mountainman

The tradition of DIONYSUS certainly predates the fourth century christian
fiction, and is heavily associated with the tradition of SHIVA, which predates
Jesus by several thousand years. "Vatican" is a work with its roots not in
the Greek language, but the Sanskrit.



Pete Brown

Huon

Another similarity, the fiery midwife, Zeus' lightning flash.

Replace it with the Holy Ghost...

Aeron

If you are going to make claims about a mythical character, it's best that you don't use an English translation of that text as the basis of those claims, especially when they involve assertions about the existence of a purported savior. This "Jesus" character that you speak of, is his name Yeshua, Yahweh, Jesus, or Joshua in your english parlance?

Semantic games make it appear you are dodging the underlying question regarding the disturbing similarity between the christian myth and the myths that preceded it. If the cited example isn't to your liking, I am sure we could come up with numerous other examples from other myths that are more heavily documented.


And if you insist or berating or belittling people for their monikers, perhaps you should spellcheck translation and linguistic next time


/rant off

jgibson000

What similarity, let alone disturbing ones?

In case you hadn't noticed, it has yet to be shown that there actualy are any between what Euripides has Διόνυσος, say about himself and what NT writers say about the object of their concern, Ἰησοῦς. and whether any similarities that might exist are in any way significant vis a vis the question of the background of "the Christian myth".

So even if I am "playing semantic games":huh: , you certainly have engaged in petitio principii.

It isnt a matter of whether the cited example is or is not to my liking ( ). It's whether:


1. Euripides' Dionysus actually says what Jake says he says;

2. the particular similarities that Jake says exist between what Euripides' Dionysus says about himself in Bac. 1-5 and what certain NT writers say about Jesus are really there; and

3. if they are, we can say, as Jake certainly seems to think we can (and should), that the claims about Jesus are based on, derived from, and have their primary conceptual background in what Euripides' Dionysus says about himself.

Do you have any answers to these questions?

OK. But you might want to check whether I actually did berate or belittle anyone for their monikers vs. ask whether the use of monikers in a forum that is dedicated to serious and informed discussion of certain topics is appropriate.

You might also want to upbraid Earl for "berating or belittling people for their monikers", since he has taken the same position as I have on this matter.

Jeffrey Gibson

jgibson000

I'd be grateful if you could tell me what your grounds are

(1) for asserting as confidently as you do that in Bacc 1-5 Euripides has Dionysus declare that Zeus' lighting flash was the means or agent or instrument of his conception which is what the HS apparently is in Luke and

(2) for thinking that Christians asserted that the HS had any kind of hand in, let alone acted as midwife at, Jesus' delivery.

These, after all, are your claims, are they not?

Jeffrey Gibson

Vivisector

Of all the names you could have chosen, mine was one of the two you selected. Perhaps I should feel honored, in some way, by the distinction. In any event, you seem to be laboring under some misconceptions where I - and perhaps others - are concerned, and I'd like to disabuse you of them as best I'm able.

The name is, indeed, a holdover from my gaming days, when I was heavily into Doom2 and then Quake. On the basis of how much I enjoyed playing those games, sure - I'd be happy to be introduced at a bar as Vivisector. As to why I prefer a nickname in preference to my real one, it's pretty simple. I've learned how easy it is for too much information to result in unwanted attentions and intrusions, and I've chosen to err on the side of caution. I'm also guilty of reading - and posting to - the forum when I should probably be doing other things, and I'd rather not publicize that. Maybe these are good reasons, maybe not, but I don't use the nickname as an empowerment mechanism to enable me to flame people anonymously, and I don't have any general principle against sharing my real name with people who ask.

It might be true that I'm a weirdo or nerd. If so, though, it might have something to do with my four college degrees (one BS, two MS, and one PhD, though none in fields related to this forum) and the 70+ papers I've had published in peer-reviewed scientific journals. It might have something to do with my nearly 30 years' service in the reserve Armed Forces, during which time I've been fortunate enough to have commanded at platoon through brigade levels and achieved a respectable rank. The truth is, though, I honestly don't care if I'm considered weird, nerdy, or even puerile.

Finally, I don't think that the use of nicknames necessarily has to diminish the level of discourse on this forum. I think ideas stand or fall on their merits, not on the credentials of their proponents or opponents. Besides, one need read only a few posts by any particular individual to get some sense of their background and approach. Those on here whom I respect, and there are quite a few, I have come to respect as a result of their command of the subject matter and their ability to apply logical reasoning - not because their credentials persuaded me that they were entitled to that respect.

V.

Amaleq13

I consider it just as disappointing, if not more so, that he joins you in wasting time on such a superficial issue. I sincerely wish that both of you would choose to rise above it and simply cut & paste the individual's chosen identifier in place of their actual name without any curmudgeonly comments.

After all, the simple courtesy of agreeing to refer to someone in the way they prefer is surely not a foreign concept to you, Jeffrey.

Camio

I am not so sure since it is you who put the original text in Greek on this thread. Anyway, your response seems to be "I won't bother translating it".

I do have a real name. How is it relevant to this translation business?

jgibson000

Even if you are correct in your surmise, can you please tell me how, with respect to the question at hand, namely, what Jake's grounds are for claiming that

1. Euripides' Dionysus actually says what Jake says he says;

2. the particular similarities that Jake says exist between what Euripides' Dionysus says about himself in Bac. 1-5 and what certain NT writers say about Jesus do in fact exist; and

3. if they do, we can indeed say, as Jake certainly seems to think we can (and should), that the claims about Jesus are based on, derived from, and have their primary conceptual background in what Euripides' Dionysus says about himself,

my being willing (or not) to translate the Greek text I posted is in any way relevant?

The issue is whether Jake has evidence in support of his claims that is based upon the Greek text of Eur. Bacc 1-5, and only Jake can answer that.


I never said it was.

Jeffrey Gibson

Camio

Absolutely not relevant, I totally agree.

However, I wish I could understand the text you posted. My initial request was as simple as that... Maybe I will have to wait for Jake's return.