Yuri Kuchinsky

It's in the other thread.

Yuri.

For every credibility gap, there is a gullibility fill.

Layman

Because you are talking about two different groups of people faced with different situations, which ones are guilty of circular reasoning?

Secular Pinoy

Yuri, let's not be obtuse. What we need is a well reasoned analysis of your position backed up with references. Your assertions are unsupported, so we have no reason to consider your opinions.

Bede

Skeptical,

As what you wrote above about pagan myths is basically rubbish gleaned from the Jesus Mysteries, you might care to quieten down your rhetoric.

In fact Habermas is right. We have almost no evidence at all for the pagan mysteries that pre date Christianity let alone evidence of copying. Justin does not refer to the creeds but very loose connections that are clearly simply flukes. He tries to explain something that does not need explaining. Actually read his work and look at his parallels - they are pathetic and do not require diabolical mimicry or anything else to explain. While the universal language of religion is shared between Pagans, Christians and Jews there are no clear cases of essential Christian doctrine or stories being copied from pagans. If you can find a clear case from a pagan source that pre dates the first century, I am all ears. But Freke and Gandy failed to do so despite all their research.

Yours

Bede

Steven Carr

Justin Martyr wrote :-
'And when we say also that the Word, who is the first-birth of God, was produced without sexual union, and that He, Jesus Christ, our Teacher, was crucified and died, and rose again, and ascended into heaven, we propound nothing different from what you believe regarding those whom you esteem sons of Jupiter.'

and 'And if we even affirm that He was born of a virgin, accept this in common with what you accept of Perseus'

But Bede will have us believe that Justin Martyr, defending Christianity against pagans, wrote words baffling to pagans, who were left scratching their heads , asking themselves what Justin Martyr was on about, as pagans regarded the parallels that Christians were making between Christianity and their religions as pathetic.

Bede

Steven,

Read the rest of Justin and actually look at his examples. He comes up with no clear parallels at all - just a load of inannity whatever Justin himself thinks about it. We do not know what ancient pagans thought but at Justins time I expect they were largely indifferent.

Your best bet for a real parallel is the virgin birth and I can accept that this could have been a common motif ascribed to Christianity. But as we have a clear reference in the Septuagint to being born of a virgin (mistranslation notwithstanding) you would be hard pressed to demonstrate this was not the source of the tradition rather than paganism.

And this keyboard is indeed driving me nuts as I cannot get square brackets or an apostrophe.

Yours

Bede

Steven Carr

You want square brackets? You can't handle aquare brackets! (I cut and paste from the square brackets in the text)

While I'm sure most pagans were indeed indifferent to what Justin wrote, the fact remains that it was Christians who first claimed that there were parallels, and they were a lot more knowledgeable to the events than we are.

I'm not sure what you mean by 'source of the tradition' being paganism. I think it is very silly to suggest that early Christians consciously decided to 'copy' pagan beliefs. I don't think religions work that sort of way (Christian taking over the Festival of Saturnalia , not withstanding)

Although Habermas and Holding do seem to claim that pagans copied from Christians - also equally daft.

Steven Carr

So there are no parallels between pagan myths and gospel stories, while the parallels exist because pagans copied from the Christians? Seems perfectly clear to me!

Skeptical

I'm so glad that you are convinced you know the sources I use that you can make such bold statements. First, I have read TJM and while I found some of their arguments interesting, there was much that was not new (as they admit) and several things that were very questionable (such as their assessment of Josephus).

Second, in addition to TJM, my sources on pagan religions include:

The mystery-religions: a study in the religious background of early christianity - Samuel Angus

Myth and mystery: an introduction to pagan relions of the biblical world - Jack Finegan

The ancient mysteries: a sourcebook: sacred texts of the mystery religions of the ancient mediterranean world - Marvin W. Mayer (editor)

(ok, I haven't actually finished this one yet)

The christians as the romans saw them - Robert L. Wilken (not directly related to paganism, but good insight into the POV of those raised in the pagan traditions)

Let's be careful about our assumptions, shall we.

