Jesus Wasn't The Only God To Be Crucified And Resurrected

[Minnesota]

I'm sorry, I was unaware that Apologist4Him was trying to scar you emotionally. I was under the impression that he was just trying to psyche you out or "mark his territory" as it were. You should instead take my quote to mean that "It's perfectly fine to puff out your chest a little to goad someone into a debate." I saw nothing in his post that was intended to be genuinely harmful.

It's simply a game LS, nothing more, just like all the posts on TWEB. At times we take ourselves and others seriously, at other times, not. But I think we all understand that none of us is going to change any minds here. So we play "post/counter-post," "gotcha," "You-Big-Dufuss," etc. often sniping at each other, sometimes hurling insults, occasionally belittling others, and once in awhile, someone will get their panties in such a knot that they keep gnawing at an issue until it dies from abuse. I guess what does surprise though is the viciousness of some Christians. They talk the talk, but when it comes to demonstrating those qualities they say their religion requires, they come on like wounded mother grizzlies. Beats me when all their professed "love one another," "do unto others," and turn the other cheek" is suppose to kick in. Evidently, one gets as many angle-wing points by being nice to the good guys as one gets being nice to the baddies, so why bother ones self with the more difficult challenge? Rack up the points with mom and pop, and baby Snuggles, and you can then sail into that bastard at TWEB knowing you have more than enough points to spare. What is the term: "sabbath saint-weekday wacko." I know it isn't an accurate description, but I think there's more truth to it than most would admit.

So, whereas A4H did make a threat, I'm sure he took it no more seriously than I did. Of course he was puffing out his chest---not sure why, but I suspect he was trying to establish himself in the pack here, probably looking to be an alpha male of sorts. I thought it pretty funny, myself--not unlike JHP's dogged, but silly, attempt in this thread to position himself over me. JP would probably bridal at the notion, but he seems to have unresolved dominance issues--why else this persistent call for battle? Of course, now that he's got himself all cranked up, I would be a fool to let him off the hook by acquiescing to his pleas for confrontation--this is far more fun. And now that Dee Dee has inserted herself, it's become all the more delightful. This all probably sounds a bit weird---playing the game while at the same time finding amusement at another level---but what the hey, just call me weird. Others have certainly called me worse.

[The Laughing Man]

Justin Martyr addressed the copycat claims because he recognized and accepted the similarities between Christianity and the earlier religions.

Jimbo, if you were any more full of it, it would be squirting out of your ears.

Does JPH "recognize and accept the similarities between Christianity and the earlier religions" because he addressed the copycat claims, too?

Why do I suspect your answer will be "yes?"

[jimbo]

Jinx,

JIMBO: Justin Martyr addressed the copycat claims because he recognized and accepted the similarities between Christianity and the earlier religions.

JINX: Jimbo, if you were any more full of it, it would be squirting out of your ears.

So you say I am "full of it..." That's nice. Why do you say this? Did Justin Martyr believe that there were similarities between Christianity and the earlier religions? The answer, of course, is yes. Clearly. Did he feel the need to explain these similarities? I would say yes. Did he believe that there was copycatting involved? Yes he did-but his position was that Satan was the copycatter.

Please explain what you think is inaccurate or false about any of this, and then specify why you believe that I am "full of it..."

Does JPH "recognize and accept the similarities between Christianity and the earlier religions" because he addressed the copycat claims, too?

Why do I suspect your answer will be "yes?"

I was not making an absolute statement that anyone who addresses an issue takes a certain position on it.

Lots of people have "addressed" the copycat claims, but not all of them have had the same opinions about them. Some people have believed copying was involved-like Justin Martyr, and others have not.

All the best,

Jimbo

[seer]

So you say I am "full of it..." That's nice. Why do you say this? Did Justin Martyr believe that there were similarities between Christianity and the earlier religions? The answer, of course, is yes. Clearly. Did he feel the need to explain these similarities? I would say yes. Did he believe that there was copycatting involved? Yes he did-but his position was that Satan was the copycatter.

Jimbo, I asked this a while back. We have myths of dying gods. Does that mean that the early christians made up the death of Christ to mimic these myths?

[LGM]

Unless "LakeGeorgeMan" is his real name, in which case I withdraw the above comment and apologise for misjudging the situation.

Yes Jezz, you have misjudged the situation.

Your friend "Mr. Holding" is fond of calling people "cowards" on TWEB (along with many other, more childish names), whenever he feels a need to puff up his own incredibly fragile ego which no doubt derives most of its pride from being an apologist "superhero" who is admired and linked by the TWEB minions.

The point of my post was to show how absurd it is to claim that real courage or cowardice is displayed in an anonymous web forum. One where even "superhero apologists" must hide behind psuedonyms.

Kapish?

LGM
...and yes, my real name is LGM, my parents named me that after I was concieved in the cuddy cabin of an old boat anchored in Paradise Bay many years ago...

