Flying Spaghetti monster

  • Thread starter Thread starter Pete_1
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
Massive superstition?

Ah, perhaps you are unaware that ‘the period’ of which you speak is actually one of the **least superstitious **ones in history for the area (the Roman Empire in the Near East) under consideration.

First: Jewish history at the time of the birth of Christ was one of ‘monotheism’ for some 2000 years previous.

Second: The Hellenistic period (some 300 years long at the time of the birth of Christ) was notable for its focus on ‘rationality’. The Greek gods (transmogrified in many cases or grafted onto what became the “Roman gods”) were ‘legend’ --even to the vast majority of peasants. The ‘middle’ and ‘upper classes’ might have paid a lip service to a particular city’s ‘god’ but they did not ‘believe’ the tales. Greek science even at this date (helped by the works of Socrates, Plato, and Aristotle) had put the ‘mythology’ of the gods quite plainly. Rationalism, stoicism, etc. were what men aspired to–not ‘superstition’.

Thrid: By the birth of Christ, even the plebs of the Roman empire were not adherents of the Roman gods. Due to the immensity of the Empire itself and the growth through conquest, many ‘mythologies’ had become ‘known’ to the Roman. . .casting his own “roman gods” even further from ‘truth’. The ‘pick and choose society’ (strongly reminiscent of today’s ‘multiculturalism’) led people to an ‘adherence’ (sometimes but most often not leading to worship) to a polyglot pantheon. . .but (just as we have today) the huge ‘variety’ made it less and less likely for ANY of the myriad gods/legends to be taken SERIOUSLY.

So–an era of ‘superstititon’? No.

Like today–an era of ‘multiculturalism’ and skepticism.
An era of ‘choice’.
An era where ‘rationalism’ was touted, and ‘variety’ embraced. All **could **be chosen:

One could worship a Roman god, Greek god, or no god.
The only thing one could **not **do was to claim that there was only **one GOD and **(This is important) by that claim ‘force’ other people to stop worshipping their gods.

IOW, the Jewish people were perfectly free to worship their one god under the Romans. But they couldn’t go around and ‘stop’ the Romans from worshipping the ROMAN gods.

This situational stalemate lasted (it was considered a GREAT TOLERANCE then, just as it is today, for everybody to able to worship ‘what they wanted’ provided they didn’t stop ‘somebody else’ from worshipping something else) until the Roman emperors decided it wasn’t enough to allow people to choose–because some people weren’t ‘choosing’ to worship what the Romans wanted them to worship–including said Emperors.

But ‘superstition?’

Neither Jewish people. . .nor Christian people. . .are ‘superstitious’. Even the 1st century AD Greeks, Romans, Arabs, and other ‘religious’ groups were not SUPERSTITIOUS.

Strangely enough, pagan groups --pantheistic naturists for the most part such as the Druids --**were superstitious. **It is those people whom Christianity sought to rescue **from **that practice.

But the Druids weren’t around the Near East, were they?
The peoples who were there were not, by and large, ‘superstitious folk’.
 
Lion:

I routinely heed scientific work by scientists who are Christian believers.

The more I read about early Christianity, the more it seems clouded in the so-called oral tradition, and the massive superstition that was a hallmark of the times.
SFT:
Please look how you phrase your insinuations.

“clouded in the so-called oral tradition…” A sneer is not an argument, it is not data, it is merely a demonstration of your bias and dislike. If you wish to critique a particular testimony, please provide specific examples of when and where it falls short of being accurate.

The late 18th and early 19th Century Deist and Atheist-minded NT scholars (for that is the root of the current secular NT studies) knew better than to try to assert a “mythologizing” of the Gospel claims within the lifetimes of the participants–these scholars were still part of quite vibrant oral history cultures–they had (as well as their academic peers) a pretty good idea of how long it took for the “fantastic” to creep into “real stories”. Which is why these same scholars asserted the creation of the Gospels as we have them 2-3 centuries after the events described–a position no longer held by anyone in NT studies–though the attitude of declaring any supernatural claims in the Gospels as “myth” persists despite the fact there simply wasnt the time for these particular radical and consistent “myths” to develop.

“…and the massive superstition…” What, a general belief in God (or gods) and the supernatural equates to “superstition”? The era is replete with lots of literate, sophisticated people who rejected “superstition” yet were quite religious in belief.
 
