|
Freethought & Rationalism ArchiveThe archives are read only. |
01-23-2002, 12:26 AM
|
#81 | |||||
|
Banned
Join Date: Aug 2000
Location: Dallas, Texas, USA
Posts: 1,734
|
Quote:
What are the dates on those sources? Quote:
MEta =>He wasn't put to death for religious matters. It never says the charge agains thim was religious. He was crucified for being king of the Jews, political sedition against Rome. Most contemporary scholars agree on that. See Corsson, White, the website for Frontline of "From Jesus to Christ" and also Death of the Messiah by Brown (a source even people like Carrier recognize as good). Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
MEta =>Most scholars today recognize that the little sign above the corss "King of the Jews" was a formal statment about the charge. |
|||||
|
|
01-23-2002, 12:34 AM
|
#82 | |
|
Banned
Join Date: Aug 2000
Location: Dallas, Texas, USA
Posts: 1,734
|
Quote:
Duh, really? Kind of like the Christ mythers themselves hu? Interestingly, these are the points you consider problematic for the Jesus myth theory, although the other points, which you have not contested and many of which do fit Jesus, you ignore in your assesment of JFK. Your misdirections are becoming an embarrassment. Some comments and questions:
I don't care! You see how I reduced their stupid list, most of the things on it didn't apply anyway. You get the general idea. |
|
|
|
|
01-23-2002, 12:50 AM
|
#83 | |||||
|
Banned
Join Date: Aug 2000
Location: Dallas, Texas, USA
Posts: 1,734
|
Quote:
Meta =>And how do we know it never happened? Because you merely deny the evidence. But don't you see that it doesn't matter? The list has to be based upon the story, otherwise there's argument that the story is copied form other stories. So if the point on the list doesn't corrospond to something cliamed in the Gospel than it doesn't count. That's all that matters in this business of comparing Jesus story to that of ancient mythic heoroes. It's not important to prove what did reall happen in this argument. Now that's an, uh, intersting approach to clever come backs too, to repeat what the other guy says but change the names, yea, I guess that's clever. I'll to ask someone. quote: -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Obviously I can't know that Jesus never had children, .... -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Quote:
MEta =>With your love of ciruclar reasoning it is not a good idea to try and make critiques of other people's logic, especially when that other person is the one who caught all your circular reasoning. Geez, take a logic class. what really absurd is how you can't understand this issue. Look man, it doesn't freaking matter if it can be proven or that that may have had children. Why can't you understand this? It's so elementry a child could get it. IT's never claimed in the Gosples, so you can't use the mere possiblity that he may have had to say that its a copy. Do you not understand that the issue here is this list? The way it works is this, they look at cliams in the Gospel story, compare them with the stories of ancient mythical heoroes and then say "O see, heroe's x,y,and z do this, and Jesus does this in the Gosples," so therefore, that story is patterened after these others stories. It's totally irrelivant what he might have done in real life! All that matters is the cliams in the Gospels because otherwise, we aren't comparing stories anymore! quote: -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- ... but since it isn't recorded in the Gospels you can't use it for the list because it's not listed as anything that is part of the story. -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Quote:
MEta =>that is an absurd response! Apparently you don't even understand what's going on here. That is toatlly irrelivant because the comparision is between the Gosples and other stories. Can you not see that? That's the issue, that the Gosples were patterned after these other stories, so only the things in the Gosples matter, but they don't have to be true, all that matters is were they original or did they have OT antecedents or were they copied after mythic heroes. BTW you don't understand my views on inspriation well enough to even comment on that so I wont even respond because you aren't even in the discussion yet. quote: -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- With that kind of thinking you can prove anything, no evidence for it, just assert we can't know it isn't true so it could be thus it is. -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Quote:
MEta =>O there's that real interesting way of copying the other guy as a means of trying to look as clever as he is. But what does my view of inspiration have to do with this thread? Try to come intot he discussion want you? quote: -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- You can only use things on the list that are clealry in the Gosples, that's the point! Come on man, that's just wasting our time to argue that way. -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Quote:
Meta =>You know you are a total amature and I dont' believe you would even pass the first semester at Perkins. I dont' even want to talk to you. Jesus Christ! What in the hell do I have do to find some intelligent dialouge partners on this stupid internet!???????????? |
|||||
|
|
|
01-23-2002, 12:59 AM
|
#84 | |
|
Banned
Join Date: Aug 2000
Location: Dallas, Texas, USA
Posts: 1,734
|
Quote:
Meta =If you read the whole page you will see that this is post Christian, and if you read my page 2 you see that evidence shows that the Mithric cult acutally coplied Christianity. |
|
|
|
|
01-23-2002, 01:34 AM
|
#85 | ||||
|
Banned
Join Date: Aug 2000
Location: Dallas, Texas, USA
Posts: 1,734
|
Quote:
Meta =>Most schoalrs accept the basic core of Jospehus. The Arabic ms has all the basic info. that is in the core of the passage that shcolars accept. So there's a good probalbity that this is what Jo really wrote. Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
|
||||
|
|
|
01-23-2002, 01:40 AM
|
#86 |
|
Senior Member
Join Date: Nov 2001
Location: I`ve left and gone away
Posts: 699
|
1.)Dionysus` mother was impregnated by a lightening bolt from a god. How is this "having sex"? And how is this this any different from "I am who I am" mysteriously impregnating mary?
