Jesus--Fact or Fiction??

[Baruch]

Element 35:
Popular cosmology of the time also held that the sub-heaven, the firmament, was a region of corruption and change and decay, while the heavens above were pure, incorruptible and changeless. 

Paul clearly embraced this view himself, and assumed his Christian congregations did as well.  For example, in 1 Cor. 15.40-50, Paul divides the world into the region of decay (the 'terrestrial' world, the epigeia, the 'earthly'  places, meaning 'on or above the earth') and the region of indecay (the 'celestial' world, the epourania, the 'heavenly' places meaning 'in the heavens'), which distinction is also reflected in 2 Cor. 5.1-5.  This is the same division of worlds that Plato, Philo and Plutarch described.  As Philo attests, this notion had already been assimilated in pre-Christian Jewish thought.

Religions are usually the Tupperware for long spoiled cosmologies ;-)

[Mike Cl]

Element 36:
Because of this division between the perfect unchanging heavens and the corrupted sublunar world, most religious cosmologies required intercessory beings, who bridge the gap between those worlds, so God need not descend and mingle with corruption.  This concept can already be seen in the cosmology of Plato.  It only became increasingly popular thereafter.  Thus, Plutarch tells us that there ar 'holy demons, guardians of men', which 'interpret and serve, being intermediary between gods and men, since they send up above the prayers and requests of men, and take back down to us revelations and gifts of blessings', and thus act as intermediaries, intercessory beings, between men and gods.

As Paul regarded Jesus to have been a preexistent being who humbled himself, died and then was exalted 'very high' (Phil. 2.6-8)), he clearly understood Jesus in the same sense as the intermediary beings common throughout  Jewish and pagan theology.  It was through Jesus that God accomplished all things, even creation itself (1 Cor. 8.6), and now our present salvation (see again Element 10).  Jesus is thus the intermediary agent of God's will from above.  And this was a common concept in both pagan and Jewish religious thought.

[Baruch]

Element 36:
Because of this division between the perfect unchanging heavens and the corrupted sublunar world, most religious cosmologies required intercessory beings, who bridge the gap between those worlds, so God need not descend and mingle with corruption.  This concept can already be seen in the cosmology of Plato.  It only became increasingly popular thereafter.  Thus, Plutarch tells us that there ar 'holy demons, guardians of men', which 'interpret and serve, being intermediary between gods and men, since they send up above the prayers and requests of men, and take back down to us revelations and gifts of blessings', and thus act as intermediaries, intercessory beings, between men and gods.

As Paul regarded Jesus to have been a preexistent being who humbled himself, died and then was exalted 'very high' (Phil. 2.6-8)), he clearly understood Jesus in the same sense as the intermediary beings common throughout  Jewish and pagan theology.  It was through Jesus that God accomplished all things, even creation itself (1 Cor. 8.6), and now our present salvation (see again Element 10).  Jesus is thus the intermediary agent of God's will from above.  And this was a common concept in both pagan and Jewish religious thought.

In angelology Jesus was likened to Metatron, and John the Baptists to Sandalphon.  But this had already been confabulated with Elijah being Sandalphon and Elisha being Metatron.  Notice the parallel between John and Jesus as the Jordan, and Elijah and Elisha at the Jordan.  In the imagination in Heaven, both of these beings are seraphim, fire angels.  The Holy Spirit could be a cherubim, one of the wind angels.  These were seen in nature as dust devils and fire devils ... who are Jinn to the Arabs.

[Cavebear]

In angelology Jesus was likened to Metatron, and John the Baptists to Sandalphon.  But this had already been confabulated with Elijah being Sandalphon and Elisha being Metatron.  Notice the parallel between John and Jesus as the Jordan, and Elijah and Elisha at the Jordan.  In the imagination in Heaven, both of these beings are seraphim, fire angels.  The Holy Spirit could be a cherubim, one of the wind angels.  These were seen in nature as dust devils and fire devils ... who are Jinn to the Arabs.

This is the most total nonsense I have ever read.  It sounds like something between the Smurfs and Transformers...

[Baruch]

This is the most total nonsense I have ever read.  It sounds like something between the Smurfs and Transformers...

