|
|
|
Tokyodreamer
SFN Regular
USA
1447 Posts |
 Posted - 12/20/2002 : 09:17:12 [Permalink]
|
quote:
Originally posted by ReasonableDoubt
quote:
Originally posted by Tokyodreamer
... there seems to be no way to tell whether this cult worshipped a myth or a real person and founder.
No, there is not. Under any interpretation, Lucian can only be reacting to hearsay. My question to you, however, was somewhat less general. Do you feel it reasonable to believe that Lucian was not satirizing a Palestine-based Judeo-Christian cult and ridiculing their "cult-leader". Does it seem reasonable, for example, that Lucian would mockingly refer to a Gnostic or Mithraic cult-leader as "prophet", "lawgiver", and "head of the synagogue"?
I'm not sure what point your getting at.
The answer to the question, "Does it seem reasonable, for example, that Lucian would mockingly refer to a Gnostic or Mithraic cult-leader as 'prophet', 'lawgiver', and 'head of the synagogue'?" is obviously "of course"! The entire story is mocking Perigrinus, who, according to Lucian, became all of this and more to the Christian cult, apparently based in Palestine.
From your post, I can't quite tell if you realize that Perigrinus is the "prophet", "lawgiver", and "head of the synagogue", or if you think he is referring to someone else.
As to "Do you feel it reasonable to believe that Lucian was not satirizing a Palestine-based Judeo-Christian cult and ridiculing their "cult-leader"", I believe he most certainly was satirizing Perigrinus, and in the meantime displaying his contempt and pity for the gullible and ignorant cult of Christianity, but only as an aside, and not as a main point in his story.
Please be patient with me, and help me understand better what it is you're asking.
[cleaned up a bit] |
| Edited by - Tokyodreamer on 12/20/2002 09:21:25 |
 |
|
|
ConsequentAtheist
SFN Regular
641 Posts |
Posted - 12/20/2002 : 10:22:17 [Permalink]
|
quote:
Originally posted by Tokyodreamer
Please be patient with me, and help me understand better what it is you're asking.
Sorry, it was my fault entirely.
First of all, Perigrinus was presumably a Cynic, and, as such, hardly your prototypic Gnostic or Mithraic philosopher.
Second, the question at hand is whether Lucian's reference to "Christian" was a reference to some Pagan movement worshipping "Christna", or to something with a clear Judaic foundation. Why would this gullible and ignorant nascent, Palestinian-based cult of Christianity be humbled by Perigrinus as "head of the synagogue" if not for its Judaic roots? Furthermore, God as "law giver", while tracible back to the Sumerian and the Mitanni, is nowhere near as central as in covenant-based Judaism.
In my opinion, this is a satire about a Cynic wowing a bunch of fringe Jews engaged in a wierd cult that got their leader crucified. Does this prove historicity? Of course not. But the proposition that Lucian was referring to a Jerusalem-based Jesus cult seems, in my opinion, more reasonably than that he was referencing some loonies following in he footsteps of our old friend, Apollonius of Tyana. |
For the philosophical naturalist, the rejection of supernaturalism is a case of "death by a thousand cuts." -- Barbara Forrest, Ph.D. |
|
|
|
Infamous
Skeptic Friend
85 Posts |
Posted - 12/20/2002 : 11:04:13 [Permalink]
|
Just so you know, Slater, I'm not arguing that Jesus was some kind of superhuman, capable of walking on water and all of that.
Has it occurred to you that he could be sort of a Davy Crockett, a real human being blown completely out of proportion, with miracles that he never really did attributed to him? |
|
|
|
ConsequentAtheist
SFN Regular
641 Posts |
Posted - 12/20/2002 : 11:10:45 [Permalink]
|
quote:
Originally posted by Infamous
Has it occurred to you that he could be sort of a Davy Crockett, a real human being blown completely out of proportion, with miracles that he never really did attributed to him?
No doubt inappropriate to say, but that was an exceedingly dumb question. |
For the philosophical naturalist, the rejection of supernaturalism is a case of "death by a thousand cuts." -- Barbara Forrest, Ph.D. |
|
|
|
Tokyodreamer
SFN Regular
USA
1447 Posts |
Posted - 12/20/2002 : 11:19:11 [Permalink]
|
quote:
Originally posted by ReasonableDoubtIn my opinion, this is a satire about a Cynic wowing a bunch of fringe Jews engaged in a wierd cult that got their leader crucified. Does this prove historicity? Of course not. But the proposition that Lucian was referring to a Jerusalem-based Jesus cult seems, in my opinion, more reasonably than that he was referencing some loonies following in he footsteps of our old friend, Apollonius of Tyana.
Ah, yes, you have broken through my density! I agree, it seems to me that it is reasonable to think it was specifically a Jesus-based cult.
