Research on Belief in God

[RetroActive]

I think you need to start a new thread Retro, you are out growing the God and Religion one. You do a lot of thinking - I can not keep up!

Not at all, no need for a new thread. Alchemy underpins all religions, all civilisation and culture in fact. It could be said that what I'm exploring here is biblical. Science and this spiritual quest are merging before our very eyes but then this spiritual quest created science so...

Alchemy
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=I3eancQx5pI

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=n33PWMWtwCM

By understanding this sort of thing history and cultural movements take on a whole new layer of 'reality'. Reading comprehension takes on a whole new layer of comprehension.

 

[Echoes]

Speaking of Brave New World, the Huxleys, Darwins, Galtons; the theory of evolution, eugenics, conscious evolution and transhumanism:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xZniI3QGPVA
(skip to 9:15)

Pierre Hillard who has a big influence on me once said that Brave New World was a globalist utopia, comparable to HG Wells' World Set Free and pointed out to Aldous' family, his brother Julian in particular, founder of WWF and first general director of the UNESCO. Aldous could very well dissociate with his family (and use the knowledge he got from it to warn people) and Brave New World was clearly a dystopia to me and not an utopia. The reader clearly sympathize with the Savage and not with Mustapha Menier.

His essay Brave New World Revisited and The Island are even more clearly dystopian. His 1958 interview that is circulating on the net is rather a warning, isn't it?

So that's one point I don't understand in Hillard's reasoning.

 

[Descender]

If I did not believe in God I woud kill Rhubroma and would find nothing wrong with it.

There you go. But then it's atheists who have "no moral barometre".

 

[rhubroma]

I think Rhub was hewing to a more metaphysical line, but you may find that this book answers some of your questions and sorts out the move from a particular individual to a discursive field of symbols that come to occupy different roles as they move through the centuries.

More generally, although not the only book on the subject by any means, its approach does much to clear up many of the less interesting binaries that were being tossed around a few days ago: church/state, laws/values, sacred/secular etc.

http://www.amazon.com/The-Kingdom-Glory-Theological-Government/dp/0804760160

That order, which the authors do not recognize, was borrowed from the late antique imperial court centered upon the sacrality of the ruler, which the Church fathers then transferred to a higher dimension, with all the Neoplatonic idealism that this entails.

 

[The Hitch]

Good news from Denmark.

http://www.worldbulletin.net/muslim-world/128887/denmark-to-ban-halal-and-kosher-slaughter-methods

 

[Maaaaaaaarten]

*What I say of Catholic orthodoxy naturally holds true for all the Christian churches, protestant, evangelical, new age alike, which, however, are utterly devoid the culture of ritual and the arts of their Catholic predecessor. And the only thing that’s plainly worse than religion, is religion without culture.

Maybe calling Protestantism religion utterly devoid of culture is a bit harsh, considering the likes of Bach being devout Protestants.

 

[rhubroma]

Maybe calling Protestantism religion utterly devoid of culture is a bit harsh, considering the likes of Bach being devout Protestants.

Sure but mine was purely in regards to the ritual, art and architecture of orthodoxy, of which music is, of course, also an integral part. Fair enough.

 

[Christian]

A while ago I asked in this thread whether jesus was illiterate... now I came across this short interview with Reza Aslan. I do not know who this person is, nor have I read his book. He seems to be a very religious person so that is not something I can relate to. But I fully agree with the assessment that it is historically near impossible that someone of jesus' origins and social status should be able to read.

The notion that a tekton, as Jesus is referred to in the Bible, a woodworker, which would make him the second-lowest rung on the social ladder in his time just above the slave and the indigent and the beggar, the notion that he would have had any sort of formal education, let alone the kind of education necessary to debate theological points with the scribes and the Pharisees, is difficult to reconcile with what we know of the history of the time.

http://blogs.wsj.com/speakeasy/2013/08/01/was-jesus-illiterate-author-reza-aslan-thinks-so/

 

[Jspear]

A while ago I asked in this thread whether jesus was illiterate... now I came across this short interview with Reza Aslan. I do not know who this person is, nor have I read his book. He seems to be a very religious person so that is not something I can relate to. But I fully agree with the assessment that it is historically near impossible that someone of jesus' origins and social status should be able to read.



http://blogs.wsj.com/speakeasy/2013/08/01/was-jesus-illiterate-author-reza-aslan-thinks-so/

Jesus was NOT illiterate. When Jesus was 12 years old he was in the temple asking the Jewish teachers questions. The Jews were amazed at his understanding.(Luke 2 speaks of this) Luke 2 also says that the child grew in strength, and increased in wisdom. In Luke 4 we see Jesus as an adult in the Synagogue reading the scriptures and interpreting them to His listeners. There will always be critics that say otherwise, but the scripture is pretty clear on this subject....I'll go with the bible.

