Have you heard about this Savior?

a reply to: godlover25

Peter in Greek is "petros" which means a "moveable, insecure, or rolling rock". I'd say that that's a pretty accurate description of the church that Peter built, unstable and moveable. Its foundation is not stable at all, that becomes clear when you see the sheer plagiarism that Christianity and the church used to form their religion.

originally posted by: undo
jesus referred to himself as the serpent raised on the staff of moses, to bring healing to the people. this means that the subject is much older than asclepius, by a wide margin. if you go back even further, you see the premise for this in the garden of eden. the serpent in the tree was a reference to medicine, specifically, dna, the creative substance of life. the fall narrative is about dna, particularly dna regarding procreation.

Also a reference to kundalini system inside the body in some cultures that is meant to symbolize how the body store spiritual energy and flows spiritual energy (both the hot fire and the cooling water version). Fire from the spine flowing upwards to meet the water flowing from above causing the body to be hot and vibrate with good feelings.

originally posted by: arpgme
a reply to: undo

How can Jesus be enki if enki means "ruler of earth"? According to the Bible, Satan is the ruler of earth (2 Corinthians 4:4) and when God brings his Judgment, he is going to be cast out by God due to his evilness ( John 12:31).

Also, the symbol of Enki is a Serpent. In the Bible it is not Jesus that represents The Serpent but the Devil (Revelation 20:2)

earth as in the clay, the soil, from which humans were created
on the other hand, enlil is the god of this planet.
hebrews had 2 different words for earth. an example, the four corners of the earth did not mean of the planet, but of the habitable land, dirt, clay, soil.

the serpent in the reference, is dna. one of them is a god of life, and the other is a god of death. they can't possibly be the same guy

a reply to: BuzzyWigs

In his autobiographical narrative of his numerous encounters with the god, Aristides reveals his special relationship with this god by most often addressing the god as "Savior."

a reply to: AfterInfinity
I think the point here - and I may be wrong, so please correct me if I am, OP - is that the whole "savior" thing is by no means an original work. "Saviors", "saints", "miracle workers" and "demigods" are a very old concept that no culture or mythology has any kind of monopoly on.

That, my friend, is precisely the point!!

I get the feeling that you view this as some sort of a "Gotcha" moment.

I'm not sure why, but as to Asclepius being called a "Savior"

Aristides is the only one I could find that called Asclepius a "Savior". Do you have any other primary sources that name Asclepius as a "Savior"? Seems like if you want to make a comparison to Christ, you'd need to show that Asclepius was known as a "Savior" to more than one person and if you're trying to show that Jesus's followers copied Asclepius's legend or something to that effect, you'd need to show that Asclepius was known as a Savior before Jesus was.

Aristides himself is problematic for the case you're trying to make, since as far as I can tell, he wrote in the second century . . . AD That would put him calling Asclepius "Savior" well after Jesus was known as a Savior. Given that, seems like if any copying was done, it was done by Aristides rather than the followers of Jesus.

Again, I couldn't find any other primary references to Asclepius as "Savior" and I couldn't find any at all that pre-dated Jesus, perhaps you'll have better luck.

according to paul, the law is the accuser. jesus came to fulfill the law because he knew the laws of the god of this world were deliberately made to be impossible to keep by humans. for example, even thinking about doing a sin was the equivalent of doing so (remember the question of divorce and adultery? and jesus' response was, it's worse than you think, moses was going easy on you--if you even entertain the idea, you are already guilty of it, under the law). he was trying to tell you that your enemy is not just a bad guy, he's a bad guy who will drag your sins before the divine council to have you condemned, so that even your thoughts will condemn you. it's one reason why we needed a savior in the first place.

the way i see it, the planet is under the accuser's rule but not for much longer. jesus fulfilled his end of the bargain to inherit the planet at the end of the age.

a reply to: imwilliam

Do you have any other primary sources that name Asclepius as a "Savior"? Seems like if you want to make a comparison to Christ, you'd need to show that Asclepius was known as a "Savior" to more than one person and if you're trying to show that Jesus's followers copied Asclepius's legend or something to that effect, you'd need to show that Asclepius was known as a Savior before Jesus was.

The story of Asclepius is 400 years before Jesus.

a reply to: imwilliam

Do you have any other primary sources that name Asclepius as a "Savior"? Seems like if you want to make a comparison to Christ, you'd need to show that Asclepius was known as a "Savior" to more than one person and if you're trying to show that Jesus's followers copied Asclepius's legend or something to that effect, you'd need to show that Asclepius was known as a Savior before Jesus was.

I already have.

