Freethought & Rationalism Archive

Ted Hoffman · 08-24-2004, 04:51 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Celsus

There is nothing to respond to, because you've confused the Hellenistic Adonis (e.g. as in De Dea Syria) with the Phoenician one, where nothing remains to be described (Smith in my opinion went farther than he needed to in even considering De Dea Syria). We're only talking about Semitic religions, all of which are shown to be chimaeric parallels (though it undermines most of Frazer's examples). As I wrote, "Detienne warns that further trajectories of the Adonis traditions in Greek material remove this figure far beyond recognition with any particular Middle Eastern god." You shouldn't fall into this trap. And if you didn't understand the point against using a 1908 translation, I don't know what to say.

Joel

Celsus, thanks for that informative response. See, I think I already stepped on that trap you talk of. I frankly "didn't understand the point against using a 1908 translation". Thanks.

Were these early people resurrecting and reinventing old gods? I mean we have Roman Mithras and Persian Mitra. We have Hellenistic Adonis and Phoenician Adonis...

I will dig up info so that I can clearly understand the manner in which the bifurcation between the Hellenistic and Phoenician Adonis came about.

Amaleq13 · 08-24-2004, 08:52 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jacob Aliet

In Isaiah's vision, we also see the son descending and getting 'crucified' (hang upon a tree) by demons:
Isaiah (9:13-17):
"The Lord will descend into the world in the last days, he who is to be called Christ after he has descended and become like you in form, and they will think that he is flesh and a man. And the god of that world will stretch out his hand against the Son, and they will lay their hands upon him and hang him upon a tree, not knowing who he is. And thus his descent, as you will see, will be concealed from the heavens, so that it will not be known who he is. And when he has plundered the angel of death, he will rise on the third day and will remain in the world for 545 days. 17And then many of the righteous will ascend with him."...<snip>...Well, Isaiah passes that realm during his ascent in 7:9-12 where he saw satan and his warring angels.

Before anybody gets confused, this is a reference to The Ascension of Isaiah and not the canonical book of Isaiah. More information on this book can be found at Kirby's website here

Excellent summary of the core of Doherty's thesis, Jacob! :thumbs:

Chili · 08-24-2004, 10:20 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jacob Aliet

Where does the Crucifixion Take Place?

In the air between the sun and the moon where satan and his demons dwell. How do we know this? Well, Isaiah passes that realm during his ascent in 7:9-12 where he saw satan and his warring angels.

For Coriolanus it took place in Corioli, which is just outside of Rome to say that it will be on neuter ground and never in Rome or any church = just outside of Jerusalem = beyond theology.

BTW, "Coriolanus" is a superb divine comedy.

Ted Hoffman · 08-25-2004, 01:45 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Amaleq13

Before anybody gets confused, this is a reference to The Ascension of Isaiah and not the canonical book of Isaiah. More information on this book can be found at Kirby's website here

Excellent summary of the core of Doherty's thesis, Jacob! :thumbs:

Thanks

.

aikido7 · 08-26-2004, 01:39 PM

Wouldn't it make sense that if all human beings are somehow genetically "wired" for some expression of spirituality, then it should be no surprise that there are similar motifs and comnmon mythic patterns across many of the world's cultures?

Chili · 08-26-2004, 07:19 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by aikido7

Wouldn't it make sense that if all human beings are somehow genetically "wired" for some expression of spirituality, then it should be no surprise that there are similar motifs and comnmon mythic patterns across many of the world's cultures?

Could that be because metamorphosis is native to humans?

Amaleq13 · 08-27-2004, 01:46 PM

I decided the recent semi-tangent on archons, etc. deserved its own thread and split it off to this location.

Roger Viklund · 08-30-2004, 01:10 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Bede

Freke and Gandy do not supply a reference for the picture in their book but kindly let me know by email. The first they supplied was R Eisler, Orpheus the Fisher (Kessinger Publishing reprints), first published in 1920 and where the fourth century date for the amulet is given and it is illustrated. Interestingly it is dated to the fourth century simply by virtue of its representation of a crucifixion so could, in theory be older or more recent.

The second reference was WKC Guthrie, Orpheus and Greek Religion Princeton University Press, 1952. This is the second edition and discusses the amulet at some length on page 265. He mentions the views of Eisler and Otto Kern who was a very distinguished German expert on Orpheus. At the time, both considered the gem to be an ancient Orphic artifact and Eisler suggested their was a tradition of a crucified Orpheus. Pointing to the evidence of Justin Martyr, who denies there ever was a crucified pagan, Guthrie rightly rejects this interpretation.

...But there is a final kicker to this story that Freke failed to mention. I found an endnote to the 1952 edition of Guthrie's work (page 278) states:

"In his review of this book [Orpheus and Greek Religion] in Gnomon (1935, p 476), [Otto] Kern [unfeasibly esteemed German expert on Orpheus] recants and expresses himself convinced by the expert opinion of Reil and Zahn [more distinguished Germans] that the gem is a forgery."

I looked up the review in Gnomon but it is in German so I can't make anything of it. Still, the gem has been branded a forgery by noted experts.

Here is the German text!