Dude,you`ve got some messed up ideas about sex and you scare me a little. 2.) Mithraism copied Christianity? This is just nut`s and I`m going to have to bite my tongue here before I say what we are probably all thinking.  <img src="graemlins/banghead.gif" border="0" alt="[Bang Head]" />[ January 23, 2002: Message edited by: Anunnaki ]</p> |
|
|
|
01-23-2002, 01:42 AM
|
#87 | ||||
|
Banned
Join Date: Aug 2000
Location: Dallas, Texas, USA
Posts: 1,734
|
Quote:
quote: -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Originally posted by Nomad: Without question, however, Jesus was executed by Rome, not the Jews, and on this we have full agreement not only by the Canonical Gospels, but also Josephus (Antiquities 18) and Tacitus (Annals 15) as well. -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Quote:
Meta =>That is among the basic facts never deneied or changed in houndreds of documents. There is no reason to supposse it was made up. Most myths have several versions, there is only one Jesus story and that is for houndreds of documents (I din't mean MS I mean different sources such as GPete, GThomas, ect). No other "myth" in the world is so well documented and so uniform. The obvious conclusion is that these basic facts of how he died, where he died, who executed him, were known to all. Quote:
METa =>many people voted for Reagan! So what? It's a stupid assumption and they would never never never bother to think that if religion wasn't invovled. Quote:
|
||||
|
|
|
01-23-2002, 01:56 AM
|
#88 | |||
|
Banned
Join Date: Aug 2000
Location: Dallas, Texas, USA
Posts: 1,734
|
Quote:
Quote:
MEta =>YOu mean its possilbe to have it and still be a virgin? Quote:
<img src="graemlins/banghead.gif" border="0" alt="[Bang Head]" /> Meta =>You show your ignorance. Every hear of Franz Cumont? The major shcolar of mithrism in the 20th century. He proved it. A. Mithrism 1) All our sources Post Date Christianity. Easter: Myth, Hallucination or History by Edwin M. Yamauchi Leadership u. <a href="http://www." target="_blank">http://www.</a> leaderu.com/everystudent/easter/articles/yama.html Updated 22 March 1997 (prof. of History at Miami University, Oxford Ohio) "Those who seek to adduce Mithra as a prototype of the risen Christ ignore the late date for the expansion of Mithraism to the west (cf. M. J. Vermaseren, Mithras, The Secret God, 1963, p. 76). The only dated Mithraic inscriptions from the pre-Christian period are the texts of Antiochus I of Commagene (69-34 B.C.) in eastern Asia Minor. After that there is one text possibly from the first century A.D., from Cappadocia, one from Phrygia dated to A.D. 77-78, and one from Rome dated to Trajan's reign (A.D. 98-117). All other dated Mithraic inscriptions and monuments belong to the second century (after A.D. 140), the third, and the fourth century A.D". (M. J. Vermaseren, Corpus Inscription et Monumentorum Religions Mithriacae, 1956). 2) Mithrism Emerged in the west only after Jesus' day. Mithrism could not have become an influence upon the origins of the first century, for the simple reason that Mithrism did not emerge from its pastoral setting in rural Persia until after the close of the New Testament canon. (Franz Cumont, The Mysteries of Mithra (Chicago: Open Court, 1903), 87ff.) No one can be sure that the meaning of the meals and the ablutions are the same between Christianity and Mirthrism. Just because the two had them is no indication that they come to the same thing. These are entirely superficial and circumstantial arguments. (Nash, Christian Research Journal winter 94, p.8) a) Roman Soldiers Spread the cult. "Roman soldiers probably encountered Mithrism first as part of Zoroastrians when they while on duty in Peria. The Cult spread through the Roman legion, was most popular in the West, and ha little chance to to spread through or influence upon Palestine. It's presence in Palestine was mainly confined to the Romans who were there to oppress the Jews. Kane tries to imply that these mystery cults were all idigidous to the Palestinian area, that they grew up alongside Judaism, and that the adherents to these religions all traded ideas as they happily ate together and practiced good neighborhsip." b) Mithric Roman Soldiers Influenced by Christians in Palestine But Mithrism was confined to the Roman Legion primarily, those who were stationed in Palestine to subdue the Jewish Revolt of A.D. 66-70. In fact strong evidence indicates that in this way Christianity influenced Mithrism. First, because Romans stationed