Story of Jesus Christ was 'fabricated to pacify the poor', claims Biblical scholar Joseph Atwill

[mrbaapt]

That's not really the way it works, though. Building a cathedral employs hundreds of people for years-- sometimes several hundred years. Afterwards you have something of infinite value; whereas, before you had a bunch of rocks in a quarry somewhere. Who was oppressed in this process?

Or think of the blank slab of marble that became Michelangelo's David. Who was that blank slab of marble feeding? Who had to starve for Michelangelo to carve it? And what has it done since? (Generated millions and millions and millions of dollars.)

This is a similar argument people use to justify the Royal family in the UK. Yes it makes money (by accident) but that wasn't the original purpose.

 

[ithinktheymad]

They created the wealth through effort.

I suggest libs look that idea up.

Not following you here.

 

[ndwolfwood]

Not following you here.

You are implying they generated wealth from stealing effort from others.

You are on a slippery slope and you don't have the footing you think you do.

 

[ithinktheymad]

You are implying they generated wealth from stealing effort from others.

You are on a slippery slope and you don't have the footing you think you do.

Are you not familiar with the concept of tithes?

 

[mrbaapt]

Are you not familiar with the concept of tithes?

Tax free tithes in the US even better!

 

[ndwolfwood]

Are you not familiar with the concept of tithes?

Very. People contribute towards a group fund so that they may receive the benefits of the organization.

 

[ithinktheymad]

Very. People contribute towards a group fund so that they may receive the benefits of the organization.

What were those benefits in the middle ages?

 

[ndwolfwood]

What were those benefits in the middle ages?

Don't know, wasn't around to learn the day-to-day back then.

 

[Fedorable]

Are you not familiar with the concept of tithes?

I love titties.

Spoiler

 

[ithinktheymad]

I love titties.

I don't think the church shares your sentiment. They're tolerated if married.

 

[ithinktheymad]

Don't know, wasn't around to learn the day-to-day back then.

Definitely wasn't a free or low cost literacy program!

 

[Jimmy Jazz]

There are no remnants of Africans in the Middle East even though millions of African slaves were imported to the Middle East, up until the late 1800's.

lol are you serious? My friend from Saudi Arabia back in the day showed me pictures of his black Saudi friends on facebook. He said the blacks in Saudi Arabia are very nice and they get along well with everybody.

It might be a fucked up thing to say but African-Americans should consider themselves fortunate that they ended up on the other side of the Atlantic Ocean, rather than into the hands of the Middle Easterners. Christian slavemasters, while brutal, were not genocidal unlike the Islamic ones.

not genocidal towards blacks anyway, which at the end of the day is all that really matters

 

[skaleton]

The fact that you somehow associated "unleashing power" with "social mobility" coupled with your "You can do anything if the potential is there" attitude tells me that you missed my point. Nobody can do whatever he likes unless certain conditions are met. Individual's inner potential isn't the only thing that counts. Great men depend on the times and societies in which they lived as much as vice-versa, even more. That is why mankind doesn't produce great men anymore. We are in the age of unprecedented mediocrity.

I never said unleashing power, accumulating power, and I meant that in relation to the adulation of Napoleon, whom I see revered because of his accumulation of power. The social mobility comment was similarly tied to someone seeing greatness in those who accumulate power.

I agree that inner potential is not all that counts in what a person “accomplishes” in the end, but the excuses for why this day and age are different than those in the past will limit what you are able to “accomplish”. I see inner potential as a chassis, a frame on which you build. Your frame may not be the greatest, and it may be best suited to another place or time but you can still optimize it to fit your goals. This is the day and age we live in, for this lifetime you have to work within those confines, that is realistic. And if everyone is mediocre shouldn’t rising above that be even simpler?

But as I already said, this discussion is pointless unless you and I come to terms on what is greatness, mediocre, power, potential, master/slave and a few other things....and for that to happen, you would have to read and understand both the entire Classical literature and Nietzsche's opus. Mere reading it takes a lot of time, whereas understanding it is a whole new ballgame. I am sure you are equipped with the intellect to understand it but I am not sure that you posses other decisive prerequisites (although some of the opinions you displayed in this thread could be a sign that you actually do posses them). I am not sure that you belong to the type that is meant to understand it i.e. the type that instinctively identifies with it.

I don’t think it means I would have to read all of classical literature for us to have a discussion. I would have to understand where you stand, your opinion, and you would have to understand where I stand,my opinion. Each of us informed by different works, experiences, teachings, literature etc. but in the end we are each just putting forth our own version of philosophy.

My moral truth in regards to greatness is that the greatest achievement is to help others learn to take on something akin to Nietzsche’s master mentality. Attempts to subjugate others are, in my mind, immoral. Morally the concept of the golden rule is spot on in my own view. To create masters from slaves requires upholding some of the values that Nietzsche believes to be values of the slave. But taking those attributes and enacting them from a position of strength is different. I agree that those values taken from a perspective of timidity are “bad”but they are not inherently weak values. It is my belief that all of society can be made stronger by raising slaves into masters.

I stand behind some communist ideals not because they save the weak from the strong but because at their heart they seek to show all individuals that they are masters. A utopia to me is a citizenry who can stand individually as pillars holding up the lentil of society, but when one pillar falls it should be rebuilt, not taken advantage of. Advocating for a society of this sort, one that builds up the weak, is a weak position to take if you are the broken pillar. Advocating for a society of this sort when you are a functional pillar taking on the broken pillars load and assisting in the repair is not weakness or “bad”. Nietzsche’s ideas are his own, many of which I agree with, but the morality he draws from his ideals is also his own, and as a master of self I recognize that his ideas on morality are not necessarily moral in my view. I have never been one with a slave mentality, but I do not strive for mastery beyond that of myself, practicing acts of stoicism is helpful to me in that regard.

