Posts by Midget-Sasquatch

I don't consider the Gospels as historically and factually accurate. I think they are stories that were made up but with the same meaningful purpose of myth.

Along with the key myth are legends and anecdotes that also build up over time. If one looks at all the collected materials, something that does stands out from the "miracles" are the sayings attributed to this Jesus. Not definitive concrete proof that he existed but having an oral tradition to me at least does make it very plausible that at least a person who spoke some of them really existed.

I realize some powerful sayings like the golden rule and the greatest of the commandments were very likely appropriated from other sources. But who's to say they weren't added on to what this Jesus was saying or if he actually put his own spin on it?

I think that there was an historical jew from the area of Galilee that got a small group of followers. I'm unsure if he was a roaming cynic, or an apocalyptic prophet. He may have been strongly associated with the Essenes .

From what's been written about James the Just and the strong association that's made between James and the early followers of Christianity, I'd say these people were definitely upset with the status quo aimed for by the Sadducees.

23

dos it really matter if it was a cross or a stake???

by highdose in

jw
friends

what does it matter?

i belive its been found that the romans used both, so what does it matter?.

what does it matter that the roman word for cross sounds also like a word for another god?.

Midget-Sasquatch

It doesn't matter, if all we're considering is the meaning of Jesus' death.

But I agree with many other posters that its important to the WTS because they try to use this to differentiate themselves from other denominations. Portraying other groups as tainted and false while they are more "pure" in their "worship".

So given that, its important to me, in that it shows the antipathy of the WTS to information/evidence that refutes any of their beliefs. Instead of taking an honest objective look at old/new evidence, they either try to discredit it or never even bring it up. For a group that supposedly is spreading "the Truth", they sure have a strong aversion to implementing and following processes of earnest truth seekers.

108

The secret of how Christianity spread across the world

by Terry in

what i am going to say may sound nasty and mean-spirited.

i assure you it is not intended in that tone.. men are power seekers and control freaks.

without using women as drones to do the grunt work of religion.

Midget-Sasquatch

I agree with PSacramwnto. There's many references in the NT of women who were key supporters of the early christian movement. Some were like patrons and some were loved very much for the charitable things they did like Dorcas in Acts. (Acts may be fiction but Dorcas is very likely a composite of early christian women and what they did for others.)

Stark's argument about the birth rate differential between christian and non christian populations works equally well if applied to the present situation of muslim immigrants in europe. Some europeans nowadays are a bit concerned over that. What shouldn't be discounted though is how the group acts to its own members and to others. Again early christians were noted for their help of the underprivileged and sick. That they were growing in numbers wasn't all that worrisome.

108

The secret of how Christianity spread across the world

by Terry in

what i am going to say may sound nasty and mean-spirited.

i assure you it is not intended in that tone.. men are power seekers and control freaks.

without using women as drones to do the grunt work of religion.

Midget-Sasquatch

While I remember Stark mentioning the role of women in spreading Christianity, I seem to recall that in one of his books he attributed an even greater reason for the spread of christianity. That being how the christians acted during the periods of epidemics and plagues that befell Rome.

You'd have the best known Roman physician high tailing it out of the city to avoid the pestilence, to hell with the sick. Alot of pagan romans shunned the sick as well. Damn it must be my Italian heritage then thats responsible for my being a little upset when someone hacks half a lung right in my face. I'm screaming internally get away!

In contrast you had the christians....actually taking care of the sick without worry of getting ill themselves. Stark postulates that it was that concern for people that served as one major draw for chrisitanity. No doubt the women were acting as nurses in those cases.

36

Car inspection woes

by Terry in

jw
friends

i'm sure texas isn't much different from any other state.. we want clean air.

so, the auto manufacturers came up with a glorified box of charcoal that "filters" out the pollutants (simultaneously making the energy output less efficient requiring yet more fuel) called a catalytic converter.. most cars' converter lasts about 10 years.. .

i'm driving a honda accord from 1998. the coverter has given up the ghost and i don't pass the nox tests.. so.... i can't renew my registration and have to spend about $1700 to replace that stupid box of charcoal.. .

Midget-Sasquatch

Hi Terry,

Have a look at some of the prices this seller has on their universal and direct fit cats:

Discount Converters LTD.
1419 Upland Drive
Houston, Texas 77043

They are much more reasonable and even if you had to pay about $100 for a muffler shop to just remove and install this one you'll save hundreds.

