TheCloudFestival t1_j9owbuc wrote
It's genuinely amazing when you begin to realise how completely credulous people in the past were.
I know we're not necessarily much better now, but as time goes on the methods needed to fool people are becoming more and more sophisticated.
When you look at the history of magic, conjuring, spiritualism, etc, you come across thousands of cases in centuries past of people being completely fooled and taken in by the most mundane trickery.
A personal favourite of mine is the 'Floating Bowl of Floating Apples' trick where a conjurer would make a bowl filled with water in which apples were floating appear to levitate and move around the stage. This trick absolutely bamboozled audiences for decades. Conjurers who performed it were accused of actual witchcraft, and even other professional conjurers engaged in the most intense espionage to try and figure out how it was done.
The whole trick was quite literally stage hands dressed in black velvet against a black velvet backdrop in a dimly lit theatre picking up and carrying the bowl around, something that today a five year old would posit as the obvious solution from just a single showing, yet trying to figure the trick out drove people in the C18th and C19th nuts.
Just go and look at old photographs of mediums producing 'ectoplasm'. One glimpse and you'll conclude that the 'ectoplasm' is just gauze covered in some sticky substance that they're pulling from a pocket or underneath their clothes, and yet even Royal Society scientists, doctors, bishops, lawyers, politicians, etc, completely and sincerely believed they witnessed mediums producing genuine ectoplasm.
It kinda gives a whole new perspective to the 'miracles' of the more ancient religions. I don't doubt that ancient peoples genuinely believed someone died and was resurrected simply by being told a living person was in fact dead, and then watching said 'dead' person get up and move around.
Seriously, it's almost sweet how childishly naive people were to the most basic and facile of trickery.
Hedgehogknight t1_j9p903s wrote
My exact thought. For months a mysterious voice is speaking to you from behind a wall. Should we check whether a person is hiding behind the wall? Nah, it’s speaking in a strange voice, it cannot possibly be a person.
Roman_____Holiday t1_j9q9ip8 wrote
All people are less likely to question something that reinforces their already held beliefs. Doubly so for religious true believers.
1945BestYear t1_j9puzzp wrote
As a counterpoint, have you ever seen a Sacha Baron Cohen film? There are a lot of people out there who would take the most ridiculous man they ever met at face value so long as he has a funny accent and says he's from a country they don't know anything about.
kahlzun t1_j9ru3qz wrote
I swear the dude has a superpower of convincing people to incriminate themselves
[deleted] t1_j9piyps wrote
[deleted]
TheCloudFestival t1_j9pkfps wrote
I've always thought of Jesus as an amalgam of several Jesuses walking around and preaching at the time (Jesus being a very common name in those days), who used elements of magic and showmanship to beef up their Post-Apocalyptic Judaism doctrine. Those preachers certainly didn't invent the Post-Apocalyptic Jewish doctrine, but they did enthusiastically spread it. They were more like the flashy megachurch pastors of their day.
[deleted] t1_j9qeif7 wrote
[deleted]
saliczar t1_j9qkh4i wrote
>in a time when people were gullible fools.
So always?
Spirckle t1_j9qjx2l wrote
> Post-Apocalyptic
It would have been pre-apocalyptic. Or just apocalyptic. People of that time thought that the apocalypse was yet to come. The closest thing they experienced to an apocalypse was the destruction of Jerusalem by the Romans in 70 AD.
TheCloudFestival t1_j9qmefd wrote
It's just another term for Messianic Judaism. I don't really understand it either, but it's one of the ways of referring to them nonetheless.
Sigg3net t1_j9qtam3 wrote
Jesus wasn't a common name, it's the Roman misspelling/latinized version of Joshua, isn't it?
TheCloudFestival t1_j9qyof2 wrote
Yeah, Joshua was a pretty common name back then, what with being an Old Testament patriarch and such.
OldKingCanary t1_j9rho4x wrote
There's a lot of hints that he was also inspired by the local Buddhist "missionaries" (not really but kinda cultural ones) that had been sent by King Asoka a bit over as hundred years before he lived. They were cultural ambassadors in a way.
lebiro t1_j9r1rxo wrote
The article doesn't say this.
Firstly it may be the earliest mention of Jesus Christ, but it might also not be a reference to him, and may in fact date to "the late 2nd century B.C."
Secondly the article does use the translation "magician" for the Greek word "goistas" but it gives no indication that the word signified a travelling performer doing 'tricks' for money. It talks about fortune-tellers and soothsayers, who offered what we might call 'service magic', i.e. magic for functional purposes, not for entertainment. We can't speculate about what individual practitioners thought or believed about what they were doing but we can say with confidence that the people who came to them in large part did so because they believed they could really learn about the future (or in other cases be healed, find their stolen goods or buried treasure, etc). Not a David Blaine situation at all, unless I am to understand that the people at David Blaine's shows believe he actually has supernatural powers.
