Author Topic: Non-biblical evidence  (Read 4388 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline Porter ODoran

  • PHILIA NIKA
  • Toumarches
  • ************
  • Posts: 12,133
  • St. John the Beloved, pray for me
  • Faith: Eastern Orthodox
  • Jurisdiction: GOAA
Re: Non-biblical evidence
« Reply #45 on: March 16, 2015, 04:19:19 PM »
Here's a good question for those in this thread: Why do you believe in Jesus?

I trust the Son of God because he and his Church testify of God that he is the Father that alone loves mankind, and teaches us how this is true, and teaches us what in response we can do. Without trusting his word, I will lose trust in God, lose meaning for world and man, and lose the ability to live. Where there is no trust, there is nothing but horror.

I love the Son of God because he loved me, and gave himself for me and works to rescue and preserve me.
"Love ... is an abyss of illumination, a mountain of fire ... . It is the condition of angels, the progress of eternity" (Climacus).

Quote from: Seekingtrue
Yes we who are far from sainthood we can recognize a living saint and I'm talking from personal experience.Yes they are gentle soo gentle it can not be described it is like gentleness and humility in one and also they have this light this energy it's beyond words...and when you are near them you feel ecstatic and very happy

Offline sakura95

  • Resident Philosonoob
  • OC.net guru
  • *******
  • Posts: 1,437
  • Faith: Orthodox seeker
  • Jurisdiction: Deanery of Great Britain and Ireland
Re: Non-biblical evidence
« Reply #46 on: March 16, 2015, 05:05:42 PM »
Here's a good question for those in this thread: Why do you believe in Jesus?

Jesus is the only God to sacrifice Himself on behalf of Creation and for it. No other deity in any mythology ever did this, at least to my awareness.
My Lord, My Lord, give my worthless soul the illumination of Wisdom in your mercy

Online Volnutt

  • Dull Sublunary Lover
  • Toumarches
  • ************
  • Posts: 11,242
  • Faith: Evangelical by default
  • Jurisdiction: Spiritually homeless
Re: Non-biblical evidence
« Reply #47 on: March 16, 2015, 05:12:27 PM »
Here's a good question for those in this thread: Why do you believe in Jesus?

Because no other religion appeals to me and when I was an Agnostic I nearly killed myself from the existential dread.
It's the double-edged sword of being lazy and being bored.- Reliant K

Quote
The breath of Thine Holy Spirit inspires artists, poets and scientists. The power of Thy supreme knowledge makes them prophets and interpreters of Thy laws, who reveal the depths of Thy creative wisdom. Their works speak unwittingly of Thee. How great art Thou in Thy creation! How great art Thou in man!
Akathist Hymn- Glory to God for All Things

Offline RobS

  • Formerly "nothing"
  • Archon
  • ********
  • Posts: 3,352
  • Christ Is Risen!
  • Jurisdiction: The thrilling romance of Holy Orthodoxy
Re: Non-biblical evidence
« Reply #48 on: March 16, 2015, 05:15:48 PM »
Here's a good question for those in this thread: Why do you believe in Jesus?
The better question I struggle with is how can I not believe in Christ. I have no doubts.

I think this Dostoevsky quote understands me: “If someone proved to me that Christ
is outside the truth, and that in reality the truth were outside of Christ, then I should prefer to remain with Christ rather than with the truth.”
« Last Edit: March 16, 2015, 05:23:08 PM by nothing »
"The business of the Christian is nothing else than to be ever preparing for death (μελεπᾷν ἀποθνήσκειν)."

— Saint Irenaeus of Lyons, Fragment XI

Modernist thinking and being consists of nothing but uncritical acceptance.

Offline Porter ODoran

  • PHILIA NIKA
  • Toumarches
  • ************
  • Posts: 12,133
  • St. John the Beloved, pray for me
  • Faith: Eastern Orthodox
  • Jurisdiction: GOAA
Re: Non-biblical evidence
« Reply #49 on: March 16, 2015, 05:43:50 PM »
Here's a good question for those in this thread: Why do you believe in Jesus?

Jesus is the only God to sacrifice Himself on behalf of Creation and for it. No other deity in any mythology ever did this, at least to my awareness.

