Freethought & Rationalism Archive

Chris Weimer · 10-03-2007, 06:16 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by NZSkep

Quote:

Originally Posted by Layman

I have some good friends that hail from Corpus Christi. And, come to think of it, I live in the City of Angels.

But I think some are missing the point. I don't think there is a real case to be made that Alexander the Great did not exist or accomplish great deeds. If such a case could be made, that would actually weaken my point. It is because he is so well attested that I can use him as a example to argue that the existence of similarities to the Iliad and Achilles are not evidence of literary creativity.

Ok, I think I see what you are getting at.
But from what we know of Alexander the great, we know he tried to model himself after Achilles, so it is only natural that we would expect to see parallels in his life.

Who was Jesus supposed to be modeling himself after?

The Messiah?

NZSkep · 10-03-2007, 06:35 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Chris Weimer

Quote:

Originally Posted by NZSkep

Ok, I think I see what you are getting at.
But from what we know of Alexander the great, we know he tried to model himself after Achilles, so it is only natural that we would expect to see parallels in his life.

Who was Jesus supposed to be modeling himself after?

The Messiah?

I thought he was supposed to be the messiah?

Alexander the Great wasn't supposed to be Achilles

Chris Weimer · 10-03-2007, 07:14 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by NZSkep

Quote:

Originally Posted by Chris Weimer

The Messiah?

I thought he was supposed to be the messiah?

Alexander the Great wasn't supposed to be Achilles

The Messiah hadn't come yet - but various thoughts on what he was supposed to be like, and these are influenced by figures such as Moses, Joshua, David, and the Temple Rebuilders, were floating around.

Roland · 10-03-2007, 08:46 PM

This was a pretty interesting argument, but here are a few possible differences as I see it:

1). Is there a body of writing (in fact, the earliest known) about Alexander that speaks of him in largely ethereal terms and is almost totally devoid of biographical details? (I speak here, of course, of the Pauline epistles). In other words, does it take awhile for the subject's life story to become widely known and disseminated (about 130 years in Jesus' case).

2). Is there writing about Alexander that includes statements like: "This was done in accordance with Homer" or "This he did in fulfillment of 'The Iliad.'" In other words, the gospel writers pretty much give the game away by their constant references to prophetic fulfillment. Do the recorders of Alexander's life do anything similar?

Steven Carr · 10-03-2007, 10:21 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Layman

Quote:

Originally Posted by Steven Carr

http://christiancadre.blogspot.com/2...character.html

'Achilles and Alexander could be moody, allowing their emotions to affect their decisions.'

Well, I'm sold.

That is at least a strong a parallel as any found in Mark's use of Psalm 22 when describing the crucifixion of Jesus

Carr,

So you don't like the moody comparison? Then I suppose you have equal disdain for the lists of the supposed similarities between Jesus and all those "dying and rising" savior gods in pagan literature?

Which was kind of the point of that point.

Really?

I thought you were meant to be attacking the way people claimed to see parallels between the Old Testament and New Testament.

Your essay starts 'A common tactic among Jesus Mythers, and not a few liberal New Testament scholars, is to approach with suspicion any part of Jesus’ life or teaching that recalls Old Testament stories or prophecies. The theory is that the early Christian communities invented actions and teachings of Jesus to match Old Testament expectations.'

And now we find out you were discussing alleged parallels between Jesus and pagan gods.

Layman - moving goalposts since 2001....

Steven Carr · 10-03-2007, 10:32 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Layman

Quote:

Originally Posted by Steven Carr

How did he get the price fixed on his head as 30 pieces of silver?

It could be a coincidence. Is there something facially improbable about the amount?

Which messianic prophecy do you think this was meant to fulfill? And do you have any evidence that people of the time and place viewed this as a messianic prophecy?

It could be that other historical characters were motivated by their own understanding of the Old Testament. The priests could have seen their payment of 30 as symbolic of what was paid to a good shepherd (Judas) after dealing with the shepherds who had been leading Israel astray (in their opinion, Jesus). Zech. 11:12-13. Or they could have seen it as an ironic amount as that is how much Exodus required to be paid to a slave owner whose slave was injured by another's animal. Ex. 21:32.

Could-have-been, could-have-been, could-have-been.

Layman has zero evidence, so starts building castles in the air.

Even when the evangelists write that Christians argued from the scriptures that Jesus was the Messiah, and when they copied whole sentences from the LXX and put them into stories about Jesus, Layman simply denies any possibility that they 'could have been' inventing things.

Let us turn from Layman's claim that parallels in the Old and New Testament are like Achilles and Alexander both being 'moody' and look at some parallels

In 2 Kings 4:27-37 a distraught parent of an only child comes to Elisha just as in Mark 5:22-24 (which continues in verses 35-43) a distraught parent of an only child comes to Jesus,pleading for help.

In both stories someone tries to discourage the parent from bothering Elisha and Jesus.

In both stories it is unclear to some people in the story whether the child is dead ,dying or asleep.

In both stories the child is in a house some distance away.

In both stories a second source comes from the house and confirms that the child is dead.

In both stories Jesus and Elisha continue anyway to the house.

In both stories the parent precedes Elisha or Jesus

In both stories Elisha and Jesus seek a high degree of privacy by turning people out of the house before their miracle .

The story in Mark is such an obvious rewrite of the story in Kings that if I remind you that Jairus in Mark 5 falls at Jesus's feet, you can guess what the parent in 2 Kings 4 did.

