• Welcome to the Internet Infidels Discussion Board.

The Creation Of Religious Myth

steve_bank

Diabetic retinopathy and poor eyesight. Typos ...
Joined
Nov 9, 2017
Messages
16,625
Location
seattle
Basic Beliefs
secular-skeptic
Herodotus was considered the first organized historian, but he also used creative liererary license to fill in the blanks.

Plato's story of Atlantis took on a life of its own even today. Apparently written as allegory there are true believers today who do not realize what the story was supposed to represent.

In the light of known stories and their authors, clearly the Old/New Testament represents tales that grew with the retelling. Jc may have been a real person, to me it is likely the gospel character is a composite of many hearsay stories out of a movement. A lot of symbolism. An obvious one, 12 disciples representing the 12 tribes following Jesus. The image would have been obvious to Jews in the 1st and 2nd century. In the day a powerful Jewish statement.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Atlant

Atlantis (Ancient Greek: Ἀτλαντὶς νῆσος, "island of Atlas") is a fictional island mentioned within an allegory on the hubris of nations in Plato's works Timaeus and Critias, where it represents the antagonist naval power that besieges "Ancient Athens", the pseudo-historic embodiment of Plato's ideal state in The Republic. In the story, Athens repels the Atlantean attack unlike any other nation of the known world,[1] supposedly giving testament to the superiority of Plato's concept of a state.[2][3] The story concludes with Atlantis falling out of favor with the deities and submerging into the Atlantic Ocean.

Despite its minor importance in Plato's work, the Atlantis story has had a considerable impact on literature. The allegorical aspect of Atlantis was taken up in utopian works of several Renaissance writers, such as Francis Bacon's New Atlantis and Thomas More's Utopia.[4][5] On the other hand, nineteenth-century amateur scholars misinterpreted Plato's narrative as historical tradition, most notably in Ignatius L. Donnelly's Atlantis: The Antediluvian World. Plato's vague indications of the time of the events—more than 9,000 years before his time[6]—and the alleged location of Atlantis—"beyond the Pillars of Hercules"—has led to much pseudoscientific speculation.[7] As a consequence, Atlantis has become a byword for any and all supposed advanced prehistoric lost civilizations and continues to inspire contemporary fiction, from comic books to films.

While present-day philologists and classicists agree on the story's fictional character,[8][9] there is still debate on what served as its inspiration. As for instance with the story of Gyges,[10] Plato is known to have freely borrowed some of his allegories and metaphors from older traditions. This led a number of scholars to investigate possible inspiration of Atlantis from Egyptian records of the Thera eruption,[11][12] the Sea Peoples invasion,[13] or the Trojan War.[14] Others have rejected this chain of tradition as implausible and insist that Plato created an entirely fictional nation as his example,[15][16][17] drawing loose inspiration from contemporary events such as the failed Athenian invasion of Sicily in 415–413 BC or the destruction of Helike in 373 BC.[18]

- - - Updated - - -

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Herodotus

Herodotus (/hɪˈrɒdətəs/; Ancient Greek: Ἡρόδοτος, Hêródotos, Attic Greek pronunciation: [hɛː.ró.do.tos]) was a Greek historian who was born in Halicarnassus in the Persian Empire (modern-day Bodrum, Turkey) and lived in the fifth century BC (c. 484–c. 425 BC), a contemporary of Thucydides, Socrates, and Euripides. He is often referred to as "The Father of History", a title first conferred by Cicero;[1] he was the first historian known to have broken from Homeric tradition to treat historical subjects as a method of investigation—specifically, by collecting his materials systematically and critically, and then arranging them into a historiographic narrative.[2]

The Histories is the only work which he is known to have produced, a record of his "inquiry" (ἱστορία historía) on the origins of the Greco-Persian Wars; it primarily deals with the lives of Croesus, Cyrus, Cambyses, Smerdis, Darius, and Xerxes and the battles of Marathon, Thermopylae, Artemisium, Salamis, Plataea, and Mycale; however, its many cultural, ethnographical, geographical, historiographical, and other digressions form a defining and essential part of the Histories and contain a wealth of information. Some of his stories are fanciful and others inaccurate, yet he states that he is reporting only what he was told; a sizable portion of the information he provided was later confirmed by historians and archaeologists.

Despite Herodotus's historical significance, little is known of his personal life.
 
Here's a cool word: mythopoesis. It means 'the process of myth-creation'. :)

Steve, I'm not sure where you want this discussion to go, but here's a question I've often asked of those who think that there is an actual historical person behind the largely mythical tales of Jesus Christ.

What parts of Jesus' story as we have it today are historically accurate?

