Again, the religious postion is HARMFUL

[KenzieAbsolutely]

It as written by Christopher Hitchens. Yes, I have read it.

 

It is a really good book, but I think I liked "The End Of Belief" by Sam Harris best of the New Atheist books.

 

thanks for the recommendation!

[Moai]

It's not the men who wrote it that I'm relying on.Christianity is rooted in history and evidence. Jesus was born during the reign of Caesar Augustus, and was put to death under Pontius Pilate during the first century of Rome.

 

Supposedly. There are no accounts of Jesus' living outside of the Bible. Muhammad lived between 570 and 632, and was inspired at some point during that time.

 

Mithraism is very close to Christianity, and many of the myths that are attributed to Jesus are rooted in Egypt. The story of Jesus' birht is identical to the birth story of Horus.

 

Here's a short list:

 

1. Horus born of a virgin. <> Jesus born of a virgin.

 

2. The foster father of Horus was Seb or Seph. <> Jesus was fostered by Joseph.

 

3. Horus was of royal descent. <> Jesus was of royal descent.

 

4. Horus birth accompanied by three solar deities [star gazers] who followed by the morning star of Sirius bearing gifts. <> Jesus birth accompanied by three wise men [Zoroastrian star gazers] who followed by a star “in the east” bearing gifts.

 

5. The birth of Horus announced by angels. <> The birth of Jesus announced by angels.

 

6. Herut tried to murder the infant Horus. <> Herod slaughtered every first born in an attempt to kill Jesus the forthcoming messiah.

 

7. Horus is baptized at age 30 by Anup the Baptiser at a river. <> Jesus is baptized at age 30 by John the Baptist at a river.

 

8. Horus resists temptation by the evil Sut [sut was to be the precursor for the Hebrew Satan] on a high mountain. <> Jesus resists temptation by Satan on a high mountain.

 

9. Horus had 12 followers. <> Jesus had 12 disciples.

 

10. Horus performed miracles like healing the sick and walking on water. <> Jesus performed miracles like healing the sick and walking on water.

 

11. Horus raised someone from the grave [his father Osiris] <> Jesus raised Lazarus [notice the name similarity] from the grave. Lazarus is short for Elasarus - the “us” on the end is romanized. Elasarus was derived from “El-Asar” which was the name given to Osiris.

 

12. Horus was buried and resurrected in the city of Anu. <> The place Bethany mentioned in John was a derivative of the words “Bet” and “Anu” which translates “the house of Anu”. The ‘y’ on the end of bethany is interchangeable with the letter ‘u’.

 

13. Horus was killed by crucifixtion. <> Jesus was crucified.

 

14. Horus was accompanied by two thieves at the crucifixtion. <> Jesus was crucified with two thieves.

 

15. Horus was buried in a tomb at Anu. <> Jesus was buried in a tomb located in Bethany [bet-Anu].

 

16. Horus was resurrected after 3 days. <> Jesus was “said” to resurrected after over a period of three days.

 

17. The resurrection of Horus was announced by three women. <> The resurrection of Jesus was announced by three women.

 

18. Horus was given the titel KRST which means “anointed one” <> Jesus was given the title Christ [Christos] meaning “anointed one”

 

The testimony of His life, death and resurrection, (God in Flesh), is validated by creditable eyewitness testimony in my mind.

 

All of whom are quoted in the same book. What do you make of the contradictions in the accounts in the Gospels--like who saw Jesus first when he rose from the dead, for example?

 

No other sect has this kind of evidence.I have to wonder how many women who've accepted the Mormon's belief system and then decided that the answer was, "no" after their husbands insisted on having multiple wives......and how many men grabbed onto the sect just to have an excuse to practice polygamy.

 

There are people converting to Mormonism every day, and not because of polygamy. In the front of the Book of Mormon, there are affirmation from early members of the church that they saw the Golden Plates that Joseph Smith translated. There were eleven of them total. Why do you not take their word for it?

 

To answer your question, I don't know if it was Satan Himself, or just individual justification to follow it, but it's either/or in my mind.

 

That doesn't answer the question, though. These people sit down and ask the Holy Spirit for guidance, and get the answer that the Book of Mormon is true. Either the Holy Spirit ignored them, or Satan beat them to it--that is, if the Holy Spirit exists. Obviously, I think that they just convinced themselves that way, and it is sad because the Book of Mormon is so pathetic it amazes me anyone over the age of six could think it is true.

 

Whoa, now....hold on....I think you may be confused. My point was:

 

The surgeon may have deep faith, and may think he's doing, "god's" work, BUT, the surgeon wouldn't be a surgeon at all had it not been God's will.

 

Therefore, that makes the surgeon a tool of God and not of Satan. Furthermore, if it's not God's will that the surgeon's patient survives, no matter how well the surgeon's abilities are, or how spiritual his/her life is, that patient will pass on regardless.

 

That would just be god using a tool of Satan. The most ardent Satan worshiper could still save a child from a burning building. But whose work does he do on the whole? He is not preaching for Jesus, but rather Jesus' enemy.

 

Let's say someone looks at his claim that god guided his hand, takes that to be true, and then becomes Muslim? DId he not lead someone away from salvation?

 

Really, I think he may be looking for the same God. I don't believe he's worshiping Satan at all. It's just that he's chosen a path that was available to him.

 

How do we know if he has or hasn't explored other avenues?

 

If he does the research, and study.....who knows....he may change his entire belief system.Yep, there's always that probability isn't there? I'll continue to adhere to what I know so far, and keep picking away at it....(I'm sure you'll help me out there).

 

Sure thing!

