(March 7, 2018 at 12:58 pm)Neo-Scholastic Wrote:

(March 6, 2018 at 9:19 pm)vulcanlogician Wrote: But the point of the thread isn't even metaphysical. It's epistemological. How the hell do you disprove Odin? -- Whether he's necessary or not, you can't do it.

Yes, from a purely episimological perspective someone cannot disprove any of the Norse gods, fantastic beasts, or cosmic teapots. These are just things within a world of things. As for the Christian God, to the extent that He is identical with the God of Classical Philosophy, He falls into a completely category. So I really don't have time for the various straw man arguments that make this dumb-ass category error. And ultimately, I really don't care whether or not any pagan god exists. Maybe they do in some Star Trek "Who Mourns for Adonais" or Q kind of way but since none are the Supreme Being, none would be worthy of worship as God.

(FWIW I didn't "bail". I'm just tapped out from working, my side-hustle, and serving as my cooperative's board secretary. I do not fault anyone for dropping threads that cease to interest them or if they go silent for long periods of time.)

I have never heard a good explanation for why the Christian god gets his own category.

(March 7, 2018 at 12:58 pm)Neo-Scholastic Wrote:

(March 6, 2018 at 9:19 pm)vulcanlogician Wrote: But the point of the thread isn't even metaphysical. It's epistemological. How the hell do you disprove Odin? -- Whether he's necessary or not, you can't do it.

Yes, from a purely episimological perspective someone cannot disprove any of the Norse gods, fantastic beasts, or cosmic teapots. These are just things within a world of things. As for the Christian God, to the extent that He is identical with the God of Classical Philosophy, He falls into a completely category. So I really don't have time for the various straw man arguments that make this dumb-ass category error. And ultimately, I really don't care whether or not any pagan god exists. Maybe they do in some Star Trek kind of way but since none are the Supreme Being, none would be worthy of worship as God.

The Christian God is a Trinity. He cannot be the Supreme Being. Odin is the one and only God of Classical Philosophy. He is "maximally great" in all the specific ways that Norse theologists have attributed to him (omnipotent, omniscient, omnipresent, omnibenevolent, etc.). It's just that, unlike Yahweh, he's not a triune God, but a strictly one and only God. Also, all the stuff you've read about Odin in books are not 100% true, so take what fallible human beings have said about him with a grain of salt, and come and join us in worshiping Odin, the one and only true God. Amen.

So we've switched goalposts now:

"Yahweh is the Supreme Being, but Odin is not."
"Why not?"
"Because I said so..... And because my other arguments would not be valid any other way."

*sigh*

(March 7, 2018 at 12:55 pm)LostLocke Wrote:

(March 7, 2018 at 11:39 am)RoadRunner79 Wrote: In either case, some caution must be used. In observing similar concepts or characteristics; it doesn't follow that there is a connection.  Even if Y looks somewhat like X, you need to show why you think the two are connected, it's not enough to just show that they are similar. 

One might also point out, that you are just pushing the problem back further; and now would be talking about this source which the other was supposedly derived from.  Pointing to something else, certainly is an end of one's argument.

I actually agree with you, but you need to tell Huggy this.
He dismisses Odin out of hand because of those points, but Yahweh also has the same issues. So it comes down to an either/or scenario: You can dismiss ANY god that is similar to older ones, or NO god that is similar to older ones. You can't pick one and not apply the standards to another.

It was to all, I just quoted you, because you isolated that part well.

I would agree, that one needs to be consistent in their reasoning and logic.  The reasons for one thing, should apply to something similar, unless you can justify with reason, that it should not apply.

(March 7, 2018 at 6:29 am)Huggy74 Wrote: I will respond to this by stating that every single major mythology and even the doctrines of some Christian denominations evolved from ancient Babylonian pagan religion.

The peoples of Ancient Mesopotamia, being the cradle of civilization changed from monotheism to polytheism, for example, Abraham was from the city of Ur which was a city of Sumeria, Abraham left the city in search of the one true God.

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

Quote:A confrontation between Nimrod and Abraham is said to have taken place, according to several Jewish and Islamic traditions. Some stories bring them both together in a cataclysmic collision, seen as a symbol of the confrontation between Good and Evil, and/or as a symbol of monotheism against polytheism.