 

[RedheadDane]

Good news from Denmark.

http://www.worldbulletin.net/muslim-world/128887/denmark-to-ban-halal-and-kosher-slaughter-methods

I haven't been following this much, but from what little I've read about it I've managed to catch two things:

1: The bit about animals being stunned before being slaughtered has actually been practiced for years.

2: Local Muslim authorities say that it's a fully acceptable Halal-slaughter because the animal isn't actually dead when the main vein is cut.

 

[Eshnar]

A while ago I asked in this thread whether jesus was illiterate... now I came across this short interview with Reza Aslan. I do not know who this person is, nor have I read his book. He seems to be a very religious person so that is not something I can relate to. But I fully agree with the assessment that it is historically near impossible that someone of jesus' origins and social status should be able to read.



http://blogs.wsj.com/speakeasy/2013/08/01/was-jesus-illiterate-author-reza-aslan-thinks-so/

That are a few scholars who believe that the whole "woodworker" thing was a code-word for a more important role.
According to the Bible Jesus was a direct descendant of David (I admit it's some time I don't read it, but I remember that pretty clearly ) and it seems somewhat strange that a direct descendant of David, like his father, could end up as a woodworker. There are many facts in the Bible that don't add up if taken literally. And that is ofc quite understandable, if we consider that it was not meant as a history book.

 

[rhubroma]

I haven't been following this much, but from what little I've read about it I've managed to catch two things:

1: The bit about animals being stunned before being slaughtered has actually been practiced for years.

2: Local Muslim authorities say that it's a fully acceptable Halal-slaughter because the animal isn't actually dead when the main vein is cut.

How hypocritical. Meat consumption takes place on an industrial scale today, and Denmark thinks that traditional slaughter methods are "unethical."

I had the honor of accompanying an Italian friend from Campagna, who recently went home to "kill the pig," a family rite, from which they will have meat throughout the year: cuts, sausages, prosciutto, etc., all home-made of course. The killing technique was to slit the animals throat then quarter it. My friend was the victimarius. The following evening we had a meal of various pork dishes and house wine (being from Tufo, where Greco di Tufo is made, it was quite good) for 35 people, all affectionately prepared by the mother, father, my friend and various aunts and uncles.

Nothing gets wasted and there is a solemnity to the affair that shows more respect for the animal than does going to any supermarket to buy pre-packaged meat, for which no connection between life, death and nourishment is established. The chain is broken so we can feel better. We do this act with total indifference, though somehow we are more humane.

Whereas my friend's act has been going on since the Stone Age, but the industrial slaughter of animals to meet the exasperated demands of today’s consumers is more principled? What a world.

 

[RedheadDane]

I always figured that the direct descendant of David ending up as a woodworker happened because the Family fell from power after the Babylonian exile.
Of course to make matters even more confusing the "Luke Genealogy" traces the lineage from David's son Nathan, rather than from Solomo, but I think I read somewhere that it's supposed to be Mary's genealogy, though of course Joseph could potentially be a descendant of both Nathan and Solomo, a few hundred years down the line not many would notice if a pair of distant cousins got married.

Now for a rather silly thought:

Joseph and Mary had to travel to Bethlehem for the census because he (and maybe she as well, not that it matters) was a descendant of David and everyone had to travel to the place their lineage originally came from. Now; who got to decide who was "the starting person of the lineage"? If the Israelites had wanted to really troll the Romans they should all have travelled to Ur, which is where Abraham was originally from.

 

[Eshnar]

I always figured that the direct descendant of David ending up as a woodworker happened because the Family fell from power after the Babylonian exile.

Falling from power is something, but when a noble family falls from power, it's still a noble family. Especially in the rather frozen society that was at the time.

About your last question: better not troll the romans

 

[RedheadDane]

I think the various occupying forces which ruled the area since the Exile made sure that none of the people who had a legitimate claim to the throne would have any chance of getting near it.

 

[Eshnar]

I think the various occupying forces which ruled the area since the Exile made sure that none of the people who had a legitimate claim to the throne would have any chance of getting near it.

Ofc not with the Romans controlling the region. But the Romans were always cool with the upper classes of the occupied countries. Nobles before occupation were always nobles after it. Without actual power ofc, but nothing like woodworkers or workers at all. And in any case, the Roman dominion over the region was relatively recent. Before that the Jews were independent iirc.

 

[Maaaaaaaarten]

A while ago I asked in this thread whether jesus was illiterate... now I came across this short interview with Reza Aslan. I do not know who this person is, nor have I read his book. He seems to be a very religious person so that is not something I can relate to. But I fully agree with the assessment that it is historically near impossible that someone of jesus' origins and social status should be able to read.

Why exactly would it be historically near impossible for a very religious jew in first century Palestine from a lower social standing to have learned how to read?