SFT:
Please look how you phrase your insinuations.

“clouded in the so-called oral tradition…” A sneer is not an argument, it is not data, it is merely a demonstration of your bias and dislike. If you wish to critique a particular testimony, please provide specific examples of when and where it falls short of being accurate.

The late 18th and early 19th Century Deist and Atheist-minded NT scholars (for that is the root of the current secular NT studies) knew better than to try to assert a “mythologizing” of the Gospel claims within the lifetimes of the participants–these scholars were still part of quite vibrant oral history cultures–they had (as well as their academic peers) a pretty good idea of how long it took for the “fantastic” to creep into “real stories”. Which is why these same scholars asserted the creation of the Gospels as we have them 2-3 centuries after the events described–a position no longer held by anyone in NT studies–though the attitude of declaring any supernatural claims in the Gospels as “myth” persists despite the fact there simply wasnt the time for these particular radical and consistent “myths” to develop.

“…and the massive superstition…” What, a general belief in God (or gods) and the supernatural equates to “superstition”? The era is replete with lots of literate, sophisticated people who rejected “superstition” yet were quite religious in belief.
Let me first apologize for some clumsy wording. I did not mean to disparage the oral tradition.

I also understand that there were many literate and sophisticated people in the area—among the social elites. There is no question that superstition and magic had a prominent place in the poorer, uneducated classes, which represented the great majority.
 
So what you’re saying is that first:

Superstition and magic were more prevalent among the ‘poorer classes’. Well, to me this seems like you’re calling ‘the poorer classes’ ignorant because of their poverty ‘breeding’ such silly things that the ‘educated’ had risen from.

However, it was actually more likely to be the ‘wealthier’ men who were out there looking for the philosopher’s stone, love potions, lucky charms, etc. Because they could pay for them.

What ‘superstition and magic’ are you saying the ‘poorer classes’ engaged in, may I ask?
 
So what you’re saying is that first:

Superstition and magic were more prevalent among the ‘poorer classes’. Well, to me this seems like you’re calling ‘the poorer classes’ ignorant because of their poverty ‘breeding’ such silly things that the ‘educated’ had risen from.

However, it was actually more likely to be the ‘wealthier’ men who were out there looking for the philosopher’s stone, love potions, lucky charms, etc. Because they could pay for them.

What ‘superstition and magic’ are you saying the ‘poorer classes’ engaged in, may I ask?
A simple reading of the New Testament, for one, will show that many conditions we today recognize as pathological were believed to be caused by the possession of demons. This would be a prime example of a superstition among the poorer classes.

I think you are correct that many affluent people, then as today, were out seeking spiritual fulfillment in mystery religions.

That the poor and uneducated believe strange things out of ignorance shouldn’t come as a surprise to a Catholic, as the Church does it share of missionary work among the poor and uneducated.
 
Spirithound:

As far as people dying for their faith: this is commonly observed behavior even today, and the ones doing it now certainly were not eyewitnesses to anything.

I have not read “Case for Christ,” and I’ve never made a tent. Is that bad?

T
Come now…we’ve all made a tent at some point during our childhood 😉
I argue that there is a difference between one of the Apostles dying for their faith, and a Christian, or a Muslim, or Hindu of today dying for their faith. The Apostles were witnesses, direct witnesses to Jesus, His death, and His glorified state, indicative of Resurrection. People today are not in a position to be first-hand witnesses to their religious beliefs.
Consider, were there any Muslims who were martyred who witnessed Muhammad receive the revelation from the Archangel Jibril? Were any Hindus murdered because they witnessed an avatar? Were any Mormons who saw the golden plates killed because of that fact? Have any Romans or Greeks actually seen their gods and then gotten murdered because they refused to recant?
 
A simple reading of the New Testament, for one, will show that many conditions we today recognize as pathological were believed to be caused by the possession of demons. This would be a prime example of a superstition among the poorer classes.

I think you are correct that many affluent people, then as today, were out seeking spiritual fulfillment in mystery religions.

That the poor and uneducated believe strange things out of ignorance shouldn’t come as a surprise to a Catholic, as the Church does it share of missionary work among the poor and uneducated.
You are applying modern knowledge to events and a culture of 2000 years ago.

People had reasoned out, with the knowledge and data they had, what they believed to be absolute fact. A very rich and well to-do Roman pagan believed very much in demons. Greeks, of pre-Roman era believed mental illness was caused by demons. This was not a superstition of the poor. It was a fact, believed by all.

