The Pagan Gospel

[Heimdall]

Guacamole, you kept asking for sources for the dying resurrecting nature gods, check out these books:

The Myth of the Resurrection - Joseph McCabe

Golden Bough - Sir J. G. Frazer ( especially the volume Adonis, Attis, Osiris)

and St Jerome's commentary on the Attis celebration. - Heimdall

[Mythra]

guac - a couple of things- I'll try not to be too puerile or obfuscating (or indistinct, vaporous, or opaque) I'm so impressed by your commodious vocabulary. Except obfuscating isn't a word. It's obfuscated.

 

OK, enough personal slam

 

Please show the primary source showing that God was "fully human" and "fully divine" at the same time.

 

Then, about your primary source, "in the beginning was the word"..

 

Who was the author of that?

 

Do you think it was John, the disciple that Jesus loved?

 

Funny that he thought Bethsaida was in Galilee. Especially since he was supposedly born there. Ah, maybe he was just having an off-day when he wrote that.

[Amanda]

First I'd like to point out that Jesus was in disguise.  He did not come right out and say, "Hey, I'm the son of God, both fully divine and fully human!"  he didn't come right out and say, "Hey Jewish people, I'm your Messiah."  You may argue that such statements would have gotten him killed, but nonetheless, he was in disguise.  He was in human disguise, to some extent and even spoke in parables so as to confuse the people.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

Madame M, I think that Jesus never said verbally, "Hey, I'm your messiah" because he said it with his actions, actions speak louder than words. Remember when he was with the woman at the well, she told him that he was the messiah, he did not tell her. The parables, I think, by their discerning qualities... it causes an internal transformation in the process of understanding and thinking them through.

 

You claim that Jesus was "stuck" as a human. Take note of this passage:

 

Matthew 26:53 (NKJV)

Or do you think that I cannot now pray to My Father, and He will provide Me with more than twelve legions of angels?

 

He was not in fact "stuck" because he could call upon God at any moment to resue him.  I don't know any humans who could speak with the same assurance, that God will send twelve legions of angels on their behalf.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

I believe Jesus had to be limited completely to full human form, as his purpose was to be a role model for us. If he allowed any priviledges to divinity that we could not access, then it would defeat his purpose. Jesus said that we could do what he did, and even greater things! I believe this would include the legions of angels on one's behalf if it alligned with the purpose of the Father. I think Jesus did not call on these legions because he knew it was not congruent with the purpose he was there.

 

Perhaps Jesus' divinity is obtainable by all of us, he was demonstrating them for us so that we might learn. He spent years teaching us everything he knew so that we can attain what he did.

[Amanda]

OK.  Go grab yourself a glass and fill it with tap water.  Now turn it into a nice chardonnay or chianti. 

 

Now grab up a slice of bread and multiply it.

 

I await your full report.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

Madame M, Madame M, Madame M... ye of little faith... are you still waiting for my full report? You might like some of this here Chateau Lafite Rothchild?

 

Just kidding! No, really... if you study the manuscript from which this scripture was taken, it claims this transformation of water to wine was done "by the force of his suggestion." I have studied some hypnosis and have seen such as this done. Not this particular feat, yet one in which a participant was lead to believe, and reacted accordingly, as if they were smelling perfume... when in actuality it was ammonia! Now I don't know your favorite perfume, but maybe we should work on that considering the price of perfume in regards to wine? Are you with me? I mean good perfume is outrageously priced for just a mere ounce!

 

The bread could mean many analogies. I believe that I did study this one and came to the understanding that they brought all the loaves of bread the disciples had, five. And they showed their generosity to share all they thought there was with everyone, and I believe that generosity stimulated everyone else who had food to contribute also. Sincere generosity can produce positive responses that might come as a surprise.

[Amanda]

So Jesus was like a travelling hypnotist?  A dime show charlatan who fooled people with tricky illusions and slight of hand? 

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

So that is how it is in your world Madame M... it is always to the interpreter to create their own world... and this seems to be the one you choose... ok... there seems to be only one road for you... and there are no surprises for me here. I was always sure that was your story and you'd be sticking to it... but of course.

 

Seriously, I've never met one christian who would reduce Jesus to a mass hypnotist.  I really have nothing left to say about that, I suspect you have shot yourself in the foot on that one.   

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

No, you see I believe that everything that was created was created by God and for God. So Madame M... do you think there is something demonic or disrespectful about the use of hypnosis? Would that put you right in there with the traditional Christians at first... uhhummm maybe so... Madame M, you might be surprised to know that they actually use hypnosis in a clinical setting in psychology, forensics, and other progressive sciences... go ahead and sit down now... I wouldn't want you to fall. There is actually a lot of our everyday lives that are subject to our own hypnotic trance... just stay sitting down Madame M... you'll digest it better once you do some research into the field... really, its not demonic or such... You can embrace the method, or deny it... it is your option... one is limiting one is expanding.

 

Maybe you should explain why I should follow your side show hustler version of the messiah?

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

Who's the hussler? I only 'recommend' you follow your own conscience.

 

Um, Amanda, the stories of Jesus earthly ministries are not writen as metaphorical tales.  They are written as historical record, even though the events do sound mythical, that was not the intent.  First you tell me that Jesus didn't really turn water into wine.  Now you tell me that he didn't really multiply the bread.  So did he really die on a cross, or was that a metaphorical sacrifice? 

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

Oh, so you're the authority? Does anyone that claims to be Christian agree with you on that one? Just curious. I've never seen you listed as an authority of the Bible in any of my books, but if you are one in your books... by all means let this authority speak to you. Are you upset that one may actually be able to do what Jesus told us we'd be able to do? Or are you disappointed that it takes a little more than 'abra cadabra'? You don't like the miracle of the muliplicity of generosity? What do you have that can beat that Madame M that you've done in your life? I can see that you are confused, and I would happily excuse it if I didn't know it was out of being firmly based in denial... yet alas... I know you like it like that. Do you ever see how you are like those 'Christians' you complain about all the time? Just curious. Yes, Jesus did die in a real sacrifice... as a way of demonstrating principles that go way deeper than you are ready for at this point. When I sense you are ready to grasp a little of that point, and you ask, then we can go through that treasure.

 

Read the story, tell me what is metaphorical about this.  It is quite clear that the crowd was not sharing amongst themselves, becasue they had no food:

 

16But Jesus said to them, "They do not need to go away. You give them something to eat."

 

17And they said to Him, "We have here only five loaves and two fish."

 

18He said, "Bring them here to Me." 19Then He commanded the multitudes to sit down on the grass. And He took the five loaves and the two fish, and looking up to heaven, He blessed and broke and gave the loaves to the disciples; and the disciples gave to the multitudes. 20So they all ate and were filled, and they took up twelve baskets full of the fragments that remained. 21Now those who had eaten were about five thousand men, besides women and children.

 

Really, you are more slippery than an eel.  I've never met any theist more skilled at moving the goal post than you.  Seriously, you should get a medal.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

Slippery because I don't agree with you? So you are the god that you think mine is? How convenient to take what you don't understand, degrade it, and make it you. How are you different in your position towards me than how you think my God is towards others?

[Cerise]

So that is how it is in your world Madame M...

 

Fucking hell STOP SAYING THAT TO EVERY FRIKKEN BODY!!!! There is no "your" world. There is no "my world". You both live in the same damn world.

 

DEAL WITH IT.

 

 

it is always to the interpreter to create their own world... and this seems to be the one you choose... ok... there seems to be only one road for you... and there are no surprises for me here. I was always sure that was your story and you'd be sticking to it... but of course.

 

Cheese with your whine, Amanda?

Madame M, you might be surprised to know that they actually use hypnosis in a clinical setting in psychology, forensics, and other progressive sciences... go ahead and sit down now... I wouldn't want you to fall. There is actually a lot of our everyday lives that are subject to our own hypnotic trance... just stay sitting down Madame M... you'll digest it better once you do some research into the field... really, its not demonic or such... You can embrace the method, or deny it... it is your option... one is limiting one is expanding.

