Jesus made to resemble Horus et. al.

[Eddi]

It is often said that there was no historical Jesus and that Jesus is merely a copy of earlier figures, such as Horus and Mithras, on account to there being many similarities.

But… what if this is deliberate, on the part of God? Perhaps God wanted Jesus to be similar to the mythological figures of the time and so made him resemble Horus et. al. so as to make the concept of him more familiar to the people of his time and place?

 

[Augustus]

It is often said that there was no historical Jesus and that Jesus is merely a copy of earlier figures, such as Horus and Mithras, on account to there being many similarities.

It's also often said that there aren't really many similarities and credulous people on the internetz have been suckered by pseudo-history as people are remarkably easily fooled by that which confirms their ideological prejudices.

This tends to have little effect though as people still seem to think it's actually true rather than being a thing dreamed up by some kook in the 70s and popularised by kooks on the internetz.

But… what if this is deliberate, on the part of God? Perhaps God wanted Jesus to be similar to the mythological figures of the time and so made him resemble Horus et. al. so as to make the concept of him more familiar to the people of his time and place?

Or maybe he decided there wouldn't be many similarities but stuck an infographic online to say that there were so it would be easy to identify credulous people online.

 

[Mindmaster]

It is often said that there was no historical Jesus and that Jesus is merely a copy of earlier figures, such as Horus and Mithras, on account to there being many similarities.

But… what if this is deliberate, on the part of God? Perhaps God wanted Jesus to be similar to the mythological figures of the time and so made him resemble Horus et. al. so as to make the concept of him more familiar to the people of his time and place?

If you think Horus was an interesting comparison, you should look up Apollonius of Tyana Literally, 100% of his miracles were bootlegged into Jesus' story. The difference of course, is that there is more proof that he existed than Jesus did. He was a cultural phenomena, people from different nations knew of him, and he traveled rather extensively. Modern day scholars trust the accounts of his students as well, whether or not they're down with the miracles.

 

[Augustus]

If you think Horus was an interesting comparison, you should look up Apollonius of Tyana Literally, 100% of his miracles were bootlegged into Jesus' story. The difference of course, is that there is more proof that he existed than Jesus did. He was a cultural phenomena, people from different nations knew of him, and he traveled rather extensively. Modern day scholars trust the accounts of his students as well, whether or not they're down with the miracles.

A man best known from a text written in 220AD, thus somewhat unlikely to be a source for the gospels written 100-140 years earlier than that.

 

[Mindmaster]

A man best known from a text written in 220AD, thus somewhat unlikely to be a source for the gospels written 100-140 years earlier than that.

Not really, Jesus has sort of gone through permutations.

First he was a man, a prophet.

Then he was a "son of god", though he himself cited Psalms in that we are "all" this and it was nothing special.

Then he was some sort of trinity thing, blah blah blah. The agreements on the miracles and whatnot didn't really happen until the Nicene Creed. It was at that point that Christianity galvanized their beliefs, but before that you had all these little sects that basically took some of this and some of that. That does happen long after Apollonius' time, and even those accounts. Anyway, we know he was living during the reported lifetime of Jesus, so it is relevant. He'd have been wildly known by the religious and philosophical men of the time, and would have easily been an influence. In fact, we could argue that at this period of time Jesus is relatively unknown while Apollonius is a near celebrity.

 

[Augustus]

Not really, Jesus has sort of gone through permutations.

First he was a man, a prophet.

Then he was a "son of god", though he himself cited Psalms in that we are "all" this and it was nothing special.

Then he was some sort of trinity thing, blah blah blah. The agreements on the miracles and whatnot didn't really happen until the Nicene Creed. It was at that point that Christianity galvanized their beliefs, but before that you had all these little sects that basically took some of this and some of that. That does happen long after Apollonius' time, and even those accounts. Anyway, we know he was living during the reported lifetime of Jesus, so it is relevant. He'd have been wildly known by the religious and philosophical men of the time, and would have easily been an influence. In fact, we could argue that at this period of time Jesus is relatively unknown while Apollonius is a near celebrity.

Or alternatively, that Apollonius' story got exaggerated in the telling in the same way that Jesus' did and figure of limited importance in his lifetime became far more celebrated after his death. It's not as if Christians were unique in embellishing the stories they told, and the stories of Jesus were written down closer to his lifetime.

On top of that, they weren't even that similar. Sons of gods and miracle working holy men weren't exactly unknown, and 'prophets' were a dime a dozen.

Both have aspects of a common heroic archetype not because one is a copy of the other, but because they both fit an archetype like the hero in a Hollywood action movie commonly does. People keep confusing "A & B are both examples of X" for "B is a copy of A".

