Freethought & Rationalism Archive

Clivedurdle · 01-20-2008, 11:23 AM

Quote:

pagan

That xian propaganda term again!

Maybe it is all pagan?

Maybe Judaism got its idea of the most high from Persia?

Maybe its priestly rituals are Persian?

And how come solar worship correlates with hieirarchical religions - in xianity priesthood of all believers was introduced by Luther - a Greek idea had been lost in a centralised religion for millenia.

And why is Isiah 45 and the myriad references to light not primary evidence?

Clivedurdle · 01-20-2008, 11:31 AM

Quote:

During the later periods of Roman history, sun worship gained in importance and ultimately led to what has been called a “solar monotheism.” Nearly all the gods of the period were possessed of solar qualities, and both Christ and Mithra acquired the traits of solar deities. The feast of Sol Invictus (Unconquered Sun) on December 25 was celebrated with great joy, and eventually this date was taken over by the Christians as Christmas, the birthday of Christ.

http://www.britannica.com/bps/home#t...20Encyclopedia

Clivedurdle · 01-20-2008, 11:36 AM

Quote:

Can anyone demonstrate a single case, using primary sources, of a reliance upon or reference to an "astrotheological" motif within the New Testament texts?

Revelation 21:1 >>
New American Standard Bible (©1995)
Then I saw a new heaven and a new earth; for the first heaven and the first earth passed away, and there is no longer any sea.

Geetarmoore · 01-20-2008, 12:20 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Malachi151

Can anyone demonstrate a single case, using primary sources, of a reliance upon or reference to a "pagan god" motif within the New Testament texts?

So, enough of this fooling around, come up with something substantial, or admit that this entire "the story of Jesus is based on astrotheology and pagan gods" is a farce and an embarrassment to Biblical scholarship.

Do you think any revisionism or perhaps upfront planning went into the Gospel stories in order to make them more acceptable to pagans?

For example, how would you explain the recording of the exact number 153 in John21:11? Did this number have some significance to Jewish scriptures, or could it be a tip of the hat to pagans who were perhaps predisposed to see something significant in that number?

I'm under the impression that there are a few facts in the story that were meant as a direct appeal to pagans.

lpetrich · 01-20-2008, 12:27 PM

Most of the discussion here has gone in circles around Tertullian's comments about Sun worship.

However, Acharya S's books contain other gross errors, as Malachi151 has noted in this earlier post; and I in this post (briefly) and this post.

She claims that Polynesians had been major seafarers over 30,000 years ago, which is clearly not the case; they started about 3000 years ago from the

Lapita people of the Bismarck Archipelago near New Guinea.

Furthermore, the Polynesians' use of celestial navigation, like most premodern celestial navigation, did not require elaborate theory or observational instruments, only a willingness to do a lot of unaided-eye observation and to use constellations as direction indicators.

She also claims that ancient astronomical science was far ahead of modern astronomical science, and that we are only now catching up, which is absolutely absurd.

No Sun worshipper ever thought of Copernicanism, even though one would expect that sort of cosmology to come naturally to a Sun worshipper. As far as anyone can tell, the first Copernican was

Aristarchus of Samos (310-230 BCE).

I've also mentioned why Jesus Christ wearing a crown of thorns is not a Sun symbol; crowns are common royal headwear, and a crown of thorns is, I think, meant as sarcasm for someone who had claimed to be a king.

Samson is usually considered a Sun-inspired character, and I agree with that assessment. He has long hair, something like the rays of the Sun, and cutting off his hair makes him weak, something like the Sun looking dim and rayless when on the horizon.

Let us now look at his name and the name of his nemesis. "Samson" looks like "Sam's son" in English, but the writers of the Samson story had not spoken English, but Hebrew. The original version of his name was Shimshon, which is rather clearly derived from the Hebrew word for "Sun", shemesh.

Delilah's name sounds something like the Hebrew word for "night", laila or layil, though that Wikipedia article derived it from a word for weakening or impoverishing.