Hippocratic doctors, who were well educated, believed a woman’s uterus required exorcising, to remove the indwelling demons. They believed if they didn’t do this, the uterus roamed around the internal organs of a woman, causing disease and illness.

You don’t have to go back that far to find what we would call superstition being practiced as well-formed and reasonable facts (to the people of those times). Bleeding. Ill-humors. Eugenics.

People use the tools they have, and they observe what their efforts do…and find an effect. Their conclusions, to us today, are erroneous. To them, it was solid fact.

It is no different than what we do today…we just have better tools, methods and the accumulated knowledge of those who came before us. But I think it would be foolish of anyone, to believe that the inherent nature of humans doesn’t influence how we observe and interact with the world.
 
A simple reading of the New Testament, for one, will show that many conditions we today recognize as pathological were believed to be caused by the possession of demons. This would be a prime example of a superstition among the poorer classes.

I think you are correct that many affluent people, then as today, were out seeking spiritual fulfillment in mystery religions.

That the poor and uneducated believe strange things out of ignorance shouldn’t come as a surprise to a Catholic, as the Church does it share of missionary work among the poor and uneducated.
Almost no one today denies that there is a thing called “mental illness” which are from natual physiological and psychological causes. In fact, a good many of the “demons” that Christ and his apostles exorcised may very well have been healings of these mental illnesses–still supernatural power to effect a cure beyond naturalistic explanation.

However, some explicit possesions described in the NT defy that categorization–like the Gardene swine. The existence of the devils, like God, in neither subject to proof or disproof by the laws of the natural universe. They exist quite apart from the natural universe, but can interact with it.

It is quite common to discount the existence of the devils by refering to them in (now) comedic images–if one can’t take seriously the idea of a harmful being in red tights, horns, and spiked tail, then demonic possesion or attack, per se, also is easy to reject.

"There are two equel and opposite errors one can take regarding the devils. The first is to disbelieve their existence, the second is to take too unhealthy an interest in them. They (the devils) delight in both errors, welcoming either a materialist or a magician"
–CS Lewis, Foward to The Screwtape Letters
 
If this has already been mentioned I apologize, because I don’t have time to read the entire thread before I have to hit the sack.

William Lane Craig makes some very compelling arguments
for the historicity of the resurrection.

Earlier in the thread someone mentioned something about the moon being split in half according to Islam’s beliefs. I don’t know about that, but you should check out Bethlehemstar

according to Kepler’s and Newtons math used in the astronomy program Starry Night. On Friday April 3rd 33 A.D. at exactly 3:00 pm Jerusalem time a lunar eclipse began and would have risen that night in full eclipse over Jerusalem. That’s a pretty crazy video, lot’s of strange things in the sky 33 years earlier as well. Sorry, I don’t mean to get off topic.
 
If this has already been mentioned I apologize, because I don’t have time to read the entire thread before I have to hit the sack.

William Lane Craig makes some very compelling arguments
for the historicity of the resurrection.

Earlier in the thread someone mentioned something about the moon being split in half according to Islam’s beliefs. I don’t know about that, but you should check out Bethlehemstar

according to Kepler’s and Newtons math used in the astronomy program Starry Night. On Friday April 3rd 33 A.D. at exactly 3:00 pm Jerusalem time a lunar eclipse began and would have risen that night in full eclipse over Jerusalem. That’s a pretty crazy video, lot’s of strange things in the sky 33 years earlier as well. Sorry, I don’t mean to get off topic.
come on Cranster, how could you ever get off the topic in a thread titled “Flying Spaghetti Monster?”
 
Almost no one today denies that there is a thing called “mental illness” which are from natual physiological and psychological causes. In fact, a good many of the “demons” that Christ and his apostles exorcised may very well have been healings of these mental illnesses–still supernatural power to effect a cure beyond naturalistic explanation.

However, some explicit possesions described in the NT defy that categorization–like the Gardene swine. The existence of the devils, like God, in neither subject to proof or disproof by the laws of the natural universe. They exist quite apart from the natural universe, but can interact with it.

It is quite common to discount the existence of the devils by refering to them in (now) comedic images–if one can’t take seriously the idea of a harmful being in red tights, horns, and spiked tail, then demonic possesion or attack, per se, also is easy to reject.

"There are two equel and opposite errors one can take regarding the devils. The first is to disbelieve their existence, the second is to take too unhealthy an interest in them. They (the devils) delight in both errors, welcoming either a materialist or a magician"
–CS Lewis, Foward to The Screwtape Letters
I have my doubts about the Gadarene swine. Do we really believe that swine would run 5 miles to drown in a lake?

Well, the distance varies depending on where this all took place:
Gadara, Gerasa, or Gergasa. They are all mentioned in the Gospels, and only Gergasa is close to the shore of the Sea of Galilee.
 
You are applying modern knowledge to events and a culture of 2000 years ago.

People had reasoned out, with the knowledge and data they had, what they believed to be absolute fact. A very rich and well to-do Roman pagan believed very much in demons. Greeks, of pre-Roman era believed mental illness was caused by demons. This was not a superstition of the poor. It was a fact, believed by all.

Hippocratic doctors, who were well educated, believed a woman’s uterus required exorcising, to remove the indwelling demons. They believed if they didn’t do this, the uterus roamed around the internal organs of a woman, causing disease and illness.

You don’t have to go back that far to find what we would call superstition being practiced as well-formed and reasonable facts (to the people of those times). Bleeding. Ill-humors. Eugenics.

People use the tools they have, and they observe what their efforts do…and find an effect. Their conclusions, to us today, are erroneous. To them, it was solid fact.

It is no different than what we do today…we just have better tools, methods and the accumulated knowledge of those who came before us. But I think it would be foolish of anyone, to believe that the inherent nature of humans doesn’t influence how we observe and interact with the world.
Most educated Romans were rather lukewarm about the supernatural. It is interesting to note for instance how they lacked mythology. Their gods were more than anything symbols of a particular human endeavor (like hunting, commerce, health, or agriculture.) They were worshipped in their capacity to help mortals in these endeavors, but had little or no substance.

Apart from that you make my point perfectly. It was a time rife with superstitions.
 
I have my doubts about the Gadarene swine. Do we really believe that swine would run 5 miles to drown in a lake?

Response: With atempted demonic possesion, natural rules of animal behavior cease to apply–but then actual or atempted demonic posesion by its nature is not “natural”.

Well, the distance varies depending on where this all took place:
Gadara, Gerasa, or Gergasa. They are all mentioned in the Gospels, and only Gergasa is close to the shore of the Sea of Galilee.

Response: I’m not familiar with this particular NT “nitpicking”–lets just leave it with the pigs ran a LONG distance (for pigs) and seemed to be willing to die rather than host demons.
 
40.png
Lion_of_Narnia:
Lion:

I don’t believe in demons.

Best,

Tor

P.S. The gospels tell the story differently. Gerasa is 31 miles from the shore of the Sea of Galilee, Gadara, 5, and Gergesa actually by the shore.
 
Lion:

I don’t believe in demons.

Best,

Tor

P.S. The gospels tell the story differently. Gerasa is 31 miles from the shore of the Sea of Galilee, Gadara, 5, and Gergesa actually by the shore.
How does that relate to whether they exist, or not?
 
Most educated Romans were rather lukewarm about the supernatural. It is interesting to note for instance how they lacked mythology. Their gods were more than anything symbols of a particular human endeavor (like hunting, commerce, health, or agriculture.) They were worshipped in their capacity to help mortals in these endeavors, but had little or no substance.

Apart from that you make my point perfectly. It was a time rife with superstitions.
You missed my point, though.

Superstition is coming to a “wrong” conclusion, using valid data (experience, observations, etc). You seem to be under the impression that this doesn’t occur with “modern” humans. Even humans who only believe what their five senses, or tools that enhance those five senses, can tell them.
 
You missed my point, though.

Superstition is coming to a “wrong” conclusion, using valid data (experience, observations, etc). You seem to be under the impression that this doesn’t occur with “modern” humans. Even humans who only believe what their five senses, or tools that enhance those five senses, can tell them.
Merriam-Webster:

Main Entry:
su·per·sti·tion
Pronunciation:
\ˌsü-pər-ˈsti-shən
Function:
noun
Etymology:
Middle English supersticion, from Anglo-French, from Latin superstition-, superstitio, from superstit-, superstes standing over (as witness or survivor), from super- + stare to stand — more at stand
Date:
13th century
1 a: a belief or practice resulting from ignorance, fear of the unknown, trust in magic or chance, or a false conception of causation b: an irrational abject attitude of mind toward the supernatural, nature, or God resulting from superstition
2: a notion maintained despite evidence to the contrary.