 

Hello little girl, would you liek some candy? Or maybe you would like to stop being so goddamn patronizing to everyone? You might be surprised to know that you aren't half as smart as you think you are, but you are indeed every bit as arrogant as I think you are. Perhaps even more so. Who knows? It's hard to see how you could sink much lower but time will tell...

 

Oh, so you're the authority? Does anyone that claims to be Christian agree with you on that one? Just curious. I've never seen you listed as an authority of the Bible in any of my books, but if you are one in your books... by all means let this authority speak to you. Are you upset that one may actually be able to do what Jesus told us we'd be able to do? Or are you disappointed that it takes a little more than 'abra cadabra'? You don't like the miracle of the muliplicity of generosity? What do you have that can beat that Madame M that you've done in your life? I can see that you are confused, and I would happily excuse it if I didn't know it was out of being firmly based in denial... yet alas... I know you like it like that. Do you ever see how you are like those 'Christians' you complain about all the time? Just curious. Yes, Jesus did die in a real sacrifice... as a way of demonstrating principles that go way deeper than you are ready for at this point. When I sense you are  ready to grasp a little of that point, and you ask, then we can go through that treasure.

 

Fuck you little girl. You don't understand half of what Madame's been through and you have no right to talk to her as if you do. If this is what you call "doing what Jesus told you to do" then you can keep it and shove it.

 

You've worn out your welcome Amanda. Your mask slipped. We all saw the rotten person inside. Go away and leave the adults alone now, okay?

[Sokudo Ningyou]

So that is how it is in your world Madame M... it is always to the interpreter to create their own world... and this seems to be the one you choose... ok... there seems to be only one road for you... and there are no surprises for me here. I was always sure that was your story and you'd be sticking to it... but of course.

No, you see I believe that everything that was created was created by God and for God. So Madame M... do you think there is something demonic or disrespectful about the use of hypnosis? Would that put you right in there with the traditional Christians at first... uhhummm maybe so... Madame M, you might be surprised to know that they actually use hypnosis in a clinical setting in psychology, forensics, and other progressive sciences... go ahead and sit down now... I wouldn't want you to fall. There is actually a lot of our everyday lives that are subject to our own hypnotic trance... just stay sitting down Madame M... you'll digest it better once you do some research into the field... really, its not demonic or such... You can embrace the method, or deny it... it is your option... one is limiting one is expanding.

Who's the hussler? I only 'recommend' you follow your own conscience.

Oh, so you're the authority? Does anyone that claims to be Christian agree with you on that one? Just curious. I've never seen you listed as an authority of the Bible in any of my books, but if you are one in your books... by all means let this authority speak to you. Are you upset that one may actually be able to do what Jesus told us we'd be able to do? Or are you disappointed that it takes a little more than 'abra cadabra'? You don't like the miracle of the muliplicity of generosity? What do you have that can beat that Madame M that you've done in your life? I can see that you are confused, and I would happily excuse it if I didn't know it was out of being firmly based in denial... yet alas... I know you like it like that. Do you ever see how you are like those 'Christians' you complain about all the time? Just curious. Yes, Jesus did die in a real sacrifice... as a way of demonstrating principles that go way deeper than you are ready for at this point. When I sense you are  ready to grasp a little of that point, and you ask, then we can go through that treasure.

Slippery because I don't agree with you? So you are the god that you think mine is? How convenient to take what you don't understand, degrade it, and make it you. How are you different in your position towards me than how you think my God is towards others?

 

 

 

Wait, wait, wait. Let me get this straight. God created everything, including hypnosis. Since God created hypnosis, acting through Jesus to hypnotize people into believing water has become wine is perfectly fine and dandy? Holy shit, I wish I had this kind of leverage. "God gave me the gift of hypnosis. Therefore, this dollar bill is now a hundred. I will now spend it in your store as if it were actually a hundred, because God created hypnosis, so I can fuck with your head."

[scotter]

Finally Amanda gets angry and resorted to machine gun bullets.

 

There were no insulting words by themselves, but the whole paragraphs’ message and tone were insulting to Madame. And ‘your world’ ‘my world’ again?

 

In the debate with Poonis, Amanda you have claimed the Bible is a spiritual book, you debated with Poonis with spiritual interpretation, and when you were challenged about your viewpoints on man’s attaining divinity and miracles, you then raised and insisted your rational, non-spiritual, non-miraculous explanation on the water-to-wine, bread-fish-multiplication miracles. (I have written some comments for the Arena debate. By July 15 I shall post some comments in the Arena too.)

 

Per this thread, your own inconsistency, not Madame, led to your shortcomings and your own fall in responding to Madame. I am afraid you failed the minority voices who had regards of you and gave you encouragement when you first came, and every now and then…..

 

Where were all the smiley emoticons when you first came to this board? Where were the niceness and humbleness of back then?

 

Sigh…..

[Vigile]

 

Wait, wait, wait.  Let me get this straight.  God created everything, including hypnosis.  Since God created hypnosis, acting through Jesus to hypnotize people into believing water has become wine is perfectly fine and dandy?  Holy shit, I wish I had this kind of leverage.  "God gave me the gift of hypnosis.  Therefore, this dollar bill is now a hundred.  I will now spend it in your store as if it were actually a hundred, because God created hypnosis, so I can fuck with your head."

 

 

Right, and so god created lies also then. Hypnosis to help a smoker kick the habit and hypnosis to fool the wedding guests are two separate animals.

 

:Amanda: Stop telling me my version of reality is not as good as everyone else's versions of reality!

[Cerise]

Where were all the smiley emoticons when you first came to this board? Where were the niceness and humbleness of back then?

 

Sigh…..

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

Amanda was never humble. And "niceness" amounts to a lot of sugary pap and no substance. Personally, I don't think she's changed. She's just stopped trying so very hard to hide her patronization and arrogance this time.

[guacamole]

The God Dionysos: "To these ends I have laid my deity aside and go disguised as man" Euripedes 5th century BCE.

 

(Guac)

On the contrary when St. Paul speaks of Jesus as having laid aside his divinity, he doesn't mean that Jesus decided to put on a disguise, as was the habit of Greek gods, but he actually became a man.

-----------------------------------

Note here:  the Word became flesh.  He didn't adopt some disguise for the purposes of fornication like the greek gods, a form that could be sloughed off or altered at will so that when the god tired of human interaction he could go back to Olympus.  Jesus was stuck, because in Christian theology, he wasn't a trickster taking on a disguise to see what was going on, but actually became a man. 

----------------------------------

A doctrine in which Jesus is fully human and fully divine.  As far as I can tell from the meager quote you've supplied, Dionysus never adopted a full humanity- as a divine being he was never subject to death and debasement at the hands of men. 

 

I'm not sure that the distinction is valid.  For one thing, it sounds like the odd twisting of words that pastors would use to try to make a distinction where no distinction exists, but perhaps that isn't the case. 

 

First I'd like to point out that Jesus was in disguise.  He did not come right out and say, "Hey, I'm the son of God, both fully divine and fully human!"  he didn't come right out and say, "Hey Jewish people, I'm your Messiah."  You may argue that such statements would have gotten him killed, but nonetheless, he was in disguise.  He was in human disguise, to some extent and even spoke in parables so as to confuse the people. 

 

I don't mean a disguise in the sense that he wasn't telling people who he was. I mean a disguise as in, you see a man, what you get is literally a man. With Dionysus, the disguise is, you see a man, but it's not a "man" in the mortal sense of the word.

 

This is what I mean when I say that the mythicist position has to use such broad categorization to make it's point. It's the same problem faced when someone describes Jesus as an "agricultural deity". You want to say that Jesus was in a disguise because he didn't tell people he was the messiah? Okay, but that's not what Eurpides means when he says that Dionysus was in a "disguise". It's not the same thing, and you can only make it the same thing by widening the set. If you're going to widen the set so much so as to make it fit, at some point the comparison becomes nonsensical, becuase then anything even remotely related to the idea of "disguise" fits into the set. The validity of saying that one is like the other becomes meaningless when the comparison becomes common place.

