Page 2 of 3 [ 38 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3  Next

Philologos
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 21 Jan 2010
Age: 81
Gender: Male
Posts: 6,987

12 May 2011, 8:58 am

The question of Paul's spectrality is on a different plane from most ancient person triage.

I should be interested to hear your take on indicators.

One reason for asking - Saul is in many respects quite similar in style to my paleontologist brother. Arguably a bit less fierce, but we are just working of letters and a few snips in Acts.

That is the brother who feels I claim Aspietude only as a ploy to "justify my [bad] behavior. You may judge for yourselvers whether that justifies my bad behavior here.

Now, I have concluded that in my family - while we are undeniably strange and challenged - I am the only one apparently fitting the spectrum.

But if you see AS traits in Paul, perhaps some of them my brother shares, and I need to revisde my estimate.



MCalavera
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 15 Dec 2010
Gender: Male
Posts: 5,442

12 May 2011, 9:24 am

WilliamWDelaney wrote:
Bethie wrote:
Of those who have seen fantastical things,
ALL the evidence is indicative of it being a hallucination,
and NONE toward it being a divine revelation.

The question is whether there is MORE evidence supporting the OP's specific (and very fitting) hypothesis about what, exactly, caused said hallucinations, versus another, neurological or psychological, cause.

Focus, theists.
Well, it's not just theists who can be a problem in these kinds of discussions. This type of discussion requires one to actually read the contents of Acts, The Corinthians, The Galations, the Timothys, etc., with a figurative "ear" to understanding and empathizing with the man who wrote them, and this is not an exercise that most atheists are up for.

Religious people dehumanize Paul in their own way by taking the asthmatic wheezings of well-meaning church leader to be "divine riddles" that can be interpreted in whatever manner happens to be convenient at the time. It annoys me that religious people can often insist on treating their religion like it's some kind of weird abstract art in practice, yet they claim loudly that they're taking it literally. All they really mean is, "I get to interpret this in any way I want, but you have to take my interpretation literally." Cheap.

And the most literal interpretation of the book is to take Paul to be both mortal and fallible. If one were to read the Epistles with this concrete concept in mind, it's like reading something that your own brother might have written. He has times when he gets emotional and weepy. He has fits of temper and says things he doesn't mean. He has moments of poetic inspiration. You see a very human man struggling to do the best that he can for people he legitimately cares about.

To me, that's a far more interesting story than either the "fraud" theory or the "madman" theory or the "prophet" theory. I just think that epilepsy is a somewhat feasible explanation for some of the symptoms reported by Paul himself.


Paul was trying to convert people to his faith and giving the impression that he was preaching the Gospel of God himself. My brother would never write anything like what he wrote in the Epistles.



WilliamWDelaney
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 26 Apr 2011
Gender: Male
Posts: 1,201

12 May 2011, 9:32 am

Well, that's the funny thing. Seizures, migraines and autism all seem to be genetically and in some cases etiologically related. For example, platelet serotonin seems to be implicated in both autism and migraines. Furthermore, the serotonin receptor associated with blood platelets, 5-HT2a is related to 5-HT2c, which is implicated in the same family of disorders as autism.

It's all very interesting.



Last edited by WilliamWDelaney on 12 May 2011, 10:25 am, edited 1 time in total.

leejosepho
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 14 Sep 2009
Gender: Male
Posts: 9,011
Location: 200 miles south of Little Rock

12 May 2011, 10:06 am

Philologos wrote:
The question of Paul's spectrality is on a different plane from most ancient person triage.

No complaint here, but you would have to bring me up to speed a bit -- quite optional, of course -- before I could/would be aware of what you are saying there.

Philologos wrote:
I should be interested to hear your take on indicators.

Mostly that I can easily "identify with him" in many ways ... kind of like "it takes one to know one".

Philologos wrote:
One reason for asking - Saul is in many respects quite similar in style to my paleontologist brother ...

That is the brother who feels I claim Aspietude only as a ploy to "justify my [bad] behavior."

At least Shaul/Paul never claimed anything like that while simply trying to be "all things to all people"!

