Failed Prophecy of the Church

Jane_the_Bane · Feb 8, 2016

Taom Ben Robert said:
1. Ebionites WERE heretics , they denied the virgin birth , Jewish Christians accepted it , the Ebionites were a split off , and that is well documented among the Fathers

Given that the tales surrounding Christ's birth originated with the gentile Christians, late in the 1st century CE, I doubt that the earliest generation of Jewish Christians regarded Jesus as either virgin-born or divine. Both of these traits make much sense to a Roman(ized) audience familiar with some of the core ideas of the mystery religions, but NO sense whatsoever in a Jewish context. It's quite likely that the earliest followers of Jesus regarded him as the messiah, nothing more.

2. What is your point with the Anti Judaism thing, Christianity as a whole has been Anti Judaism yes , but anti Jewish ? no despite popular belief

Ah, my sweet summer child. Your utter ignorance (unintentional or deliberate) regarding a nearly 2,000-year-long history of Christian antisemitism motivated by religion is almost intoxicatingly upbeat.

Protestantism was a particular offender in this regard. Martin Luther's "On the Jews and their Lies" reads like a how-to guide for the Holocaust (and was apparently instrumental in the "Reichskristallnacht", a series of pogromes that saw most German synagogues and Jewish shops burning and/or vandalized).

John Calvin (whose influenced Anglophone protestantism even more) wrote: "Their [the Jews] rotten and unbending stiffneckedness deserves that they be oppressed unendingly and without measure or end and that they die in their misery without the pity of anyone." (Excerpt from "Ad Quaestiones et Objecta Juaei Cuiusdam Responsio," by John Calvin; The Jew in Christian Theology, Gerhard Falk, McFarland and Company, Inc., Jefferson, NC and London, 1931.)

LoAmmi · Feb 8, 2016

Jane_the_Bane said:
Well, I'd say that no offense would ever justify such a gruesome and utterly monstrous form of execution, and that attributing it to a deity does not paint the same in a favourable light at all. Capital punishment is problematic enough in and of itself, but dragging a screaming human to the edge of the village before pelting her/him to death in an excruciating process (or "allowing" their relatives to try to knock them out/kill them with an initial hit to the head) is just SO much worse.

There are no excuses, except "it happened a long time ago, in considerably more savage times. And deities had nothing to do with it."

Except there's almost no chance that anybody would actually do that. The parents have to go before the entire place they live within and basically tell everybody: "We're such lousy parents that our child is terrible. We raised him so poorly that he is a drunk and a glutton and won't listen to us when we discipline him. We're terrible people so please kill our son". Yeah, who's going to actually walk in front of their entire town and say that? Nobody. Maybe, MAYBE a few people, but why would you want to subject your family to that kind of shame in a small town where, let's be honest, you would be making it so your family would be pariahs. So, yes, it's in there. It probably happened so rarely that winning the Powerball is about the same odds.

Aryeh Jay · Feb 8, 2016

LoAmmi said:
Except there's almost no chance that anybody would actually do that. The parents have to go before the entire place they live within and basically tell everybody: "We're such lousy parents that our child is terrible. We raised him so poorly that he is a drunk and a glutton and won't listen to us when we discipline him. We're terrible people so please kill our son". Yeah, who's going to actually walk in front of their entire town and say that? Nobody. Maybe, MAYBE a few people, but why would you want to subject your family to that kind of shame in a small town where, let's be honest, you would be making it so your family would be pariahs. So, yes, it's in there. It probably happened so rarely that winning the Powerball is about the same odds.

Things have changed, being a bad parent is almost a badge of honor for some.

Jane_the_Bane · Feb 8, 2016

LoAmmi said:
Except there's almost no chance that anybody would actually do that. The parents have to go before the entire place they live within and basically tell everybody: "We're such lousy parents that our child is terrible. We raised him so poorly that he is a drunk and a glutton and won't listen to us when we discipline him. We're terrible people so please kill our son". Yeah, who's going to actually walk in front of their entire town and say that? Nobody. Maybe, MAYBE a few people, but why would you want to subject your family to that kind of shame in a small town where, let's be honest, you would be making it so your family would be pariahs. So, yes, it's in there. It probably happened so rarely that winning the Powerball is about the same odds.

I'm not just talking about disobedient children being stoned to death. I'm talking about anybody being executed like that.
As I said, capital punishment is questionable in and of itself, but add that extra piece of senseless violence to it, and it just gets worse. EVEN IF it was only used in the most extreme criminal cases, it'd be an atrocious practice to attribute to any deity.
As it is, Mosaic law sees it used to
a) kill people who collect kindlewood on the sabbath (Numbers 15:32)
b) kill homosexuals caught in the act (Lev 20:13)
c) losing one's virginity before marriage and keeping silent about it (Deut 22:13-21)
d) adultery, including having sex with one guy while being promised to another (Deut 22: 23-24)

LoAmmi · Feb 8, 2016

Jane_the_Bane said:
As it is, Mosaic law sees it used to
a) kill people who collect kindlewood on the sabbath (Numbers 15:32)
b) kill homosexuals caught in the act (Lev 20:13)
c) losing one's virginity before marriage and keeping silent about it (Deut 22:13-21)
d) adultery, including having sex with one guy while being promised to another (Deut 22: 23-24)

I've always considered many of these to be a slight-of-hand trick. Now, I could argue the entire Lev 20:13 thing to not even mean what most people think it means, but beyond that, there is an interesting requirement that's needed to kill someone:
One witness is not enough to convict anyone accused of any crime or offense they may have committed. A matter must be established by the testimony of two or three witnesses.

