Ancient Literature Discussion (History, Myth, Philosophy &c.)

[LegalLoliLover]

I really hate modern American stories about ancient Greece where Hades is portrayed as the Lucifer to Zeus's Yahweh. Zeus is supposed to be the Lucifer to Cronus's Yahweh. It's just that, unlike Lucifer, Zeus ended up winning. Then again, Cronus originally overthrew Uranus. Actually, did Hades ever have political ambitions in the original Greek myth? Or is that just a Christian American smear campaign against "the man downstairs"?

[Mattias]

Hades always struck me as the most level headed of the Big Three no constant infidelity, or cursing people because they disagree with him. His most asshole-ish thing was kidnapping Persephone, which on the scale of dick moves by Greek Gods is like a 2.

[LegalLoliLover]

Amakusa was obviously Christian, but wasn't Zhang Jiao also monotheistic (back when most people in China were polytheistic)?

[Arashi_Leonhart]

Anyone more familiar with Inanna/Ishtar or Meso-Sumerian myth know where the name Maanna comes from for Ishtarin's boat of heaven?

[Five_X]

Daneel, return to us from KanColle hell

[BookHolic]

I've been following a good Youtube channel for Mythology and History, they're called Overly Sarcastic Productions. Great humor, animation and quality in their works. They cover a bit of everything. Greek myth, South American, Paradise Lost and Dante's Inferno. I really enjoy their miscellaneous series which are only a few minutes long.

[RoydGolden]

Been reading The Pagan Christ by Tom Harpur. Pretty interesting. I haven't read that far yet and I'm not sure whether to take all the more extreme claims at face-value (such as Jesus = Horus/Mithras), but at the very least it offers a fascinating look into the history of the early Church and the

corruption

evolution

Christianity underwent.

[SeiKeo]

The evidence for the historical person of Jesus of Nazareth is incontestable outside of fringe conspiracy theory. Don't read trash.

[RoydGolden]

The evidence for the historical person of Jesus of Nazareth is incontestable outside of fringe conspiracy theory. Don't read trash.

I doubted that too, but the author at least seems like a reputed scholar rather then a hack (plus he is actually is a Christian, so you can't accuse him of secularist bias). To be honest, I'm not even really at the point where he argues for or against a historical Christ yet. So far he's mainly talking about the history of the early Church, which does seem accurate. (With plenty of historical quotes to back up his assertions, so if they were made up it'd be pretty obvious)

[SeiKeo]

I mean, idk what to tell you man, this is like climate science, denying historicity by definition makes you unreputable.

[RoydGolden]

I mean, idk what to tell you man, this is like climate science, denying historicity by definition makes you unreputable.

What are some good sources for the authenticity of a historical Jesus (other then the Bible, obviously)? Most of the references seem to be either outright forgeries (like with Josephus), extremely vague or inserted hundreds of years after the fact. I'm not saying you're wrong, I'm just curious.

[SeiKeo]

Ironically, Josephus is considered to be extremely authentic. Moreover, the strongest evidence is the fact that, despite all the motivation in the world to tear down Christanity, 'Jesus wasn't real' was only an argument invented after the Enlightenment.

[Dullahan]

ey kid, ya wanna buy some pelagianism

[NMR-3]

ey kid, ya wanna buy some pelagianism

I dunno, mister, my pastor always told me not to talk to strangers.

[RoydGolden]

Ironically, Josephus is considered to be extremely authentic. Moreover, the strongest evidence is the fact that, despite all the motivation in the world to tear down Christanity, 'Jesus wasn't real' was only an argument invented after the Enlightenment.

Wasn't one of Josephus' reports thought to be added after the fact by the Church? (Granted, it may have been constructed around a core of actual truth). Also, some of the arguments in favor of Jesus as a historical figure seem to rely on the only alternative being a falsely historical Jesus, rather then a myth as Harpur is suggesting. A myth is different then false history; in the same way there's a difference between Star Wars and RL ancient alien theories.

[Five_X]

What are some good sources for the authenticity of a historical Jesus (other then the Bible, obviously)? Most of the references seem to be either outright forgeries (like with Josephus), extremely vague or inserted hundreds of years after the fact. I'm not saying you're wrong, I'm just curious.

T A C I T U S

I mean the best sources for Jesus being a real dude who riled up some Jews are those written by Romans who didn't like this weird new Judaic cult, but felt like mentioning the guy behind it because he existed.

[SpoonyViking]

Been reading The Pagan Christ by Tom Harpur. Pretty interesting. I haven't read that far yet and I'm not sure whether to take all the more extreme claims at face-value (such as Jesus = Horus/Mithras), [...]

How exactly does he compare Jesus to Horus and Mithras?

[RoydGolden]

How exactly does he compare Jesus to Horus and Mithras?

Again, I haven't gotten that far yet and I know very little about Mithras, but with Horus (who he seems to be combining with Osiris a la Yahweh being both Father and Son) the gist seems to be that they were both sky-gods who came down to earth to spread righteousness, were violently killed and then resurrected to triumph over a devil-like figure. Plus some (most?) of Jesus' sayings apparently derive from very similar Egyptian sayings.

[SpoonyViking]

...Honestly, I'd recommend throwing the book away.

[Five_X]

Almost reminds me of a (modern) history book I unfortunately bought a few years ago, that blamed the problems of the Roman Empire in part on, I quote, "the meddling character of the Hebrews." Just goes to show that just because something is recent scholarship doesn't prevent it from being absolute rubbish.