Then we have the idea that Nicaea was somehow fundamental in shaping the Bible, which is simply wrong. The miracle were in the Gospels, and the Gospels and the canon were not what Nicaea discussed. Also, Jesus was considered the son of God long before then, so why would they doubt he could miracles?

 

[Riders]

Or alternatively, that Apollonius' story got exaggerated in the telling in the same way that Jesus' did and figure of limited importance in his lifetime became far more celebrated after his death. It's not as if Christians were unique in embellishing the stories they told, and the stories of Jesus were written down closer to his lifetime.

On top of that, they weren't even that similar. Sons of gods and miracle working holy men weren't exactly unknown, and 'prophets' were a dime a dozen.

Both have aspects of a common heroic archetype not because one is a copy of the other, but because they both fit an archetype like the hero in a Hollywood action movie commonly does. People keep confusing "A & B are both examples of X" for "B is a copy of A".

Then we have the idea that Nicaea was somehow fundamental in shaping the Bible, which is simply wrong. The miracle were in the Gospels, and the Gospels and the canon were not what Nicaea discussed. Also, Jesus was considered the son of God long before then, so why would they doubt he could miracles?

Because he was not considered to be the Son of God, if he were the real messiah Jews would have accepted him as the Messiah.

There have been sons of Gods and saviors all through man kind.Jesus is like all the rest, no big deal.

 

[Augustus]

Because he was not considered to be the Son of God, if he were the real messiah Jews would have accepted him as the Messiah.

Some people consider the world to be run by lizard people headed by Queen Elizabeth II, that has nothing to do with whether it is actually true.

Jesus was considered to be the Son of God by some Christians within a few decades of his death.

The point was to explain that Jesus was considered to be God long before Nicaea, Constantine, etc.

There have been sons of Gods and saviors all through man kind.Jesus is like all the rest, no big deal.

Of course he is far from unique, but he is a big deal simply because Christianity is the biggest religion in the world (although Paul probably deserves more credit for that).

 

[Riders]

Some people consider the world to be run by lizard people headed by Queen Elizabeth II, that has nothing to do with whether it is actually true.

Jesus was considered to be the Son of God by some Christians within a few decades of his death.

The point was to explain that Jesus was considered to be God long before Nicaea, Constantine, etc.



Of course he is far from unique, but he is a big deal simply because Christianity is the biggest religion in the world (although Paul probably deserves more credit for that).

Actually the Muslims compete with Christianity in the size and Wiki says Muslims will be the biggest in the next 10 to 20 year so,and church attendance is falling a lot, so actually i disagree with you.

But sense Muslim religion is so big I assume you say the same about them, Alah must be truly unique too.

 

[Augustus]

Actually the Muslims compete with Christianity in the size and Wiki says Muslims will be the biggest in the next 10 to 20 year so,and church attendance is falling a lot, so actually i disagree with you.

But sense Muslim religion is so big I assume you say the same about them, Alah must be truly unique too.

I'm reporting a historical fact that Early Christians saw Jesus as the Son of God. It's also a fact that some Romans saw Augustus Caesar as Divi Filius: son of a god.

This has nothing to do with my opinion on whether or they actually were sons of gods or deserved to be worshipped.

It's a fact that some Republicans saw Obama as a Kenyan Muslim who was literally the anti-Christ, that doesn't make this true either.

Also, whether or not Islam will become the biggest religion in the future, doesn't change the fact that Christianity is the biggest now. Even if it completely disappears, this wouldn't change the fact that it has been incredibly influential.

The same is true for Muhammad. He has been massively influential due to the impact of Muslims on world history.

This is simply a fact.

 

[The Anointed]

Jesus made to resemble Horus

Cleopatra represented herself as the reincarnation of the Egyptian goddess ‘Isis’, and was given the title of “Queen of Kings” by Mark Anthony. Her son ‘Caesarion’ was also given many titles, including ‘god’, ‘Son of god’ and ‘King of Kings’ and was depicted as Horus the son of Isis. It was after the assassination of Caesar in 44 BC, that Cleopatra coupled up with Mark Anthony and in 40 BC she bore to him the twins Cleopatra Selene II and Alexander Helios, (HELI) and later on another son, Ptolemy Philadelphus.

In late 34 BC, at the Donations of Alexandria, shortly after Anthony had conquered Armenia, Cleopatra and Caesarion were crowned rulers of Egypt and Cyprus. Alexander Helios, their six-year-old son, was crowned ruler of Aemenia, Media and Parthia; Cleopatra Selene II, Heli’s six-year-old twin sister, was crowned ruler of Cyrenaica and Libya, and Ptolemy Philadelphus, the younger of their three children was crowned ruler of Phoenicia, Syria and Cilicia.

