P
Peter_Plato
Guest
So where do you put the goalposts?
Or are you just very comfortable sitting on the sidelines watching the game of Moving Goalposts?
- Status
Or are you just very comfortable sitting on the sidelines watching the game of Moving Goalposts?
K
Kaninchen
Guest
It’s not a simple question - its existence is one set of questions, the ability to ‘know’ it is another set of questions and how seriously one is to take claims that somebody ‘knows’ it is quite another set of questions.
K
Kaninchen
Guest
It’s not a question of comfort, it’s a matter of wondering how long it will take for some people to realise that some approaches are ‘you can’t get there from here’ situations.
K
Kliska
Guest
But you do get from our perspective it is replies like this that seem to show that you are unwilling to have some type of dialogue that will lead anywhere?
M
M1Garand
Guest
Haven’t you figured out that she is playing with you and every one else on this forum with her relativistic drivel? You are being goaded into a circular discussion.But you do get from our perspective it is replies like this that seem to show that you are unwilling to have some type of dialogue that will lead anywhere?
R
Randy_Carson
Guest
G
Goya
Guest
Gotcha’. I understood ‘characters in a story’ to mean ‘fictitious characters’. So my last line applies–i.e.–you don’t believe the substantive content of their legacies–I’ll respect your beliefs here. My issue was with the suggestion that they were fictitious, or made up.
R
Randy_Carson
Guest
Kaninchen-
I spent some time this afternoon putting this together just for you. Enjoy!
Connections
Writing a few years after the turn of the first century, a man known to us as Ignatius of Antioch, was arrested by the Romans and sent via overland route to Rome where he was eventually martyred for his faith in Jesus Christ. Ignatius was the third Bishop of Antioch – his predecessors were Simon Peter and Evodius – and it is believed that Ignatius was ordained by Peter and was also known to Paul
The journey from Antioch to Rome was long, and along the way, his Roman guards allowed Ignatius to write letters to friends living in various cities, and seven of Ignatius’ letters including his letter to his friend, Polycarp, Bishop of Smyrna, have survived to this day. Polycarp himself would follow Ignatius in martyrdom many years later, and though the actual date of his death is disputed, it is interesting to note that the Roman historian, Eusebius, places it in the reign of Marcus Aurelius – ca. 166-167. According to an ancient eye-witness account of Polycarp’s death, he was bound and burned at the stake, but ultimately stabbed to death when the flames failed to touch him.
Polycarp’s disciple, Irenaeus of Lyons, mentioned his mentor frequently in his letters. Writing in the late second century in a letter to Florinus, Irenaeus describes his tutelage under Polycarp thus:
For, while I was yet a boy, I saw thee in Lower Asia with Polycarp, distinguishing thyself in the royal court, and endeavouring to gain his approbation. For I have a more vivid recollection of what occurred at that time than of recent events (inasmuch as the experiences of childhood, keeping pace with the growth of the soul, become incorporated with it); so that I can even describe the place where the blessed Polycarp used to sit and discourse-his going out, too, and his coming in-his general mode of life and personal appearance, together with the discourses which he delivered to the people; also how he would speak of his familiar intercourse with John, and with the rest of those who had seen the Lord; and how he would call their words to remembrance. Whatsoever things he had heard from them respecting the Lord, both with regard to His miracles and His teaching, Polycarp having thus received [information] from the eye-witnesses of the Word of life, would recount them all in harmony with the Scriptures. These things, through, God’s mercy which was upon me, I then listened to attentively, and treasured them up not on paper, but in my heart; and I am continually, by God’s grace, revolving these things accurately in my mind.