Philologos wrote:
Now, I have concluded that in my family - while we are undeniably strange and challenged - I am the only one apparently fitting the spectrum.

But if you see AS traits in Paul, perhaps some of them my brother shares, and I need to revise my estimate.

I do understand your willingness to look inward there, but I do not understand -- I just need a bit of elaboration -- as to how your brother and I might be seeming to present to you a similar challenge (if I have even understood there at all!).


_________________
I began looking for someone like me when I was five ...
My search ended at 59 ... right here on WrongPlanet.
==================================


AngelRho
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 4 Jan 2008
Age: 45
Gender: Male
Posts: 9,366
Location: The Landmass between N.O. and Mobile

12 May 2011, 10:57 am

Bethie wrote:
Focus, theists.

But what's the point? The question of MORE evidence for one thing or another is rendered moot by a tremendous LACK of evidence. All we have left is the text. That's our only evidence.

Your reasoning is also flawed. You said "ALL" the evidence points to hallucination. You don't KNOW that to be true. As an example, if you rule out all possible explanations for any given experience--no drug influence, no artificially induced altered state of consciousness, no dreaming, no unusual environmental conditions, proper brain functioning, and so forth, you're left with simply "I don't know" OR the experience really was from the divine. The flaw in your reasoning is an assumed impossibility of any encounter at all with the divine. Under the circumstances, such an assumption is unfalsifiable. Proper scientific investigation, which you seem to be fond of, makes no such biased assumptions. It doesn't "rule out" God, despite being ill-equipped to detect God. The experiences themselves are not reproducible in a strictly empirical sense unless you allow for psychology--and even that as a science doesn't "make up its mind" about divine experiences being divine but rather reports the consensus of those who claim to have the experience. I mean, you could TRY to explain these occurrences in strictly scientific terms, but the explanations will tend to be ad hoc.

Let's suppose that divine experiences really are hallucinations driven by neurological anomalies. Since we have no evidence that rules out God, neither can we in absolute terms rule out that the anomalous neural impulses are themselves results of divine intervention.

Getting back to the point...
@WilliamWDelaney

Now, as far as HOW the causes of whatever condition it is/was Saul/Paul came about--it's entirely possible, though conjectural, that Paul suffered from migraines or epilepsy. I doubt it was a common occurrence, though, as Paul was a man of status within the religious community and a lifetime of "fits" would have damaged his credibility. Could have been an aneurism, too. That doesn't explain how he could undergo a "faith healing" and recover so quickly, though. A simple migraine could have caused the blinding light, but doesn't adequately explain the long term, although temporary, blindness. The timing of his recovery, as far as I can tell, defies any medical explanation. So, I mean, really, you have such a confluence of factors that are extremely unlikely. Not impossible, but unlikely. The easy explanation if we want to keep it in a naturalistic context is that God brought about all these symptoms at the appropriate time.

Um... Yes, it helps to read Paul's writings as well as what his contemporaries had to say about him. Peter acknowledged that Paul was ok, even if difficult. Acts was written by Luke, Paul's companion. I like Luke's writings, both Acts and the gospel, because of how thorough he was getting as much as he could down in writing and because of how much more "scholarly" he seems to be. I mean, he writes like someone who knows how to write. But you do get a lot of background information on Paul that way, with the exception of the "missing years;" but apparently that period of time was not important in comparison with Paul's actual WORK. Paul's own literary voice is shaped by his experiences at various times in his career, and Paul also shows a tendency to tell people less what they WANT to hear and more what they NEED to hear. Paul gets ugly with the Galatians, yes, but his scathing remarks are in the spirit of correction during a tumultuous time when the church was just getting off the ground. So I think his attitude is justified as it would be with any good leader.

