Jeffrey Gibson

In all ancient fertility cults? And does it symbolize the world in all of them (or righteousness as it does in Jewish tradition)? If so, may we see your evidence for this claim?

Which cults in particular? And whichever cults you have in mind, what is your evidence that they were such "forerunners"?

Thus? Are you saying that the pomegranate seed (which is not a pomegranate) was a cult object before the story of Hades' trick -- not attested to before the Homeric Hymn to Demeter -- arose?

And do you really think that in this story, a pomegranate seed in itself , as opposed to the act of eating anything offered to a person after that person has been taken to Hades, are presented as something significant and as having some special power that no other food would have had? Is this really what is said in the Hymn to Dememter or in any other version of the Hades' trick story (i.e., in Apollodorus or in Ovid)? Have you actually read the Homeric Hymn to Demeter where the story of Hades' trick is (to my knowledge) first laid out (it's not in Hesiod or in the Iliad or the Odyssey)?

More importantly, what is the evidence -- the hard evidence -- that there is such a thing as a collective unconsciousness.

Jeffrey

Jeffrey Gibson

Where specifically may this critique -- let alone anything that indicates that the Greeks did not think that Helios was divine -- actually be found?

I am noting that -- as with your assertions about Paul, Plato, and the graces -- you are not producing primary evidence for your claims

Where specifically may we find in pre christian Greek literature the specific critique of the folly of worshiping all the gods that the Greeks identified with, and saw as personified in, the heavenly luminaries that Theophilus makes and that you identify as Greek?

Cite some texts!

Jeffrey

schilling.klaus

no, any interpretation that tries to make Mark's gospel appear
as based in first-ccentury Judaism is a hilarious absurdity

of course the story in the canonical gospels is explicitly based on
the annual course of the sun, as best shown by H.Ph.W.E. van den
Bergh van Eysinga in Het Christusmysterie,
already 100 years ago, before scholarship degenerated.

Of course the conclusion is totally correct.
It may be incomplete in the sense of exp[laining only
some aspects of the story
, but the conclusion that
the story of Jesus in Mark's gospel is based on
solar astrology is as solid as it can get.
And not just the twelve disciples as the zodiac,
but many details of the gospel story underline this.


Klaus Schilling

Toto

I was reminded in tracking the recent disucssion of a quote from Joseph Campell, that the difference between Campbell, or Alan Watts, for instance, and Acharya, is that Campbell and Watts carefully worded their claims to confine them to discussions of mythic themes, and avoided making any claims about actual history. This avoided any direct confrontation with the church or othodoxy, while subtly undermining it.

Jeffrey Gibson

They did? I wonder. For instance, immediately following the quote about Dionysus that we've been looking at, Campbell states:

This certainly seems to be a claim about what happened in history -- specifically in the history of the presentation by Christians of how they understood the conception of Jesus to have come about. Or have I misunderstood what you were claiming about Campbell?

Even if your claim about a lack of direct confrontation with "the church" or with "orthodoxy" is true, I'm not sure how such a statement could possibly undermine the church's doctrines in any way, since the Christian legend Campbell notes is hardly an original part of that legend. It is not attested to (AFAIK) until the early middle ages, and then only in art (which may be the origin of the legend) and hardly universally. It's first literary attestation does not appear until the 13th century or so. And let's not even get into when the belief in Jesus "hypostatic" presence in bread and wine became doctrine!

How does a retrojection into Luke both of late (and probably misunderstood) representations of the annunciation story and eucharistic theology, a claim that the legend is really just a revamp of themes found Orphic legend of the birth of Dionysus to a goddess that is based on an undocumented claim about doves and an equivocation of something associated with a goddess and which, when associated with goddesses does not represent divine seed or the power to cause conception, with something associated with/a symbol of god, serve to undermine anything, since, like the purported existence of ancient myths of and beliefs in "dying and rising god", the legend of Jesus' birth that Campbell speaks of is a modern scholarly construct that that had no existence in the ancient world, let alone among early Christians.

But all of this is off topic. Aren't we supposed to be discussing the validity of A.S.'s claims and how well researched they are?

Jeffrey

Roger Pearse

I'm afraid that using terms this loosely is useless; anything may be made to 'be' anything else, if we stop being precise in our language and start treating loose verbal associations as evidence of connection and derivation. Unless we want our arguments to be treated with derision, surely we mustn't make this kind of 'argument'?

All the best,

Roger Pearse

Malachi151

Oh really? I'd like to know how this is an absurdity?

http://www.rationalrevolution.net/ar...ospel_mark.htm

Please provide refutations of the relationships therein.

In addition, please demonstrate the use of any ancient non-Jewish text within the Gospel of Mark.

As for the twelve apostles, please present an argument as to why the twelve apostles are more convincingly explained as "zodiac signs" than as traditional Jewish hero references, as shown below:

vs.

Loomis

Who in the skies can compare to Malachi151?

Who among the Sons of Acharya S can rival him? :notworthy:

Malachi151

Well, Cicero for example, in On the Nature of the Gods:

http://thriceholy.net/Texts/Cicero3.html

But these beliefs about the sun were far from universal and were far from the basis of all religious beliefs, as The Nature of the Gods itself demonstrates.

Demonstrating Greek and Roman "sun worship" is quite simple, demonstrating that this had anything to do with the origins of the Christ story, however, is another matter, and one that I have never seen successfully done, because it wasn't the basis of the Christ story, the Jewish messiah was the basis of the Christ story.

mountainman

And the story was a fiction story.
It was - and is - a monstrous tale.

All that remains is to determine who
perpetrated the fraud, and when.
What does the evidence say?


Best wishes,


Pete Brown