 

I had a great time!! Thanks!

 

Awesome!

 

I was able to pull a couple of surprises on all sides of the family this year.....it was great!! I got smiles, laughter, hugs and shock values....Be safe would you??!!

 

I'll be sober, as I am working behind the bar. Thanks though!

[FleshNBones]

I have read several times statements about logic or rationalism that it is somehow cold or lacks beauty, or lacks hope. Not only is that not true, the opposite position is objectively harmful.

Yep. No hope and no mercy.

 

So now, because frightened women (who themselves are tragically uneducated regarding science) didn't vaccinate their children, 50 to 100 British children will die from the measles. THE MEASLES. The measles is horrible, but people forget because it has been virtually eradicated in the West.

How many people die in car accidents? Do you want to ban the automobile?

Why are you comparing the UK? Less than 10% there are actually practicing Christians.

If we look at the flu virus, the booster you get is different than the vaccination for the 1918 flu variant, simply because the virus has evolved. Right before our eyes. Ms. Phillips says that virologists are just "beating the drum for Darwin" in pointing this out. She actually suggests that god tweaks the virus every year. One wonders what would make god such a sadist...

The 1918 flu has been recovered by scientists, and it is still just as lethal now as it was then. I think all of the lab animals exposed to it died quickly (within 24 hours).

The closest virus today would have to be SARS in China. It is 1 mutation away from the 1918 flu's deadliness.

You can vaccinate against a few strains, but not against the hundreds or thousands of strains.

The gods of science will fail because this pandemic can and will hit.

And look at Mullahs in the Middle East. We were on the cusp of eradicating polio, until Mullahs heard about it. In Northern Nigeria Mullahs told their followers that the polio vaccine was really part of a plan by the West to sterilize their children. As you might imagine, they stopped giving their children the vaccine and polio is rampant.

Because they don't tolerate casual sex, instances of AIDS and STDs in general are very rare.

 

Feel free to give me a few whacks.

[shadowofman]

I look forward to the pandemic. It will break the monotany that is this American life. And the world is overpopulated anyway. If it happens in my life time, I will know God does exist. All of my prayers will have been answered. JK

(About the prayer part, not the flu. I still like the flu part.)

[JamesM]

Supposedly. There are no accounts of Jesus' living outside of the Bible. Muhammad lived between 570 and 632, and was inspired at some point during that time.

 

Mithraism is very close to Christianity, and many of the myths that are attributed to Jesus are rooted in Egypt. The story of Jesus' birht is identical to the birth story of Horus.

 

 

 

This is interesting information. Do you have a link or two that shows where this comes from?

 

I have some links to read that answer each one of these points. These are obviously from a Christian viewpoint which should not discredit them. Many of these criticisms of Jesus and Christianity come from the view that there is no God, so bias can be used as a discredit for both views.

 

This one answers the points that Mithra is like Jesus.

http://www.tektonics.org/copycat/mithra.html

 

This one answers the points that Jesus was copied from Horus and Osiris.

http://www.tektonics.org/copycat/osy.html

 

Here are some additional places that rebut the points raised.

http://christopherbutler.wordpress.com/2006/10/07/jesus-is-not-a-mithras-redux/

http://www.about-jesus.org/paganism.htm

 

http://www.frontline-apologetics.com/Mithras.html

 

These criticisms have been made before, but many of the points are not factual or even significant. An easy one for me to see is the same birthday. As was stated in another thread, Christmas is a celebration day for His birth...not an actual day of Jesus' birth. No one knows the actual date. Other points listed for Horus are also not accurate.

 

Hope this helps.

Edited January 1, 2008 by JamesM

[JamesM]

Supposedly. There are no accounts of Jesus' living outside of the Bible.

 

There are numerous links that list the historical sources where Jesus is mentioned, but here are two. They all say pretty much the same thing.

 

Some of the non-Biblical historians who mention Jesus include...

The first-century Roman Tacitus

Flavius Josephus

Julius Africanus, who quotes the historian Thallus

Pliny the Younger

The Babylonian Talmud

Lucian of Samosata

Mara Bar-Serapion

 

 

http://www.probe.org/content/view/18/77/

http://www.gotquestions.org/did-Jesus-exist.html

 

Again, Christian sources.

 

So, we do have many places that show that Jesus existed and had quite an impact on world history at the time.

Edited January 1, 2008 by JamesM

[Moai]

Yep. No hope and no mercy.

 

No hope in an afterlife, yes. Hope in humanity and life, very much so. Mercy is a human construct, which has nothing to do with atheism. Whether one is merciful or not has nothing to do with belief in a deity or deities. I would argue that the reverse is true.

 

Is it merciful to burn people at the stake? Is it merciful to whip the victim of rape? Is it merciful to ostracize someone from your family because of whom he or she chooses to love?

 

How many people die in car accidents? Do you want to ban the automobile?

 

Of course not. Automobiles perform a necessary function, so the benefits outweigh the dangers. This is not so with religious thought.

 

Why are you comparing the UK? Less than 10% there are actually practicing Christians.

 

Where did you get that stat from? They are much less religious than the US, true, but 10% is extremely low. You imply that 90% are atheists, and that is false.

 

The 1918 flu has been recovered by scientists, and it is still just as lethal now as it was then. I think all of the lab animals exposed to it died quickly (within 24 hours).

The closest virus today would have to be SARS in China. It is 1 mutation away from the 1918 flu's deadliness.

You can vaccinate against a few strains, but not against the hundreds or thousands of strains.

The gods of science will fail because this pandemic can and will hit.

 

Which is proof of evolution.

