Christianity did NOT borrow from pagan "Dying-Rising" God motifs (page 2)

yaddayadda

tetrapod: "people who fight this view, have an ulterior motive that they may not always own up to, or even be aware of: God."

Oh come on! Spare us the self-righteous 'ulterior motive' crap. The exact same thing could be said of those who attack the reliablity of the New Testament. They can just as easily be charged with being motivated by a disbelief of God.
(But if you want to indulge in ad hominem attacks, hows this) And even more so, since disbelief in God, hence disbelief in the Bible, means no accountability to anything higher than yourself and the police. Eat, drink, fornicate, and generally be merry with impunity, for tomorrow you are to die. Complete moral freedom. Lovely notion aye. So very tempting. I'd fight tooth and nail to defend my right to complete moral freedom.

Its not hard to see who has more reason for 'ulterior motives'.

tetrapod.sapien

LOL

hey, whatever gets you through the night man.

tetra (of the "self-righteous ulterior motive crap" class)

ps: i am not accountable to the police either.

Inquisitor

Even the premier liberal German historian of early Christianity during the first three decades of the twentieth century, Adolf von Harnack (1911), admitted:
“We must reject the comparative mythology which finds a causal between everything and everything else…By such methods one can turn Christ into a sun god in the twinkling of an eye, or one can bring up the legends attending the birth of every conceivable god, or one can catch all sorts of mythological doves to keep company with the baptismal dove…the wand of “comparative religion” triumphantly eliminate(s) every spontaneous trait in religion.”

So we reject the method because we fear the findings? That's hardly being objective, much less truthful.

Nash (2003) states: “The uncompromising monotheism and the exclusiveness that the early church preached and practiced make the possibility of any pagan inroads…unlikely, if not impossible.”

Metzger (1968) makes the same point: “Another methodological consideration, often overlooked by scholars who are better acquainted with Hellenistic culture than with Jewish, is involved in the circumstance that the early Palestinian Church was composed of Christians from a Jewish background, whose generally strict monotheism and traditional intolerance of syncretism must have militated against wholesale borrowing from pagan cults.

No inroads into Judaism? Intolerance of syncretism? Are they asserting that the entire 1st century Jewish nation successfully insulated themselves from the Hellenization process?

http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/shows/religion/portrait/hellenisticculture.html

If the Jews prior to Christ had embraced philosophies from the "outside", what reason is there to suppose that early Christian ideas MUST BE novel, since to quote Metzger, "the early Palestinian Church was composed of Christians from a Jewish background"?

Those who see parallels every which way between the NT and other religions fall into the ‘terminological fallacy’.

If there is any dependant relationship between the mysteries and Christianity, as some liberal scholars contend, it is for the most part a REVERSED dependency.

Fancy jargon. Care to share some examples of these two types of "errors"?

INQ

Leolaia

Born of a virgin on Dec. 25
Stars appeared at their births
Visited by Magi from the East
Healed the Sick
Cast out demons
Performed miracles
Transfigured before followers
Rode donkeys into the city
Betrayed fro 30 pieces of silver
Celebrated communal meal with bread and wine, which represented the savior's flesh and blood
Killed on a cross or tree
Descended into hell
Resurrected on third day
Ascended into heaven to forever sit beside father god and become divine judge

I don't think artificial lists like these really help at all (tho they are frequently repeated on the internet). I know of no specific Greco-Roman/ANE heroes or gods that really have such an impressive list of parallels. Many of these items I'm very, very doubtful of (such as "born of a virgin on Dec. 25" and "betrayed for 30 pieces of silver"), not having seen any evidence from primary sources for them. These always look to me like an attempt to shoehorn or distort myths about non-Christian heroes/gods around a Christian template.

tetrapod.sapien

sorry, but PBS won't work. they're part of a "liberal goddless conspiracy" to subvert he faith of wholesome chirstians, that dates all the way back to ancient "pagan" times. [gasp!!]

tetra

Inquisitor

sorry, but PBS won't work. they're part of a "liberal goddless conspiracy" to subvert he faith of wholesome chirstians, that dates all the way back to ancient "pagan" times. [gasp!!] tetra

WHAT!!? Not even if the PBS-hosted information had been received from a professor of New Testament Yale Divinity School?? It wouldn't work even if the interviewer had stooped down to presume that Christ was a living, breathing human being? Tsk Tsk Tsk..... INQ

lovelylil

yadda,

Brilliant!

Elsewhere,

In your own evidence which you kindly highlighted, I would like to point out this phrase used several times; "we shall seem to utter the doctrine of". What does this term mean to you?

Again, the point is that although the similarities make it SEEM like these are the same teachings of Plato, or the Stoics, they are not. That is what the quotes are saying, but you have tried to hide this fact by only quoting a small snippet of information. By only reading your small highlight, you are missing the entire point of the quote.

I've already explained why those like Justin Martyr pointed out the similarities - to appeal to what they had in common and use it as a basis for proclaiming the gospel of Christ. Sort of like Paul who found a common ground with the men of Athens.

Yadda brings out a good point about the so-called similarities with the Ancient mystery cults and that is the evidence is not as similar as some proclaim. I know this from experience for I've been down this road before and rather than read the views of the one proclaiming this teaching, I looked at the evidences myself on BOTH sides of the issue.

Lilly

Inquisitor

Dear lovelylil

One question that you might like to ponder is:

If Christianity had indeed plagiarised the concepts from pagan religions, what would you expect the evidence to look like?

Again, the point is that although the similarities make it SEEM like these are the same teachings of Plato, or the Stoics, they are not.

What then would the teachings have to look like if they were indeed from Plato and/or the Stoics?

Would they be any different from what they are now?

INQ

tetrapod.sapien

hey, listen. if the roots are not pagan, and judeo/xianity are the sole inventors of these myths, then all i have to say is: "go ahead! keep them! they're all yours."

sincerely and good night,

tetra

alt

"the myths: they're ours! all ours! clean and unspoilt by pagans!"

lovelylil

INQ,

Good Q. First of all as per yaddas posts, and I agree after doing much reading on the subject myself, there are not that many similarities. Some events being interpreted by some as a resurrection, other experts say are not really resurrections.

The point with elsewheres quotes was that he was missing the whole point of what was being said, as I am afraid you are also missing the point. That being just because there is something in common, does not mean they are entirely the same teachings. It may SEEM the same as the stoics, or plato's view but under careful scrutiny are not.

You would think if the early disciples of Christ or church fathers wanted to create an entirely fictional character named Jesus, that they would make sure there were NO similarites with any other religious beliefs, so that they would not be accused of plagerism. Which in fact was what happened. Some pagans did protest and say that they had similar Gods so why should they believe in this one called Christ? But the early church fathers did not hide this fact which shows they were more interested in writing what was true about Jesus, then in manipulating evidence to create an entirely ficitonal person. Had they created a new totally fictional person it would have been easier to "sell" to the people, don't you see that? Lilly

Christianity did NOT borrow from pagan "Dying-Rising" God motifs

Share this