The story is from Asclepius (/æsˈkliːpiəs/; Greek: Ἀσκληπιός, Asklēpiós [asklɛːpiós]; Latin: Aesculapius) was a god of medicine and healing in ancient Greek religion. Asclepius represents the healing aspect of the medical arts; his daughters are Hygieia ("Hygiene", the goddess/personification of health, cleanliness, and sanitation), Iaso (the goddess of recuperation from illness), Aceso (the goddess of the healing process), Aglæa/Ægle (the goddess of beauty, splendor, glory, magnificence, and adornment), and Panacea (the goddess of universal remedy). He was associated with the Roman/Etruscan god Vediovis. He was one of Apollo's sons, sharing with Apollo the epithet Paean ("the Healer").[1] The rod of Asclepius, a snake-entwined staff, remains a symbol of medicine today. Those physicians and attendants who served this god were known as the Therapeutae of Asclepius.

Just the Wiki page!

a reply to: imwilliam

I get the feeling that you view this as some sort of a "Gotcha" moment.

Yes, I do!!

a reply to: BuzzyWigs

it's an interesting premise, but i don't think the premise is the same as the story of jesus. it's one thing to say some are capable of healing the sick or resurrecting the dead (doctors do that all the time) and it's quite another to say, the person capable of doing so, also created humans in the first place and then has had to spend the next 6000 years of recorded history (at the very least) defending them from the guy who owns the planet they are on. that's a tall order and a noble goal.

i also find it verrrry interesting that it says in the last book of the bible, that the book of life (dna of some kind), can only be opened by jesus. if he created the dna in the first place, he perhaps put a little locking mechanism on it that only he knows how to open. remember in the garden, enlil demanded the serpent's legs be removed, the tree of life be barred from humans. that's the equivalent of saying, that part of your dna that fully regenerates every part of your body, has been blocked by decree. enlil went to the divine council over it and demanded it be done. since enki created the humans in the first place, he put the lock on the tree of life, as it were, and made it so no one else could unlock it. theoretically, this was so the elite couldn't save that for themselves alone, allowing everyone else to perish,which ya know some of them would do in a heart beat.

a reply to: BuzzyWigs

You haven't shown a reference to Asclepius being called "Savior" except by Aristides who wrote in the second century AD, after Jesus was referred to as "Savior".

Again, I don't attach the degree of importance that you seem to be implying for Asclepius being called "Savior" , but in any case, the evidence I'm able to find indicated that Asclepius was only referred to as "Savior" by one man and that only some time after Jesus was referred to as Savior. You haven't provided anything beyond that either.

In other words, the "Savior" element of the Asclepius legend, that you seem to attach so much importance to, doesn't occur until after Jesus was referred to as Savior. (Or at least you've provided no evidence for it being part of the Asclepius legend prior to Christ)

Lacking a reference to Asclepius as Savior, prior to Jesus being referenced as Savior, one might be able to make the argument that Aristides imposed an element of the Jesus story onto the Asclepius legend, but not the other way around. (I'm not making that argument by the way)

In any case, I don't think there is any significance in Asclepius merely being called "Savior", even if you could show that it occurred prior to Jesus being referred to as Savior and that it was a common title assigned to him. (Which you haven't shown, you've only provided evidence of an Asclepius myth prior to Christ, not the "Savior" element of that myth prior to Christ)

I order for there to be any significance, you'd have to demonstrate that Asclepius was known by his followers as "Savior" and that this occurred prior to Christ. I think you'd have to show that the term "Savior" was used in the same sense and carried the same connotations in both cases. Even then, you wouldn't have much.

For a "gotcha" moment, in addition to the above you'd have to show that Jesus's followers were aware of the savior element of the Asclepius legend, that they applied it to the story of Christ after being exposed to the Savior element in the Asclepius legend and not before. I don't think you're going to be able to find anything to support those ideas in any meaningful way . . . and still what would you really have?

Lol Buzzy you heathen!! Blasphemy!! you will burn because Jesus is king baby!!!

reading this thread has made me laugh at the fundies...again cheers love.

Didnt look at any of the answers but the first, which was jesus... jesus... jesus ........ no comment! Answer: Britannia- if theres no prize im pissed!

a reply to: BuzzyWigs

Woops, got ahead of myself: best answer i got if its a lightning bolt, neptune? Maybe? The trident right??? a reply to: BuzzyWigs

Jesus had a twin, so, who picked??? I mean, lol... my eyes, im blind! Sorry... a reply to: boymonkey74

Thats a long time ago... 😮a reply to: BuzzyWigs

a reply to: imwilliam

I order for there to be any significance, you'd have to demonstrate that Asclepius was known by his followers as "Savior" and that this occurred prior to Christ. I think you'd have to show that the term "Savior" was used in the same sense and carried the same connotations in both cases. Even then, you wouldn't have much.