[romepunk]

Justin Martyr "ANALOGIES TO THE HISTORY OF CHRIST. And when we say also that the Word, who is the first-birth of God, was produced without sexual union, and that He, Jesus Christ, our Teacher, was crucified and died, and rose again, and ascended into heaven, we propound nothing different from what you believe regarding those whom you esteem sons of Jupiter. For you know how many sons your esteemed writers ascribed to Jupiter: Mercury, the interpreting word and teacher of all; Aesculapius, who, though he was a great physician, was struck by a thunderbolt, and so ascended to heaven; and Bacchus too, after he had been torn limb from limb; and Hercules, when he had committed himself to the flames to escape his toils; and the sons of Leda, and Dioscuri; and Perseus, son of Danae; and Bellerophon, who, though sprung from mortals, rose to heaven on the horse Pegasus. For what shall I say of Ariadne, and those who, like her, have been declared to be set among the stars? And what of the emperors who die among yourselves, whom you deem worthy of deification, and in whose behalf you produce some one who swears he has seen the burning Caesar rise to heaven from the funeral pyre?"

(snip)

"As to the objection of our Jesus’s being crucified, I say, that suffering was common to all the aforementioned sons of Jove [Jupiter] . . . As to his being born of a virgin, you have your Perseus to balance that. As to his curing the lame, and the paralytic, and such as were cripples from birth, this is little more than what you say of your Aesculapius."

(snip)

"It having reached the Devil’s ears that the prophets had foretold the coming of Christ, the Son of God, he set the heathen Poets to bring forward a great many who should be called the sons of Jove. The Devil laying his scheme in this, to get men to imagine that the true history of Christ was of the same characters the prodigious fables related of the sons of Jove."

(snip)

"Be well assured, then, Trypho, that I am established in the knowledge of and faith in the Scriptures by those counterfeits which he who is called the devil is said to have performed among the Greeks; just as some were wrought by the Magi in Egypt, and others by the false prophets in Elijah’s days. For when they tell that Bacchus, son of Jupiter, was begotten by [Jupiter’s] intercourse with Semele, and that he was the discoverer of the vine; and when they relate, that being torn in pieces, and having died, he rose again, and ascended to heaven; and when they introduce wine into his mysteries, do I not perceive that [the devil] has imitated the prophecy announced by the patriarch Jacob, and recorded by Moses? And when they tell that Hercules was strong, and travelled over all the world, and was begotten by Jove of Alcmene, and ascended to heaven when he died, do I not perceive that the Scripture which speaks of Christ, "strong as a giant to run his race," has been in like manner imitated? And when he [the devil] brings forward Aesculapius as the raiser of the dead and healer of all diseases, may I not say that in this matter likewise he has imitated the prophecies about Christ? . . . And when I hear, Trypho, that Perseus was begotten of a virgin, I understand that the deceiving serpent counterfeited also this."

It would be somewhat helpful if you provided some direct citations so readers could place these quotes in context. Justin Martyr was responding to mythic parallels, but he is doing it in two separate ways in the quotes you've supplied. In one, he is arguing that certain portions of the life of Christ should not seem foolish to pagans since they have parallels in their own stories. In the other, he is, of course, placing some responsibility on the devil.

I myself have no problem with archetypal parallels. In fact, I'd say they're quite obvious. But it's silly to search for specifics in parallels, when you do, you almost always come up empty-handed. So-called "virgin births" are usually not such according to the Christain understanding, but rather demigods arising from divine-human copulation, etc. To say that the early Christain writers consciously mimicked myths about Horus or Mithras is difficult when you take it out of the world of raw archetypal patterns and into the world of concrete specifics. Also, how does one deal with the fact that many of these archetypes are found among Native Americans, with whom the early writers had no possible contact. One might propose an ur-myth, from which all world mythology evolved, but this idea falls apart given the fact, I believe (and my numbers may be off here) that North America began to be inhabited 70,000 years ago, and all of the world myths can probably not be traced back more that 10,000 years.

I think, and here's where I'm getting specualtive, that God hardwired these archetypal patters into the human subconscious (or collective subconscious, what have you) as a sort of natural ingrained foreshadow of the life of Christ to come.

[guacamole]

It would be somewhat helpful if you provided some direct citations so readers could place these quotes in context. Justin Martyr was responding to mythic parallels, but he is doing it in two separate ways in the quotes you've supplied. In one, he is arguing that certain portions of the life of Christ should not seem foolish to pagans since they have parallels in their own stories. In the other, he is, of course, placing some responsibility on the devil.

I myself have no problem with archetypal parallels. In fact, I'd say they're quite obvious. But it's silly to search for specifics in parallels, when you do, you almost always come up empty-handed. So-called "virgin births" are usually not such according to the Christain understanding, but rather demigods arising from divine-human copulation, etc. To say that the early Christain writers consciously mimicked myths about Horus or Mithras is difficult when you take it out of the world of raw archetypal patterns and into the world of concrete specifics. Also, how does one deal with the fact that many of these archetypes are found among Native Americans, with whom the early writers had no possible contact. One might propose an ur-myth, from which all world mythology evolved, but this idea falls apart given the fact, I believe (and my numbers may be off here) that North America began to be inhabited 70,000 years ago, and all of the world myths can probably not be traced back more that 10,000 years.

