Freethought & Rationalism Archive

ShadowGryffindor · 08-05-2007, 06:35 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Chris Weimer

I'm sensing epic pwnage.

Bascom, William. "The Forms of Folklore: Prose Narratives." The Journal of American Folklore vol. 78, no. 307 (1965): 3-20.

Quote:

Myths are prose narratives which, in the society in which they are told, are considered to be truthful accounts of what happened in the remote past. They are accepted on faith; they are taught to be believed; and they can be cited as authority in answer to ignorance, doubt, or disbelief. Myths are the embodiment of dogma; they are usually sacred; and they are often associated with theology and ritual. Their main characters are not usually human beings, but they often have human attributes; they are animals, deities, or culture heroes, whose actions are set in an earlier world, when the earth was different from what it is today, or in another world such as the sky or underworld. Myths account for the origin or the world, or mankind, of death, or for characteristics of birds, animals, geographical features, and the phenomena of nature. They may recound the activities of the deities, their love affairs, their family relationships, their friendships and enmities, their victories and defeats. They may purport to "explain" details of ceremonial paraphernalia or ritual, or why tabus must be observed, but such etiological elements are not confined to myths.

Um wow. That just described the Bible (or at the very least, the OT)

Quote:

Myths are prose narratives

Sounds like the Bible to me.

Quote:

which, in the society in which they are told, are considered to be truthful accounts of what happened in the remote past.

Sounds like the Jewish society, etc.

Quote:

They are accepted on faith; they are taught to be believed;

I believe that aptly describes how the Bible is taught, etc.

Quote:

and they can be cited as authority in answer to ignorance, doubt, or disbelief.

Very common among Christians/Jews, etc.

Quote:

Myths are the embodiment of dogma;

Bible sure sounds like: "a system of principles or tenets, as of a church."

Quote:

they are usually sacred;

Sounds like the Bible to me.

Quote:

and they are often associated with theology and ritual.

Definitely the Bible.

Quote:

Their main characters are not usually human beings, but they often have human attributes; they are animals, deities, or culture heroes, whose actions are set in an earlier world, when the earth was different from what it is today, or in another world such as the sky or underworld.

Well, seems the Bible is one of the ones that are human beings (as it says "usually not")

Quote:

Myths account for the origin or the world,

Genesis 1 anyone?

Quote:

or mankind,

Genesis 1 anyone?

Quote:

of death,

Apples anyone? ("you will surely die")

Quote:

or for characteristics of birds, animals,

Serpents curse to crawl on their bellies, anyone?

Quote:

geographical features,

Dunno about this one, but Creationists usuall use it as such.

Quote:

and the phenomena of nature.

Rainbows anyone?

Quote:

They may recound the activities of the deities, their love affairs, their family relationships,

Funny, I sure thought the Bible recounted the activities and family relationships of Jesus (and, controversially, the "love affairs"

)

Quote:

their friendships

Discliples, Mary and Martha, Nicodemus, etc.

Quote:

and enmities,

Herod, Pilate, etc.

Quote:

their victories

Victory over satan, anyone?

Quote:

and defeats.

Well, this one doesn't fit, but only because he's portrayed as holy and perfect.

Quote:

They may purport to "explain" details of ceremonial paraphernalia or ritual, or why tabus must be observed, but such etiological elements are not confined to myths.

That sure sounds like it too.

aa5874 · 08-05-2007, 07:20 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by WishboneDawn

Quote:

Originally Posted by figuer

Does anyone know if the Bible has ever been published under the title, Judeo-Christian Mythology?

If it hasn't I think it should. Would help putting Christians in their proper place.

If you want a book of Judeo-Chrisitan mythology publish a book of Judeo-Christian mythology. It would likely include a lot of selections from the bible.

The bible is a collection of ancient texts that includes many different genres from myth to legend to poetry to liturgry to letters to apocalyptic writings to laws and more. How do Leviticus, Micah, Psalms or James fit into the genre of mythology?

Well Leviticus contains 27 chapters and 20 chapters start like this, "And the Lord spoke unto Moses.... " Leviticus, Micah, Psalms and James are essentially about a mythical figure, the Jewish Creator of the world.

Toto · 08-05-2007, 08:18 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Chris Weimer

Um, you can't pick and choose what you like. What part of remote past didn't get through to you? Explain again how a Holocaust survivor attributing his survival to God is mythical according to the above definition?

....

I know you are young, but the Holocaust is not the "remote past." I live in an urban area that has many Holocaust survivors. I have met people who were in concentration camps, or who avoided concentration camps by luck, or who are still scarred by their parents' experience in concentration camps. (And none of them attribute their survival to a god.) There are still lawsuits going on respecting property that was confiscated from Jews by the Nazis. The Holocaust is part of contemporary history.

By remote past, one has to mean events that are outside the memory of anyone living or their parents.

