Love of Money and Crassus

[Clive]

And sorry, I would have thought a major problem with humanity is that most of us do act like sheep most of the time!

[DCHindley]

Has anyone looked?

Probably. All I can say is that when I encounter inconsistencies, I store them in the back of my mind. If I start to detect a pattern, then I would start to devise potential explanations.

That being said, I have not noted any inconsistencies that might be conducive to such a conjecture (rich elites manipulating religion in an extraordinary manner to control people). The difference between 15th century states with institutionalized churches, etc., is that Roman subjects were under no obligation to join the Christian church or punished for holding pagan beliefs, while in medieval times you were subject to execution for non-adherence to the church establishment's creed.

DCH

[Clive]

I am not proposing it was large scale to start with, just a new side line for a couple of centuries until a takeover by an Emperor. I would seriously follow the money. Marcion was one of the hyper rich, how many more were involved?

Someone possibly saw there was money in another "oriental cult".

[bcedaifu]

Hi Clive,

http://www.gregtrimble.com/the-logic-be ... on-church/

Some forum members will consider that link to be useless garbage, I think, contrarily, that it serves as an excellent explanation of the motivation of people who join the Mormon church.

Why do folks join a religion, any religion? In the second century, a time when I believe, Christianity commenced, Jerusalem had been emptied. No messiah came to save the Jews, from the Romans. Those many educated believers in Judaism, were now destitute, wandering about, and in the turmoil, arose a dozen odd claimants to the "new" religion, based on old teachings from a variety of traditions.

Did not the Mormon church arise in somewhat similar circumstances, with "pilgrims", wandering west in wagon trains, facing a dangerous and uncertain future? They may not have been destitute, but likely they were barely subsistent farmers, one drought away from penury. Were the founders of Mormonism wealthy? It is difficult to obtain accurate information about conditions in Syria 1800 years ago, it is easier to investigate financial shenanigans in New York, Illinois, Missouri, and other locales, from which Mormonism arose, two hundred years ago.

[Ulan]

In the second century, a time when I believe, Christianity commenced, Jerusalem had been emptied. No messiah came to save the Jews, from the Romans. Those many educated believers in Judaism, were now destitute, wandering about, and in the turmoil, arose a dozen odd claimants to the "new" religion, based on old teachings from a variety of traditions.

The "wandering about" part is somewhat of a myth. Jerusalem was a relatively small city of maybe 60,000 inhabitants. It wasn't even the largest city in Judea, let alone the capital. Also, only a small fraction of the Jews lived in Judea at that time. Which means that the "destitution" was more an ideological one, as the temple as symbol of the unity of faith was gone. This symbol had to be replaced. Of course, this doesn't really touch what you think about the mechanism.

Did not the Mormon church arise in somewhat similar circumstances, with "pilgrims", wandering west in wagon trains, facing a dangerous and uncertain future? They may not have been destitute, but likely they were barely subsistent farmers, one drought away from penury. Were the founders of Mormonism wealthy?

No, quite the opposite. Btw, I recommend that you look a bit more closely into the origins of Mormonism, as it's rather enlightening regarding how religions are founded. Mormonism is basically the child of two subsequent con men. The original founder, Joseph Smith, started his con man career in a more mundane business. He claimed to have Urim and Thummim, the two stones from the vestment of the Jewish high priest, and used these to defraud farmers. He got sentenced for fraud, because he took money for finding treasures on the land of farmers with these stones. Later on, he went the religious route, invented that story with the angel Moroni and the golden plates with some invented sign language, which he "translated" by use of Urim and Thummim. The fraudulent nature of these claims would again become obvious when he also "translated" some real Egyptian papyrus, probably in the hope that hieroglyphs would never be deciphered. Well, the Rosetta Stone put an end to these shenanigans, but it obviously doesn't deter his followers. His writings are in part based on some French travel novel. Joseph Smith was probably not aware of the totally invented nature of the travels in there.

The second con man, Brigham Young, then persuaded his followers to move to a place where they were cut off from disturbing outside influences, in typical sect manner. Cutting off their followers from outside influences is still a practice Mormons follow today, as their only source of news ought to be Deseret News, the Mormon news service. They practice not to listen when they are subjected to unfiltered news.

In case you wonder, the apostle Paul ticks a lot of boxes for me when it comes to comparisons with Joseph Smith. And don't let the guy at your linked site fool you: also for Paul, it was often enough about money. It's also one of the less than a handful occasions where he actually quotes Jesus. None of these figures, Paul or the Mormon examples, fit the model presented in this thread though. But one funny thought from this is that Christianity might be based on a collection of begging letters.

