Freethought & Rationalism Archive

Ted Hoffman · 02-23-2006, 09:51 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ziffel

I am new to this, so is it the case then that you guys (Mr Hoffman, Mr Weimer) are saying that there are no solid examples of a single figure that the Christ legend could've been drawn from?

What do you believe about the claims of Jesus' attributes, and where they came from? Was it a collection of sources, like Iasion seems to suggest above?

My purpose here is that I'm collecting information from many different areas for establishing my own personal case against the judeo-christian world view. I came from, and was heavily indoctrinated in that view, and now I want to erase it completely

I believe these saviour figures belong to the same type as Jesus. As far as influence goes, the figure of Horus and his mother may have influenced Christian iconography of Madonna and baby Jesus.
But the figure of Jesusas is first found in Paul was not modeled on any pre-existing dying and rising god. The ones we find, like Isis (in Plutarch), come much later. Paul was influenced by Greek culture and the Old Testament and he did not model Jesus on any antecedent saviour figure AFAICS.
Then Mark came and wrote a gospel that had a figure that was metaphorical and fictional. He of course was influenced by Hellenistic Thought but by and large, he used the OT.

Jayrok · 02-23-2006, 10:46 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ted Hoffman

Then Mark came and wrote a gospel that had a figure that was metaphorical and fictional.

I've read articles, such as Doherty's, about a mythical Jesus. What other sources might you have that convince you that the author of Mark intended his Jesus character to be fictional and/or metaphorical?

Thanks

Toto · 02-23-2006, 11:13 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by jjramsey

...
Unfortunately, it's usually the Christian apologists who end up debunking the low-end skeptics rather than the scholars. ....

Acharya S is not a skeptic in any sense of the word.

As for other antecedents of Jesus, keep in mind Joshua son of Nun from the Hebrew Scriptures, and Odysseus (from Dennis McDonald's Homer and Mark. The gospel Jesus was clearly a composite character.

Spanky · 02-23-2006, 11:21 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Roger Pearse

I'm afraid that this Mithras stuff is all unsound. It relies on assertions by Franz Cumont in the conclusions section of Textes et Monumentes. While it was a great compilation in its day -- the beginning of scientific Mithras study -- it is now a century old and scholars have largely rejected it. In particular his identification of Persian Mitra with Roman Mithras does not explain the lack of iconographic archaeology for Mithras (especially the Mithraea) in Persia.

All the literary texts and archaeology for Mithras date to 80AD and later. Only one -- Plutarch's Life of Pompey -- suggests that Mithras was known before then, and I understand from Manfred Clauss, The Roman cult of Mithras, that the archaeology points so suggestively to Rome as the origin of the cult ca. 50-60 AD that scholars tend to think Plutarch got confused with Perseus.

I have found, from experience, that you should presume any statement about Mithras-as-image-of-Christ made online is nonsense unless it gives a specific reference to the ancient source on which it is based, and even then, you need to be wary. The classic example are supposed 'quotes' which really come from medieval Persian literature (and so are based on Christianity!).

After discovering this, I made a collection of every passage in ancient literature known to me which mentions Mithras, even in passing. It is here and includes a nice photograph of a relief from the Museo Nazionale in Rome which shows how the Mithraic reliefs were originally coloured.

From this, if I recall correctly, I find that the only real parallel is limited to the fact that both Christianity and Mithraism had ritual meals (although Mithras seems to have had seven such, with different ingredients, and derives such from mystery religions). But as Clauss says, such things originate in the common environment in which both arose, rather than being copied one from another. It's worth bearing in mind that Mithras was syncretistic (like all paganism) and would adopt material from others, while Christianity notoriously was not.

All the best,

Roger Pearse

What does this mean? Are you talking of a "historical" Mithras who never existed? I don't understand any of this!!!

Can you or someone please speak in laymans terms? I hope this isn't a derailment. Maybe this question belongs in the sticky thread "basic questions!"

jjramsey · 02-23-2006, 11:31 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Toto

Acharya S is not a skeptic in any sense of the word.

She is skeptical of Christianity, just not anything else.

I told you I was using the term loosely.

Toto · 02-23-2006, 11:45 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by jjramsey

She is skeptical of Christianity, just not anything else.

I told you I was using the term loosely.

Loosely does not mean incorrectly. Skepticism is a methodology, or a point of view, not just opposition to one particular philosophy.

Besides, I don't think you can say that Acharya S is "skeptical" of Christianity. It is more that she rejects it as an abomination.

Toto · 02-23-2006, 11:54 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Spanky

What does this mean? Are you talking of a "historical" Mithras who never existed? I don't understand any of this!!!

Can you or someone please speak in laymans terms? I hope this isn't a derailment. Maybe this question belongs in the sticky thread "basic questions!"

Good idea - if Mithras is not in the basic questions, someone should add him.

There was no historical Mithras. There was a Persian god Mithras, and a later (perhaps not well connected) Roman cult of Mithras. There seem to have been a number of similarities between Mithraism and Christianity, noted as early as Justin Martyr. Some opponents of Christianity charge that Jesus is just a version of Mithra, or alternatively that Catholicism is a version of Mithraism. This charge has not held up very well, altough there is a lot of missing data.

And Roger - Christianity was not syncretic? Where did all of those saints come from? How is it that modern American evangelicals have adapted everything from Dale Carnegie to self-help support groups to psychotherapy into their practice?

Roger Pearse · 02-23-2006, 11:57 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Toto

And Roger - Christianity was not syncretic?

No.

Quote:

Where did all of those saints come from? <etc>

This is all a category confusion, I'm afraid.

All the best,

Roger Pearse

Roger Pearse · 02-23-2006, 12:00 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Spanky

What does this mean? Are you talking of a "historical" Mithras who never existed? I don't understand any of this!!!

Can you or someone please speak in laymans terms? I hope this isn't a derailment. Maybe this question belongs in the sticky thread "basic questions!"

I beg your pardon. One hears the same thing so many times that one ends up writing too briefly.

There are various stories circulating online about what the ancient Romans believed about their deity Mithras; what his mysteries-rites involved, in antiquity; and supposed connections between these and Christianity. The majority of the information that one can see online about these subjects is untrue, and based on either outdated research, malicious gossip, or is plain manufactured! I don't see how such basic mistakes help anyone, so I try to draw attention to the modern mythologising.

Does that explain the context of my remarks?

All the best,

Roger Pearse

Kapyong · 02-23-2006, 02:37 PM

Greetings,

Thanks for your reply :-)

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ted Hoffman

When I write "useful", I mean useful in arguing pagan influence on Christianity, which I presume is what makes these figures of interest.

Don't get me wrong - I am not making any particular argument about Jesus being based on any or all of these figures. Their influence on Christianity is disputed.

I just wanted to mention the names that MIGHT be helpful to ziffel in this context - although it is true that most scholars do not see strong connections to Jesus.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ted Hoffman

Iasus is equally late.

Pardon?
There are many references to Iasius before Jesus -

Homer, The Odyssey, Book V, 116
Hesiod, Theogony, 970
Theocritus, The Idylls, Lovesong 6
Ovid, Metamorphoses, 9.682
Diodous Siculus gives Iasius' story at length in Book 5
Strabo, Geography, 7 f49

Iasius is a an early figure, not late.

Iasion

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

Freethought & Rationalism Archive

The archives are read only.