 

You claim that Jesus was "stuck" as a human.  Take note of this passage:

 

Matthew 26:53 (NKJV)

Or do you think that I cannot now pray to My Father, and He will provide Me with more than twelve legions of angels?

 

He was not in fact "stuck" because he could call upon God at any moment to resue him.  I don't know any humans who could speak with the same assurance, that God will send twelve legions of angels on their behalf.  In fact, the lack of miracles indicates that this is not the case for most humans.  You also claim that Dionysus was not subject to death and debasement.  I counter that neither was Jesus except he allowed it.  Isn't that one of the pivotal points of Christianity, that Jesus went willingly to the slaughter?

 

Rescue him from what? Human life? I don't think you can get that from this passage. Dionysus, like all greek gods, could change his own form at will. Jesus either would not or could not. That's what I mean when I say he was stuck.

 

The passage you cite brings up another interesting point of difference between Jesus' incarnation and Dionysus' "disguise". Dionysus was free to bail himself out. The verse you cited emphasizes the fragile human position of Jesus; he has pray, his Father will provide. Jesus is dependent upon exterior spiritual forces to resolve his difficulty.

 

The very fact that Jesus was capable of dying at the hands of mortal men, willingly or not, is the point I was trying to make. You can make no such claim of similarity for Dionysus because he never became a literal man.

 

You also stated that Jesus was fully human and fully divine. This is similar to Dionysus, who you yourself claim could at any moment reclaim his divinity.  So he had not actually sloughed off his divinity, so much as he was walking the earth in human form but still retained divinity.  If Dionysus had lost this divinity, he would be unable to reclaim his divine form.  So Jesus also walked the earth in human form but retained divine powers.  The fact that there is a difference in expressing this between two differen stories with two different authors does not mean that a meaningful comparison does not exist.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

I don't dispute that Jesus had some sort of supernatural power. I hardly think that's an apt point of similarity; supernatural things happen to supernatural people in supernatural stories. What I dispute is Dionysus was ever conceived of by anyone, in actuality, of ever being an actual man. Dionysus never makes himself mortal- hence the difference and hence my deconstruction of Dionysus as having done "exactly what Jesus did."

 

fwiw

guac.

[guacamole]

guac - a couple of things- I'll try not to be too puerile or obfuscating  (or  indistinct, vaporous, or opaque)  I'm so impressed by your commodious vocabulary.  Except obfuscating isn't a word.  It's obfuscated.

 

OK, enough personal slam

 

Please show the primary source showing that God was "fully human" and "fully divine" at the same time.

 

I just did. Please tell me that you finally understand what a primary source is for the purposes of this discussion.

 

Then, about your primary source, "in the beginning was the word"..

 

Who was the author of that?

 

Do you think it was John, the disciple that Jesus loved? 

 

Funny that he thought Bethsaida was in Galilee.  Especially since he was supposedly born there.  Ah, maybe he was just having an off-day when he wrote that.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

Do you have another point about mythology? That stuff probably belongs in another thread.

[Heimdall]

the primary sources would be pagan texts to prove the borrowing and the new testament

 

Yes, I agree, with one minor exception – the primary sources should be the pagan texts and the ORIGINAL version of the NT! Since the earliest still existing copies of the Christ Cult mythology book date to the 4th century CE and show some differences with the modern NT (Mark is shorter by 12 verses, cutting off at Mk 16:8), there is cause to believe that earlier version would possibly vary even more from the now existing NT. Consequently, we need the the 2nd and 3rd century versions of the NT in order to do a textual comparison. Without those versions, any comparison would be basically one-sided. We can, however, use historical data to determine if the Christ Cult borrowed from other religions. If a religion is older and had the practices in place that were later mirrored in The Christ Cult, the chances of plagiarism is 4 or 5 times higher than the chances of independent development! Let’s start with Mithra. Many Christ Cultists aver that Mithraism copied from the Cult. That the Romans altered the very fabric of the older cult when they created the Sol Invictus cult. Let’s look at history and see what we can find on Mithraism. Mithra’s ascension to heaven was said to have occurred in 208 B.C., 64 years after his birth. Parthian coins and documents bear a double date with this 64 year interval. Well now we have a good time line of an established Mithrian cult. Since Mithra was the “special protector” of nobility and monarchs and many ancient monarchs took theophorous (god bearing) names, we only have to look for monarchs with theophorous names that incorporate variants of Mithra to refine our time line. We find that the Mithradates line of the Parthians (and other Anatolian monarchs) included numerous rulers with that theophorous name, with a timeline ranging from 366 BCE to 51 CE. This establishes that Mithraism was a viable and popular cult from the mid 4th century BCE. The Roman Legion XV Apollinarius was called to the East to help fight in a campaign against the Parthians. While there (Parthia controlled ancient Persia) they confronted and adopted a Mithraism that was several centuries old, with an established ritual and dogma. Members of the legion made mithraic dedications back in Carnuntum after their return from this campaign, around 70 CE. This shows that Mithra was worshipped in the Empire from at least 70 CE (before any of the Christ Cult gospels were written) and archaeological evidence from Germany and Britain and dating from the late 1st and early 2nd centuries CE show engraved scenes of baptism, sacred meals, etc. Mithra was the ascendant religion (the official religion of the Empire) and an exclusive religion (male only) until Constantine adopted Christianity as the official religion of the Empire in the 4th century CE, so it would have had little reason to adopt anything from a lesser religion such as Christianity. As for Attis, he too was a dying/resurrecting God and the historical evidence of his cult is strongly attested to prior to the establishment of the Christ Cult. In the mid 5th century BCE, Herodotus tells the tale in his ironic tale of the “Death of Attys”, Some time before 54 BCE Gaius Valerius Catullus wrote a poem “Attis”, setting forth many of the beliefs of the Attis Cult. Ovid wrote of Attis in the 1st century BCE as did Statius. The pedigree of the Attis cult is well established. Adonis is another of those dying/resurrection gods (whether they are agricultural gods or not is of no importance), whose cult was firmly established on the isle of Lesbos by 600 BCE, his story echos that of both Tammuz (of whom he is identified with) and Attis. Around 700 BCE, the Greek Poet Hesiod mentions Adonis in his Theogony, as does Apollodorus in his history of Athens written in mid 2nd century BCE. Krishna is another of the genre of the dying/resurrecting/savior man-gods. I posted the information on where to find his “background” evidence, so enough is said on that matter. As for Osiris, you can find the “Book of the Dead” translations all over the internet, Also check out the “Contending of Horus and Seth (Horus became another aspect of Osiris), The Hymn to Osiris and the Legend of the Origin of Horus, and many others. Each one seems to lead you to another. I guess basically all this evidence of these dying/resurrecting/savior Gods from the time before the Christ Cult, shows that there were multiple cults with similar or identical practices and beliefs to the Cult. As I said before, the probability of plargiarism by those establishing the Cult is 5 times greater than parallel evolution of those practices. - Heimdall

[Amanda]

Rant all you want about the valid uses of hypnotism, none of which I deny.  Like anything, hypnotism can be used for valid and invalid purposes.  But, a miracle is not fooling the human brain into believing something has happened that has not.  That is trickery.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

Madame M, perhaps the use of hypnosis, or something similar, was not known as "hypnosis"... nor used for stage shows back then, but more or less an untapped resource of the time, being harnessed... as it can be very closely associated to guided meditation. As you seem to know, it can serve wonderful purposes. It seems to me that Jesus was showing us what we were all capable of doing... resources he wanted us to know... no trickery... no magic... it is about us having the ability to be accomplishing these things too... he was teaching us how he did it, and he said we could do everything he could do and even greater things. He was the first fruit of the many to come after him.

 

A condemnation to hell already, and I haven't even had me Lucky Charms...  Why Mandy, I'm shocked, I took you for a Universalist type, not a fundy. 

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

Whatever you want to label me, I still don't think you or anyone else is bound to hell for eternity. As far as I understand the Bible, I'm not getting any better treatment in the end than anyone else... and vice versa.

