Our server costs ~$56 per month to run. Please consider donating or becoming a Patron to help keep the site running. Help us gain new members by following us on Twitter and liking our page on Facebook!
Festingers research is interesting from a number of angles, but not relevant in this case, and it has become now extremely rare for serious scholars to use it relating to Xianity's origins, because of the force of the counter-arguments.
I will only mention one of the methodological issues- up to a third of the group at any one time were researchers, so small were the numbers.
More importantly, there was little follow up of the destinations of the group. It can only be assumed that, in complete contrast to the disciples, virtually all of them ultimately recognised their mistake and went back to the day jobs, and the group disbanded.
But there is one far more crucial difference.
Festinger's subjects were reacting to the happening of nothing, when they were expecting something. The disciples were reacting to something- something radically different to what they had been expecting. They actually realised they had been radically wrong (about the nature of the Kingdom, the functioning of the Messiah, the scope of God's project), where the flying saucer cult sought to hold on to the belief that they were right.
With Festinger, the new material failed to displace the old beliefs.
With the disciples, the new material utterly changed their beliefs.
Quote:Jesusism apparently appealed to quite a few. You can't use the people it wouldn't appeal to as evidence that it couldn't have spawned a revolution even though the original revolution was a failure. This is not evidence that C1 failed revolutions can't spawn greater revolutions.
The original revolution wasn't a failure !!! Between the crucifixion and Easter it appeared to be, and that's why it was rapidly imploding. Then at Easter it became a success...
Every other dead Messiah in C1 Jewish history ended up a failure. For reasons I've explained at length, and you seem determined to avoid.
Quote:That's two examples that contradict your claim.
No. You can't just wave a hand like that and wish it all away. Answer the arguments, please.
Let me repeat: Judaism is working to a script, called the Old Testament. Messiahs who can't deliver the Kingdom of God, and die, cannot qualify as Messiahs, because they have failed in the basic requirement of the job. We know this from C1 Jewish history in theory and in practice. Start with Josephus. By contrast, BDs have no such restrictions, and it is tolerably clear they were making it up as they went along.
Let me say it yet again- C1 Judaism worked differently to BD and Festinger's cult in crucial ways. In your next post please try to show that you understand what C1 Jewish messianism involved.
No examples, then.
Quote:This is all beside the point.
This isn't evidence, it's not even speculation, it's a clumsy attempt at rhetoric.
I see a lot of ad hoc reasoning and shifting the goalposts.
Are you for real? I have used detailed argument and explanation. By contrast, of the seven (!!!) sentences in your post, three/nearly half of them exist only to attack my supposed style, and contain no argument content at all.
Festingers research is interesting from a number of angles, but not relevant in this case, and it has become now extremely rare for serious scholars to use it relating to Xianity's origins, because of the force of the counter-arguments.
I will only mention one of the methodological issues- up to a third of the group at any one time were researchers, so small were the numbers.
More importantly, there was little follow up of the destinations of the group. It can only be assumed that, in complete contrast to the disciples, virtually all of them ultimately recognised their mistake and went back to the day jobs, and the group disbanded.
But there is one far more crucial difference.
Festinger's subjects were reacting to the happening of nothing, when they were expecting something. The disciples were reacting to something- something radically different to what they had been expecting. They actually realised they had been radically wrong (about the nature of the Kingdom, the functioning of the Messiah, the scope of God's project), where the flying saucer cult sought to hold on to the belief that they were right.
Not buying it. With any failed prediction, if the group carries on, new beliefs replace old beliefs.
(February 2, 2016 at 5:42 pm)Vicki Q Wrote: Let me say it yet again- C1 Judaism worked differently to BD and Festinger's cult in crucial ways. In your next post please try to show that you understand what C1 Jewish messianism involved.
(February 3, 2016 at 3:51 pm)Jörmungandr Wrote: Not buying it. With any failed prediction, if the group carries on, new beliefs replace old beliefs.
And if the group doesn't carry on, because they got disillusioned, they go their separate ways. Like every failed C1 Jewish messainic group in history.
Quote:This is just special pleading.
That's nearly the point.
We agree that it is entirely possible for a religious movement to suffer serious failure, and for that movement to continue, possibly in a modified form.
However, for reasons I have outlined repeatedly, a C1 messainic claimant who died without inaugurating the Kingdom was by definition a fraud. Therefore their movement ended without hope of continuing. That's where C1 Judaism is different from many other religious movements.
What is utterly astonishing is that Jesus' followers could somehow still think he had inaugurated the Kingdom, and were willing to die for the claim. The best explanation is that what they said they saw, they saw.
(February 3, 2016 at 3:51 pm)Jörmungandr Wrote: This is just special pleading.
That's nearly the point.
We agree that it is entirely possible for a religious movement to suffer serious failure, and for that movement to continue, possibly in a modified form.
However, for reasons I have outlined repeatedly, a C1 messainic claimant who died without inaugurating the Kingdom was by definition a fraud. Therefore their movement ended without hope of continuing. That's where C1 Judaism is different from many other religious movements.
What is utterly astonishing is that Jesus' followers could somehow still think he had inaugurated the Kingdom, and were willing to die for the claim. The best explanation is that what they said they saw, they saw.
What is utterly astonishing is that you continue to plead that the Jesus movement was somehow different, more prone to failure than modern examples of cults, just so you can turn around and declare how astonishing it is that it survived. You're playing both ends off against the middle.
(February 3, 2016 at 6:47 pm)Jörmungandr Wrote: What is utterly astonishing is that you continue to plead that the Jesus movement was somehow different, more prone to failure than modern examples of cults, just so you can turn around and declare how astonishing it is that it survived. You're playing both ends off against the middle.
Firstly, it's a pity that you seem unable to grasp that different religions have very different characteristics. The clue is in the different names.