And as to the name Matthew being from some supposed Egyptian name Mattiu, a check on

Matthew (name) yields

English Matthew
French Mathieu
Latin Matthaeus
Greek Matthaios
Aramaic Mattay
Hebrew Matatyahu
"Gift of Yahweh"

Jeffrey Gibson · 01-20-2008, 12:28 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Geetarmoore

Quote:

Originally Posted by Malachi151

Can anyone demonstrate a single case, using primary sources, of a reliance upon or reference to a "pagan god" motif within the New Testament texts?

So, enough of this fooling around, come up with something substantial, or admit that this entire "the story of Jesus is based on astrotheology and pagan gods" is a farce and an embarrassment to Biblical scholarship.

Do you think any revisionism or perhaps upfront planning went into the Gospel stories in order to make them more acceptable to pagans?

For example, how would you explain the recording of the exact number 153 in John21:11? Did this number have some significance to Jewish scriptures, or could it be a tip of the hat to pagans who were perhaps predisposed to see something significant in that number?

I'm under the impression that there are a few facts in the story that were meant as a direct appeal to pagans.

What makes you think that John was written to non believers, let alone non Jews?

Jeffrey

Toto · 01-20-2008, 12:52 PM

The Chili digression has been split off here

mountainman · 01-20-2008, 01:29 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Malachi151

This is really ridiculous and has gone on too far.

Can anyone demonstrate a single case, using primary sources, of a reliance upon or reference to a "pagan god" motif within the New Testament texts?

They are written in Greek.

Quote:

In the letters of Paul there are dozens of direct quotes from and references to the Jewish scriptures. In the letters of Paul, Paul uses the Jewish scriptures to describe Jesus Christ, indeed the entire description of Jesus by Paul is defined by the Jewish messiah.

The letters of Paul have been diminishing in number.
As time goes by more and more of these letters are
categorically understood to be forgeries. They are
written in Greek, not in Hebrew. I would not get too
attached to anything about these remnant forgeries.

Quote:

There are zero quotes from "pagan" sources in the letters of Paul.

These letters are written in Greek. There are many
commentators who argue there are Hellenic motives
in Paul. Paul is a stooge. A literary plant. How many
of his letters, once thought of with the highest integrity,
are now classified as outright blatant forgeries?

How can people be so nieve?

Best wishes.

Pete Brown

Malachi151 · 01-20-2008, 01:40 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Geetarmoore

Quote:

Originally Posted by Malachi151

Can anyone demonstrate a single case, using primary sources, of a reliance upon or reference to a "pagan god" motif within the New Testament texts?

So, enough of this fooling around, come up with something substantial, or admit that this entire "the story of Jesus is based on astrotheology and pagan gods" is a farce and an embarrassment to Biblical scholarship.

Do you think any revisionism or perhaps upfront planning went into the Gospel stories in order to make them more acceptable to pagans?

For example, how would you explain the recording of the exact number 153 in John21:11? Did this number have some significance to Jewish scriptures, or could it be a tip of the hat to pagans who were perhaps predisposed to see something significant in that number?

I'm under the impression that there are a few facts in the story that were meant as a direct appeal to pagans.

Well for one thing John 21 is a very late addition. It was added to John by a different hand after it was originally written, so even if there were some "pagan" appeal in it, I wouldn't say it had anything to do with the origins of the Jesus story.

Secondly, as far as I know, no one has any explanation for the 153 number in John 21;11, and I have no idea what it could mean, either to "pagans" or Jews. Perhaps it just means "a lot".

Clivedurdle · 01-20-2008, 01:41 PM

Quote:

Article Preview
Beastly tales: Rewriting human history

* 19 January 2008
* Bob Holmes
* Magazine issue 2639

ACCORDING to the history books, the Madeira archipelago 600 kilometres west of Africa was discovered in 1419 when Portuguese mariners were blown off-course by a storm. In Roman times Pliny and Plutarch wrote about islands that might be Madeira, but there is no definite account of the islands, nor any signs of people, prior to the arrival of the Portuguese. The mice of Madeira Island, however, tell a different and unexpected story.