204

Paul, leading authority on Christianity, does NOT quote Jesus!

by Terry in

paul's letters practically invent christianity.. the gospels trickled in after him.. paul never walked with jesus and yet explains him.. never a quote from the master at all.. yet, paul is such a maven.. if jesus couldn't be bothered to actually reveal what he was all about to his apostles with whom he ate, drank, spoke and slept---why this persecutor, saul?.

the apostles heard every word jesus spoke and were willing to die for him.. paul didn't--yet--miraculously explained every detail of the entire history of god's purpose including his messiah.. .

can anybody provide a non-gimmick answer?.

Midget-Sasquatch

TD

There's no denying that Paul definitely had zero credibility among the earliest Jewish Christians. And you've listed some thought provoking inconsistencies about the biography of Saul, that should make us skeptical of the Paul presented to us by the NT.

James the Just was leading a movement that almost certainly was apocalyptic, and Josephus wrote that James was very popular with the Jewish people. Many of them were against the establishment (i.e Sadduccees).

I'm not sure if its Eisenman or not, but I recall reading someone's suggestion, that Saul of Tarsus may have been Herodian and had a vested interest in subverting the anti Roman movement in Judea. He put his own spin on the movement, co-opting it from James and turning it into something that was not going to be an immediate revolutionary threat to Herod and the Sadduccees.

Band to Run

The Ebionites were described by later writers as being a sect of Christians that still believed they should keep Torah. "Ebion" deriving from the word for "poor". Likely that they considered themselves "The Poor" in that they didn't focus on material things, status, priviledged living etc. The later writer mocked the meaning of "Ebion" and said they were "poor" spiritually.

204

Paul, leading authority on Christianity, does NOT quote Jesus!

by Terry in

paul's letters practically invent christianity.. the gospels trickled in after him.. paul never walked with jesus and yet explains him.. never a quote from the master at all.. yet, paul is such a maven.. if jesus couldn't be bothered to actually reveal what he was all about to his apostles with whom he ate, drank, spoke and slept---why this persecutor, saul?.

the apostles heard every word jesus spoke and were willing to die for him.. paul didn't--yet--miraculously explained every detail of the entire history of god's purpose including his messiah.. .

can anybody provide a non-gimmick answer?.

Midget-Sasquatch

The Ovious: If we quote something, its to make a point.

Paul quoted parts of the OT, early homilies, etc when it suited him but nary anything from the historical Jesus. Maybe almost all of the existing "Jesus Sayings" didn't suit his agenda. Isn't there a contrast between the role reversals that are thematic of the parables and Sayings attributed to Jesus, and Paul's urging to submit to the status quo?

204

Paul, leading authority on Christianity, does NOT quote Jesus!

by Terry in

paul's letters practically invent christianity.. the gospels trickled in after him.. paul never walked with jesus and yet explains him.. never a quote from the master at all.. yet, paul is such a maven.. if jesus couldn't be bothered to actually reveal what he was all about to his apostles with whom he ate, drank, spoke and slept---why this persecutor, saul?.

the apostles heard every word jesus spoke and were willing to die for him.. paul didn't--yet--miraculously explained every detail of the entire history of god's purpose including his messiah.. .

can anybody provide a non-gimmick answer?.

Midget-Sasquatch

Marcion liked Paul because alot of his ideas about the risen Christ, and several of the terms he uses, like the archons, fit well with a proto-gnostic view. Although I wonder if Paul's letters may have been tampered somewhat.

IIRC, Tarsus was a center known for Mithraism and mystery religions. I think thats a closer fit to what Paul purports to have gotten directly from Christ about what was done during the Last Supper.

Its not surprising that the earliest followers of the movement didn't accept his teachings. Looks like he was putting his own spin on foreign ideas and passing them off as revelation.

204

Paul, leading authority on Christianity, does NOT quote Jesus!

by Terry in

paul's letters practically invent christianity.. the gospels trickled in after him.. paul never walked with jesus and yet explains him.. never a quote from the master at all.. yet, paul is such a maven.. if jesus couldn't be bothered to actually reveal what he was all about to his apostles with whom he ate, drank, spoke and slept---why this persecutor, saul?.

the apostles heard every word jesus spoke and were willing to die for him.. paul didn't--yet--miraculously explained every detail of the entire history of god's purpose including his messiah.. .

can anybody provide a non-gimmick answer?.

Midget-Sasquatch

brotherdan

Isn't the wording Paul used in that passage you cited a bit curious? He received it from the Lord. (Implying he didn't receive it from the oral christian tradition of the time). Wouldn't it make more sense that it already would have come from the Apostles who were there? And have already incorporated something so central into their agapes?

Terry

You do have a valid point about the scarcity of quotes, but its not absolutely missing. How's this quote?

Acts 20:35 "In everything I showed you that by working hard in this manner you must help the weak and remember the words of the Lord Jesus, that He Himself said, 'It is more blessed to give than to receive."