Quote:

Wenn Ich hier die Freude habe, ein neues Denkmal an die Spitze aller Orpheusdarstellungen zu setzen, muß ich ein anderes, das mir fast als das jüngste aller monumentalen Zeugnisse für die orphische Bewegung erschien, streichen und bekennen, daß ich allein daran die Schuld trage, daß es nach der Publikation in den Orphicor. Fragm. S. 46 test. 150 von R. Eisler und anderen, jetzt auch von Guthrie, ohne Bedenken als Glaubwürdiges Dokument gewertet wird. Diesem ist offenbar entgangen, daß das Amulett mit dem Bilde des Crucifixus und der Inschrift OPΦEOΣ BAKKIKOΣ im Kaiser Friedrich-Museum zu Berlin höchst wahrscheinlich eine Fälschung ist. Solchen hervorragenden Kennern dieser Materie wie Joh. Reil und Rob. Zahn, die dies im ’Άγγελος 2, 1926, 62ff. ausgesprochen haben, muß man Glauben schenken, und es ist daran kein Anstoß zu nehmen, daß auch dieser italienische Fälscher wie so viele – das Amulett stammt aus Italien, kam aus Ed. Gerhards Nachlaß in das Berliner Museum – gelehrte Kenntnisse hatte und von der Beziehung des Orpheus zu Bakhos wußte.

I am not particularly good at German. I have however made a translation to the best of my ability and I hope that it is fairly accurate. Perhaps someone else can make a better translation.

Quote:

As I here have the joy to set a new monument on top of all other depictions of Orpheus, I must you see, as almost the youngest of all monumental testimony for the orphish movement, release and admit, that I alone is to blame for the fact that after the publication in the Orphicor. Fragm. S. 46 test. 150 by R. Eisler and others, now also by Guthrie, it without hesitation was valued as reliable documents. It obviously escaped their notice that the amulet with the image of the crucifix and the inscription OPΦEOΣ BAKKIKOΣ in the Kaiser Friedrich-Museum in Berlin most probably is a forgery. You have to have confidence in such prominent experts on this material as Joh. Reil and Rob. Zahn, who have expressed their views about this in ’Άγγελος 2, 1926, 62ff., and it is then no attack to mention that these Italian counterfeiter as so many others - the amulet originates from Italy, came from the property left by Ed. Gerhard to the museum of Berlin – had scholarly knowledge and knew about Orpheus' relation with Bacchus.

If my interpretation is correct, it seems like Joh. Reil and Rob. Zahn already in 1926 suspected that it was a forgery and Otto Kern also points to the fact that the item came from Italy, which seems to have been a place where many forgeries were produced. At least that is my interpretation.

Kindly, Roger Viklund,
Sweden

08-30-2004, 01:26 PM

Roger,

What can I say but thank you for the translation and welcome to the boards. I'd like to add the details to my blog. Please let me know if you don't want to be credited (some people are funny about that).

Yours

Bede

Bede's Library - faith and reason

Roger Viklund · 08-31-2004, 02:01 AM

Hi Bede,
and thanks for the welcome!

The German text is of course not mine. My translation is however probably not absolutely correct and if you separate it from the German text these things tend to overflow the Internet. It would be better if someone fluid in German proofread it before you attach it to some document. There has to be someone on this list who can do it.

The text by Kern actually does not add much, apart from the fact that some scholars back in the 20’s thought is was a forgery. It would be interesting to get hold of ’Άγγελος 2, 1926, to see on what criteria they suspected it to be a forgery. I do not know if that is a journal and I have so far not been able to locate it. I do not even know if it is in Greek. Perhaps someone else can shed some light on this.

Kindly, Roger Viklund,
Sweden

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

08-26-2004, 01:39 PM	#35
aikido7 Regular Member Join Date: Jan 2001 Location: Here Posts: 234	Wouldn't it make sense that if all human beings are somehow genetically "wired" for some expression of spirituality, then it should be no surprise that there are similar motifs and comnmon mythic patterns across many of the world's cultures?

08-27-2004, 01:46 PM	#37
Amaleq13 Veteran Member Join Date: Nov 2003 Location: Eagle River, Alaska Posts: 7,816	I decided the recent semi-tangent on archons, etc. deserved its own thread and split it off to this location.

08-30-2004, 01:26 PM	#39
Bede Guest Posts: n/a	Roger, What can I say but thank you for the translation and welcome to the boards. I'd like to add the details to my blog. Please let me know if you don't want to be credited (some people are funny about that). Yours Bede Bede's Library - faith and reason

08-31-2004, 02:01 AM	#40
Roger Viklund Junior Member Join Date: Jan 2004 Location: Sweden, Ume� Posts: 39	Hi Bede, and thanks for the welcome! The German text is of course not mine. My translation is however probably not absolutely correct and if you separate it from the German text these things tend to overflow the Internet. It would be better if someone fluid in German proofread it before you attach it to some document. There has to be someone on this list who can do it. The text by Kern actually does not add much, apart from the fact that some scholars back in the 20’s thought is was a forgery. It would be interesting to get hold of ’Άγγελος 2, 1926, to see on what criteria they suspected it to be a forgery. I do not know if that is a journal and I have so far not been able to locate it. I do not even know if it is in Greek. Perhaps someone else can shed some light on this. Kindly, Roger Viklund, Sweden

Freethought & Rationalism Archive

The archives are read only.