That question is very hard to answer; see for example Albert Schweizer's The Quest of the Historical Jesus.

If you have something other than yet another chapter of the mythical vs. historical Jesus debate you want to discuss, say so now and I'll drop the subject.
 
A lot of effort has gone into keeping myth out of the Gospel.
 
I mean apocryphal/gnostic myth fought very hard to compete for ascendency.
 
Nope.
Why "must" I be joking?
There would have been hundreds/thousands of competing fictitious accounts trying to garner acceptance.

Fighting to keep them out of the canonical scripture would have been like playing Whack-A-Mole.
(See? I made a joke there)
 
Nope.
Why "must" I be joking?
There would have been hundreds/thousands of competing fictitious accounts trying to garner acceptance.

Fighting to keep them out of the canonical scripture would have been like playing Whack-A-Mole.
(See? I made a joke there)

It's bizarre that you overlook the obvious fact that all of the competing accounts (including the winners) were fictitious.

None so blind...
 
Nope.
Why "must" I be joking?
There would have been hundreds/thousands of competing fictitious accounts trying to garner acceptance.

Fighting to keep them out of the canonical scripture would have been like playing Whack-A-Mole.
(See? I made a joke there)

You must be joking becasu we do not who wrote the gosples and why, and because tthe gospels do not present a coherent story.

You must be joking because of the biblical stories. Jomah in a whale. Blowing down walls with a horn blast. A large number of people wandering in the desert for years leaving no trace. Moses bringing down plagues on Egypt and parting the Red Sea.

All unended to embellish Hebrew self image with a mythical past of glory and power. Same across all ancient cultures. The Pilgrims are an American mythical icon, the myth far removed from the reality of who they were and what they did.
 
Nope.
Why "must" I be joking?
There would have been hundreds/thousands of competing fictitious accounts trying to garner acceptance.

Fighting to keep them out of the canonical scripture would have been like playing Whack-A-Mole.
(See? I made a joke there)

You must be joking because we do not [know] who wrote the gosples and why, and because tthe gospels do not present a coherent story.

If you don't know who wrote them how can you question their honesty/integrity?
Also, I find nothing incoherent. So your lack of understanding could be an outlier.


You must be joking because of the biblical stories. Jomah in a whale. Blowing down walls with a horn blast. A large number of people wandering in the desert for years leaving no trace. Moses bringing down plagues on Egypt and parting the Red Sea.

I agree if God didn't exist then miracles would be otherwise hard to understand.
But the non-existence of God is an obscure belief held by a very very tiny religion called atheism.
Also, the slow erosion of Newtonian determinism/empiricism and the rise of post-modern quantum 'spookiness' (uncertainty) is opening up a multiverse of super, supernatural possible worlds where turning wine into water isn't really an extraordinary claim.


All unended to embellish Hebrew self image with a mythical past of glory and power. Same across all ancient cultures. The Pilgrims are an American mythical icon, the myth far removed from the reality of who they were and what they did.

You weren't there. You don't know.
...isn't that what you say to ppl like me who claim belief about what went down?
 
If you don't know who wrote them how can you question their honesty/integrity?
Also, I find nothing incoherent. So your lack of understanding could be an outlier.


You must be joking because of the biblical stories. Jomah in a whale. Blowing down walls with a horn blast. A large number of people wandering in the desert for years leaving no trace. Moses bringing down plagues on Egypt and parting the Red Sea.

I agree if God didn't exist then miracles would be otherwise hard to understand.
But the non-existence of God is an obscure belief held by a very very tiny religion called atheism.
Also, the slow erosion of Newtonian determinism/empiricism and the rise of post-modern quantum 'spookiness' (uncertainty) is opening up a multiverse of super, supernatural possible worlds where turning wine into water isn't really an extraordinary claim.


All unended to embellish Hebrew self image with a mythical past of glory and power. Same across all ancient cultures. The Pilgrims are an American mythical icon, the myth far removed from the reality of who they were and what they did.

You weren't there. You don't know.
...isn't that what you say to ppl like me who claim belief about what went down?

Exactly. If you do not know the authors how can you question how much they invented or how much was unverified hearsay? All of Christianity rests on the tale of the resurrection being true. Without that there is no Christianity.

Religious and cultural myth and embellishment is a known practice throughout history. Pharos invented religion and myths around them for power and justification to the people. The Torah paints the ancient Jews as powerful and glorious. In reality they were minor players in the region. The known histories and archeological evidence bare that out.

You are welcome to your faith, but it is just that. A few ancient documents of unknown authorship is not proof.
 
A lot of effort has gone into keeping myth out of the Gospel.

