Freethought & Rationalism Archive

spamandham · 05-29-2008, 12:44 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Solitary Man

This is everything wrong with amateur "scholarship". There's nothing "eyebrow raising" in any of these fake parallels. These aren't even real parallels!

In what sense are they 'fake'? The similarities are there on the walls of the tombs for anyone to verify. I provided a link to the tranlsated source material that you can read and verify for yourself. This isn't just handwaving based on a book based on another book rooted in 'the 16 crucified saviors'. It's source material (well, English translations thereof).

I'm making no claim of a causal link, just noting some similarities, in particular where I'm unaware of a Jewish tradition from which they would be derived.

Solitary Man · 05-29-2008, 02:12 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by spamandham

Quote:

Originally Posted by Solitary Man

This is everything wrong with amateur "scholarship". There's nothing "eyebrow raising" in any of these fake parallels. These aren't even real parallels!

In what sense are they 'fake'? The similarities are there on the walls of the tombs for anyone to verify. I provided a link to the tranlsated source material that you can read and verify for yourself. This isn't just handwaving based on a book based on another book rooted in 'the 16 crucified saviors'. It's source material (well, English translations thereof).

I'm making no claim of a causal link, just noting some similarities, in particular where I'm unaware of a Jewish tradition from which they would be derived.

They're fake as in your just listed two passages side by side, but nothing suggests any sort of parallel at all. I mean seriously

Quote:

Utterance 83:
"The Eye of Horus is given to him that he may be satisfied with it. "

proverbs 20:13 (OT, buy hey)
"open thine eyes, and thou shalt be satisfied with bread."

There's nothing at all which suggests a parallel. There's not even any straws here to grasp at.

spamandham · 05-29-2008, 03:06 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Solitary Man

They're fake as in your just listed two passages side by side, but nothing suggests any sort of parallel at all. I mean seriously

Quote:

Utterance 83:
"The Eye of Horus is given to him that he may be satisfied with it. "

proverbs 20:13 (OT, buy hey)
"open thine eyes, and thou shalt be satisfied with bread."

There's nothing at all which suggests a parallel. There's not even any straws here to grasp at.

I'm claiming no causal relationships. I'm simply pointing out similarities, either in imagery or context. In this case, the imigary is similar though certainly not the context (assuming you know that the Eye of Horus is ritually represented by bread and beer).

You searched the list for the weakest point rather than the strongest.

Solitary Man · 05-29-2008, 04:27 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by spamandham

I'm claiming no causal relationships. I'm simply pointing out similarities, either in imagery or context. In this case, the imigary is similar though certainly not the context (assuming you know that the Eye of Horus is ritually represented by bread and beer).

Imagery? Don't you mean imaginary?

Quote:

You searched the list for the weakest point rather than the strongest.

No, that would be the last one you quoted:

Quote:

Utterance 215:140
O Unas! Your messengers go, your heralds hurry to your father, to Atum.

...a possible parallel to the transfiguration?

And there are factual errors as well. Judaism had both an afterlife and resurrection of the dead.

spamandham · 05-30-2008, 07:15 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Solitary Man

And there are factual errors as well. Judaism had both an afterlife and resurrection of the dead.

Can you support that?

Solitary Man · 05-30-2008, 08:13 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by spamandham

Quote:

Originally Posted by Solitary Man

And there are factual errors as well. Judaism had both an afterlife and resurrection of the dead.

Can you support that?

Josephus says so, and he's just one. A good study would be C. D. Elledge's Life after Death in Early Judaism.

Roger Pearse · 05-30-2008, 08:53 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Solitary Man

Quote:

Originally Posted by spamandham

What about the ritualistic consumption of the body and blood of Jesus to gain new life? I can't think anything similar to that in Judaism, but it is remarkably similar to Horus/Osiris rituals:

...some fairly weak parallels individually...

There are many many more eyebrow raising passages in these tombs for anyone who wants to go read more at the site I referenced above.

This is everything wrong with amateur "scholarship". There's nothing "eyebrow raising" in any of these fake parallels. These aren't even real parallels!

Agree. This kind of argument tends to bring anyone who advances it into contempt:

* Heaping up material to impress by amount rather than quality
* None of the material actually demonstrating the point
* The point to be proven not explicitly stated, but insinuated
* Material edited by selection, omission and misrepresentation, to give a false impression of the source text and what it says.

Isn't this precisely what von Daniken did? Albeit from enthusiasm, rather than malice?

All the best,

Roger Pearse

Toto · 05-30-2008, 09:00 AM

Life after Death in Early Judaism: The Evidence of Josephus By C. D. Elledge

Quote:

C.D. Elledge's book provides a comprehensive analysis of what Josephus reveals about Jewish hope in life after death, including such crucial passages of Josephus' works as his portrayal of Abraham, the Essenes, Pharisees, Sadducees, and Eleazar ben Jair. When cross-examined by other accounts of the afterlife in contemporary Judaism, Josephus' treatment of this important topic presents the conspicuous marks of interpretatio graeca - an apologetical translation of Jewish beliefs into Hellenistic conceptions that obscure their original forms. Instead of literally reporting the actual content of Palestinian Jewish beliefs in life after death, Josephus has instead brought together an eclectic blend of mythological, philosophical, and noble death traditions that acclaims Judaism in the eyes of Greek and Roman audiences. When viewed as a recurrent motif throughout his writings, Josephus uses life after death as a device that offers apologetical praise of Judaism to outsiders, addresses the problem of theodicy, and reinforces the moral ideals of his presentation of history.

Reviewed from here - Review by Daniel Moaz in pdf

Toto · 05-30-2008, 09:07 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Roger Pearse

Quote:

Originally Posted by Solitary Man

This is everything wrong with amateur "scholarship". There's nothing "eyebrow raising" in any of these fake parallels. These aren't even real parallels!

Agree. This kind of argument tends to bring anyone who advances it into contempt:

* Heaping up material to impress by amount rather than quality
* None of the material actually demonstrating the point
* The point to be proven not explicitly stated, but insinuated
* Material edited by selection, omission and misrepresentation, to give a false impression of the source text and what it says.

Isn't this precisely what von Daniken did? Albeit from enthusiasm, rather than malice?

All the best,

Roger Pearse

If you are going to argue influence, you have to show a large quantity of similarities, or your parallels will be dismissed as random chance.

And I suspect that "selection, omission and misrepresentation" is in the eye of the beholder.

I am not that familiar with von Daniken. Finding and classifying similarities in literary documents is a common practice in many disciplines.

Roger Pearse · 05-30-2008, 11:15 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Toto

Quote:

Originally Posted by Roger Pearse

Agree. This kind of argument tends to bring anyone who advances it into contempt:

* Heaping up material to impress by amount rather than quality
* None of the material actually demonstrating the point
* The point to be proven not explicitly stated, but insinuated
* Material edited by selection, omission and misrepresentation, to give a false impression of the source text and what it says.

Isn't this precisely what von Daniken did? Albeit from enthusiasm, rather than malice?

All the best,

Roger Pearse

If you are going to argue influence, you have to show a large quantity of similarities, or your parallels will be dismissed as random chance.

Indeed so. But if we are going to argue influence, we have to show connection, acceptance of influence, and that the material selected is representative. Large numbers of questionable 'parallels' (the worst kind of argument for influence anyway) is not the sort of thing we see.

Quote:

And I suspect that "selection, omission and misrepresentation" is in the eye of the beholder.

It's a standard technique to misrepresent something, particularly in a TV documentary, so I'm surprised that you haven't come across it. The phrase isn't mine, as far as I know.

Quote:

I am not that familiar with von Daniken. Finding and classifying similarities in literary documents is a common practice in many disciplines.

Not like this it isn't.

All the best,

Roger Pearse

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

Freethought & Rationalism Archive

The archives are read only.