21 Feb 07
Originally posted by twhiteheadNot all OT events prefigure events in Christ's life; nor do all myths. Neither are all events in Christ's life prefigured elsewhere.
I did have a look but they are a bit too deep for me. Just to clarify:
Do they say that all myths are a reflection (prefiguration) of a Christian
belief or just the specific one about a goddess descending into hell?
Does that mean that every Norse myth for example is a prefiguration of something and if not how do we tell which are and which aren't?
When there is a genuine similarity between Christ's life and an earlier myth (as opposed to the fallacious similarities often cited - e.g. Mithras), then the Christian is free to believe that the earlier myth prefigured Christ's life as the earlier religion would, doubtless, have some element of truth to it.
21 Feb 07
Originally posted by lucifershammerI see.
Not all OT events prefigure events in Christ's life; nor do all myths. Neither are all events in Christ's life prefigured elsewhere.
When there is a [b]genuine similarity between Christ's life and an earlier myth (as opposed to the fallacious similarities often cited - e.g. Mithras), then the Christian is free to believe that the earlier myth p ...[text shortened]... ed Christ's life as the earlier religion would, doubtless, have some element of truth to it.[/b]
I took your original statement:
For the Christian, that wouldn't be 'coincidence' at all - it would be a prefiguring of Christ's own Resurrection.
to mean that Christians must necessarily believe it was a prefiguring of Christ's own Resurrection, when actually you are saying it is just a possibility.
The problem of course is to know when something is a prefiguration and when it is not as coincidences are extremely common. I suppose it doesn't really matter though.
21 Feb 07
Originally posted by lucifershammerWhether you're dealing with Christ or Nostradamus, interpreting texts retrospectively to underwrite a foregone conclusion is not a terribly impressive exercise.
For the Christian, that wouldn't be 'coincidence' at all - it would be a prefiguring of Christ's own Resurrection.
That aside, your source does not actually provide any historical evidence to back that rather grandiose claim ("most ancient Pagan religions" ) or name the Goddesses involved. Care to do the honours?
Inanna's descent into the underworld and subsequent resurrection took three days.
"Then, after three days and three nights, Inanna had not returned,
Ninshubur set up a lament for her by the ruins.
She beat the drum for her in the assembly places." (from The Descent of Inanna to the Underworld", http://www.utexas.edu/courses/medweb/descent.html ).
Here is an interpretation of the Goddess' descent myth as a menstrual journey:
http://bailiwick.lib.uiowa.edu/wstudies/grahn/chapt13.htm
According to the IVth Sallier Papyrus, Osiris fought Set for three days and three nights, as you can read here: http://www.sacred-texts.com/egy/ebod/ebod04.htm
Not that he was a god, but Jonah, too, spent three days and nights in the belly of the whale. And Naciketas spent three days in the house of Yama, or Death, according to the Katha Upanishad.
So, there are a few examples. The period of three days and nights is evidently symbolic, not to be taken literally. Symbolic of what exactly, I don't know!
21 Feb 07
Originally posted by Bosse de NageI am sure you can find myths with 7 day intervals or 5 day intervals. The real question is whether the myths have a common source or whether it is just coincidence or a particularly attractive number for such myths.
Whether you're dealing with Christ or Nostradamus, interpreting texts retrospectively to underwrite a foregone conclusion is not a terribly impressive exercise.
Inanna's descent into the underworld and subsequent resurrection took three days.
"Then, after three days and three nights, Inanna had not returned,
Ninshubur set up a lament for her ...[text shortened]... is evidently symbolic, not to be taken literally. Symbolic of what exactly, I don't know!
21 Feb 07
Originally posted by Bosse de NageWhether you're dealing with Christ or Nostradamus, interpreting texts retrospectively to underwrite a foregone conclusion is not a terribly impressive exercise.
Whether you're dealing with Christ or Nostradamus, interpreting texts retrospectively to underwrite a foregone conclusion is not a terribly impressive exercise.
Inanna's descent into the underworld and subsequent resurrection took three days.
"Then, after three days and three nights, Inanna had not returned,
Ninshubur set up a lament for her ...[text shortened]... is evidently symbolic, not to be taken literally. Symbolic of what exactly, I don't know!
Sure. But no one here's doing that.
Thanks for the reference, btw.
The period of three days and nights is evidently symbolic, not to be taken literally.
I don't deny a symbolic meaning to it. That doesn't mean it needn't be taken literally either.
21 Feb 07
Originally posted by lucifershammerInanna's myth appears to be the oldest on record, and the three-day period does tie in nicely with the menstrual theory (read that link if you don't know what I'm on about). Could be the three-day period later became traditional, i.e. people forgot why it was three days but kept it anyway.
Or lunar movements. Or something else.
Lots of nine-day cycles around too, eg. Odin on Yggdrasil. Not to mention some of William Blake's more profound obscurities. Anyhoo--natural rhythms seem to govern them all.
23 Feb 07
Originally posted by Bosse de NageNot exactly. Adam's "punishment" was his troublesome agricultural fortunes; which presupposes he had to develop technology around an agricultural lifestyle (which is just about most technology -- since agriculture implies fixed human settlements).
Balls. Architecture began as a hymn to the cosmos!
The sewers of Rome were sacred to the goddess Cloacina.
Of course, Cain was the father of technology. Biblically speaking, that is.
23 Feb 07
Originally posted by lucifershammerActually agriculture requires no technology. Stick a seed in the ground and it grows. However it is greatly enhanced by various forms of technology (starting with a stick to make the whole to put the seed in).
Not exactly. Adam's "punishment" was his troublesome agricultural fortunes; which presupposes he had to develop technology around an agricultural lifestyle (which is just about most technology -- since agriculture implies fixed human settlements).
Fixed human settlements as a result of agriculture and combined with agriculture does encourage the development of technology as:
1. the needs of agriculture are more complex and more readily suited to advances in technology.
2. the lack of requirement to cart around everything you develop.
3. the development of things of a more permanent nature that is impossible with a nomadic lifestyle such as permanent housing.
I am not sure who has the most free time on their hands, hunter gatherers, pasturalists or agriculturalists.
23 Feb 07
Originally posted by lucifershammerAfter murdering Abel, Cain started wandering around. The murder rate went up. "But even while violence was increasing, there was a parallel development. Culture and technology rapidly developed. Cain's son Enoch built the first city. Lamech's three sons were credited with various first-time achievements: Jabal for domestication of animals, Jubal for music, and Tubal-cain for copper and iron industries." http://www.hope.edu/bandstra/RTOT/CH1/CH1_1B1.HTM
Not exactly. Adam's "punishment" was his troublesome agricultural fortunes; which presupposes he had to develop technology around an agricultural lifestyle (which is just about most technology -- since agriculture implies fixed human settlements).
So, from a certain perspective, there would be no technology without murder.