Jesus from Outer Space

Discussion about the New Testament, apocrypha, gnostics, church fathers, Christian origins, historical Jesus or otherwise, etc.
User avatar
Joseph D. L.
Posts: 1405
Joined: Sat Nov 11, 2017 2:10 am

Re: Jesus from Outer Space

Post by Joseph D. L. »

Giuseppe wrote: Fri Aug 14, 2020 9:52 am
Joseph D. L. wrote: Fri Aug 14, 2020 9:30 am
Giuseppe wrote: Fri Aug 14, 2020 6:35 am The cover and the title are a subtle way to insult what they - the early Christians - believed.
It isn't subtle and an insult is only effective if it's true.
the Christian apologists deserve insult. Always.
Carrier isn't insulting apologists. He's insulting the supposed early Christians.
Joseph D.L. ==Tim O'Neill.
Giuseppe Ferri =

Image
Giuseppe
Posts: 13732
Joined: Mon Apr 27, 2015 5:37 am
Location: Italy

Re: Jesus from Outer Space

Post by Giuseppe »

The god ass is YHWH according to Tacitus.

But it is always better to be compared to a god ass rather than to Tim O'Neill.
Nihil enim in speciem fallacius est quam prava religio. -Liv. xxxix. 16.
User avatar
Joseph D. L.
Posts: 1405
Joined: Sat Nov 11, 2017 2:10 am

Re: Jesus from Outer Space

Post by Joseph D. L. »

And YHWH is a villain and a vile abomination to Marcion according to you.

Yeah. I think a failed abortion describes you well, Giuseppe.
User avatar
GakuseiDon
Posts: 2295
Joined: Sat Oct 12, 2013 5:10 pm

Re: Jesus from Outer Space

Post by GakuseiDon »

On Dr Carrier's use of "outer space": someone asked him about it on his open thread where people can ask him about his mythicist theory:
https://www.richardcarrier.info/archive ... ment-30594

Question:

I’ve seen a lot of resistance to your use of the term “outer space.” How would you respond to that resistance?

See here, for example:

https://www.reddit.com/r/AcademicBiblic ... _in_outer/
"I think a first point to get out of the way is that something being in the ‘heavens’ does not mean ‘outer space’. Referring to things in the heavens as being in outer space is needlessly clunky terminology, and I think only Carrier chooses to use such obfuscating language. If something is in the ‘heavens’ we can just say ‘heavens’."

Carrier's response:

To the contrary, “outer space” is more accurate terminology. It is anachronistic to use “heaven” when translating ancient texts as today we mean by the word “heaven” at an alternate dimension that has no physical place in this universe; whereas they meant by the word what we mean now by…outer space. Literally. The physical space above the earth that contains the moon, planets, and stars, exists a measurable (and flyable) physical distance from us (and is, indeed, inhabited by extraterrestrial beings). I explain and demonstrate this in the Preface to my new book Jesus from Outer Space. You cannot understand what ancient peoples, and early Christians, were saying, if you do not understand this.

Anyone who pretends it’s otherwise is thus demonstrating their commitment to modern dogmas and their fear of ideas that make them uncomfortable, rather than logic or historical accuracy. And it is high time to stop coddling them.

It is really important, in life, to concentrate our minds on our enthusiasms, not on our dislikes. -- Roger Pearse
User avatar
MrMacSon
Posts: 8798
Joined: Sat Oct 05, 2013 3:45 pm

Re: Jesus from Outer Space

Post by MrMacSon »

Giuseppe wrote: Fri Aug 14, 2020 6:35 am The cover and the title are a subtle way to insult what they - the early Christians - believed.
I don't think so, but it is doing what Carrier himself criticises people today for doing^ - "demonstrating...commitment to modern dogma" - and it misrepresents and fosters misunderstanding of "what ancient peoples, and early Christians, were saying", as Carrier puts it.
Last edited by MrMacSon on Fri Aug 14, 2020 4:18 pm, edited 2 times in total.
User avatar
MrMacSon
Posts: 8798
Joined: Sat Oct 05, 2013 3:45 pm

Re: Jesus from Outer Space

Post by MrMacSon »

This is quite something -
Unarius c.o. Ben Smith.PNG
Unarius c.o. Ben Smith.PNG (484.11 KiB) Viewed 6071 times
Giuseppe
Posts: 13732
Joined: Mon Apr 27, 2015 5:37 am
Location: Italy

Re: Jesus from Outer Space

Post by Giuseppe »

MrMacSon wrote: Fri Aug 14, 2020 4:11 pm
Giuseppe wrote: Fri Aug 14, 2020 6:35 am The cover and the title are a subtle way to insult what they - the early Christians - believed.
I don't think so, but it is doing what Carrier himself criticises people today for doing^ - "demonstrating...commitment to modern dogma" - and it misrepresents and fosters misunderstanding of "what ancient peoples, and early Christians, were saying", as Carrier puts it.
I agree with Lataster about the fact that Carrier is subtly anti-Christian, but I like anti-Christians so I am ok with that interpretation.
Nihil enim in speciem fallacius est quam prava religio. -Liv. xxxix. 16.
User avatar
Ben C. Smith
Posts: 8994
Joined: Wed Apr 08, 2015 2:18 pm
Location: USA
Contact:

