2 edits
I'll never forget how Socrates' friends begged him not to drink the poison. But he argued them down to a pulp persuading them that this was the most logical and right action he should take, if he was to be faithful to the society which rejected him.
He must have been quite a guy.
Originally posted by jaywillUnfortunately, his statement was not about Socrates.
He is not joking.
There is more historical reason to believe that a Jesus of Nazareth lived than there is to believe that a Socrates lived.
Don't get me wrong. I believe there was a Socrates and I read his arguments as were passed on to us by Plato. They are very interesting.
He was apparently quite a deep thinker and consistent debater, to the poin ...[text shortened]... t Plato's word for it how much would we know about Socrates ?
That is a genuine question.
1 edit
Originally posted by David CThe burden of proof is not that I am required to prove the story of Horus to be
I'll try, although I'm playing the Devil's Advocate here, since I am of the opinion that the Jesus character of the Gospels represents a syncretic evolution of previous Sun-gods (which includes Horus).
Let's start with #1. Please demonstrate that Horus was born "of a virgin".
true but to show that it preceeded and influenced the bible.
The story goes that Horus's father Osiris was ripped into 14 pieces and that when
Isis went looking for him, she found everything but his penis. So she makes him
a well bling substitute out of gold. Although she was not a virgin, it was still understood
that this was an immaculate conception as she was to believed to have used Ra's
power to do so.
Originally posted by Thequ1ckLet's not confuse the RC dogma of an "Immaculate Conception" for Mary with Jesus being "born of a virgin". Quite simply, many of the items on the list of your OP are difficult to substantiate. As I wrote in my first reply, that doesn't mean there isn't a grain of truth to the premise, though. As one studies the available evidence of the gods described by Graves' book, one can see a pattern emerge...but you will obviously meet with serious resistance from the apologetics.
The burden of proof is not that I am required to prove the story of Horus to be
true but to show that it preceeded and influenced the bible.
The story goes that Horus's father Osiris was ripped into 14 pieces and that when
Isis went looking for him, she found everything but his penis. So she makes him
a well bling substitute out of gold. Although she ...[text shortened]... at this was an immaculate conception as she was to believed to have used Ra's
power to do so.
Originally posted by David CI think it's important that we recognise the languages that were being used at
Let's not confuse the RC dogma of an "Immaculate Conception" for Mary with Jesus being "born of a virgin". Quite simply, many of the items on the list of your OP are difficult to substantiate. As I wrote in my first reply, that doesn't mean there isn't a grain of truth to the premise, though. As one studies the available evidence of the gods described by Gra ...[text shortened]... ttern emerge...but you will obviously meet with serious resistance from the apologetics.
the time. A lot of words had either ambiguous meanings or meanings different to
our current-day derived versions. A good example is the word virgin.
"Virgin" originated from the Greek and Latin word "Virgo," or maiden. At the time
it was used as a reference to power. I think that in this sense it Isis was very much
a "virgin", being the archetype of the ideal mother and wife.
It was not until the medieval times that it took upon similarities to modern day versions.
As I say though, the burden of proof is not upon me to justify every
one of the points set forth in my OP, as this would contradict the nature of the
bible and Egyptian stories outside of absolute faith.
I intend instead to provide a strong correlation, coupled with motive and opportunity.
330 years BC the Romans were vicariously spreading Egyptian culture to their
empire to help bolster their own heritage. Only 30 years before the birth of Christ
this message was at it's strongest due to the annexing of Egypt to the Roman
state.
Originally posted by Thequ1ckI think you're onto a good track there. The Mary myth is an innovation in the virgin birth tradition. So you should also recognise the difference between it and Isis, and the difference between Christ and Horus. They aren't functionally identical.
I think it's important that we recognise the languages that were being used at
the time. A lot of words had either ambiguous meanings or meanings different to
our current-day derived versions. A good example is the word virgin.
The Hindu avatar concept could be a useful point of comparison. Avatars, although incarnating the same deity each time, have progressively different functions.
