Vridar: Tim Widowfield, Euhemerism and Richard Carrier

[Ben C. Smith]

Be there a Pre-Christian cult of Jesus?

William Benjamin Smith's Ecce Deus is available at the Internet Archive: https://archive.org/details/eccedeusstudieso00smituoft. Some of his ideas on that topic are developed therein.

Passages adduced by Kraft are of some relevance to the question: http://ccat.sas.upenn.edu/gopher/other/ ... ity/Joshua.

A possibly significant passage from the Sibylline Oracles has been discussed here before: viewtopic.php?f=3&t=1573.

[MrMacSon]

FWIW, there has been speculation, discussed on the predecessor forum FRDB, that there was a popular divinity known as "Jesus" who was anthropomorphized. Arthur O. Lovejoy, in "The Theory of a Pre-Christian Cult of Jesus," (The Monist, Vol. 18-4, Oct, 1908, 597-609), critiques a book by W. B. Smith, Der Vorchristliche Jesus (1906) which included essays that proposed a pre-Christian cult of Jesus ...

And that is what euhemerization is - anthropomorphization of entities previously portrayed or narrated as a god or gods.

• Someone at some point in time portrays them as human or having human characteristics

Euhemerus is said to have done it to Zeus and Uranus (though ironically he may not have been the first to do so)

Carrier is proposing that the synoptic writer Mark (+/- others) did it to Paul's Christ.

I somewhat disagree with Carrier as I don't think it was that simple.

[DCHindley]

Be there a Pre-Christian cult of Jesus?

William Benjamin Smith's Ecce Deus is available at the Internet Archive: https://archive.org/details/eccedeusstudieso00smituoft. Some of his ideas on that topic are developed therein.

The guy's interesting, to say the least. Do I understand him? I don't know ... It's a shame some of the pages seem blurry.

Passages adduced by Kraft are of some relevance to the question: http://ccat.sas.upenn.edu/gopher/other/ ... ity/Joshua.

But does this kind of messianic speculation qualify as a mythical deity?

A possibly significant passage from the Sibylline Oracles has been discussed here before: viewtopic.php?f=3&t=1573.

Dem Oracles! The parts that are generally accredited to Judean authors seem to deal with an apocalyptic change of empire (replace the Romans with a new just one that was to be led by a messianic figure). Regardless of whether this involves human action alone or divine assistance, is not the leader to be a human being?

DCH

[MrMacSon]

.
Were Paul & Barnabas euhemerized in Acts 14 -

(NIV)
11 When the crowd saw what Paul had done, they shouted in the Lycaonian language, “The gods have come down to us in human form!”
12 Barnabas they called Zeus, and Paul they called Hermes because he was the chief speaker.

They are said to have replied -

14 But when the apostles Barnabas and Paul heard of this, they tore their clothes and rushed out into the crowd, shouting: 15 “Friends, why are you doing this? We too are only human, like you. We are bringing you good news, telling you to turn from these worthless things to the living God, who made the heavens and the earth and the sea and everything in them...

Interestingly, in between, Acts 14:13 has -

13 The priest of Zeus, whose temple was just outside the city, brought bulls and wreaths to the city gates because he and the crowd wanted to offer sacrifices to them ...

and later Acts 14:18-

18 Even with these words, they had difficulty keeping the crowd from sacrificing to them.

and Acts 14:19 -

19 Then some Jews came from Antioch and Iconium and won the crowd over. They stoned Paul and dragged him outside the city, thinking he was dead.
20 But after the disciples had gathered around him, he got up and went back into the city. The next day he and Barnabas left for Derbe.

[Ben C. Smith]

Passages adduced by Kraft are of some relevance to the question: http://ccat.sas.upenn.edu/gopher/other/ ... ity/Joshua.

But does this kind of messianic speculation qualify as a mythical deity?

A possibly significant passage from the Sibylline Oracles has been discussed here before: viewtopic.php?f=3&t=1573.

Dem Oracles! The parts that are generally accredited to Judean authors seem to deal with an apocalyptic change of empire (replace the Romans with a new just one that was to be led by a messianic figure). Regardless of whether this involves human action alone or divine assistance, is not the leader to be a human being?