in the West were sent on short tours of duty to fight the Parthians in the East, and to put down the Jewish revolt. This is where they would have encountered a Christianity whose major texts were already written, and whose major story (that of the life of Christ) was already formed. There is no real evidence for a Persian Cult of Mirthras. The cultic and mystery aspect did not exist until after the Roman period, second century to fourth. This means that any similarities to Christianity probably come from Christiantiy as the Soldiers learned of it during their tours in Palestine. The Great historian of religions, Franz Cumont was able to prove that the earliest datable evidence for the cult came from the Military Garrison at Carnuntum, on the Danube River (moern Hungary). The largest Cache of Mithric artifacts comes form the area between the Danube and Ostia in Italy. (Franz Cumont, The Mysteries of Mithra (Chicago: Open Court, 1903), 87ff.) >3) Mithrism was not Christianity's Major Rival Mithraism The Ecole Initiative: <a href="http://cedar.evansville.edu/~ecoleweb/articles/mithraism.html" target="_blank">http://cedar.evansville.edu/~ecoleweb/articles/mithraism.html</a> Mithraism had a wide following from the middle of the second century to the late fourth century CE, but the common belief that Mithraism was the prime competitor of Christianity, promulgated by Ernst Renan (Renan 1882 579), is blatantly false. Mithraism was at a serious disadvantage right from the start because it allowed only male initiates. What is more, Mithraism was, as mentioned above, only one of several cults imported from the eastern empire that enjoyed a large membership in Rome and elsewhere. The major competitor to Christianity was thus not Mithraism but the combined group of imported cults and official Roman cults subsumed under the rubric "paganism." Finally, part of Renan's claim rested on an equally common, but almost equally mistaken, belief that Mithraism was officially accepted because it had Roman emperors among its adherents (Nero, Commodus, Septimius Severus, Caracalla, and the Tetrarchs are most commonly cited). Close examination of the evidence for the participation of emperors reveals that some comes from literary sources of dubious quality and that the rest is rather circumstantial. The cult of Magna Mater, the first imported cult to arrive in Rome (204 BCE) was the only one ever officially recognized as a Roman cult. The others, including Mithraism, were never officially accepted, and some, particularly the Egyptian cult of Isis, were periodically outlawed and their adherents persecuted. More on how little we know about Mithrism Ecloe Initative <a href="http://cedar.evansville.edu/~ecoleweb/articles/mithraism.html" target="_blank">http://cedar.evansville.edu/~ecoleweb/articles/mithraism.html</a> "The evidence for this cult is mostly archaeological, consisting of the remains of mithraic temples, dedicatory inscriptions, and iconographic representations of the god and other aspects of the cult in stone sculpture, sculpted stone relief, wall painting, and mosaic. There is very little literary evidence pertaining to the cult." The Origins of the Mithraic Mysteries: Cosmology and Salvation in the Ancient World (Oxford University Press, revised paperback 1991), [on line summary visted 9/6/01] <a href="http://www.well.com/user/davidu/mithras.html" target="_blank">http://www.well.com/user/davidu/mithras.html</a> "Owing to the cult's secrecy, we possess almost no literary evidence about the beliefs of Mithraism. The few texts that do refer to the cult come not from Mithraic devotees themselves, but rather from outsiders such as early Church fathers, who mentioned Mithraism in order to attack it, and Platonic philosophers, who attempted to find support in Mithraic symbolism for their own philosophical ideas. However, although our literary sources for the Mithraic mysteries are extremely sparse, an abundance of material evidence for the cult exists in the many Mithraic temples and artifacts that archaeologists have found scattered throughout the Roman empire, from England in the north and west to Palestine in the south and east. The temples, called mithraea by scholars, were usually built underground in imitation of caves. These subterranean temples were filled with an extremely elaborate iconography: carved reliefs, statues, and paintings, depicting a variety of enigmatic figures and scenes. This iconography is our primary source of knowledge about Mithraic beliefs, but