Tuesday, April 7, 2009

Re: Meri, Mary and the Mother of the Saviour

Meri, Mary and the Mother of the Saviour by Stephen J. Bedard

And my response:

Those are good criticisms. D.M. Murdock responds to them, but you’d have to be the judge of how well she does.

The main point probably is that, by the Christian era, Isis was one of the most (if not the most) well known Egyptian deity, and one of the most widely worshipped in the Roman Empire. So, it’s possible that the term Meri was beginning to be identified with her. However, Isis (and Isis syncretizations) were referred with meri and similar terms all the way through the centuries prior to Rome being Christianized.

Even though the Egyptian term Meri could refer to even inanimate objects, I don’t know if there is any evidence that Jews and Romans would’ve been familiar with that meaning. It probably would’ve been most known as an epithet or, as Murdock argues, maybe even as a name. Very few non-Egyptians could tell an ipethet or a name apart when it was stated both as Isis-Meri and Meri-Isis. Murdock sees evidence that Meri was beginning to be used by itself.

As for the second problem, Mary isn’t used exclusively for either Egyptians or for Jews. Mary was a common name for Pagan goddesses. So, it isn’t surprising that it was a popular name for people as well. As for the 6 Marys of the NT, Murdock mentions this and hypothesizes a possible connection to 6 Hathors (as Hathor was the goddess of love that became identified with Isis).

All of this is is just one tiny aspect of the mythicist theory. It doesn’t stand or fall on one single detail. Meri is just a possible connection that many reputable scholars have written about. There are many other possible connections that mythicists point out. As the possible connections increase so does the probability of those connections.

2 comments:

Marmalade said...

herqlez253 - Have you actually read the books Murdock/Acharya has written? Or, like so many, are you speaking from ignorance? I’ve seen all the criticisms (ignorant and otherwise), and it takes enough of my time simply to respond to the more intelligent critics such as Bedard. When you demonstrate you understand even the basic elements of the mythicist theory, I’ll take your comments seriously.

Isis was a virgin because that is what she was called. You can claim the Egyptians were liars for describing Isis as a virgin, but that is your problem. As I was telling Bedard, there is a difference between a myth and an evemerized myth. Did the historical story come first or the mythology? It is practically impossible to tell.

Anyways, I’m not arguing for certainty about any of this. My interest is merely to consider possibilities and probabilities, and the deeper meanings implied. History can be interesting to study, but I don’t base my religious beliefs on historical figures.

Marmalade said...

As I remember it, the possible Hathor and Mary connection was mostly a passing comment and not an argument that she fleshed out. She merely stated that the Hathors and Marys have similar attributes, but she didn’t give further details as I recall.

I understand your objection about your saying they’re spread out. I’ve never studied this particular connection to any great extent, and so I don’t know if it is significant… just another possibility to be followed if one’s curiosity is piqued.

However, there are some possible explanations to the issue you brought up.

The gospels were collected by people who may have collected them because they noticed certain mythological motifs. Many early Christians would’ve been aware of these other myths. This would be especially true for those who were educated which would definitely include the type of person who collects texts.

Many scholars (such as Ehrman) argue that many things were added to (and removed from) the early Christian scriptures. The Marys may have been added or the name Mary added to already existing characters or the Hathor attributes may have been added.

I really don’t know. This specific aspect isn’t one that personally intrigues me. It’s just a possibility. If you don’t like, feel free (as you always are) to discard it.

As for Mary goddesses, I’ve come across various mentions of this. But it is also something I haven’t looked much into. There are some Semitic goddesses named such as Mari-El and Mari-Anath. Some scholars have hypothexized Miriam comes from Egypt and possibly originated as Meri-Amu, and so Miriam may be an evemerized goddess. Mari is the main goddess of Basque mythology. Murdock said that early Christians were aware of Stella Mare. There is the Indian Mariamman, and the Indian mythology had major contact with the Egyptian and Graeco-Roman.

I think Murdock mentioned some other examples, but you get the idea. This similarity maybe isn’t that surprising as many of the cultures in the Graeco-Roman world had been influencing eachother for thousands of years prior to Christianity.