Bobzammel

Here's an interesting thing I noticed....Throughout the bible, the characters are cursed or bring evil on their people because they made a decision without the consent of God, boasted they were Gods, boasted that humans were better than God etc.
I noticed this same theme in the Odyssey. In much the same way the Israelites were unable to reach Israel for forty years due to their sin with the Golden calf, Odysseus is likewise cursed with having to wonder for several years until he reaches Ithica. Odysseus's men fall prey to many deadly temptations; so does Moses's crowd. Both the bible and the Odyssey are based "loosely" on at least some historical events.

Any thoughts?

Greg2003

The Odyssey is older than the greek or hebrew bibles, and was the most popular story of the ancient mediterranian world. It just seems obvious from a lit crit perspective that the bible must be borrowing from and alluding to the Odyssey, as well as the Illiad, and the Aneid of Virgil and probably a bunch of other ancient texts.

Of course Satan put all those texts there to lead people astray by making them more original, interesting, creative, thought-provoking and exciting than the Bible. Curse that Sexy Satan!

aikido7

How about the opinion that both the Bible and the Odyssey are creations of the same hardwired human mind?

It is easy to view the ancient writers as simple and ourselves as complicated and sophisticated, but Homer--even though blind and illiterate--supposedly composed two of the greatest sagas of all time.

There are discernable patterns to human history--especially when we are far removed from them and can finally look back dispassionately. Kierkegaard said that while life can only be lived forwardly, it can be best understood looking back at it. Art, poetry, architecture and thought take on harmonious and periodic similarities. As Goethe once said, everything has been thought of before; one must only think of it again. I don't imagine this is a conscious process at all....

AndresDeLaHoz

I think the site has a review of a book called "Homeric Epics and the Gospel of Mark" that deals with this in considerable detail.

philechat

Let's say there are still considerable differences between the two works, due to the difference in their cultural ideals.

Classical Greece places stress on the character of Odysseus (as with Archilles) which is meant to represent an ideal of a heroic individual. The Greek "Arete" is specifically referred to those who performed best according to their character, which then gives glory to the Greek community. The heroes almost always have some character flaws that will disrupt their accomplishment, but as a whole their "individual style" is affirmed above any overarching ideals.

On the other hand, the Hebrew Bible stresses "the convenant", namely an entire people that is delivered by God. There is little emphasis on individual characters--all people are supposed to act and submit to one ideal alone, which applies to the entire group. Character is not only discouraged but also severely punished.

Greg2003

I don't know how you can believe that the Heroic character of Moses is not emphasized in the old testament just the same as Odysseus in Homer. Moses is the hero of the story, not the Isrealites or the covenant. Moses shares qualities with the egytian gods and overcomes trials the same as Odysseus and other greek, egyptian, persian and babylonian heroes. I would agree that the emphasis of the covenant is an identifier of the hebrew origins of the story, but clearly the authors intended to apeal to the heroic traditions of the surrounding empires to make their hero interesting and recognizable.

philechat

Yes, Moses does have certain heroic characteristics that is also found in Odysseus. But his role is more of a mouthpiece of God than an individual, if you know what I meant. That is, he is there to bring God's glory to his people, not to bring affirmation of his own character (as in the Greek concept of "honor"). I doubt Hebrew authors will tolerate a character like Achilles (who was respected by the Greeks), who refused to fight because he was personally offended by another man.

Greg2003

Come on. You're totally ignoring the biblical account of Moses. He is a flawed leader with a studder who kills an egyptian soldier for whipping a jewish slave (borrowed from Achilles, duh!) He is the reluctant mouthpiece of god. He argues with god about what to do with his people and fails to follow god's orders on occasion resulting in his banishment from entering the promised land. The story is largely about this interesting character. God, by contrast doesn't have much of a human character at all, and of course the Isrealites are portrayed as disobedient children who have to be threatened into following god's commands. God is not the one that we are drawn to relate to. It is Moses that people relate to, the flawed hero full of doubt and physical limitation, but ultimately faithful to god and to the mission of his life and the covenant with god.

philechat

I guess you misunderstood me. I mean character is depicted in the Bible, but as secondary to what the Hebrew authors believed to be the will of God. In the Biblical literature human character is not as important compared to Greek literature, for the purpose of the Hebrew authors is to convey God's ideal to everyone, not to glorify a given person's character for its own sake.

I read the entire Torah account several times and noticed the tendency...Moses is a hero but only in the sense that he was honored in spite of his personality as a medium for God's will. Odysseus and Achilles, on the other hand, see personal glory as an end in-itself.

worldling

Dennis McDonald wrote "The Homeric Epics and the Gospel of Mark". Caused quite a stir for a while.

It's reviewed by Richard Carrier here