You may not believe any of them, but that doesn't make them all the same.
Here's the thing.
Like many movements before and after, Xianity was for a couple of days declared to be a fraud.
Whether you like it or not, ancient historians, the C1 Jewish narrative and the Gospels all triangulate in saying that there was no coming back from yer Messiah being dead. Make no mistake about it; no Kingdom = game over.
But they came back. And unlike the other examples we've discussed, it wasn't a reaction to something that didn't happen where failure needed explaining. It was a reaction something that did happen, to a complete and utterly unexpected success that no-one saw coming.
(February 3, 2016 at 6:47 pm)Jörmungandr Wrote: What is utterly astonishing is that you continue to plead that the Jesus movement was somehow different, more prone to failure than modern examples of cults, just so you can turn around and declare how astonishing it is that it survived. You're playing both ends off against the middle.
Firstly, it's a pity that you seem unable to grasp that different religions have very different characteristics. The clue is in the different names.
You may not believe any of them, but that doesn't make them all the same.
Here's the thing.
Like many movements before and after, Xianity was for a couple of days declared to be a fraud.
Whether you like it or not, ancient historians, the C1 Jewish narrative and the Gospels all triangulate in saying that there was no coming back from yer Messiah being dead. Make no mistake about it; no Kingdom = game over.
But they came back. And unlike the other examples we've discussed, it wasn't a reaction to something that didn't happen where failure needed explaining. It was a reaction something that did happen, to a complete and utterly unexpected success that no-one saw coming.
Your first problem, you're extrapolating from a single source which is a conflation of third hand acoounts and outright mythology, which was massively altered on numerous occasions over the intervening centuries to conform with then current theology. There is no way you can realiably assign a truth value to the bible.
On the supposed resurrection, you have absolutely no evidence, and most critical scholarship agrees that it is a later addition to the Markan gospel, ie when orthodoxy was decided on the ressurectiin narrative was retrofitted back into the parts of the bible where it was missing.
And many religions have gained massive followings on the foot of an obvious lie. If you think that numbers of believers is a truth signifier then you have to accept that the book of mormon is a valid historical document with an accurate history of North America, including all the bits which are demonstrably false.
February 7, 2016 at 10:58 am (This post was last modified: February 7, 2016 at 11:00 am by robvalue.)
Yep. If Jesus did come back from the dead, and Mark saw him, he didn't think it important enough to write down. He had to be "reminded" by a later forger.
Well, Mark didn't see shit of course. The story he was retelling didn't include anyone seeing Jesus reborn.
Feel free to send me a private message.
Please visit my website here! It's got lots of information about atheism/theism and support for new atheists.
Festingers research is interesting from a number of angles, but not relevant in this case, and it has become now extremely rare for serious scholars to use it relating to Xianity's origins, because of the force of the counter-arguments.
I will only mention one of the methodological issues- up to a third of the group at any one time were researchers, so small were the numbers.
More importantly, there was little follow up of the destinations of the group. It can only be assumed that, in complete contrast to the disciples, virtually all of them ultimately recognised their mistake and went back to the day jobs, and the group disbanded.
But there is one far more crucial difference.
Festinger's subjects were reacting to the happening of nothing, when they were expecting something. The disciples were reacting to something- something radically different to what they had been expecting. They actually realised they had been radically wrong (about the nature of the Kingdom, the functioning of the Messiah, the scope of God's project), where the flying saucer cult sought to hold on to the belief that they were right.
With Festinger, the new material failed to displace the old beliefs.
With the disciples, the new material utterly changed their beliefs.
Quote:Jesusism apparently appealed to quite a few. You can't use the people it wouldn't appeal to as evidence that it couldn't have spawned a revolution even though the original revolution was a failure. This is not evidence that C1 failed revolutions can't spawn greater revolutions.
The original revolution wasn't a failure !!! Between the crucifixion and Easter it appeared to be, and that's why it was rapidly imploding. Then at Easter it became a success...
Every other dead Messiah in C1 Jewish history ended up a failure. For reasons I've explained at length, and you seem determined to avoid.
Quote:That's two examples that contradict your claim.
No. You can't just wave a hand like that and wish it all away. Answer the arguments, please.
Let me repeat: Judaism is working to a script, called the Old Testament. Messiahs who can't deliver the Kingdom of God, and die, cannot qualify as Messiahs, because they have failed in the basic requirement of the job. We know this from C1 Jewish history in theory and in practice. Start with Josephus. By contrast, BDs have no such restrictions, and it is tolerably clear they were making it up as they went along.
Let me say it yet again- C1 Judaism worked differently to BD and Festinger's cult in crucial ways. In your next post please try to show that you understand what C1 Jewish messianism involved.
No examples, then.
Quote:This is all beside the point.
This isn't evidence, it's not even speculation, it's a clumsy attempt at rhetoric.
I see a lot of ad hoc reasoning and shifting the goalposts.
Are you for real? I have used detailed argument and explanation. By contrast, of the seven (!!!) sentences in your post, three/nearly half of them exist only to attack my supposed style, and contain no argument content at all.
Only people with highly critical parents who insisted on exceptionally early toilet training would point out prose style on a mssg bd. And make sure you leave enough for the members of the spelling and grammar police in order for them to continue to find purpose in life.
Atheist Credo: A universe by chance that also just happened to admit the observer by chance.
(February 24, 2016 at 11:50 pm)snowtracks Wrote: Only people with highly critical parents who insisted on exceptionally early toilet training would point out prose style on a mssg bd. And make sure you leave enough for the members of the spelling and grammar police in order for them to continue to find purpose in life.
![[Image: extraordinarywoo-sig.jpg]](https://i.postimg.cc/zf86M5L7/extraordinarywoo-sig.jpg)
