Printable Version of Topic
Click here to view this topic in its original format |
Open Forums for ExChristian.Net > Debating with Christians > In the interests of academic integrity |
Posted by: Lokmer Mar 7 2005, 02:34 PM |
As many of you know, one of my primary fields of interest is myth (and, consequently, I have a deep and abiding interest in History and Language as well). In the interests of intellectual integrity, I cast my net wide when reading secondary sources, checking out mavericks as well as mainstreamers as I can find or afford their works. And, every once in a while, I run into a real winner in the "I'm a travesty and embarassment to my field" department. Read, if you dare, an interview with the author of "The Parthenon Code" who is convinced that Greek Myth corroborates Genesis, but from Satan's point of view: http://www.publishersnewswire.com/articles/article_0013.shtml. Or, indeed read some sample chapters from his book, and some supporting essays http://www.theparthenoncode.com/default.htm. This man, I kid you not, is the Christian response to Acharya S. However, unlike Acharya (who at least seems to be a decent, if overreaching, linguist), this man has NO background in any fields related to his subject. Now, I'm not one to stand on academic credentails - plenty of idiots have Ph.D.s. But his bio doesn't even mention an abiding interest or the history of his avocation, so we might know how exactly he came to be doing this kind of "work" (if one can demean the term to match the quality of this man's output). I just don't have the words... Rameus, if you're reading, you'll enjoy this one for a good laugh. -Lokmer |
Posted by: sexkitten Mar 7 2005, 03:34 PM |
Summary of ape-degenerate's basic thesis: Greek architecture and art all contained coded messages that prove that GENESIS IS HISTORICAL FACT AND BIBLEGOD IS REAL!!!! Excuse me while I wipe the bottled water off my monitor... |
Posted by: sexkitten Mar 7 2005, 03:53 PM |
I'm currently reading the essay which Lokmer linked to, and I'm finding myself somewhere between ROTFLMAO and highly disappointed. It would be *wonderful* to read an intelligent critique of Campbell's work on mythology. It would be wonderful to discuss different theories of how the common elements of myth connect togehter. However, when a serious essayist asks "Since Campbell is an evolutionist, shouldn’t his "archetype of incarnate being" look less like a human and more like a tadpole, a monkey, or a knuckle-dragging apeman?" it is difficult to take him seriously. That is a completely useless and irrelevant ad hominem. And his basic point in the essay appears to be that if you can't see that all myth is about Adam and Eve and the garden of Eden, you're trying too hard to avoid it and "blunt critical thinking." Because all critical thought leads back to *his* conclusion that all myth proves Genesis true. What a crock of poop. |
Posted by: Zach Mar 7 2005, 04:00 PM |
Somewhere, Jason Gastrich is reading this book... |
Posted by: Karl Mar 7 2005, 06:51 PM | ||||||||||||||
Upon reading it for the second time, I was as amazed that any human could utter such stupidity, as I was the first time.
Yes, they had magnificent Architecture and we have strip malls. They had Alexander the Great, we have Bush. They had Honor, Dignity and sound Philosophy in society. We have neo-con greed, graft, corruption and increasing poverty, with a little religio-statist idiocy thrown in. The fucked up mess we have now doesn't hold a candle to the Glory of the ancients.
Yes, the bible is the "word" of biblegod alright.
We've demonstrated the errancy, self-contradiction and incongruity of the "word" of "perfect" biblegod numerous times in this forum. Yes Pagan Greek Mythology definitely "proves" that the barbaric myths of primitive, uneducated ancient Hebrew tribesmen depicted in the OT are literally true, doesn't it? This is a new depth of dementia, even for Christian "apologetics".
The only kind of "mental paralysis" going is called fundie dogma.
An absolutely incredible bit of blather, especially the "intellectual stupor" comment. The whole interview with this "scholar" is one of the most asinine things anyone will ever read. But it IS indeed a very good laugh. Thanks for posting it, Lokmer.
