It's not as if origen tells a different story when he's putting words in celsus' mouth.........I don't understand the objection.

Hoffman, who unlike Holding is an actual scholar and not just a fucking xtian money-grubber, actually went through all of Contra Celsum and extracted the words of Celsus which Origen sought to refute and consolidated them into a facsimile of what On The True Doctrine must have looked like originally.  Quite a tremendous work of scholarship but of course not something that the assholes could tolerate since it does not give their godboy proper due.

I have the book somewhere around the house.  I read it some years ago.  Fantastic stuff.  Unlike Origen, Celsus was not a pious stick-in-the-mud.

BTW, another superb quote of Celsus':

Quote:"You are fond of saying that in the old days this same most high god made these and greater promises to those who gave heed to his commandments and worshiped him. But at the risk of appearing unkind, I ask how much good has been done by those promises have done either the Jews before you or you in your present circumstances. And would you have us put out faith in such a god? Instead of being masters of the whole world, the jews today have no home of any kind."

Or perhaps you would prefer to talk about the OP and mystery religions.  I don't think that Christianity qualifies as a mystery religion.  Namely because it lacks the all important mystery (secretive) part from which it gets it's name.  Christianity doesn't promise secret knowledge upon initiation and advanced knowledge upon becoming a part of it.  Which in the case of the Mystery Religions leaves us with little knowledge about them.

From what I have gathered; apart from the argument from silence with imaginative editorializing (which we discussed before) this is the other of Carriers favored arguments.  However all I ever seen is loosely based comparison, that are reduced (or distorted) so much, to have little meaning.  Many of the comparisons to other god's are either inconsequential, so mundane as to be expected, or highly distorted.  And a number of them are not seen until after Christianity.  However, I do want to know if I am wrong, so let's dig into the meat of these claims, and examine them a little, and what follows or can be gathered from it!

Not concerning Carrier, but Gary Habernas commented on similar books and theories concerning mystery religions [Here]

Quote:The truth is that Allegro’s views are credible only to skeptics who already wish to find “evidence” to support their skepticism....

Unfortunately for skeptics, when Allegro’s theory—or that involving any other mystery tradition—is objectively examined and compared with Christianity, only superficial similarities remain because Christianity and the mystery religions are as distinct as night and day.Even secular scholars have rejected this idea of Christianity borrowing from the ancient mysteries. The well-respected Sir Edward Evans-Pritchard writes in Theories of Primitive Religion that “The evidence for this theory… is negligible.” Negligible is defined in Webster’s New World Dictio­nary as, that which “can be neglected or disregarded because small, unimpor­tant, etc.; trifling.”

When asked if other scholars agreed with his conclusions.

Quote:Habermas: Well, I think you going to have to agree to this extent: virtually nobody is going to say that the Christians copied off these ideas. That’s a pretty radical idea. You could find it a couple of decades ago with some of the Bultmannian ideas. You can find a hundred years ago with the history of religions movement of similarities and comparisons. Both have died death of a thousand qualifications. So in general, no one’s going to push the heathen accounts, but they want to get them on the table because they want to show you Jesus isn’t alone.

Personally I like, when he was talking about the differences of the Gospels occurring within history and current to those hearing

Quote:And I love the words of Plutarch, whose in his famous story of Isis and Osiris, he says, now listen don’t you guys think that this is a historical account, I’m telling you a story here, and he says that twice. So, I think that’s important that there’s a contrast. 

But as I said, if my information is wrong, I want to know... do you want to inspect these claims more closely and thoroughly?

Wouldn't this line, from the first post in thread...respond to the above?

Quote:To say Christianity was a mystery religion is not to say that Christianity is exactly like any other mystery religion, any more than any mystery religion was 'exactly like' any other.

I read the rest of that link.....and I found exactly what I expected.  A man calling the gospels eyewitness accounts and insisting that we had some empty tomb as evidence....lemme guess, Habermas is an apologist?

(October 19, 2017 at 11:04 pm)Minimalist Wrote: And who is going to decide?  You?  You are a scholar of ancient Greco-Roman Literature, I suppose?

No... but I can read... and I like to check things out.
I just want to go back to the source, to see if it is accurate.  As well, to see the context, and what origin said in response.


In the end, this is just one man's opinion so I don't see it as a big deal.  Especially when there are others who contradict him about the early Church (including those outside of Christianity).

Besides, if all he did, was pull the words of Celsus out (remove the words of Origen), then I dont' think I need to be a scholar to evaluate if that is accurate.

Unlike some, I don't dismiss things, just because of who wrote it.  But I do want to know what they based it on.  And especially with Carrier and Jehovah Witnesses, I have learned that you should always go back and check the original source.

---

(October 19, 2017 at 11:37 pm)Khemikal Wrote: Wouldn't this line, from the first post in thread...respond to the above?

Quote:To say Christianity was a mystery religion is not to say that Christianity is exactly like any other mystery religion, any more than any mystery religion was 'exactly like' any other.

I read the rest of that link.....and I found exactly what I expected.  A man calling the gospels eyewitness accounts and insisting that we had some empty tomb as evidence....lemme guess, Habermas is an apologist?

Does that matter?

So Roads evidence is some bullshit from a loon U . And yes Christianity is virtually identical to most if not all mystery religions and is just variation of the theme . THERE IS NOTHING UNIQUE ABOUT CHRISTIANITY that requires the supernatural to explain it. Nor is the acceptance Jeebus was not real a conspiracy no matter how much Road distorts the position in order to dismiss the fact it best fits the evidence.

(October 19, 2017 at 11:43 pm)RoadRunner79 Wrote: Does that matter?

Clearly it does.  The articles of his faith have run all over any chance at getting a cogent response. Not only are his comments pre-empted by section I quoted above..the things he points to as an illustration of what's already been responded to are nonsense.

Apologism is not history. It's not even comparative myth.

Quote:Gary Habernas

Oh please.  Who's next with you?  Ken Ham or Jerry Falwell?

This is a History Forum.  Your bullshit, and those bullshitters, are not HISTORY.  Carrier is.  He makes a most compelling case that jesusism is nothing more than the syncretism of judaism with Hellenistic thought and he has a discussion elsewhere of how Hellenism mixed with various other cultures across the Greco-Roman world to create these mystery cults.  I understand that you want your bullshit to be "special" but it isn't.

If you want to talk about Habermas and his idiot "minimal facts" nonsense ( which is his apparent way of saying "no facts") we can do that in the Religion Forum where reality does not matter.

Gary Habernas is an apologist crank 

Richard Carriers a respected historian 

Quote:Richard Carriers a respected historian

No, see he can't be because it is dogma with these people that "all" real historians agree that the jesus shit is true.

And you KNOW how they are about dogma.