 

Because they don't tolerate casual sex, instances of AIDS and STDs in general are very rare.

 

Feel free to give me a few whacks.

 

They actually tolerate casual sex readily, and reported instances of AIDS are rare, given the result of admitting it. We have no idea how many omen in the Muslim world are raped, for example, as the victim is punished often more than the rapist. Recently, a woman was stoned to death by her uncles and cousins because she was seen with a man who was of a different faith. Yep, faith is super!

[Moai]

Pardon me for being underwhelmed, but it appears that THIS is your basis for this thread...not the original article. I see that the story of the mullahs is here, too. In fact, if I read your thread and his article, I think it is hard to see much difference. Now, why did you not link us to his article in the first place?

 

 

I answered this post just as the Loveshack servers went down, and I do not have the energy at the moment to address everything, but here are some main points:

 

First, you are not "giving" me anything. I do not need to reference the entire editorial, as I was essentially providing a book report, which is much different than a research paper. I actually quoted the article when relevant, giving full credit to the author. In no way did I represent the work as my own.

 

When you post things like, "Scientists have no examples of transitionals" that requires a reference. There is a difference between quoting an article based on opinion (which can be debated) and describing current scientifc thinking, which cannot.

 

I am glad you Googled that quote. Such should be done everytime, in my opinion. I would hope that you would put this much energy into reading thwe 900 section of your local library.

[Moai]

There are numerous links that list the historical sources where Jesus is mentioned, but here are two. They all say pretty much the same thing.

 

Some of the non-Biblical historians who mention Jesus include...

The first-century Roman Tacitus

Flavius Josephus

Julius Africanus, who quotes the historian Thallus

Pliny the Younger

The Babylonian Talmud

Lucian of Samosata

Mara Bar-Serapion

 

 

http://www.probe.org/content/view/18/77/

http://www.gotquestions.org/did-Jesus-exist.html

 

Again, Christian sources.

 

So, we do have many places that show that Jesus existed and had quite an impact on world history at the time.

 

Of course they are Christian sources. I know off the top of my head that the reference to Jesus by Josephus was added after Josephus is long dead--I have read it myself and the writing style is very obviously different. Here is some info from http://skeptically.org/newtestament/id13.html

 

"Christians make much of the few non-Christian references to Jesus. As you shall see below, none of these sources are sufficient evidence to prove that there was an historical Jesus; viz., historical enough to overturn the speculation of some scholars that the legend was seeded by an Essene teacher executed around 100 BC. As I have shown in History of Christ, the silence of Paul in his Epistles is prima facie evidence for the Gospels being too unreliable to be considered a source for the life or for the teachings of Jesus. The Pagan sources are no help to the Christians.

 

The Josephus passage is among the most celebrated as proving that Jesus existed:

"Now, there was about this time, Jesus, a wise man, if it be lawful to call him a man, for he was a doer of wonderful works; a teacher of such men as received the truth with pleasure. He drew over to him both many of the Jews and many of the Gentiles. He was the Christ; and when Pilate, at the suggestion of the principal men amongst us, had condemned him to the cross, those that loved him at the first did not forsake him; for he appeared to them alive again the third day, as the divine prophets had foretold these and ten thousand other wonderful things concerning him; and the tribe of Christians, so named from him, are not extinct at this day."

At first glance, this appears to be a very good source for the historical existence of Jesus. However, Josephus was a Jewish priest of high position and a general in the revolt against Rome. Given that in his long history of the Jews, there is no indication (other than this passage) that he was anything but an orthodox Jewish priest. And being such there is no way that he would have written such an account of one whom he would in no ways have considered the long awaited for Messiah of the Jews, a Messiah who would reestablish the Jewish state. The conflict between this passage and the rest of the book is strong evidence for the conclusion that the passage was an interpolation by a Christian scribea common practice. Futhermore, up until the 4th Century there are no mentions of Josephus having written about Jesus in this way. None of the Christian Church Fathers mentioned Josephus as having written about Jesus, and they specifically addressed in their writing the topic of Pagan sources on the life of Jesus. Justin Martyr and Origen, among others undoubtedly were familiar with Josephus history and would have been glad to use it to answer Pagan and Jewish critics. They did not, however, no mention of it at all. Origen actually said that Josephus did not acknowledge Jesus. The reasonable conclusion is that the passage is an interpolation done after the 4th century. [bold mine]

 

"Since the Jews constantly made disturbances at the instigation of Chrestus, he expelled them from Rome". Life of Claudius

 

Who was Chrestus, since the term was not Latin for Christians? First, Suetonius spelt "Christians" correctly later in his book. 'Chrestus' is the correct Latin form of an actual Greek name. Perhaps Chrestus was a Jewish fanatic whose instigations got them expelled from Rome at about 49CE.

 

"Consequently ... Nero fastened the guilt and inflicted the most exquisite tortures on a class hated for their abominations. Called Christians by the populace. Christus, from whom the name had its origin, suffered the extreme penalty during the reign of Tiberias at the hands of the Procurator Pontius Pilatus, and a deadly superstition, thus checked for a moment, again broke out not only in Judea, the first source of the evil, but also in the City." Annals (XV.44.2-8)

 

This passage it has been noted is informing his Roman audience about what was commonly said of Jesus. There is no indication that this passage is the product of Tacitus research in the death of Jesus. His silence on the topic of the Messiah indicates that if this passage is genuine, that Tacitus did not, nor his audience, believe Jesus to be the Jehovahs profit. The section is about the depravity of Nero. This particular piece is not quoted before the 15th Century, and when it was quoted, there was supposed to be only one copy of the 'Annals' in the world, made in the eighth century (600 years after Tacitus' death). Further evidence of an interpolation is that Tacitus would not have refered to Pilate as a Procurator, when he was a Prefect. [bold mine]

 

Pliny wrote a letter to the emperor Trajan saying:

"They also declared that the sum total of their guilt or error amounted to no more than this: that they had met regularly before dawn on a fixed day to chant verses alternately among themselves in honour of Christ as if to a god, and also to bind themselves by oath, not for any criminal purpose, but to abstain from theft, robbery, and adultery ..."