 

Actually, I am planning on utilizing hypnotism in the near future for a phobia I have and I have friends who have used it for pain control during labor.  Those are known as "valid" uses.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

It seems to me that for a phobia an 'affect bridge' with desensitization of the initial synthesizing event is the most effective way, of using a hypnotic technique for that kind of problem. I'm hoping you have great success! I'm sure you will.

 

Mandy, have you ever seen one of those travelling hypnotists that come to high school auditoriums and make people cluck like a chicken?  Do you think that is a valid use of hypnotism?  For entertainment purposes, play with people's minds a bit.  Sure?  But what has it to do with someone who is supposedly the son of a diety?  Why would Jesus need to trick people into believing he turned something into wine.  Go rent the movie Mesmer, get back to me.  If that was Jesus game, then the Mesmer guy is a divine son too. 

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

First, they do not 'make' people cluck like a chicken. No one can make you do what you would not do anyway. The only real hypnosis is 'self hypnosis' and the hypnotist is just your guide. You are in total control to accept or reject anything. There seems to be different levels of awarenesses, and at these different levels... people seem to be more proficient at different skills. Clucking like a chicken may be entertainment, but it also seems to expand the perspectives of what your mind is capable of doing... for the subject and the audience. Jesus turned a special occasion into a better one, and if someone were to come to my wedding or one I attended and did that... I'd be quite grateful. It wouldn't have to be Chateau Lafite either!

 

  I suspect there will be a few Christians on the board who read this and disagree with you too. 

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

I'm use to that too... haven't you figured that out by now? I am open to sincere discourse and willing to change my mind... and have done so of several things from this site.

 

Generosity is great.  Where did I say I don't like generosity?      But where is the miracle.  A miracle is something that can not happen under normal circumstances (natural law). When I was a Christian, I read the story of Jesus ministry literally- as though the events really happened.  Why was my interpretation (which is backed by the majority of christianity) wrong and your off the cuff interpretation correct?

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

Merriam-Webster Online Dictionary

Main Entry: mir·a·cle

Pronunciation: 'mir-i-k&l

Function: noun

Etymology: Middle English, from Old French, from Late Latin miraculum, from Latin, a wonder, marvel, from mirari to wonder at

1 : an extraordinary event manifesting divine intervention in human affairs

2 : an extremely outstanding or unusual event, thing, or accomplishment

3 Christian Science : a divinely natural phenomenon experienced humanly as the fulfillment of spiritual law

 

How do you know that, when does the metaphorical turn into the physical in your interpretation.  I suspect only when you want it to.  Listen Amanda, and listen good and hard.  Either Jesus did what the gospels said or he didn't.  End of story.  Either it was all real or all metaphor.  End of story.  I don't have time to play move the goalpost games.  This is not about "me" specifically.  It is about yes or no, are the gospels historical accounts, did the events occur as they say.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

Madame M, I would surmise that it really doesn't matter to you how I or anyone else answers that question. It certainly requires more depth than either yes or no. You know which answer you're accepting before you asked it. Now I could really put forth extensive effort to clarify my perspectives of these different aspects to you, but you know and I know it would be a waste of time... now wouldn't it?

 

BTW, I've seen some phenominal phobia cures... for even agoraphobia... using hypnosis. It seems that there is wonderful relief after just one session, and sometimes even totally discipated! Positive expectations also seem to enhance the outcome... and I'm sure you have a proficient guide. Again, good luck to you.

[NotBlinded]

Please don't take this wrong, but are you saying that Jesus feed the masses by mere suggestion? I wouldn't think that that would be very nutritious.

[Ouroboros]

OK.  Go grab yourself a glass and fill it with tap water.  Now turn it into a nice chardonnay or chianti. 

 

Now grab up a slice of bread and multiply it.

 

I await your full report.

Warning! Don't repeat too many times, you migh be suffocated when the whole house has been filled with bread and wine.

 

Actually it's easier to multiply rabbits...

[Cerise]

Please don't take this wrong, but are you saying that Jesus feed the masses by mere suggestion?  I wouldn't think that that would be very nutritious.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

Hey, maybe that's Jesus' "plan" for the starving kids in Africa. No real food but hey, if they think they are eating...

[Amanda]

Please don't take this wrong, but are you saying that Jesus feed the masses by mere suggestion?  I wouldn't think that that would be very nutritious.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

No, I interpreted the feeding of the masses starting with five loaves of bread to be accomplished by the mere instigative miraculous quality of generosity of all one has to offer. Sometimes that might be quite contagious in the right situations... yet not only for physical needs... I see it happening miraculously to emotional needs on this site in many cases. I suppose what is nutuitious for the emotions is sometimes healthier than that for the body.

[guacamole]

Bold quotes by Heimdall

 

Yes, I agree, with one minor exception – the primary sources should be the pagan texts and the ORIGINAL version of the NT! Since the earliest still existing copies of the Christ Cult mythology book date to the 4th century CE and show some differences with the modern NT (Mark is shorter by 12 verses, cutting off at Mk 16:8), there is cause to believe that earlier version would possibly vary even more from the now existing NT. Consequently, we need the the 2nd and 3rd century versions of the NT in order to do a textual comparison. Without those versions, any comparison would be basically one-sided.

 

I think your datings for the earliest NT manuscripts is debateable and quite possibly rather controversial. Comfort and Barret (Complete Text of the Earliest NT Manuscripts, pub. Baker) date P52, a fragment of the Gospel of John at ca. 100-125:

 

"The earliest known NT manuscript is P52, a fragment of John's Gospel. This papyrus gragment was dated by various paleographers to the first half of the second century-- even to the first quarter (see discussion under P52). Adolf Deissmann was convinced that P52 was written at least during the reign of Trajan (A.D. 98-117), but no one would commit to a date earlier than A.D. 125. In the end, C. H. Roberts dated it to "the first half of the second century." This conservative dating allows for a larger time gap between the autograph and copy, but there is nothing unreasonable about assigning a date of A.D. 100-125 for P52. If the Fourth Gospel was written in the 70s or 80s, then we have a munscript fragment twenty years removed from the autograph." (pg. 18)

 

They include fifty manuscripts and fragments that have been assigned a date earlier than ca. 300 c.e. I imagine that were the disputing the dating of manuscripts not beyond the ken of this thread, it would be certainly beyond my ability, and unless you are a manuscript scholar, presumably yours. Hence I suggest that we leave dating of manuscripts alone; I'm not sure anyone would buy it as an end-run around late texts used to justify the claim of borrowing. I certainly won't; if your argument hinges on a late date for the composition of Christian texts, something which cannot be verified and which is controversial to extant scholarship, then you have a very weak case indeed.

 

In addition, we have the early church fathers who already affix certain passages from the NT writings and already establish key points of doctrine. IOW, if Justin Martyr, writing in second century is defending the divinity and virgin birth of Jesus, then it's not unreasonable to assume that the most primitive forms of NT manuscripts would uphold those self-same concepts.

 

We can, however, use historical data to determine if the Christ Cult borrowed from other religions. If a religion is older and had the practices in place that were later mirrored in The Christ Cult, the chances of plagiarism is 4 or 5 times higher than the chances of independent development! Let’s start with Mithra. Many Christ Cultists aver that Mithraism copied from the Cult. That the Romans altered the very fabric of the older cult when they created the Sol Invictus cult.

 

I agree with you so far. However, I have yet to see documentary evidence of the Mithraic cult's mythology and theology paralleling that of Christianity. You've already pointed out that the Romans altered the very fabric of the older cult, so what proof do you have that the cult was anything like what it was beneath the romans in more distant antiquity? Why weaken your case from the get go?

 

In addition, if you want to use the phrase "plagiarism" instead of "borrowing" I fully assent to do so. However "plagiarism" implies a more literalistic copying than simple "borrowing". I do not think that proving "plagiarism" is even remotely possible, considering the rather unfortunate dearth of Mithraic primary texts.

 

Let’s look at history and see what we can find on Mithraism. Mithra’s ascension to heaven was said to have occurred in 208 B.C., 64 years after his birth. Parthian coins and documents bear a double date with this 64 year interval. Well now we have a good time line of an established Mithrian cult.

