A thought on the mystery of the passion of the Christ.

Discussion about the New Testament, apocrypha, gnostics, church fathers, Christian origins, historical Jesus or otherwise, etc.
User avatar
neilgodfrey
Posts: 6161
Joined: Sat Oct 05, 2013 4:08 pm

Re: A thought on the mystery of the passion of the Christ.

Post by neilgodfrey »

Paul the Uncertain wrote: Thu Oct 17, 2019 2:32 am As it happens, the possibly most famous-notorious of the Delphic prophecies (one of the incidents that Herodotus discusses, the one predicting that the outcome of a proposed war will be decisive, without specifying who would win) is not at all ambiguous. As prophecies go, it is unusually falsifiable: one of the combatants will be destroyed. That is not the only seriously possible outcome of a military adventure, or even typical. Many wars are stalemates or settled on liveable terms, this one won't be.
It (the Delphic oracle) is a declaration of a prophecy, a prediction of a future event. "Prophecies" of Jesus found in the OT were very often not written as prophecies at all. They were twisted into becoming prophecies by word games, puns, gematria, and so forth.
vridar.org Musings on biblical studies, politics, religion, ethics, human nature, tidbits from science
Paul the Uncertain
Posts: 994
Joined: Fri Apr 21, 2017 6:25 am
Contact:

Re: A thought on the mystery of the passion of the Christ.

Post by Paul the Uncertain »

I think we're in agreement here.

I posted a link to an entire blog post about modern people taking demonstrably non-prophetic material and then, after thematically related traumatic events occurred, finding the material at least emotionally "uncanny" (and in one case intellectually uncanny, seriously considering whether a piece was an "interpolation" of sorts created after the fact). If it was previously unclear, let me now declare that I believe that this propensity is a species-level feature, not anything peculiar to modern people.

With those facts established, my post here could emphasize other aspects of the problem, e.g that ancient testimony survives to some awareness that understanding of prophetic material is labile "before versus after." Since the famous part of Herodotus' oracle story is about a consumer reading what he wanted to read in a text that said no such thing, how could you and I disagree that some ancients found some prophecies in some texts that were very often not written as prophecies at all?

Yes, I see the distinction from the "issue" in Herodotus' story: whether or not that utterance was intended as prophetic wasn't in question: it was. Now, please return the favor and try to see that the cognitive lapse in that situation and "They were twisted into becoming prophecies" are very similar: some readers read what they wanted to read even when that isn't in the text.

While "Bible code" style lapses may be especially interesting ways to "read" a text wishfully, those weren't the only kind of laspes made. Matthew rewrote Mary's sexual history partly because of a poor word-choice by a pre-Christian translator, but also by Matthew's pointedly ignoring the context within which the word appeared. He did, however, correctly identify the cited story as an explicit prophecy, as explicit as any Delphic pronouncement, but it wasn't about Jesus or any other Messianic claimant. That was Matthew's wishful reading.

The moral of our story is that there are many ways to read a text to comport with interest. Herodotus' famous anecdote shows one, Matthew shows a few all by himself, and away we go.

ETA There is some irony here, since our discussion is predicated on a strong belief that we share but which is not demonstrably true: That God Almighty did not, as a matter of fact, dictate every jot and tittle of the Hebrew source text, of the original LXX translation and of the 1611 King James Version. Some of the people whose "lapses" you and I agree are lapses would consider careful examination of God's compositions, even down to the character level, to be a well-founded excavation of genuine information placed in the texts by their sole author, the Creator of the Universe.

We do well not to let our disagreement with a premise cloud our understanding of what follows from it, lest we fail to understand the behavior of those whose premise it is :)
User avatar
neilgodfrey
Posts: 6161
Joined: Sat Oct 05, 2013 4:08 pm

Re: A thought on the mystery of the passion of the Christ.

Post by neilgodfrey »

Paul the Uncertain wrote: Fri Oct 18, 2019 6:17 am
We do well not to let our disagreement with a premise cloud our understanding of what follows from it, lest we fail to understand the behavior of those whose premise it is :)
I can't say I disagree with you because I don't think I fully understand what it is you are arguing. I often get the sense that we are talking about different things in our discussions. If we are addressing common material we are doing so view totally different perspectives and with quite different questions.
vridar.org Musings on biblical studies, politics, religion, ethics, human nature, tidbits from science
Paul the Uncertain
Posts: 994
Joined: Fri Apr 21, 2017 6:25 am
Contact:

Re: A thought on the mystery of the passion of the Christ.

Post by Paul the Uncertain »

At least with respect to the "Edited to Add" portion of my previous post, part of the problem is that that isn't an "argument." I am acknowledging that our discussion had been based on premises which the people we're taliking about didn't share. Thus, I can write about their "lapse" of "wishful reading," and you can talk about how they "twisted" a text. If our subjects' own premises are granted, however, then their behavior follows rationally from their premises.

The paragraph seemed to me worth editing to add it because it discloses a limitation on the applicability and reasonableness of what I had presented. I also think it somewhat limits the applicability of your side of the argument, but nothing much depends on your agreeing that it does. So, take it not as an argument, but a confession of limitation on my own part, a limitation different from the ones you had already pointed out to me.

Peace?
User avatar
neilgodfrey
Posts: 6161
Joined: Sat Oct 05, 2013 4:08 pm

Re: A thought on the mystery of the passion of the Christ.