I read Timothy, too. It's not something I've applied to my life as a Christian very much up to this point. I'm now starting to wonder whether the direction of my life and career is going in a more leadership kind of direction. I've never set one foot in a seminary, but quite frankly neither have a lot of "worship pastors." I'm very good at organizing things and telling people how to get certain kinds of musical results, playing by ear, computer-based music, "leading from the bench," improvising, underscoring, AND I do have a master's degree in music composition. Creative direction is not something I struggle with. But I lack the social skills and confidence to be the guy in front. So maybe I have a little bit in common with Paul! People used to call Barnabus "Zeus" and Paul "Mercury," if I remember correctly. The Timothy letters have to do with the proper role of church leadership and how to confront certain issues as they arise. They are a good guide to interpersonal relationships, I think, but I don't get that as their primary purpose. With the changes happening in my life right now, I suspect those kinds of writings are about to take on a new kind of importance for me. And that's just the thing with Paul: His writings change to suit his purpose.

Age and experience also factor into it. I don't use the same writing style I did, say, in high school or even college. If you look up my first posts on WP, you'll likely find changes in style--and that just happening in a year's time. My moods are different, too, and my writing reflects that. Rotting in prison will tend to have a different effect compared with, for example, being insulted by your own people. I personally am plagued by DEEP bouts of depression. I have SOME signs of bi-polar disorder, of course, but compared with people diagnosed with it my case is quite mild. It is not out-of-control, and I'm not certain I really want to "control" the part of my mood swings that I do have to deal with, at least not artificially, because I've found any time that I have taken drugs, like when I used Ritalin from 6th-8th grade, my creative impulses were completely shattered. What I find is if I indulge my negative moods and really surrender to them in my work, I end up motivated to keep working on things not quite so tense--or I can refocus the tension in other directions.

If you care to see what I mean, you can check out my youtube channel: http://www.youtube.com/user/angelrho?feature=mhee

Compare my "space music" with my handbell music.

Same idea with the epistles. I don't think that makes the epistles less "inspired" or the truth of the epistles less inerrant. It would appear useless to say that God didn't use the situations Paul and other apostles found themselves in to speak not only to people living at the time who could directly relate, but also to generations of Christians who could find applications for their words in their own lives.



WilliamWDelaney
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 26 Apr 2011
Gender: Male
Posts: 1,201

12 May 2011, 11:10 am

Actually, I think that he sounded more confused and hurt than anything, in Galations. I see him as a very sensitive man. In my mind, I could see him stopping to wipe his face with a cloth while writing this, shaking his head hopelessly and then trying to compose himself again to write.

More later, time allowing.



leejosepho
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 14 Sep 2009
Gender: Male
Posts: 9,011
Location: 200 miles south of Little Rock

12 May 2011, 11:58 am

WilliamWDelaney wrote:
Actually, I think that he sounded more confused and hurt than anything, in Galations. I see him as a very sensitive man. In my mind, I could see him stopping to wipe his face with a cloth while writing this, shaking his head hopelessly and then trying to compose himself again to write.

More later, time allowing.

Yes ... and in relation to the "debate" about which bible books he either did or did not write, I have heard it speculated that "complete apostolic 'burnout'" might/could be why the uncertainty even exists ...

Quote:
Christianity Today named [Richard B.] Hays's book "Moral Vision of the New Testament" one of the top 100 most important religious books of the 20th century ...

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Richard_B._Hays


_________________
I began looking for someone like me when I was five ...
My search ended at 59 ... right here on WrongPlanet.
==================================


WilliamWDelaney
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 26 Apr 2011
Gender: Male
Posts: 1,201

12 May 2011, 12:29 pm

AngelRho wrote:
Now, as far as HOW the causes of whatever condition it is/was Saul/Paul came about--it's entirely possible, though conjectural, that Paul suffered from migraines or epilepsy. I doubt it was a common occurrence, though, as Paul was a man of status within the religious community and a lifetime of "fits" would have damaged his credibility.
So another possibility was that his fit forced him to change his attitudes about other people who suffered from the same kinds of problems. This would also explain his conversion, assuming that the mentally ill were not looked highly upon in his culture.

Quote:
A simple migraine could have caused the blinding light, but doesn't adequately explain the long term, although temporary, blindness. The timing of his recovery, as far as I can tell, defies any medical explanation. So, I mean, really, you have such a confluence of factors that are extremely unlikely. Not impossible, but unlikely. The easy explanation if we want to keep it in a naturalistic context is that God brought about all these symptoms at the appropriate time.
Well, acute blindness associated with seizures is rare, but it's not unheard of.

