Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.
 

[XTalk] Apollonius of Tyana

Expand Messages
  • R.Solarion - Apollonius.Net
    Message 1 of 21 , Aug 7, 1999
    • Steven Carr
      In message , Jeffrey B. Gibson writes ... Partly because Christian
      Message 2 of 21 , Aug 7, 1999
        In message <37AC958E.3A6849CE@...>, "Jeffrey B.
        Gibson" <jgibson000@...> writes

        >Bernard Muller wrote:
        >> And yes, the cult of
        >> Mithras, might have a lot to do about the dating of Jesus' birth.
        >>
        >
        >It is a typical ploy of those who want to maintain that Jesus is only a
        >dressed up X, or that most of the elements in the Christian myth were taken
        >over from X, to work from the post hoc fallacy. Why, I wonder, when (alleged)
        >parallels between Jesus and some other figure are noted, must it be the case
        >(assuming the parallels are not imaginative) that the flow of influence is
        >always **from** X **to** Jesus. Why is it never considered by the Jesus as
        >myth school that the flow of influence is the **other way around**, that
        >certain elements that have come down to us in the story of X have not been
        >taken over and up by devotees of this figure FROM the story of Jesus? On
        >Mithas especially as a good candidate for a reverse influence, see the brief
        >entry on Mithraism in the ODCC.

        Partly because Christian apologists insist that the reason no Roman
        writer writes about Jesus in the 1st century AD is that Christianity was
        too small to be noticed by the Romans. It is hard for A to influence B
        if followers of B have never heard of A.

        --
        Steven Carr
      • Jeffrey B. Gibson
        ... This may very well be true as far as the earlier Apologists go (can you cite a source?), but I wonder how much it is the case with those from the late 2nd
        Message 3 of 21 , Aug 8, 1999
          Steven Carr wrote:

          > In message <37AC958E.3A6849CE@...>, "Jeffrey B.
          > Gibson" <jgibson000@...> writes
          >
          > >Bernard Muller wrote:
          > >> And yes, the cult of
          > >> Mithras, might have a lot to do about the dating of Jesus' birth.
          > >>
          > >
          > >It is a typical ploy of those who want to maintain that Jesus is only a
          > >dressed up X, or that most of the elements in the Christian myth were taken
          > >over from X, to work from the post hoc fallacy. Why, I wonder, when (alleged)
          > >parallels between Jesus and some other figure are noted, must it be the case
          > >(assuming the parallels are not imaginative) that the flow of influence is
          > >always **from** X **to** Jesus. Why is it never considered by the Jesus as
          > >myth school that the flow of influence is the **other way around**, that
          > >certain elements that have come down to us in the story of X have not been
          > >taken over and up by devotees of this figure FROM the story of Jesus? On
          > >Mithas especially as a good candidate for a reverse influence, see the brief
          > >entry on Mithraism in the ODCC.
          >
          > Partly because Christian apologists insist that the reason no Roman
          > writer writes about Jesus in the 1st century AD is that Christianity was
          > too small to be noticed by the Romans. It is hard for A to influence B
          > if followers of B have never heard of A.
          >

          This may very well be true as far as the earlier Apologists go (can you cite a
          source?), but I wonder how much it is the case with those from the late 2nd and
          early 3rd centuries?. In any event, we shouldn't confuse a rhetorical ploy with
          how much knowledge about things Christian there actually was, especially when we
          are considering the question of whether Philostratus' portrait of Apollonius was
          influenced by Christian portraits of Jesus.

          It is demonstrable that well before the time that Philostratus wrote there is
          knowledge among even elite "pagans" of Jesus and Christians and of Christians
          claims for Jesus. Witness the rather full knowledge of all of this in Celsus'
          _True Discourse_ (c. 178). And without such a knowledge Justin Martyr would not
          have come over to the Christian camp. Philostratus composed his Life of A. no
          earlier than 217 CE and at the behest of an empress, Julia Domna, who seems to
          have been aware of and alarmed by how much Christianity represented a threat to
          the philosophical schools she favoured.

          Yours,

          Jeffrey
          --
          Jeffrey B. Gibson
          7423 N. Sheridan Road #2A
          Chicago, Illinois 60626
          e-mail jgibson000@...
        • R.Solarion - Apollonius.Net
          How do you know this about Julia Domna? It seems to me that you are speculating, and Philostratus book wasn t published till 220 CE, three years after the
          Message 4 of 21 , Aug 8, 1999
            How do you know this about Julia Domna? It seems to me that you are
            speculating, and Philostratus' book wasn't published till 220 CE, three
            years after the death of the Empress. Regards, Rob

            >have come over to the Christian camp. Philostratus composed his Life of A. no
            >earlier than 217 CE and at the behest of an empress, Julia Domna, who
            >seems to
            >have been aware of and alarmed by how much Christianity represented a
            >threat to
            >the philosophical schools she favoured.
            >
            >Yours,
            >
            >Jeffrey
          Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.