You must log in or register to comment.
deleted by creator
Also every Hollywood agent with Jewish clients from 1900 until present day.
It worked on Muhammad Ali too
The names don’t have obvious meaning in English but they did in their original languages. Simon is a Hebrew name from the torah and means “he who hears”. Peter comes from Petros, the Greek translation of Cephas, the original Aramaic name Jesus gave him and means “rock”. So Jesus gave a Jewish guy with a Hebrew name an Aramaic (nick)name because Jesus saw him as the rock (foundation) of his church.
And I tell you, you are Peter, and on this rock I will build my church, and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it.
Matthew 16:18
BTW I know this one because of Angels & Demons.
You can see them too?
Now everything make sense. In spanish, “Peter” is “Pedro”, that sounds like “Piedra”, that means “Rock”
See also ‘petrify’ (make into rock) and ‘petroleum’ (rock fat)
The female for “Pedro” is “Petra”, what make it more obvious, and also “Petronila” is a woman name, that comes from “Petroleum”
I’d be fucking mad if my parents named me after petroleum
Late XX century in Mexico, were pretty common name your child based in their born date. So, there are so much woman called “Petronila” because were born in March 18th
I take it back, that’s a cool tradition
“The name’s Diesel now”
omg, in french Peter is translated to Pierre which also means “rock”! i always assumed that was a coincidence
deleted by creator
Yeah, his name was Simeon bar Jonah, Simon, son of Jonah, or by modern style, Simon Johnson. Then Jesus pops up and starts calling him the Rock… Simon the Rock Johnson. (also fun gravy, Dwayne means fishhook)
I thought Dwayne meant pipe?
deleted by creator
i was once taught by a guy named Pete Rock and he was the first to tell you that his name means Rock Rock lol
Similarly Platos name means broad, which was because he was a wrestler and kept up his physique. It also spawned a joke I’m fond of.
Diogenes wanders into Platos academy and says “Broadly speaking-” To which Plato responds “Yes I was now shut up”
Is this the time Plato threw Diogenes off the top of Hell In A Cell and through the announcer’s table?
also couldn’t the term mean “jacked” basically? like Plato= Daddy Swole essentially
Fuck you for this acursed comment.
Hmm, makes it more likely that Jesus never existed and the whole thing is made up by the church, imo. It’s always retrospective with names and meanings, especially if you name them “foundation”.
Jesus obviously existed. He wasn’t a god (he never claimed he was) but he obviously existed.
No, it’s not obvious at all. There’s no historic account of him aside of the bible. And yeah, the trinity thing, that was the church ~300 a.c.
There is historical account of him, just not from contemporary figures.
There are Roman historians who write of him, but they came years after.
It is generally accepted that the Christ figure is based on a historical figure however the story we are told now is much more tenuous as it is largely based on written works from folks who are retelling tales that may (or may not) have been known
Mind you we also have historical writings about Santa Claus
they don’t really talk of Jesus specifically though that’s the kicker.
If Jesus did miracles and had such an impact on the empire his name would be known his story would be better known.
The claim that Roman historians wrote about him is semi true they claim there are Christians and they have a Messiah but they never talk about what he did or anything. They mostly speak of the persecution of these people. So it makes a lot of things we think about Jesus unverified.
The only thing we know is Pontius Pilate under the rule of Tiberius allegedly killed their Messiah. That’s it.
The name Jesus, who he was or what he did is unverified and likely largely stolen. I’m pretty sure Gilgamesh was tied to being a carpenter or a son of a carpenter for instance
There are no contemporary records of Jesus.
Even of Pilate killing a guy named Jesus.
It all came later.
I’m simply saying there is a historical figure who fits the bill BUT the story as folks know it now starts as a retelling of a tale by people who came later.
So it starts with an untrustworthy narrator.
I’m not trying to say he existed one way or the other just that it’s more likely a guy did exist who loosely fits the bill and the story as we know it was able to grow and be built from there.
