Is Jesus Lucifer ?

[flamingjimmy]

Hmm, this is funny for me to try to answer because I am myself an atheist and a scientist, but that doesn't mean I want to deride the beliefs of others (although I have fallen into this trap at times), I'm just interested in the history and philosophy of religion and what that can still teach us today. So please understand that I'm largely arguing for the opposition here

Fair enough, my pa likes to play that game, he never bloody agrees with me even though he does (if you get what I mean).

 

1. The widespread idea that the Bible holds mysteries really stems from the Renaissance period during which scholars such as Pico, Ficino, De Bussi, Perotti etc all tried to deduce the meanings of some of the symbology by comparing the Bible with Pagan and Hebrew tradition.

 

Pico della Mirandolla for example, argued that because Moses had, on 2 occasions, spent 40 days at Mount Sinai in order to receive the tablets of the 10 commandments he had obviously received more information from God- or why spend 40 days there? He believed that these divine secrets had been passed down through oral tradition and were still transmitted by rabbi's as the Cabbala. - The law was given to many (through the Bible), but its spiritual understanding to the few (through the Cabbala).

 

However, as early as the 2nd century AD Origen wrote that Christ preached parables to the masses, but revealed many mysteries to his disciples which were communicated by word of mouth.

 

So the belief has been around for a very long time that these mysteries exist, but to really understand them is of course impossible because you cannot prove or refute a purely oral tradition if you're not one of the initiated (if they even exist).

 

Still I think if you have a reasonable understanding of pre-Christian east Meditterranean pagan mythology you can pick out certain elements of the Bible- the Trinity, the Nativity, the astrological references etc that strongly hint towards meanings that run deeper than the surficial story and have older roots. I'm sure I've read that there is also a lot of Hindu philosophy wrapped up in Christianity too.

I agree that there are plenty of ideas in the bible that clearly have origins from before the bible but I don't see how that implies that there are any 'deeper' meanings to them. One of the problems is that words like 'deep' (in this context) can mean different things to different people, hell to some people (to my continual annoyance) 'truth' doesn't even have an objective meaning.

 

I don't want to get into individual examples because, as I say, in the absence of documented explanations I think all possible meanings are valid. However these websites have quite interesting ideas without being preachy:-

 

http://www.apocalipsis.org/symbology.htm

http://www.religioustolerance.org/chr_symb.htm

If there is something to symbology, then to me its being drowned out by the vast amount of complete nonsense within the field. If all possible meanings are valid then what is the point in any of them?

 

2. I'd define a 'spiritual truth' as either a philosophical idea or a divine statement, depending upon whether or not you believe in God. It's the philosophy that interests me personally.

I don't see the point in calling anything a 'spiritual truth', especially philosophical ideas (many of which are neither spiritual nor necessarily true). I know it seems like I'm being awkward, but I'm really not doing it on purpose, I still don't know what you mean. A 'spiritual truth' to me is still a meaningless concept.

 

3. The moral code of the Bible is perhaps out-dated (we have a more than comprehensive system of law), but it has been a great protection to us historically in a sense. We've had a tradition of 'all people equal under God' which meant that (in an ideal world anyway) no one was above the law. People in post-Christian western society, no matter how rich or powerful, have not been able to claim god-like status, a strong form of tyranny- just look at some of the crazier exploits of the pagan Roman emperors. So I think in this respect, the Bible has been a saving grace.

Have you ever heard of the pope? I don't think this argument holds water, it is precisely because of the pope's position as moral guardian of the catholic world that he has the power that he does (which historically has been a lot more).

 

4. The scientific community actually moralises all of the time- they are after all human. Most research is done in Universities and to do research there you must complete an ethical form about your work and, if it's considered necessary, attend a ethics committee meeting before you start work. Science is also subject to law which tends to keep researchers from performing the types of eugenics experiments that were permitted in Hitler's Germany or other similar atrocities though some countries are more lax than others.