It's actually a common trope.
"Love ... is an abyss of illumination, a mountain of fire ... . It is the condition of angels, the progress of eternity" (Climacus).

Quote from: Seekingtrue
Yes we who are far from sainthood we can recognize a living saint and I'm talking from personal experience.Yes they are gentle soo gentle it can not be described it is like gentleness and humility in one and also they have this light this energy it's beyond words...and when you are near them you feel ecstatic and very happy

Offline sakura95

  • Resident Philosonoob
  • OC.net guru
  • *******
  • Posts: 1,437
  • Faith: Orthodox seeker
  • Jurisdiction: Deanery of Great Britain and Ireland
Re: Non-biblical evidence
« Reply #50 on: March 16, 2015, 06:15:29 PM »
Here's a good question for those in this thread: Why do you believe in Jesus?

Jesus is the only God to sacrifice Himself on behalf of Creation and for it. No other deity in any mythology ever did this, at least to my awareness.

It's actually a common trope.

Oh man, I didn't know. Any examples?
My Lord, My Lord, give my worthless soul the illumination of Wisdom in your mercy

Offline Porter ODoran

  • PHILIA NIKA
  • Toumarches
  • ************
  • Posts: 12,133
  • St. John the Beloved, pray for me
  • Faith: Eastern Orthodox
  • Jurisdiction: GOAA
Re: Non-biblical evidence
« Reply #51 on: March 16, 2015, 06:30:18 PM »
Prometheus?
"Love ... is an abyss of illumination, a mountain of fire ... . It is the condition of angels, the progress of eternity" (Climacus).

Quote from: Seekingtrue
Yes we who are far from sainthood we can recognize a living saint and I'm talking from personal experience.Yes they are gentle soo gentle it can not be described it is like gentleness and humility in one and also they have this light this energy it's beyond words...and when you are near them you feel ecstatic and very happy

Offline sakura95

  • Resident Philosonoob
  • OC.net guru
  • *******
  • Posts: 1,437
  • Faith: Orthodox seeker
  • Jurisdiction: Deanery of Great Britain and Ireland
Re: Non-biblical evidence
« Reply #52 on: March 16, 2015, 06:45:17 PM »
Prometheus?

I guess so though Prometheus was defying the King of gods(Zeus) in Greek Mythology. Jesus followed the Will of the Father.
My Lord, My Lord, give my worthless soul the illumination of Wisdom in your mercy

Offline Porter ODoran

  • PHILIA NIKA
  • Toumarches
  • ************
  • Posts: 12,133
  • St. John the Beloved, pray for me
  • Faith: Eastern Orthodox
  • Jurisdiction: GOAA
Re: Non-biblical evidence
« Reply #53 on: March 16, 2015, 09:48:28 PM »
Adonis, Osiris, Persephone? Actually any deity that gives him or herself to allow the spring to come and harvest to be had, altho that's not the only kind of self-sacrificing god. I'm not sure why you're discounting Prometheus just because he had to disobey Zeus to save mankind.
"Love ... is an abyss of illumination, a mountain of fire ... . It is the condition of angels, the progress of eternity" (Climacus).

Quote from: Seekingtrue
Yes we who are far from sainthood we can recognize a living saint and I'm talking from personal experience.Yes they are gentle soo gentle it can not be described it is like gentleness and humility in one and also they have this light this energy it's beyond words...and when you are near them you feel ecstatic and very happy

Offline wgw

  • All scorpions must DIE!!!
  • Taxiarches
  • **********
  • Posts: 5,816
  • This icon is of St. Athansius.
  • Faith: Christian
  • Jurisdiction: Orthodox
Re: Non-biblical evidence
« Reply #54 on: March 16, 2015, 10:32:02 PM »
For that matter one could cite the redemptorist disobedience of Melek Taus in the Yazidi faith, which could have resulted in his annihilation, but instead led to his exaltation and extinguished the fires of Hell.  Which is actually baffling because all this transpired right after the creation of Adam, so it's not entirely clear who would have been burning in the Yazidi Hell, but regardless, the Peacock Angel, identified with the Islamic Shaitan, a word Yazidis are forbidden to pronounce, by disobeying God in refusing to bow before Adam passed his test.  So there's an example of such a redemptory action occurring in a folk religion that appears to be at least two dogmatic regenerations removed from Christianity.