Regarding Mormons, you may have noticed that the guy at your link actually didn't address the question at hand. If you want to get an insight into Mormon thought, I recommend the following thesis: History through Seer Stones: Mormon Historical Thought 1890-2010 (direct link to pdf). I particularly recommend the prologue (it's just 9 pages), which gives a comprehensive summary of the Mormon scriptural narrative. This should be an eye-opener to anyone who dismisses routes of thought solely on the basis that "nobody would believe anything like that".

[Clive]

A tentmaker has a vision and goes into the oriental cult business, selling "death where is thy sting" remedies....

[steve43]

Good summary of Smith and Young.

I think a better understanding of Paul is had when you realize he was only half-Jewish (on his mother's side) but he was trying to break into the Second Temple elite. That was a tough row to hoe- well nigh impossible.

And Saul found that his family having money didn't cut it either.

Saul likely was gung-ho to persecute to the point of murdering the early Christians in a desperate and misguided attempt to impress the High Preisthood with his zealous passion for Judaism.

[Leucius Charinus]

So what is wrong with my theory of christianity being the result of bored hyper rich and their highly educated and skilled freed slaves playing with some business opportunities around religion, building, old religious texts, stoic ideas, gnosis, sources of income from believers...

No conspiracy, just ad hoc experiments that eventually gelled and became institutionalised? Groups arguing about who holds franchises!

Doesn't this assume that people, everywhere, are sheep to be herded. People form beliefs over the course of a lifetime, and like steering a battleship folks just don't take sharp turns. Folks just are not going to believe something entirely new unless there is something in it for them.

Incentives can be positive or negative. What about forced conversions?


LC

[Leucius Charinus]

(Not probably Crassus literally but it is an obvious business development!)

Have we got the same Crassus?
http://penelope.uchicago.edu/Thayer/E/R ... ssus*.html

Crassus' homonymous grandfather, M. Licinius Crassus (praetor c.126 BC), was facetiously given the Greek nickname Agelastus (the grim)

LC

[Clive]

Yes, him

For when Sulla took the city and sold the property of those whom he had put to death, considering it and calling it spoil of war, and wishing to defile with his crime as many and as influential men as he could, Crassus was never tired of accepting or of buying it.2 4 And besides this, observing how natural and familiar at Rome were such fatalities as the conflagration and collapse of buildings, owing to their being too massive and close together, he proceeded to buy slaves who were architects and builders. Then, when he had over five hundred of these, he would buy houses that were afire, and houses which adjoined those that were afire, and these their owners would let go at a trifling price owing to their fear and uncertainty. In this way the largest part of Rome came into his possession. 5 But though he owned so many artisans, he built p319no house for himself other than the one in which he lived; indeed, he used to say that men who were fond of building were their own undoers, and needed no other foes. And though he owned numberless silver mines, and highly valuable tracts of land with the labourers upon them, nevertheless one might regard all this as nothing compared with the value of his slaves; 6 so many and so capable were the slaves he possessed, — readers, amanuenses, silversmiths, stewards, table-servants; and he himself directed their education, and took part in it himself as a teacher, and, in a word, he thought that the chief duty of the master was to care for his slaves as the living implements of household management.

7 And in this Crassus was right, if, as he used to say, he held that anything else was to be done for him by his slaves, but his slaves were to be governed by their master. For household management, as we see, is a branch of finance in so far as it deals with lifeless things; but a branch of politics when it deals with men.3 He was not right, however, in thinking, and in saying too, that no one was rich who could not support an army out of his substance; 8 for "war has no fixed rations," as King Archidamus said,4 and therefore the wealth requisite for war cannot be determined. Far different was the opinion of Marius, who said, after distributing to each of his veterans fourteen acres of land and discovering that they desired more, "May no Roman ever think that land too small which suffices to maintain him."

p3213 1 However, Crassus was generous with strangers, for his house was open to all; and he used to lend money to his friends without interest, but he would demand it back from the borrower relentlessly when the time had expired, and so the gratuity of the loan was more burdensome than heavy interest. When he entertained at table, his invited guests were for the most part plebeians and men of the people, and the simplicity of the repast was combined with a neatness and good cheer which gave more pleasure than lavish expenditure.

Christianity was also very popular with slaves. I think there is a direct connection with someone educating them waiting to be dug out. Goldman pointed it out very clearly - Christianity is not actually about morality and helping poor people.