 

5. With regard to your last point, I have the same (probably too) idealistic view. I was never raised in a religious family, but I still know right from wrong, I'm not perfect but I'm no monster either. We do learn most of our values from our parents so I think it's largely externalised anyway though.

No arguments about this part:thumbsup:

[Cavegirl]

These are all really interesting questions and points and each really deserves a huge answer- but I'll do my best to be concise You're really making me think hard about this and I appreciate it!

 

I agree that there are plenty of ideas in the bible that clearly have origins from before the bible but I don't see how that implies that there are any 'deeper' meanings to them. One of the problems is that words like 'deep' (in this context) can mean different things to different people, hell to some people (to my continual annoyance) 'truth' doesn't even have an objective meaning.

 

I agree with you in that I think gaining any meaning from the Bible is absolutely relative to the way you perceive the Bible. 'Deeper' (sorry I used this word!) meanings can only be gained if you're a religious person and truly believe that what is written in the Bible was a divine testament. If you believe in this way then the Bible has great significance to the way you live your life.

For me however, the philosophies are not so deep, but they do offer an interesting insight into many things. One of the major philosophies of the New Testament is the idea that money is a dangerous thing and greed is a dangerous emotion. We currently live in a capitalist society that inherently values money and greed above all else. The Bible therefore enables us to question our own social constructs- some will agree totally with the Bible, others with capitalism, most fall in between, but without this long history of questioning we wouldn't have this choice- this is the value of philosophy, it enables us to question the 'reality' that we construct for ourselves and therefore make better individual choices. This is what people search for in the Bible.

What interests me about the older philosophies within the Bible is that they stem from a period before 'civilisation' and the 'state'. I'm personally curious about the philosophies that arose when humans were truly free to roam, free of law, free of government, free of social etiquette etc. What did these free humans think? What was important to them? How are we different/ similar to them? These are the types of questions I like to ask.

 

If there is something to symbology, then to me its being drowned out by the vast amount of complete nonsense within the field. If all possible meanings are valid then what is the point in any of them?

 

I think the point is that we learn by questioning. Questions are more important than definitive answers. With regard to Bible symbology for example, some people have argued that the halo around Jesus' head is an astrological symbol (a Sun or a star), others have argued that it represents the helmet of a time travelling astronaut (it's true!). Now I can't prove who is right, but I can make a rational choice based upon the fact that I believe I've seen enough evidence to suggest that astrology was a prominent part of religious life. So for now, I've learned something that may affect the way I perceive other things, creating new questions.

 

I don't see the point in calling anything a 'spiritual truth', especially philosophical ideas (many of which are neither spiritual nor necessarily true). I know it seems like I'm being awkward, but I'm really not doing it on purpose, I still don't know what you mean. A 'spiritual truth' to me is still a meaningless concept.

 

The reason I've given above is why I believe philosophies or ideas are important as they evolve the way we think about the world, they give us choices, they enable us to see things from a new perspective. Religious people believe in a spirit world so for them the philosophies have emerged directly from this spirit world and because of this they cannot be questioned, they are truths. I'm more of a humanist, I think the Bible's philosophies arose from the human mind because we are all capable of questioning the social constructs around us if we desire. I feel sad that the philosophies of the Bible were not allowed to evolve, but have kept in a straight jacket of tradition.

 

Have you ever heard of the pope? I don't think this argument holds water, it is precisely because of the pope's position as moral guardian of the catholic world that he has the power that he does (which historically has been a lot more).

 

The Pope's status is at the top of a pyramid of power that has developed within our society. This is mirrored in the spiritual world- God being supreme, then angels, archangels etc, but this second pyramid has been given higher status by past peoples so whilst I can definately see your point here I see it as the Pope having had only moderate religious status historically. This is very different from the ultimate tyrannical power of Emperor Nero or Caligula. The Pope has also been kept in a straight jacket of religious tradition so his power has been constrained. Try to imagine how a human might act if he had supreme God-like power- Stalin in his atheist communist state springs to mind.