But there is a reason for this according to the Catholics and that's the doctrine of general vs. special revelation, the latter being the specific truths of Christianity and the former being where other religions coincide with it; this coincidence is attributed to the loving nature of God and the information available about Him contained in his creation and also available to those who earnestly seek Him in every age even without having heard of Christianity specifically.  And this seems a good idea to me.  In other words, we find these redemption stories, as well as flood narratives or equivalents, across the range of human religion because this information is encoded by God into Creation itself and is also readily accessible through prayer.  Note that I'm not a universalist, I don't regard religions built on general revelation to have any value next to Christianity, but rather the coincidence is simply evidence of the loving nature of God.  Or maybe in some cases demons intentionally influencing false prophets with distorted but similiar narratives in order to erect stumbling blocks for us.  Certainly in the case of Islam and it's derivatives like Yazidism that appears to be the case.
Axios and many years to you, Fr. Trenham!

Offline sakura95

  • Resident Philosonoob
  • OC.net guru
  • *******
  • Posts: 1,437
  • Faith: Orthodox seeker
  • Jurisdiction: Deanery of Great Britain and Ireland
Re: Non-biblical evidence
« Reply #55 on: March 16, 2015, 10:34:31 PM »
Adonis, Osiris, Persephone? Actually any deity that gives him or herself to allow the spring to come and harvest to be had, altho that's not the only kind of self-sacrificing god. I'm not sure why you're discounting Prometheus just because he had to disobey Zeus to save mankind.

The circumstances of these figures are differing in nature than that of Jesus. Sure those deities actually endured suffering, death and pain but they did not do it for human beings. Adonis was killed out of revenge or jealousy. The whole Osiris story focuses on the Egyptian throne and Persephone had to give herself to Hades since she ate the pomegranate.

Prometheus didn't save mankind from anything as well. He gave them knowledge, not save them from some impending doom and death as Jesus did.
My Lord, My Lord, give my worthless soul the illumination of Wisdom in your mercy

Offline sakura95

  • Resident Philosonoob
  • OC.net guru
  • *******
  • Posts: 1,437
  • Faith: Orthodox seeker
  • Jurisdiction: Deanery of Great Britain and Ireland
Re: Non-biblical evidence
« Reply #56 on: March 16, 2015, 10:46:45 PM »
For that matter one could cite the redemptorist disobedience of Melek Taus in the Yazidi faith, which could have resulted in his annihilation, but instead led to his exaltation and extinguished the fires of Hell.  Which is actually baffling because all this transpired right after the creation of Adam, so it's not entirely clear who would have been burning in the Yazidi Hell, but regardless, the Peacock Angel, identified with the Islamic Shaitan, a word Yazidis are forbidden to pronounce, by disobeying God in refusing to bow before Adam passed his test.  So there's an example of such a redemptory action occurring in a folk religion that appears to be at least two dogmatic regenerations removed from Christianity.

But there is a reason for this according to the Catholics and that's the doctrine of general vs. special revelation, the latter being the specific truths of Christianity and the former being where other religions coincide with it; this coincidence is attributed to the loving nature of God and the information available about Him contained in his creation and also available to those who earnestly seek Him in every age even without having heard of Christianity specifically.  And this seems a good idea to me.  In other words, we find these redemption stories, as well as flood narratives or equivalents, across the range of human religion because this information is encoded by God into Creation itself and is also readily accessible through prayer.  Note that I'm not a universalist, I don't regard religions built on general revelation to have any value next to Christianity, but rather the coincidence is simply evidence of the loving nature of God.  Or maybe in some cases demons intentionally influencing false prophets with distorted but similiar narratives in order to erect stumbling blocks for us.  Certainly in the case of Islam and it's derivatives like Yazidism that appears to be the case.

Wow, I didn't know about the Yazidi mythology. I would say that is the closest to the Biblical narrative of Christ ever though there are obvious differences.

I'd take your view since it's my personal viewpoint as well. I don't believe that other religions have it completely wrong. They do on many points but they also got some things right as well. I'd say that's akin to St Justin Martyr's viewpoint regarding the similarities between Paganism and Christianity. He even goes as far as to consider the Greek philosophers such as Plato and Socrates as having received Divine Revelation though incomplete and borrowing from Moses which would be the case with Clement of Alexandria's viewpoint.