Isis was the most popular goddess from the time of Psamtik 1 (663-610 B.C) till the coming of Christianity, her cult appealed to the Greeks and Romans alike and when Egypt came under Roman rule, her cult spread through much of Europe. By the time of Jesus, the chief centre of her worship was in Rome. Isis is commonly depicted with Horus the child (Harpocrates) on her lap, and today, it is almost impossible to distinguish between the late pagan and early Christian figures of the mother and child, [Isis and Horus---Mary and Jesus] it’s almost as though the old Pagan Queen was stripped of her mythical garments and clothed with the new covering of Christianity.

 

[Unguru]

Jesus wasn't a hawk

 

[The Anointed]

Jesus wasn't a hawk

Fair dinkum! Well who would have thunk it?

 

[The Anointed]

Jesus wasn't a hawk

Fair dinkum! Well who would have thunk it?

 

[1213]

If you think Horus was an interesting comparison, you should look up Apollonius of Tyana Literally, 100% of his miracles were bootlegged into Jesus' story.....

But what did Apollonius say? The greatest thing from Jesus is his words. And I think there is no one that comes to even close to him in that.

 

[The Anointed]

But what did Apollonius say? The greatest thing from Jesus is his words. And I think there is no one that comes to even close to him in that.

Except for the fact that they were not his words.

I have just recently posted these words in another thread.

Deuteronomy 18: 18; YHVH, the God of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob, says to Moses; "I will send them a prophet like you from among their own people; I will put MY WORDS in his mouth, and he and he shall speak to them all that I command, and whosoever will not heed MY WORDS which he shall speak in my name, I will punish, etc.

Destroy this Temple [Which temple was The Man Jesus] said the Lord, and in three days I will raise it up.

Acts 5: 30; The God of our fathers raised up Jesus, whom you slew and hanged on a tree.

Acts 13: 30; But God raised him from the dead: and he was seen many days of them which came up with him from Galilee, etc.

1st Corinthians 6: 14; And God has both raised up the Lord, and will also raise up us by his own power.

2nd Corinthians 1: 9; But we had the sentence of death in ourselves, that we should not trust in ourselves, but in God which raiseth the dead.

2nd Corinthians 4: 14; knowing that he who raised the Lord Jesus will raise us also with Jesus and bring us with you into his presence.

Acts 17: 31; For the Lord has fixed a day [And that day is the Lords day of one thousand years, the great Sabbath, of which Paul says is the future reality of which the weekly Sabbath was but a shadow] in which he will judge the whole world with Justice by means of a MAN he has CHOSEN. He has given proof of this to everyone by raising that MAN from death. _________________________

It was the God of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob, (The Son of Man, the MOST HIGH in the creation) who said through his obedient servant Jesus; “Destroy this Temple and in three days I will raise it up.”

 

[Unguru]

Fair dinkum! Well who would have thunk it?

I'm not sure

 

[1213]

Except for the fact that they were not his words.

I have just recently posted these words in another thread...

I agree that Jesus spoke what God had commanded him to speak. But still, they are also words of Jesus, because he said them and I think he agrees with them.

For I spoke not from myself, but the Father who sent me, he gave me a commandment, what I should say, and what I should speak. I know that his commandment is eternal life. The things therefore which I speak, even as the Father has said to me, so I speak."
John 12:49-50

Jesus therefore answered them, "My teaching is not mine, but his who sent me. If anyone desires to do his will, he will know about the teaching, whether it is from God, or if I am speaking from myself.
John 7:16-17

 

[lukethethird]

No one has a clue as to whether Jesus existed or not. We have nothing but religious texts so we can read our Bible for what it's worth, and we can choose to believe or not, but that doesn't prove anything.

 

[Hildeburh]

It is often said that there was no historical Jesus and that Jesus is merely a copy of earlier figures, such as Horus and Mithras, on account to there being many similarities.[/QUOTE

I haven't read that the Jesus mythos resembled that of Horus but there are striking parallels between the Jesus story and those of Osiris, Dionysus, Mithras and Attis. Far too many similarities to dismiss as coincidence.

But… what if this is deliberate, on the part of God? Perhaps God wanted Jesus to be similar to the mythological figures of the time and so made him resemble Horus et. al. so as to make the concept of him more familiar to the people of his time and place?

Unconvincing. This is a very old issue pagan writers, such as Celsus, accused early Christians of borrowing motifs from the Mystery religions and doctrines from Plato.

There were some absurd arguements adopted by early Church writers such as 'diabolical mimicry' used by (Tertullian, Justin Martyr and Irenaeus) in which Satan was blamed for 'plagerism by anticipation' and St Ambrose who accussed Plato of plagerising Moses.