Opinion of this meme

[Statilius the Epicurean]

the Gospel writers only clearly show relating the story to the OT and not, say, to mystery Greco-Roman religions or Homeric epics.

In general this is true but there are some instances in the NT where we can see the influence of Homer. The most obvious example I know is the story of Eutychus in Acts 20 being a transvaluation of Elpenor in the Odyssey.

[True Federalist (진정한 연방 주의자)]

the Gospel writers only clearly show relating the story to the OT and not, say, to mystery Greco-Roman religions or Homeric epics.

In general this is true but there are some instances in the NT where we can see the influence of Homer. The most obvious example I know is the story of Eutychus in Acts 20 being a transvaluation of Elpenor in the Odyssey.

That's really a stretch. The only link between the two is that both prefigured Humpty Dumpty by taking a great fall. Tho obviously the tale of Humpty Dumpty was more influenced by Elpenor than Eutychus since like Elpenor, Humpty Dumpty was not put back together again.

The reasons why they fell, their end fate, and their use within the narrative were completely different. It's a fevered take from a grad student desperate for a thesis topic to satisfy a professor who thinks much of the New Testament was a response to the Homeric tradition.

[Statilius the Epicurean]

the Gospel writers only clearly show relating the story to the OT and not, say, to mystery Greco-Roman religions or Homeric epics.

In general this is true but there are some instances in the NT where we can see the influence of Homer. The most obvious example I know is the story of Eutychus in Acts 20 being a transvaluation of Elpenor in the Odyssey.

That's really a stretch. The only link between the two is that both prefigured Humpty Dumpty by taking a great fall. Tho obviously the tale of Humpty Dumpty was more influenced by Elpenor than Eutychus since like Elpenor, Humpty Dumpty was not put back together again.

The reasons why they fell, their end fate, and their use within the narrative were completely different. It's a fevered take from a grad student desperate for a thesis topic to satisfy a professor who thinks much of the New Testament was a response to the Homeric tradition.

The allusion is more than both falling down: e.g. both Elpenor and Eutychus are only picked up the next day by their comrades, which is kind of inexplicable in the Acts narrative. There are linguistic parallels, notably the use of the same word for roof that is found nowhere else in Luke-Acts (and only one other place in the entire NT).  Elpenor is called "unlucky" in the Odyssey, the name Eutychus means "lucky". And where does the author of Acts place the story? While Paul is visiting the city of Troy.

Elpenor was a famous character in ancient literature and his story was also reworked by among others Plato in the Republic, and Clement of Alexandria references him by name (don't be drunk like Elpenor was). Any educated Greek reader, having been drilled on Homer since they were a child, would have immediately grasped the allusion and its moral: the pagan afterlife is death, the gospel of Paul is life.

There are likely other Homeric allusions in the New Testament but the above is the one I'm most familiar with.

[Associate Justice PiT]

     Satsuma makes a good point about "Abrahamic". It is a term with anthropological value and one that I see bandied about in secular society, but when I became religious one of the things that struck me was how little value classical Christian thought assigns to someone being Jewish or Muslim, and so forth. If you were to ask me whether Christianity is more similar to Islam or Buddhism, I would answer the question based on the theology, cosmology, and phronema of these systems. That Christianity and Islam both credit Abraham as a major forebear is essentially irrelevant in the calculus.

I hadn't really thought about this before. The "Abrahamic" category makes obvious sense from an outside perspective, and it makes perfect sense from an Islamic perspective, being basically an Islamic concept. It does not clearly make a lot of sense from a Christian perspective. I think it does make some sense from a Jewish perspective, considering the concept of the Abrahamic covenant, but then again Christians by and large do not practice circumcision so maybe the only Abrahamic religions are Judaism and Islam.

I suspect the "Abrahamic" category makes different amounts of sense to different denominations. But I'm biased in favor of Abrahamic both as a nonbeliever and as a "cultural leftist"

It's worth noting that the East/Southeast Asian countries that are majority/plurality Christian have high male circumcision rates. Source

     Malaysia and Indonesia are majority Muslim though, and South Korea is majority unaffiliated (though those who claim an affiliation are predominantly Christian). The Philippines are a bizarre case, because they have an extremely high circumcision rate but it usually occurs at the ages of 11 to 13. I don't know what the rationale is there.