I mean, I'm sure the literacy rate in first century Palestine was low (for modern standards that is), but that doesn't automatically mean that people from a low social class are somehow not able to learn reading. Certainly, to me it seems hardly impossible for a very religious jew, spending a lot of time in the synagogue, to have found an oppurtunity to learn reading somewhere. Especially given the fact that the historical sources about the person in question testify to him being able to read.

 

[Eshnar]

Why exactly would it be historically near impossible for a very religious jew in first century Palestine from a lower social standing to have learned how to read?

I mean, I'm sure the literacy rate in first century Palestine was low (for modern standards that is), but that doesn't automatically mean that people from a low social class are somehow not able to learn reading. Certainly, to me it seems hardly impossible for a very religious jew, spending a lot of time in the synagogue, to have found an oppurtunity to learn reading somewhere. Especially given the fact that the historical sources about the person in question testify to him being able to read.

Learning to read was very difficult not because it was per se, but because it was considered inconvenient (I actually have no clue about the Jewish culture of the time - so this might be bs - but it was like this in many middle-east cultures of the time - again I'm not an historian but...) . Writing and reading was a very serious stuff that was considered a bit like today's industrial secrets. It was a privilege. I doubt lower classes had any access to religious scriptures, even in synagogues. That happened in western medieval culture too, before Gutenberg.

 

[Zam_Olyas]

Falling from power is something, but when a noble family falls from power, it's still a noble family. Especially in the rather frozen society that was at the time.

About your last question: better not troll the romans

The Genealogy of Jesus the Messiah

1 This is the genealogy[a] of Jesus the Messiah the son of David, the son of Abraham:

2 Abraham was the father of Isaac,
Isaac the father of Jacob,
Jacob the father of Judah and his brothers,
3 Judah the father of Perez and Zerah, whose mother was Tamar,
Perez the father of Hezron,
Hezron the father of Ram,
4 Ram the father of Amminadab,
Amminadab the father of Nahshon,
Nahshon the father of Salmon,
5 Salmon the father of Boaz, whose mother was Rahab,
Boaz the father of Obed, whose mother was Ruth,
Obed the father of Jesse,
6 and Jesse the father of King David.
David was the father of Solomon, whose mother had been Uriah’s wife,
7 Solomon the father of Rehoboam,
Rehoboam the father of Abijah,
Abijah the father of Asa,
8 Asa the father of Jehoshaphat,
Jehoshaphat the father of Jehoram,
Jehoram the father of Uzziah,
9 Uzziah the father of Jotham,
Jotham the father of Ahaz,
Ahaz the father of Hezekiah,
10 Hezekiah the father of Manasseh,
Manasseh the father of Amon,
Amon the father of Josiah,
11 and Josiah the father of Jeconiah[c] and his brothers at the time of the exile to Babylon.
12 After the exile to Babylon:
Jeconiah was the father of Shealtiel,
Shealtiel the father of Zerubbabel,
13 Zerubbabel the father of Abihud,
Abihud the father of Eliakim,
Eliakim the father of Azor,
14 Azor the father of Zadok,
Zadok the father of Akim,
Akim the father of Elihud,
15 Elihud the father of Eleazar,
Eleazar the father of Matthan,
Matthan the father of Jacob,
16 and Jacob the father of Joseph, the husband of Mary, and Mary was the mother of Jesus who is called the Messiah.
17 Thus there were fourteen generations in all from Abraham to David, fourteen from David to the exile to Babylon, and fourteen from the exile to the Messiah

 

[Zam_Olyas]

To be clear, we don’t have any record in the New Testament about Jesus working with wood, laying stones, or helping his pop out in the shop. The only references we have to Jesus’ vocation are the two times when He’s called a tekton or the son of a tekton (the word often translated “carpenter”).

“Is not this the carpenter (tekton), the son of Mary and brother of James and Joses and Judas and Simon?” (Mark 6:3).
“Is not this the carpenter’s (tekton) son? Is not his mother called Mary?” (Matt 13:55)
Now, tekton could refer to a carpenter or a stonemason, but the word simply refers to “one who works with his hands.” If someone wants to describe a carpenter, the phrase they’d use would be “a tekton of wood;” if a mason, then “a tekton of stone.” The absence of either stone or wood as a modifier indicates that the gospel writers didn’t specify which occupation Jesus and his father were engaged in. Mark 6:3 and Matthew 13:55 simply say that they worked with their hands—they were laborers who performed physically demanding and socially shameful jobs.

And I think this is the point. In highlighting Jesus’ occupation, the point is not that Jesus was a carpenter and not, say, a fisherman or a mason (or a mason and not a carpenter, etc.), but that Jesus was a blue-collar worker and not a white collar worker; a peasant and not a noble; a man of humble origins and was not born into a family of high social standing.

