The Vanity of Knowledge

[Larniavc]

Even if they were making it up for some reason and colluding on the "facts", they nonetheless wanted the reader to believe that what they claimed to have observed truly happened. When I read the Epic I don't get that at all. I read one (apparentlcommentator's vivid imaginations and, on top of that, walk away discerning that I've learned nothing of value.

I take your point but that is only YOUR take away. To me neither has a greater claim to accuracy. And to be fair one only needs to read Revelation to see a vivid imagination.

 

[Larniavc]

Elements of Jesus' life clearly fit the template of myth, but other elements do not. Most historians believe Jesus existed, that he was a Galilean rabbi, apocalyptic prophet, and faith healer who was executed by the Romans. Historians of the period generally agree on those points.

I’m not saying he could not have existed. I’m say what is written about him is unremarkable when compared with other characters from antiquity.

 

[FireDragon76]

I’m not saying he could not have existed. I’m say what is written about him is unremarkable when compared with other characters from antiquity.

Who else in that region of the world started a movement that became a world religion? I'd say that remarkable enough.

 

[o_mlly]

I've spend most of my young adolescent and adult life trying to explain everything with logic.

In their sea of confusion, the post-modernists have at least correctly identified the frailty of both rationalists and empiricists correctly, ie., neither method achieves a knowledge of reality that is certain.

The rules of logical inference are limited to the domain under examination and, indeed, must change with changes in domain. Intuitionist logics, for instance, are appropriate for constructive domains of mathematics; quantum logics are adequate for quantum domains, and temporal logics for tensed ones. We thus have a form of logical pluralism whose underlying (metaphysical) presuppositions vary with the subjects of inquiry. Since a "truth" claim must be true in all places, at all times, for all people; it seems logic fails to deliver at that level of certainty. ("Metaphysical presupposition" is the scientific phrase for the more familiar word: "faith".)

Faith, on the other hand, does not rely on the frailty of the human endeavor to know reality. I am more certain of the truth God has revealed than the "truths" discovered by men. Reason cannot achieve the revealed truths on its own; nor can reason dispute the revealed truths.

 

[timewerx]

Knowledge is only vanity when you stopped giving the benefit of doubt everything you know is probably wrong or in error.

Everything means everything including your religious beliefs.

When debating a topic, even religious topics with an unbeliever or even an atheist always consider the possibility they may be right and you are wrong and I don't mean treating the matter lightly but with heavy consideration.

People get stuck in dogmas for one reason. Pride has overcome them. This is possibly the biggest problem in Christianity for all time.

 

[FireDragon76]

The legacy of Billy Graham's ministry hasn't aged well, and I don't find his anti-intellectual take on Christianity particularly appealing.

 

[Larniavc]

Who else in that region of the world started a movement that became a world religion? I'd say that remarkable enough.

It's very similar to Muhammed, Zarathustra and the Buddha.

 

[FireDragon76]

It's very similar to Muhammed, Zarathustra and the Buddha.

We don't know much about Zarathustra's life, even when he lived.

Muhammed appears to have derived alot of his religious ideas from his contact with Jews and Christians in Arabia.

The Buddha was influential in Asia, but not so much in our own civilization.

What I find unique about Jesus was that he was essentially a peasant, and not a particularly noble born person, unlike the Buddha or Muhammed. Jesus' teachings also lead to a movement that crystalized notions of human dignity in a way that other religious teachers did not, necessarily. Tom Holland's book Dominion presents a good argument on why Christianity is something unique in the world, and is not just another religious myth. Holland is an atheist and has no metaphysical axe to grind, and I found his arguments hard to dismiss (during COVID I went through a deconstruction of my own).

Personally, I find Jesus teaching on the Kingdom of God to be unique in western thought, in terms of an idea with widespread influence, and to a great extent, in global thought as well.

 

[Larniavc]

esus' teachings also lead to a movement that crystalized notions of human dignity in a way that other religious teachers did not, necessarily.

Are you sure that applies to the Buddha?

And if Islam pinched from the Jews so did the Christians pinch from the Jews.

 

[FireDragon76]

Are you sure that applies to the Buddha?

Yes.

I studied Buddhism a great deal in the past.

