If you believe in these events as being true...

[Riverwolf]

I understand that there are those that have supposedly debunked it, but I want non-biased sources that can either confirm or deny. If you do a Google search, 99% of the debunkers are from Christian writers that are obviously going to support their side of the coin. That is the problem I am running into (for either argument).

Just familiarize yourself with the stories, presented from sources independent of this issue, and make the comparisons yourself.

Might save you a lot of time and headaches.

 

[psychoslice]

I myself don't believe any of it anyway, so it doesn't bother me where the source comes from.

 

[lostwanderingsoul]

most so calles "christian" beliefs are just left over ideas from pagan religions. around the third century a false religion inspired by Satan and using these left over pagan ideas hijacked the name "christian" and the true beliefs of Jesus were pushed aside

 

[Popcorn]

Hey look, a solar eclipse: Coat of arms of Pope Francis - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Pretty nifty, eh?

 

[psychoslice]

most so calles "christian" beliefs are just left over ideas from pagan religions. around the third century a false religion inspired by Satan and using these left over pagan ideas hijacked the name "christian" and the true beliefs of Jesus were pushed aside

Totally agree.

 

[Neo Deist]

Just familiarize yourself with the stories, presented from sources independent of this issue, and make the comparisons yourself.

Might save you a lot of time and headaches.

Oh, there's no headache. The issue is not really that deep for me. The OP was a half joke to begin with (at least I thought it was funny). As a deist I could care less one way or another.

 

[Neo Deist]

The OP is intellectually irresponsible.

You are absolutely correct. I never should have made that post. It was completely beneath me and I must sincerely apologize to everyone who's faith might have been troubled by the OP. I should have taken the higher, moral ground on that issue and...wait, a second. I think I am starting to care...

...nope, false alarm.

Get a sense of humor dude. It was meant as a half joke. Quit sounding like an old man!

 

[Shad]

The list:

1. Born from a virgin who conceived via a god.
2. Mother was a mortal.
3. Comes from a royal bloodline.
4. Birth announced by angels.
5. A star heralded his birth.
6. There was an attempt to kill the newborn child.
7. Coming of age ritual at age 12.
8. No data from the age of 12 to 30.
9. Baptized at age 30.
10. His baptizer was later beheaded.

If you believe these events are true and factual, then congratulations! You believe in the Egyptian god Horus who lived some 3,000 years prior to Jesus of Nazareth.

I know, I know, it has all been said before. The parallels between the two have been beaten into the ground repeatedly. Some affirm them, others deny them. Others still insist that Satan dropped the Horus stories centuries before Jesus in an effort to undermine his coming.

What do I believe about the Horus-Jesus connection? TBH, I am not sure as I have not really looked into it. As a deist it does not really matter one way or another. If there is any validity to the connection, then Christianity is simply a copycat religion, and would not be the first. If there is not any validity, then obviously people are trying to debunk Christianity.

Hmmm...now I have to brush up on my Egyptology and try to find reputable, non-biased sources. Christian sources are going to deny the parallels while anti-Christian sources are going to try and promote them as truth.

Parallels in religions in the Middle-East are not that uncommon nor are shared stories such as the Romance of Alexander which is found in Christian, Hebrew and Islamic text.

 

[Neo Deist]

Parallels in religions in the Middle-East are not that uncommon nor are shared stories such as the Romance of Alexander which is found in Christian, Hebrew and Islamic text.

I am well aware and have always been of the opinion that "religions" are not original, merely copies of each other over the ages.

 

[psychoslice]

I am well aware and have always been of the opinion that "religions" are not original, merely copies of each other over the ages.

Yes they certainly are.

 

[Skwim]

That film is where this nonsense comes from, and they largely derive it from nineteenth century crackpots. (That which they don't just outright make up). The entire film is nothing but a conspiracy theory designed to dupe those all too willing to take any claim that 'undermines' Christianity without question.

How do you know both aren't drawing from the same or similar source? You don't. So, so much for your integrity.

Because no matter how sound a Christian's research, he's biased and can't be trusted. You'll find nothing confirming the Horus-Jesus connection because it's either not there (they made it up) or they have taken vague and coincidental similarities and stretched them to absurdity. There is no other side to the argument. It is conspiracy theory nonsense.

More, "I don't want it to be so, so it isn't" bluster. Try citing your evidence rather than parading your fear as fact. You ain't convincing anyone here.

 

[Shad]

I am well aware and have always been of the opinion that "religions" are not original, merely copies of each other over the ages.