First of all, exactly what "connotation" of the term 'Savior' would satisfy you?

here is a source indicating how many cults/sanctuaries/statues were all around the area. Asclepius was the Healing God. On this page you will find dozens of primary sources as to how revered he was. He saved people from illness, injury, and death. = Savior, imo.

-------------------------

Perhaps you aren't clear on the Greeks' idea of the afterlife.

Tartarus
Tartarus is not considered to be directly a part of the underworld, it is described as being as far beneath the underworld as the earth is beneath the sky.[9] It is so dark that the "night is poured around it in three rows like a collar round the neck, while above it grow the roots of the earth and of the unharvested sea."[10] Tartarus is the place that Zeus cast the Titans along with his father Cronus after defeating them.[11] Homer wrote that Cronus then became the king of Tartarus.[12] While Odysseus does not see them himself, he mentions some of the people within the underworld who are experiencing punishment for their sins. Tantalus, who betrayed the trust of the gods, is suffering torment by having food and drink eternally beyond his reach. Sisyphus, who disrupted the income of souls by tricking and chaining up Thanatos, is condemned to push a heavy rock up a slope, only to have it roll back down each time.

Fields of Punishment
The Fields of Punishment was a place for those who had created havoc on the world and committed crimes specifically against the gods. Hades himself would make the individual's punishment of eternal suffering based on their specific crime. For Tityos, who attempted to rape Leto, this was being staked to the ground while two vultures fed on his regenerating liver.[13]

Fields of Asphodel
The Asphodel Meadows was a place for ordinary or indifferent souls who did not commit any significant crimes, but who also did not achieve any greatness or recognition that would warrant them being admitted to the Elysian Fields. It was where mortals who did not belong anywhere else in the Underworld were sent.[14]

Elysium
Elysium was a place for the especially distinguished. It was ruled over by Rhadamanthus, and the souls that dwelled there had an easy afterlife and had no labors.[15] Usually, those who had proximity to the gods were granted admission, rather than those who were especially righteous or had ethical merit.[9] Heroes such as Kadmos, Peleus, and Achilles also were transported here after their deaths. Normal people who lived righteous and virtuous lives could also gain entrance, such as Socrates, who proved his worth sufficiently through philosophy.[9]

Isles of the Blessed
The Isles of the Blessed were islands in the realm of Elysium. When a soul achieved Elysium they had a choice to either stay in Elysium, or to be reborn. If a soul was reborn three times and achieved Elysium all three times, then they were sent to the Isles of the Blessed to experience eternal paradise.

en.wikipedia.org...

---------------------

If this information doesn't resonate with you as to its similarity to the Jesus myths and legends, I don't know what to tell you. Clearly Asclepius was widely popular, worshipped, believed to heal and give guidance, and if one was favored by him, their lives were eased. He refused to treat the wicked.

This myth tells us that Asclepius was the son of the God Apollo and the mortal Coronis. This genealogy samples already and characterizes the nature of the demi-god, as Apollo is the sunlight Divinity, which encompasses health and life sources widely appreciated by men. Coronis' name, his mother, is the crow bird, a bird with a very long life, which also symbolizes health.

Asclepius became a well-known God through out the Greek and Roman world, perhaps because he started as a mortal, and knows the pain of human suffering, in ways that his father Apollo cannot.

As with all archaic civilizations of initiatic roots, Medicine in Greece was part of the Sacred Sciences. It was a Science that integrated Philosophy, Magic, Religion and Art.

In all civilizations, knowledge was deeper in the most archaic times, and the specialization of Science by experimentation ways just demonstrates a loss of magic formulas or extraordinary powers.

Asclepius is the Saviour God (Soter, also one of the names of Zeus), which kept the dangers away not only in the case of diseases, but in all adverse circumstances of life.

Who is Asclepius

-------------------------

Holylandphotos
The inscription means "Asclepius Soter" (Asklepios Savior).

-------------------------

The Emperor Julian also, in his orations (yes, this was in 4th century CE) also referenced that Helios (the Sun God) made Asclepius the savior of the world.


It was established myth. Click the thumbnail to see the screenshot large, (including source).

-----------------------
Yet another source, but not primary

-------------------------
Also - please note in the underworld description the concept of REINCARNATION.
Yes, it was also widely believed.

originally posted by: 3NL1GHT3N3D1
a reply to: godlover25

Peter in Greek is "petros" which means a "moveable, insecure, or rolling rock". I'd say that that's a pretty accurate description of the church that Peter built, unstable and moveable. Its foundation is not stable at all, that becomes clear when you see the sheer plagiarism that Christianity and the church used to form their religion.

