker's World of Fantasy

PghPanther
Guru
Posts: 1242
Joined: Mon Feb 18, 2013 8:18 pm
Location: Parts Unknown

Re: The Best "Non-Divine" Explanation of Christian

Post #32

Post by PghPanther »

liamconnor wrote: This is different from my previous Threads. I give first what is considered by numerous scholars representing the full gamut of theological beliefs to be historical bedrock. I then give what I think the "best" non-divine explanation of the early Jesus movement will entail.

1. Jesus is an historical figure.
2. Jesus was regarded by his contemporaries as a exorcist and miracle worker.
3. He was crucified under the auspice of Pontius Pilate
4. He was buried in a tomb
5. His tomb was discovered empty by female followers of his
6. Within two months of his burial, followers of his believed and declared that he had been raised, they believed that this encounter involved such sensory interactions as touch and conversation.
7. Jesus’ brother, James, believed he had an encounter with the risen Jesus
8. Within three years Paul, a Pharisee who zealously persecuted the Jesus-movement in Palestine, had an experience which he believed to be an encounter with the risen Jesus. This encounter differed from mere visions which even other Christians report (i.e. Ananias Acts 9:5; 1 Cor. 15).


Best “natural� Hypothesis: (I have borrowed from Vermes, Sanders, and other non-Christian scholars).

1) Jesus’ body was taken by a non-disciple leaving the tomb empty: there is no historical data suggesting why. All explanations are purely speculative.

2) His tomb was discovered empty by women two days after his death (crucified and buried on Friday; unobserved on the Sabbath; found empty on Sunday morn) and verified by at least a couple of Jesus' closest disciples--Peter most certainly.

3) Not much later (within a little more than a month of his death), several of his disciples, collectively and individually, suffered complex hallucinations—we can call them uniform hallucinations. In the case of individual hallucinations, the uniform general impression was a vocation—“go and tell� and the content of the vocation was generally the same. In the case of collective hallucinations, the victims saw and heard the very same things.

Question: Do you think this is a good/plausible explanation for Christianity's origins?


1) Embellished text from miscommunications/exaggerations of supernatural claims that people (especially the masses of the poor and ignorant) presumed actually happened and therefore jumped on the idea of things being better in the hereafter than their miserable life on Earth spread like wildfire........just like gossip does.

2) Roman government officials noticed the value of the poor masses being more complacent by believing all this and decided to make it a state religion for control.

That's it.......nothing more

User avatar
dianaiad
Site Supporter
Posts: 10220
Joined: Sun Oct 24, 2010 12:30 pm
Location: Southern California

Re: The Best "Non-Divine" Explanation of Christian

Post #33

Post by dianaiad »

[Replying to post 33 by Kapyong]
Moderator removed nine one-line, non-contributing posts, from nine different threads. They weren't even one-line posts. They were one line quotes without response. Kindly refrain from making posts that contribute nothing to debate and/or simply express agreement / disagreement or make other frivolous remarks.

For complementing or agreeing use the "Like" function or the MGP button. For anything else use PM.

Post Reply