FRDB Archives

Freethought & Rationalism Archive

The archives are read only.


Go Back   FRDB Archives > Archives > Religion (Closed) > Biblical Criticism & History
Welcome, Peter Kirby.
You last visited: Yesterday at 03:12 PM

 
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old 03-17-2007, 03:55 PM   #81
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: London, Ontario, Canada
Posts: 1,719
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Ben C Smith View Post
Solo and Gerard, does neither of you understand the meaning of the word echo? I intentionally avoided a stronger term such as based on.

Specifically, not a few scholars have found connections between the birth narratives and Judges 13, in which the barren wife of Manoah sees an angel, who tells her that she is going to give birth.

Now, tell me I am crazy for seeing a possible echo of this story in the birth narratives of Jesus. Especially when the son in Judges 13 is to be a Nazarite and the son in the birth narratives is to be a Nazarene.
Ah, echo, I was obviously reading what I expected and missed that subtlety. I can go along with echo. Let us compare the two stories.

The correspondences are as you have stated: God helps a woman conceive, this is announced by an angel and the boy will be a nazarite. But there are two important differences. First, there is no indication that God in any way impregnates the woman. This indication is present in the Jesus story, and allows Christian mythology to develop the concept that God sent his son to earth. Second, the woman (nameless, as opposed to Manoah, feminists of the world unite, perhaps we'll call her Manoette) is obviously not a virgin. In the Jesus story Maria's virginity allows the Church to later develop the doctrine of immaculate conception and all that goes with it, substituting the archetype of the Madonna for that of the Mother (and the implied Seductress) for their main goddess.

So we have a situation much like the passion: the form is there from the OT, the essence is not. The essence came, qua divine impregnation, from pagan tradition. Whence the essence came qua virginity is less clear, perhaps as I suggested from the Jewish god's transcendence. But no doubt the form found in Judges 13 helped the syncretism along.

So, a side-track question from an ignoramus: what's up with this nazarite? The usual interpretation in the NT is either from Nazareth, or from some cult/organization. It is unlikely Nazareth is meant--we are 7C BCE here, I think--so were there nazarites similar to 1C CE at that time?

Gerard Stafleu
gstafleu is offline  
Old 03-17-2007, 07:04 PM   #82
Banned
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: Alberta
Posts: 11,885
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by gstafleu View Post
So, a side-track question from an ignoramus: what's up with this nazarite? The usual interpretation in the NT is either from Nazareth, or from some cult/organization. It is unlikely Nazareth is meant--we are 7C BCE here, I think--so were there nazarites similar to 1C CE at that time?

Gerard Stafleu
Nazarite is a state of mind for which circumcision is symbolic except here we are circumsized by nature itself (it has nothing to do with a foreskin this time but with moral sensorship by nature via the gifts of the HS).
Chili is offline  
Old 03-17-2007, 08:06 PM   #83
Banned
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: Queens, NY
Posts: 2,293
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by gstafleu
Agreed. Of course the fact that the Augustus cult had added a miraculous conception may have been extra impetus for the Christ cult to do the same.
Hi Gerald,

What do we have as the date for when the Augustus cult added a 'miraculous' conception ? Beyond the 2nd century Suetonius writing, referencing an earlier writing, do we have any other evidence of this aspect of the Augustus cult ?

Shalom,
Steven Avery
Steven Avery is offline  
Old 03-17-2007, 09:32 PM   #84
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: Ottawa, Canada
Posts: 2,579
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Ben C Smith View Post
Solo and Gerard, does neither of you understand the meaning of the word echo? I intentionally avoided a stronger term such as based on.

Specifically, not a few scholars have found connections between the birth narratives and Judges 13, in which the barren wife of Manoah sees an angel, who tells her that she is going to give birth.

Now, tell me I am crazy for seeing a possible echo of this story in the birth narratives of Jesus. Especially when the son in Judges 13 is to be a Nazarite and the son in the birth narratives is to be a Nazarene.

