Are there any novel concepts uniquely attributable to Christianity?
Post Reply
 
Thread Rating:
  • 0 Votes - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
15-05-2015, 11:39 AM
RE: Are there any novel concepts uniquely attributable to Christianity?
Limbo? The Holy Spirit?

“The first duty of a man is to think for himself” ― José Martí
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes Marozz's post
15-05-2015, 11:50 AM
RE: Are there any novel concepts uniquely attributable to Christianity?
(15-05-2015 07:51 AM)Bucky Ball Wrote:  
(15-05-2015 07:07 AM)Szuchow Wrote:  Maybe original sin and idea that god needs to kill himself while being his own son to forgive humanity for something?

As for transubstantiation Dawkins in "Unweaving the Rainbow" claims that this idea was known to Aryans in ancient India before Christianity was created.

That's actually rather interesting. The concept of "personal (ie *spiritual*) purificationan" (as opposed to Jewish *external* or *ritual* purifiaction") came in by the Greek route from Zoroastrianism : http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Zoroastrianism via Mithraism, (Tarsus was a center of Mithraism ... guess who came from there ?). I never paid any attention to the *actual* transubstantiation concept (the change of a *substance* to another) but the effect of *eating* a sacred substance to turn one *into* the sacred substance is not new. There are many interesting references for that especially from "animism" where hunters ate their prey with ritual respect to gain their courage and abilities. I'll have to check out that Indian reference. Thanks. It is somewhat interesting that the Hebrews FORBAD the priests to share the sacrificial offerings with anyone : (Leviticus 22:14 - 22:16) "Anyone who eats a sacred offering by mistake must make restitution to the priest for the offering and add a fifth of the value to it. The priests must not let the Israelites defile the sacred offerings brought to the Lord, by allowing them to eat the sacred offerings and so bring upon them guilt requiring payment. I am the LORD, who makes them holy." In Hebrew culture, it was a. direct, and b. external. The Greeks and Romans had an influence (as they were the competition)
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Greco-Roman_mysteries
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Origin_of_the_Eucharist

Transubstantation Dawkins write is about changing bread to the body, or at least it is so in polish translation. More info could be found in James Frazer "The Golden Bough" from which Dawkins has taken this little piece of information.

As for the Hebrews maybe it had something to do with exclusivity of priest caste? I've never really looked into this subject.

The first revolt is against the supreme tyranny of theology, of the phantom of God. As long as we have a master in heaven, we will be slaves on earth.

Mikhail Bakunin.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
15-05-2015, 01:08 PM
RE: Are there any novel concepts uniquely attributable to Christianity?
(15-05-2015 10:17 AM)Chas Wrote:  Innocents were often sacrificed - that was kind of the point.

There innocents is something we recognize only after the fact, like we do when it comes to the Jews, or black lynch mob victims. In the religious myth, and narratives the victims are not deemed as innocent, and the guilt of the mob, those that sacrificed these individuals is concealed.

The myth are ritualized forms of scapegoating. We might know the white mobs that lynched back victims were culpable and the victims were innocent, but we only acknowledge this as outsiders, from within that guilt is not acknowledged. In fact the perspective is reversed on the inside. The victim is blame worthy, and the mob's culpability is concealed.

To understand why this was, one would have to understand the purpose of scapegoating to begin with, and why early cultures were dependent on these rituals for preserving social harmony.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
15-05-2015, 01:11 PM
RE: Are there any novel concepts uniquely attributable to Christianity?
(14-05-2015 06:24 PM)GirlyMan Wrote:  Is there anything unique about Christianity or is it just a selective aggregation and amalgamation of previously proposed concepts? A metaphysical Drudge Report.

You could argue that any cultural artifact, when broken down to the basics, in bearing the characteristics of its progeny however changed or modified they may be overtime, are technically just copy-paste jobs; same pasta, different sauce.

Of course that's more a philosophical lens to approach the topic with, about how cultural ideas morph overtime and what exactly does it mean to call an idea or concept "unique." Probably not what people are lining up to do, so I'll bid adieu and proceed back to my corner.

[Image: giphy.gif]
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
15-05-2015, 01:13 PM (This post was last modified: 15-05-2015 01:18 PM by Tomasia.)
RE: Are there any novel concepts uniquely attributable to Christianity?
(15-05-2015 10:18 AM)Bucky Ball Wrote:  AND not only that, you misinterpreted him.

No, I didn't. I even quoted him to prove this.

But I'll go ahead and quote him again for you:

"Instead of blaming victimization on the victims, the Gospels blame it on the victimizers. What the myths systematically hide, the Bible reveals.