 

Since Mithra was the “special protector” of nobility and monarchs and many ancient monarchs took theophorous (god bearing) names, we only have to look for monarchs with theophorous names that incorporate variants of Mithra to refine our time line. We find that the Mithradates line of the Parthians (and other Anatolian monarchs) included numerous rulers with that theophorous name, with a timeline ranging from 366 BCE to 51 CE. This establishes that Mithraism was a viable and popular cult from the mid 4th century BCE.

The Roman Legion XV Apollinarius was called to the East to help fight in a campaign against the Parthians. While there (Parthia controlled ancient Persia) they confronted and adopted a Mithraism that was several centuries old, with an established ritual and dogma. Members of the legion made mithraic dedications back in Carnuntum after their return from this campaign, around 70 CE. This shows that Mithra was worshipped in the Empire from at least 70 CE (before any of the Christ Cult gospels were written) and archaeological evidence from Germany and Britain and dating from the late 1st and early 2nd centuries CE show engraved scenes of baptism, sacred meals, etc. Mithra was the ascendant religion (the official religion of the Empire) and an exclusive religion (male only) until Constantine adopted Christianity as the official religion of the Empire in the 4th century CE, so it would have had little reason to adopt anything from a lesser religion such as Christianity.

 

You still haven't established the character and nature of this supposed cult. Despite our rather scintilating discussion on manuscripts and primary sources you have yet to post any. While this is certainly a fascinating discussion on a possible historical timeline, unless you can provide the sources that demonstrate the borrowing, you haven't shown anything.

 

I would be happy to read any texts of Mithraic dedications, histories by contemporaneous authors, or myths and doctrine of Mythra from that period. Until that time you cannot be certain that the extant passages that antedate the ascencion of Christianity do not constitute corruptions of original practices. In fact, you admit that the Romans altered the cult for their own purposes. How can you be so certain that the supposed cult of Mithra wasn't influenced by Christianity if the Romans have already had their way with it?

 

Futhermore I have to take issue with your characterization of Mithraism as the "official religion" of the Empire. The only official religion of the empire, that is the only cult specifically promulgated with imperial sanction and vested with the full force of roman law was the Imperial Cult. It is on the basis of abstinence from the Imperial Cult that early Christian martyrs are made, not Mithraism.

 

 

As for Attis, he too was a dying/resurrecting God and the historical evidence of his cult is strongly attested to prior to the establishment of the Christ Cult. In the mid 5th century BCE, Herodotus tells the tale in his ironic tale of the “Death of Attys”

 

Here's the text of the Attis myth from Herodotus 1:34-35:

 

http://classics.mit.edu/Herodotus/history.1.i.html

 

For Croesus had two sons, one blasted by a natural defect, being deaf and dumb; the other, distinguished far above all his co-mates in every pursuit. The name of the last was Atys. It was this son concerning whom he dreamt a dream that he would die by the blow of an iron weapon. When he woke, he considered earnestly with himself, and, greatly alarmed at the dream, instantly made his son take a wife, and whereas in former years the youth had been wont to command the Lydian forces in the field, he now would not suffer him to accompany them. All the spears and javelins, and weapons used in the wars, he removed out of the male apartments, and laid them in heaps in the chambers of the women, fearing lest perhaps one of the weapons that hung against the wall might fall and strike him.

 

Now it chanced that while he was making arrangements for the wedding, there came to Sardis a man under a misfortune, who had upon him the stain of blood. He was by race a Phrygian, and belonged to the family of the king. Presenting himself at the palace of Croesus, he prayed to be admitted to purification according to the customs of the country. Now the Lydian method of purifying is very nearly the same as the Greek. Croesus granted the request, and went through all the customary rites, after which he asked the suppliant of his birth and country, addressing him as follows:- "Who art thou, stranger, and from what part of Phrygia fleddest thou to take refuge at my hearth? And whom, moreover, what man or what woman, hast thou slain?" "Oh! king," replied the Phrygian, "I am the son of Gordias, son of Midas. I am named Adrastus. The man I unintentionally slew was my own brother. For this my father drove me from the land, and I lost all. Then fled I here to thee." "Thou art the offspring," Croesus rejoined, "of a house friendly to mine, and thou art come to friends. Thou shalt want for nothing so long as thou abidest in my dominions. Bear thy misfortune as easily as thou mayest, so will it go best with thee." Thenceforth Adrastus lived in the palace of the king.

 

It chanced that at this very same time there was in the Mysian Olympus a huge monster of a boar, which went forth often from this mountain country, and wasted the corn-fields of the Mysians. Many a time had the Mysians collected to hunt the beast, but instead of doing him any hurt, they came off always with some loss to themselves. At length they sent ambassadors to Croesus, who delivered their message to him in these words: "Oh! king, a mighty monster of a boar has appeared in our parts, and destroys the labour of our hands. We do our best to take him, but in vain. Now therefore we beseech thee to let thy son accompany us back, with some chosen youths and hounds, that we may rid our country of the animal." Such was the tenor of their prayer.

 

But Croesus bethought him of his dream, and answered, "Say no more of my son going with you; that may not be in any wise. He is but just joined in wedlock, and is busy enough with that. I will grant you a picked band of Lydians, and all my huntsmen and hounds; and I will charge those whom I send to use all zeal in aiding you to rid your country of the brute."

 

With this reply the Mysians were content; but the king's son, hearing what the prayer of the Mysians was, came suddenly in, and on the refusal of Croesus to let him go with them, thus addressed his father: "Formerly, my father, it was deemed the noblest and most suitable thing for me to frequent the wars and hunting-parties, and win myself glory in them; but now thou keepest me away from both, although thou hast never beheld in me either cowardice or lack of spirit. What face meanwhile must I wear as I walk to the forum or return from it? What must the citizens, what must my young bride think of me? What sort of man will she suppose her husband to be? Either, therefore, let me go to the chase of this boar, or give me a reason why it is best for me to do according to thy wishes."

 

Then Croesus answered, "My son, it is not because I have seen in thee either cowardice or aught else which has displeased me that I keep thee back; but because a vision which came before me in a dream as I slept, warned me that thou wert doomed to die young, pierced by an iron weapon. It was this which first led me to hasten on thy wedding, and now it hinders me from sending thee upon this enterprise. Fain would I keep watch over thee, if by any means I may cheat fate of thee during my own lifetime. For thou art the one and only son that I possess; the other, whose hearing is destroyed, I regard as if he were not."

 

"Ah! father," returned the youth, "I blame thee not for keeping watch over me after a dream so terrible; but if thou mistakest, if thou dost not apprehend the dream aright, 'tis no blame for me to show thee wherein thou errest. Now the dream, thou saidst thyself, foretold that I should die stricken by an iron weapon. But what hands has a boar to strike with? What iron weapon does he wield? Yet this is what thou fearest for me. Had the dream said that I should die pierced by a tusk, then thou hadst done well to keep me away; but it said a weapon. Now here we do not combat men, but a wild animal. I pray thee, therefore, let me go with them."

 

"There thou hast me, my son," said Croesus, "thy interpretation is better than mine. I yield to it, and change my mind, and consent to let thee go."

 

Then the king sent for Adrastus, the Phrygian, and said to him, "Adrastus, when thou wert smitten with the rod of affliction- no reproach, my friend- I purified thee, and have taken thee to live with me in my palace, and have been at every charge. Now, therefore, it behoves thee to requite the good offices which thou hast received at my hands by consenting to go with my son on this hunting party, and to watch over him, if perchance you should be attacked upon the road by some band of daring robbers. Even apart from this, it were right for thee to go where thou mayest make thyself famous by noble deeds. They are the heritage of thy family, and thou too art so stalwart and strong."

 

Adrastus answered, "Except for thy request, Oh! king, I would rather have kept away from this hunt; for methinks it ill beseems a man under a misfortune such as mine to consort with his happier compeers; and besides, I have no heart to it. On many grounds I had stayed behind; but, as thou urgest it, and I am bound to pleasure thee (for truly it does behove me to requite thy good offices), I am content to do as thou wishest. For thy son, whom thou givest into my charge, be sure thou shalt receive him back safe and sound, so far as depends upon a guardian's carefulness."