 

He was asking Trajan to advise him what action to take against Christians living in Asia Minor. He proves that there were Christians there, but not that Jesus ever existed.

 

Thallus is said to have written that Jesus' death was accompanied by earthquake and darkness. His original work has been lost and it was cited only in Julius Africanus' work in the third century. This is the only reference to unusual meterological events occuring after the death of Jesus outside the New Testament, which is strange as such things were routinely recorded. It is impossible to determine whether Thallus actually wrote this, or that it was an interpolation.

 

The Talmud says Jesus was the illegitemate son of a Roman soldier called Pandera (or Pandira) who worked magic. However, most of that material derives from 200-500CE and is the Jewish reaction to the spread of Christianity. It is not a contemporary reference but a reaction to a movement. There are several other like passage, all of them equally unflattering. (For anti-Christian parts of the Talmud, including those referring to Jesus, refuted, please see http://crnews.pastornet.net.au/jmm/aasi/aasi0151.htm

 

Many Christians also make reference to the "Acts of Pilate" which Justin Martyr said was Pilate's report to Rome of the crucifixion of Jesus. Several other early church writers also referred to this, including Euseubius, who said there was a forged copy of that report circulating in his day. At the present time, the apocryphal Gospel of Nicodemus claims to have this report within it, and there is also another report. The second report, called " The letter of Pontius Pilate which he wrote to the Roman Emperor, concerning our Lord Jesus Christ. is thought by most historians to have been written in the fifth century. The Gospel of Nicodemus is thought to have been written c150-200 which leaves a small possibility that it has a copy of the report of Pilate in it, but the gospel is not accepted by most Christians as being authentic, and most historians doubt that it has the report of Pilate either.

 

There are some other historical sources, but these are the main (and earliest) ones, so I will not cover them. There is a possibility that Jesus did exist, as vouchsafed by the historical evidence, but the practice of the Christian church in destroying records of Jesus (at one time, anyone attempting to preserve writings which were hostile to him was subject to the death penalty) and of falsifying various others (such as Josephus) has paradoxically made it unlikely we will ever be able to say with certainty that Jesus existed.

 

 

John E. Remsburg, in his book The Christ: A Critical Review and Analysis of the Evidence of His Existence wrote, “Enough of the writings of the authors named in the foregoing list remains to form a library.Yet in this mass of Jewish and Pagan literature, aside from two forged passages in the works of a Jewish author, and two disputed passages in the works of Roman writers, there is to be found no mention of Jesus Christ."

 

Here is the list to which he refers:

 

Apollonius Persius

Appian Petronius

Arrian Phaedrus

Aulus Gellius Philo-Judaeus

Columella Phlegon

Damis Pliny the Elder

Dio Chrysostom Pliny the Younger

Dion Pruseus Plutarch

Epictetus Pompon Mela

Favorinus Ptolemy

Florus Lucius Quintilian

Hermogones Quintius Curtius

Josephus Seneca

Justus of Tiberius

Silius Italicus

Juvenal Statius Lucanus Suetonius

Lucian Tacitus

Lysias Theon of Smyran

Martial Valerius Flaccus

Paterculus Valerius Maximus

Pausanias

 

There are numerous websites about Remsburg's work, too numerous to link.

[disgracian]

It's telling how many Christians blindly cite Josephus and Tacitus and others without ever apparently having read their accounts or looked into their validity in any noticable way.

 

Why seek the truth when it's easier to merely confirm your own preconceived notions?

 

Cheers,

D.

[JamesM]

Moai, thank you for your well thought out response. It is posts like these that help me learn. If you get some time, I would appreciate some responses to the post I made regarding the original topic of this thread. I hesitate to respond too much to this subject of Jesus as this is not the main topic of this thread.

 

I know off the top of my head that the reference to Jesus by Josephus was added after Josephus is long dead--I have read it myself and the writing style is very obviously different.

 

Did you read it in the original language? I AM impressed. Seriously, I mean that...no sarcasm intended. I have Josephus' works in English, but I cannot read it in the original language. I am familiar with the controversy surrounding this piece, and I agree with you...the part that says that Jesus was the Messaiah does seem to be different than the rest. But even if we drop that section, we have.....

 

"Antiquities 20.9.1 But the younger Ananus who, as we said, received the high priesthood, was of a bold disposition and exceptionally daring; he followed the party of the Sadducees, who are severe in judgment above all the Jews, as we have already shown. As therefore Ananus was of such a disposition, he thought he had now a good opportunity, as Festus was now dead, and Albinus was still on the road; so he assembled a council of judges, and brought before it the brother of Jesus the so-called Christ, whose name was James, together with some others, and having accused them as law-breakers, he delivered them over to be stoned."

 

The following link addresses your suggestion that this whole passage is an interpolation. This doesn't simply seem to be Christians blindly quoting Josephus.