because we do not have any written accounts of its meaning the ideas that it expresses have proven extraordinarily difficult to decipher." "Our earliest evidence for the Mithraic mysteries places their appearance in the middle of the first century B.C.: the historian Plutarch says that in 67 B.C. a large band of pirates based in Cilicia (a province on the southeastern coast of Asia Minor) were practicing "secret rites" of Mithras. The earliest physical remains of the cult date from around the end of the first century A.D., and Mithraism reached its height of popularity in the third century. In addition to soldiers, the cult's membership included significant numbers of bureaucrats and merchants. Women were excluded. Mithraism declined with the rise to power of Christianity, until the beginning of the fifth century, when Christianity became strong enough to exterminate by force rival religions such as Mithraism." [ January 23, 2002: Message edited by: Metacrock ]</p> |
|||
|
|
|
01-23-2002, 02:35 AM
|
#89 |
|
Contributor
Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: Barrayar
Posts: 11,866
|
No that's absurd. You can't reject a historian just because he's writting after the event. Tacitus is known as our best source on the period. Hisotirans accept him for many things of which he wrote decades after the event. Historians do that they write after the events. It doesnt' matter. He had the research avaible to him he had access to all the archieves of Rome and had ways of getting at the info. Most importantly he had a good histoircal ethic of research!
The issue is not that he is writing after events. The issue is that his information contains nothing that he could not have got from contact with Christians. Thus, it cannot be used as an independent evidence of the historicity of the Christian mythos. As for Josephus, everyone disagrees over that one. It is clear, from the differing versions of Josephus that the ancients knew, that the version we have now has been worked over. It's contaminated, and no longer trustworthy. It may well contain a core, but we no longer no what that core said. After all, the core may have said something like "Many believed Jesus rose again, but his body was fed to the dogs." As many have pointed out, Josephus' rival, Justus of Tiberias, also wrote a history of the region, and never even mentioned the Christian god-man. Michael |
|
|
|
01-23-2002, 03:19 AM
|
#90 |
|
Contributor
Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: Barrayar
Posts: 11,866
|
There is no real evidence for a Persian Cult of Mirthras. The cultic and mystery aspect did not exist until after the Roman period, second century to fourth. This means that any similarities to Christianity probably come from Christiantiy as the Soldiers learned of it during their tours in Palestine. The Great historian of religions, Franz Cumont was able to prove that the earliest datable evidence for the cult came from the Military Garrison at Carnuntum, on the Danube River (moern Hungary). The largest Cache of Mithric artifacts comes form the area between the Danube and Ostia in Italy. (Franz Cumont, The Mysteries of Mithra (Chicago: Open Court, 1903), 87ff.) Quoting Cumont from 1903 is not really a good strategy. We know that Mithraism predates Christianity. From David Ulansey's wonderful article <a href="http://www.well.com/user/davidu/mithras.html" target="_blank">http://www.well.com/user/davidu/mithras.html</a> "For most of the twentieth century it has been assumed that Mithraism was imported from Iran, and that Mithraic iconography must therefore represent ideas drawn from ancient Iranian mythology. The reason for this is that the name of the god worshipped in the cult, Mithras, is a Greek and Latin form of the name of an ancient Iranian god, Mithra; in addition, Roman authors themselves expressed a belief that the cult was Iranian in origin. At the end of the nineteenth century Franz Cumont, the great Belgian historian of ancient religion, published a magisterial two- volume work on the Mithraic mysteries based on the assumption of the Iranian origins of the cult. Cumont's work immediately became accepted as the definitive study of the cult, and remained virtually unchallenged for over seventy years." Ulansey says that the oldest physical remains are late first century, which, combined with Pliny's clear attribution of the cult to the first century BCE, shows that mithraism predates Christianity. Michael |
|
|
| Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
|