So how did the tradition arise that Jesus was a carpenter?

In the early church, some leaders assumed that Jesus worked with wood. Justin Martyr, for instance, noted that Jesus made various farm instruments out of wood—plows, yokes, and other tools (Dial. 88). In an effort to glorify Jesus’ humble occupation, the Gnostic Infancy Gospel of Thomas has the boy Jesus miraculously extending wood that his father cut too short. In any case, the retelling of Jesus’ vocation as a woodworker became as firm as a 2×4, so that even today this tradition is more or less assumed.

-

See more at: http://facultyblog.eternitybiblecollege.com/2011/12/was-jesus-a-carpenter/#sthash.ZR75x6xR.dpuf

 

[The Hitch]

I haven't been following this much, but from what little I've read about it I've managed to catch two things:

1: The bit about animals being stunned before being slaughtered has actually been practiced for years.

2: Local Muslim authorities say that it's a fully acceptable Halal-slaughter because the animal isn't actually dead when the main vein is cut.

If that is the case then there should be no issue. The law doesn't prohibit people from saying a prayer when they slaughter the animal or from believing their deity has blessed their food.

It merely prohibits them from breaking basic animal rights laws when doing so.

If they weren't slaughtering the animal that way in the first place, then there is absolutely no problem, everything continues as it was.

Maybe that is how it was in Denmark. I don't know. I do know in other countries there is a strong movement from the religious to stop animal rights laws from being enforeced, and animals very much are slaughtered without getting stunned, because they believe god tells them to do so.

 

[The Hitch]

How hypocritical. Meat consumption takes place on an industrial scale today, and Denmark thinks that traditional slaughter methods are "unethical."

Its about stopping animals from unnecessarily suffering, not about stopping them from being killed.

So no its not hypocrticial in the slightest. Its 100% the right thing to do. And I hazzard a guess that if it was the US Christian Right who were advocating slaughtering animals in a more painful way because their god told them so, you would be the most vocal opponent of it on the internet.

 

[Christian]

Why exactly would it be historically near impossible for a very religious jew in first century Palestine from a lower social standing to have learned how to read?

I mean, I'm sure the literacy rate in first century Palestine was low (for modern standards that is), but that doesn't automatically mean that people from a low social class are somehow not able to learn reading. Certainly, to me it seems hardly impossible for a very religious jew, spending a lot of time in the synagogue, to have found an oppurtunity to learn reading somewhere. Especially given the fact that the historical sources about the person in question testify to him being able to read.

Which historical sources are you refering to?

What you are asking me is, is it conceivable that as a poor peasant from the backwoods of Galilee, who grew up a woodworker, a day laborer really, an artisan, in a village that was so small and so poor that it didn’t have any roads, or bathhouses or synagogues, and its name did not appear on any maps, could he have nevertheless been so well educated that he could not only read and write but debate the scriptures, is that possible? Sure. But is it likely? No. It’s the job of the historian to talk about what is most likely.

http://blogs.wsj.com/speakeasy/2013/08/01/was-jesus-illiterate-author-reza-aslan-thinks-so/

 

[Netserk]

If that is the case then there should be no issue. The law doesn't prohibit people from saying a prayer when they slaughter the animal or from believing their deity has blessed their food.

It merely prohibits them from breaking basic animal rights laws when doing so.

If they weren't slaughtering the animal that way in the first place, then there is absolutely no problem, everything continues as it was.

Maybe that is how it was in Denmark. I don't know. I do know in other countries there is a strong movement from the religious to stop animal rights laws from being enforeced, and animals very much are slaughtered without getting stunned, because they believe god tells them to do so.

It was. For as long as I can remember. The new law doesn't change anything, other than the law of course

In fact 100% of Danish chickens are halal slaughtered, though most aren't marked as such.

 

[Maaaaaaaarten]

Which historical sources are you refering to?

The gospels.

And as for this one:

What you are asking me is, is it conceivable that as a poor peasant from the backwoods of Galilee, who grew up a woodworker, a day laborer really, an artisan, in a village that was so small and so poor that it didn’t have any roads, or bathhouses or synagogues, and its name did not appear on any maps, could he have nevertheless been so well educated that he could not only read and write but debate the scriptures, is that possible? Sure. But is it likely? No. It’s the job of the historian to talk about what is most likely.

I'd feel it better to stick with the historical sources. If Jesus was illiterate and could not debate scripture or whatever, how do you explain that the account we have of his live all describe doing exactly that?

So yes, it may be remarkable for Jesus to have learned how to read, considering his background. But if all our historical sources portray him as discussing scripture as a fundamental part of his public ministry, then what's the more likely conclusion? That all of that stuff is just made up, or that he learned to read, because he wanted to read the scriptures?