In agreement with your viewpoint, St Justin Martyr also mentions how Paganism is affected by demonic distortion. I wouldn't be surprised if this actually happened to the Yazidis or even Islam(Such as Muhammad receiving Divine Revelation from Gabriel the Archangel).
My Lord, My Lord, give my worthless soul the illumination of Wisdom in your mercy

Offline Porter ODoran

  • PHILIA NIKA
  • Toumarches
  • ************
  • Posts: 12,133
  • St. John the Beloved, pray for me
  • Faith: Eastern Orthodox
  • Jurisdiction: GOAA
Re: Non-biblical evidence
« Reply #57 on: March 16, 2015, 10:48:25 PM »
I wasn't replying to "No other deity has resembled our Lord in every particular" but to

Jesus is the only God to sacrifice Himself on behalf of Creation and for it. No other deity in any mythology ever did this, at least to my awareness.

Prometheus didn't save mankind from anything as well. He gave them knowledge, not save them from some impending doom and death as Jesus did.

You seem a little unclear on the story. In Hesiod, it begins when "Zeus ... imagined evils for mortal men in his mind, and meant to fulfill them" (Theogony 550ff). The first evil he inflicted was to remove from mortals warmth and fire, so their numbers would dwindle and lives become untenable. For daring to remedy this, Prometheus was bound to perpetual death at the talons of an eagle.
"Love ... is an abyss of illumination, a mountain of fire ... . It is the condition of angels, the progress of eternity" (Climacus).

Quote from: Seekingtrue
Yes we who are far from sainthood we can recognize a living saint and I'm talking from personal experience.Yes they are gentle soo gentle it can not be described it is like gentleness and humility in one and also they have this light this energy it's beyond words...and when you are near them you feel ecstatic and very happy

Offline Porter ODoran

  • PHILIA NIKA
  • Toumarches
  • ************
  • Posts: 12,133
  • St. John the Beloved, pray for me
  • Faith: Eastern Orthodox
  • Jurisdiction: GOAA
Re: Non-biblical evidence
« Reply #58 on: March 16, 2015, 10:50:01 PM »
WGW, yes, there are strains of Islam and Buddhism with savior-gods or -beings, but as these postdate Christianity, sometimes by a long time, I doubt that is what Sakura was thinking of.
"Love ... is an abyss of illumination, a mountain of fire ... . It is the condition of angels, the progress of eternity" (Climacus).

Quote from: Seekingtrue
Yes we who are far from sainthood we can recognize a living saint and I'm talking from personal experience.Yes they are gentle soo gentle it can not be described it is like gentleness and humility in one and also they have this light this energy it's beyond words...and when you are near them you feel ecstatic and very happy

Offline sakura95

  • Resident Philosonoob
  • OC.net guru
  • *******
  • Posts: 1,437
  • Faith: Orthodox seeker
  • Jurisdiction: Deanery of Great Britain and Ireland
Re: Non-biblical evidence
« Reply #59 on: March 16, 2015, 11:04:54 PM »
You seem a little unclear on the story. In Hesiod, it begins when "Zeus ... imagined evils for mortal men in his mind, and meant to fulfill them" (Theogony 550ff). The first evil he inflicted was to remove from mortals warmth and fire, so their numbers would dwindle and lives become untenable. For daring to remedy this, Prometheus was bound to perpetual death at the talons of an eagle.

Oh ok. Reading the text seems to indicate Zeus taking away man's ability to built fire since he was tricked by Prometheus who then further enrages him by giving them the knowledge back, resulting in his eternal punishment. I suppose this can be an example of a deity sacrificing itself on behalf of humanity(though it's still kinda different from Jesus)
« Last Edit: March 16, 2015, 11:05:52 PM by sakura95 »
My Lord, My Lord, give my worthless soul the illumination of Wisdom in your mercy

Offline Porter ODoran

  • PHILIA NIKA
  • Toumarches
  • ************
  • Posts: 12,133
  • St. John the Beloved, pray for me
  • Faith: Eastern Orthodox
  • Jurisdiction: GOAA
Re: Non-biblical evidence
« Reply #60 on: March 16, 2015, 11:13:29 PM »
So maybe you'd revisit your original statement and explain its significance?
"Love ... is an abyss of illumination, a mountain of fire ... . It is the condition of angels, the progress of eternity" (Climacus).