Buddhist notions of human dignity, such as they are, are quite distinct from Christianity. In Buddhism, it's harder to make the case that people have any intrinsic rights. There are some forms of Buddhism that are more amenable to the notion of universal human rights, but on the whole, no.

And if Islam pinched from the Jews so did the Christians pinch from the Jews.

Jesus was himself a Jew (as were the earliest followers of Jesus). He didn't have to plagiarize anything. An a mature adult male in his community, it was his right to be a teacher.

 

[Larniavc]

In Buddhism, it's harder to make the case that people have any intrinsic rights.

How do you square that with humans being vile sinners who are unable to manage without Jesus?

 

[Larniavc]

Jesus was himself a Jew (as were the earliest followers of Jesus). He didn't have to plagiarize anything. An a mature adult male in his community, it was his right to be a teacher.

Then it’s not exactly remarkable as a story.

 

[FireDragon76]

How do you square that with humans being vile sinners who are unable to manage without Jesus?

What do you mean by "unable to manage without Jesus"? I don't know any historic Christian confession that preaches that.

Human beings being sinners doesn't mean that human beings lack intrinsic worth.

 

[FireDragon76]

Then it’s not exactly remarkable as a story.

I was responding to your assertion that early Christians just plagiarized Judaism. They did not. Early Christians were Jews. You can't plagiarize what is properly yours.

 

[Larniavc]

I was responding to your assertion that early Christians just plagiarized Judaism. They did not. Early Christians were Jews. You can't plagiarize what is properly yours.

I dunno, man. Jesus came to show people how to get right with God to move away from Judaism and then Mohammad came to show people how to get right with God and move away from Christianity.

Islam is just the most recent of the Abrahamic religions. No doubt at some point I the future there will be a new Abrahamic religion that gains traction with the faithful.

 

[FireDragon76]

I dunno, man. Jesus came to show people how to get right with God to move away from Judaism

I don't know how you come to that conclusion. Mainstream biblical scholarship and religious authoritities have been moving away from any notion of that for the past half century or more, towards seeing a more complex relationship between Christianity and Judaism.

Certainly, Jesus and his earliest followers all saw themselves as Jews, and not abandoning their religion.

 

[fhansen]

I take your point but that is only YOUR take away. To me neither has a greater claim to accuracy. And to be fair one only needs to read Revelation to see a vivid imagination.

I agree-Revelation's in a ballpark all its own-and if the rest of the bible was of the same style I'm sure I wouldn't be interested. As with the EoG I wouldn't know where to begin with it-what to do with it.

And so, yes, that was only MY takeaway. It didn't happen all at once- I just, over time, found myself increasingly impressed with this fellow named Jesus-and I had no dog in the fight-just studying here and there in all forms of religion and philosophies, etc,, wondering if their was anything more important and valuable than all the stuff we might pursue in this life. And I was surprised to find that anything would ever impress me.

 

[fhansen]

I'm unconvinced that the Gospels are anything like modern history. Most actual biblical scholars at places like Harvard or Yale would also agree.

Ancient people held to a kind of "ur-Platonism". What seemed true was just as likely to be true, if it fit an established narratival pattern.

That's a very broad, speculative viewpoint though. Ancient people did lots of things, including simply reporting the truth. It's not as if we have to question Tacitus's or Pliny's or Josephus's or Herodotus's honesty or writing style just because they were of the ancient world.

 

[fhansen]

Haven't you heard of Ludwig Feuerbach, and his notion that God is merely the idealization of humanity?

No, but I've heard the concept and speculated myself about it for that matter. It's just another human idea itself at the end of the day.

People don't have to make something up if the psychic structures pre-exist their conscious awareness.

We can psychoanalyze any and all motives and actions of people-especially from the vantage point of looking back to the past from the present-since they're not here to affirm or deny it. So perhaps we prefer to interpret their actions a certain way because of our own psychic structures that pre-exist our conscious awareness.

 

[fhansen]

Gandhi: "I like your Christ, but not your Christianity."

I'm in total agreement with Mahatma. I think Jesus was an example to us all. But then, so are so many people.

And I agree with Gandhi-at least concerning the actions of many "Christians". Anyway, I see Christ as a model par excellence, without peer actually, to the extent that he's cut from a whole different cloth. But, JMO of course.