You have no imagination yourself, nor can you appreciate the imagination of others?  I am just reporting, I don't think like this.  But I do have an imagination, and I can appreciate the imagination of others.  If you have no appreciation for literature ... then you are like an Arab, who hates all stories and poetry, because he is a literalist.  The Arab then goes on to accept the Quran and Hadith ... straining out a gnat and swallowing a camel ;-)

[Cavebear]

You have no imagination yourself, nor can you appreciate the imagination of others?  I am just reporting, I don't think like this.  But I do have an imagination, and I can appreciate the imagination of others.  If you have no appreciation for literature ... then you are like an Arab, who hates all stories and poetry, because he is a literalist.  The Arab then goes on to accept the Quran and Hadith ... straining out a gnat and swallowing a camel ;-)

I love comic strips, comic books, science fiction, speculative fiction and sometimes falsifiable science, write fictional short stories, have vivid dreams, and you suggest I lack "imagination"? Oh you poor fool!

There is SUCH a difference between the willing suspension of disbelief I CAN engage in and the rational logical world of thought I choose to engage in.  I have more sci-fi book shelves than textbook shelves, but not many much more.  I am comfortable in both worlds.

[Mike Cl]

This is the most total nonsense I have ever read.  It sounds like something between the Smurfs and Transformers...

I quite agree, Cavebear.  But what Carrier is referring to and Baruch is commenting on, is what was believed in those days.  We think of it as superstition or fiction; they thought of it as real and not allegorical.  Christians of today want to turn the superstition and fiction of the early christian teachings as purely allegory.  Remember, facts and religion don't mix.  Carrier, and Baruch, take on an important task when setting the record straight and demonstrate what the early church believed and taught.

[Mike Cl]

Element 37:
The lowest heaven, the firmament, the region of corruption and change, was popularly thought to be teeming with invisible spirits and demons, throughout the whole space, who control the elements and powers of the universe there, meddle in the affairs of man, and do battle with one another.  In pagan conception some of these demons were evil and some were good, and the good demons were often intermediary deities.  In Jewish conception all the demons were evil, defying the will of God; and they did the bidding of fallen angels who also set up residence in the firmament, who were once intermediary deities serving God but who were cast down and took up residence in the lower realm.  And the leader of these fallen angels was Satan, also known by many other names (e.g. the Devil, Belial, Beelzbul, Lucifer, Sammael, or just the Adversary, the literal meaning of the work Satan.)

The same follows for archon, 'principal, prince, headman'.  This is evident in Eph. 2.2, which was forged in Paul's name by clearly by someone of his sect, and relatively early in the development of the church.  There we have the statement that before baptism each Christian 'once walked according to the fashion of this world, according to the prince of the domain, the spirit who is now working in the sons of disobedience'.  Here, just as 'authority' is clearly being used of a supernatural dominion and not a human office, so also the word achon is used to refer to a celestial being, Satan.  Thus it, too, could be used of nonhuman authorities without need of explanation.  And here we also have a clear expression of common Judeo-Christian demonology:  Satan rules over the firmament, the entire 'domain of the air', which was considered 'this world' (as opposed to the other, heavenly world above).

Learning all of this [What you see copied here is just a small taste of the detail Carrier goes into--it takes up 6 pages in his book for this element alone.] was once a component of the secret teaching given to Christians of varying ranks (Element 13).  It's unlikely that Paul came to be completely reinterpreted by all later Christians.  We have seen enough evidence that Paul does in fact mean supernatural powers and princes when he speaks thereof, inhabiting and traversing the firmament, and all later Christian interpreters understood him to mean that.  It was clearly a fundamental component of Christian teaching in all document post-dating Paul.  And from the preponderance of evidence here, we should conclude it was certainly a fundamental component of Christian teaching in Paul--and therefore in the original Christian church as a whole, as he clearly felt it required no defense or explanation in his correspondence.

[Cavebear]

Element 37:
The lowest heaven, the firmament, the region of corruption and change, was popularly thought to be teeming with invisible spirits and demons, throughout the whole space, who control the elements and powers of the universe there, meddle in the affairs of man, and do battle with one another.  In pagan conception some of these demons were evil and some were good, and the good demons were often intermediary deities.  In Jewish conception all the demons were evil, defying the will of God; and they did the bidding of fallen angels who also set up residence in the firmament, who were once intermediary deities serving God but who were cast down and took up residence in the lower realm.  And the leader of these fallen angels was Satan, also known by many other names (e.g. the Devil, Belial, Beelzbul, Lucifer, Sammael, or just the Adversary, the literal meaning of the work Satan.)

The same follows for archon, 'principal, prince, headman'.  This is evident in Eph. 2.2, which was forged in Paul's name by clearly by someone of his sect, and relatively early in the development of the church.  There we have the statement that before baptism each Christian 'once walked according to the fashion of this world, according to the prince of the domain, the spirit who is now working in the sons of disobedience'.  Here, just as 'authority' is clearly being used of a supernatural dominion and not a human office, so also the word achon is used to refer to a celestial being, Satan.  Thus it, too, could be used of nonhuman authorities without need of explanation.  And here we also have a clear expression of common Judeo-Christian demonology:  Satan rules over the firmament, the entire 'domain of the air', which was considered 'this world' (as opposed to the other, heavenly world above).