Quote from: Seekingtrue
Yes we who are far from sainthood we can recognize a living saint and I'm talking from personal experience.Yes they are gentle soo gentle it can not be described it is like gentleness and humility in one and also they have this light this energy it's beyond words...and when you are near them you feel ecstatic and very happy

Offline RobS

  • Formerly "nothing"
  • Archon
  • ********
  • Posts: 3,352
  • Christ Is Risen!
  • Jurisdiction: The thrilling romance of Holy Orthodoxy
Re: Non-biblical evidence
« Reply #61 on: March 18, 2015, 09:41:44 AM »
Here's a good question for those in this thread: Why do you believe in Jesus?

Jesus is the only God to sacrifice Himself on behalf of Creation and for it. No other deity in any mythology ever did this, at least to my awareness.

It's actually a common trope.
Yeah usually coming from cranks.
"The business of the Christian is nothing else than to be ever preparing for death (μελεπᾷν ἀποθνήσκειν)."

— Saint Irenaeus of Lyons, Fragment XI

Modernist thinking and being consists of nothing but uncritical acceptance.

Offline RobS

  • Formerly "nothing"
  • Archon
  • ********
  • Posts: 3,352
  • Christ Is Risen!
  • Jurisdiction: The thrilling romance of Holy Orthodoxy
Re: Non-biblical evidence
« Reply #62 on: March 23, 2015, 09:12:50 AM »
For Bultmann he wants to strip away any superstitious or legendary elements from Christianity, and get to the core of the Gospel message itself beyond whatever was contingent in the time period it was written. Yeah its radical, but I don't it is radical enough. His thinking of God has influenced me as well, I think even saying God is "transcendent" is problematic.
Bonhoeffer said the same in correspondence published in the posthumous Letters and Papers From Prison, and I agree with him -Bultmann did not go far enough -given his program.

Bultmann held the universe to be a closed continuum of cause and effect, which notion explicitly precluded any event like a space-time-physical resurrection; for Bultmann Christ "rose in the kerygma." A very good account of Bultmann's program is found in John Macquarrie, The Scope of Dymytholiogizing: Bultmann and His Critics -good in particular because Macquarrie corresponded extensively with Rudolf Bultmann who in turn gave highest praise for Macquarrie's repersentations of Bultmann's views. The book explains critical focus upon Bultmann's  staunch insistence upon the decisive act of God in Jesus notwithstanding his axiomatic denial of anything beyond the non-supernaturalist closed continuum of cause and effect; this, specifically constituted for him the limit of demythologization (the act of God was placed beyond it), a limit he insisted was a "paradox" rather than a contradiction or tension.

This manner in which Bultmann's program demythologized the supernatural but -very adamantly- left "God" in as a "paradox" is very arbitrary; in this sense I absolutely do think far enough *given his program* -there is nothing left but an empty shell with no kernal for anyone not willing to embrace his personal take on where the paradox should be/might be placed. His presupposition of the closed continuum and the impossibility as such of the supernatural was a sine qua non to the results of application of said axiom in his rationalist portrait of Jesus; as with the criticism at the conclusion of the Old Quest mentioned above the methods determined the result; output is simply input extrapolated to its natural conclusion.

Perhaps some of the blame for this sort of thinking might be attributed to the nature/grace dualism and medieval nature/supernature dichotomy central to Western theology from St. Augustine to the present, and in contradistinction to the paleo-orthodox contrasting only created vs. Uncreated, with the latter viewed apophatically.
Sorry for the late response xariskai. I must have confused your book recommendation with something else this weekend. I'll have to get the Macquarrie book.

As you might suspect I'm in agreement with Bultmann on many things: demythologization of the gospel, the irrelevance of the historical Jesus, the usefulness of Heideggerian existentialism in understanding the Christian message. My difference is one of emphasis. Bultmann's decisive work of God still holds out some event other than the gospel narrative itself that effectuates salvation. My view is that event is none other than the gospel.

