Edenthiel wrote:
You see, if these modern people "speaking in tongues" were actually "filled with the Holy Ghost"...EVERYONE WOULD BE ABLE TO UNDERSTAND THEM!
They had that covered. After someone spoke in tongues someone else would interprate. I think the interprater was just making up some religous sounding pleasantries about how God would help everone in much the same way the speaker was making up random sylables (not evidence of God's power acting on them if you ask me).
It's a lot like the Oracle at Delphi, how the gibberish of the Oracle had to be "interpreted" by the priests and they would make the prophesy say anything they felt was convenient for them.
I wonder how much of the Bible was influenced by Greek ideas. The Greek culture was very pervasive at the time. Remember that about a third of the Bible was written in Greek. I think perhaps it was written for Greeks, by Greeks, in the Greek language by men who had never set foot in Israel.
I don't think the New Testament could be from Israel because the ideas in it seem very unjewish. The idea of God becoming a flesh and blood man seems very unjewish. For the Jews, God is entirely separate from man. For the Jews, God turning into a man would be like a fish riding a bicycle.
I think some of Jesus' ideas like turning the other cheek might come from Greek philosophers. Didn't Epicurus say something similar? Perhaps combined with ideas from the Cult of John the Baptist, which was extremely popular at the time.
And Eastern philosophies? Some people say in the "lost years", traveled to India to study under the Buddhists. I think this is a very Eurocentric idea. Why should Jesus go to the Buddhists when the Buddhists can come to Jesus? I've heard there was a Buddhist mission near Alexandria at the time. Did those Eurocentrists think ancient Indians were incapable of traversing long distances?
Edenthiel wrote:
And that's the key - they're like some bizarre Cargo Cult version of what they think the Bible says, which tells me they aren't actually studying the thing in any sort of comprehensive, structured manner.
Yes a cargo cult. Like the natives studying a Jeep or a radio tower, they cannot understand the purpose.
Some of the things in the Bible don't fit, with later parts of the Bible. Even when the latter parts of the Old Testament don't fit with the earlier parts of the Old Testament. I wonder if parts of Genesis could be a vestigial remnant of some even more ancient religion.
Having been raised in an conservative Christian family, I studied the bible into early adulthood including formal studies at a Christian college. Luckily, it was decades ago when this particular flavor of Xianity was far more liberal/progressive. The Bible - like much if not all of Christianity - was appropriated from other cultures in a very Borg-esque fashion. Typically the assimilation was done as the Holy Roman Empire spread and violently wiped out any competing social-political systems. Not always, but usually. Later, herbalist-midwives who were the local village connection to nature became witches, non-sexually repressed peoples became incubi & succubi, that sort of thing. Most holidays came from celebrations of the natural world & were tweaked & twisted just enough to provide a disconnect, forcing a practical reliance on the Church instead.
So exceedingly little in the Bible is original. The Old Testament of course has large parts lifted directly from the Hebrew people's books, but even those as presented are a cobbling together of older traditions & stories such as the epic of Gilgamesh, Babylonian creation myths, etc.. Basically, you can take most ideas in the Bible, add the search term 'myths' and find the precedents (ie: virgin birth myths). Some are very strikingly similar & most have the connections & lineage well documented by historians.