 

http://www.tektonics.org/jesusexist/josephus.html

 

And regarding Suetonius, here is a link at the same website that answers some of your objections. This may help you understand how this historian's mention of Chrestus very well could have been Christ. I quote: "The only way to completely devalue the Suetonius reference is to say that it has nothing to do with Jesus, or with Christians, at all. The issue is an open one, and since we have Tacitus (who both wrote earlier and gave far more information), this reference is not really that important."

http://www.tektonics.org/qt/remslist.html

 

Regarding Tacitus, here is a link that explains how this very well is a good reference to Jesus.

http://www.tektonics.org/tekton_01_01_01_TC.html

 

And they address your objection on the grounds that he would not have called Pontius a Procurator. It goes in length about every objection that has been shown.

 

Pliny... proves that there were Christians there, but not that Jesus ever existed.

 

Again, this link anticipates this objection to Pliny and lists why he still is a good source.

http://www.tektonics.org/jesusexist/pliny.html

 

Thallus is said to have written that Jesus' death was accompanied by earthquake and darkness. His original work has been lost and it was cited only in Julius Africanus' work in the third century.

 

Here are two links that address Thallus as a good source for Jesus.

http://www.tektonics.org/jesusexist/thallus.html

http://www.christian-thinktank.com/jrthal.html

 

The Talmud says Jesus was the illegitemate son of a Roman soldier called Pandera (or Pandira) who worked magic.

 

You are right in that it is not a good source, but it provides positive evidence that Jesus did exist. Here is a link that addresses it briefly...

http://www.tektonics.org/jesusexist/talmud.html

 

There is a possibility that Jesus did exist, as vouchsafed by the historical evidence,

 

It seems that there is a strong basis for this, but this historical evidence alone is not enough to convince anyone (who does not believe that God exists) the He was the Son of God. Simply proving that Jesus existed would not be enough to prove Christianity as truth.

 

Yet in this mass of Jewish and Pagan literature, aside from two forged passages in the works of a Jewish author, and two disputed passages in the works of Roman writers, there is to be found no mention of Jesus Christ."

 

This IS interesting. I wonder why. Personally, I would think it has something to do with the fact that He was not as well known then as He is not as well-known as He is now, but that is me talking. Again, the website that addresses these issues has anticipated this. Here is their rebuttal to Remburg's list.

http://www.tektonics.org/qt/remslist.html

 

You brought up some excellent points, and it seems that these objections have been anticipated. While you can dismiss them out of hand since they are from Christian authors, I think you can also take them as a way to educate yourself. I don't think I will have convinced you, but maybe it has given you something to think about. I am guessing that you have some objections to my objections, and feel free to post the links or even PM me. I would enjoy looking at them. However, I understand if you do not want to turn this thread into the historicity of Jesus. A quick response is fine, and no response does not indicate to me that I have all of the answers.

 

Again, thanks for the response. It has given me things to think about.

[JamesM]

 

Why seek the truth when it's easier to merely confirm your own preconceived notions?

 

Cheers,

D.

 

I agree. Sadly, many of us do that and not just in areas of religion and God. It is good to have posters like you who are well educated in the areas that oppose my beliefs. This presents me with an opportunity to re-examine why I believe them...or even SHOULD I believe them. Hopefully, something in some of my posts gives you the same opportunity.

 

I wish you and your wife the best for this New Year. I admire how the two of you are able to stay close despite differences. This says alot about you and her.

 

I am sure that you and I will cross paths numerous times on this Board. And hopefully, we will leave the better for it.

[shadowofman]

As a life long atheist, I obviously never believed in miracles. But I always took for granted the historical claim that Jesus was a real person that lived. I have argued the position that he was a man whom mythologies were attributed to him. Until I actually started looking over the evidence for his existence, I assumed there was plenty. Until James Cameron can confirm his claim to have found the tomb of Jesus, we have no evidence.

 

And concidering that the Roman Catholic church had a monopoly on knowledge for several centuries, they were able to expand upon the myths of the Palestinian mystery cults. The early Christian religion was just as diverse as it is today in the first century. The original Gnostics including Paul believed that "the Christ" was a spiritual being.

 

Just as they commandeered the holidays and temples of pagan deities, they also commandeered their attributes and miracles, and packaged them into a flesh and blood character.

[disgracian]

I wish you and your wife the best for this New Year. I admire how the two of you are able to stay close despite differences. This says alot about you and her.

Why thank you, and we likewise wish good fortunes for you and your family.

I am sure that you and I will cross paths numerous times on this Board. And hopefully, we will leave the better for it.

Until such time as I am banned for trolling at least. I'm impressed that you can withstand my acerbic tone and will make efforts in the new year to tone it down a bit. I will count upon you to remind me of how well (or poorly) I fare in this resolution for the new year. My others (run more, eat less) I shall have to monitor myself.

 

Cheers,

D.

[JamesM]

My others (run more, eat less) I shall have to monitor myself.

 

Cheers,

D.

 

If you post your weight every week, I am sure most of us will be glad to remind you of how well you are doing.

 

I'm impressed that you can withstand my acerbic tone and will make efforts in the new year to tone it down a bit. I will count upon you to remind me of how well (or poorly) I fare in this resolution for the new year.

 

I am far from perfect as well. I am not proud of all the words I have used in the past year either. When I reach that pinnacle of perfection, I will be certain to remind you of that fact. Until that day, I am who I am...and you are who you are. If we all accept each other's differences on this Board as we do with our families in real life, then I think we would all be better for it.

 

Thanks for the well wishes...and back to the thread. (Sorry, Moai.)

Edited January 2, 2008 by JamesM

[Moai]

Moai, thank you for your well thought out response. It is posts like these that help me learn. If you get some time, I would appreciate some responses to the post I made regarding the original topic of this thread. I hesitate to respond too much to this subject of Jesus as this is not the main topic of this thread.

