By: Hector Plasmic To: Michael Hardy Re: Re: ASKING SILLY QUESTIO HP Isn't it _odd_ (and _

---
Master Index Current Directory Index Go to SkepticTank Go to Human Rights activist Keith Henson Go to Scientology cult

Skeptic Tank!

By: Hector Plasmic To: Michael Hardy Re: Re: ASKING SILLY QUESTIO HP>>>>> Isn't it _odd_ (and _convenient_) that miracles quit occurring when HP>>>>> xtianity began getting noticed? :-) RB>>>> Isn't it odd that Paul (who was Jesus' supposed contemporary) didn't RB>>>> say a word about miracles, but the gospels (which came 70 to 120 RB>>>> years later) were full of em? MH>>> Actually, Paul's entire theology was centered on the most important MH>>> miracle, the resurrection. HP>> A "miracle" which he didn't observe, and a "miracle" which just HP>> happened to be commonplace in the theologies of those to whom Paul made HP>> himself a self- appointed missionary. How _odd_ (and _convenient_), HP>> eh? :-) MH> Common? Yep. MH> I don't think so. Of course not -- you view the world through xtian filters. MH> And neither do historians who know the subject. I've already quoted you historians who _do_ agree and mythologies in which resurrected savior gods figure, Mikey. The Greeks, Romans and Egyptians all had gods who died and returned to some semblance of life. In the case of the Egyptians, the god in question died and returned as the lord of the underworld with the ability to bestow a happy afterlife to those who met his criteria. The differences between that and the Jess myth (Jess died, returned as the lord of heaven with the ability to bestow a happy afterlife to those who met his criteria) are superficial at best. A holy mother/wife figure often appeared in such myths; Mary was elevated to such a status in the early church (remember, at the time, Isis worship was all the rage in Rome). Other resurrected gods were Adonis, Baal, and even Quetzalcoatl in the new world -- it's hardly an original theme. "Common?" Yeah, it looks that way. Your denials remind me of my daughter's recent attempt at writing an original story. In it, four wolves sit down to eat some baby buffalo stew, but it's too hot, so they take a walk to wait for it to cool. When they get back, a little boy has come into their house, sampled their stews and fallen asleep on the couch of the littlest wolf. She denies that it is in any way based on "The Three Bears," and sites examples of the obvious differences in the stories (wolves instead of bears, three instead of four, stew instead of porridge, couches instead of beds, a male intruder instead of female). She's right that there are differences, but it's also true that the basis for the story is still the old Goldilocks story, right, Mikey? :-)

---

E-Mail Fredric L. Rice / The Skeptic Tank