Longfellow
Well-Known Member
My ideal church is people studying and practicing together, with love for Jesus and trust in him, learning together to live together the way he says to live.
I Want to Start a Mythicist Cult
- Thread starter The XYL
- Start date
Longfellow
Well-Known Member
That takes me completely by surprise. You don't see him openly and self-admittedly despising Christianity and openly trying to discredit it? You don't see that permeating his blog and his books? You don't see that as the whole reason for his books? You seriously think that the reason he's promoting his theory about the origins of Christianity is to give Christians a better mythology?
What I mean by "invented" is that he is the first person ever to propose his version of mythicism. There is no trace of any such belief in any documents in history, including writings against heresies, and the only way he uses it himself is to calculate a low probability for the existence of Jesus, which he openly sees as making Christianity false, not as way to improve its mythology.
Last edited:
Longfellow
Well-Known Member
He abandoned Christianity more than 30 years ago, and started publicly campaigning against it more than 20 years ago. And you think that he constructed his unique version of mythicism as a better way to be a Christian? Do you see him recommending it for that purpose?
Longfellow
Well-Known Member
Here is what he says about the authors of the Bible, including Paul:
"It is an authoritarian document, front to back, that simply proclaims all its writers’ claims are true and not to be significantly questioned—writers who were demonstrably extremely primitive and ignorant in their actual understanding of people and the world."
He says that all of its writers, that would include Paul, were extremely primitive and ignorant in their actual understanding of people and the world. That means that even if he's reading Paul correctly, especially if he's reading Paul correctly, Paul's Jesus would be based on a primitive and ignorant understanding of people and the world. And that's what you want to use for a mythicist cult?
A Primer on Christian Anti-Intellectualism
(later) Sorry for my outburst again. I'm just dumbfounded at your choice for a mythicism cult.
"It is an authoritarian document, front to back, that simply proclaims all its writers’ claims are true and not to be significantly questioned—writers who were demonstrably extremely primitive and ignorant in their actual understanding of people and the world."
He says that all of its writers, that would include Paul, were extremely primitive and ignorant in their actual understanding of people and the world. That means that even if he's reading Paul correctly, especially if he's reading Paul correctly, Paul's Jesus would be based on a primitive and ignorant understanding of people and the world. And that's what you want to use for a mythicist cult?
A Primer on Christian Anti-Intellectualism
(later) Sorry for my outburst again. I'm just dumbfounded at your choice for a mythicism cult.
Last edited:
Longfellow
Well-Known Member
Besides the Clergy Project, Dawkins, and forums with cultural Christians, maybe some other places to get ideas for finding people are on websites about the Next Quest, or in forums where people are discussing it.
RJM
God Feeds the Ravens
- Messages
- 12,711
- Reaction score
- 4,501
- Points
- 108
"God" responds to the sincere seeker no matter the time or place or religion or no-religion. God meets us where we are. IMO
I am a loosely tethered but lifelong Catholic, having seen the changes in the Catholic church for more than half a century, retaining its role as the shell of the nut that contains the living truth.
Most of the arguments and discussions are lifeless quibbling over the dry wood of the shell, imo.
Last edited:
Ahh! Music to mine ears!
Keep going, keep going! I would classify myth in that space.
Yes ... a blind alley, a dead end, but above all a false dichotomy.
It was the Dalai Lama, I think (or someone with equivalent insight) who said, "If you can't find it in your own tradition, you won't find it in any other."
Another guru, who's name I won't offend by trying to spell it from memory, was approached in his ashram by a westerner who said, "I've travelled to (and listed all the places he'd been), and I've read (and listed all the spiritual classics he'd read), so what should I do now?"
To which the guru replied, "Go back to where you came from."
The traveller thought he meant go away (as in the quaint old English saying, 'bugger off'). What the guru actually meant was a wisdom akin to what Dorothy arrived at in The Wizard of Oz.
I'm afraid I disagree. as I see it, Jesus' crucifixion and resurrection is absolutely fundamental to the evangelium Paul's preaching.