Post by neilgodfrey »

Paul the Uncertain wrote: Fri Oct 18, 2019 11:25 pm I am acknowledging that our discussion had been based on premises which the people we're taliking about didn't share. Thus, I can write about their "lapse" of "wishful reading," and you can talk about how they "twisted" a text.
The methods by which Second Temple scribes and rabbinical authors "midrashically" "twisted" texts is not speculation. The techniques are clearly understood and well recognized in the scholarship.
Paul the Uncertain wrote: Fri Oct 18, 2019 11:25 pmPleace?
I wasn't aware of a war. Can't fight if we're in different universes :-) (I get the impression you're disagreeing with something I'm writing but I don't really think I fully understand your criticism or alternative. We seem to have quite different assumptions and background data to work from and quite different questions only superficially meeting through common words that are in fact interpreted quite differently.)
vridar.org Musings on biblical studies, politics, religion, ethics, human nature, tidbits from science
Paul the Uncertain
Posts: 994
Joined: Fri Apr 21, 2017 6:25 am
Contact:

Re: A thought on the mystery of the passion of the Christ.

Post by Paul the Uncertain »

The methods by which Second Temple scribes and rabbinical authors "midrashically" "twisted" texts is not speculation. The techniques are clearly understood and well recognized in the scholarship.
You and I have no dispute about what the scribes and rabbis did, nor that scholarship takes note of what they did. We don't even disagree that twisted could be a reasonable description of it.

But I continue to feel justified to acknowledge that our agreement, yours and mine, follows from some premises we share, and the behavior that we're agreeing about may well have followed from sincerely held premises different than ours.

Maybe you disagree with that explanation of their behavior, and believe that what the scribes and rabbis did was fundamentally and typically dishonest in some way (ie, twisted as an intentional act, rather than as a description of the result of applying pious premises to pious texts). If so, then that we do disagree about.
I wasn't aware of a war. Can't fight if we're in different universes :-) (I get the impression you're disagreeing with something I'm writing but I don't really think I fully understand your criticism or alternative. We seem to have quite different assumptions and background data to work from and quite different questions only superficially meeting through common words that are in fact interpreted quite differently.)
Sporadic skirmishes. I think I've explained that at least in this case, I estimate that you and I agree about a lot. You don't seem pleased at the prospect that we might agree on many things.
User avatar
neilgodfrey
Posts: 6161
Joined: Sat Oct 05, 2013 4:08 pm

Re: A thought on the mystery of the passion of the Christ.

Post by neilgodfrey »

Paul the Uncertain wrote: Sat Oct 19, 2019 2:37 am Sporadic skirmishes. I think I've explained that at least in this case, I estimate that you and I agree about a lot. You don't seem pleased at the prospect that we might agree on many things.
I really don't think I exactly follow your arguments or exactly what it is you are trying to say so I can't say if I'm pleased or not. I am reminded that you do often seem to challenge points I make but I am never sure why. I don't know what you mean by "skirmishes", either. You comments tend to confuse me, sorry.

(I feel you are talking at a different level, in a different dimension, from mine. If you think when I suggest we agree on some things that I am saying that with displeasure I suggest you are imagining a figure that is not me. I don't know who or what you think you are engaging with.)
vridar.org Musings on biblical studies, politics, religion, ethics, human nature, tidbits from science
Paul the Uncertain
Posts: 994
Joined: Fri Apr 21, 2017 6:25 am
Contact:

Re: A thought on the mystery of the passion of the Christ.

Post by Paul the Uncertain »

If you think when I suggest we agree on some things that I am saying that with displeasure I suggest you are imagining a figure that is not me.
It isn't that it seems to me that you acknowledge anything with displeasure, but rather that I suspect displeasure based on how much agreement between us you don't acknowledge at all.

Surely you can see the difference. Plus, I could be mistaken, as sometimes happens with things that seem.

Speaking of seeming things, why is my stating a marginally different point of view from yours challenging points you make? It's a discussion board. You say what you think, I say what I think, it turns out we agree in part and disagree in part. Who in that scenario challenged anybody else?
User avatar
neilgodfrey
Posts: 6161
Joined: Sat Oct 05, 2013 4:08 pm

Re: A thought on the mystery of the passion of the Christ.

Post by neilgodfrey »

Paul the Uncertain wrote: Sat Oct 19, 2019 9:55 am
If you think when I suggest we agree on some things that I am saying that with displeasure I suggest you are imagining a figure that is not me.
It isn't that it seems to me that you acknowledge anything with displeasure, but rather that I suspect displeasure based on how much agreement between us you don't acknowledge at all.

Surely you can see the difference. Plus, I could be mistaken, as sometimes happens with things that seem.

Speaking of seeming things, why is my stating a marginally different point of view from yours challenging points you make? It's a discussion board. You say what you think, I say what I think, it turns out we agree in part and disagree in part. Who in that scenario challenged anybody else?
Sorry, Paul. You continue to lose me. I really don't know what your driving at. Too many suspicions and seeming things, it seems to me. I love discussions but only when I know what we're each talking about. This space is surely meant for more useful discussion. Why not take any other concerns you have about my responses to personal messaging?
vridar.org Musings on biblical studies, politics, religion, ethics, human nature, tidbits from science
Paul the Uncertain
Posts: 994
Joined: Fri Apr 21, 2017 6:25 am
Contact:

Re: A thought on the mystery of the passion of the Christ.

Post by Paul the Uncertain »

I can't lose what I've never had, Neil.

Peace. Not a question this time.
Post Reply