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/12661932

Shahar E, Barak S. wrote:
Acute blindness is a rare presentation of epileptic seizures, referring to loss of sight without loss of consciousness associated with electroencephalographic (EEG) epileptic discharges, mainly representing an ictal phase but also either pre- or postictal. We report a series of 14 children with documented epileptic blindness, describing the accompanying fits and thereafter the response to therapy to resolve the blindness and control associated seizures. All patients experienced episodes of acute complete visual obscuration lasting for 1 to 10 minutes. Seven patients hadaccompanying generalized seizures, with a photosensitive response recorded in three of them. All of these seven children were treated with valproic acid, regaining full vision, and six of them became seizure free. Three patients with acute blindness who had accompanying focal motor seizures and unilateral temporooccipital posterior epileptic discharges were treated with carbamazepine regained full vision and complete seizure control. Four additional children had the constellation of migrainous headaches, focal motor phenomena, and complete blindness, along with occipital discharges compatible with Gastaut syndrome, benign childhood epilepsy with occipital paroxysms. All four patients were started on carbamazepine and became asymptomatic. Our overall experience suggests that epileptic blindness in children is associated with a favorable outcome when promptly diagnosed and treated appropriately, resulting in complete resolution of blindness in all children and satisfactory control of seizures in most of them. We therefore recommend performing a prompt EEG in any child presenting with acute visual obscuration, even in the absence of other epileptic phenomena.
However, this study is on acute blindness in children suffering from epilepsy. To investigate possible causes behind Paul's blindness, we would have to determine whether it can happen in adult patients who have previously not had any such problem.

Quote:
Um... Yes, it helps to read Paul's writings as well as what his contemporaries had to say about him.
I agree with much of what you had to say here.

Quote:
I read Timothy, too. It's not something I've applied to my life as a Christian very much up to this point. I'm now starting to wonder whether the direction of my life and career is going in a more leadership kind of direction. I've never set one foot in a seminary, but quite frankly neither have a lot of "worship pastors." I'm very good at organizing things and telling people how to get certain kinds of musical results, playing by ear, computer-based music, "leading from the bench," improvising, underscoring, AND I do have a master's degree in music composition. Creative direction is not something I struggle with. But I lack the social skills and confidence to be the guy in front. So maybe I have a little bit in common with Paul! People used to call Barnabus "Zeus" and Paul "Mercury," if I remember correctly. The Timothy letters have to do with the proper role of church leadership and how to confront certain issues as they arise. They are a good guide to interpersonal relationships, I think, but I don't get that as their primary purpose. With the changes happening in my life right now, I suspect those kinds of writings are about to take on a new kind of importance for me. And that's just the thing with Paul: His writings change to suit his purpose.
Social skills can only be come by through continual practice. It's difficult and tedious, but it has to be done. Practicing in front of a mirror might help. It helped me.

Quote:
I personally am plagued by DEEP bouts of depression. I have SOME signs of bi-polar disorder, of course, but compared with people diagnosed with it my case is quite mild. It is not out-of-control, and I'm not certain I really want to "control" the part of my mood swings that I do have to deal with, at least not artificially, because I've found any time that I have taken drugs, like when I used Ritalin from 6th-8th grade, my creative impulses were completely shattered. What I find is if I indulge my negative moods and really surrender to them in my work, I end up motivated to keep working on things not quite so tense--or I can refocus the tension in other directions.
I'm more manic-biased, as you can tell from my long-winded rant indicating what you identified for me as megalomaniacal episodes.

Look, don't give up on finding a medication or therapy that works for you. You know what the first med I was put on was? Paxil. Ruined my life. But that's only because neither I nor my parents knew or understood at the time, you don't just take one drug and declare it a success or failure uncritically, but you keep a diary of how your experience of things changes and discuss it in a follow-up appointment with your doctor. The first medication is not guaranteed to be the right thing for you.

My boyfriend is on Welbutrin for example. It helps him a lot because it's the right thing for him. But I'll also have you know that he takes half of what his doctor tells him to because, like you probably would feel, he doesn't want his life to be ruled by it. He wants to do as much as he feasibly can on his own.