Um...no. It means rock. Just rock. Unless you have a source?

a reply to: boymonkey74

Too bad they bugger off instead of engaging in actual research and info gathering, though.
I enjoy the lively debates, and just want people to think -- really THINK -- about from where their beliefs stem.

a reply to: AfterInfinity

Here ya go

The word petros for Peter in the Greek is in the masculine gender and the word petra for the rock is in the feminine gender. Petros and petra are two distinct words in the Greek. Petros is a shifting, rolling, or insecure stone, while petra is a solid, immov­able rock. In the English language the gender is not specified by the article. We say the fork, the spoon, and the knife. The three words have the same article. In the Greek, as in many of the modern languages, each noun and corresponding article is in the masculine, feminine, or neuter gender. In many cases it is an arbitrary arrangement, regardless of sex.

Is The Church Built on “Petros” or “Petra”?

a reply to: BuzzyWigs

I couldn't find a date on the votive offering with the inscription "Asclepius Soter" were you able to find one? Without a date prior to Christ being known as Savior, it doesn't address the specific issue I raised.

The Emperor Julian also, in his orations (yes, this was in 4th century CE) also referenced that Helios (the Sun God) made Asclepius the savior of the world.

That's nice, however it doesn't address the issue of Asclepius being referred to as "Savior" prior to Christ being known as Savior. The statement occurred after Christ was known as Savior, which you pointed out, so I have to ask, "What's your point?" Standing on it's own, because of the date, it might be used in an argument that the Asclepius cult copied elements of the Christian narrative rather than the other way around.

Perhaps you aren't clear on the Greeks' idea of the afterlife.

I am completely unclear on what this or anything in your rather lengthily set of quotes below it has to do with the issue of whether Asclepius was known as "Savior" prior to Christ being known as "Savior" I can't see any relevance at all to the issue at hand.

(Soter, also one of the names of Zeus),

You might have more luck finding references to Zeus as "Savior" that occur prior to Jesus being referred to as Savior, than you have had with Asclepius. If you think it's that important to demonstrate that someone was referred to as "Savior" prior to Jesus, then you might want to start there. Or you could start with any of the many others among the Greek pantheon that bore the title "Soter" . . . there are lots of them. It's entirely possible that some of them were referred to as "Savior" prior to Christ, but I still don't see any evidence that Asclepius was.

Believe it or not, I'm trying to help you make what I think is your point, or at least help you make a better case for it. Though, I'm loss as to why you think it's a point worth making or how it qualifies as a "gotcha" moment for Christians.

First of all, exactly what "connotation" of the term 'Savior' would satisfy you?

Satisfy me in what sense? If it's not clear by now, I don't have a horse in the "Someone was called Savior before Jesus" race. In and of itself, I don't think its of any significance either way.

But if you're asking me what would lend more significance to me then:

1) Show that someone else was referred to as "Savior" before Christ was, which you still haven't done. (I actually don't think this is as difficult as you're making it, I'm guessing "it's" there, though limiting it to Asclepius is making your job more difficult than it needs to be. Perhaps you're concerned that the other members of the Greek Pantheon that were referred to as "Savior" don't share some of the other attributes that Asclepius had, the ability to heal and such that Jesus had; and therefore the overall thrust of your op is undermined? )

2)Demonstrate some special significance to the term "Soter." Show me that it wasn't a commonplace word that could be used for a variety of situations, like "good guy" or " teacher" or what have you. Otherwise the fact that the followers of Jesus referred to Jesus as Savior in the early years of the Church doesn't have any more importance than that they referred to him as a "teacher" or "good guy" (And that prior to that others had been referred to by the same terms), or whatever. (I think one of the problems you're having is that the term "Savior" has gained significance and meaning since and in relation to Christ and you're having trouble divorcing yourself from that significance and applying it to people for who it didn't bare that kind of significance)

And yet still . . . as I've already stated, even at that point I don't think you really have much, certainly nothing that approaches a "gotcha" moment.

Unless you can show that the early followers of Christ added the appellation "Savior" to Jesus with the knowledge that others Gods had been referred to as such AND then only as a willful corrective, (to what they saw as a short coming in the Jesus narrative), to the then extant Jesus narrative to try and bolster his "God" credentials, I fail to see the "gotcha"

Having read a few of your posts; I wonder, if what I've described in the immediately proceeding paragraph, isn't exactly what you're tying to imply occurred, or perhaps the conclusion you're hoping people will draw from the Asclepius myth.

I don't think any thing of the sort follows from the Asclepius myth or the term "Savior" being applied to anyone prior to Christ and it certainly follow even less so from evidence of someone being referred to as "Savior" after Christ was known as Savior.