3 edits
Originally posted by Bosse de NageI would argue that the functionality of Osiris, Horus and Isis as aspects of
I think you're onto a good track there. The Mary myth is an innovation in the virgin birth tradition. So you should also recognise the difference between it and Isis, and the difference between Christ and Horus. They aren't functionally identical.
The Hindu avatar concept could be a useful point of comparison. Avatars, although incarnating the same deity each time, have progressively different functions.
a holy trinity and is very similar to the holy trinity of the bible.
Don't believe me? Listen to the words to the 'lord's prayer'.
This prayer was actually preceeded by an Egyption prayer which began
O Amen, O Amen, who are in heaven.... and ends with Amen.
Amen being the lead polytheistic deity at the time.
Akhenaton then comes along and attempts to construct the first monotheistic
religion. He attempts to replace the polytheistic god with one called Atem.
Aten is identified with Pautti, the oldest of all the gods, and with the Aged
Horus, or Horus the Elder.
It is believed than that Akhenaton's top religious boys were then exiled from Egypt one
of whom was a high priest of Ahktnaton called Ra-Mose (Moses).
sidenote:- Freud, being the kind of nutter he is believes Moses was overthrown by
his followers and it was this overwealming sense of guilt and wanting to shag
or kill a close relative which led to the Jewish faith.
Originally posted by Thequ1ckTaking Freud one step further is Ahmed Osman, who argues that Akhenaten was Moses. The originator of monotheism, if you will.
It is believed than that Akhenaton's top religious boys were then exiled from Egypt one
of whom was a high priest of Ahktnaton called Ra-Mose (Moses).
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ahmed_Osman
Also, among his many other unconventional arguments, is that the Jesus character developed out of the Essene tradition and may be based on Joshua.
Originally posted by David CSo Osman has a theory that 'Jesus' aka Joshua actually lived some
Taking Freud one step further is Ahmed Osman, who argues that Akhenaten was Moses. The originator of monotheism, if you will.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ahmed_Osman
Also, among his many other unconventional arguments, is that the Jesus character developed out of the Essene tradition and may be based on Joshua.
200 years before Christ was reported to as an Egyptian pharoh.
I can't find sources to his evidence other than his written works but
it says that he uses evidence from writings of the dead sea scrolls.
This maybe true, but I think the important thing here is to show that
the story of Jesus was not a new one but one adapted from story's
before. If this can be done then it will be as a brick has been removed
from the Christian fallicy and Christian fallicy being what it is cannot
have a single brick removed without the whole house coming down.
I'd like that, I'd like that alot 🙂
Originally posted by Thequ1ckhttp://www.iht.com/articles/2008/07/06/mideast/tablet.php
This maybe true, but I think the important thing here is to show that
the story of Jesus was not a new one but one adapted from story's
before.
"A 3-foot-tall tablet with 87 lines of Hebrew that scholars believe dates from the decades just before the birth of Jesus is causing a quiet stir in biblical and archaeological circles, especially because it may speak of a messiah who will rise from the dead after three days.
If such a messianic description really is there, it will contribute to a developing re-evaluation of both popular and scholarly views of Jesus, because it suggests that the story of his death and resurrection was not unique but part of a recognized Jewish tradition at the time."
Taking that one step further, from where did the Jewish tradition arise? I think it's fair to say that, at this point, there are some serious misconceptions regarding the historical nature ascribed to the New Testament.
Originally posted by David CDo you know of have a thorough and well-documented book or documentary about this? I saw The God Who Wasn't There and was a bit let down...
The Wikipedia article on Jesus-as-myth hypothesis, in case anyone might be interested:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jesus_myth_hypothesis
Originally posted by PalynkaI can't say I'm aware of one. Each writer seems to arrive from different angles. Carrier has a nice series of articles on IIDB, Doherty often posts on their web forums. That's usually a good place to start, they generally don't tolerate the unscholarly riff-raff (like me!).
Do you know of have a thorough and well-documented book or documentary about this? I saw The God Who Wasn't There and was a bit let down...