Nietzsche’s view of only master and slave I do not believe to be a complete view of the world. When he sees cloven hooves he sees lambs and calves, I see bulls and buffalo. I seek to be a bull in life, not a lion. And when a lion steps up I want my compatriots by my side to be bulls not calves. For me( and I may be wrong here, my understanding of Nietzsche is mainly in passing I never read much) I associate Nietzsche’s master concept with a predatory mindset that I as find as reprehensible for an adult to take in life as taking on the mindset of a slave/calf.

TLDR youre probably right that I don’t instinctually identify with his conclusion but I agree with a lot of what he sees to draw that conclusion.

You're right in one thing, though, and that is that philosophers don't fulfill the same role as people we mentioned, at least not what passes as a philosopher in people's mind. True philosophers on the other hand do fulfill the same role, not in the sense that they also conquer militarily but that they are masters in their own right (see Aristotle's and Nietzsche's definition of what constitutes a master before you add your own meaning to my words).

I really like the bold part, I always thought the greatest philosophers weren’t philosophers.

Thanks for giving me interesting things to think about at work. If I read one of Nietzsche’s works what would you suggest it be?

 

[meauneau]

No I wouldn't agree, we are starting with a different definition of "Christianity". Christians to me are followers of Christ, and that's it no other requirement needed. It seems like you believe a Christian can only be a follower of Christ that believes in the doctrines of Paul. There were many different forms of Christianity in the early church believing in very different things, just because the Pauline's had the most swords and slaughtered the rest doesn't make their doctrine true.

Ebionites Christians - Believed Jesus Christ was the Jewish Messiah
Marconian Christians - Dualists and rejected the old testament, believed Christ was a manifestation of the Greek Logos
Gnostic Christians - Hellenized, Platonic and Dualist followers of Christ
Pauline Christians - Syncretic blend of Hellenism, Judaism and Zorastrian Dualism

They were all followers of Christ so they are all Christians but believe different things.

Then I stand corrected.

 

[MayhemMonkey]

I know I want to be fucking God. You don't. It comes down to strength as was discussed. You don't fuckin dare to be God. Thus you don't see him in you.

lol you sound like a cliched super villain

 

[PainIsLIfe]

And the sea gave up the dead which were in it, and death and Hades gave up the dead which were in them; and they were judged, every one of them according to their deeds. Then death and Hades were thrown into the lake of fire This is the second death, the lake of fire.

The Bible is incoherent and can't even decide how many realms of the dead there are in this belief system.

You're quoting Revalations, but earlier you said Jesus said Hades.

Revalations is John's vision so Jesus never said anything in it.


AND I'll have to wait until I'm home to see what the actual text said before translstions.

 

[skaleton]

You keep saying blacks didn't earn their freedom. Explain to me how a successful black freedom rebellion would have gone down?

I think it would have gone down like Nat Turners rebellion. MLK managed to achieve gains in an effective way. A rebellion would have been futile. But that doesn’t change the fact that freedom was not “earned”. Whether you find that important can be debated, but the fact that freedom was given is just a fact.

I happen to believe, as I stated earlier, that there is something missing lost when you don’t take it. It doesn’t mean trying to take it would be the most effective path.

 

[ithinktheymad]

You're quoting Revalations, but earlier you said Jesus said Hades.

Revalations is John's vision so Jesus never said anything in it.


AND I'll have to wait until I'm home to see what the actual text said before translstions.

I was using that verse to dismiss the "translation" argument that poster was running to. I was pointing out one of many incongruencies in the Bible.

Are you familiar with Jesus' parable of Lazarus on the rich man?
22 “The time came when the beggar died and the angels carried him to Abraham’s side. The rich man also died and was buried. 23 In Hades, where he was in torment, he looked up and saw Abraham far away, with Lazarus by his side. 24 So he called to him, ‘Father Abraham, have pity on me and send Lazarus to dip the tip of his finger in water and cool my tongue, because I am in agony in this fire.’

 

[A.S. Deep]

lol you sound like a cliched super villain

Fitting for a guy whose username is JonesBones.

 

[skaleton]

Everyone gets that there is more to this life than what we get.

An infinite number of galaxies to this universe, an infinite number of dimensions in this universe, and probably an infinite number of universes all but seals the idea that there is more out there. Also that we are part of it a safe we speak.

I actually think some nasty people decided to cheapen our existence by getting other people to become nihilistic by brainwashing so when these people continue their crimes and oppression they are only met with apathy and "nothing matters"

Even if there is more out there it doesn’t nullify nihilism. If you zoom out far enough it seems almost guaranteed to me that nihilism is the real truth. If you believe in big bang/contraction theories then all those galaxies, and everything ever done in them will be swallowed up destroyed and return to that which they came from. But that doesn’t mean on the small scale, a human lifetime, that nothing matters.

For me the knowledge of infinite universes and galaxies is as uplifting as the idea that in the end...it doesn’t even matter. But if it doesn’t matter then for your lifetime it is what you make of it, and for our lifetimes we do exist, and those universes exist and we are all interconnected. None of that is cheapened by nihilism.