 

Thus assured, Croesus let them depart, accompanied by a band of picked youths, and well provided with dogs of chase. When they reached Olympus, they scattered in quest of the animal; he was soon found, and the hunters, drawing round him in a circle, hurled their weapons at him. Then the stranger, the man who had been purified of blood, whose name was Adrastus, he also hurled his spear at the boar, but missed his aim, and struck Atys. Thus was the son of Croesus slain by the point of an iron weapon, and the warning of the vision was fulfilled. Then one ran to Sardis to bear the tidings to the king, and he came and informed him of the combat and of the fate that had befallen his son.

 

If it was a heavy blow to the father to learn that his child was dead, it yet more strongly affected him to think that the very man whom he himself once purified had done the deed. In the violence of his grief he called aloud on Jupiter Catharsius to be a witness of what he had suffered at the stranger's hands. Afterwards he invoked the same god as Jupiter Ephistius and Hetaereus- using the one term because he had unwittingly harboured in his house the man who had now slain his son; and the other, because the stranger, who had been sent as his child's guardian, had turned out his most cruel enemy.

 

Presently the Lydians arrived, bearing the body of the youth, and behind them followed the homicide. He took his stand in front of the corse, and, stretching forth his hands to Croesus, delivered himself into his power with earnest entreaties that he would sacrifice him upon the body of his son- "his former misfortune was burthen enough; now that he had added to it a second, and had brought ruin on the man who purified him, he could not bear to live." Then Croesus, when he heard these words, was moved with pity towards Adrastus, notwithstanding the bitterness of his own calamity; and so he answered, "Enough, my friend; I have all the revenge that I require, since thou givest sentence of death against thyself. But in sooth it is not thou who hast injured me, except so far as thou hast unwittingly dealt the blow. Some god is the author of my misfortune, and I was forewarned of it a long time ago." Croesus after this buried the body of his son, with such honours as befitted the occasion. Adrastus, son of Gordias, son of Midas, the destroyer of his brother in time past, the destroyer now of his purifier, regarding himself as the most unfortunate wretch whom he had ever known, so soon as all was quiet about the place, slew himself upon the tomb. Croesus, bereft of his son, gave himself up to mourning for two full years.

 

, Some time before 54 BCE Gaius Valerius Catullus wrote a poem “Attis”, setting forth many of the beliefs of the Attis Cult.

 

Here is the text of the Catullus poem "Attis". Specifically, what beliefs of the "Attis" cult are set forth here-in? Have you read Catullus 63 before?

 

Attis, propelled by his swift ship through deep waves, set his

quick feet upon the Phrygian shore;

entered the heavy sunless forest where his mind grew dark as

shadows over him

and there, his blood gone mad, seized a sharp stone, divorced his

vital members from his body,

then rising (the ground wet with blood) he was transformed, a

woman with her delicate white hands

Sounding the tympanum, the tympanum singing praise through sacred

trumpets raised to goddess Cybele, mysterious mother of a sexless race.

Then in his sweet falsetto Attis sang: Now follow me, O priests

of Cybele, come follow, we are creatures

of this goddess, wind, dance, unwind the dance again, O exiles

from a far land, come with me

across the rapid salt sea wave. Your bodies shall be clean; no

more shall Venus

stain you with foul disease and move your limbs with power of love.

Now under my leadership (this mad delight) land in her rich

dominions, sing you her praise

make her heart leap with the same joy that rises in your blood at

this sweet liberty.

No longer wait for her, but come, follow my way that winds upward

to her temple.

making glad noises with the pipe that plays a song to welcome her,

clash cymbals, dance and shake the earth with thunder, your quick

feet sounding her glory, and like the girls

who follow Bacchus, toss your heads, shout songs in measure to

the Phrygian pipes, come join her merry

company where drunken cries rise in a chorus. The sacred symbol

of her worship trembles in air

that moves with noise poured from your lips here in this place

where the great goddess wanders.

Now Attis (not quite woman) called her followers, leading them

toward green blooming Ida where

his followers crowded, tongues trembling with shrill noises,

hollow cymbals crashed and the tympanum rang again, again

the race sped forward. Then wavering exhausted, the ghost of

their very lives issuing

from lips, circling in delirium they followed Attis through the

green shadows, she who sprang

like a raging heifer freed from harness, till they sank, defeated

(weariness in their eyes, and starved for lack of food) at

the high temple of Cybele, their goddess,

then madness declined into a heavy wave of sleep, minds sunk in

darkness.

But when the sun transformed the skies into a radiant heaven, his

mighty rolling brilliant eye

disclosing hills, the savage sea all in clear outlines, and there

was liquid peace within his mind, the horses

of dawn rose galloping, trampling night underfoot, and Attis,

leaving sweet Pasithea wife of sleep, awoke,

looked back and saw what he had done, how his mad brain deceived

him saw how he lost

his manhood--all this in passionless clarity seized his mind, and

with his eyes turned homeward

across the sea, she wept, poor creature, neither man nor woman.

Land of my birth, creating me, my fatherland I left with you (O

miserably, a fugitive)

I have gone into this wilderness of snow to live with beasts that

circle Ida's mountain,

my brain in darkness--and where are you, and of my fathers, for

you have vanished and my eyes return

where you once rose before me. In this short hour while my brain

still welcomes sunlight,

I praise you--now shall I be driven back into this wilderness

where everyone,

my friends, my parents, and all I love shall fade. I shall not

walk again through the city streets, nor join the crowd,

(O glorious young men) who fill the stadium and who excel in many

pleasures.

Look at my misery and hear me cry my curse against this miserable

fate,

I am a woman, hear my voice and look at me who once walked

bravely hero of games, a boy who stood

rich flower of youth equal to all who challenged him. All these

were mine: friends crowding at my door,

wreaths of sweet flowers in my room when morning sun calls me

away, and a welcome threshold that I left

behind me. Witness me, a girl, a slave of Cybele, dressed like a

girlish follower of Bacchus,

half my soul destroyed, and sterile I must live on this cold mountain

and like all others in snow-bound Ida's province, follow the deer

and wild boar--a man undone,

longing for home again. And as these words flowed from her

glowing lips a prayer rose to the gods,

Cybele released her lions, driving one nearest to her side into

the forest saying:

Go follow him, he who is mad Attis, mangle his brain within your

claws, go follow

him who longs to leave my empire; give your rage to him,

transmute your madness to his person,

lash tail and throw your rolling head, mane erect in fury, follow him.

At this the creature sprang through the deep wilderness, and on a

glittering sunstruck beach found Attis

drove him back to Ida where now wandering forever Attis

delirious, sings praise, a servant to the goddess Cybele.

Great goddess, spare me, never haunt my home--take others for

your slaves, those creatures

that you have driven mad and those who in their madness wake

again your passionate cruelty.

 

Ovid wrote of Attis in the 1st century BCE as did Statius.

 

What practices and narratives of the Attis cult are attested? Here are the extant passages from Ovid:

 

“Pines, high-girdled, in a leafy crest, the favourite of the Gods’ Great Mother (Grata Deum Matri), since in this tree Attis Cybeleius doffed his human shape and stiffened in its trunk.” –Metamorphoses 10.103

 

Whose cult is specifically mentioned in this portion? (Hint, if you guess Attis, you guess wrong.) What role does Attis play in this cult?

