spamandham

A tradition of WHAT!? You keep harping on this, but you don't explain WHAT tradition you are referring to.

I've already explained that the prior tradition I'm referring to is the use of the cross as a sacred icon. THAT IS A SIMILAR PRIOR TRADITION. I don't give a flying fuck if you find that to be an unreasonable standard.

The rest is you attempting to, by your own admission extrapolate my position. Yet, even though it was not confusing in the first place, and I've explained it to you twice now, you keep insisting my position is something other than what it is.

What was it you said about willful ignorance? A foolish man beats a dead horse. I tell you what, since it seems so important to you to get some sort of a debate win out of this, I'll simply concede all points.

You are right about everything, I'm wrong about everything. Now that we've established that, we have nothing more to discuss.

(it's a damn shame mods can't be added to ignore lists. maybe you can work on fixing that)

spamandham

Actually it's more of a distraction for the very reason you stated. I'd prefer that wasn't the case in English, because I think the argument is reasonable without the similarity in modern English dialect.

The argument is not based on the similar English sound.

I already conceded this point earlier in the thread.

Ok, assuming that to be the case, why did the Egyptians use those numbers?

gupwalla

Bah, I should not be up posting past my bedtime. Egyptians used a mix of base-10 and base-64 mathematics. Many cultures, including the Sumerians, did adopt a base-12 system for at least portions of their mathematics, and measuring time is the most perservering example. The most likely original root cause is the observation of 12 lunar cycles corresponding to one cycle of seasons.

However -- and this is critical -- it does not derive that there are 12 disciples because there are 12 moons, and it emphatically does not derive that there are 12 disciples because there are 12 astrological signs. The root cause is entirely natural, the observation of lunar cycles. Everything else is descended from that single observation.

In the direct symbolic descent, 12 moons begat 12 tribes which begat 12 disciples.

In a parallel descent, 12 moons begat 12 astrological signs.

But to say there are 12 disciples because there are 12 astrological signs draws a false and unnecessary Hellenistic/mystical/pagan bent to the whole story.

So the point I had hoped to make last night is that there is no reason to go scouring in Greece when the answer is right there in Israel. Regardless of whether one reads Jesus as historical, legendary, or mythological, he is nevertheless presented as a Jew living in the Jewish homeland with Jewish followers. Judaism gives us a perfectly good, sensible, and reasonable answer to the question "Why 12?" and Occam would suggest we assume that explanation in the absence of clear evidence along another path.

Amaleq13

You consider that to be a sufficiently similar to conclude a direct connection? From symbol of life to symbol of sacrificial death?

I don't see how anyone could consider that more of an influence that the general symbolism I've already described.

Are you restricting yourself to the use of the cross in Christian art?

As I've already mentioned, Paul provides several examples of what Christians thought the cross stood for so I consider your apparent restriction to be entirely arbitrary. The cross was clearly a powerful symbol among Christians at least as early as Paul.

Amaleq13

I'm describing a general standard that should apply to consideration of any specific tradition.

What is your answer? Do you think identifying a similar prior tradition is or is not necessary to show a direct link to a subsequent Christian tradition?

It is a very vague and general similarity that is clearly inadequate to support your very specific assertion.

Yes, I'm certainly getting the impression that you are unconcerned with the legitimacy of your assertions. That's too bad because you're only making it easy for your opponents.

Vague similarities simply do not establish direction connections. I would hope that is obvious.

No, I was trying to obtain a better understanding of your position since you deny what appears to me to be a quite sound concept implied by what you wrote.

Why are you reluctant to improve my understanding when you complain it is lacking?

My question about how you are using "standard" has nothing to do with it and I continue to be interested in what you think it means because you do not appear to be using it appropriately. Standards are a mechanism for filtering evidence so as to reach a conclusion. They are not, in and of themselves, conclusions.

Are you claiming, in the post I reprint below, that you were not identifying parts of the Gospels that were directly connected to pagan traditions?:
I would be happy if you just indicated you understood why your assertion about the cross cannot legitimately be made. :angel:

No, you are wrong about asserting a direct connection between pagan cross symbolism and Christian cross symbolism and wrong about denying that it was symbol of anything for Jews. I thought it was clear from my previous post that I considered your other statements about the Lazarus story and Jesus' teachings to be much more legitimate (though not necessarily convincing). One can certainly argue that sufficient similarity exists in Egyptian or Stoic tradition to establish a direct connection. The same simply cannot be said of pagan cross symbolism.

spamandham

Ok, I understand why my assertion about the cross cannot legitimately be made. I assume you are now happy.

Amaleq13

As a clam.

I'm always happy when observing others at least giving the appearance of learning.

I certainly look forward to your future assertions. :angel:

spamandham

I'm not going to argue the point, since I've already conceded it, but merely as an FYI, there is a school of thought that claims the 12 tribes are not historical either, but merely represent the zodiac.