Everyone is familiar with the tower of Babel (which meant the 'gate of God', 'Bab' meaning gate and 'El' meaning God, and more importantly "El Shaddai" is another name for the one God) story where at one time everyone spoke the same language but were confused and ended up speaking many different languages, but the same could be said with religion, one God turned in to many gods.

As people migrated out, the Babylonian pagan religion spread throughout the world by way of Egypt, Greece and Rome.

For example Both Horus and Odin sacrifice one of their eyes
http://www.jewishencyclopedia.com/articles/11548-nimrod

Quote:When Nimrod was informed that Abraham had come forth from the furnace uninjured, he remitted his persecution of the worshiper of Yhwh; but on the following night he saw in a dream a man coming out of the furnace and advancing toward him with a drawn sword. Nimrod thereupon ran away, but the man threw an egg at him; this was afterward transformed into a large river in which all his troops were drowned, only he himself and three of his followers escaping. Then the river again became an egg, and from the latter came forth a small fowl, which flew at Nimrod and pecked out his eye.

Who is Nimrod?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nimrod

Quote:The first biblical mention of Nimrod is in the Table of Nations. He is described as the son of Cush, grandson of Ham, and great-grandson of Noah; and as "a mighty one in the earth" and "a mighty hunter before the Lord". This is repeated in the First Book of Chronicles 1:10, and the "Land of Nimrod" used as a synonym for Assyria or Mesopotamia, is mentioned in the Book of Micah 5:6:

   And they shall waste the land of Assyria with the sword, and the land of Nimrod in the entrances thereof: thus shall he deliver us from the Assyrian, when he cometh into our land, and when he treadeth within our borders.

Genesis says that the "beginning of his kingdom" (reshit mamlakto) were the towns of "Babel, Erech, Akkad and Calneh in the land of Shinar" (Mesopotamia) (Gen 10:10)

http://www.hebroots.org/hebrootsarchive/...901_q.html

Quote:Nimrod means "tyrant". He led the Sumerians of Babylon to pay tribute to the skies (sun, moon, stars, planets) with the sacrifice of their children. The Tower of Babel was built for this purpose, echoed in other cultures such as the Aztecs, Mayans, and Incas. Since the head of this government was such an idolatrous tyrant, Shem (Nimrod's uncle) killed him. Nimrod's mother, Semiramis, consoled the people by making them believe the child she carried was Nimrod "reincarnated" -- and named him "Duzu" (Tammuz), Babylonian for the son who rises. This Duzu went into the groves (forests) and placed a gift on a tree to honor Nimrod each year at the winter solstice. It has been said that Duzu was the offspring of Nimrod, who mated with his mother. Nimrod became known as Baal, meaning LORD, and was worshipped by the Babylonians as the sun in the sky -- thus the origin of "going to the heavens" at death.

Therefore it is my position that the Norse god Odin is derived from previously held concepts and can reasonably be dismissed as being real.

I would be interested to hear a comparison of the Babylonian Myth with the Norse Mythology Huggy. The Norse Myths do incorporate some aspects of Greek Mythology, but it's tangential. For example there are three fate like creatures weaving the past, present and future at the bottom of the world tree. There is a Hell like hot world, but it's not where the damned are sent. It will however, in the end engulf all worlds at the end. Odin hung from a tree in agony with a spear in his side, but it was not for anyone's sins. He traded pain for the ability to read magic runes. He traded an eye for wisdom. The sky is a dome, abet made from a giants skull. But there isn't much one to one correspondence of gods or tales about them.

Odin is no Zeus. He is not the strongest, but the wisest. He is the creator of men whom he and his brothers equipped to life on their own. Asengaard is a fortress not a place where gods sup ambrosia.

The Norse Gods are locked in a war to keep the giants from taking over all worlds. It a battle they are doomed to lose as the Frost Giants continue to grow and are thus winning the arms race. But even if the gods did somehow win, the great world tree that as you might guess, supports all worlds, is doomed. There are poisoned wells as its roots. It will die and fall. There is no salvation. The gods are not eternal. They can be and sometimes are killed. The gods must pay real prices for things. They suffer long term loss for the common good. They are also for the most part loyal husband's and wives who do not stray. Odin and Thor do not spend their time seducing mortal women.