I am not so naieve to say that there is a direct one for one copying, although I have seen such claims made. I also grant that unfortunately, the amount of data we have regarding mystery religions is very scant. However, this does not mean that we do not know general themes and that we cannot see that there are some clear parallels in christianity. General themes of the death of a god and his being brought back to life, virgin births, the drinking of blood and eating of flesh and the savior motif are clearly seen, albeit one cannot say they are duplicated exactly in the same form in christianity. In my view, there is clear adaptation, but adaptation it is.

I looked at the page written by "Justin Martyr" you posted in another thread and I would say this:

1) The general theme of a god who dies and then achieves some level of being brought back to life is clear. You can argue as to whether Horus being brought back to "life" to rule in Hades is actually a "resurrection", but to me this is just semantics. Horus died, he is brought back to existence and continues living. This general theme is found in other pagan traditions, albeit the specific form may vary considerably from christian traditions and from other pagan ones.

The writers basic argument seems to be that the parallels noted by Frazer and the general mythical themes noted by Raglan are too general or not close enough to be considered parallels. At some level this is just a matter of opinion. How many salient points of a myth must be duplicated (and how many _not_ duplicated) in another "story" before we conclude influence of one on the other or at least a common mythical foundation? Where one falls on this question is probably directly related to whether one thinks a particular story is mythical or factual. I see salient points duplicated, you apparently do not.

2) This quote was interesting:

"Points of contact between Christianity and other religions are damaging to Christianity's truth claims only if actual borrowings can be proven - not if the parallel features have simply sprung from the same psychological source common to all humans - that is, from the innate religious instinct which Christians regard as a gift of God."

In other words, even though other religions prior to christianity may have been nothing more than an answer to a psychological need and christianity parallels this answering of a pychological need, it also by some stroke of incredible fortune happens to be true while all the other religions are false. How fortuitous.

So Justin, sitting 18.5 centuries closer to the events in question, was not in a better position to evaluate whether or not there were clear parallels between pagan beliefs and those positied by 2nd century christians than those living today? I disagree.

The death and return of a god-man, virgin birth and the drinking of blood and eating of flesh are, IMO, clear. The particular forms vary greatly. If you think the variance is too great to see a parallel, we'll simply have to agree to disagree.

One more point I'd like to make. It is clear that christianity did not arise in a vacumn. It arose in a Roman society where many religions had been followed piously for centuries. Many romans considered themselves devoutly religious and strongly attached to their particular creeds. It is inconceivable that the early christian movement would not have been in some significant ways influenced by these older traditions it was trying to supplant. (this argument is basically taken from "The christians as the romans saw them")

I do not believe there was a simple copying by christians or construction out of whole cloth. I do believe that there were wide-spread general religious themes that influenced the early christians and their movement.

[ September 05, 2002: Message edited by: Skeptical ]</p>

jess

(ugh, it deleted my first line!)

'I just finished it yesterday. I was lying down to rest my back and '

it was within reach... I just felt odd going straight from 'shadows of forgotten ancestors' to it...


It had been loaned to our housemate (The guy in the flat downstairs) by his sister... I read it first, and ran out of post-its trying to annotate it for him (he is a bit more susceptable than me)


It seemed to try to prove (at least at first) that you can be edumacated and a believer at the same time...


one thing Lee said that convinced me that he was full of bunk... that James was a skeptic before the ressurection and a believer afterwards--- proving that he had seen the glorified Christ... (page 335 in the paperback)


He goes on to explain that Jesus' family disbeleived him and this was an 'arguement from embarrassment' for the disciples...


my question was, what, after the two angels and the virgin birth, Mary and Joeseph just 'forgot' that Jesus was the son of god and 'negelected' to tell his siblings this?


It wasn't a secret when he was born, eh?


I mean, there are lotsa other things (like the stupid use of 'never' and 'always' and the fact that this journalist and none of the interviewees ever heard of Roswell (no such thing as a legend popping up in just a few years--- it takes 500 years for that to happen! (500 years? where did they get that number?))

I haven't read the rebutts. I have suggested that my housemate send those to his sister when he returns to book...




(edited to add the cut line at top)

[ September 06, 2002: Message edited by: jess ]</p>