The argument/speculation/possibility is that the figure of Joshua was considered divine; an ancient snippet of song, after all, attributed powers to him (commanding the sun and moon) that only gods should have. The magical amulet in view calls Joshua/Jesus the "god" of the Hebrews. The Oracle mentioned above appears to conflate the OT figure of Joshua with the NT figure of Jesus as if they were the same person, implying some kind of postexistence for the former and preexistence for the latter. These pieces are sometimes reassembled to imply a Joshua/Jesus cult of some kind that predates Christianity. (I am not saying it is right; I am saying it sometimes happens.)

[iskander]

I have never seen a Joshua humbled,

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_v2exWrsGOc

but I know of religious dissenters fried.

[DCHindley]

I have never seen a Joshua humbled,

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_v2exWrsGOc

but I know of religious dissenters fried.

Original, or Extra Crispy?

DCH

[iskander]

I have never seen a Joshua humbled,

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_v2exWrsGOc

but I know of religious dissenters fried.

Original, or Extra Crispy?

DCH

a la carte

[DCHindley]

.
Were Paul & Barnabas euhemerized in Acts 14 -

(NIV)
11 When the crowd saw what Paul had done, they shouted in the Lycaonian language, “The gods have come down to us in human form!”
12 Barnabas they called Zeus, and Paul they called Hermes because he was the chief speaker.

They are said to have replied -

14 But when the apostles Barnabas and Paul heard of this, they tore their clothes and rushed out into the crowd, shouting: 15 “Friends, why are you doing this? We too are only human, like you. We are bringing you good news, telling you to turn from these worthless things to the living God, who made the heavens and the earth and the sea and everything in them...

Uh, no. There is a difference between already existing Gods (Zeus & Hermes) coming to visit mankind as evidenced by miracles, and popular deifying of heroes on account of the benefits they bestowed on mankind.

I'm not going to exchange volleys on this, and don't get the idea that I am being critical of your contributions, but you seem to be stuck on this "euhemerizing" thing, almost fanatically so, citing Carrier's writings as if proof texts like Christians do the Bible. I do not get into "apologetics" whether Christian or atheist.

Euhemerus: Great men like Kings and Heroes > did wonderful things for the benefit of mankind > were popularly deified. Popular deification of human beings was not unheard of even in his day (late 4th century BCE, although usually after their death), and he was promoting this option for his patron Cassander, the king of Macedon (after he dropped dead, of course). It was an honorary "deification".

But to say that a Mythical God being imagined or presented as walking among men in some made-up historical context is just not the same thing. While many of Euhemerus' contemporaries might have believed in the Greek god's as supernatural entities possessing great powers, this was in an age where Plato and Aristotle had been questioning just what exactly these mythical gods were, sometimes treating them like glorified daemons who were part of the World Soul, who had little or no influence on mankind except in some astrological sense as the "gods" (daemons) governing the Sun, Moon, and the seven planets. Euhemerus presented the Greek gods as being actually deified individuals, and not all-powerful Gods. These deified men were not presented as having walks on earth in recent times, but ages ago.

If you want to believe that Euhemerus was suggesting that the Mythic Gods came to walk on earth in recent historical past, as kings and heroes, then more power to you, but that is not what he actually said.

So, anyhow, were done with this as far as I'm concerned. (You did, after all, suggest that I "get f**ked")

DCH

[JoeWallack]

JW:
So far this Thread reminds me of:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kQFKtI6gn9Y

Based on the Merriam-Webster definition of euhemerism

interpretation of myths as traditional accounts of historical persons and events

If the major components of Carrier's argument are:

• 1) The only significant extant Christian author before GMark is Paul.
  
  2) Paul's Jesus is primarily mythical.
  
  3) GMark's Jesus has a historical setting.

Than Carrier's argument seems to be supported by the definition above (at least regarding GMark).

Widowfield is clear that he thinks Carrier's use of euhemerism is wrong but Widowfield's related argument is unclear. he needs to:

• 1) Clearly provide what he thinks are the major parts of Carrier's related argument.
  
  2) Clearly demonstrate why one or more parts of 1) are in error.

Joseph

The New Porphyry