Newsgroups: sci.lang,sci.classics
Path: cantaloupe.srv.cs.cmu.edu!das-news2.harvard.edu!news4.ner.bbnplanet.net!news3.near.net!paperboy.wellfleet.com!news-feed-1.peachnet.edu!gatech!howland.reston.ans.net!vixen.cso.uiuc.edu!uchinews!ellis!deb5
From: deb5@ellis.uchicago.edu (Daniel von Brighoff)
Subject: Re: Do Zeus and Jupiter derive from `light' ?
X-Nntp-Posting-Host: midway.uchicago.edu
Message-ID: <DBM6vE.z9@midway.uchicago.edu>
Sender: news@midway.uchicago.edu (News Administrator)
Reply-To: deb5@midway.uchicago.edu
Organization: The University of Chicago
References: <DAtu1A.Lyr@prl.philips.nl> <09JUL95.11186536.0031@music.mus.polymtl.ca> <DBIJsn.9As@midway.uchicago.edu> <11JUL95.12780834.0035@music.mus.polymtl.ca>
Date: Wed, 12 Jul 1995 17:50:01 GMT
Lines: 47
Xref: glinda.oz.cs.cmu.edu sci.lang:41234 sci.classics:8119

In article <11JUL95.12780834.0035@music.mus.polymtl.ca>,
Alexander Kiefer  <KA00@music.mus.polymtl.ca> wrote:
>In article <DBIJsn.9As@midway.uchicago.edu> deb5@ellis.uchicago.edu (Daniel von Brighoff) writes:
>>In article <09JUL95.11186536.0031@music.mus.polymtl.ca>,
>>Alexander Kiefer  <KA00@music.mus.polymtl.ca> wrote:

>> I'm sorry, are you saying that there is no historical evidence
>>for Muhammad, the Bab, the Ba'al Shem Tov, "the Younger Brother of
>>Jesus" (both of them), and so on, or are you saying that none of these are
>>"messianic figures"?  Please clarify your statement.
>
>Being a historically documented person has nothing to do with
>being a Messiah. Every religion has its own set of "holy men".
>Religious terms such as Prophet or Messiah can be validated by
>religious dogmas only. There are no miracles documented by
>history. Do you know about some?

	I see the confusions now:  a "messianic figure" is NOT the
same thing as "a Messiah."  Whether either Hong Xiuquan or Jesus the 
Christ or Menachem Schneerson or Bob Marley was "a Messiah" is purely 
a question of faith.  Whether they are "messianic figures" is something 
which can productively be discussed without overt reference to 
religious dogma.

>>>Certainly not a messianic "figure".
>>
>>But a historical one who may be the basis for a messianic figure.
>
>There is your catch, "may be".
>Lets twist it, who "may be not" a Messiah.

That certainly is twisting it:  I never called *anyone* "a Messiah."

>Please, understand that I dont tell that there is/would be no
>Messiah. But to me, He is just One, and you dont seem to like
>his Name.

I have nothing against His name; in fact, I'm not even sure to 
which putative Messiah you are referring.  (I'd guess Jesus Christ,
but you've already accused me of "anglocentricity" and I wouldn't
want to be presumptuous.)


-- 
	 Daniel "Da" von Brighoff    /\          Dilettanten
	(deb5@midway.uchicago.edu)  /__\         erhebt Euch
				   /____\      gegen die Kunst!