This difference is not merely “moralistic” (as Nietzsche believed) or a matter of subjective choice; it is a question of truth. When the Bible and the Gospels say that the victims should have been spared, they do not merely “take pity” on them. They puncture the illusion of the unanimous victimization that foundational myths use as a crisis-solving and reordering device of human communities." -Rene Girard


Quote:The POINT is, there IS NOTHING unique in Christianity, or the cults it developed from. There'a nothing really "reversed" in the Christian story. He tried to present it as such. In fact I don't think he knew *what* he was trying to say. Apparently he never really read the gospels.

What's not reversed? Are you saying the Gospel myth doesn't proclaim that the sacrificed victim is innocent?
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
15-05-2015, 01:33 PM
RE: Are there any novel concepts uniquely attributable to Christianity?
(15-05-2015 01:13 PM)Tomasia Wrote:  "Instead of blaming victimization on the victims, the Gospels blame it on the victimizers. What the myths systematically hide, the Bible reveals.

There is no "instead". The (innocent) "victims" were NEVER "blamed". Just chosen. He's attempting to create a false distinction where there is none to be made, and YOU agreed with it. There is no "truth" to be found in the gospels anyway. It's all propaganda.

"When the Bible and the Gospels say that the victims should have been spared, they do not merely “take pity” on them. They puncture the illusion of the unanimous victimization that foundational myths use as a crisis-solving and reordering device of human communities." -Rene Girard

Bullshit. 100 % false. Assertion with no explanation. The Bible never says that, and indeed Christianity is glad that their "victim" was sacrificed. ("Oh happy fault" ... etc from the Easter liturgy.). It was GOD that required the "sacrifice" and Christians thank their god for it all the time. There is nothing "punctured". He's an idiot.

(15-05-2015 01:13 PM)Tomasia Wrote:  What's not reversed? Are you saying the Gospel myth doesn't proclaim that the sacrificed victim is innocent?

An innocent sacrificed victim IS the standard scapegoat. There IS nothing "reversed" about that. Both you and Girard are bullshitters who try to do your little verbal "rabbits out of hats". There is no essential point he or you have. There is nothing different about the Christian sacrifice, and you can't tell us what is different about it in a simple declarative correct English sentence. Try one more time. What EXACTLY was "different" about the Christian sacrificail system ?

Insufferable know-it-all.Einstein God has a plan for us. Please stop screwing it up with your prayers.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 5 users Like Bucky Ball's post
15-05-2015, 03:51 PM
RE: Are there any novel concepts uniquely attributable to Christianity?
(15-05-2015 01:33 PM)Bucky Ball Wrote:  
(15-05-2015 01:13 PM)Tomasia Wrote:  "Instead of blaming victimization on the victims, the Gospels blame it on the victimizers. What the myths systematically hide, the Bible reveals.

There is no "instead". The (innocent) "victims" were NEVER "blamed". Just chosen. He's attempting to create a false distinction where there is none to be made, and YOU agreed with it. There is no "truth" to be found in the gospels anyway. It's all propaganda.

"When the Bible and the Gospels say that the victims should have been spared, they do not merely “take pity” on them. They puncture the illusion of the unanimous victimization that foundational myths use as a crisis-solving and reordering device of human communities." -Rene Girard

Bullshit. 100 % false. Assertion with no explanation. The Bible never says that, and indeed Christianity is glad that their "victim" was sacrificed. ("Oh happy fault" ... etc from the Easter liturgy.). It was GOD that required the "sacrifice" and Christians thank their god for it all the time. There is nothing "punctured". He's an idiot.

(15-05-2015 01:13 PM)Tomasia Wrote:  What's not reversed? Are you saying the Gospel myth doesn't proclaim that the sacrificed victim is innocent?

An innocent sacrificed victim IS the standard scapegoat. There IS nothing "reversed" about that. Both you and Girard are bullshitters who try to do your little verbal "rabbits out of hats". There is no essential point he or you have. There is nothing different about the Christian sacrifice, and you can't tell us what is different about it in a simple declarative correct English sentence. Try one more time. What EXACTLY was "different" about the Christian sacrificail system ?

Dunno who this Girard fellow is that Tomatillo is trying to tap dance to on what seem rather trivial semantic distinctions (is there anything unique to Christianity which doesn't require semantic mental gymnastics?) but it does appear that "An innocent sacrificed victim IS the standard scapegoat." From the article Chas linked "The preferred human sacrifice was an innocent child who, as a vicarious victim, represented the most extreme act of propitiation possible and was probably intended to guaranteed the future of the entire community." It sure seems like putting forth Jesus as the most innocent and perfect of all sacrifices is just a logical conclusion to the pagan sacrifices. And by "seems like" I mean it follows directly without requiring any semantic tap dancing or mental gymnastics.