Hence, a belief that possession by demons causes disease can rightly be called a superstition.
 
Lion:

I don’t believe in demons.

Best,

Tor

P.S. The gospels tell the story differently. Gerasa is 31 miles from the shore of the Sea of Galilee, Gadara, 5, and Gergesa actually by the shore.
God believes in demons and so did the apostles and ancient Jews. And I assure you that Demons believe in God more than you do. 😉

Check out these verses (NIV) that all speak of demons.
Deuteronomy 32:17 Psalm 106:37 Matthew 4:24
Matthew 7:22 Matthew 8:16 Matthew 8:28
Matthew 8:31 Matthew 8:33 Matthew 9:32
Matthew 9:33 Matthew 9:34 Matthew 10:8
Matthew 11:18 Matthew 12:22 Matthew 12:24
Matthew 12:27 Matthew 12:28 Matthew 15:22
Matthew 17:14 Matthew 17:18 Mark 1:32
Mark 1:34 Mark 1:39 Mark 3:15 Mark 3:22
Mark 5:1 Mark 5:12 Mark 5:15
Mark 5:16 Mark 5:18 Mark 6:13
Mark 7:26 Mark 7:29
Mark 7:30 Mark 9:38 Mark 16:9
Mark 16:17 Luke 4:33 Luke 4:35
Luke 4:41 Luke 7:33 Luke 8:2
Luke 8:26 Luke 8:27 Luke 8:29
Luke 8:31 Luke 8:32 Luke 8:33
Luke 8:35 Luke 8:36 Luke 8:38
Luke 9:1 Luke 9:42 Luke 9:49
Luke 10:17 Luke 11:14 Luke 11:15
Luke 11:18 Luke 11:19 Luke 11:20
Luke 13:32 John 7:20 John 8:48
John 8:49 John 8:52
John 10:20 John 10:21 Acts 19:13
Romans 3:25 Romans 3:26 Romans 5:8
Romans 8:38 1 Corinthians 2:4 1 Corinthians 10:20
1 Corinthians 10:21 1 Timothy 4:1 James 2:19
Revelation 9:20 Revelation 16:14 Revelation 18:2

James
 
God believes in demons and so did the apostles and ancient Jews. And I assure you that Demons believe in God more than you do. 😉

Check out these verses (NIV) that all speak of demons.
Deuteronomy 32:17 Psalm 106:37 Matthew 4:24
Matthew 7:22 Matthew 8:16 Matthew 8:28
Matthew 8:31 Matthew 8:33 Matthew 9:32
Matthew 9:33 Matthew 9:34 Matthew 10:8
Matthew 11:18 Matthew 12:22 Matthew 12:24
Matthew 12:27 Matthew 12:28 Matthew 15:22
Matthew 17:14 Matthew 17:18 Mark 1:32
Mark 1:34 Mark 1:39 Mark 3:15 Mark 3:22
Mark 5:1 Mark 5:12 Mark 5:15
Mark 5:16 Mark 5:18 Mark 6:13
Mark 7:26 Mark 7:29
Mark 7:30 Mark 9:38 Mark 16:9
Mark 16:17 Luke 4:33 Luke 4:35
Luke 4:41 Luke 7:33 Luke 8:2
Luke 8:26 Luke 8:27 Luke 8:29
Luke 8:31 Luke 8:32 Luke 8:33
Luke 8:35 Luke 8:36 Luke 8:38
Luke 9:1 Luke 9:42 Luke 9:49
Luke 10:17 Luke 11:14 Luke 11:15
Luke 11:18 Luke 11:19 Luke 11:20
Luke 13:32 John 7:20 John 8:48
John 8:49 John 8:52
John 10:20 John 10:21 Acts 19:13
Romans 3:25 Romans 3:26 Romans 5:8
Romans 8:38 1 Corinthians 2:4 1 Corinthians 10:20
1 Corinthians 10:21 1 Timothy 4:1 James 2:19
Revelation 9:20 Revelation 16:14 Revelation 18:2

James
Hello James:

If you had made a list of prominent, distinguished people who believe in Communism it wouldn’t change my mind on that one either.

Best,

Tor
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top