I am not a historian of first century Greece and I don't speak Greek, so it could well be that the word on the cup does signify an entertainer (though I highly doubt it), but the article absolutely doesn't support the idea that Jesus was perceived as someone who "travelled around performing magic tricks for donations".
Pogo152 t1_j9q6flj wrote
The article linked doesn’t confirm that the bowl is the earliest mention of Jesus Christ. According to the article, it’s just as if not more probable that the bowl predates Jesus Christ. Even if it doesn’t, there isn’t much reason to think that the “Christ” mentioned is Jesus Christ. “Christ” wasn’t Jesus’s last name or something, it’s the Greek word for messiah, a title that could be used for lots of religious or mythological figures before the dominance of Christianity.
[deleted] t1_j9qe6jf wrote
[deleted]
Pogo152 t1_j9qu3sw wrote
I already read the whole article
>dating between the late 2nd century B.C. And the early 1st century A.D.
Most of that timeframe well predates when Jesus Christ could have been born. It seems that, at best this could have been contemporary with Jesus or made within a couple decades of his supposed death, and considering that Christianity was yet to really catch on at this time, it makes it even more doubtful that Jesus is being referred to here.
Also, the article admits that the idea that the “Christ” being referred to is Jesus (as, once again, “Christ” is a title and not part of his name) is based purely on speculation. The entire second-half of the article is discussing different explanations for the writing on the bowl.
The whole thing seems kinda like click-bait. The article runs with the interpretation that will grab the most attention and the couches it in weasel words like “could very well be”, “is speculated”, and “it is very probable”. No actual evidence is furnished within the article for this interpretation.
[deleted] t1_j9r17kv wrote
[deleted]
jcd1974 t1_j9p0s5v wrote
At least back then people had an excuse (lack of universal public education).
creggieb t1_j9pldhp wrote
"Because nobody told me" isn't a good reason for such ignorance.
Credulance as a default isn't banished by school. In fact they kind want that you believe ebeeything that school says is true, and work towards understanding your error if you disagree.
Very few teachers actually cause rational thought. Mostly the system tells you what rational thought is and grades on how well you repeat that back to them
Zandrick t1_j9pmc4s wrote
Ignorance is a lack of knowledge. “Because nobody told me” is the actual definition of ignorance.
I do agree though, that critical thinking is more important than wrote memorization.
creggieb t1_j9qveep wrote
Yes, critical thinking is what isn't taught.
"Because nobody told me" is also the definition of willfull ignorance. If we say
"because i chose not to inform myself, relying on others to fulfill this responsibility for me"
The idea becomes more clear.
Zandrick t1_j9r01tb wrote
Those are two very different statements.
“Nobody told me” implies withheld information, like a secret.
“Choose not to inform myself” is a failure of personal responsibility, sure.
But either way, you are talking about ignorance, both things are ignorance. If someone withholds secret information from you, you are ignorant of that information.
FuckFuckFakultativ t1_j9pdwqo wrote
> It's genuinely amazing when you begin to realise how completely credulous people in the past were. > > I know we're not necessarily much better now, but as time goes on the methods needed to fool people are becoming more and more sophisticated.
Influencer is just a new word for salesman ;)
HPmoni t1_j9pyr15 wrote
People refused to look at Obama's birth certificate in 2008.
People have their ideas about something and they refuse to change them.
Positive_Try_5699 t1_j9q3pv2 wrote
Tbf didn't lighting suck then? Surely "dimly lit" was just their default? It's not just that they couldn't see in that lighting, but maybe they couldn't envision a world in which you could see with clarity, and so their mind never even went to the possibility of manoeuvres obscured by lack of vision.
I think a modern equivalent (maybe slightly too literal) would be if future generations had hyper-fluorescent lighting that illuminated every single speck and shadow beyond modern capabilities. There are lots of magic / party tricks we're still vaguely fooled by today that wouldn't be able to withstand that scrutiny. They wouldn't impress a 5 year old from the future even if the lights were turned off etc – the 5 year old would have the ability to envision simple visual possibilities in their mind that us adults today can't
tahitisam t1_j9r3uef wrote
You’re aware that they could go outside during the day, aren’t you ?…
If someone did a trick in a dark room that they couldn’t replicate outside it doesn’t seem like much of a stretch to assume that the darkness has something to do with it…
PoopieButt317 t1_j9pjrp4 wrote
Trickle down economics.
NoChipmunkToes t1_j9qcjtz wrote
Um, qanon, the cult of trump, Mormons, jehovahs, flat earthers etc etc. The past is no different to today. Dumbfucks gonna dumbfuck.
houseman1131 t1_j9q0nw3 wrote
Vaccine conspiracies and child slavery rings under strip mall pizzerias.
[deleted] t1_j9pp571 wrote
[removed]
thegreatestajax t1_j9t7cgl wrote
More sophisticated? Today you just needs to be part of the same political tribe and people will believe whatever you say.
Viewing a single comment thread. View all comments