I would rather approach from my own 'mythic' belief that in Christ the physical and the spiritual meet and are united, and that was Jesus' mission, to heal the would that left the world in the grip of "the archons of this age" – an event proclaimed by the 'rending of the veil of the temple'.
As I see it, if Jesus is a celestial myth, then here in the world, nothing has changed.
Again, I don't see it that way. Paul preaches the evangelium of the Jesus whom he had met, and his mission is based on his own understanding and insights. He remarks on the gospel he, and they, have received from the apostles via Christian missionaries, but those stories are not Paul's. He's quite clear when he repeated the faith as commonly preached.
My own attendance is Catholic.
LOL, I can't, I think it's central, but not in the sense of commonly-understood mythicisms.
The Church is a place where the physical, ethereal and the spiritual; the historical, the mythical and the mystical, meet. In that sense it's a sacred place. The traditional architecture reflects that. I've walked out of a church in a monastic abbey because of the placement of the tabernacle in relation to the altar was symbolically defective. Modern church architecture is largely ignorant of the significances. Having said that, there are quite stark modern churches that I do admire, although their symbolism is more psychological than mystical.
The traditional interior architecture of the Church is a symbolic representation of the Cosmos and its relation to God through Christ; and from there to the Mass, as an ascent of the soul into union with the Divine.
wil
UNeyeR1
You're description sounds like my introduction to Unity. (At the risk of evangelizing). Charles Fillmore started a metaphysical discussion group for all Christians that wanted to explore the Bible and Christianity beyond what their church provided. Eventually the evening prayer and study groups said we want a Sunday service...and decades later, I after rejecting conventional organized religion, Unity was suggested by friends. I am still not in complete agreement with all it is, but it resonates(for me) far more than most. AND between my lessons and learning there a d here, I have become much more accepting and understanding of more conventional beliefs.
The XYL
Member
- Messages
- 21
- Reaction score
- 7
- Points
- 3
Haha I actually agree with you, and so does Carrier. The ONLY difference is where these central events took place, not whether they did. Carrier would argue that Paul's gospel (which he received by direct revelation and not from any human authority) is the announcement that Jesus incarnated, died, and rose in the celestial realm and not on earth (in keeping with the many of dying-and-rising celestial gods of the time).
Longfellow
Well-Known Member
I don't think that Carrier would argue that Paul actually got a direct revelation from God or Jesus. Carrier is describing a belief that he thinks is false, superstitious, and taught by people who were "demonstrably extremely primitive and ignorant in their actual understanding of people and the world." Those are Carrier's own words for all the authors of the Bible. In other words, Carrier would think that you are "demonstrably extremely primitive and ignorant" in your "actual understanding of people and the world," if you take his interpretation of Paul seriously.It seems very unlike to me that you will ever find anyone else who would be interested in using Carrier's interpretation of Paul in a Christian fellowship, at least not as long as you associate it with Carrier. You might do better learning about the Next Quest, which looks to me like Carrierism without Carrier's anti-Christian rhetoric. Christianity without an earthwalking Jesus. Not specifically a dying-and-rising God in the sky, but there might be room for that or at least for some kind of Christus Victor. There might be forums with people who are interested in the Next Quest, and that might give you some leads of where to find people who would be interested in a Christus Victor fellowship without an earthwalking Jesus.
Longfellow
Well-Known Member
Accidentally duplicated my post.
The XYL
Member
- Messages
- 21
- Reaction score
- 7
- Points
- 3
Yes, I believe I have agreed with this several times throughout this thread but I will state it again so we can move on from this point: Carrier's Mythicism is about what he believes Paul believed, not about what Carrier himself believes. He is arguing for a Pauline position that he himself does not think is true.
Aupmanyav
Be your own guru.
I believe that is true.
Longfellow
Well-Known Member
wil
UNeyeR1
Unity Church
Hi please feel free to move this message to another thread if it fits here better. I used to attend a Unity church for years. I loved it there for a long time but things changed when the minister left. I wanted to know if others had attended Unity church and what their experiences were and what...
www.interfaith.org