What of Christianity is historical and what isnt?

Argue for and against Christianity

Moderator: Moderators

Tart
Banned
Banned
Posts: 1663
Joined: Wed Dec 20, 2017 8:55 pm
Been thanked: 1 time

What of Christianity is historical and what isnt?

Post #1

Post by Tart »

There is a lot of dispute of the history of Christrianity, and whether or not it is a myth... Some people even believe it was invented by the Council of Nicaea in 300AD...

So what do you think? Of this timeline from Wikipedia, of Christianity. Where would you draw the line, from when Christianity went from a mytth to history...

What would be your guess for an estimation, of what percentage of this list is real and what percentage is myth?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Timeline_of_Christianity

steveb1
Scholar
Posts: 330
Joined: Wed Feb 28, 2018 10:57 pm
Been thanked: 6 times

Re: What of Christianity is historical and what isnt?

Post #2

Post by steveb1 »

Tart wrote: There is a lot of dispute of the history of Christrianity, and whether or not it is a myth... Some people even believe it was invented by the Council of Nicaea in 300AD...

So what do you think? Of this timeline from Wikipedia, of Christianity. Where would you draw the line, from when Christianity went from a mytth to history...

What would be your guess for an estimation, of what percentage of this list is real and what percentage is myth?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Timeline_of_Christianity
Of course, Christianity is a historically documented religion, but in my view, its origins are twofold: 1) transcendent/mystical/non-material and 2) mythical.

1 I believe that the first Christians made sincere claims that they had seen the celestial Jesus through mystical visions and revelations - a transcendent, spiritual claim of a non-material sacred reality.
I also hold that this heavenly Son/Christ was the "founder" of Christianity and never lived an "incarnate" life as Jesus of Nazareth, the carpenter-sage. Which makes me a Christ Myth theory advocate. The real Christ was not a myth, but a genuinely experienced celestial figure. It's just that he never had a biological incarnation on the earthly plane.

2 I believe that starting with Mark and his community, the celestial Jesus became metaphorically fleshed out as a fictional Jesus of Nazareth. The hitherto spiritual Son was, so to speak, drawn down from heaven in the form of Jesus of Nazareth, who was the creative invention of the Gospel authors.

Therefore, as a non-materialist transcendentalist, I believe that the original Jesus was probably a real heavenly, pre-existent, angelic spirit from whom the first disciples received inner revelations. This Jesus, for me is not a myth, but is a real spiritual "Person". The actual "Myth" comes in with the translation of the original heavenly Christ into the human being called by the Gospels "Jesus of Nazareth".

So the really mythical part of Christianity is not its central character of a heavenly Christ, but rather its embrace of creative fictions called the Gospels - specifically in its embrace of the Gospels as literal narratives about a literal historical Jesus.

User avatar
Willum
Savant
Posts: 9017
Joined: Sat Aug 02, 2014 2:14 pm
Location: Yahweh's Burial Place
Has thanked: 35 times
Been thanked: 82 times

Post #3

Post by Willum »

Of course Christianity is a religion documented by the Roman Catholic Church. All its authenticity comes from that source.
We find most other documents supporting it aren't very strong or are suspected forgeries.
Even the stone suggesting Pilate, may simply have been was stone and a typo.

We find that there are none of the documents and chronicles required if any of the events had occurred.
Such as the resurrection of several people, and their stories - particularly Lazarus.

Then there is the very suspicious circumstance that the Church destroyed any contrary documents, particularly in Europe, and we had to rediscover the wisdom of the Greeks and so on, after it was recovered in the Renaissance.

Oh, well.

User avatar
Willum
Savant
Posts: 9017
Joined: Sat Aug 02, 2014 2:14 pm
Location: Yahweh's Burial Place
Has thanked: 35 times
Been thanked: 82 times

Post #4

Post by Willum »

I am curious, though, why would anyone believe that tales of healing resurrection, things that are physically impossible, would be anything other than myth?

The only other sources for such tales are acknowledged myths - Theseus returning from the dead, Asclepius raising people from the dead.
Arthurian tales are not acknowledged as anything byt Christian myths...

What reason does anyone have to believe them?

steveb1
Scholar
Posts: 330
Joined: Wed Feb 28, 2018 10:57 pm
Been thanked: 6 times

Post #5

Post by steveb1 »

Willum wrote: I am curious, though, why would anyone believe that tales of healing resurrection, things that are physically impossible, would be anything other than myth?

The only other sources for such tales are acknowledged myths - Theseus returning from the dead, Asclepius raising people from the dead.
Arthurian tales are not acknowledged as anything byt Christian myths...