[if only Lucian had mentioned the name of this cult leader!  ] |
| Edited by - Tokyodreamer on 12/20/2002 11:22:40 |
|
|
|
ConsequentAtheist
SFN Regular
641 Posts |
Posted - 12/20/2002 : 11:22:23 [Permalink]
|
quote:
Originally posted by Tokyodreamer
Ah, yes, you have broken through my density!
If we have to wait each time for me to write coherently before you understand what I think you should be clear that I meant, we'll never get through this discussion.  |
For the philosophical naturalist, the rejection of supernaturalism is a case of "death by a thousand cuts." -- Barbara Forrest, Ph.D. |
|
|
|
ConsequentAtheist
SFN Regular
641 Posts |
Posted - 12/20/2002 : 12:07:11 [Permalink]
|
quote:
Originally posted by Tokyodreamer
I agree, it seems to me that it is reasonable to think it was specifically a Jesus-based cult.
So, that, in turn, suggests a couple of things: - it is reasonable to believe in the existence of a Palestinian-based, Judeo-Christian cult extant ca 175 CE and
- it is reasonable to presume that both the existence and peculiarities of this cult were known to his audience.
Point #1 lends credance to Pauline and Lucan references to the Jerusalem Church (assuming, of course, that they are not 4th century fabrications), while point #2 seems to limit the list of possible claimants. In fact, it would seem curious that a messianic claimant would be known to Lucian's audience but not to Josephus. OK so far? |
For the philosophical naturalist, the rejection of supernaturalism is a case of "death by a thousand cuts." -- Barbara Forrest, Ph.D. |
| Edited by - ConsequentAtheist on 12/20/2002 12:07:47 |
|
|
|
Computer Org
Skeptic Friend
392 Posts |
Posted - 12/20/2002 : 12:38:36 [Permalink]
|
quote:
Originally posted by ReasonableDoubt
quote:
Originally posted by Infamous
Has it occurred to you that he could be sort of a Davy Crockett, a real human being blown completely out of proportion, with miracles that he never really did attributed to him?
No doubt inappropriate to say, but that was an exceedingly dumb question.
I hope that this isn't too far "off topic" but I don't see why Infamous's question is "dumb". Isn't this roughly along the line of thinking that Slater has been proposing---Jesus being a man turned into a superman via an applications of old mythologies (the Mithran dogmas, et al.)?
|
Do thou amend thy face, and I'll amend my life. --Falstaff |
|
|
|
ConsequentAtheist
SFN Regular
641 Posts |
Posted - 12/20/2002 : 12:49:53 [Permalink]
|
quote:
Originally posted by Computer Org
I hope that this isn't too far "off topic" but I don't see why Infamous's question is "dumb". Isn't this roughly along the line of thinking that Slater has been proposing---Jesus being a man turned into a superman via an applications of old mythologies (the Mithran dogmas, et al.)?
What I found dumb was the suggestion that Slater might not know to distinguish between the question of historicity and that of divinity.
|
For the philosophical naturalist, the rejection of supernaturalism is a case of "death by a thousand cuts." -- Barbara Forrest, Ph.D. |
|
|
|
Computer Org
Skeptic Friend
392 Posts |
Posted - 12/20/2002 : 13:15:39 [Permalink]
|
quote:
Originally posted by Slater
Hang on here CO.
The Sidhe (pronounced "she") are the Tuatha DéDanann. They are the Fairies. There's no quantum physics or meteors involved. They are imaginary...as in "fairy tales."
"Imaginary". Ah, ha. Imaginary means . . . ?
Possibly of interest to u, Slater, might be the two authors of a recent paper (Nov. 2002) on Mirror Matter in connection with data from the recently visited asteroid 433 Eros.
R. Foot of the Research Center for High Energy Physics, University of Melborne (Australia), I've mentioned in a previous post. But the second author of the co-authored paper is- S. Mitra, Instuut vor Theoretische Fysica, Universiteit van Amsterdam (The Netherlands)
Hmmmm. A coincidence, surely; albeit a strange one.
|
Do thou amend thy face, and I'll amend my life. --Falstaff |
|
|
|
Tokyodreamer
SFN Regular
USA
1447 Posts |
Posted - 12/20/2002 : 14:10:23 [Permalink]
|
quote:
Originally posted by ReasonableDoubt
So, that, in turn, suggests a couple of things: - it is reasonable to believe in the existence of a Palestinian-based, Judeo-Christian cult extant ca 175 CE and
- it is reasonable to presume that both the existence and peculiarities of this cult were known to his audience.
Point #1 lends credance to Pauline and Lucan references to the Jerusalem Church (assuming, of course, that they are not 4th century fabrications), while point #2 seems to limit the list of possible claimants. In fact, it would seem curious that a messianic claimant would be known to Lucian's audience but not to Josephus. OK so far?