I’d bet the “real figure”, if I had to speculate, was more likely rejecting the theism of Judaism over trying to push another religion.
Nope. He’s just a man they considered their Messiah. The name Jesus isn’t recorded by any other source which is why he’s a questionable character. Somebody died, not sure if it was Jesus because as you bring up this happened and likely the story built up further. I mean allegedly Jesus was born in both Bethlehem but also he’s Jesus of Nazareth somehow? His story doesn’t track
I’d bet the “real figure”, if I had to speculate, was more likely rejecting the theism of Judaism over trying to push another religion.
He was absolutely. There are these groups called Mystery Cults they’re something between fraternal orders and religions kinda, all about secret rituals. It is likely things like the sacrament was made in response to these cults, possibly mocking them in some areas.
For insuance Jews were considered to practice evil magic, the Eucharist was probably Jesus literally mocking people thinking Jews eat flesh and drink blood it’s probable that he wasn’t speaking genuinely when he said eat my flesh drink my blood, he was probably joking.
Another reason to think he joked is that is the story we get that got Jesus in trouble, Palm Sunday, he walks into the city upon a donkey claiming he’s king of the Jews and son of God which was absolutely mocking the Roman Emperor at the time
Jesus was basically just an anti establishment punk who got killed by the state for saying they suck and it was so traumatic people still talk about it 2000 years later but likely many of the stories were condensed to express the Jewish experience in Rome at the time. I don’t believe he embraced as much spirituality as people believe he did.
I am amazed that the name “Pierre” (also french for stone) litterally comes from the greek for “rock”
Rome and it’s consequences
Like Ging did to Wdwune in HxH
you tend to do that when you and your buddies are up to street crime
What’s the charge? Eating a meal? A succulent meal of loaves and fishes?
taking multiple roman soldiers’ equipment a mile down the road, destruction of money lender property, theft of grain
Not to mention destroying the local bread, fish, and wine economy.
The destruction of the money lenders property and the theft of grain were justified imo
as well as fucking with roman military logistics. i support all three of the things i listed
Yubaba vibes
I actually sometimes do that to people too :P
Very common cult tactic to this day
Learn from the best.
Also a friend tactic. It’s just a nickname
We have a Posh Mike at work.
I don’t even think he’s called Mike.
I have friends of which I could not tell you their legal name at Gunpoint
friends of witch
is this witch… you?
Thanks, it is corrected
Your name is Gunpoint now.
I’m imagining a Reservoir Dogs scene playing out about the names.
Someone on another mission trip is Acolyte Paul! I assign the names, otherwise we’d have a bunch of Jews dead from an argument over who gets to be Acolyte John. So, you are Acolyte Pink!
Ron Swanson vibes
I guess the people who downvoted you didn’t feel these situations were comparable
The cool thing about being on an instance with downvotes disabled is I never have to worry about this sort of petty random downvoting stuff because I never see downvotes.
I always recommend this to people. It literally fixes lemmy. People are really quick to downvote here and it’s a serious negative aura even if you have thick skin
Cult 101
Had a friend in college who wiped out repeatedly - stumbling down stairs, walking into trees while talking, stepping on his own feet - all through freshman year.
Everyone started calling him “Trip”.
Which, I guess, implied he’d joined a Cult?
LOGICAL FALLACY - AFFIRMING THE CONSEQUENT.
If X, then Y does not imply if Y, then X.
LOGICAL FALLACY
Calling someone a pet name is not a matter of logic.
Of course not. It is your interpretation that having a nickname implies cult membership that is the logical fallacy.
The argument is:
- If CULT, then NICKNAME
- i.e. If X, then Y
Your interpretation seems to be:
- If NICKNAME, then CULT
- i.e. If Y, then X
Which is the logical fallacy of affirming the consequent.
It is your interpretation that having a nickname implies cult membership
That’s OP’s claim. My interpretation is that he gave Simon the nickname out of affection not domination
That’s OP’s claim.