It happens with shared stories or religious ideas which share common themes such as the significant of water in Greek mythology, the Abrahamic religions and other religions of the area. That does not suggest every religion is a copy but that common ideas become filtered through stories be it new, old or modified. At times it is easier to modify an existing story which many know of as a general or majority view of into a specific for an intended group. As such with the difference between the Islamic, Talmud, Christian and Greek versions.

 

[Glaurung]

How do you know both aren't drawing from the same or similar source? You don't. So, so much for your integrity.

I know with certainty that the OP got his claims (directly or indirectly) from that movie. The claims about Horus are verbatim. And as has been pointed out numerous times, they are fabrications.

More, "I don't want it to be so, so it isn't" bluster. Try citing your evidence rather than parading your fear as fact. You ain't convincing anyone here.

It is fact, the connections to Horus are simply not there. If you want to argue that Jesus is another version of various pagan deities, then you have the burden of proof. If all you can do is give me Zeitgeist (demonstrable quackery) then we have nothing do discuss. It's the same thinking used by conspiracy theorists. Any denial by the sheeple, is validation.

The only one not convincing anyone, is you and your pseudo-intellectual contrarianism.

Here:

Zeitgeist, the movie Debunked - Part One - Zeitgeist Exposed - Skeptic Project

 

[Skwim]

I know with certainty that the OP got his claims (directly or indirectly) from that movie. The claims about Horus are verbatim. And as has been pointed out numerous times, they are fabrications.

So indirectly is a possibility now. You do realize that this is quite different from "That film is where this nonsense comes from." don't you? No need to answer. In any case, you still haven't shown why it's impossible that both got their information from the same source. So, I'm taking your dodge as an admission that you don't.

The only one not convincing anyone, is you and your pseudo-intellectual contrarianism.

Easy, dear Tlaloc. Easy. Take a deep breath or two. Now . . . if you actually believe I presented "pseudo-intellectual contrarianism" please cite the instance, because all I've done is comment on your over-wrought denial, and nothing concerning the substance of the issue.

 

[oldbadger]

The list:

1. Born from a virgin who conceived via a god.
2. Mother was a mortal.
3. Comes from a royal bloodline.
4. Birth announced by angels.
5. A star heralded his birth.
6. There was an attempt to kill the newborn child.
7. Coming of age ritual at age 12.
8. No data from the age of 12 to 30.
9. Baptized at age 30.
10. His baptizer was later beheaded.

If you believe these events are true and factual, then congratulations! .......................................

You haven't studied 'Jesus as a historical figure', have you?
Before you mouth-off to show your knowledge, you firstly need to acquire some knowledge.
The Gospel of Mark, thinned of its evangelical fervour, can provide accurate answers to some of the above points, and academic endeavour can suggest probabilities for others. But if the info was gleaned from the Gospel of John, then it's probably a bit wobbly.
Your Horus 'thing' is quite coincidental ........
1. Born from a virgin who conceived via a god.
Mary was possibly a Temple Virgin in the Hellenised city of Sepphoris, and raped by a Roman soldier who may have been named Patronus.
2. Mother was a mortal.
Oh No! How could Mary have possibly been a Mortal? ...... Wake up! Of course Mary was Mortal.
3. Comes from a royal bloodline.
Not mentioned in the Gospel of Mark. Pauline manipulation, there.....
4. Birth announced by angels.
Not mentioned in the Gospel of Mark. Paul's mate Luke thrived on that kind of stuff.
5. A star heralded his birth.
Not mentioned in the Gospel of Mark. See? If not in Mark, don't bother.
6. There was an attempt to kill the newborn child.
Not mentioned in the Gospel of Mark.
7. Coming of age ritual at age 12.
Not mentioned in the Gospel of Mark
8. No data from the age of 12 to 30.
Not much data from 0-30(ish) in the Gospel of Mark.
9. Baptized at age 30.
Good! Yes. The Consensus of HJ scholars seems to agree on this.
10. His baptizer was later beheaded.
Good! John the Baptist was certainly executed by Prince Antipas.

........................ but your idea is total gobblywobblies, mate.......

 

[Glaurung]

So indirectly is a possibility now. You do realize that this is quite different from "That film is where this nonsense comes from." don't you?

Sure, if he has not watched the film then he nonetheless took it from someone who took the claims directly from Zeitgeist. I know this with certainty because here it is.

Find me any other source on the internet for the OP's claims that doesn't one way or the other trace to this film. The fact you're trying to argue against the blatantly obvious in an attempt to attack me is telling.

