K
KarenNC
Guest
Why?–are you pre-disposed to "man is innatly good?–Or is it from a misundertanding of what Original sin actually means? Original sin is NOT the same as personal sin.
I understand that it is not personal sin. No I do not believe man is innately good. I also do not believe man is born innately evil or sinful or flawed. We are innately human.
I agree that humanity has a capacity for good or ill. However, the doctrine of infinite punishment for finite sin makes a mockery of the idea of a Deity who claims to be infinitely just. Such a Deity is not one I am prepared to worship.
My husband says he was taught that the Christ event was necessary for salvation from Hell. If this is true, then he is in agreement with my statement above about infinite justice. If it is not true, then he fails to see the necessity of the Christ event.
But the composition is very different–and utterly lacking in such homey details that do nothing to advance the story–like Jesus drawing in the dust–or actually detract from the “reliability” of the account–like women being the first witnesses to the Resurection. Some recent scholarship has tried to refute Lewis (a professional mythologist he knew a LOT of myths,) saing some ancient world fiction matches the Gospel’s style–but the comparisions to date have been very strained at best
So all the events described in the Gospels must be historically true because the Gospel writers were poor storytellers?
Fyi, you may want to look at some commentaries on Jesus’ drawing in the dust. It actually advances the story quite a bit.biblegateway.com/resources/commentaries/index.php?action=getCommentaryText&cid=4&source=1&seq=i.50.7.7. or the footnotes to the verse found at nccbuscc.org/nab/bible/john/john8.htm. It was far from simply doodling to pass the time.
**we are talking about people who the composition of a mythic story would have gained the composers nothing but ridicule, alienation from their communities, persecution, and even shamefull death. **
What, then, do you consider to be the minimum amount of ridicule and alienation from community or persecution at which the claims of a religion become “real” or “true”? Would it have been less real or true if Jesus and his followers were welcomed with open arms?
Christians have been alienated, ridiculed, persecuted and killed. Jews and Muslims have been alienated, ridiculed, persecuted and killed. So have Buddhists and Hindus. So were pre-Christian pagans of various religions, not infrequently by each other (though it wasn’t usually over religion). Neopagan religions are hardly welcomed with open arms and celebrated in today’s Western society (thankfully I don’t know of any that have been actually killed).
The only thing that I will grant that such alienation and persecution proves is that humans have a propensity to divide into “us” and “them” and do their best to either make “them” into “us” or to get rid of “them.” It is an issue of a power struggle, not the validity of a religion. As soon as a minority group becomes the majority, the unfortunate trend is for that group to start alienating, ridiculing, persecuting and, yes, sometimes killing, other groups.
Mythic stories are not “composed” in the way I am composing this email or an author would compose a book. Mythic stories grow organically out of the culture. They are the result of many sources which over time gain refinements, sometimes paring them down to the elements needed to convey the spiritual message, sometimes accruing additional details that enhance the message.
The phrase “just mythic” does a grave disservice to the roles of these stories in any culture or religion, including Christianity. It does not mean that the people who perpetuate the stories do not believe them at some level. Actually it means exactly the opposite. If the stories did not convey something that the society or subgroup felt was fundamental about themselves or about reality as they experience it, the stories would not persist. Such stories are important because they are not “just history.”
I am not making a claim that a committee sat down on a Sabbath afternoon and said “Gee, wouldn’t it be fun to create a new religion just to tweak the Pharisees?” and got out their papyri to write the thing wholesale (they did a pretty poor job of it if so).
My contention is that simply because someone (or a lot of someones) believes something to be true does not make it objectively more true than the beliefs of someone else. That just because a group of people are persecuted for their belief does not make it more valid or historically “true” than the belief of the persecutors or of other groups who are also persecuted.
I understand that it is not personal sin. No I do not believe man is innately good. I also do not believe man is born innately evil or sinful or flawed. We are innately human.
I agree that humanity has a capacity for good or ill. However, the doctrine of infinite punishment for finite sin makes a mockery of the idea of a Deity who claims to be infinitely just. Such a Deity is not one I am prepared to worship.
My husband says he was taught that the Christ event was necessary for salvation from Hell. If this is true, then he is in agreement with my statement above about infinite justice. If it is not true, then he fails to see the necessity of the Christ event.
But the composition is very different–and utterly lacking in such homey details that do nothing to advance the story–like Jesus drawing in the dust–or actually detract from the “reliability” of the account–like women being the first witnesses to the Resurection. Some recent scholarship has tried to refute Lewis (a professional mythologist he knew a LOT of myths,) saing some ancient world fiction matches the Gospel’s style–but the comparisions to date have been very strained at best
So all the events described in the Gospels must be historically true because the Gospel writers were poor storytellers?
Fyi, you may want to look at some commentaries on Jesus’ drawing in the dust. It actually advances the story quite a bit.biblegateway.com/resources/commentaries/index.php?action=getCommentaryText&cid=4&source=1&seq=i.50.7.7. or the footnotes to the verse found at nccbuscc.org/nab/bible/john/john8.htm. It was far from simply doodling to pass the time.
**we are talking about people who the composition of a mythic story would have gained the composers nothing but ridicule, alienation from their communities, persecution, and even shamefull death. **
What, then, do you consider to be the minimum amount of ridicule and alienation from community or persecution at which the claims of a religion become “real” or “true”? Would it have been less real or true if Jesus and his followers were welcomed with open arms?
Christians have been alienated, ridiculed, persecuted and killed. Jews and Muslims have been alienated, ridiculed, persecuted and killed. So have Buddhists and Hindus. So were pre-Christian pagans of various religions, not infrequently by each other (though it wasn’t usually over religion). Neopagan religions are hardly welcomed with open arms and celebrated in today’s Western society (thankfully I don’t know of any that have been actually killed).
The only thing that I will grant that such alienation and persecution proves is that humans have a propensity to divide into “us” and “them” and do their best to either make “them” into “us” or to get rid of “them.” It is an issue of a power struggle, not the validity of a religion. As soon as a minority group becomes the majority, the unfortunate trend is for that group to start alienating, ridiculing, persecuting and, yes, sometimes killing, other groups.
Mythic stories are not “composed” in the way I am composing this email or an author would compose a book. Mythic stories grow organically out of the culture. They are the result of many sources which over time gain refinements, sometimes paring them down to the elements needed to convey the spiritual message, sometimes accruing additional details that enhance the message.
The phrase “just mythic” does a grave disservice to the roles of these stories in any culture or religion, including Christianity. It does not mean that the people who perpetuate the stories do not believe them at some level. Actually it means exactly the opposite. If the stories did not convey something that the society or subgroup felt was fundamental about themselves or about reality as they experience it, the stories would not persist. Such stories are important because they are not “just history.”
I am not making a claim that a committee sat down on a Sabbath afternoon and said “Gee, wouldn’t it be fun to create a new religion just to tweak the Pharisees?” and got out their papyri to write the thing wholesale (they did a pretty poor job of it if so).
My contention is that simply because someone (or a lot of someones) believes something to be true does not make it objectively more true than the beliefs of someone else. That just because a group of people are persecuted for their belief does not make it more valid or historically “true” than the belief of the persecutors or of other groups who are also persecuted.
, and remind them of already shared belief–which included the Resurection of Jesus and that actual event foretold the believer’s bodily Resurection.