You might be able to get someone with A more often, but B, C, and D become more difficult to find two or three witnesses to the event. Think about all of those "these people will be killed" commands in light of two or three witnesses being necessary. Husband marches his wife out, says she wasn't a virgin. Where's his second witness?

Taom Ben Robert · Feb 8, 2016

Jane_the_Bane said:
Given that the tales surrounding Christ's birth originated with the gentile Christians, late in the 1st century CE, I doubt that the earliest generation of Jewish Christians regarded Jesus as either virgin-born or divine. Both of these traits make much sense to a Roman(ized) audience familiar with some of the core ideas of the mystery religions, but NO sense whatsoever in a Jewish context. It's quite likely that the earliest followers of Jesus regarded him as the messiah, nothing more.

Ah, my sweet summer child. Your utter ignorance (unintentional or deliberate) regarding a nearly 2,000-year-long history of Christian antisemitism motivated by religion is almost intoxicatingly upbeat.

Protestantism was a particular offender in this regard. Martin Luther's "On the Jews and their Lies" reads like a how-to guide for the Holocaust (and was apparently instrumental in the "Reichskristallnacht", a series of pogromes that saw most German synagogues and Jewish shops burning and/or vandalized).

John Calvin (whose influenced Anglophone protestantism even more) wrote: "Their [the Jews] rotten and unbending stiffneckedness deserves that they be oppressed unendingly and without measure or end and that they die in their misery without the pity of anyone." (Excerpt from "Ad Quaestiones et Objecta Juaei Cuiusdam Responsio," by John Calvin; The Jew in Christian Theology, Gerhard Falk, McFarland and Company, Inc., Jefferson, NC and London, 1931.)

1. So your calling the Apostles John and Matthew Gentiles , so your calling the Jewish majority of the first century church who supported the apostles views Gentiles ?

2. I recognize Christianity's history with anti semitism, I simply argued that it was an influential minority ( Popes , Kings , nobles etc ) rather than an absolute majority of Christianity supporting it

ChetSinger · Feb 8, 2016

Jane_the_Bane said:
...As it is, Mosaic law sees it used to
a) kill people who collect kindlewood on the sabbath (Numbers 15:32)...

I actually think that particular law was a blessing for the workingman because it guaranteed him one day a week of rest, even if his employer or slavemaster demanded otherwise.

If I imagine myself a hired hand, servant, or slave in the ANE, I can well imagine my employer or master demanding that I work for many days without a rest. But under Jewish law, I'm guaranteed every seventh day off. Should anyone attempt to press me into working my reply would be simply "I can't work today, I'll be executed if I do". And because it's true, I'm guaranteed the day off. In fact, I can't even be ordered to collect firewood. I can spend every seventh day as a cool dude, in a loose mood, regardless of my station in life. :oldthumbsup:

smaneck · Feb 9, 2016

LoAmmi said:
Think about all of those "these people will be killed" commands in light of two or three witnesses being necessary. Husband marches his wife out, says she wasn't a virgin. Where's his second witness?

It is even harder according to the shariah. For the crime of adultery you need four eyewitnesses to the act of penetration.

LoAmmi · Feb 9, 2016

smaneck said:
It is even harder according to the shariah. For the crime of adultery you need four eyewitnesses to the act of penetration.

Same idea that it's only a capital case? Because that's all it is in Jewish law, so it takes far less to convict of a theft.

smaneck · Feb 9, 2016

LoAmmi said:
Same idea that it's only a capital case? Because that's all it is in Jewish law, so it takes far less to convict of a theft.

Actually adultery was not originally a capital case in the Qur'an. The penalty was 100 lashes, not death by stoning. The later is based on some rather dubious ahadith, one of which states there was an surih calling for death by stoning but a goat ate it. Yeah, right.
The insistence on four eyewitnesses was intended to protect women from slander. If you accuse a woman of adultery and can't come up with four witnesses you are deemed guilty of slander and the penalty is 80 lashes (ouch!) The moral of the story is, even if you saw something keep your mouth shut!

jacknife · Feb 9, 2016

smaneck said:
Actually adultery was not originally a capital case in the Qur'an. The penalty was 100 lashes, not death by stoning. The later is based on some rather dubious ahadith, one of which states there was an surih calling for death by stoning but a goat ate it. Yeah, right.
The insistence on four eyewitnesses was intended to protect women from slander. If you accuse a woman of adultery and can't come up with four witnesses you are deemed guilty of slander and the penalty is 80 lashes (ouch!) The moral of the story is, even if you saw something keep your mouth shut!

Ah yes goats, the divine never expect goats!

Search

Search

Failed Prophecy of the Church

Jane_the_Bane

Gaia's godchild

More options

LoAmmi

Dispassionate

More options

Aryeh Jay

Gone and hopefully forgotten.

More options

Jane_the_Bane

Gaia's godchild

More options

LoAmmi

Dispassionate

More options

Taom Ben Robert

Roman Catholic

More options

ChetSinger

Well-Known Member

More options

smaneck

Baha'i

More options

LoAmmi

Dispassionate

More options

smaneck

Baha'i

More options

jacknife

Theophobic troll

More options

Similar threads