What reason does anyone have to believe them?

Not the Biggies like true resurrection...but the minor miracles are easily viewed as plausible, such as psychosomatic healings of hysterical blindness, certain kinds of mental disorders (then interpreted as possession by "unclean spirits"), exorcism (a practice as old as shamanism and still practiced in many religious groups), and faith healing in general (as Jesus supposedly said, "Go - your faith has healed you").

User avatar
Tcg
Savant
Posts: 8487
Joined: Tue Nov 21, 2017 5:01 am
Location: Third Stone
Has thanked: 2141 times
Been thanked: 2293 times

Post #6

Post by Tcg »

Willum wrote:
I am curious, though, why would anyone believe that tales of healing resurrection, things that are physically impossible, would be anything other than myth?
They crave the comfort that death denial brings to those who are afraid to except that death is final.

What reason does anyone have to believe them?
Death denial is one of the strongest urges known to mankind. I'm not sure why. We live for a bit and then we die. Our status after death is the same as our status before birth.

Some folks have an odd need for comfort that for them can only be obtained by denying this obvious reality. Once they are dead, they'll no longer have this childish need for comfort, or anything else for that matter. They'll be dead.

The dead have no fears, only the living do.

User avatar
Tcg
Savant
Posts: 8487
Joined: Tue Nov 21, 2017 5:01 am
Location: Third Stone
Has thanked: 2141 times
Been thanked: 2293 times

Re: What of Christianity is historical and what isnt?

Post #7

Post by Tcg »

Tart wrote:
What would be your guess for an estimation, of what percentage of this list is real and what percentage is myth?
I'd guess 2% versus 185%. Of course guesses are useless, but I gave you precisely what you asked for. Facts are what are important, but you didn't ask for any of those.

User avatar
Willum
Savant
Posts: 9017
Joined: Sat Aug 02, 2014 2:14 pm
Location: Yahweh's Burial Place
Has thanked: 35 times
Been thanked: 82 times

Post #8

Post by Willum »

[Replying to post 6 by Tcg]

Well, you are right, of course, and what you have said is a sobering commentary.
My point was much less poignant: I was simply trying to say; if someone wrote about tales of unicorns, they would be dismissed as fantasy.

Why are these stories given any credence at all?

Best regards,

User avatar
Tcg
Savant
Posts: 8487
Joined: Tue Nov 21, 2017 5:01 am
Location: Third Stone
Has thanked: 2141 times
Been thanked: 2293 times

Post #9

Post by Tcg »

Willum wrote:
Well, you are right, of course, and what you have said is a sobering commentary.
Thanks, I believe so.

My point was much less poignant: I was simply trying to say; if someone wrote about tales of unicorns, they would be dismissed as fantasy.
Because other than providing some thrill in seeing such fantastic creatures, unicorns couldn't really provide any deeply meaningful advantage. Not much more than a U.S. resident seeing a zebra at a zoo or wildlife park.

Why are these stories given any credence at all?
Because of the perceived advantage they would bring if they were true. If some dude somewhere, somehow managed resurrection, then perhaps somehow, somewhere we can too.

It's like buying lottery tickets that will provide nothing for anyone, anywhere, at any time. If one can find a reason to believe that they will at some time provide some advantage, the cash is coming out of the pocket.

Best regards,
And to you!

User avatar
Willum
Savant
Posts: 9017
Joined: Sat Aug 02, 2014 2:14 pm
Location: Yahweh's Burial Place
Has thanked: 35 times
Been thanked: 82 times

Post #10

Post by Willum »

[Replying to post 9 by Tcg]

Yes, but my last question was rhetorical.
Little children hear how other children and themselves were given gifts on Christmas by a elf who rides a sleigh driven by flying reindeer; a story infinitely more possible than resurrection, God and, by default 'souls.'

It is only because parents are a real Santa that this myth ever dies, apparently.

Since the objective and the originator of Judeo-Christianty are only claimed, and don't exist, it seems more difficult to prove.

However, it should never be assumed by any generation.

One can, prove their is no afterlife simply by discovering we have no soul separate fro our body - there is nothing to see.
There is no reason to believe any creature fitting any description of God would take interest in these souls...
There isn't even any reason to believe, except for the belief in a soul and resurrection to believe there is a God.

The only historical evidence only comes from hope.
Which is a thing - Superman has his place in history-books, just as Jesus, Zeus and Yahweh. But though man needs fiction, the belief in the Santa-like outcomes should be dismissed by mature minds.

Post Reply