No it’s not.
OP’s claim is that cults give nicknames. Not that all entities that give nicknames are cults.
But your second statement makes me realize that you likely have an inherent bias that is preventing you from seeing the logic involved.
OP’s claim is that cults give nicknames.
Post-Hoc Ergo Proper Hoc Fallacy. “Cults give nicknames, therefore if you give someone a nickname you’re a cult” doesn’t logically follow.
you likely have an inherent bias
Casual Fallacy. The existence of individual bias does nothing to affirm or reject a claim
If we were weighting on bias, your extreme reaction to a casual anecdote would disqualify your observations immediately.
One guy gets a nickname? No problem. You have a guy claiming to be a holy man assigning people names? Then you got a cult
You have a guy claiming to be a holy man assigning people names?
“Simon, you’re the most reliable person I know. You’re my rock. I’m going to refer to you as My Rock, because you are my most loyal and stalwart friend.”
Huge red flag. Avoid this person at all costs. You are in a
profoundly deep, possibly romantic relationshipCult.Is the guy naming him also claiming to be the messiah? That seems to be the part of the quotation you’re missing out on
Is the guy naming him also claiming to be the messiah?
All while performing bonafide miracles, sure. The pet name for a loved one isn’t the problem.
If, two thousand years from now, the High Priestess of the Church of Getting Your Vaccines So You Don’t Spread Illness was referred to as “Saint Cuddlebug” I’d consider that kinda sweet, not cultish.
I’m not abjectly religious but I don’t believe Jesus ever called himself the Messiah.
No, but this is pretty culty… Jesus answered, “I am the way and the truth and the life. No one comes to the Father except through me.
Generally he referred to himself as the son of man, but there were instances of other references: “before Abraham was, I am” might not make a lot of sense to us but the Jews understood this to be a direct claim to divinity, and calling God his Father riled them up too because in their understanding that made him equal with God.
I don’t actually believe Jesus ever claimed to be holy or did half the shit he is claimed to have done. I think he was an activist and kind person and the story got twisted over time.
Only the true messiah would deny being the messiah.
He was a doomsday prophet.
He claimed God was about to show up and judge everyone for their sins and then start a new world order. But then he got killed by the state and one or two of his followers had hallucinations of him a few days later (more common than you think). They essentially then rationalized WTF him coming back from the dead meant, and that morphed into Jesus being God. The first few decades after his death was a whirlwind of arguing about the “true” nature of Jesus and standardization within the baby church. Over the next few centuries there were more arguments that were less fundamental than turning Jesus into a God, though being a religion, the arguments were insane and fierce. Cue to today and we have a bunch of sub-versions of Christianity and even a whole spin-off religion.
Several thousand over different days and locations, not “one or two”. If it were one or two then this thing would never have taken off. People back then weren’t as dumb as we like to believe.
So it’s fairly likely it really was only a couple, but they were already devout and already had teammates to go and start this new church, which explains their success and gumption in starting a new church. Within a few years the descriptions of Jesus post-crucification become more and more elaborate and more and more robust against doubt. Essentially, as the disciples encountered resistance to their word, their stories became harder and harder to refute. Afterall, what’s a little embellishment when you’re trying to save people’s souls? In the earliest gospels we have, Jesus is only seen by a few people and he ascends almost immediately. It’s not until the later gospels that we get Doubting Thomas and Jesus walking around for 40 days before ascending.
Pretty much this. Cults isolate you as their first step. Anything that can be used to make you feel beholden to them, or “fresh/new”. They make you think your parents are the enemy, and convince you that your real “family” is inside the cult.
A: “Good job Tex.”
B: “My name is Sam sir, I’m from Wisconsin.”
A: “Nah, you’re Tex now.”
(This is my vague memory of a gag in an Atomic Robo comic)
Even in the Bible they people with deadnames.