Here's a book you should read, Lion.

misquoting-jesus-097231739.jpg

Ehrman does think there was a historical Jesus- but his work makes clear that we have practically nothing that is really a dependable historical record of his words, or an original version of any of the four gospels.
 
Yeah, I know his work pretty well.

Why would he think (believe) Jesus was a real historical figure if there's no dependable record?

You can't say...anonymous author wasn't there, didn't see it happen, can't be believed - and the reason you can't say this is precisely because you don't know who the author was.
 
I believe there was likely an historical Jesus, HJ. Much like the region today Palestine was a hotbed of ethic and religious conflict, nationalism, and sedition against Rome.

It is known there were people, some bandits, claiming to be the messiah. The Jews were looking for the return of a king, not a wandering rabbi.

Many factions. The name Jesus Christ itself represents a Greek concept mot a real name, as do halos.

The George Washington cherry tree myth. The mythic pilgrims vs the real Pilgrims.

How the tales develoed from oral retelling can be seen today. The proliferation of fake news. The original Dracula morphing into modern vampire stories. The name Dracula may come from from a bloody ruler. The overall story evolved out of folk tales. Shakespeare's Romeo And Juliet was based on a folk tale.

The evolution of myth

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dracula

Throughout the 1880s and 1890s, authors such as H. Rider Haggard, Rudyard Kipling, Robert Louis Stevenson, Arthur Conan Doyle, and H. G. Wells wrote many tales in which fantastic creatures threatened the British Empire. Invasion literature was at a peak, and Stoker's formula was very familiar by 1897 to readers of fantastic adventure stories, of an invasion of England by continental European influences. Victorian readers enjoyed Dracula as a good adventure story like many others, but it did not reach its legendary status until later in the 20th century when film versions began to appear.[8]


Shakespearean actor and friend of Stoker's Sir Henry Irving was a possible real-life inspiration for the character of Dracula. The role was tailor-made to his dramatic presence, gentlemanly mannerisms, and affinity for playing villain roles. Irving, however, never agreed to play the part on stage.
Before writing Dracula, Stoker spent seven years researching European folklore and stories of vampires, being most influenced by Emily Gerard's 1885 essay "Transylvania Superstitions" which includes content about a vampire myth.[9][10] Some historians are convinced that a historic figure, Vlad III Dracula, often called Vlad the Impaler, was the model for Stoker's Count although there is no supporting evidence.[11] Stoker borrowed only "scraps of miscellaneous information", according to one expert, about this bloodthirsty tyrant of Wallachia and there are no comments about him in Stoker's working notes.[12] Dracula scholar Elizabeth Miller has remarked that aside from the name and some mention of Romanian history, the background of Stoker's Count bears no resemblance to that of Vlad III Dracula.[13
 
Yeah, I know his work pretty well.

Why would he think (believe) Jesus was a real historical figure if there's no dependable record?

You can't say...anonymous author wasn't there, didn't see it happen, can't be believed - and the reason you can't say this is precisely because you don't know who the author was.

The default position of sane people is not to believe unsubstantiated claims.

You not only CAN you say "anonymous author wasn't there, didn't see it happen, can't be believed"; That's the only sane position to take. Sure, you cannot PROVE that an anonymous author wasn't there and/or didn't see it happen - But in the absence of ANY knowledge of who he was or when he lived, it is so implausible that his account has survived intact and unaltered, apart from all evidence of his identity, that believing it would be grade A crazy.

If you are involved in a traffic accident, and you present the judge at your trial with a dozen alleged witness statements, none of which can be attributed to a named individual, you will quite rightly be laughed out of court.

There is a tiny, but non-zero chance that an anonymous author was there, and did see 'it' happen. But no rational person would believe such nonsense.

Nullius in Verba, as they say at the Royal Society. Even the testimony of a known and named witness should not be taken at face value without corroborating evidence, ideally forensic in nature.
 
Even the testimony of a known and named witness should not be taken at face value without corroborating evidence, ideally forensic in nature.

I refuse to accept this unsupported, anonymous, second-hand claim.
Were you there at this place you call "the Royal Society" when that wacky idea was proposed?
No. So why should I believe you?
 
The best example of human created myth is the difference between the very sparse words attributed to JC in the gospels and Christianity today. The vast RCC theology developed over a thousand years with little basis in the gospels. Confession for one. The idea you need to talk to a priest in dark closet to talk to god.

The modern evangelicals and their often bizarre interpretations. The wacky TV personalities who spin daily events as being predicted in the bible.

It is all manufactured by human imagination year by year until the point it brco,es truth to the believers.
 
Back
Top Bottom