 

"What causes the impulse [of the devotees of Kybele] to self-castrate?’ I was silent. The Pierid [Mousa] began: ‘A woodland Phrygian boy, the gorgeous Attis, conquered the towered goddess with pure love. She wanted to keep him as her shrine’s guardian, and said, ‘Desire to be a boy always.’ He promised what was asked and declared, ‘If I lie, let the Venus [Aphrodite] I cheat with be my last.’ He cheats, and in the Nympha Sagaritis stops being what he was: the goddess’ wrath punished him. She slashes the tree and cuts the Naiad down. The Naiad dies: her fate was the tree’s. He goes mad, and imagines that the bedroom roof is falling and bolts to Dindymus’ heights. He cries, ‘Away torches!’, ‘Away whips!’, and often swears the Palestine goddesses have him. He even hacked his body with a jagged stone, and dragged his long hair in squalid dirt, shouting, ‘I deserved it; my blood is the penalty. Ah, death to the parts which have ruined me!’ ‘Ah, death to them!’ he said, and cropped his groin’s weight. Suddenly no signs of manhood remained. His madness became a model: soft-skinned acolytes toss their hair and cut their worthless organs.” –Ovid Fasti 4.222

 

And here is the pertinent snippet from Silvae Statius:

 

“The hollow caves of Phrygian Synnas Attis bedewed with the bright drops of his own blood [from which the red-coloured stone was quarried].” –Silvae 1.5.37

 

The pedigree of the Attis cult is well established.

 

Nope. Try again. Maybe you have some Attis sources I haven’t already read?

 

Adonis is another of those dying/resurrection gods (whether they are agricultural gods or not is of no importance), whose cult was firmly established on the isle of Lesbos by 600 BCE, his story echos that of both Tammuz (of whom he is identified with) and Attis. Around 700 BCE, the Greek Poet Hesiod mentions Adonis in his Theogony, as does Apollodorus in his history of Athens written in mid 2nd century BCE. Krishna is another of the genre of the dying/resurrecting/savior man-gods. I posted the information on where to find his “background” evidence, so enough is said on that matter. As for Osiris, you can find the “Book of the Dead” translations all over the internet, Also check out the “Contending of Horus and Seth (Horus became another aspect of Osiris), The Hymn to Osiris and the Legend of the Origin of Horus, and many others. Each one seems to lead you to another. I guess basically all this evidence of these dying/resurrecting/savior Gods from the time before the Christ Cult, shows that there were multiple cults with similar or identical practices and beliefs to the Cult. As I said before, the probability of plargiarism by those establishing the Cult is 5 times greater than parallel evolution of those practices.

 

Thank you. Aside from letting me type up a snippet from Comfort and Barret indicating exactly how extraordinary is your assertion on textual dating, you’ve wasted my time by posting the exact same baseless assertions that everyone else except Madame M has already posted. If you want to talk about Adonis, fine post some pre-Christian Adonis texts, or Tammuz texts, or Kirshna texts, or Osiris texts. I don’t care which. You haven’t done this.

 

I’m not supporting the positive side in this discussion. You are. The burden of proof is therefore upon you. Either post the relevant sources or stop prattling about the abundance of evidence. The fact that I had to post the evidence on Attis for you is embarrassing for your side of the argument. If you won’t post the source then why bother posting in the thread. The gist of your argument was already expressed by at least 3 or 4 other posters who also haven’t offered any evidence. Repeating the assertion when asked for evidence does not constitute evidence.

 

Fwiw

Guac.

[a midnight star]

Oh my gods. a person useing the title and claim of a christian while at the same time belittling their god. Or does she really believe that the god/desses are more powerful that her god?

 

Hypnosis? get real. either you believe your god is all powerful or not. Why would anyone worship a god whose only power is to trick everyone into seeing things? One who doesn't even have to power to turn water into wine? Or to perform any of the miracles?

 

You claim to be an authority on christianity? You don't know shit.

[a midnight star]

NO wait!!! God didn't creat the earth. He just hypnotised us into believing it.

 

Thank you for the laugh. It was much needed

[Mythra]

I tell you the truth, you shall see heaven open, and the angels of God ascending and descending on the Son of Man. (John 1:51)

 

Open to me heaven, O mother of the gods! Let me see the bark of Phre [the sun god] descending and ascending.. For I am Geb, heir of the gods. (The Leyden Papyrus - 2nd century Egypt)

___________________________________________________________________

 

He that overcometh shall not be hurt by the second death. Revelation 2:11

 

Not to die a second time on the part of the ba [spirit] of a man. (Egyptian Book of the Dead, 64 Addendum)

___________________________________________________________________

 

Saul, Saul, why do you persecute me? It is hard for you to kick against the goads. [pros kentra laktizoimi] Acts

 

For you disregard my words of warning.. and kick against the goads [pros kentra laktizoimi] Euripedes Bacchae 5th century BC

 

__________________________________________________________________

 

In Euripedes Bacchae, line 447: "Of their own accord (autamato), the chains were loosed from their feet and keys opened the doors (thura) without human hand"

 

similar accounts in the bible: Acts 10:12 and Acts 16:26

 

____________________________________________________________________

 

Romulus, he declared, the father of our City, descended from heaven at dawn this morning and appeared to me. In awe and reverence I stood before him, praying for permission to look upon his face without sin. "Go, he said, and tell the Romans that by heaven's will my Rome shall be capital of the world. Let them learn to be soldiers. Let them know, and teach their children, that no power on earth can stand against the Roman arms." Having spoken these words, he was taken up again into the sky.

 

Titus Livius (Livy) reporting of Proculus' account. Livy (59 BCE - 19 CE)

[guacamole]

Many times, when Christians took over a culture, like Hawaii, they trashed almost all religious texts, drawings, statues, etc.  When they took over Hawaii, the Hula wasn't even allowed, not to mention the fact that a lot of times they brought diseases that killed off many in a tribe. 

 

True. Many Christians were ignorant, vicious and short-sighted. Not all missionary programmes were so destructive however. Matteo Ricci and the Jesuit mission to China in the 1800's was very culturally sensitive and it served as the model for Christian missions when evangelism, not cultural imperialism, was the key factor.

 

I'm not sure, but I think that biblegod says to do that type of thing in the bible but I can't remember.  Well, we know that the Israelites were instructed to wipe out entire cities along with their inhabitants....is it any wonder that much has been lost or destroyed?  Even if the bible isn't historically correct, obviously Christianity believed in what it said to do to pagans.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

 

It depends on which Christians you talk to. Yes, I know... I know... another area in which we do not agree. Many Christians, including me, will tell you that the mission of the Church and the mission of the Israelites are different and so the methods need to be different. There is a strong strain of Christianity that appropriates the methods and legalism of the Israelite covenant but I think, mostly on account of St. Paul's epistles, that they are greivously in error.

 

fwiw

guaca.

[Vixentrox]

That "you think". Maybe god disagrees with you. What if THEY are right and you are wrong? Maybe your damning yourself to hell fire.

[guacamole]

Thank you, Mythra. This is helpful. You may not agree with my comments on these passages but I appreciate your posting them and I truly look forward to your reading now that we have the material in front of us.

 

I tell you the truth, you shall see heaven open, and the angels of God ascending and descending on the Son of Man. (John 1:51)

 

Open to me heaven, O mother of the gods! Let me see the bark of Phre [the sun god] descending and ascending.. For I am Geb, heir of the gods. (The Leyden Papyrus - 2nd century Egypt)

___________________________________________________________________

 

I'm not sure what comparison you are trying to draw. If you want to make additional comments on the passages feel free. I'm not troubled by similar images of descent and asscent by divine beings. It's such a common motif even in Judaism(Jacob's ladder, wheels of light in Ezekiel, angelic messengers in Daniel, to name a few) that I can't imagine that the borrowing was pagan to Christian. [i hope you were able to read my comments on my feelings about the Egyptians a post to MM a few back].

 

In general, it seems that the subject of the ascending and descending in both passages is rather different. In the passage from John, the angels are ascending and descending. The sun is not identified with angels as far as I know from Judaism, even from the apocrypha and rabbis. In the Leyden Papyrus, is the Bark of the Sun God that is making the circuit. It's relationship to Geb, who seems to be a passive observer, is unclear from the snippet, unlike that in John where Jesus is focus of the action.