The mice are not native to the island and must have arrived on European ships. Genetically, they most closely resemble the mice of Portugal. However, some of their DNA has strong similarities to that of mice found in Scandinavia - a strong hint that Viking ships found Madeira long before the Portuguese. "It might have been a temporary occupation, or just a few boats landing for a short period of time," says Jeremy Searle, an evolutionary biologist at ...
The complete article is 2506 words long.
This is a preview of the full article. If you are a subscriber, log in now on the right, to continue reading. If not, subscribe to New Scientist and get 4 FREE issues plus instant access to all online content.

The article continues to discuss Polynesia.

http://www.newscientist.com/channel/...n-history.html

And

Quote:

Aborigines are Australia's indigenous people. Recent government statistics counted approximately 400,000 aboriginal people, or about 2% of Australia's total population.

Australian Aborigines migrated from somewhere in Asia at least 30,000 years ago. Though they comprise 500–600 distinct groups, aboriginal people possess some unifying links. Among these are strong spiritual beliefs that tie them to the land; a tribal culture of storytelling and art; and, like other indigenous populations, a difficult colonial history.

http://www.infoplease.com/spot/aboriginal1.html

Quote:

Lapita culture
Main

cultural complex of what were presumably the original human settlers of Melanesia, much of Polynesia, and parts of Micronesia, and dating from between 1600 and 500 BC. It is named for a type of fired pottery that was first extensively investigated at the site of Lapita in New Caledonia.

The Lapita people were originally from New Guinea or some other region of Austronesia. They were highly mobile, seaborne explorers and colonists who had established themselves on the Bismarck Archipelago (northeast of New Guinea) by 2000 BC. Beginning about 1600 BC they spread to the Solomon Islands; they had reached Fiji, Tonga, and the rest of western Polynesia by 1000 BC; and they had dispersed to Micronesia by 500 BC

http://www.britannica.com/bps/home#t...20Encyclopedia

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

01-20-2008, 12:27 PM	#335
lpetrich Contributor Join Date: Jul 2000 Location: Lebanon, OR, USA Posts: 16,829	Most of the discussion here has gone in circles around Tertullian's comments about Sun worship. However, Acharya S's books contain other gross errors, as Malachi151 has noted in this earlier post; and I in this post (briefly) and this post. She claims that Polynesians had been major seafarers over 30,000 years ago, which is clearly not the case; they started about 3000 years ago from the Lapita people of the Bismarck Archipelago near New Guinea. Furthermore, the Polynesians' use of celestial navigation, like most premodern celestial navigation, did not require elaborate theory or observational instruments, only a willingness to do a lot of unaided-eye observation and to use constellations as direction indicators. She also claims that ancient astronomical science was far ahead of modern astronomical science, and that we are only now catching up, which is absolutely absurd. No Sun worshipper ever thought of Copernicanism, even though one would expect that sort of cosmology to come naturally to a Sun worshipper. As far as anyone can tell, the first Copernican was Aristarchus of Samos (310-230 BCE). I've also mentioned why Jesus Christ wearing a crown of thorns is not a Sun symbol; crowns are common royal headwear, and a crown of thorns is, I think, meant as sarcasm for someone who had claimed to be a king. Samson is usually considered a Sun-inspired character, and I agree with that assessment. He has long hair, something like the rays of the Sun, and cutting off his hair makes him weak, something like the Sun looking dim and rayless when on the horizon. Let us now look at his name and the name of his nemesis. "Samson" looks like "Sam's son" in English, but the writers of the Samson story had not spoken English, but Hebrew. The original version of his name was Shimshon, which is rather clearly derived from the Hebrew word for "Sun", shemesh. Delilah's name sounds something like the Hebrew word for "night", laila or layil, though that Wikipedia article derived it from a word for weakening or impoverishing. And as to the name Matthew being from some supposed Egyptian name Mattiu, a check on Matthew (name) yields English Matthew French Mathieu Latin Matthaeus Greek Matthaios Aramaic Mattay Hebrew Matatyahu "Gift of Yahweh"

01-20-2008, 12:52 PM	#337
Toto Contributor Join Date: Jun 2000 Location: Los Angeles area Posts: 40,549	The Chili digression has been split off here

Freethought & Rationalism Archive

The archives are read only.