As confirmation that Mark used 2 Kings 4 for his stories of the feeding of a crowd, and the raising of a dead child, Mark 5:42 says that after the miracle, the parents were 'amazed with great amazement' (exestesan ekstasei megale), while 2 Kings 4:13 we have 'amazed with all amazement' (exestesas... pasan ten ekstasin tauten)

Or take another miracle...

Jesus in Luke 7 raises the son of a widow from the dead. In 1 Kings 17, Elijah raises the son of a widow from the dead. Both stories employ exactly the same words - and he gave him to his mother.The Greek is 'kai edoken auton te metri autou', copied word for word from the Septuagint version of 1 Kings 17.

Did Luke use 1 Kings 17 as a basis for his story? Jesus met the widow at the gate of a city. Elijah met his widow in 1 Kings 17:10. It should come as no surprise that it was at the gate of a city. Luke 7 also copies other phrases from the Septuagint version of 1 Kings 17.

Luke writes 'tay pulay tays poleos kai idoo' (to the gate of a city and behold), which is almost identical to the Old Testament Greek of 'tou pulona tays poleos kai idoo'.

But I'm sure Layman will claim that the widow knew her Old Testamen and so just knew she had to get to the gate of a city before her child could be raised.

Compare these startling parallels with Layman's claim that both Alexander and Achilles were sad after somebody died, and you can see just how irrelevant his essay is.

John Kesler · 10-04-2007, 11:07 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Layman

Quote:

Originally Posted by Steven Carr

How did he get the price fixed on his head as 30 pieces of silver?

It could be a coincidence. Is there something facially improbable about the amount?

Which messianic prophecy do you think this was meant to fulfill? And do you have any evidence that people of the time and place viewed this as a messianic prophecy?

It could be that other historical characters were motivated by their own understanding of the Old Testament. The priests could have seen their payment of 30 as symbolic of what was paid to a good shepherd (Judas) after dealing with the shepherds who had been leading Israel astray (in their opinion, Jesus). Zech. 11:12-13. Or they could have seen it as an ironic amount as that is how much Exodus required to be paid to a slave owner whose slave was injured by another's animal. Ex. 21:32.

It's also possible that Matthew, in his eagerness to connect Jesus to another OT "prophecy," made up the amount (see Matthew 27:9 and Zech. 11:12-13). Note that Matthew alone gives the amount as thirty pieces of silver:

Quote:

Mark 14:10-11
10 Then Judas Iscariot, who was one of the twelve, went to the chief priests in order to betray him to them. 11 When they heard it, they were greatly pleased, and promised to give him money. So he began to look for an opportunity to betray him.

Luke 22:3-6
3 Then Satan entered into Judas called Iscariot, who was one of the twelve; 4 he went away and conferred with the chief priests and officers of the temple police about how he might betray him to them. 5 They were greatly pleased and agreed to give him money. 6 So he consented and began to look for an opportunity to betray him to them when no crowd was present.

Matthew 26:14-16
14 Then one of the twelve, who was called Judas Iscariot, went to the chief priests 15 and said, "What will you give me if I betray him to you?" They paid him thirty pieces of silver. 16 And from that moment he began to look for an opportunity to betray him.

epepke · 10-04-2007, 11:13 AM

I don't know, but according to MAD magazine, Alexander the Great wasn't really all that great, but nobody had the nerve to call him Alexander the So-So.

Gamera · 10-04-2007, 11:18 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Toto

This is an interesting essay, but I don't think that it adds any insight to the discussion.

When you have two military heroes from the same culture, one of whom as read about the other and is consciously copying him, yes there will be parallels. Both of their mothers were influential in their lives? They both had close male companions? It would be unusual if this were not true of any ancient Greek.

But is the claim that the numerous parallels with the Hebrew Scriptures are just evidence that Jesus based his life on consciously copying those themes? How did he get himself born of a virgin, or of the house of David, sent to Egypt as a child, etc? How did he get the Roman soldiers who crucified him to cast lots for his clothes?

Perhaps the same way Alexander claimed to be a god: i.e., his historicity attracted all kinds of claims.

aa5874 · 10-04-2007, 11:29 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Steven Carr

http://christiancadre.blogspot.com/2...character.html

'Achilles and Alexander could be moody, allowing their emotions to affect their decisions.'

Well, I'm sold.

That is at least a strong a parallel as any found in Mark's use of Psalm 22 when describing the crucifixion of Jesus

So, why is Achilles undisputable fictitious? Because he is moody?

Homer's Achilles is fictitious because, fundamentally, he is the son of a goddess, his conquests are not written by historians, but by poets. So, basically, he could not have been born and no-one, not even Homer, have ever seen him alive.

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

10-03-2007, 08:46 PM	#24
Roland Senior Member Join Date: Mar 2003 Location: California Posts: 748	This was a pretty interesting argument, but here are a few possible differences as I see it: 1). Is there a body of writing (in fact, the earliest known) about Alexander that speaks of him in largely ethereal terms and is almost totally devoid of biographical details? (I speak here, of course, of the Pauline epistles). In other words, does it take awhile for the subject's life story to become widely known and disseminated (about 130 years in Jesus' case). 2). Is there writing about Alexander that includes statements like: "This was done in accordance with Homer" or "This he did in fulfillment of 'The Iliad.'" In other words, the gospel writers pretty much give the game away by their constant references to prophetic fulfillment. Do the recorders of Alexander's life do anything similar?

10-04-2007, 11:13 AM	#28
epepke Veteran Member Join Date: Oct 2004 Location: Anywhere but Colorado, including non-profits Posts: 8,787	I don't know, but according to MAD magazine, Alexander the Great wasn't really all that great, but nobody had the nerve to call him Alexander the So-So.

Freethought & Rationalism Archive

The archives are read only.