What is the deal with Mary, the mother of Jesus, with Catholics.

[Proteus_MST]

Well, the earliest available fragments are what? 150 AD or so? All in Greek? You find something like that, it would be the holy grail.

Aye, that is true. The turmoil of the rebellions as well as christian inter-faith battles (not to forget the history afterwards with crusades and other wars in the territory) may make it extremly difficult to still find something useful surviving about early jewish christianity

For me personally something like the Gospel of Thomas seems to point nearer to a historical Jesus, than the synoptic gospels do.
Why?
For one, because it doesn´t contain any miracle stories, virgin births and crucifixations (all without confirmation by secular sources ... and all things which IMHO were added by pauline christianity, to make christian faith competitive with all the other gods in the roman empire).
For the other because it doesn´t contain full fleshed stories, but rather is a collections of sayings by Jesus ... actually something I would expect more, as a transcript of oral tradition, than the full fleshed stories found in the synoptic gospels (which, on the other hand, might have been builz upon such transcriptions and just woven stories around them ... added a miracle here and there, and so on).
(which is why I would expect story collections like the synoptic gospels to be more removed from the original source than pure collections of sayings)

But this is, of course, just my opinion

[Sava]

We care about that sort of thing because part of Christ's message was about who He is, i.e. God. Christianity cannot be made into a simple philosophy devoid of the supernatural without doing violence to the teachings of Jesus Himself. You're leaving out the Jesus of the Last Judgment, the Jesus risen from the dead, the Jesus who cast out demons, the Jesus transfigured on the mountain, the Jesus who spoke of the Holy Spirit, etc.

This is not to denigrate His humanity, but He was more than a simple moral teacher.

best to abandon the fairy tales altogether






pro-tip... you can still live your life by the teachings of christ without the nonsense

[Ben Kenobi]

For me personally something like the Gospel of Thomas seems to point nearer to a historical Jesus, than the synoptic gospels do.

Well, there's a problem with that. The earliest copy of the Gospel of Thomas dates to 350 AD. By that time we already have full copies of the entire bible in the Codex Vaticanus and Codex Sinaiticus. Plus, you have only one copy of the gospel of Thomas. It's very late, there's no evidence for it being any earlier than about 350, along with tons of other books that receive less publicity. It doesn't stand out much from all the other books written about this time.

It was not accepted as canonical by St. Athanasius either, so we have the argument that the folks who were much closer to the sources than we were, determined that the Gospels were a better account.

For one, because it doesn´t contain any miracle stories, virgin births and crucifixations (all thing which IMHO were added by pauline christianity, to make christian faith competitive with all the other gods in the roman empire).

Then why isn't it quoted by the ancient Fathers of the Church? Why didn't it get included along with the other four?

For the other because it doesn´t contain full fleshed stories, but rather is a collections of sayings by Jesus

This actually makes it far less likely to be closer to the historical Christ.

... actually something I would expect more, as a transcript of oral tradition, than the full fleshed stories found in the synoptic gospels (which, on the other hand, might have been builz upon such transcriptions and just woven stories around them ... added a miracle here and there, and so on).

Only if you assume they were written sometime in the 2nd century rather than in the 50s and 60s, while witnesses to Christ were still alive.

(which is why I would expect something story collections like the synoptic gospels to be more removed from the original source than pure collections of sayings)

The fully fleshed out stories would gradually get pared away over time.

[Ben Kenobi]

you can still live your life by the teachings of christ without the nonsense

Only if you reject the teaching that Christ is the son of God. Which is kinda a core teaching of Christianity.

[Sava]

if I had to guess, I'd suspect God would prefer you be a good person

personally, I think faith is an intelligence test from god... if you believe without proof, you fail

i suspect God likes people who use the gifts he gave them... and not mindless idiots

[Ben Kenobi]

i suspect God likes people who use the gifts he gave them... and not mindless idiots

Interesting. First you make Christ fit into your little box and pare away everything that doesn't fit. Then you condemn those who reject the little box Christ you've made for yourself.

Personally - why would one want to believe in what Christ teaches without his full teachings, which include the miracles he performed? There's lots of other teachers out there. Why not prefer, say, Marcus Aurelius?

[Sava]

religious indoctrination should also be considered child abuse

[Sava]

i mean, it is all child abuse and religionistas love to rape children

lets just call it what it is

[Ben Kenobi]

religious indoctrination should also be considered child abuse

I expect we are not far from the state, and Child Protective Services trying to take children away if there's evidence of them receiving Christian religious training.

[Sava]

eventually, I suspect we'll find the cause of religion... brain imaging will be useful in diagnosing and treating the illness

I long for the day when walking into a church is cause to put someone on a mental health watch

[Sava]

I hope the NSA is cross referencing church attendance and gun ownership

we could easily map out domestic terrorist hotposts and send in troops

[ricketyclik]

eventually, I suspect we'll find the cause of religion... brain imaging will be useful in diagnosing and treating the illness

I long for the day when walking into a church is cause to put someone on a mental health watch

It's that cat thing.

[Sava]

the pee parasite?


if that's the case, i'm ****ed

[Proteus_MST]

Well, there's a problem with that. The earliest copy of the Gospel of Thomas dates to 350 AD. By that time we already have full copies of the entire bible in the Codex Vaticanus and Codex Sinaiticus. Plus, you have only one copy of the gospel of Thomas. It's very late, there's no evidence for it being any earlier than about 350, along with tons of other books that receive less publicity. It doesn't stand out much from all the other books written about this time.

It was not accepted as canonical by St. Athanasius either, so we have the argument that the folks who were much closer to the sources than we were, determined that the Gospels were a better account.



Then why isn't it quoted by the ancient Fathers of the Church? Why didn't it get included along with the other four?



This actually makes it far less likely to be closer to the historical Christ.

If we consider Pauline christianity to be in competition with other early forms of christianity during the first centuries (for example gnosticism, jewish christianity and so on), then, because the church fathers had an agenda ... i.e. they chose those scripta that reflected their own theological standpoint ... and disregarded others who didn´t or were used by other forms of christianity.
The gospel of Thomas for example, is missing all the miracle stories and rather shows Jesus as teacher ... which would probably make it rather suspicious for people who may work from the basis assumption that those gospel which later became the synoptic gospels, are true accounts of Jesus works on earth. In addition to this, Mary Magdalena seems to fulfill a role as a close companion there ... another thing that may make it suspicious (for someone who believes in the truth of the synoptic gospels), considering her absence in such a role in the synoptic gospels (where Jesus was closer to his 12 disciples than to Mary Magdalena).

Only if you assume they were written sometime in the 2nd century rather than in the 50s and 60s, while witnesses to Christ were still alive.

The fully fleshed out stories would gradually get pared away over time.

Well, in this case I would expect a varying amount of detail in the stories, depending on whether the eye witness would be present at the scene or just would quote from hearsay. Considering that the gospels even give fully detailed stories about things like the youth of Jesus and his birth (where surely no disciple was present), IMHO rather make them more unbelievable than just quotations of sayings duringJesus active time as teacher/prophet.

[Ben Kenobi]

I long for the day when walking into a church is cause to put someone on a mental health watch

You'll probably get your wish. But you won't like it very much. You'll probably have to change your name.