 

My comments on threads being derailed are in reference to threads I did not start. I don't care which direction this thread goes in, as I started it. Post anything and everything you feel like.

 

Did you read it in the original language? I AM impressed. Seriously, I mean that...no sarcasm intended. I have Josephus' works in English, but I cannot read it in the original language. I am familiar with the controversy surrounding this piece, and I agree with you...the part that says that Jesus was the Messaiah does seem to be different than the rest. But even if we drop that section, we have.....

 

No, I didn't read it in the original language.

 

[edit]

 

I appreciate the links to that apologetics website. I have come across that before, yet I am left wondering why there is no evidence supporting Jesus' existence on major university websites.

 

It seems that there is a strong basis for this, but this historical evidence alone is not enough to convince anyone (who does not believe that God exists) the He was the Son of God. Simply proving that Jesus existed would not be enough to prove Christianity as truth.

 

I would say that there should be a great deal of doubt considering there is a question about it at all. There is no doubt that Julius Caesar existed or the Ghengis Kahn existed, and they never performed any miracles. There is no doubt that Pontius Pilate existed, he lived at the same time that Jesus supposedly existed, and he performed no miracles. Ask yourself why the mass reanimation of the dead described in Matthew is not recorded anywhere else by anyone--an event that surely would shock everyone alive at that time?

 

You are absolutely correct, of course, that even if you could show that Jesus actually lived beyond doubt, that would not mean that he was the Messiah or the Son of God or anything else.

 

This IS interesting. I wonder why. Personally, I would think it has something to do with the fact that He was not as well known then as He is not as well-known as He is now, but that is me talking. Again, the website that addresses these issues has anticipated this. Here is their rebuttal to Remburg's list.

http://www.tektonics.org/qt/remslist.html

 

They've had plenty of time, Remburg's list is pretty old. I am personally more interested in where the Jesus myths themselves come from, i.e. Horus etc. There is some interesting stuff there, if only from a rhetorical standpoint.

 

You brought up some excellent points, and it seems that these objections have been anticipated. While you can dismiss them out of hand since they are from Christian authors, I think you can also take them as a way to educate yourself. I don't think I will have convinced you, but maybe it has given you something to think about. I am guessing that you have some objections to my objections, and feel free to post the links or even PM me. I would enjoy looking at them. However, I understand if you do not want to turn this thread into the historicity of Jesus. A quick response is fine, and no response does not indicate to me that I have all of the answers.

 

Again, thanks for the response. It has given me things to think about.

 

I'm glad.I hope that you are having a great New Year.

[JamesM]

I am sorry. I did not realize that you had addressed this post. I understand your frustration with the servers going down. I had the same problem on this thread. I was wondering if YOU had something to do with it.

 

 

First, you are not "giving" me anything. I do not need to reference the entire editorial, as I was essentially providing a book report, which is much different than a research paper. I actually quoted the article when relevant, giving full credit to the author. In no way did I represent the work as my own.

 

Perhaps I mispoke. I did not mean that you plagiarized, but I did wonder why you did not direct us to this editorial. It would have made the discussion a little more informed. My thought...as I am guessing many others was...is that this thread was based on you reading the articles/stories mentioned. That is why I wanted a link to see the articles myself.

 

There is a difference between quoting an article based on opinion (which can be debated) and describing current scientifc thinking, which cannot.

 

Yes, there is a difference, but both can be debated. Current scientific thinking is just that...current. But the point here was...could WE see the article being discussed? And I provided links to articles/individuals that seemed pertinent.

 

I am glad you Googled that quote. Such should be done everytime, in my opinion. I would hope that you would put this much energy into reading the 900 section of your local library.

 

I agree. Yowser, do you know how many books are there? When I do research, I put too much energy into it, I think.

 

I am still curious though...did you ever find out if there was any follow up on this "scare" that this article by Ms Phillips allegedly started? I would think that this editorial woud have included some sort of statistics or anecdotal evidence that would have shown the results.

 

And as a side note, you asked earlier why I did not mention the Muslim portion of your post...one main reason, right or wrong...as a Christian, I do not feel qualified. Was this example also a fringe example if the Muslim world? I do not know. IMO, it would be nice if we did have soem Muslims who posted here.

[JamesM]

My comments on threads being derailed are in reference to threads I did not start. I don't care which direction this thread goes in, as I started it. Post anything and everything you feel like.

 

Ohhh, booyyyy! That leaves it wide open! Speaking of how...what is your take on the presidential race? Okay, I am guessing that anything and everything did not include politics. Sorry...an attempt at humor.

 

I am left wondering why there is no evidence supporting Jesus' existence on major university websites.

 

Hmmm...something to look into. What do you qualify as a "major university?" When I google "evidence Jesus" for .edu sites, I get a lot of hits. This includes Stanford, Baylor, Holy Cross, and many more. I did not check out many very thoroughly, but there does seem to be many that DO think He was real...not simply a myth. However, since few of these are Christian and are historian, then this is as far as they go.

 

I am personally more interested in where the Jesus myths themselves come from, i.e. Horus etc.

 

Interesting. Perhaps the best place to start is to see IF Jesus is a myth. The list you quoted earlier about Horus and Mithraism came from a book that gets quoted on many websites, I noticed. I posted a link that refuted most of those supposed similarities.

 

I'm glad. I hope that you are having a great New Year.

 

Thank you, and the same to you.

[Moai]

Ohhh, booyyyy! That leaves it wide open! Speaking of how...what is your take on the presidential race? Okay, I am guessing that anything and everything did not include politics. Sorry...an attempt at humor.