Irenaeus makes the unmistakable connection between Polycarp and John the Apostle and others who had seen the Lord Jesus. This is certain because elsewhere he wrote:
“4Polycarp also was not only instructed by apostles, and conversed with many who had seen Christ, but was also, by apostles in Asia, appointed bishop of the church in Smyrna, whom I also saw in my early youth, for he tarried [on earth] a very long time, and, when a very old man, gloriously and most nobly suffering martyrdom, departed this life, having always taught the things which he had learned from the apostles, and which the Church has handed down, and which alone are true. To these things all the Asiatic churches testify, as do also those men who have succeeded Polycarp down to the present time” (Against Heresies 3:3:4 [A.D. 189]).
In this same work, in fact, just one paragraph earlier, Irenaeus had provided a detailed history of the succession of bishops from the time of the Apostles to his own day:
“3The blessed Apostles [Peter and Paul], having founded and built up the Church [of Rome], they handed over the office of the episcopate to Linus. Paul makes mention of this Linus in the Epistle to Timothy. To him succeeded Anencletus; and after him, in the third place from the Apostles, Clement was chosen from the episcopate. He had seen the blessed Apostles and was acquainted with them. It might be said that He still heard the echoes of the preaching of the Apostles, and had their traditions before his eyes. And not only he, for there were many still remaining who had been instructed by the Apostles. In the time of Clement, no small dissension having arisen among the brethren in Corinth, the Church in Rome sent a very strong letter to the Corinthians, exhorting them to peace and renewing their faith. To this Clement, Evaristus succeeded; and Alexander succeeded Evaristus. Then, sixth after the Apostles, Sixtus was appointed; after him, Telesphorus, who also was gloriously martyred. Then Hyginus; after him, Pius; and after him, Anicetus. Soter succeeded Anicetus, and now, in the twelfth place after the Apostles, the lot of the episcopate has fallen to Eleutherus. In this order, and by the teaching of the Apostles handed down in the Church, the preaching of the truth has come down to us.” (Against Heresies 3.3.3, [A.D. 180])
Irenaeus mentions Clement, the fourth Bishop of Rome, and space does not permit me to connect him to Peter and Paul, but let me simply point out that Clement is mentioned by name in Paul’s Lettter to the Philippians (4:3).
So, what does all this mean?
(cont.)
R
Randy_Carson
Guest
Jesus had disciples including Peter, Paul and John, and they had disciples whom they ordained and appointed as Bishops; among these were Polycarp of Smyrna, Ignatius of Antioch and Clement of Rome. Polycarp, in turn, discipled Irenaeus of Lyons. Thus, from the time of the death of Jesus Christ in AD 33 to the death of Irenaeus in AD 200, nearly 170 years had passed, and yet, Irenaeus is able to document the successors of the Apostle Peter, Bishop of Rome, down to his own day.
Where in all of this did pious fiction become historical reality? All of these later men knew one another they personally knew the Apostles who knew Jesus…so, at what point did the fiction end and the historical Church begin?
Where in all of this did pious fiction become historical reality? All of these later men knew one another they personally knew the Apostles who knew Jesus…so, at what point did the fiction end and the historical Church begin?
G
Goya
Guest
^^^
K
Kaninchen
Guest
Where is ‘anywhere’?But you do get from our perspective it is replies like this that seem to show that you are unwilling to have some type of dialogue that will lead anywhere?
K
Kaninchen
Guest
The thing is that any number of religions can tell similar stories so at what point did their fiction end and their historical religious entity begin?
I should point out something here.
Jews don’t believe that anybody is disadvantaged in any way for not believing as we do.
In other words, there’s no sense in which I would prefer it if you stopped believing what you believe in - the best thing for any Christian is to be the best kind of Christian they can be.
K
Kliska
Guest
Thanks for making my point for me.
P
Peter_Plato
Guest
While I do agree with your comment on how to be the “best kind of Christian,” I am a bit confused about your contention that there is no “disadvantage” for not believing as you do. What would be the point of belief if it is of absolutely no benefit to anyone?
Are you under that impression that Jewish beliefs are nothing more than “pious fiction,” as well? The Easter Bunny, Santa Claus, and La Befana are pious fictions perhaps, but these “beliefs” have at least the benefit of keeping children behaved or, at least, innocent for a time. If there is simply no advantage, then what meaning can there be in it? I am genuinely puzzled.