Learning all of this [What you see copied here is just a small taste of the detail Carrier goes into--it takes up 6 pages in his book for this element alone.] was once a component of the secret teaching given to Christians of varying ranks (Element 13).  It's unlikely that Paul came to be completely reinterpreted by all later Christians.  We have seen enough evidence that Paul does in fact mean supernatural powers and princes when he speaks thereof, inhabiting and traversing the firmament, and all later Christian interpreters understood him to mean that.  It was clearly a fundamental component of Christian teaching in all document post-dating Paul.  And from the preponderance of evidence here, we should conclude it was certainly a fundamental component of Christian teaching in Paul--and therefore in the original Christian church as a whole, as he clearly felt it required no defense or explanation in his correspondence.

I am perfectly happy to just ignore all the "elements" entirely.  Well, "someone" has to and I voted for myself.  1-0

[Mike Cl]

I am perfectly happy to just ignore all the "elements" entirely.  Well, "someone" has to and I voted for myself.  1-0

That's just it, Cavebear, these elements have been ignored far too long.  Each element is a 'fact' about Christianity.  Add these 48 basic facts about Christianity and one gets a clear picture of what it was from its inception.  Make these facts known and it will hasten the end of that particular religion.  Remember, the search for the historical Jesus is a new enterprise.  I think it is only 200 years or so old.  This study is really in it's infancy; Carrier has added a clear set of facts to this study.  I find these facts to be fascinating.  Which is why I want to share these with the board.

[Cavebear]

That's just it, Cavebear, these elements have been ignored far too long.  Each element is a 'fact' about Christianity.  Add these 48 basic facts about Christianity and one gets a clear picture of what it was from its inception.  Make these facts known and it will hasten the end of that particular religion.  Remember, the search for the historical Jesus is a new enterprise.  I think it is only 200 years or so old.  This study is really in it's infancy; Carrier has added a clear set of facts to this study.  If find these facts to be fascinating.  Which is why I want to share these with the board.

I was seeing these as almost an explanation or christian apologetics, but OK. I'll try to look at the idea with fresh eyes and some space between the ears. 

[Baruch]

I quite agree, Cavebear.  But what Carrier is referring to and Baruch is commenting on, is what was believed in those days.  We think of it as superstition or fiction; they thought of it as real and not allegorical.  Christians of today want to turn the superstition and fiction of the early christian teachings as purely allegory.  Remember, facts and religion don't mix.  Carrier, and Baruch, take on an important task when setting the record straight and demonstrate what the early church believed and taught.

The Church, Synagogue and Mosque have all had their foundation myths accepted as fact, depending on your ethnic group ... so yes, honesty requires that the record be set straight.  One can't think straight about religion, without honesty.  Then realizing that we are dealing with psychology, sociology and anthropology, we can dot "i"s and cross "t"s if one is so inclined.

I don't mind myth.  But you have to say "this is a myth I am going to tell you" before you start.  Same thing with legends and much of history.  History should be prefaced with "this is propaganda by party X".  There are a few facts we can agree to in history, but the meat of it is the interpretation, and that is where the ideology comes in.  Something isn't scientific, just because it isn't theological ... ideology is bull shit too.

[Baruch]

Element 37:
The lowest heaven, the firmament, the region of corruption and change, was popularly thought to be teeming with invisible spirits and demons, throughout the whole space, who control the elements and powers of the universe there, meddle in the affairs of man, and do battle with one another.  In pagan conception some of these demons were evil and some were good, and the good demons were often intermediary deities.  In Jewish conception all the demons were evil, defying the will of God; and they did the bidding of fallen angels who also set up residence in the firmament, who were once intermediary deities serving God but who were cast down and took up residence in the lower realm.  And the leader of these fallen angels was Satan, also known by many other names (e.g. the Devil, Belial, Beelzbul, Lucifer, Sammael, or just the Adversary, the literal meaning of the work Satan.)

