h2g2 The Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy: Earth Edition

Saw some science/religion proggy on telly with a scientist bod talking to various religious bods.

There was a bit where the presenter was talking to the Vatican astronomer and asked him whether he had any problems with the universe being billion yrs old, age of earth, evolution and so forth.

I found the answer interesting - basically he said 'nope, genesis isn't literal' etc and that the bible is not the 'inerrant word of god' but rather the word of god translated through the imperfect human medium and "we're not muslims you know".

>"we're not muslims you know"



'Cos obviously what Muslims believe is ridiculous. Whereas Catholics only believe sensible stuff, like transubstantiation and resurrection.

Gif

I would have loved to have seen the guys face if they had crushed a consecrated wafer in front of him.

An interesting article on the origin of Christendom's Trinity:
http://www.thoughts.com/letusreason/blog/god-and-the-trinities-240835

Hi Warner,

Interesting find. There's a version at:
http://www.heraldmag.org/olb/Contents/doctrine/The%20Origin%20of%20the%20Trinity.htm

that gives the author's name as Cher-El [sic] L. Hagensick, orginally published in The Herald Magazine. The idea that Christian (and, yes, Jewish and Muslim too) theology has evolved over time with outside influences is well established.

I'm not convinced by the claim that monotheism predates polytheism though - the fact that the article cites a single source, who seems to be a 19th-Century churchman who made that assumption in the face of all available evidence, doesn't convince me.

Gif

Hi warner, Gif,

I'm not convinced that monotheism predates polytheism. All the evidence seems to go the other way. Karen Armstrong in History of God points out that the Hebrew Yahweh was one of the older Canaanite gods (the war god) and a child of the older god Al. Yahweh was in competition with the others as the people were in competition with their neighbours.

Monotheism came later as the Hebrews went from saying Yahweh was their god to saying he was the only god. Some think it was Egyptian thinking that did this. Makes sense when you consider that Canaan was part of the Egyptian empire at the time.

As Tumsup has said, the basic thinking behind Yahweh being the only god was to try an stop the problems between different tribes around North Africa. By producing a monotheistic religion and getting rid of poltheism it was hoped the troubles would subside...yeah right!...but it was a good well-meaning try.

Yes Gif,
You seem to have the original article of my ref. Here's some interesting facts about Sunday's:

In 274 C.E. the Roman Emperor Aurelian begins new Sun cult.

"In 274, Aurelian … created a new cult of the “Invincible Sun.” Worshipped in a splendid temple, served by pontiffs who were raised to the level of the ancient pontiffs of Rome, celebrated every fourth year by magnificent games, Sol Invictus was definitely promoted to the highest rank in the divine hierarchy and became the official protector of the Sovereigns and of the Empire… He [Aurelian] placed in his new sanctuary the images of Bel and Helios, which he captured at Palmyra. In establishing this new State cult, Aurelian in reality proclaimed the dethronement of the old Roman idolatry and the accession of Semitic Sun-worship…
[p. 56] This sidereal theology, founded on ancient beliefs of Chaldean astrologers, transformed in the Hellenistic age under the twofold influence of astronomic discoveries and Stoic thought, [was] promoted, after becoming a pantheistic Sun-worship, to the rank of official religion of the Roman Empire. “

Source: Franz Cumont, Astrology and Religion Among the Greeks and Romans (reprint; New York: Dover Publications, Inc., 1960), pp. 55, 56.


First Sunday Law enacted by Emperor Constantine - March, 321 A.D. This Emperor is the true legislator of Sunday worship, not Amen as some suppose.
“On the venerable Day of the Sun let the magistrates and people residing in cities rest, and let all workshops be closed. In the country, however, persons engaged in agriculture may freely and lawfully continue their pursuits; because it often happens that another day is not so suitable for grain-sowing or for vine-planting; lest by neglecting the proper moment for such operations the bounty of heaven should be lost. (Given the 7th day of March, Crispus and Constantine being consuls each of them for the second time [a.d. 321].) “

Source: Codex Justinianus, lib. 3, tit. 12, 3; trans. in Philip Schaff, History of the Christian Church, Vol. 3 (5th ed.; New York: Scribner, 1902), p. 380, note 1.

Gif, Tumsup:

In all my years of studying religion, I've never seen any evidence that monotheism predates polytheism. Of course, lack of evidence has never prevented people from violently believing in their pet theories.