It doesn’t mean we should believe only to attain some eternal reward, but it seems to me that simply knowing the truth or, at least, having an assurance that all the pain and struggle are, in the end, meaningful is an advantage. Yet, you are claiming there is no advantage at all. I find that you having remained Jewish very puzzling, given your pious fiction view of religions in general, including, it seems, your own.
I am, by your statement, led to think you believe Judaism is also merely pious fiction, since you say it is of no advantage in any respect. Certainly, that can’t be an “attractive” quality of any world view, since it would make no difference whether one believed it or not.
I am sure that Moses and the prophets would disagree with you, though. Are there not Old Testament verses decrying the people for being “lukewarm?” Yet, why would anyone get passionate about something that is by your definition, indifferent?
I am not clear why God would ask a nation of people to wander the desert for - What was it? - 40 years, for some purpose that made no difference to them.
W
willie_duggan
Guest
For me, part of the proof is that what began with 12 men in an upstairs room in Jerusalem approximately 2,000 years ago has stood the test of time, through persecution, through trial, through periods of flourishment, through period of stasis, through periods of schism and estrangement.
The core message and the core teaching from 2,000 years ago has stayed pretty much the same throughout that entire time.
The core message and the core teaching from 2,000 years ago has stayed pretty much the same throughout that entire time.
R
Randy_Carson
Guest
I’m not concerned with other religions, and since you spend a lot of time here at CAF, I’m guessing that you aren’t either. Otherwise, you’d be at their forums.
That’s nice.
Now, back to my original question. Since 2008, you have used the phrase “pious fiction” just over 30 times…once or twice in dialogue with a Muslim early on, but more recently, you bring that out when chatting with Christians. It seems to be your “Get Out of Jail Free” card, because playing it allows you to skate from any real discussion.
I am interested to know exactly how you can justify calling the Bible (Hebrew and Christian Scriptures combined) a work of “pious fiction” when the historical evidence I presented suggests that the Apostles were NOT fictional characters nor were they merely historical figures in a fictional text.
You made the assertion; the burden of proof is on you. Let’s hear your presentation.
R
Randy_Carson
Guest
To a logical conclusion based upon evidence - even if that conclusion is only the “best possible explanation.”
D
daler
Guest
Peter,
. If I may enter the conversation, speaking only for myself, my thoughts are that some of the “stories” which have been handed down as literal are in fact metaphorical with hidden spiritual truths. That the process of sifting wheat from chaff requires discernment on the part of “believers” naturally implies the transition from a comfort zone into an arena where real slings and arrows are hurled.
. The pressures of the herd impose upon rational minds the necessity of choice either to conform or suffer the consequences. What I hear Kan saying is that stories be accepted for what they are where evidence is lacking sufficiency to determine definite historical accuracy.
. This is where the limits of reality taper off and faith in the unknown ascends upon the wings of the spirit. We must feel the wind before we leave the nest of uncertainty behind us, lest we plunge into the depths of fantasy. How many inherit fantasy and call it faith?
. God has given us minds which are capable of reason, and rational understanding is no sin, nor irrational imitations virtue. To merely mimic and echo those around us is not a sign of faith, but of an attribute shared by lesser mammals in the interests of physical survival only. To be fully human requires more, if we are to blossom into spiritual existence and truly redeem our souls.
.
P
Peter_Plato
Guest
K
Kaninchen
Guest
The focus of Judaism isn’t so much about belief, it’s more about ‘doing’ - the meaning and living of a good/ethical life (the whole “orthopraxy’ v’s orthodoxy” business).
So, when one looks at Christianity, for example, one asks oneself whether following its precepts will enable somebody to live a good/ethical life which, one rather supposes, it would.
No, I’m under the impression that I draw the line differently - and that our relationship to text is more than a little different.
I’d leave the ‘pious’ part aside.
- Status