     In terms of Christian countries, Ethiopia and Eritrea are notable for having very high circumcision rates. This is attributable to their distinctive practice of Ethiopian Tewahedo Orthodoxy, which has extensive Jewish influence that is not seen in other Christian sects (e.g. not eating pork). Though looking at that map for the first time in a couple of years, I notice there are other African countries that are surprisingly high, e.g. Democratic Republic of the Congo.

[Kingpoleon]

I have no idea what he has written about in terms of Jungian archetypes nor to any attempts at linking Biblical writings to Greek stories and religious practices.

May you give us a bit more detail or perhaps give us some book titles for further review.

Really? In my experience, most atheists are at least vaguely familiar with Price and Carrier. Anyway, the book where Price really explains his theory wrt the OT is actually one of those “multiple views” series called The Historical Jesus: Five Views.

The two things that I remember in particular were the 40 days in the wilderness as the Exodus, the 12 disciples as the 12 tribes, and the 70 disciples with the Table of Nations.

[HisGrace]

Not sure the backstory with this person but I assume the point is to demonstrate the hypocrisy of the left's insistence that Islam must be 100% respected at all times even by non-Muslims, but then constantly dunking on Mormons, and even just Christians in general. In which case good meme I guess.

[Kingpoleon]

The allusion is more than both falling down: e.g. both Elpenor and Eutychus are only picked up the next day by their comrades, which is kind of inexplicable in the Acts narrative. There are linguistic parallels, notably the use of the same word for roof that is found nowhere else in Luke-Acts (and only one other place in the entire NT).  Elpenor is called "unlucky" in the Odyssey, the name Eutychus means "lucky". And where does the author of Acts place the story? While Paul is visiting the city of Troy.

Elpenor was a famous character in ancient literature and his story was also reworked by among others Plato in the Republic, and Clement of Alexandria references him by name (don't be drunk like Elpenor was). Any educated Greek reader, having been drilled on Homer since they were a child, would have immediately grasped the allusion and its moral: the pagan afterlife is death, the gospel of Paul is life.

There are likely other Homeric allusions in the New Testament but the above is the one I'm most familiar with.

MacDonald is sort of the epitome of the bad scholarship which often comes out of Claremont and, to a lesser degree, Harvard and Yale. The idea that the Gospels are closer to Homeric epics than, say, to Plutarch’s Parallel Lives is just demonstrably false to anyone who has ever read the two. Luke is clearly familiar with the normal historiographical practice of his day, of the sort we find in Plutarch and Tacitus and, in a more biased history, Cicero. His careful and rigorous documentation of fact after fact comes often at the expense of prettier if false narratives, although he does have a few ideas of concealment in common with Matthew and Mark.

[I spent the winter writing songs about getting better]

Not sure the backstory with this person

For the record it appears the creator of it is an ex-Mormon who converted to Episcopalism but is still fairly defensive against anti-Mormon talk.

[Statilius the Epicurean]

MacDonald is sort of the epitome of the bad scholarship which often comes out of Claremont and, to a lesser degree, Harvard and Yale. The idea that the Gospels are closer to Homeric epics than, say, to Plutarch’s Parallel Lives is just demonstrably false to anyone who has ever read the two. Luke is clearly familiar with the normal historiographical practice of his day, of the sort we find in Plutarch and Tacitus and, in a more biased history, Cicero. His careful and rigorous documentation of fact after fact comes often at the expense of prettier if false narratives, although he does have a few ideas of concealment in common with Matthew and Mark.

I don't find MacDonald's grand theories like all of Mark is a rewriting of Homer very persuasive. But he's clearly right that there are Homeric influences in some places in the NT. Elpenor/Eutychus is the most obvious example. 

I could say more about ancient historiographical standards but that wouldn't be really relevant.