So if you have qualms about Bultmann's views, you'll have greater qualms about mine. For me, transcendence happens via discourse, and particular narratives which do not involve truth statements, and that in a real sense God resides in the gospel text. What happens after the resurrection in the gospel? Nothing. There is no sequel. Or rather the sequel's written by doctrinal Christianity and its theology are badly written and add nothing of value.

I honestly don't understand the urge to make God's salvational activities "real" in the historical (hence empirical) sense. If God isn't transcendent he isn't at all interesting. If God is transcendent then he can saves as easily with a little story as he can with apodictic history. We don't have that history and never will. But we have the narrative. What more do we need?
"The business of the Christian is nothing else than to be ever preparing for death (μελεπᾷν ἀποθνήσκειν)."

— Saint Irenaeus of Lyons, Fragment XI

Modernist thinking and being consists of nothing but uncritical acceptance.

Online Volnutt

  • Dull Sublunary Lover
  • Toumarches
  • ************
  • Posts: 11,242
  • Faith: Evangelical by default
  • Jurisdiction: Spiritually homeless
Re: Non-biblical evidence
« Reply #63 on: March 23, 2015, 02:16:36 PM »
For Bultmann he wants to strip away any superstitious or legendary elements from Christianity, and get to the core of the Gospel message itself beyond whatever was contingent in the time period it was written. Yeah its radical, but I don't it is radical enough. His thinking of God has influenced me as well, I think even saying God is "transcendent" is problematic.
Bonhoeffer said the same in correspondence published in the posthumous Letters and Papers From Prison, and I agree with him -Bultmann did not go far enough -given his program.

Bultmann held the universe to be a closed continuum of cause and effect, which notion explicitly precluded any event like a space-time-physical resurrection; for Bultmann Christ "rose in the kerygma." A very good account of Bultmann's program is found in John Macquarrie, The Scope of Dymytholiogizing: Bultmann and His Critics -good in particular because Macquarrie corresponded extensively with Rudolf Bultmann who in turn gave highest praise for Macquarrie's repersentations of Bultmann's views. The book explains critical focus upon Bultmann's  staunch insistence upon the decisive act of God in Jesus notwithstanding his axiomatic denial of anything beyond the non-supernaturalist closed continuum of cause and effect; this, specifically constituted for him the limit of demythologization (the act of God was placed beyond it), a limit he insisted was a "paradox" rather than a contradiction or tension.

This manner in which Bultmann's program demythologized the supernatural but -very adamantly- left "God" in as a "paradox" is very arbitrary; in this sense I absolutely do think far enough *given his program* -there is nothing left but an empty shell with no kernal for anyone not willing to embrace his personal take on where the paradox should be/might be placed. His presupposition of the closed continuum and the impossibility as such of the supernatural was a sine qua non to the results of application of said axiom in his rationalist portrait of Jesus; as with the criticism at the conclusion of the Old Quest mentioned above the methods determined the result; output is simply input extrapolated to its natural conclusion.

Perhaps some of the blame for this sort of thinking might be attributed to the nature/grace dualism and medieval nature/supernature dichotomy central to Western theology from St. Augustine to the present, and in contradistinction to the paleo-orthodox contrasting only created vs. Uncreated, with the latter viewed apophatically.
Sorry for the late response xariskai. I must have confused your book recommendation with something else this weekend. I'll have to get the Macquarrie book.

As you might suspect I'm in agreement with Bultmann on many things: demythologization of the gospel, the irrelevance of the historical Jesus, the usefulness of Heideggerian existentialism in understanding the Christian message. My difference is one of emphasis. Bultmann's decisive work of God still holds out some event other than the gospel narrative itself that effectuates salvation. My view is that event is none other than the gospel.

So if you have qualms about Bultmann's views, you'll have greater qualms about mine. For me, transcendence happens via discourse, and particular narratives which do not involve truth statements, and that in a real sense God resides in the gospel text. What happens after the resurrection in the gospel? Nothing. There is no sequel. Or rather the sequel's written by doctrinal Christianity and its theology are badly written and add nothing of value.

I honestly don't understand the urge to make God's salvational activities "real" in the historical (hence empirical) sense. If God isn't transcendent he isn't at all interesting. If God is transcendent then he can saves as easily with a little story as he can with apodictic history. We don't have that history and never will. But we have the narrative. What more do we need?

