Fictional Jesus Synthesis

Discussion about the New Testament, apocrypha, gnostics, church fathers, Christian origins, historical Jesus or otherwise, etc.
User avatar
Secret Alias
Posts: 9779
Joined: Sun Apr 19, 2015 8:47 am

Re: Fictional Jesus Synthesis

Post by Secret Alias » Thu Oct 11, 2018 3:09 pm

Oh God aa. It's NOT NICE to see you again!
“Finally, from so little sleeping and so much reading, his brain dried up and he went completely out of his mind.”
― Miguel de Cervantes Saavedra, Don Quixote

Ulan
Posts: 1261
Joined: Sat Mar 29, 2014 3:58 am

Re: Fictional Jesus Synthesis

Post by Ulan » Thu Oct 11, 2018 3:10 pm

hakeem wrote:
Thu Oct 11, 2018 2:53 pm
The very gJohn contradicts you.

Galatians contradicts you.

1 Corinthians contradict you.
Don't you feel silly at this point? Of course the NT texts have parts that contradict other parts of the same texts. I said so myself. They have all been edited numerous times. Alternatively, you are free to think that all writers of the NT texts were dope heads that couldn't keep up a straight story. Take your pick.

I have quoted 1 Corinthians directly at you:
44 It is sown a physical body, it is raised a spiritual body.
50 ... flesh and blood cannot inherit the kingdom of God

The part in John 20:
19 When it was evening on that day, the first day of the week, and the doors of the house where the disciples had met were locked for fear of the Jews, Jesus came and stood among them and said, “Peace be with you.”

He came through the locked doors.

To recognize the "last Adam", the one Paul describes as "life-giving spirit", as Jesus, you have to know a bit about the Bible. Many Bible translations will mention that in a commentary though.

It's funny that you try to tell me that those texts you quoted contradict me. They contradict other parts of the same text. Which is something that should make you think.

User avatar
Secret Alias
Posts: 9779
Joined: Sun Apr 19, 2015 8:47 am

Re: Fictional Jesus Synthesis

Post by Secret Alias » Thu Oct 11, 2018 3:17 pm

You don't understand aa was legendarily insane. Giuseppe, Charles Wilson, mountainman, maryhelena were all mere pretenders. aa was in the all time mental case hall of fame. His arguments superficially make some sort of sense. But the longer you engage with you it is apparent he is writing these comments from a padded cell.
“Finally, from so little sleeping and so much reading, his brain dried up and he went completely out of his mind.”
― Miguel de Cervantes Saavedra, Don Quixote

Ulan
Posts: 1261
Joined: Sat Mar 29, 2014 3:58 am

Re: Fictional Jesus Synthesis

Post by Ulan » Thu Oct 11, 2018 3:19 pm

I guess this "aa" was before my time. The way he ignores my direct quotes from NT texts as if I had invented them is certainly irritating though.

User avatar
Secret Alias
Posts: 9779
Joined: Sun Apr 19, 2015 8:47 am

Re: Fictional Jesus Synthesis

Post by Secret Alias » Thu Oct 11, 2018 3:26 pm

If the search engine worked over at the archive look up "aa5874." He was legendary. The Michael Jordan of crazy.
“Finally, from so little sleeping and so much reading, his brain dried up and he went completely out of his mind.”
― Miguel de Cervantes Saavedra, Don Quixote

User avatar
Secret Alias
Posts: 9779
Joined: Sun Apr 19, 2015 8:47 am

Re: Fictional Jesus Synthesis

Post by Secret Alias » Thu Oct 11, 2018 3:29 pm

Here are some traces of his legendary lunacy on the internet - http://www.internationalskeptics.com/fo ... p?t=269572
We started doing point by point rebuttals of his strange posts. All we got in reply was shouting and weirdness. It then became clear to those of us familiar with the FRDB Treehouse Club who we were dealing with and so we realised that talking to aa5874 is completely futile.http://www.rationalskepticism.org/chris ... -4940.html
and a classic battle between spin and aa on another forum:
Tell me where you have seen a sillogism in a historical analysis lately, aa5874?? That's right, you haven't. You are just talking nonsense and you have been doing so non-stop for the last several years. You don't interact with what people say to you. You have the habit of monomanically hijacking almost any comment so that you can repeat your nonsense.http://www.rationalskepticism.org/chris ... 34420.html
“Finally, from so little sleeping and so much reading, his brain dried up and he went completely out of his mind.”
― Miguel de Cervantes Saavedra, Don Quixote

User avatar
Ben C. Smith
Posts: 5741
Joined: Wed Apr 08, 2015 2:18 pm
Location: USA
Contact:

Re: Fictional Jesus Synthesis

Post by Ben C. Smith » Thu Oct 11, 2018 4:14 pm

Secret Alias wrote:
Thu Oct 11, 2018 3:26 pm
If the search engine worked over at the archive look up "aa5874." He was legendary. The Michael Jordan of crazy.
I used to plug in four random digits or even underscores ("aa____") because I could not remember "5874" (and am still merely taking it on faith that those are the correct ones).
ΤΙ ΕΣΤΙΝ ΑΛΕΘΕΙΑ

User avatar
DCHindley
Posts: 2474
Joined: Mon Oct 07, 2013 9:53 am
Location: Ohio, USA

Re: Fictional Jesus Synthesis

Post by DCHindley » Thu Oct 11, 2018 8:21 pm

Hmmm,

Shouldn't we make a distinction between the doctrines about the resurrection body in A) the canonical Gospels, B) in Acts, and C) the Pauline letters (maybe even further distinguish between letters to churches and letters to individuals)?