I have seen evidence, however, that atheism predates both monotheism and polytheism. Here's some: http://tiny.cc/kq8GW

anhaga,

Ah, well I remember the story of Blessed St Patrick teaching the Trinity to the savages. God is an arthropod with three lobes. From Him were created all things delicious in garlic butter and that red sauce wi' horseradish in it.

Hi Tumsup,

>the older god Al

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-xEzGIuY7kw

More seriously, there's a theory that the (slow) transition to Yahweh-only worship is reflected in the evolution of the documents that make up the OT. Don't know what Armstrong's take on that is but Silberman & Finkelstein are big fans. The idea is that any setback (and specifically the Babylonian conquest and Exile) were blamed by the Yahwists on polytheism, triggering the shift to monotheism. The Yahwists finally 'discovered' their texts during rebuilding of the Temple and had them read to the population - this is the story about Josiah in 2 Kings & 2 Chron.
http://personman.com/king-josiah-s-book

Fascinating stuff.

Gif

Hi Warner,

Yes - Constantine was the first Christian Emperor and instituted a lot of Christian traditions. I'm not convinced there's a direct link between Aurelian's sun-worship and Sunday sabbaths, but hey.

Constantine may even have been influenced by pagan trinities - but remember that there are also plenty of pagan dualist and even monotheist religions, as well as polytheism. Trinities influenced Constantine partly because they fit so well with (some schools of) early Christian thought. Up until Constantine, there was no agreement among Christians on whether there was one God, two, three or 365. Constantine demanded a straight answer from his bishops, and when they gave him one he had all other opinions declared heresy.

Gif

Thanks for that Gif,

I can't quote Karen Armstrong because I lent the book and it never came back.
The link was an interesting take on the story. Imagine that, using religion for political purposes. I'm glad no one does that now.

>> Well, it's somebody else's turn to bother you all.
You can always leave me a message <<

Well done warner! May peace be upon you!
You have fought the Good fight!

Most here would have to admit you stuck it out longer than any normal person might have. You kept going in a spirit of free speech and honest debate in spite of so many unwarranted and wearisome personal attacks and much juvenile name calling directed against you.

You'll be pleased to know that we'll be looking thru the backlog and taking down the names of anyone who, unable to argue sensibly against you in any reasonable way, resorted to attacking you on a personal level.

In the coming Great Reckoning these people will be the first to be rounded up and tormented. We will send them to the unholy eternal flames of damnation via the tried and true method of holy conflagration just as we have always dispatched the wicked and the evil on the bonfires of righteousness. In the meantime you are right to do as we do and simply ignore them.

On behalf of the management,
~jwf~

warner!

I see by post 15389 that you have failed to heed your own advice and have returned. And you come back to us with that most niddling and mindboggling of Christian conceits the Trinity.

3 into 1 is nothing more or less than the old shell game (or three card monty) which draws the participant in by an assumption that the pea is hidden under one of three shells at the expense of considering the possibility that there is no pea in the first place.


~jwf~

*make that post 15404;
15389 was the one I first replied to*
~j~

Speaking of Pontiffs...

The word comes from the Latin for bridge.
(Also in French as in Sur la Pont D'Avignion, etc.)

Anyway...
The title 'pontiff' was originally the keeper or custodian of the seven bridges of Rome.

It is likely these were drawbridges and the duty of the pontiff was to keep the city secure by controlling access on these bridges. Not much has changed then.


~jwf~

actually, ~jwf~ the full title 'Pontifex Maximus' probably originally belonged (as a direct translation indicates) to the 'Bridge Builder in Chief' in the very, very early Kingdom of Rome (pre-Republican). Very early (distinct from very, very early) in the era of the Kings, the office of Pontif became a priestly office, as it has been ever since.

There are other theories of the origin of the word and office -- I like the Etruscan idea, myself -- but what I've offered above is the usually accepted one.

Oh, and . . .


where did you find this idea of seven bridges? Are you confusing bridges with hills? There were various numbers of bridges over the Tiber (none of them drawbridges as far as I've ever been told) during the many centuries of the Republic and Empire, sometimes less than seven, sometimes more.

Here's an interesting study of the Tiber bridges and the development of the City of Rome, if anyone is interested: http://www.iath.virginia.edu/rome/Journal2TaylorNew.pdf