 

Funny!

 

Hmmm...something to look into. What do you qualify as a "major university?" When I google "evidence Jesus" for .edu sites, I get a lot of hits. This includes Stanford, Baylor, Holy Cross, and many more. I did not check out many very thoroughly, but there does seem to be many that DO think He was real...not simply a myth. However, since few of these are Christian and are historian, then this is as far as they go.

 

Lots of theologians do, and each of those schools has a school of theology. But that wasn't my point. None of those universities has a website (that I can find) that has a list showing the Horus claims to be erroneous (for example). Last May Stanford hosted a lecturer who asserts that Jesus did not exist, and such was covered in their school paper.

 

JP Holding, the man behind the Tektonics website that you link to so often, is a known internet troll, and uses a great many aliases:

 

http://www.slumdance.com/blogs/brian_flemming/archives/002146.html

 

Interesting reading, at least.

 

Interesting. Perhaps the best place to start is to see IF Jesus is a myth. The list you quoted earlier about Horus and Mithraism came from a book that gets quoted on many websites, I noticed. I posted a link that refuted most of those supposed similarities.

 

Yes, and the Horus stuff is in The Egyptian Book Of The Dead, I guess. Some Egyptian parallels are in "101 Myths of The Bible" by Gary Greenberg, who is President of the Biblical Archaeological Society of New York.

 

I do not think that JP Holding, aka Robert Turkel really refutes anything, but that is my opinion. Given some of his behavior (as noted on some skeptical websites like the one above) is all I need to know.

 

Here's another, just for the heck of it:

 

http://the-anointed-one.com/exposed.html

 

Thank you, and the same to you.

 

Thank you.

[JamesM]

None of those universities has a website (that I can find) that has a list showing the Horus claims to be erroneous (for example). Last May Stanford hosted a lecturer who asserts that Jesus did not exist, and such was covered in their school paper.

 

I could not find any either, whether that is relevant or not, I am not sure. As for Stanford hosting someone who "asserts that Jesus did not exist" and not hosting someone who says He does exist, IMO this is easier. It seems that quite often anytime a public institution hosts someone or some group that promotes or argues for Christianity, Jesus, or God, the public considers this a violation of Church and State. While our public dollars CAN be spent demoting religions, it cannot be spent if the ideas are defended.

 

Interesting article about that visit.....

http://daily.stanford.edu/article/2006/5/31/jesusNeverLivedSpeakerSays

 

One quote explains why this person was probably allowed more than any reason:

 

The highly-controversial speech stood in contrast to accepted Christian theology and religious-academic thought. Most scholars accept that there was a historical Jesus, who is the basis of the Christian religion, though he may or may not have exhibited any special abilities

 

Since most scholars accept that there was a historical Jesus, one who did not would probably give an interesting take on things.

 

JP Holding, the man behind the Tektonics website that you link to so often, is a known internet troll, and uses a great many aliases.

 

That was interesting. It was also noteworthy that those who decried his past were out to discredit his opinions. It certainly goes without saying that a person's past does not invalidate the facts or information he presents. As for aliases, I find it hard to believe that this is even mentionable, as the internet if full of individuals who use aliases. But for our discussion, we can move beyond that. We can easily sidetrack this discussion by avoiding the facts, but I think we are both more intelligent than that. If this is something that will prevent you from learning, then we can find another sit or two to back up the information. He is only one of many sites who refuted the claims that there was similarities between Horus and Jesus. So, we will choose other sites for discussion and focus on the information that refutes the assertions.

 

My next post will address the facts and myths surrounding the assertions that Horus can be the source of Jesus' story.

Edited January 4, 2008 by JamesM

[JamesM]

Yes, and the Horus stuff is in The Egyptian Book Of The Dead, I guess. Some Egyptian parallels are in "101 Myths of The Bible" by Gary Greenberg, who is President of the Biblical Archaeological Society of New York.

 

Let us look at each point and see if there is any validity to the rebuttals given. I will go back to your original post that asserted these claims. My quotes I used are from this site.

http://www.kingdavid8.com/Copycat/JesusHorus.html

 

By googling, I found that your list was copied from this link. As a Christian, I certainly do not find it objective as you undoubtedly find Christian sites somewhat biased, but for our discussion, both will do quite well.

http://atheistempire.wordpress.com/2007/01/22/the-cult-of-horus/

 

Here's a short list:

 

1. Horus born of a virgin. <> Jesus born of a virgin.

 

Horus’ mother was not a virgin. She was married to Osiris, and there is no reason to suppose she was abstinent after marriage. Horus was, per the story, miraculously conceived. Seth had killed and dismembered Osiris, then Isis put her husband's dead body back together and had intercourse with it. In some versions, she used a hand-made phallus since she wasn't able to find that part of her husband. So while it was a miraculous conception, it was not a virgin birth.

 

2. The foster father of Horus was Seb or Seph. <> Jesus was fostered by Joseph.

 

First of all, there is no parallel between the Egyptian name “Seb” and the Hebrew name “Joseph”, other than the fact that they’re common names. Also, Seb was Osiris’ father, not Horus’.

 

3. Horus was of royal descent. <> Jesus was of royal descent.

 

This one’s true! But it's not really a comparison to Jesus. When followers speak of Jesus being of 'royal descent', they usually mean His being a descendent of King David, an earthly king. Horus was, according to the myth, descended from heavenly royalty (as Jesus was), being the son of the main god.

 

4. Horus birth accompanied by three solar deities [star gazers] who followed by the morning star of Sirius bearing gifts. <> Jesus birth accompanied by three wise men [Zoroastrian star gazers] who followed by a star “in the east” bearing gifts.