Chris Weimer · 08-05-2007, 08:46 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Toto

Quote:

Originally Posted by Chris Weimer

Um, you can't pick and choose what you like. What part of remote past didn't get through to you? Explain again how a Holocaust survivor attributing his survival to God is mythical according to the above definition?

....

I know you are young, but the Holocaust is not the "remote past." I live in an urban area that has many Holocaust survivors. I have met people who were in concentration camps, or who avoided concentration camps by luck, or who are still scarred by their parents' experience in concentration camps. (And none of them attribute their survival to a god.) There are still lawsuits going on respecting property that was confiscated from Jews by the Nazis. The Holocaust is part of contemporary history.

By remote past, one has to mean events that are outside the memory of anyone living or their parents.

No shit sherlock. That's what I was trying to explain to the feller. << self edit >>

Read more carefully next time.

Amaleq13 · 08-05-2007, 08:57 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by figuer

No it is not, and I think it is inappropriate for you (specially in your position as moderator), to call me "perverse".

My position as moderator is irrelevant to my posts as a member and I called your position perverse, not you. That you have to completely change the subject (ie jump from Genesis story to "The Bible") to defend it only serves to support my observation.

Quote:

The Bible is not a "short tale containing a moral lesson".

The story of Adam and Even is.

Are you really sure you want to argue that the story of the Garden of Eden is not a short tale containing a moral lesson? Really?

Quote:

It is a collection of many short stories...

Yes and the story of the Garden of Eden is certainly one of them and certainly attempts to teach a moral lesson.

Quote:

The snake is a character, true, but it is generally interpreted as a manifestation of Satan.

It was eventually interpreted as a manifestation of Satan but the text makes it very clear that the original author had no such deeper meaning in mind. The snake is blatantly described as being just another animal albeit more subtil.

Quote:

Mythology is not exclusive of fables.

Then it was silly of you to argue with me.

Quote:

A story can be both a myth and a fable, but I don't see how Genesis can be regarded as not mythology but rather "only a fable".

It is misleading to place words in quotes that weren't actually written.

Amaleq13 · 08-05-2007, 08:59 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by aa5874

Why is it perverse to have a view that is not the same as yours?

It isn't.

It is perverse to hold a view so blatantly at odds with the text.

Toto · 08-05-2007, 09:42 PM

A tangiential tiff has been split off and moved.

Please stick to the issues, not the personalities, and tone things down a bit.

figuer · 08-06-2007, 03:52 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Amaleq13

Quote:

Originally Posted by aa5874

Why is it perverse to have a view that is not the same as yours?

It isn't. It is perverse to hold a view so blatantly at odds with the text.

I don't understand why you insists with this. It is you that holds a position blatantly at odds with the text. Genesis is a myth, or a collection of various myths. Anyone that observes that text and the various definitions of myth can verify it. I have no problem with you wanting to categorize some of the stories as "fables", but to call the whole of Genesis a "fable" simply does not match either the definition of fable or the text.

figuer · 08-06-2007, 04:14 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Amaleq13

My position as moderator is irrelevant to my posts as a member and I called your position perverse, not you. That you have to completely change the subject (ie jump from Genesis story to "The Bible") to defend it only serves to support my observation.

While I did mention "Bible" instead of "Genesis", I did mean the later, not the former (Genesis is "a collection of many short stories, which together provide a supernatural explanation for the origin of the world, mankind, languages, and the Hebrew nation.") My mistake.

Nonetheless I will point out that I still consider it completely inappropriate to call my position "perverse", or to consider that a change of subject "serves to support my observation" (mistakes happen you know). You are implying that I am being sophistic in my arguments, which is unnecessary. My position is based on a rational analysis of both the definition of myth and the texts involved.

If you want to present a case for Genesis being considered as a whole a fable, and not a myth, do so. We might agree on a lot of things, or enhance each other positions, or ending not agreeing at all. But assumptions about motives or dubious debate tactics are not constructive.

WishboneDawn · 08-06-2007, 04:29 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by aa5874

Well Leviticus contains 27 chapters and 20 chapters start like this, "And the Lord spoke unto Moses.... " Leviticus, Micah, Psalms and James are essentially about a mythical figure, the Jewish Creator of the world.

Mentioning or having to do with a mythical figure (assuming your position) does not make something myth. Leviticus mentions God but it is not myth. Micah is closer to contemporary comment on real world events. Psalms are poetry and James is a letter addressing practical questions about belief and faith.

Would a letter describing the details of a ritual in an temple to Athena be put in the mythology section? Would the rules of behaviour demanded by followers of Athena be put in mythology? Or a comment by a follower of Athena on the political goings-on in Athens?

Mythology is something specific. Why muddy it by putting the bible in it?

Thread Tools	Search this Thread
Show Printable Version	Search this Thread: Advanced Search

08-05-2007, 09:42 PM	#77
Toto Contributor Join Date: Jun 2000 Location: Los Angeles area Posts: 40,549	A tangiential tiff has been split off and moved. Please stick to the issues, not the personalities, and tone things down a bit.

Freethought & Rationalism Archive

The archives are read only.