Okay, I figured out a way to listen to the video.
So far, the author says that he read only the first apology. Barker, didn’t even read that, apparently. Still, Justin wrote more then one apology. He also wrote a dialogue with Trypho, which I’ve quoted extensively.
As an aside, I’m not a huge fan of Dan Barker.
Now then, on to the author’s specific claims - it seems as though he spends about 5 minutes ad-homing Barker/atheism. Did he lose the debate or something?
Criticisms:
- Barker states that Christianity is no different - this is not true - Justin was arguing that Christianity was superior and that Pagan religion was a demonic forgery. So, the author is correct - however I’m not arguing what Barker is arguing.
- The author admits my position, that Justin was arguing that the other ‘gods’ were demonic imitations. In order to make sense that the demons created these imitations, they would have to be, you know, SIMILAR to the Christian story. (Something Sloth has denied).
- The author is arguing that Justin is specifically not saying that the miraculous stories are the same thing. I would argue this too. I have consistently been saying that the have had the same ideas, the same general stories (birth narrative, among others), etc. I have made great pains to state that Christianity is not a direct copy of pagan beliefs.
Charges of ‘it’s all the same thing’:
This is the problem with linking to videos. This author is clearly rebutting Barker’s position that Justin was saying it’s all the same thing. This was not my position and as a result, this video doesn’t really respond to what I’ve been saying. So, it’s better to actually deal with the claims then it is to just copy and paste a link.
- It’s odd that he skips the passages where Demons ‘misrepresent’ Christian beliefs and goes into the heathen analogies. The demons are essentially the opposite of Christians and use such things to confuse the pagans.
He quotes this passage, where Justin essentially admits to Pagan parallels AND similar beliefs:
"And the Sibyl and Hystaspes said that there should be a dissolution by God of things corruptible. And the philosophers called Stoics teach that even God Himself shall be resolved into fire, and they say that the world is to be formed anew by this revolution; but we understand that God, the Creator of all things, is superior to the things that are to be changed. If, therefore, on some points we teach the same things as the poets and philosophers whom you honour, and on other points are fuller and more divine in our teaching, and if we alone afford proof of what we assert, why are we unjustly hated more than all others? For while we say that all things have been produced and arranged into a world by God, we shall seem to utter the doctrine of Plato; and while we say that there will be a burning up of all, we shall seem to utter the doctrine of the Stoics: and while we affirm that the souls of the wicked, being endowed with sensation even after death, are punished, and that those of the good being delivered from punishment spend a blessed existence, we shall seem to say the same things as the poets and philosophers; and while we maintain that men ought not to worship the works of their hands, we say the very things which have been said by the comic poet Menander, and other similar writers, for they have declared that the workman is greater than the work. "
Justin is saying that Christian doctrine seems to be the same as all these documents…
Yet somehow Sloth believes Justin is also saying that they aren’t similar? The author tries to excuse this by saying they are ‘addressing simple matters of truth’. That’s good rationalization, but beside the point. We aren’t arguing with Justin, what we are doing is simply pointing out the similarities in thoughts and ideas.
“there are elements of God’s real truth throughout man’s philosophies, etc, etc”.
The author is admitting my position. Again, I’m not arguing that Christianity simply copied and pasted doctrine, which might be what Dan Barker was arguing. So the author of this video is, once again, agreeing with my position.
- Sons of jupiter passage:
The author brings up the differences - which I agree, the stories are different, so would Justin. Justin would argue that these differences show that they are forgeries of Satan. The point is they share similar ideas.
I wouldn’t argue that Justin thought Christianity stole this material from the Pagan’s either (Dan Barker might have). My point is that they are similar. Justin, justifies this similarity with appeals to demonic forgeries.
What he doesn’t do is say that they aren’t similar.
"And if we even affirm that He was born of a virgin, accept this in common with what you accept of Ferseus. And in that we say that He made whole the lame, the paralytic, and those born blind, we seem to say what is very similar to the deeds said to have been done by AEsculapius. "
The author tries to differentiate the purpose of these, by saying that Justin tries to justify these alone in Christianity.
Justin is not saying they are not similar.
Neither is the author.
Both are saying that Christian stories are true.
BTW - he’s not denying other miracles:
“And, thirdly, because after Christ’s ascension into heaven the devils put forward certain men who said that they themselves were gods; and they were not only not persecuted by you, but even deemed worthy of honours. There was a Samaritan, Simon, a native of the village called Gitto, who in the reign of Claudius Caesar, and in your royal city of Rome, did mighty acts of magic, by virtue of the art of the devils operating in him.”
He’s just blaming them on demons.
In short, while this video would refute the claim that Christianity copied and pasted Pagan beliefs, it seems to affirm my stance, that Christianity and Paganism shared similar ideas. One being the birth narrative.
So, thanks for the video.
I would also recommend reading the second apology AND the dialogue with Trypho, both which make the case even more clear.