But the stories about these gods are often trickster tales concerning Loki, how is part giant. He is not a creature to be worshiped. He is happily amoral and too clever by half. He gets the gods into and out of much trouble. One goddess is unmarried. Many tales revolve around giants wanting to marry her, not rape, marry. She is no Diana deviated to virginity. The problem is not marriage itself, but the potential bridegroom.

It is a dark world view in the long run where what you do in the present is what matters. The end is predetermined. Sacrifice , strength, and wisdom are admired and demonstrated.

It is precisely this no free lunch aspect of the Norse Gods that makes them more real than, either the Greek gods, or the early Hebrew myths.

Obviously, The Norse peoples received a clearer vision of the real state of affairs than the muddied softer visions of the Greeks and Babylonians. These Norse Gods are real.

(March 7, 2018 at 1:02 pm)LadyForCamus Wrote:

(March 7, 2018 at 7:40 am)Huggy74 Wrote: No, my argument is that Odin is a myth formed from older myths... The city of Babel existed... Their mythology also existed... That mythology was incorporated into Norse mythology. Therefore since Norse mythology is in no way original, it cannot be the truth, making Odin not real.

Got it?

Did you not say, “I can prove Odin does not exist’?  I’ve forgotten the thread where the original discussion took place.

The OP quoted what I said in the beginning of the thread.

(March 6, 2018 at 8:40 am)Huggy74 Wrote: I'll take you up on submitting evidence against Odin, I won't break a sweat winning that argument.

Start a thread whenever you're ready.

Victory conditions are who has more evidence for or against.

(March 7, 2018 at 1:25 pm)Huggy74 Wrote:

(March 7, 2018 at 1:02 pm)LadyForCamus Wrote: Did you not say, “I can prove Odin does not exist’?  I’ve forgotten the thread where the original discussion took place.

The OP quoted what I said in the beginning of the thread.

(March 6, 2018 at 8:40 am)Huggy74 Wrote: I'll take you up on submitting evidence against Odin, I won't break a sweat winning that argument.

Start a thread whenever you're ready.

Victory conditions are who has more evidence for or against.

No, victory conditions are who has more evidence corresponding better to one's position than the other. You're failing big time so far, and I note you haven't bothered to address my challenge yet.

(March 7, 2018 at 1:31 pm)Grandizer Wrote:

(March 7, 2018 at 1:25 pm)Huggy74 Wrote: The OP quoted what I said in the beginning of the thread.


Victory conditions are who has more evidence for or against.

No, victory conditions are who has more evidence corresponding better to one's position than the other. You're failing big time so far, and I note you haven't bothered to address my challenge yet.

Who are you to say what the victory conditions are or aren't?

(March 5, 2018 at 7:33 pm)Cecelia Wrote:

(March 5, 2018 at 5:39 pm)Huggy74 Wrote: How about this... I present evidence that God exists and you present evidence that a God does not exist and we'll judge based on who has the most evidence for and against.

How about this... I present evidence that Odin exists and you present evidence that Odin does not exist and we'll judge based on who has the most evidence for and against.

Then we'll repeat that for every other god except the Christian God.  We'll see how you go about obtaining evidence against the existence of these other gods.

*emphasis mine*

Quote:How the hell do you disprove Odin?

The same way you disprove the FSM - or fucking jesus.

(March 7, 2018 at 1:35 pm)Huggy74 Wrote:

(March 7, 2018 at 1:31 pm)Grandizer Wrote: No, victory conditions are who has more evidence corresponding better to one's position than the other. You're failing big time so far, and I note you haven't bothered to address my challenge yet.

Who are you to say what the victory conditions are or aren't?

(March 5, 2018 at 7:33 pm)Cecelia Wrote: How about this... I present evidence that Odin exists and you present evidence that Odin does not exist and we'll judge based on who has the most evidence for and against.

Then we'll repeat that for every other god except the Christian God.  We'll see how you go about obtaining evidence against the existence of these other gods.

*emphasis mine*

Regardless, you've dismissed the stories about Odin, not his existence. It would be the same if I were to dismiss Christian claims because the stories have the character of myth.