 

He that overcometh shall not be hurt by the second death. Revelation 2:11

 

Not to die a second time on the part of the ba [spirit] of a man. (Egyptian Book of the Dead, 64 Addendum)

___________________________________________________________________

 

Again, belief in final punishment is not uncommon through out the ancient mediterranean basin. The Pharisaical sect of judaism had already developed a belief in an afterlife, a ressurrection, and eternal punishment by the time Jesus is supposed to have walked the earth. I suppose you could assert that the Pharisee's had to pick it up somewhere since an afterlife is noticably absent from the hebrew scriptures. If that is so, it would make more sense that the influence would come from either Babylon, where the Jews had a long exile, or Persia, beneath whom they finished the exile and returned to Israel. Perhaps a search of Babylonian and Persian sources would prove more fruitful?

 

Saul, Saul, why do you persecute me? It is hard for you to kick against the goads. [pros kentra laktizoimi] Acts

 

For you disregard my words of warning.. and kick against the goads [pros kentra laktizoimi] Euripedes Bacchae 5th century BC

__________________________________________________________________

 

True story. My wife hates that phrase because I use it in certain contexts with her. Yes I'm married. Yes I know. She's a saint, poor bloke.

 

The phrase "kick against the goads" isn't an inherently religious phrase by any stretch of the imagination. It contains no reference to any divine figures or cultic actions. It is quite probable that, precisely because of Euripides, the phrase was common parlance in Greek.

 

In Euripedes Bacchae, line 447: "Of their own accord (autamato), the chains were loosed from their feet and keys opened the doors (thura) without human hand"

 

similar accounts in the bible: Acts 10:12 and Acts 16:26

____________________________________________________________________

 

Again. Supernatural things happen to people in supernatural stories. Was there an earthquake in the Bacchae like in Acts? How about a angelic agent?

 

Romulus, he declared, the father of our City, descended from heaven at dawn this morning and appeared to me. In awe and reverence I stood before him, praying for permission to look upon his face without sin. "Go, he said, and tell the Romans that by heaven's will my Rome shall be capital of the world. Let them learn to be soldiers. Let them know, and teach their children, that no power on earth can stand against the Roman arms." Having spoken these words, he was taken up again into the sky.

 

Titus Livius (Livy) reporting of Proculus' account. Livy (59 BCE - 19 CE)

 

That's a very interesting passage for two reasons. Firstly, the translator chose to use the word "Sin", a pretty specifically semitic concept, when rendering that passage. The greek word chosen to represent "sin" in both the Septuagint and NT is "hamartia (sin) and hamartano (to sin)". In greek they literally mean "to miss the mark". It's the term that Aristotle uses in the Poetics when he writes on tragedy and he means it in the sense of a miscalculation rather than a moral error. I'm curious about the word choice here, since the greeks would have been the strong influence on the Romans, not the Jews. Secondly, like Attis, there are a lot of citations in a lot of the samge places for Romulus.

 

Here is part of the account from Plutarch: (here: http://penelope.uchicago.edu/Thayer/E/Roma.../Romulus*.html)

 

whereas Romulus disappeared suddenly, and no portion of his body or fragment of his clothing remained to be seen. But some conjectured that the senators, convened in the temple of Vulcan, fell upon him and slew him, then cut his body in pieces, put each a portion into the folds of his robe, and so carried him away. section 6Others think that it was neither in the temple of Vulcan nor when the senators alone were present that he disappeared, but that he was holding an assembly of the people outside the city near the so‑called Goat's Marsh,Link to the editor's note at the bottom of this page when suddenly strange and unaccountable disorders with incredible changes filled the air; the light of the sun failed, and night came down upon them, not with peace and quiet, but with awful peals of thunder and furious blasts driving rain from every quarter, section 7during which the multitude dispersed and fled, but the nobles gathered closely together; and when the storm had ceased, and the sun shone out, and the multitude, now gathered together again in the same place as before, anxiously sought for their king, the nobles would not suffer them to inquire into his disappearance nor busy themselves about it, but exhorted them all to honour and revere Romulus, since he had been caught up into heaven, and was to be a benevolent god for them instead of a good king. section 8The multitude, accordingly, believing this and rejoicing in it, went away to worship him with good hopes of his favour; but there were some, it is said, who tested the matter in a bitter and hostile spirit, and confounded the patricians with the accusation of imposing a silly tale upon the people, and of being themselves the murderers of the king.

 

28 At this pass, then, it is said that one of the patricians, a man of noblest birth, and of the most reputable character, a trusted and intimate friend also of Romulus himself, and one of the colonists from Alba, Julius Proculus by name,Link to the editor's note at the bottom of this page went into the forum and solemnly swore by the most sacred emblems before all the people that, as he was travelling on the road, he had seen Romulus coming to meet him, fair and stately to the eye as never before, and arrayed in bright and shining armour. section 2He himself, then, affrighted at the sight, had said: "O King, what possessed thee, or what purpose hadst thou, that thou hast left us patricians a prey to unjust and wicked accusations, and the whole city sorrowing without end at the loss of its father?" Whereupon Romulus had replied: "It was the pleasure of the gods, O Proculus, from whom I came, that I should be with mankind only a short time, and that after founding a city destined to be the greatest on earth for empire and glory, I should dwell again in heaven. So farewell, and tell the Romans that if they practise self-restraint, and add to it valour, they will reach the utmost heights of human power. And I will be your propitious deity, Quirinus." section 3These things seemed to the Romans worthy of belief, from the character of the man who related them, and from the oath which he had taken; moreover, some influence from heaven also, akin to inspiration, laid hold upon their emotions, for no man contradicted Proculus, but all put aside suspicion and calumny and prayed to Quirinus, and honoured him as a god.

 

and here are few from Ovid:

 

Gliding through the air, [Mars] came to land on the top of the wooded Palatine hill. There Romulus was giving his friendly laws to the citizens, and Mars caught Ila's son [Romulus] up. His mortal body became thin, dissolving in the air, as a lead pellet shot by a broad sling will melt away in the sky. (Ovid, Metamorphoses 14:805-851)

 

There is a place, called by the old ones the marsh of Caprea. By chance, Romulus, you were there giving laws. The sun disappeared, and rising clouds obscured the sky, and a heavy rain shower fell. Then it thundered, the air was torn by flames. The people fled, and the king (Romulus) flew to the stars on his father's (Mar's) horses. There was grieving, and certian senators were falsely charged with murder, and that belief might have stuck in the people's mind. But Proculus Julius was coming from the Alba Longa ... Beautiful and more than human and clothed in a sacred robe, Romulus was seen, standing in the middle of the road. ... He gave the order and he vanished to the upper world from Julius' eyes. (Ovid, Fasti 2:481-509)

 

(When Romulus) was holding a maneuver in order to review the army at the field near the marsh of Caprea, suddenly a storm arose, with great lightning and thunder, and it veiled the king in such a dense cloud that his form was hidden from the troops; from that time Romulus was not on earth. ... I believe there were some even then who argued secretly that the king had been torn apart by the hands of the senators. [but Julius Proculus said:] "Romulus, O Quirites, the father of this city, at the first light of this day, descended from the sky and clearly showed himself to me ..." (Livy, Book 1:16)

 

A lot of mythicists hold that this a good example of a death, ressurection and ascencion (sp?). I would like to point out that there is by no means a literal death in any of these passages except for the mistaken assumption of the common people who are then reassured that they are wrong. If no death, then no ressurrection. Period. The final charge of the famous speaker is another point of weak similarity. I'd like to point out that at the time, virtually all famous people were "known" to have given rousing speeches filled with charges to those they left behind.

 

Ascention itself is noteworthy for a slightly different reason. There was already a strong tradition of bodily ascention in Judaism. Melchizedek in the apocryphal tradition, Enoch and Elija from the Biblical tradition. It is unlikely, considering the antiquity of the Hebrew references that they were influenced by later Roman stories. It is probably more likely that if the Christians borrowed, then they borrowed, again, from the Jews; judaism being the cultural matrix from which Christianity was born. In Judaism, ascention was the mark of having gotten it all right with God. The two prophets and the priest Melchizidek ascended because they were close to God. Luke portrays Jesus' last moments on earth, he is probably taping into a similar idea. Jesus got it right, he walked with God. That is very unlike Romulus.

 

fwiw

guaca.