I think, and here's where I'm getting specualtive, that God hardwired these archetypal patters into the human subconscious (or collective subconscious, what have you) as a sort of natural ingrained foreshadow of the life of Christ to come.

Sadly, you are being much to sensible for this thread at this point. Pearls to you...

[jpholding]

Not to have the respect of JP Holding is like......like......well.... excuse me people while go I slit my wrists.

No need to bother; you'd foul THAT up to and most likely slit some poor innocnent nearby instead. Like the time you tried to blow your brains out....and missed....

Needless to say, this only amplifies that Minny is a coward who won't debate specifics...most likely, because he's been pulling all his arguments direct off of some half-wit skeptical site like "positiveatheism.org" or some such nonsense, which provides no depth beyond what was read in some 19th century freethinker pamphlet.

As for LGM -- he set his own rep in the yellowbelly section ages ago, when he refused to debate me on Gospel authorship. His evasion of Jezz' point amplifies the point. This crowd always evades to another issue when they can't get out of the trap set for them, which is always what happens when you take Thomas Paine as a source over David Ulansey.

It's interesting how challenges to put up or shut up are spun out into "dominance issues" or "ego". Yes, I admit it: I have a desire to crush the ignorant who take life from others. I guess the police have "dominance issues" too...as do firefighters, editorialists, and journalists....and we should always accuse them of such to reassure us that we aren't deficient in the intellect and knowledge department after all...

....which is much easier to do than actually answering any arguments made, of course.

I am just as happy with Minny hiding behind his own skirts, as it
happens. The amount of work I need to do is about the same.

[Minnesota]

"No need to bother; you'd foul THAT up to and most likely slit some poor innocnent nearby instead. Like the time you tried to blow your brains out....and missed....

.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.

I am just as happy with Minny hiding behind his own skirts, as it happens. The amount of work I need to do is about the same. "

Your so easy, Jp

[jpholding]

Your so easy, Jp

Any chance of you learning some basic grammar? Try:

"YOU'RE so easy..."

Maybe we should debate that...may be easier for you than Mithra or Dionysius.

[Chuck Lee]

Danger: flame wars occurring in this area.

[Faramir]

Moderated By: Faramir

Hey guys, read the sign on the door. This is Apologetics 301 not the locker room. I appreciate clever retort as much as the next guy, but in here clever retorts (or attempts at clever retorts) better be accompanied by substantive arguments (or at least an attempt at a substantive argument). This thread is quickly deteriorating.

:shame: Shame on you guys. Don’t you make me move this thread.

***If you wish to take issue with this notice DO NOT do so in this thread.***
Contact the forum moderator or an administrator in Private Message or email instead. If you feel you must publically complain or whine, please take it to the Psychotherapy Room unless told otherwise.

[Minnesota]

Faramir,

Well HE started it. Abetted by his co-conspirator, the brilliant Dee Dee.

I am completely innocent


But of course, you're right . JP has been reduced to picking on spelling oversights, so it's high time we put an end to the nonsense .


You are truly a fair and wise moderator
May you prosper and be blessed with many rug rats.


Yours in abject groveling,

Minn.

[jpholding]

What can I say? There's no quality of debate to be had from the North Star State.

Ciao.

[FirstSunday33ad]

Saviour-gods mutilated throughout antiquity


TOM HARPUR Toronto Star

One of the big questions nobody has asked about Mel Gibson's The Passion Of The Christ is this: If the crucifixion was a historic event and so central to the Christian Gospel, why is it that there is no evidence whatever of a man on a cross in Christian art and monuments for almost seven centuries?

Not until 692 CE, in the reign of Emperor Justinian II, was it decreed that henceforth instead of a lamb (the zodiacal sign of Aries) fixed on the cross, the figure of Jesus be placed there instead. Another question: How is it that the earliest known figure of any man on a cross comes from about 300 BCE and that "person" is not Jesus but Orpheus, a mythical Greek sun-god?

More significantly, why were there so many crucified or otherwise mutilated saviour-gods in antiquity? One has only to think of the cutting to pieces of the later resurrected Osiris, or of Horus, or Dionysus, or Prometheus, or many more similarly tortured hero-divinities. Scholar Kersey Graves once wrote a book titled The World's Sixteen Crucified Saviours. Seminary didn't tell me that.

Surely the question must arise in minds that are accustomed to thinking and not just to accepting every story presented by state, religion, or the media at its surface value: Could there be some deeper meaning to this whole dying-rising god myth that pops up everywhere in the ancient world? Was Mel Gibson's greatest error not the ubiquitous and ever-so-carefully filmed gore in his two-hour sermon but the fact that he took absolutely literally something that can only be properly understood in the context of what crucifixion symbolism is all about?


MORE

Okay I know I'm probably repeating what has already been said but I have to say this or bust.....


SCHOLAR???? KERSEY GRAVES ....TOM HARPER IS DUMB BUT CHEESEWHIZ I NEVER REALIZED HE WAS THAT DUMB....

Thank you.