Ask Lemmy
A Fediverse community for open-ended, thought provoking questions
Please don't post about US Politics. If you need to do this, try !politicaldiscussion@lemmy.world
Rules: (interactive)
1) Be nice and; have fun
Doxxing, trolling, sealioning, racism, and toxicity are not welcomed in AskLemmy. Remember what your mother said: if you can't say something nice, don't say anything at all. In addition, the site-wide Lemmy.world terms of service also apply here. Please familiarize yourself with them
2) All posts must end with a '?'
This is sort of like Jeopardy. Please phrase all post titles in the form of a proper question ending with ?
3) No spam
Please do not flood the community with nonsense. Actual suspected spammers will be banned on site. No astroturfing.
4) NSFW is okay, within reason
Just remember to tag posts with either a content warning or a [NSFW] tag. Overtly sexual posts are not allowed, please direct them to either !asklemmyafterdark@lemmy.world or !asklemmynsfw@lemmynsfw.com.
NSFW comments should be restricted to posts tagged [NSFW].
5) This is not a support community.
It is not a place for 'how do I?', type questions.
If you have any questions regarding the site itself or would like to report a community, please direct them to Lemmy.world Support or email info@lemmy.world. For other questions check our partnered communities list, or use the search function.
Reminder: The terms of service apply here too.
Partnered Communities:
Logo design credit goes to: tubbadu
view the rest of the comments
I've been really into early Christianity / Biblical textual analysis. I found a priest I like on YouTube I really like and I've watched 100+ hours of lectures of his, plus a couple podcasts and audiobooks.
I'm not religious at all and kinda the stuff I like is the "huh, this is pretty obviously fake/contradictory, interesting nobody saw through this" stuff. It's like anthropologically interesting.
Obviously a dominant religion, not like a fringe thing to know about, but nobody's into these facts in just this way. Don't want to talk about it to religious people, non-religious people don't want to talk about it to me.
even in the deepest depths of my "bitter newly-deconverted atheist" phase i always found the bible and its history downright fascinating. mainline christians and critical atheists alike sell it so short.
I read Zealot by Reza Aslan and I thought it was a very interesting look into historical Jesus and early Christianity. I'm likewise not a Christian (I grew up as one, but became cynical at around 12 years old), but I do find fascination in the religion.
Historical Jesus is really interesting to me and stuff like how John The Baptist...baptized historical Jesus into something. So probably, Jesus was an acolyte of John The Baptist who went off and founded his own, similar movement. But then early Christians didn't like the implications of their main guy being a spinoff so these weird interpretations like John himself saying at the time 'I don't deserve to do this baptism, but I'm going to anyway for some reason and this other guy is the main guy and also in one gospel I'm Jesus' cousin.'
And also then Jesus' brother James the Just running the church after Jesus and there's a non-canonocal gospel (Thomas I think) that says 'James, for whom the Earth and Sky came into being' or something like that. And Jude calls himself Jude, brother of James. But James is the brother of Jesus so probably he is also the brother of Jesus, but that isn't the most relevant thing about Jude. So what an interesting alt-history you could write where Paul doesn't exist and James' church wins out and he's...also co-God? Or Jesus gets demoted and they're both just Mohammad-style brother prophets?
Oh boy. Here I go theorizin' again.
Yeah there's a lot to talk about. I think however that if Paul didn't exist, Christianity would have remained a Jewish cult.
Paul was the Don Draper of the 1st century. He effectively took an illiterate desert people's religion and molded it in such a way where it would be approachable to the gentile and educated Roman citizens.
He was a Greek Jew who understood the gentile world. And he made fantastic stories. Iirc in his earliest letter, which became one of the Bible books I don't remember which, there was nothing about immaculate conception or the 3 day resurrection, or the 3 wise men, etc
But adding all that stuff adds to the legend and mythology and it helped really spread the religion.
I think in a lot of ways, Paul is the founder of Christianity. Of course, Jesus is important. He must have been a fascinating figure in his time. Pontius killed thousands of Jews a year, but we really only talk about one.
Religion fascinates me so much as well. It also thoroughly disgusts me because of how fucked up a lot of practitioners are. The history of it all is interesting AF tho
There are terrible people everywhere, they don't need religion to make them that way. What really gets me is religions like WBC that do make all of their people over that terrible stereotype.
There are definitely non-believers who look at the history or philosophy of religion. In high school I remember enjoying a unit about Kierkegaard relating to Jesus's temptations in the desert (Matthew 4, maybe?). Kierkegaard himself may have had some religion, but that's certainly not the case for all the existentialsts.
Whether you're likely to run into agnostics or atheists into religious philosophy on a daily basis is another matter, I suppose.