Easy, dear Tlaloc. Easy. Take a deep breath or two. Now . . . if you actually believe I presented "pseudo-intellectual contrarianism" please cite the instance, because all I've done is comment on your over-wrought denial, and nothing concerning the substance of the issue.

It is not over-wrought denial to dismiss out of hand what is, and has been shown to be, demonstrable nonsense.

You have no point whatsoever. You simply want to argue as a petty, self-congratulatory game getting one up on 'the Christian'. It is pseudo-intellectual and I have only so much patience for such games.

 

[psychoslice]

Yes Zeitgeist, may not be completely right, but it only needs one thing to be true, and Christianity falls too pieces.

 

[Skwim]

Sure, if he has not watched the film then he nonetheless took it from someone who took the claims directly from Zeitgeist. I know this with certainty because here it is.

Find me any other source on the internet for the OP's claims that doesn't one way or the other trace to this film. The fact you're trying to argue against the blatantly obvious in an attempt to attack me is telling.

It is not over-wrought denial to dismiss out of hand what is, and has been shown to be, demonstrable nonsense.

You have no point whatsoever. You simply want to argue as a petty, self-congratulatory game getting one up on 'the Christian'. It is pseudo-intellectual and I have only so much patience for such games.

Not really conversant with the Horus-Jesus similarities, and I have no desire in getting into them; however, let me present the findings of two scholars, Timothy Freke and Peter Gandy, who, looking into the Osiris-Dionysus/Jesus connection, and the machinations of the Catholic Church, said:

"The more we studied the various versions of the myth of Osiris-Dionysus, the more it became obvious that the story of Jesus had all the characteristics of this perennial tale. Event by event, we found we were able to construct Jesus' supposed biography from mythic motifs previously relating to Osiris-Dionysus:

Osiris-Dionysus is God made flesh, the savior and "Son of God."

His father is God and his mother is a mortal virgin.

He is born in a cave or humble cowshed on December 25 before three shepherds.

He offers his followers the chance to be born again through the rites of baptism.

He miraculously turns water into wine at a marriage ceremony.

He rides triumphantly into town on a donkey while people wave palm leaves to honor him

He dies at Eastertime as a sacrifice for the sins of the world.

After his death he descends into hell, then on the third day he rises from the dead and ascends to heaven in glory.

His followers await his return as the judge during the last days.

His death and resurrection are celebrated by a ritual of bread and wine, which symbolize his body and blood.

These are just some of the motifs shared between the tales of Osiris-Dionysus and the biography of Jesus. Why are these remarkable similarities not common knowledge? Because, as we were to discover later, the early Roman Church did everything in its power to prevent us perceiving them. It systematically destroyed Pagan sacred literature in a brutal program of eradicating the Mysteries---a task it performed so completely that today Paganism is regarded as a "dead" religion.

Although surprising to us now, to the writers of the first few centuries CE these similarities between the new Christian religion and the ancient mysteries were extremely obvious. Pagan critics of Christianity, such as the satirist Celsus, complained that this recent religion was nothing more than a pale reflection of their own ancient teachings. Early "Church Fathers," such as Justin Martyr, Tertullian, and Irenaeus, were understandably disturbed and resorted to the desperate claim that these similarities were the result of diabolical mimicry. Using one of the most absurd arguments ever advanced, they accused the Devil of "plagiarism by anticipation," of deviously copying the true stories of Jesus before it actually happened in an attempt to mislead the gullible. These Church fathers struck us as no less devious than the Devil they hoped to incriminate.

Other Christian commentators have claimed that the myths of the Mysteries were like "pre-echos" of the literal coming of Jesus, somewhat like premonitions or prophecies. This is the more generous version of the diabolical mimicry theory, but no less ridiculous to us. There was nothing other than cultural prejudice to make us see the Jesus story as the literal culmination of its many precursors. Viewed impartially, it appeared to be just another version of the same basic story."

Freke, T and Gandy, P., 2000. The Jesus Mysteries, Harmony Books. 5-6.

​

The balance of the book, 343 pages, concerns itself with the evidence supporting these findings

 

[Neo Deist]

You haven't studied 'Jesus as a historical figure', have you?
Before you mouth-off to show your knowledge, you firstly need to acquire some knowledge.


........................ but your idea is total gobblywobblies, mate.......

Sigh...the OP was a joke!

Yes I went on to state that I did not know much about Egyptology. No I have never seen the movie Zeitgeist. Yes I have seen Religulous.

 

[oldbadger]

Sigh...the OP was a joke!

Yes I went on to state that I did not know much about Egyptology. No I have never seen the movie Zeitgeist. Yes I have seen Religulous.

........ Sigh........... my response was a joke!