Mythology vs. Christianity

[Jistyr]

Now as people we've always kind of been taught and told that Mythology of ancient Greek and other places is interesting to study, but that it is never actually true. It has even been covered in schools and is always under the light that it has no ground to stand on, is impossible, and will never become true.

Now to think that a number of people believed enthusiastically in such mythology, when it was told as the 'truth' of their time, what makes it different from Christianity today?

Basically... What makes Christianity any more believable than something like Mythology that we justify as not true using the common sense we bear today?

 

[Gentoo]

I don't see it as any different. I also don't think the ancient Greeks saw their religion as mythology. We do consider it mythology now, but in thousands of years, Christianity have a great potential to be considered as much of mythology as the ancient greek mythology is now.

 

[Mister Emu]

To the unbeliever, nothing is different...

 

[doppelganger]

Because something is mythology does not make it untrue. Indeed, myth points to the only truth.

 

[Rolling_Stone]

Now as people we've always kind of been taught and told that Mythology of ancient Greek and other places is interesting to study, but that it is never actually true. It has even been covered in schools and is always under the light that it has no ground to stand on, is impossible, and will never become true.

Now to think that a number of people believed enthusiastically in such mythology, when it was told as the 'truth' of their time, what makes it different from Christianity today?

Basically... What makes Christianity any more believable than something like Mythology that we justify as not true using the common sense we bear today?

Anyone who has listened to Joseph Campbell knows that something doesn't have to be factual in order to be true, but in order for the meaning of that truth to be realized, we must be able to relate to it in some way. As the world changes, as the prevailing worldview changes, the meaning of some myths are lost because we can no longer relate to them.

 

[Jistyr]

To the unbeliever, nothing is different...

Or perhaps to the believer, identical things are warped to look different for the sake of their own ideas.

 

[Zephyr]

Norse Mythology is real enough to me

 

[Mister Emu]

Or perhaps to the believer, identical things are warped to look different for the sake of their own ideas.

Perhaps not.

 

[Panda]

Or maybe it is, both are (or were) religions that believed in god(s) there is no difference except you believe one is true and the other isn't

 

[Mister Emu]

both are (or were) religions that believed in god(s) there is no difference except you believe one is true and the other isn't

Knowledge, I don't believe much about my religion

 

[Zephyr]

Knowledge, I don't believe much about my religion

Same

 

[Jistyr]

Mister Emu, I respect your opinion, but your stance seems to be too much of a "what-I-say-is-right-and-therefor-whatever-I-say-goes" argument. Just because you believe you are correct does not mean you can just state things that you pose as facts and never provide any evidence for their factuality.

Point and case: Make your claims, but back them up.

 

[MaddLlama]

I don't see it as any different. I also don't think the ancient Greeks saw their religion as mythology. We do consider it mythology now, but in thousands of years, Christianity have a great potential to be considered as much of mythology as the ancient greek mythology is now.

Exactly what she said. =)

Sorry, lazy tonight.

 

[gnostic]

What is found in the Bible, like the Creation and the Flood has its root in Sumerian religion...but now called Sumerian mythology.

Judging by the myth of the Flood, Ziusudra predates Noah, from chronological standpoint of when each was written. Moses had supposedly got the revelation when he supposedly wrote the Genesis, thus possibly 13th-12th century BCE. However there are indication that the Genesis was composed in the 10th century BCE as the earliest but the earliest extant text or fragment of 6th century BCE.

The Sumerian text on Ziusudra, on the other hand is 2300-2000 BCE, in what we now referred to the text as the Eridu Genesis. Sumerian version of Gilgamesh mentioned Ziusudra (as the survivor of the Flood) in Death of Gilgamesh and Gilgamesh and the Netherworld were written around the same time of the Eridu Genesis.

A longer Akkadian-Babylonian version of Ziusudra, but the hero is called Atrahasis (Atrahasis is clearly derived from Ziusudra), which is also the name of the text, was written around 1800 BCE, indicates that this version is also older than Genesis' Noah.

So i think that Genesis 1-11 is largely based on the original Sumerian texts, thus make at least this part of the Bible as myth.

Also the Judaeo-Christian God (Yahweh or whatever you want to call him) seemed to have the attributes of the triad of Sumerian gods - An (Babylonian Anu), Enlil (Ellil) and Enki (Ea). An was the god and personification of heaven, Enlil of earth and wind, and Enki of water and wisdom.

It was Enlil who separated heaven from earth. And depending on the various myths, both Enlil and Enki have claims of creating mankind.

It was also Enlil who got angry with mankind and brought about the Flood, but Enki who saved mankind, by rescuing Ziusudra and his wife, by building the boat (Ark).

Also, there is story of tree and snake in Gilgamesh and the Netherworld, but the tree was created by the goddess Inana (Babylonian Ishtar), who planted the tree in Uruk.

There is also the talking snake in the myth of Etana, as well as a talking eagle. The oldest version found written in Old Babylonian, which is roughly around the time of Genesis' Abraham, which still make this story of Etana to be older than the Genesis.

Even the story of Cain and Abel seemed to be derived from Sumerian myth.

It sort of make you wonder how much of the Bible was derived from Sumerian or Babylonian originals, and then adapted by the Hebrew composers of the Genesis.

 

[Mister Emu]

Same

Mister Emu, I respect your opinion, but your stance seems to be too much of a "what-I-say-is-right-and-therefor-whatever-I-say-goes" argument. Just because you believe you are correct does not mean you can just state things that you pose as facts and never provide any evidence for their factuality.

There you go with that word again... believe...

Personal experience with the being I refer to as God, while hardly meriting the title evidence in a way scientific at all, is all I need.

 

[Aqualung]

Because something is mythology does not make it untrue. Indeed, myth pointsto the only truth.

True dat. Myth =/= wrong

 

[Jayhawker Soule]

Personal experience with the being I refer to as God, while hardly meriting the title evidence in a way scientific at all, is all I need.

Much as is the case with any delusion. It impresses me as the penultimate in naive arrogance to place so much faith in 'personal experience'.

 

[Jayhawker Soule]

Because something is mythology does not make it untrue. Indeed, myth points to the only truth.

True dat. Myth =/= wrong

It is true that "because something is mythology does not make it untrue", but to suggest that "myth points to the only truth" is simply inane.

There is, by the way, well developed sociology suggesting that myth must necessarily exceed truth to serve its function.

 

[Aqualung]

Excede truth, perhaps, but miss truth entirely, no.

By the way, do you have any references for this well-documented sociological phenomenon? I'd very much like to read up on it, so if you could point me to a good starting place I would very much appreciate it.

 

[Jayhawker Soule]

Excede truth, perhaps, but miss truth entirely, no.

By the way, do you have any references for this well-documented sociological phenomenon? I'd very much like to read up on it, so if you could point me to a good starting place I would very much appreciate it.

In Gods We Trust: The Evolutionary landscape of Religion