Another thing to consider is the complete lack of knowledge of chemistry and especially organic chemistry. They may have assumed that the physical body, on death, decomposes into the earth, leaving only bones at best. It may not have occurred to them that the elements could later be incorporated into another person's body, including their di-hydrogen monoxide molecules and carbon atoms. Everybody alive may share molecules and atoms from the decomposed bodies of personages long deceased.

If one is "resurrected" (stands again) it is merely those remains that are reconstituted, with improvements of course. The Apocalypse of John speaks of the seas and land both yielding up the dead who were in them, some to be resurrected to life, the rest to be judged and burnt up. Maybe they latter class get resurrected just long enough to be judged and piss their tunics, before being cut-off from life. Those silly people ...

They may call it a "spiritual" body, but in what way? Is it made of "spiritual" (im)materials? Or is the reconstituted body re-animated by the spirit of God or somehow regains breath = life at his hands?

It seems, though, that some thought that a resurrected body was immaterial. Were some folks thinking that the disciples had merely seen the ghost* of a dead man, with the author(s) of the gospel or Acts "setting things straight"? "No! They did not see a ghost, but a reconstituted living human being!"

These "some" may have been inspired by Philo of Alexandria's account of the Therapeutae, because they believed that on death one's soul rises up to God and does not resurrect as a physical being. The early "Jesus" Christians, on the other hand, probably believed that on death the person ceases to exist (no conscious existence) until resurrected, when their memories and mental faculties return as well. Any souls crying out for vengeance against unjust rulers and the demons who spur them on is meant in a figurative sense.

Ancient beliefs about how bodies, minds and souls worked are exceptionally contradictory, with different schools using the same words to mean different things.

DCH

* For you, hakeem. As to whether you are in fact aa5874, it should be understood that this ID is the flight number for a daily American Airlines flight from Dallas-Ft Worth International airport to El Paso regional airport, Terminal B. The aircraft involved is a Canadair (Bombardier) Regional Jet. When I used to periodically work in Texas, I usually just drove rather than fly, but I may have taken this flight before. But why? Emirates Airline and Qatar Air operates from terminal D.

nightshadetwine
Posts: 96
Joined: Mon Aug 06, 2018 10:35 am

Re: Fictional Jesus Synthesis

Post by nightshadetwine » Thu Oct 11, 2018 9:30 pm

DCHindley wrote:
Thu Oct 11, 2018 8:21 pm
Shouldn't we make a distinction between the doctrines about the resurrection body in A) the canonical Gospels, B) in Acts, and C) the Pauline letters (maybe even further distinguish between letters to churches and letters to individuals)?
Some scholars like James Tabor think that Paul believed the physical body dies and decomposes(doesn't rise) and the spirit is "reclothed" with a spiritual body while the gospel writers portray the resurrection as the physical body transforming into a spiritual body. https://jamestabor.com/resurrection-of- ... -new-body/ and https://jamestabor.com/why-people-are-c ... -the-dead/

He says:
Paul makes clear that in Christian resurrection the body is left behind like an old change of clothing, to turn to the dust, and the spirit is “reclothed” with a new spiritual body. He compares the physical body to a temporary tent, and the new body is a permanent house (2 Corinthians 5:1-5). He even throws in a polemic against the Greek Platonic view of the “unclothed” or disembodied immortal soul—he says our desire is not to be naked, which is the state of death before resurrection, but to be clothed again!

Ulan
Posts: 1261
Joined: Sat Mar 29, 2014 3:58 am

Re: Fictional Jesus Synthesis

Post by Ulan » Thu Oct 11, 2018 9:51 pm

I guess we are looking at a mix of beliefs. Even in the half-way coherent parts of 1 Cor, Paul's rambling seems to suggest that he wasn't really sure, regardless of his starting sentences with "Fools..." (I guess that was meant to discourage further questions).

Unlike the English word "spirit", which has a rather different secondary meaning, the word "pneuma" gives a rather clear image of something material (not sure whether that point was clear to all ancients; I heard Jews generally thought yes, Greeks thought no), but rather light or at least very different from flesh. It seems to be able to penetrate normal matter or change places at will. Paul's σῶμα πνευματικόν seems to be a different entity from his σῶμα ψυχικόν. I do not think Paul's idea was that this new body would carry the wounds that caused our death, as some of the gospels seem to imply for Jesus. His Jesus seemed to live in him, and I don't have the feeling that the he saw the resurrection of other people any different.

In the end, the hodgepodge of ideas produced something like an "all of it" teaching in most churches. Even many church statements nowadays admit that the question is hard to answer. Of course, doctrinal aspects like "in the flesh" have to be mentioned, but I think that general belief mostly dropped that idea. If we look at our cultural staple that we will see our beloved ones again the moment we die (at least that's the standard Hollywood version), there seems to be no waiting for the final judgment involved anymore.

Post Reply