Point 1: Certainly seems reasonable to me. I'm afraid I'm not learned enough to contribute anything to your statement: "Point #1 lends credance to Pauline and Lucan references to the Jerusalem Church (assuming, of course, that they are not 4th century fabrications)"
(Of course, I may be giving myself too much credit in limiting that comment to just that particular statement...   )
Point 2: Unless this cult appeared sometime between Josephus and Lucian? Weren't Josephus and Lucian about 100 years apart? But I could see how this could tie in and lend evidence of authenticity to Josephus 20.9.1, perhaps. |
| Edited by - Tokyodreamer on 12/20/2002 14:11:16 |
|
|
|
ConsequentAtheist
SFN Regular
641 Posts |
Posted - 12/20/2002 : 14:45:20 [Permalink]
|
quote:
Originally posted by Tokyodreamer
Point 1: Certainly seems reasonable to me. I'm afraid I'm not learned enough to contribute anything to your statement: "Point #1 lends credance to Pauline and Lucan references to the Jerusalem Church (assuming, of course, that they are not 4th century fabrications)"
(Of course, I may be giving myself too much credit in limiting that comment to just that particular statement... )
Point 2: Unless this cult appeared sometime between Josephus and Lucian? Weren't Josephus and Lucian about 100 years apart? But I could see how this could tie in and lend evidence of authenticity to Josephus 20.9.1, perhaps.
Though it's closer to 75 years than 100, your comments re Point #2 are well made. Nevertheless, the only post-Josephus/pre-Lucian mesianic claimants that I'm aware of are Lukuas and Simon ben Kosiba, neither of whom seem to fit.
If this is true, we are dealing with a 1st century CE Judaic-Christian movement. There is a good deal of chit chat in Paul and Acts that deals with relationships between the Paul on the one hand and Cephas, James, and John on the other. My point #1 intends no more that the assertion that accepting the existence of a well know, pre-175 CE Judeo-Christian cult renders more likely the possibility that the context of Paul and Acts reflect real history of a real Jesus cult, centered in Jerusalem, and under the leadership of these "pillars" (James, Cephas, and John, as per Galatians 2:9). |
For the philosophical naturalist, the rejection of supernaturalism is a case of "death by a thousand cuts." -- Barbara Forrest, Ph.D. |
| Edited by - ConsequentAtheist on 12/20/2002 14:47:05 |
|
|
|
darwin alogos
SFN Regular
USA
532 Posts |
Posted - 12/21/2002 : 10:12:18 [Permalink]
|
Atomic bitches and moans: quote:
Yeah it looks great when you pick and choose from your favorite "experts". You would get an "F" in school for your poor references. Hell, for all we know you made all the above you wrote up. No, it was probably someone else since you excel at cutting and pasting and little else.
@tomic
You idiot even if I wrote all of it ITS STILL EVIDENCE! You whine "this thread is 5 pages long and no evidence" and then when I sum up the EVIDENCE that's already been presented you still complain.But that's ok because I really don't expect to convince gullible fools such as you all who would even entertain Slater's wild eyed, halfassed,no fact speculations about Jesus being a myth.However, you never know there may be a rational person browsing these pages someday and they at least will be able to see whose views were supported by facts and logic,which by the way Atomic I would definitely say you get an "F" in logic! |
To deny logic you must use it.To deny Jesus Existed you must throw away all your knowledge of the ancient world. To deny ID
you must refute all analogical reasoning. So the question is why deny? |
|
|
|
Slater
SFN Regular
USA
1668 Posts |
Posted - 12/21/2002 : 12:01:21 [Permalink]
|
Infamous, I understand perfectly well what you mean by Jesus/Davy Crockett. While the possibility is always there, the problem with it is that there is no "David Crockett" in Israel at the time. There is nobody "on the ground" that the Superman story can be pinned to. The character is made completely from Hellenistic gods, Platonic philosophy and Roman anti-Semitism. The nearest "good teacher", a nameless Essene who was "Jesus like" was over one hundred years too early.
For there to be an "historic" Jesus you need sombody who was recorded by history, and we just don't have him. |
-------
I learned something ... I learned that Jehovah's Witnesses do not celebrate Halloween. I guess they don't like strangers going up to their door and annoying them.
-Bruce Clark
There's No Toilet Paper...on the Road Less Traveled |
| Edited by - Slater on 12/21/2002 12:02:07 |
|
|
|
@tomic
Administrator
USA
4607 Posts |
Posted - 12/21/2002 : 12:18:38 [Permalink]
|
I think when people insist that Jesus existed because generations later people spoke about him they should consider things like Roswell. There we have a real event: A balloon crash. Now, years later, a myth has developed that aliens were involved and many people continue to believe fervently that aliens were involved yet we have no historical aliens. Just eyewitness accounts.
@tomic |
Gravity, not just a good idea...it's the law!
Sportsbettingacumen.com: The science of sports betting |
|
|
 |
|
|
|
Topic Locked