I wouldn't doubt it. In the case of Robert and Jason, I would also recommend the film 'The Clash of the Titans'. They can put that with their other films about "supportive" mythology ('The Ten Commandments', 'The Passion Of The Christ', etc.) After all, to these types of "minds", especially if they made a movie about it, it must have literally happened.... K |
Posted by: ficino Mar 7 2005, 07:13 PM |
Well, let's not idealize the ancient Greeks too much. In Lucian's Icaromenippus, Zeus and Hermes look down at earth. "Who are those people?" asks Zeus. "They're the Athenians." "How do you know?" "They're all suing each other in court." Still, I hear you. I love it when Nietzsche points out that beauty was an ethical value for the Greeks. |
Posted by: Mr. Neil Mar 7 2005, 07:22 PM | ||
Goddammit, Zach! You beat me to it! |
Posted by: Asimov Mar 7 2005, 07:24 PM | ||||
You could say something about Hovind, but he's probably too busy beating off to pictures of women "giving birth" to bananas. |
Posted by: kemeticpoet Mar 7 2005, 07:37 PM |
The Parthenon Code gets the official... |
Posted by: crazy-tiger Mar 7 2005, 08:34 PM | ||
Hmm... Thanatos, as any quick search would show, is the Greek God of Death. And from that first error, he uses a line of reasoning with no other proof... The guy's a complete tit. |
Posted by: kemeticpoet Mar 7 2005, 09:00 PM |
Sheesh, making Athena into Eve takes like 8 different changes in the name. You could make ANYTHING allude to anything else by doing that much work to it. |
Posted by: crazy-tiger Mar 7 2005, 09:38 PM |
I've just discovered a slight problem with his assertion that Athena was originally spelt Athana... ATHENA: Greek Warrior Goddess. ATHENE: Known as a Greek goddess but was originally a Minoan or Mycenaean household goddess. She is the guardian ruler of the home. Goddess of domestic crafts. From what I can tell, Athene was called Athana by the Minoans. That demolishes that particular assertion, and all it took was 5 minutes of websearching. Why do I think research is something this guy doesn't believe in? |
Posted by: Tocis Mar 7 2005, 11:24 PM | ||
|
Posted by: Lokmer Mar 7 2005, 11:48 PM |
Well, I have spent a few hours going over these and several other essays this yahoo has published online, and it's like watching a road accident. Utter chaos, terrible scholarship (if scholarship it can be called), I haven't seen anything so utterly daft in all my years of reading mythology and mythological studies (and, in a field peopled with people like Acharya S and David Icke, that's saying A LOT). It's just... an embarassment. Even taken in a vacuum, ignoring the contrary evidence to many of his contentions (evidence I'm decently well versed in), and attempting to slip into his logic and give him the best possible reading, it just can't be made to work. Assertion piled on assumption, then conclusions drawn from said assertions and assumptions as if they were proved. For Pete's sake, Acharya S at least relies on bullshit scholarship to build her more wacky theories about the freemasons. This guy invents from whole cloth what he can't prove, gussies it up with badly done etymology, and layers it over with a fine layer of bullshit. His own logic doesn't work internally, even taking his assumptions (i.e. the outmoded and pretty well debunked early-enlightenment assumption that all mythic figures are legendary accretions around real historical personages) as plausible (and, lets be honest, with the finding of Troy there is at least some slim basis for giving that assertion a little bit of lead on the leash), it still can't hold up. Trying to make Triton into Noah, for example, utterly bastardizes the stories of Triton at their most primordial. Likewise, attempting to assert that there are two groups in the Levant/Occident/Asia Minor (1: the Jews, 2: everyone else) and that they all preserve the same stories independantly just stretches credulity beyond measure. Even just from a Christian perspective, nobody can reasonably read the Bible, take it as true, and buy that the Hebrews (and later the Christians) were not thoroughly inculturated and influenced by the surrounding civilizations (who, after all, made their prophets priests of their foreign religions - Jeremiah, Daniel, and Ezekiel were all in the Zoroastrian Priesthood, if the Bible is to be believed). It's one thing to believe that God was preserving a core message through these people (I don't buy it, but it's not insane to believe so), it's another to contend that each civilization preserved completely independant accounts of the SAME STORY from opposing points of view. Culture, history, et. al. just do not work that way, particularly with civilizations that are continually cross polinating in ways that can be OBSERVED and TRACED. Furthermore, his contention that "If my theories are correct, it presents a serious problem for the Darwinian theory of evolution, as the Greeks certainly remembered the same history as the Hebrews and did not believe that they came from slime, monkeys, and knuckle-dragging troglodytes" is bizarre beyond words. Even barring cross-polination, it's manifestly obvious that nobody but the Egyptians believed that life arose from the mud, and even then not in a fashion that in any way resembles evolutionary theory. This fairly easy observation doesn't connect in any logical way to debunking evolution, as even some fairly conservative Christians manage to perform mental gymnastics and make the Genesis account seem to work as history while still believing that God used Evolution to do his work. Would racial memory go BACK to a time BEFORE there was a race? Would primordial humans remember coming from Austrolopithicus or other hominids? What tripe! Again, I've run out of words before I've run out of outrage. Someone else want to carry this ball for a while? -Lokmer |
Posted by: Lokmer Mar 7 2005, 11:59 PM |
Okay, one more thing... Does it strike anyone else as mildly ironic that this man, who holds to the literal historical truth of the Bible in every book and every page, is railing against the "serpent wisdom" of Greek religion, the snake worship, the snake iconography, etc. but has nothing to say about YHWH commanding the people of Israel to venerate an idol of the serpent god to receive healing in Numbers 21:8-9? The passage reads: "21:8 The Lord said to Moses, 'Make a poisonous snake and set it on a pole. When anyone who is bitten looks on it, he will live.' 21:9 So Moses made a bronze snake and put it on a pole, so that if a snake had bitten someone, when he looked to the bronze snake he lived. -Lokmer |
Posted by: skankboy Mar 8 2005, 08:10 AM |
If mental gymnastics was an olympic event, this guy would win the gold medal for sure... |