Stone Tablet questions origins of Christianity.

I am fascinated with things like this. About a decade ago, a stone tablet was unearthed in the Dead Sea region, covered in Hebrew. It has been dated to sometime in the last few decades BCE, and the dating has stood up to scrutiny.

(in case anyone is wondering, dating for something like this is done based on language style, tools used, method used, and historical records of the area. No, this isn't in the story. It comes from discussing the Dead Sea Scrolls with a few scholars who got to work on them.)

Anyway, it is what the tablet says that is fascinating:

Actually, this is not surprising. Anyone who looks at some of the non-Judeo-Christian-Islamic religions of the region will see certain patterns of stories. The idea of a God/Human being can be found in some of the stories of Ancient Egypt, as well as the Zoroastrian story of Mithras from Persia (and still practiced in remote areas of Iran, India, and oddly enough northern Spain). The idea of a sacrificial God is in both those places as well (Osiris in Egypt, Mithras, hell even Odin was sacrificed.) Even how some of those gods were sacrificed is similar. Odin was hung from a tree and stabbed with a spear.

Anyway, what this means is that there might have been a tradition of a messianic figure who would be killed and rise again in 3 days decades before Jesus was supposed to have lived.

I find it interesting.

Careful. They're going to come after you for hating god again.

However, this is pretty interesting. Religious history is really cool. If you find out any more about this please post it.

Next thing you know, I'll be accused of slipping over to Israel, making the tablet myself, selling it to an antiques collector, bribing the academics who have studied it, all so I could come to SG and annoy Christians

You're right, though. Comparative religious studies is facinating. I have a cousin who majored in it, and he and I argue about it whenever we can.

neat.

You're just baiting Rude_ruca at this point, aren't you?

The mythos had to have some sort of origin.

Not really. I'm just really interested in these sort of things. I blame Indiana Jones

Well, if you believe Joseph Campbell and Jung, there are archetypes that are common to nearly all human mythology.

Okay, but you have to know she'll come trolling around this one sooner or later. Part of me wonders if you're doing it subconsciously.

Well, we all have to have our hobbies.

It is interesting, I think, to compare various mythologies. Wikipedia has a great bit on the flood myth across a pretty large selection of cultures.

Flood Mythology is interesting. From the yearly flooding of the Nile, to the sinking of Atlantis, from Noah to Gilgamesh to ancient Chinese legends and the sinking of Lyonesse in Arthurian legends, it does get around.

Have you read The Pagan Christ? I'm reading that now and it deals with this subject. Interesting read.

No, I haven't read it. But I'll have to check it out.

Have you seen Zeitgiest ?

Beaten to the punch by Chainlink.

Dude...don't you understand that the origins of and understanding of Christianity has already been determined by Rude Ruca! How dare you challenge her omniscience!!!

I'd really rather discuss the tablet than any member's behavior.

I'm sorrry...I am so easily drawn into the rousing of rabbles...

Not at all. I find religious history fascinating as well. What I have a problem with is ignorance of religion and religious history by those who have the most to say about it. It is a common view that Jesus was supposed to have fulfilled certain prophecies, and certainly any mythological parallels would have been played up by the gospel writers. But whether or not the resurrection or other miracles actually occurred matters little to me. My view of Jesus is that he achieved a mystical level of realization which was widely misinterpreted by the culture in which he lived. Thus, when he claimed that he and the Father are one, people thought that only applied to him, when in fact the same is true of everyone.

As to the topic at hand, it is certainly intriguing. One can certainly see a certain theological tradition interwoven into many different religious archetypes, and many that persist to this day (e.g. similar conceptions of right and wrong).

The thing i find intriguing about the bible is that it was written by men, who are by definition fallible and are certainly open to possible corruption.

Well, when you think about it, certain archetypes seem to be ingrained in the human psyche. Take Cinderella fo example. Nearly every culture in the world has a variation on the story that, while not identical in every detail, has enough similarities and the same underlying "people get what they deserve" story to almost have to be related.

And that's just a fairy tale. Why couldn't religions follow a similar pattern?

Don't forget the cross-translations that have stumbled through the ages.

Coyotemike, have you ever studied hermeneutics?

This is where I think science, and more specifically psychology have provided a good understanding of human nature.