We need something worth dying for. Those 21 men who lost their lives on that beach in Libya did so for something greater than just a charming story.
It's the double-edged sword of being lazy and being bored.- Reliant K

Quote
The breath of Thine Holy Spirit inspires artists, poets and scientists. The power of Thy supreme knowledge makes them prophets and interpreters of Thy laws, who reveal the depths of Thy creative wisdom. Their works speak unwittingly of Thee. How great art Thou in Thy creation! How great art Thou in man!
Akathist Hymn- Glory to God for All Things

Offline Niko92

  • Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 113
Re: Non-biblical evidence
« Reply #64 on: March 23, 2015, 04:56:58 PM »
For Bultmann he wants to strip away any superstitious or legendary elements from Christianity, and get to the core of the Gospel message itself beyond whatever was contingent in the time period it was written. Yeah its radical, but I don't it is radical enough. His thinking of God has influenced me as well, I think even saying God is "transcendent" is problematic.
Bonhoeffer said the same in correspondence published in the posthumous Letters and Papers From Prison, and I agree with him -Bultmann did not go far enough -given his program.

Bultmann held the universe to be a closed continuum of cause and effect, which notion explicitly precluded any event like a space-time-physical resurrection; for Bultmann Christ "rose in the kerygma." A very good account of Bultmann's program is found in John Macquarrie, The Scope of Dymytholiogizing: Bultmann and His Critics -good in particular because Macquarrie corresponded extensively with Rudolf Bultmann who in turn gave highest praise for Macquarrie's repersentations of Bultmann's views. The book explains critical focus upon Bultmann's  staunch insistence upon the decisive act of God in Jesus notwithstanding his axiomatic denial of anything beyond the non-supernaturalist closed continuum of cause and effect; this, specifically constituted for him the limit of demythologization (the act of God was placed beyond it), a limit he insisted was a "paradox" rather than a contradiction or tension.

This manner in which Bultmann's program demythologized the supernatural but -very adamantly- left "God" in as a "paradox" is very arbitrary; in this sense I absolutely do think far enough *given his program* -there is nothing left but an empty shell with no kernal for anyone not willing to embrace his personal take on where the paradox should be/might be placed. His presupposition of the closed continuum and the impossibility as such of the supernatural was a sine qua non to the results of application of said axiom in his rationalist portrait of Jesus; as with the criticism at the conclusion of the Old Quest mentioned above the methods determined the result; output is simply input extrapolated to its natural conclusion.

Perhaps some of the blame for this sort of thinking might be attributed to the nature/grace dualism and medieval nature/supernature dichotomy central to Western theology from St. Augustine to the present, and in contradistinction to the paleo-orthodox contrasting only created vs. Uncreated, with the latter viewed apophatically.
Sorry for the late response xariskai. I must have confused your book recommendation with something else this weekend. I'll have to get the Macquarrie book.

As you might suspect I'm in agreement with Bultmann on many things: demythologization of the gospel, the irrelevance of the historical Jesus, the usefulness of Heideggerian existentialism in understanding the Christian message. My difference is one of emphasis. Bultmann's decisive work of God still holds out some event other than the gospel narrative itself that effectuates salvation. My view is that event is none other than the gospel.

So if you have qualms about Bultmann's views, you'll have greater qualms about mine. For me, transcendence happens via discourse, and particular narratives which do not involve truth statements, and that in a real sense God resides in the gospel text. What happens after the resurrection in the gospel? Nothing. There is no sequel. Or rather the sequel's written by doctrinal Christianity and its theology are badly written and add nothing of value.

I honestly don't understand the urge to make God's salvational activities "real" in the historical (hence empirical) sense. If God isn't transcendent he isn't at all interesting. If God is transcendent then he can saves as easily with a little story as he can with apodictic history. We don't have that history and never will. But we have the narrative. What more do we need?

So wait you are saying that its all just a story and there is no need for a historical Jesus along with everything else that happened in the gospels etc etc?