There is only one really serious philosophical question, and that is suicide. -Camus
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 4 users Like GirlyMan's post
15-05-2015, 05:17 PM (This post was last modified: 15-05-2015 07:12 PM by Bucky Ball.)
RE: Are there any novel concepts uniquely attributable to Christianity?
(15-05-2015 03:51 PM)GirlyMan Wrote:  
(15-05-2015 01:33 PM)Bucky Ball Wrote:  There is no "instead". The (innocent) "victims" were NEVER "blamed". Just chosen. He's attempting to create a false distinction where there is none to be made, and YOU agreed with it. There is no "truth" to be found in the gospels anyway. It's all propaganda.

"When the Bible and the Gospels say that the victims should have been spared, they do not merely “take pity” on them. They puncture the illusion of the unanimous victimization that foundational myths use as a crisis-solving and reordering device of human communities." -Rene Girard

Bullshit. 100 % false. Assertion with no explanation. The Bible never says that, and indeed Christianity is glad that their "victim" was sacrificed. ("Oh happy fault" ... etc from the Easter liturgy.). It was GOD that required the "sacrifice" and Christians thank their god for it all the time. There is nothing "punctured". He's an idiot.


An innocent sacrificed victim IS the standard scapegoat. There IS nothing "reversed" about that. Both you and Girard are bullshitters who try to do your little verbal "rabbits out of hats". There is no essential point he or you have. There is nothing different about the Christian sacrifice, and you can't tell us what is different about it in a simple declarative correct English sentence. Try one more time. What EXACTLY was "different" about the Christian sacrificail system ?

Dunno who this Girard fellow is that Tomatillo is trying to tap dance to on what seem rather trivial semantic distinctions (is there anything unique to Christianity which doesn't require semantic mental gymnastics?) but it does appear that "An innocent sacrificed victim IS the standard scapegoat." From the article Chas linked "The preferred human sacrifice was an innocent child who, as a vicarious victim, represented the most extreme act of propitiation possible and was probably intended to guaranteed the future of the entire community." It sure seems like putting forth Jesus as the most innocent and perfect of all sacrifices is just a logical conclusion to the pagan sacrifices. And by "seems like" I mean it follows directly without requiring any semantic tap dancing or mental gymnastics.

And they purposely engineered his "innocence". No original sin, mommy was even made to be free from sin. This kind of puts him in context, from "the business" :
http://transformingviolence.nd.edu/asset...stract.pdf I see Girard, (even though he was a professor at Stanford), as quite the kook. He is (like every other YouTube nut case), absolutely convinced he's on to something absolutely unique and special. "Things Hidden Since the Foundation of the World" ... really ? hahahaha.

Insufferable know-it-all.Einstein God has a plan for us. Please stop screwing it up with your prayers.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
15-05-2015, 05:24 PM
RE: Are there any novel concepts uniquely attributable to Christianity?
(15-05-2015 01:08 PM)Tomasia Wrote:  
(15-05-2015 10:17 AM)Chas Wrote:  Innocents were often sacrificed - that was kind of the point.

There innocents is something we recognize only after the fact, like we do when it comes to the Jews, or black lynch mob victims. In the religious myth, and narratives the victims are not deemed as innocent, and the guilt of the mob, those that sacrificed these individuals is concealed.

The myth are ritualized forms of scapegoating. We might know the white mobs that lynched back victims were culpable and the victims were innocent, but we only acknowledge this as outsiders, from within that guilt is not acknowledged. In fact the perspective is reversed on the inside. The victim is blame worthy, and the mob's culpability is concealed.

To understand why this was, one would have to understand the purpose of scapegoating to begin with, and why early cultures were dependent on these rituals for preserving social harmony.

Huh?

Skepticism is not a position; it is an approach to claims.
Science is not a subject, but a method.
[Image: flagstiny%206.gif]
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes Chas's post
16-05-2015, 04:53 AM (This post was last modified: 16-05-2015 05:01 AM by Tomasia.)
RE: Are there any novel concepts uniquely attributable to Christianity?
(15-05-2015 03:51 PM)GirlyMan Wrote:  Dunno who this Girard fellow is that Tomatillo is trying to tap dance to on what seem rather trivial semantic distinctions (is there anything unique to Christianity which doesn't require semantic mental gymnastics?) but it does appear that "An innocent sacrificed victim IS the standard scapegoat."

Uhm, the victim is not innocent from the perspective of those doing the scapegoat. This is true not just in ritualized forms of scapegoating, but in non-ritualized forms as well. The Jews were innocent victims, but not from the perspective on the Nazis. The black lynch mob victims were innocent, but not from the perspective of the white mob that lynched them.

The cultures and their myths highlighting human sacrifice did not see the scapegoat victim as innocent, or place culpability on those killing them. So when you say "an innocent sacrificed victim", you're saying this as someone looking from the outside in, the way you would say the jews were innocent.

You won't find a single pre-judeo christian myth, in which the innocence of the victim is declared, no one that places the guilt on the mob. In the classic myths this is hidden. Where as in the Christian myth the innocence of the victim is revealed and declared.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
Post Reply
Forum Jump: