Freethought & Rationalism Archive

andrewcriddle · 08-28-2008, 02:47 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by aa5874

Quote:

Originally Posted by andrewcriddle

I meant that "the Jesus Mysteries" is not a reliable source, some at least of the supposed parallels are probably just not true.

Eg can you give me primary sources for the claim that either Osiris or Doinysus died for the sins of the world and rose on the third day ?

Andrew Criddle

Aren't you confusing parallels between mythichal figures like Osiris, Dionysus and Jesus with what you seem to be suggesting that mythical figures like Jesus and Osiris or Jesus and Dionysus must be identical in every single mythical aspect or characteristic to be cosidered parallel myths?

It is not necessary for the myths, Jesus and Osiris, or Jesus and Dionysus to be identical to claim that there are parallels, just some fundamental similarities of their mythical characteristics.

To some extent this is a good point.

However I was trying to explain to angelo atheist why claims about parallels based on the Jesus Mysteries are unreliable eg these claims posted previously in this thread

Quote:

The ancient myths of Osiris or Dionysus for one.
1.Orsiris-Dionysus is God made flesh, the saviour and 'Son of God'
2.His father is God and his mother is a mortal virgin.
3.He is born in a cave or humble cowshed on 25 December before three shepherds
4.He offers his followers the chance to be born through the rites of baptism.
5.He miraculoiusly turns water into wine at a marriege ceremony.
6.He rides into town on a donkey while people wave palm leaves to honour him.
7.He dies at Easter time as a sacrifice for the sins of the world.
8.After his death he descends into hell, then on the third day he rises from the dead and ascends into heaven in glory.
9.His followers await his return as the judge during the Last Days.
10.His death and resurrection are celebrated by a ritual meal of bread and blood.

These are just some of the motifs shared between the tales of Osiris-Dionysus and a 'biography' of Jesus.
[Source-- The Jesus Mysteries.]

I emphasised the detailed points because they were mentioned in the earlier post specifically in claims 7 and 8..

Andrew Criddle

sschlichter · 08-28-2008, 05:15 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by JamesABrown

This is not correct. Here is a link written by a Mormon apologist answering criticisms against the LDS church. It's interesting to me that the language used by Mormon apologists mirrors that of Christian apologists:

Two of these men were excommunicated and later denied ever seeing the plates. Harris later confessed that he only saw them with his 'eyes of faith', not his natural eyes. I suggest you read up on these fellows. I really do not think Mormonism is going to be the best way to make your point - whatever your point is.

sschlichter · 08-28-2008, 05:18 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Huon

Ignatius of Antioch, born in Syria, around the year 50; died at Rome between 98 and 117. At best, witness of witness.

The oldest collection of the writings of St. Ignatius known to have existed was that made use of by Eusebius in the first half of the fourth century, but which is no longer extant.

The oldest of the later collections is known as the "long recension". This collection dates from the latter part of the fourth century. It contains the seven genuine and six spurious letters, but even the genuine epistles were greatly interpolated to lend weight to the personal views of its otherwise unknown author.

Polycarp, martyr (69-155). At best, witness of witness.

Papias (100-150), bishop of Hierapolis in Phrygia.

Papias says: "But I shall not hesitate also to put down for you along with my interpretations whatsoever things I have at any time learned carefully from the elders and carefully remembered, guaranteeing their truth. For I did not, like the multitude, take pleasure in those that speak much, but in those that teach the truth; not in those that relate strange commandments, but in those that deliver the commandments given by the Lord to faith, and springing from the truth itself.

4. If, then, any one came, who had been a follower of the elders, I questioned him in regard to the words of the elders—what Andrew or what Peter said, or what was said by Philip, or by Thomas, or by James, or by John, or by Matthew, or by any other of the disciples of the Lord, and what things Aristion and the presbyter John, the disciples of the Lord, say. For I did not think that what was to be gotten from the books would profit me as much as what came from the living and abiding voice."

Papias is a witness of the followers of the elders.

Barnabas ?

The so-called "Epistle of Barnabas" is dated after the destruction of the temple in 70 CE, and before the Bar Kochba revolt in 132 CE. The companion of Paul was most likely not the author of the Epistle of Barnabas, given its date of composition and hostility toward Mosaic law.

Please read the original question. I was supplying witnesses to the lives of the apostles. Your referring to them as a witness to a witness is confirming that very point.

sschlichter · 08-28-2008, 05:35 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by thentian

Keep in mind that I'm an atheist, ssclichter. I don't believe the claims of the Qur'an any more than I believe the claims of the bible. I only wanted to show you that other religions also claim miracles as proof of correctness. If you want to quarrel about this or other alleged muslim miracles you can do so at an islamist forum. Clearly, your critical faculties work at peak efficiency when evaluating such claims from other religions than your own...

Your personal beliefs, my friend have no bearing on the truth. You brought up Islam and your argument that there is multiple eye-witnesses to the original revelation of God in Islam seems to have ended quite abruptly and now you are escorting me off the forum for something you brought up.

Quote:

You can tell a tree by it's fruit? Then consider what the millions of dead at the hands of christians says about the tree of christianity.

This only confirms the same point. If you find yourself unjustly killed by someone claiming to be a Christian, the same truth applies. Someone claiming to follow Christ is not automatically following Christ. Someone claiming to speak for God likely does not. That is the point of the analogy of the fruit and the tree.

gregor · 08-28-2008, 06:36 PM

Steve,

Given that you won't even acknowledge basic, elementary-school level historical methods that demonstrate: (i) the authors of M,M, L, & J are anonymous, (ii) the authors don't even claim to be witnesses (and Luke actually tacitly admits that he's writing his story to compete with other stories, (iii) the stories reflect development from other sources dating to the earliest at 70 CE, and most considerably later, and (iv) the stories reflect that they could not even possibly be remotely described as being eye-witness accounts, are discussions with you a waste of electrons?

Tell me, when exactly was Matthew standing by Mary's side during inpregnation, with Jesus in the wilderness, faking to be asleep during the agony in the garden, and present in Pilate's offices. LDS history at least contains statements from persons claiming to be witnesses.

For someone whose posts demonstrate little knowledge of Xian history, text crit, and theological issues, you're certainly undaunted.

aa5874 · 08-28-2008, 06:47 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by andrewcriddle

Quote:

Originally Posted by aa5874

Aren't you confusing parallels between mythichal figures like Osiris, Dionysus and Jesus with what you seem to be suggesting that mythical figures like Jesus and Osiris or Jesus and Dionysus must be identical in every single mythical aspect or characteristic to be cosidered parallel myths?

It is not necessary for the myths, Jesus and Osiris, or Jesus and Dionysus to be identical to claim that there are parallels, just some fundamental similarities of their mythical characteristics.

To some extent this is a good point.

However I was trying to explain to angelo atheist why claims about parallels based on the Jesus Mysteries are unreliable eg these claims posted previously in this thread

Quote:

The ancient myths of Osiris or Dionysus for one.
1.Orsiris-Dionysus is God made flesh, the saviour and 'Son of God'
2.His father is God and his mother is a mortal virgin.
3.He is born in a cave or humble cowshed on 25 December before three shepherds
4.He offers his followers the chance to be born through the rites of baptism.
5.He miraculoiusly turns water into wine at a marriege ceremony.
6.He rides into town on a donkey while people wave palm leaves to honour him.
7.He dies at Easter time as a sacrifice for the sins of the world.
8.After his death he descends into hell, then on the third day he rises from the dead and ascends into heaven in glory.
9.His followers await his return as the judge during the Last Days.
10.His death and resurrection are celebrated by a ritual meal of bread and blood.

These are just some of the motifs shared between the tales of Osiris-Dionysus and a 'biography' of Jesus.
[Source-- The Jesus Mysteries.]

I emphasised the detailed points because they were mentioned in the earlier post specifically in claims 7 and 8..

Andrew Criddle

Parallels of mythical figures cannot be deemed to be unreliable. The parallels are either there are not. When one is dealing with fiction or legendary fables, reliabilty is not an issue.

There may be many versions of a myth even though the fables about them are fundamentally similar. For example, Joseph Smith's Jesus or his angel called Moroni may have some parallels to the Jesus of the Catholics and the and the angel called Gabriel, but they are all the same myths with some differences.

Huon · 08-29-2008, 01:53 AM

Oh, sorry, was it this question ?

Quote:

Originally Posted by sschlichter

Do you need eye-witnesses of the persecution of those that followed them for the next 300 years?

If it is indeed this question, then, here is another story of martyrdom :

The feast of St. Sabina is celebrated on 29 August (today).

Quote:

Sabina, widow of Valentinus and daughter of Herod Metallarius, suffered martyrdom about 126, during the reign of Hadrian (117-138). According to the Acts of the martyrdom, which however have no historic value, (according to the Catholic Encyclopedia), she lived at Rome and was converted to Christianity by her female slave Serapia. Serapia was put to death for her faith and later, in the same year, Sabina suffered martyrdom. In 430 her relics were brought to the Aventine, where a basilica is called after St. Sabina. Originally the church was dedicated to Sabina and Serapia.

We can also understand that the name "Serapia" is too near to the name of the god Serapis, and that Serapia, a slave, and moreover a female slave, did not deserve a basilica. :devil1:

Steve, you could understand that an unbeliever can accept the idea that some Christians were martyred at some moments, and in some places of the Roman empire, and as well, in the Persian empire. But an unbeliever will not buy the tale of Sabina and Serapia.

Another idea : the death of Paul and Peter is mentioned in the letter of Clement, bishop of Rome (AD 88-97), to the Corinthians. Nothing in Acts, nothing in gLuke, if I am not mistaken.

sschlichter · 08-29-2008, 03:29 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by gregor

Steve,

Given that you won't even acknowledge basic, elementary-school level historical methods that demonstrate: (i) the authors of M,M, L, & J are anonymous, (ii) the authors don't even claim to be witnesses (and Luke actually tacitly admits that he's writing his story to compete with other stories, (iii) the stories reflect development from other sources dating to the earliest at 70 CE, and most considerably later, and (iv) the stories reflect that they could not even possibly be remotely described as being eye-witness accounts, are discussions with you a waste of electrons?

Tell me, when exactly was Matthew standing by Mary's side during inpregnation, with Jesus in the wilderness, faking to be asleep during the agony in the garden, and present in Pilate's offices. LDS history at least contains statements from persons claiming to be witnesses.

For someone whose posts demonstrate little knowledge of Xian history, text crit, and theological issues, you're certainly undaunted.

an eyewitness to the resurrected Jesus.

I find it funny how you are incapable of posting without adding some derogatory statement about me personally. I think you are 100% on this. does it make your position more comfortable to you to attempt to make me uncomfortable?

angelo · 08-29-2008, 04:57 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by andrewcriddle

Quote:

Originally Posted by angelo atheist

So the claims in the gospels aren't dodgy in a similar way?

I meant that "the Jesus Mysteries" is not a reliable source, some at least of the supposed parallels are probably just not true.

......but if even one is reliable or true, what's it do to the christian myth?
Doesn't it make it possible that christianity and it's early followers are plagiarising from the mystery Pagan religions?

Doug Shaver · 08-29-2008, 06:16 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by sschlichter

What year do you suppose the existence of the apostles was manufactured?

Whatever year Mark wrote his gospel. I'm not sure when that was. I'm guessing early second century, but late first wouldn't surprise me at all.

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

08-28-2008, 06:36 PM	#1095
gregor Senior Member Join Date: Sep 2003 Location: Texas Posts: 932	Steve, Given that you won't even acknowledge basic, elementary-school level historical methods that demonstrate: (i) the authors of M,M, L, & J are anonymous, (ii) the authors don't even claim to be witnesses (and Luke actually tacitly admits that he's writing his story to compete with other stories, (iii) the stories reflect development from other sources dating to the earliest at 70 CE, and most considerably later, and (iv) the stories reflect that they could not even possibly be remotely described as being eye-witness accounts, are discussions with you a waste of electrons? Tell me, when exactly was Matthew standing by Mary's side during inpregnation, with Jesus in the wilderness, faking to be asleep during the agony in the garden, and present in Pilate's offices. LDS history at least contains statements from persons claiming to be witnesses. For someone whose posts demonstrate little knowledge of Xian history, text crit, and theological issues, you're certainly undaunted.

Freethought & Rationalism Archive

The archives are read only.