(June 4, 2013 at 12:40 am)Rhythm Wrote:

(June 3, 2013 at 11:33 pm)Drich Wrote: So you wanted me to watch the movie because you all were convinced it was Religious kryptonite, and when I did and did not fall before it in tears, but took the argument down to it core and took it apart

That's quite the imagination you have there Drich, what dream did you visit this world in?

the world that has post 63 included in this thread.

I listened to the first hour or so. Mildly interesting, but I think he goes on a bit too long with the Odysseus stuff. It's an interesting idea but I think it would be better as a summary. Lots more to watch, though.

(June 4, 2013 at 8:08 am)Tonus Wrote: I listened to the first hour or so. Mildly interesting, but I think he goes on a bit too long with the Odysseus stuff. It's an interesting idea but I think it would be better as a summary. Lots more to watch, though.

In one of my first posts here I refuted the 'odysseus stuff' with links to the encyclopaedia Britannica, wiki, and the university of Ohio. In short Odysseus has nothing in common with Christ.

Sigh, Drich...just sigh, common themes and devices in common narrative styles......your lack of appreciation for literature never fails to leave me unimpressed. Perhaps you didn't realize this, but the contention is not that jesus-is-odysseus....or vv......

"But but but, my character has a different name, and the details of my story are different in minutae" No shit Sherlock, different authors different narratives.....

The contention, my uninterested friend, is that the author used a narrative style that would be familiar to his audience (and respected/admired/otherwise positively valued) - mimesis- to convey a dissimilar (in some regards...and not in others) message. That this narrative style is one that we would classify as fiction (intentionally so) leads one to surmise that the narratives message was most likely more important than it's contents - and that the author realized this full well...and never intended it to be anything other than-much like the feeding of the multitudes bit that you so casually shit on in our other thread. Get it now?

This is why you are in lala-land when you imagine yourself to be the triumphant christian warrior valiantly defending the gospel of christ. No one's attacking it. In fact, people are highlighting it's well developed literary style, the education of the author - and it's value as a vehicle for delivering a message that would be so readily available to it's readers. You can talk about the differences of beliefs espoused therein all day long - and you will -not- be discussing the narrative style, the narrative devices, or the common literary "culture" of the audience and their receptiveness to a narrative based on those factors. I get that this is not enough for you, your personal faith demands that this be a dry fucking historical document. Tough titties, because it isn't. Can anyone establish the intent of a long dead author with certainty? Absolutely not. We can, however, compare their styles and draw parallels and dissimilarities. We - of course- being those of us who are actually interested in these stories and their manufacture to begin with.

(June 4, 2013 at 11:01 am)Drich Wrote: In one of my first posts here I refuted the 'odysseus stuff' with links to the encyclopaedia Britannica, wiki, and the university of Ohio. In short Odysseus has nothing in common with Christ.

The video's creator floats a theory that Mark was influenced by the tales of Odysseus, and he compares numerous points where he feels the influence shows. It is only presented as a pet theory because it's not conclusive. I got the impression that it was like those Lincoln/Kennedy assassination comparisons; take the details that confirm a link and ignore the rest.

I think that the idea that Mark was influenced by old tales and legends is interesting and worth making with a few good examples. But he spends a lot of time finding every conceivable link, no matter how faint. Maybe he felt that quantity would be better than quality. I think it's a point worth making, but not worth drawing out as far as he did.

(June 4, 2013 at 11:31 am)Tonus Wrote: The video's creator floats a theory that Mark was influenced by the tales of Odysseus,

Given the time period -and that the author had to learn to read and write from something.......had to learn the art of the tale somewhere -more than reasonable. The stories we read/hear float around in our heads waiting for a moment to resurface. I don't personally feel that this lessens the value of the narrative contained in Mark at all, personally. An author is influenced by other authors, and? Know what I mean?

Quote: and he compares numerous points where he feels the influence shows. It is only presented as a pet theory because it's not conclusive. I got the impression that it was like those Lincoln/Kennedy assassination comparisons; take the details that confirm a link and ignore the rest.

I think that the idea that Mark was influenced by old tales and legends is interesting and worth making with a few good examples. But he spends a lot of time finding every conceivable link, no matter how faint. Maybe he felt that quantity would be better than quality. I think it's a point worth making, but not worth drawing out as far as he did.

I get that impression with alot of literary comparisons. Though I don't know if it raises to the level of assassination conspiracies. I suppose when you invest the time to draw parallels you want to make sure your audience gets the full measure of what you see. As ever with these narratives, we are free to assign our own value to the relative importance of any comparison between parts.

Quote:In one of my first posts here I refuted the 'odysseus stuff' with links to the encyclopaedia Britannica, wiki, and the university of Ohio. In short Odysseus has nothing in common with Christ.

Drippy you have this expectation that just because you say something that everyone else automatically takes you as some kind of fucking authority.

Try to understand that I think you are a fucking asshole who is overly invested in trying to breathe life back into your holy horseshit. Virtually nothing you say has any relevance to the subject at hand. As Rhythm notes, the concept of a literary motif is lost on you because you exist in a world of black and white. Shades of gray have no place in your bizarre little personal universe.

Time to grow up.

(June 4, 2013 at 11:38 am)Rhythm Wrote: I suppose when you invest the time to draw parallels you want to make sure your audience gets the full measure of what you see. As ever with these narratives, we are free to assign our own value to the relative importance of any comparison between parts.

That was what I found most compelling and interesting about it. The notion that Mark (or any writer of the time) would be influenced by old legends and myths struck me as obvious once it was made and demonstrated, and I enjoyed that part. But I think it drags on. "Odysseus escaped by clinging to the underside of a sheep. The demons escaped by possessing swine. See the parallel???" Errr, well... not really. A number of the comparisons are much better and give the viewer something to think about, and limiting it would have had more impact IMO.

As an aside, the links Drich provided are just encyclopedia entries for Odysseus. Am I missing something?

I think that what Drich doesn't realize too well is that we operate under the very likely assumption that his particular god is non-existent, and hence, made up.
If it's made-up, then, as with all artists, inspiration must have been drawn from somewhere.
Greek tales were right next door, so it stands to reason that some parts of those styles did find their way into the myth being written up.

And places where you learn to read and write, must have been somewhat scarce, so the prevailing literary styles would be known to everyone who could write.
Other sources of inspiration must have been used, of course, mixed in with some genuinely new material and you get what we see.

(June 4, 2013 at 11:56 am)Tonus Wrote: As an aside, the links Drich provided are just encyclopedia entries for Odysseus. Am I missing something?

LOL, no...-you- aren't missing anything............

Greek tales weren't "right next door" btw Poca, they were "in-house".