Re: Jesus from Outer Space

Post by Ben C. Smith »

GakuseiDon wrote: Fri Aug 14, 2020 2:26 pmCarrier's response:

To the contrary, “outer space” is more accurate terminology. It is anachronistic to use “heaven” when translating ancient texts as today we mean by the word “heaven” at an alternate dimension that has no physical place in this universe; whereas they meant by the word what we mean now by…outer space. Literally. The physical space above the earth that contains the moon, planets, and stars, exists a measurable (and flyable) physical distance from us (and is, indeed, inhabited by extraterrestrial beings). I explain and demonstrate this in the Preface to my new book Jesus from Outer Space. You cannot understand what ancient peoples, and early Christians, were saying, if you do not understand this.

Anyone who pretends it’s otherwise is thus demonstrating their commitment to modern dogmas and their fear of ideas that make them uncomfortable, rather than logic or historical accuracy. And it is high time to stop coddling them.

I recall that some people in the evangelical Christian circles in which I grew up believed that Heaven was located in a black hole ("up there") while Hell was well and truly located at the center of Planet Earth ("down there"). I asked my (pastor/missionary) parents about this, and they seemed to prefer more of an "alternate dimension" interpretation, as mentioned by Carrier in the highlighted section above, but they had nothing personal against the more literal interpretation of "up" and "down" in the Bible, and acknowledged it was possible. (I think my mom may have actually thought that way at some point in her life; I remember her observing that we cannot detect what lies beyond the event horizon of a black hole, so..., you know..., it could be....)

In truth, the "heavens" which the ancients imagined bears little resemblance either to the Outer Space into which our astronauts are launched or to the kind of Alternate Dimension my parents contemplated. They imagined layers of tangible reality stacked on top of a firmament, and they were wrong.

It may be worth noting that, despite the title of the book, its cover depicts neither Outer Space nor the Heavens (or, alternately, it depicts a weird combination of the two of them). Concentric varicolored circles? That is not Outer Space. A spherical planet floating in a sea of night sky? That is not the Earth imagined by the ancients.
ΤΙ ΕΣΤΙΝ ΑΛΗΘΕΙΑ
User avatar
Irish1975
Posts: 1057
Joined: Fri Dec 15, 2017 8:01 am

Re: Jesus from Outer Space

Post by Irish1975 »

My favorite part is:

“PhD”

I can’t deny Richard’s dilligence and scholarship, but oh man. Does he have to be so corny?

But what about the Christ of the Odes of Solomon? Of John and the gnostics? What about Paul discovering the son “in himself” (Galatians 1:16), and, “I bear the wounds of Jesus in my body”? Carrier seems to have a poor comprehension of religious anthropology, how experience creates belief. He thinks the Bible comes from a campfire recitation.
User avatar
GakuseiDon
Posts: 2295
Joined: Sat Oct 12, 2013 5:10 pm

Re: Jesus from Outer Space

Post by GakuseiDon »

Ben C. Smith wrote: Fri Aug 14, 2020 8:57 pmI recall that some people in the evangelical Christian circles in which I grew up believed that Heaven was located in a black hole ("up there") while Hell was well and truly located at the center of Planet Earth ("down there"). I asked my (pastor/missionary) parents about this, and they seemed to prefer more of an "alternate dimension" interpretation, as mentioned by Carrier in the highlighted section above, but they had nothing personal against the more literal interpretation of "up" and "down" in the Bible, and acknowledged it was possible. (I think my mom may have actually thought that way at some point in her life; I remember her observing that we cannot detect what lies beyond the event horizon of a black hole, so..., you know..., it could be....)
A black hole sounds more like a place to locate Hell than heaven! Crushing weight, dark, inescapable...

I often wonder how the idea of having the realm of the Gods literally located above you affected how people acted in those times. And then the change it had on people when they started to think that heaven wasn't in fact above them but somewhere else.

Though CS Lewis's "Out of the Silent Planet" trilogy was able to reconcile ancient views of "heaven" and modern views of "outer space" effectively.
Ben C. Smith wrote: Fri Aug 14, 2020 8:57 pmIn truth, the "heavens" which the ancients imagined bears little resemblance either to the Outer Space into which our astronauts are launched or to the kind of Alternate Dimension my parents contemplated. They imagined layers of tangible reality stacked on top of a firmament, and they were wrong.
The advantage of the word "heaven" is that, even today, the word conjures up the image of the abode of God and angels. "Outer space" loses that connotation. There is no advantage that I can see in using that term, other than a gimmick to get popular attention.
It is really important, in life, to concentrate our minds on our enthusiasms, not on our dislikes. -- Roger Pearse
Post Reply