The same follows for archon, 'principal, prince, headman'.  This is evident in Eph. 2.2, which was forged in Paul's name by clearly by someone of his sect, and relatively early in the development of the church.  There we have the statement that before baptism each Christian 'once walked according to the fashion of this world, according to the prince of the domain, the spirit who is now working in the sons of disobedience'.  Here, just as 'authority' is clearly being used of a supernatural dominion and not a human office, so also the word achon is used to refer to a celestial being, Satan.  Thus it, too, could be used of nonhuman authorities without need of explanation.  And here we also have a clear expression of common Judeo-Christian demonology:  Satan rules over the firmament, the entire 'domain of the air', which was considered 'this world' (as opposed to the other, heavenly world above).

Learning all of this [What you see copied here is just a small taste of the detail Carrier goes into--it takes up 6 pages in his book for this element alone.] was once a component of the secret teaching given to Christians of varying ranks (Element 13).  It's unlikely that Paul came to be completely reinterpreted by all later Christians.  We have seen enough evidence that Paul does in fact mean supernatural powers and princes when he speaks thereof, inhabiting and traversing the firmament, and all later Christian interpreters understood him to mean that.  It was clearly a fundamental component of Christian teaching in all document post-dating Paul.  And from the preponderance of evidence here, we should conclude it was certainly a fundamental component of Christian teaching in Paul--and therefore in the original Christian church as a whole, as he clearly felt it required no defense or explanation in his correspondence.

Paul was pro-Roman, in fact pro-human-authority in general.  He was no anarchist.  He was a deluded apocalypticist.  Perhaps if there was a Jesus, Jesus was selling a "here now" eschatology.  Mohammad was clearly like Paul, very much hellfire and brimstone, very soon now.  So the Romans weren't entirely opposed to his preaching (as opposed to the death-to-the-Romans messianics).  He was guilty of operating a "society" without government license.  You had to have a license, because the paranoid Romans thought that un-licensed "societies" were ... criminal by implication.  Initially the Roman officials considered this a Jewish problem to be handled by their Jewish leadership.  But when Gentiles gained membership, thanks to Paul, that changed everything.  The Jewish community was an example of a licensed society.  The Jewish community excluded some people from fellowship, for various reasons, and the early Jewish Christians didn't have Cavebear there to help them file the proper Gentile paperwork ;-)

[Cavebear]

The Church, Synagogue and Mosque have all had their foundation myths accepted as fact, depending on your ethnic group ... so yes, honesty requires that the record be set straight.  One can't think straight about religion, without honesty.  Then realizing that we are dealing with psychology, sociology and anthropology, we can dot "i"s and cross "t"s if one is so inclined.

I don't mind myth.  But you have to say "this is a myth I am going to tell you" before you start.  Same thing with legends and much of history.  History should be prefaced with "this is propaganda by party X".  There are a few facts we can agree to in history, but the meat of it is the interpretation, and that is where the ideology comes in.  Something isn't scientific, just because it isn't theological ... ideology is bull shit too.

You are being unusually thoughtful and factual lately.  I credit you entirely of course.

I agree completely that it is helpful when discussing religious beliefs to state that you stand one way or the other.  It lets later readers know what is a belief vs what is merely being discussed.

I have long supported teaching ABOUT religion in school, by people trained i the history and causes of religion.  Sadly, where it has been tried always seems to end up a clss in some particular religion.  Atheists are not generally allowed to teach ABOUT religion except obliquely through history.

I COULD discuss christianity as a book and some might think I was a christian.  Given a few months, I could do the same with the old testament or the koran  (my easy spelling).  And Hinduism etc.  I often read a few books I have on world religions.

I actually find it all very interesting.  Everything from Norse to Native Amerind to Eurasian.  I love the psychology of it all.

[Cavebear]

Paul was pro-Roman, in fact pro-human-authority in general.  He was no anarchist.  He was a deluded apocalypticist.  Perhaps if there was a Jesus, Jesus was selling a "here now" eschatology.  Mohammad was clearly like Paul, very much hellfire and brimstone, very soon now.  So the Romans weren't entirely opposed to his preaching (as opposed to the death-to-the-Romans messianics).  He was guilty of operating a "society" without government license.  You had to have a license, because the paranoid Romans thought that un-licensed "societies" were ... criminal by implication.  Initially the Roman officials considered this a Jewish problem to be handled by their Jewish leadership.  But when Gentiles gained membership, thanks to Paul, that changed everything.  The Jewish community was an example of a licensed society.  The Jewish community excluded some people from fellowship, for various reasons, and the early Jewish Christians didn't have Cavebear there to help them file the proper Gentile paperwork ;-)

I am honored.  Had I been there, the western world might well have been a millennia advanced.  Alas... 

The Romans basically "blew it"  by suppressing the christians.  If they hadn't created martyrs, we might well be arguing about Mithraism vs Hinduism today.