 

Horus' birth was not announced by a star in the east

 

There were no “three wise men” at Horus’ birth, or at Jesus’ for that matter (the Bible never gives the number of wise men, and they showed up at Jesus’ home, not at the manger, and probably when Jesus was a year or two old).

 

Acharya's source for the last two claims appears to be Massey, who says "the Star in the East that arose to announce the birth of the babe (Jesus) was Orion, which is therefore called the star of Horus. That was once the star of the three kings; for the 'three kings' is still a name of three stars in Orion's belt . . . " Massey's apparently getting mixed up, and then the critics are misinterpreting it. Orion is not a star, but a constellation, of which the 'three kings' are a part. And even if there is a specific star called 'the star of Horus', there's no legend stating that it announced Horus' birth (as the critics are claiming) or that the 'three wise men' (the three stars in Orion's belt) attended Horus' birth in any way.

 

5. The birth of Horus announced by angels. <> The birth of Jesus announced by angels.

 

(James talking here...this is a new assertion that is not shown to be used by others. So, for the sake of brevity, we will assume that it is true...even though I doubt it is.)

 

6. Herut tried to murder the infant Horus. <> Herod slaughtered every first born in an attempt to kill Jesus the forthcoming messiah.

 

(James talking here...Again, a new one compared to other lists.)

 

7. Horus is baptized at age 30 by Anup the Baptiser at a river. <> Jesus is baptized at age 30 by John the Baptist at a river.

 

Again, Horus was never baptized. There is no “Anup the Baptizer” in the story.

 

8. Horus resists temptation by the evil Sut [sut was to be the precursor for the Hebrew Satan] on a high mountain. <> Jesus resists temptation by Satan on a high mountain.

 

The story actually goes that Horus and Sut were having one of many large battles, and one of them seduces the other. Then Set became preganant by Horus.

 

9. Horus had 12 followers. <> Jesus had 12 disciples.

 

Horus had four disciples (called ‘Heru-Shemsu’). There’s another reference to sixteen followers, and a group of followers called ‘mesnui’ (blacksmiths) who join Horus in battle, but are never numbered. But there’s no reference to twelve followers or any of them being named “Anup” or “Aan”.

 

10. Horus performed miracles like healing the sick and walking on water. <> Jesus performed miracles like healing the sick and walking on water.

 

He did perform miracles, (but Horus) did not walk on water.

 

11. Horus raised someone from the grave [his father Osiris] <> Jesus raised Lazarus [notice the name similarity] from the grave. Lazarus is short for Elasarus - the “us” on the end is romanized. Elasarus was derived from “El-Asar” which was the name given to Osiris.

 

but he never exorcised demons or raised his father from the dead. Also, Osiris is never referred to as ‘El-Azarus’ or ‘El-Osiris’ (clearly an attempt to make his name more closely resemble the Bible’s “Lazarus”).

 

Actually, Isis was the one who resurrected Osiris. Horus was the one who avenged him.

 

12. Horus was buried and resurrected in the city of Anu. <> The place Bethany mentioned in John was a derivative of the words “Bet” and “Anu” which translates “the house of Anu”. The ‘y’ on the end of bethany is interchangeable with the letter ‘u’.

 

Which pre-New Testament primary sources support these assertions?

 

13. Horus was killed by crucifixtion. <> Jesus was crucified.

 

Horus was never crucified. There’s an unofficial story in which he dies and is cast in pieces into the water, then later fished out by a crocodile at Isis’ request. This unofficial story is the only one in which he dies at all.

 

14. Horus was accompanied by two thieves at the crucifixtion. <> Jesus was crucified with two thieves.

 

(James...see above refutation.)

 

15. Horus was buried in a tomb at Anu. <> Jesus was buried in a tomb located in Bethany [bet-Anu].

 

16. Horus was resurrected after 3 days. <> Jesus was “said” to resurrected after over a period of three days.

 

17. The resurrection of Horus was announced by three women. <> The resurrection of Jesus was announced by three women.

 

(James...again, see above. The story does not speak that Horus was crucified or resurrected.)

 

18. Horus was given the titel KRST which means “anointed one” <> Jesus was given the title Christ [Christos] meaning “anointed one”

 

He was never referred to by either of these titles. "Krst", in Egyptian, means "burial", by the way. It wasn't a title.

 

So, these assertions that have spread like wildfire across the web since the publication of Acharya 's book and the movie The Zetigeist have been refuted at many sites. The truth is that these claims did not exist until the 19th and 20th centuries. These Egyptian mythological similarities to Jesus did not exist until around the 20th century.

 

Here are a few links that may be helpful. Some of them refer only to this list, while others also discuss the historical evidences that do exist for Jesus. You may find this helpful.

 

http://www.kingdavid8.com/Copycat/JesusHorus.html

http://www.answeringinfidels.com/answering-skeptics/answering-acharya-s/a-refutation-of-archary-ss-book-the-christ-conspiracy-pt-1.html

http://www.preventingtruthdecay.org/copycats.shtml

http://singinginthereign.blogspot.com/2007/07/zeitgeist-movie-is-christianity.html

http://www.studywell.org/articles/mythorhistory.htm

 

Here are some sites that give the story of Horus, Osiris, and Isis.

http://www.reshafim.org.il/ad/egypt/religion/osiris1.html

http://www.pantheon.org/articles/h/horus.html

 

Even Wikpedia has the story....not that I am a big fan of that site, but it was fun reading.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Horus

 

Thank you.

 

You are welcome. I enjoy the continual education.