The Myth of Dionysus'

[thestoat]

I am using brackets for me reply since cut and paste not easy using the current os

So, it seems to me that you are stating that the only credible internet resource is one that you quote? [Wot?] Or is it simply one that agrees with your stance? [Wotlul] Just stating "nah nah I can't hear you" is pretty poor form. [I did not so[

(
I provide a reference suggesting what you have been saying in many threads is wrong. You don't try to refute the article, you give no reason for suspecting it is wrong, you simply state you don't accept it. That is the "nah nah I can't hear you"
)



I also quoted a wiki article stating "According to Persian mythology, Mithra, the sun god, was born at dawn on the 22nd of December to a virgin mother", which since it goes against what you have been saying is presumably discarded in the same way by you. [negative, I went to the source of that article, which claimed no such thing]

(
Utter bollocks. That was a direct QUOTE with corresponding URL to the source. Click the link, go to the source and reread. You will see the quote. Ignore the statement if you need to, but don't lie about something so easily refuted.
)

I come to these forums with a point of view - certainly. But I also read and take on board what others have said. [As do I see above] If I believe them wrong I explain why. [As do I] If I believe they have a valid point I state this. [As do I] Personally I don't simply ignore uncomfortable truths. But that's just me

[Scooter]

I also quoted a wiki article stating "According to Persian mythology, Mithra, the sun god, was born at dawn on the 22nd of December to a virgin mother", which since it goes against what you have been saying is presumably discarded in the same way by you.

negative, I went to the source of that article, which claimed no such thing

Utter bollocks. That was a direct QUOTE with corresponding URL to the source. Click the link, go to the source and reread. You will see the quote. Ignore the statement if you need to, but don't lie about something so easily refuted.

You expect her to be able to read through the bottom of a bottle?

[Joe Guy]

It theems to me that thith dithcussion hath turned into a hit or myth converthation.

[thestoat]

Scooter, I think I can see what you mean ...

[loCAtek]

Um, you were quoting yourself there, Stoat. Either circular logic or misquoting.

[The Hen]

Um, you were quoting yourself there, Stoat. Either circular logic or misquoting.

I am using brackets for me reply since cut and paste not easy using the current os

[Sean]

You may notice if you bother to read it Lo that your responses were included in that quote...

[The Hen]

Good point. One I wanted to make, but obsficated it instead.

[Sean]

Your point would be clear to most people Hen.

Most people...

[loCAtek]

..where stoat ignored my brackets first.

I followed the linked sources in his articles and found more leads to more relevant data*. Meaning I read more information from more than one source, to base my assertions on, while providing credit to the new sources.







*Persian/Iranian followers of an existing Mithras sect, descended from the original temple practitioners, are more relevant than an extinct Greco-Roman, copy-cat, cult.

[Scooter]

He posted a quote from a source, you claimed the source contained no such quote, when in fact it did. You were either lying, or too crocked to read it properly. Once again, instead of having the cojones to admit you were wrong, you completely sidestep your original accusation that he had made up the quote.

[thestoat]

..where stoat ignored my brackets first.

I followed the linked sources in his articles and found more leads to more relevant data*. Meaning I read more information from more than one source, to base my assertions on, while providing credit to the new sources.

Utterly bizarre, lo. I post a quote from a page, post a link to that page and you say "I went to the source of that article, which claimed no such thing" There is clearly no logic or method to your obvious madness

[The Hen]

..where stoat ignored my brackets first.

No Lo. His very next post, (after you posted your squared bracket response to him), is this very post you are complaining of being circular logic, or him quoting himself when he was responding to you. (your claim.). This is in fact the first opportunity he had to address your quote inserts.

[loCAtek]

I've found internet searching, takes much researching the source of the info, a few levels before it can considered a valid source.

So are the sources which you posted, which say that Dionysus was born of a mortal mother and a divine father, valid or not?

Which ones? Dionysus means 'born of two mothers', while there are numerous more legends and myths to explain his origins. He could support any god-mythos, from Afrikaner to Aztec, what does that prove about Christ?

[loCAtek]

There are lots of different interpretations due to the fact that a lot of the rituals and mythology of the various gods weren't written down, and much that was was destroyed by Christianity when it tried to consume the older faiths. There is plenty of controversy and interpretation going on about the bible, and we all know how much that has been manipulated, edited, changed and re-edited over the years. As I said, not a lot is written on wiki about it but I posted an interesting article (imo) giving more detail on Mithras and others.

So, I linked to the present day Mithra worshipers, who have carried on the traditions for 5,000 years. It may have been mysterious and misinterpreted in Greece and Rome but they still say to this day, Mithras has no mortal nor virgin mother.

...but very well, I'll research the Persians, the oldest followers of Mithras known thus far, for more insight into this mythology.

lo- [Not] sorry, I'll just accept an authority, and stop asking questions. -CAtek

[thestoat]

lo- [Not] sorry, I'll just accept an authority, and stop asking questions. -CAtek

But you don't accept anything unless you have posted it, simply stating that you "can't trust the internet". In fact, previously when I quoted a wiki article (seemingly the only source you will accept unless you post it), so pretended to read the source and state that the text I quoted wasn't there! And in a still earlier post the words weren't good enough for you - you wanted cave paintings.

[loCAtek]

That's over-generalizing; I've said 'that's the internet' in reference to only one source you posted.

Begging your pardon, to explain once more; I read the source you posted, and then read the source of that source.
Your quote was there, but it was explained by its source as hearsay.

Yes, I respect forensic archeology or verifiable cultural references, most significantly from the culture itself being studied; more than net hearsay.

[loCAtek]

Possible historical King Arthur.

[Gob]

Yes, and?

[The Hen]

Begging your pardon, to explain once more; I read the source you posted, and then read the source of that source.
Your quote was there, but it was explained by its source as hearsay.

No actually, it wasn't explained as heresy at all. It wasn't discussed.

Additionally the point you tried to promote was also lacking, as it had no citation.

It was said that Mithra was born out of the light that came from within the Alborz mountains[citation needed] .