Offline wgw

  • All scorpions must DIE!!!
  • Taxiarches
  • **********
  • Posts: 5,816
  • This icon is of St. Athansius.
  • Faith: Christian
  • Jurisdiction: Orthodox
Re: Non-biblical evidence
« Reply #65 on: March 23, 2015, 05:38:05 PM »
For that matter one could cite the redemptorist disobedience of Melek Taus in the Yazidi faith, which could have resulted in his annihilation, but instead led to his exaltation and extinguished the fires of Hell.  Which is actually baffling because all this transpired right after the creation of Adam, so it's not entirely clear who would have been burning in the Yazidi Hell, but regardless, the Peacock Angel, identified with the Islamic Shaitan, a word Yazidis are forbidden to pronounce, by disobeying God in refusing to bow before Adam passed his test.  So there's an example of such a redemptory action occurring in a folk religion that appears to be at least two dogmatic regenerations removed from Christianity.

But there is a reason for this according to the Catholics and that's the doctrine of general vs. special revelation, the latter being the specific truths of Christianity and the former being where other religions coincide with it; this coincidence is attributed to the loving nature of God and the information available about Him contained in his creation and also available to those who earnestly seek Him in every age even without having heard of Christianity specifically.  And this seems a good idea to me.  In other words, we find these redemption stories, as well as flood narratives or equivalents, across the range of human religion because this information is encoded by God into Creation itself and is also readily accessible through prayer.  Note that I'm not a universalist, I don't regard religions built on general revelation to have any value next to Christianity, but rather the coincidence is simply evidence of the loving nature of God.  Or maybe in some cases demons intentionally influencing false prophets with distorted but similiar narratives in order to erect stumbling blocks for us.  Certainly in the case of Islam and it's derivatives like Yazidism that appears to be the case.

Wow, I didn't know about the Yazidi mythology. I would say that is the closest to the Biblical narrative of Christ ever though there are obvious differences.

I'd take your view since it's my personal viewpoint as well. I don't believe that other religions have it completely wrong. They do on many points but they also got some things right as well. I'd say that's akin to St Justin Martyr's viewpoint regarding the similarities between Paganism and Christianity. He even goes as far as to consider the Greek philosophers such as Plato and Socrates as having received Divine Revelation though incomplete and borrowing from Moses which would be the case with Clement of Alexandria's viewpoint.

In agreement with your viewpoint, St Justin Martyr also mentions how Paganism is affected by demonic distortion. I wouldn't be surprised if this actually happened to the Yazidis or even Islam(Such as Muhammad receiving Divine Revelation from Gabriel the Archangel).

I agree with that.  I think the Yazidis were Syrian Gnostics who came under the leadership of Sheikh Adi, a disillusioned Sufi mystic, who realized Islam was evil and reasoned that what the Muslims thought of as Shaitan must actually be good.  This explains their "devil worship" and also the substrata of Christian praxis that exist in their incredibly obscure and complex faith tradition.  Yazidism is a mystifying tribal religion, syncretic in the extreme.  Compare this with Japanese Shintoism, which is a very simple, even elegant, expression of animism characteristic of tribal religions.

But both religions are fascinating to study.

It's pure coincidence, perhaps, but Shinto priests often celebrate their liturgies ad orientem, facing the rising Sun, which is important in Japanese ethnocultural mythology.  Is this general revelation at work?  Yes.

By the way,,regarding Yazidis, I believe the current form of their religion does date from around AD 1200 and is influenced by Christianity and Islam.  But aspects of it are incredibly ancient and relate to Zoroastrianism, Mandaeism, Gnosticism and other Kurdish tribal religions.  The Yarsanis, who revere a Sheikh Adi like figure named Sultan Sahak and also believe in an emanation of seven archangels for example, are very similiar, if more subdued and esoteric in the manner of the Druze.  So there are ancient rheological ideas, or should we say errors, present in these religions.  And there are traces of general revelation, which is why the Roman Catholics did get the idea of general vs. special revelation right, and one does indeed see this idea in the writings of St. Justin Martyr.
Axios and many years to you, Fr. Trenham!

Offline xariskai

  • юродивый/yurodivy
  • OC.net guru
  • *******
  • Posts: 1,612
  • יהוה עזי ומגני
  • Faith: Orthodox
Re: Non-biblical evidence
« Reply #66 on: March 29, 2015, 02:46:39 AM »
Sorry for the late response xariskai
No apologies necessary; from your worst I could learn better habits than my own.  8)