Ben.
No, Ben I don't think you are crazy. I just think you (and not a few other scholars) are being pig-headed (I speak plainly) when you are trying to deny the link between the Christian virgin birth and pagan myth. The idea of God, (or a god) impregnating a woman did not originate in Judaism. An angel announcing to a barren woman she was going to conceive a holy man (or Isaiah predicting a golden age through a birth of a boy) is not a Holy Ghost impregnating a woman. That idea would be as offensive to a mainstream, Jewish traditionalist (in early rabbinical Judaism), as it later was to Mohammed and his followers. There is but one God to both, and that God does not procreate. OTOH, mythical nativities of the sort suggested by the virgin birth, were widely in circulation in the Middle East at the break of the ages. It cannot be denied.

Why should it be denied ? To my mind it is one thing to claim that Jesus originated as a synthetic myth and another thing to admit that syncretic mythical elements are very much in evidence in the forming of religion that centered around him. I don't understand the fear of admitting the latter. We are all human, aren't we ? Wasn't that the novel idea of Christianity ? So, what is so unpalatable about other cultures participating in the creation of religious symbols for all humans ? Tell me.

Jiri
Solo is offline  
Old 03-17-2007, 10:44 PM   #85
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: Ottawa, Canada
Posts: 2,579
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Ben C Smith View Post
Quote:

Quote:
Originally Posted by jgibson000
It's 5th century CE.
One wonders how much of an effort will have to be expended to make this century V text relevant to century I traditions about Jesus of Nazareth.

Ben.
FYI, Stobaeus' was a doxographer. The origin of the KK text is likely unknown; only a fragment was preserved.

Quote:
DATING OF HERMETICA

from: http://www.granta.demon.co.uk/arsm/jg/corpus.html

Most modern experts on the Hermetica distinguish the "popular" occultist writings attributed to Hermes from the "learned" or "philosophical" treatises. Garth Fowden, in his The Egyptian Hermes, argues persuasively that all the Hermetica, whether practical or theoretical, magical or philosophical, can be understood as responses to the same milieu, the very complex Graeco-Egyptian culture of Ptolemaic, Roman and early Christian times
Jiri
Solo is offline  
Old 03-17-2007, 11:19 PM   #86
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: none
Posts: 9,879
Default

Jiri,

That same article you linked said that the corpus dated from the second to third centuries CE. Early Christian really equates to early Orthodox, not anywhere near the origins of the gospels.

Chris
Chris Weimer is offline  
Old 03-18-2007, 01:15 AM   #87
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Bli Bli
Posts: 3,135
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by youngalexander View Post
There is only one 'reality', and that is the one subject to scientific observation.

Provided of course, we leave out the observations of quantum mechanincs.
judge is offline  
Old 03-18-2007, 02:06 AM   #88
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: Mornington Peninsula
Posts: 1,306
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by judge View Post
Provided of course, we leave out the observations of quantum mechanincs.
Shush, don't get Gibson onto QM.
youngalexander is offline  
Old 03-18-2007, 07:34 AM   #89
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: Ottawa, Canada
Posts: 2,579
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Chris Weimer View Post
Jiri,

That same article you linked said that the corpus dated from the second to third centuries CE. Early Christian really equates to early Orthodox, not anywhere near the origins of the gospels.

Chris
Thank you, Chris. We are making progress.

Jiri
Solo is offline  
Old 03-18-2007, 08:09 AM   #90
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: London, Ontario, Canada
Posts: 1,719
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by praxeus View Post
What do we have as the date for when the Augustus cult added a 'miraculous' conception ? Beyond the 2nd century Suetonius writing, referencing an earlier writing, do we have any other evidence of this aspect of the Augustus cult ?
Good question, I don't know. Ben pointed to The Priene calendar inscription, circa 9 before Christ, but it doesn't mention any miraculous conception. Maybe Ben has more data on this?

Gerard Stafleu
gstafleu is offline  
 

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -8. The time now is 09:01 PM.

Top

This custom BB emulates vBulletin® Version 3.8.2
Copyright ©2000 - 2015, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.