DiscussMormonism.com

dastardly stem wrote: ↑

Mon Dec 19, 2022 9:22 pm

huckelberry wrote: ↑

Mon Dec 19, 2022 9:16 pm

People are posting their personal summaries.

I think I am quite able to question and doubt. I can see logical doubts about the reality of God and Jesus being raised from the dead. On the other hand I think the evidence of the New Testament and the existence of Jesus followers going back into the first part of the first century is very strong evidence that Jesus existed and was in at least a general form the person presented in the gospels.

Double thumbs up on this, huckelberry. Thanks for posting a brief summary. This makes a good deal of sense and I have no particular objection. I've been objectionable enough with your views and would like to say you are a delightful person to talk to on these topics.

Always true of Huck. Not so much of that Res Ipsa dude.

Turning my original question around, how many other religions at that time were based on (assumed to be) real people?

Gadianton wrote: ↑

Tue Dec 20, 2022 3:26 pm

Turning my original question around, how many other religions at that time were based on (assumed to be) real people?

I don't know. There were tons of religions...if they were all in some sense considered separate religions. Many to most contained many similar elements, it appears. Many to most also had their own touches of uniqueness. Romulus was thought to have been a real person at some point. Osirus was. Innana was....Asceplius, Baal...many seemed to be like Jesus...not really some man who lived, but a unique Son of God who lived and conquered death.

Were there any religions around that had not in some sense thought of their worshipped peoples and beginners not having lived some time some where? I don't know.

Wanted to add: Moses is often considered a character lacking historicity as well. But in the first century Jews, it appears, thought Moses too was a real character. The same with Abraham. Adam....And the like. So it's not just all these pagan religions that clearly had influence on Christianity, but also the one religion that Christianity sprang from also had characters who were at its beginning and may not have lived, but were thought to have lived.

dastardly stem wrote: ↑

Tue Dec 20, 2022 3:37 pm

Gadianton wrote: ↑

Tue Dec 20, 2022 3:26 pm

Turning my original question around, how many other religions at that time were based on (assumed to be) real people?

I don't know. There were tons of religions...if they were all in some sense considered separate religions. Many to most contained many similar elements, it appears. Many to most also had their own touches of uniqueness. Romulus was thought to have been a real person at some point. Osirus was. Innana was....Asceplius, Baal...many seemed to be like Jesus...not really some man who lived, but a unique Son of God who lived and conquered death.

Osiris was never believed to have been a human. Nor, as far as I am aware, were Inanna or Baal.

Gadianton wrote: ↑

Tue Dec 20, 2022 3:26 pm

Turning my original question around, how many other religions at that time were based on (assumed to be) real people?

From what I recall, Everett Ferguson's "Backgrounds of Early Christianity" names a few messianic figures from the same time period (both pre-and-post Jesus). I don't know that their following (and doctrinal development/claims) would be enough for the classification of a religion though. The chances are slim that it isn't boxed up somewhere, but I'll see if I can find it when I get home tonight.

Manetho wrote: ↑

Tue Dec 20, 2022 4:28 pm

dastardly stem wrote: ↑

Tue Dec 20, 2022 3:37 pm

I don't know. There were tons of religions...if they were all in some sense considered separate religions. Many to most contained many similar elements, it appears. Many to most also had their own touches of uniqueness. Romulus was thought to have been a real person at some point. Osirus was. Innana was....Asceplius, Baal...many seemed to be like Jesus...not really some man who lived, but a unique Son of God who lived and conquered death.

Osiris was never believed to have been a human. Nor, as far as I am aware, were Inanna or Baal.

I'd think the most likely of these 3 Baal was never said to be a real person. Some have speculated that both Osiris and Inanna were at one time real people, some even think Osiris was an early Pharoah, of sorts. Most, no doubt, suggest, to keep it simple, none of these three were human. Anyway...thanks.

My view as to why Jesus became divine is because Caesar, Augustus, Claudius, Vespasian, and Titus did.

Kishkumen wrote: ↑

Fri Dec 23, 2022 1:20 pm

My view as to why Jesus became divine is because Caesar, Augustus, Claudius, Vespasian, and Titus did.

If ya can't beat the Romans... join em!

Philo Sofee wrote: ↑

Fri Dec 23, 2022 3:00 pm

Kishkumen wrote: ↑

Fri Dec 23, 2022 1:20 pm

My view as to why Jesus became divine is because Caesar, Augustus, Claudius, Vespasian, and Titus did.

If ya can't beat the Romans... join em!

And when in Rome, do as the Romanians do!

dastardly stem wrote: ↑

Tue Dec 20, 2022 5:05 pm

Manetho wrote: ↑

Tue Dec 20, 2022 4:28 pm

Osiris was never believed to have been a human. Nor, as far as I am aware, were Inanna or Baal.

I'd think the most likely of these 3 Baal was never said to be a real person. Some have speculated that both Osiris and Inanna were at one time real people, some even think Osiris was an early Pharoah, of sorts. Most, no doubt, suggest, to keep it simple, none of these three were human. Anyway...thanks.

I am just reading one of my early Christmas presents, from Dan McClellan's intriguing book "YHWH's Divine Images, A Cognitive Approach," describing what it is that makes a deity a Deity. It has precious little to do with being a historical person first or not. It doesn't mean it is not an option, but it is not a necessary option in order for the reality of the Deity to be for any group who has and worships Deity. McClellan used to post here a few years back, and has really written a great book here.