Skip to main content

There are a few problems with the Jesus/Dionysus comparison.

 

First of all, using your search terms you're more likely to find proponents of the recycled Jesus theory. Not really objective information, a fact proven by the link you posted from "HolyBlasphemy.net".

 

Second, a Greek god dying and coming back to life is very different than the story of Jesus. The rabbi that you acknowledged as existing was publicly executed. He was buried in the same town he was executed in. People began to risk their own lives by claiming that the tomb was empty. That's very significant.

 

All anyone had to do was go point to the tomb and say "Nope, he's still dead", but that isn't the response that was given. Jewish leadership claimed the body was stolen, confirming the empty tomb. Given the fact that the tomb was guarded by 1st century equivalent of Navy Seals, it's a very unlikely story.

 

Plus, there is the simple fact that liars make poor martyrs. If you held a gun up to Tom Cruise's head and said "Stop talking about Scientology or you'll be slowly tortured to death", what would he choose? There were many people who not only risked their lives but died on the belief that Christ was risen. Plus, the fact that Christianity spread so fast in a hostile environment.

 

Not only that, but the reason for the death and resurrection is completely unique.

 

It's a matter of historical fact and context. Many of the Jesus comparisons to other myths are either re-telling Jesus' story wrong, re-telling the myth wrong, or both to try and make them fit. One can't buy into the recycled Jesus theory and still claim objectivity.

Why bother wasting time on deeps intentional attention to grooming his own ignorance.

One interested in being convinced of the truth that Jesus existed should visit Princeton University and Boston University Departments of religion on line and listen to the genius of someone like Paula Fredriksen.

http://www.bu.edu/religion/faculty/bios/fredriksen/

 

http://hulk03.princeton.edu:8080/WebMedia/lectures/

Nash, I said my source was not the final word, but one of many.  I never claimed it was definitive.

 

A greek god, or a Persian god, or an Egyptian god coming back from death demonstrates little.  So does the resurrection of Jesus.  It was simply what was expected of earthbound gods at the time.  The denial of death.  Jesus was one in a long line of alleged deniers.

 

Why would the equivalent of the Navy Seals guard the tomb of a common criminal?  That is what he was crucified for.  Why would the Romans care if the tomb was robbed?  They would not.  More likely, he was guarded by the Cherokee Police Dept., and a fiver would have them look the other way.

 

I'm not impressed by martyrs.  Jim Jones and David Koresh had martyrs.  Al Qaeda has self-proclaimed martyrs.  Buddhist monks immolated themselves in Saigon in 1972 or so.  As best as I can see, martyrs are people with little to live for except a religion that they cannot demonstrate.  Perhaps they're better off making what small, insignificant point they can in their suicides.

 

You're right.  It is a matter of historical fact and context.  The extra-biblical history of Jesus is, to say the least, suspect.  Non-existent is more like it.  Christians, yes.  Jesus, no.  There is a list of contemporary historians in the area who never heard of the man.  I'm aware of no historians who offer an eyewitness account of Jesus or his disciples in their time.

 

Nash, there was a formula for religious heroes of the time, and Jesus fit most of the popular criteria.  Miraculous birth, walking on water, other miracles, son of god, died for redemption of ordinary people, heal the sick, surrounded by disciples, resurrected only to be swiftly and controversially ascended into heaven.... it goes on and on.  Read up on it.

 

You'll find all the above in the Egyptian book of the Dead, and other Egyptian theology.  Egypt was butted up against Israel, after all, and a far more ancient society.  It is only reasonable that their religion was influential on Judaism and Christianity.

 

Have you read Karen Armstrong?  Her history of the Bible is a remarkable read.  She was a nun, and her only pursuit is truth.  Check her out.

 

Jesus is Horus.  Jesus is Dionysus.  Jesus is Joseph of the multi colored coat.  Jesus is Mithra.  Jesus is anything but original.

 

DF

Jesus is Horus.  Jesus is Dionysus.  Jesus is Joseph of the multi colored coat.  Jesus is Mithra.  Jesus is anything but original.

 

Maybe. Maybe not. You cannot prove or disprove your assumption. If an omnipotent being was watching the evolution of a stupid species, he would send the messengers that they could understand at the time. It may be that Mithra, Jesus, Mohammed, etc... are all from the same God.

There is quite a bit of extra Biblical, historical evidence for Jesus. It's been posted here many times before and is available to find if you choose to check it out. There is a lot more significant historical information not related to Jesus contained within those works. One can't toss out all of that information just because it mentions Jesus.

 

The reason the tomb was guarded is simple. Judea is occupied territory. If the Jews rebel, Jerusalem is destroyed and a lot of people killed by the Romans. If the Jews go along with it and submit to Roman rule, life goes on. It was a very delicate and tense situation.

 

Jesus was saying and doing a lot of things that was considered blasphemous. He was challenging Jewish leadership and gaining followers. The best way to stop that is to let everyone see him die. Then, keep people away from his body so he doesn't become a martyr. The goal was for him to be forgotten.

 

To compare Roman soldiers to Cherokee police is a compliment to the cops. Rome didn't conquer much of their known world by being incompetent as you implied. They were skilled fighters and killers. When soldiers were told to guard something, they did so with their lives. That's literal, because if they failed they were usually executed.

 

To believe the Jesus/Horus comparison is to believe the claim that they were both born on December 25th. It's not true for either of them, and that's just one example of how the comparison is false. So why believe it?

 

The main reason the other comparisons fail is because they don't take into account the reason for Jesus' death and resurrection. The stories of other gods dying and coming back are not only very different contextually, but they did so to benefit themselves. Jesus' death was to benefit you. The resurrection was to prove the debt was paid. A unique event backed by history.

Deep, “

"their religion was influential on Judaism and Christianity.”

How ignorant is that?

On the contrari, the Jews taught the Egyptians more than they bargained for about God and religion.

Compared to the Jews the Egyptians were somewhat uncivilized. The Egyptians were good at stacking rocks. They could hammer gold into thin sheets. They were very poor artists.

Very superstitious. The only thing they were good at was embalming and stacking rocks.

They were dull and dimwitted. No I don’t think the Jews patterned anything religious after the Egyptians.

The Jews on the other hand were a highly civilized people that eventually out foxed their neighbors with the help of a single God.

Originally Posted by NashBama:

There is quite a bit of extra Biblical, historical evidence for Jesus. It's been posted here many times before and is available to find if you choose to check it out. There is a lot more significant historical information not related to Jesus contained within those works. One can't toss out all of that information just because it mentions Jesus.

 

The reason the tomb was guarded is simple. Judea is occupied territory. If the Jews rebel, Jerusalem is destroyed and a lot of people killed by the Romans. If the Jews go along with it and submit to Roman rule, life goes on. It was a very delicate and tense situation.

 

Jesus was saying and doing a lot of things that was considered blasphemous. He was challenging Jewish leadership and gaining followers. The best way to stop that is to let everyone see him die. Then, keep people away from his body so he doesn't become a martyr. The goal was for him to be forgotten.

 

To compare Roman soldiers to Cherokee police is a compliment to the cops. Rome didn't conquer much of their known world by being incompetent as you implied. They were skilled fighters and killers. When soldiers were told to guard something, they did so with their lives. That's literal, because if they failed they were usually executed.

 

To believe the Jesus/Horus comparison is to believe the claim that they were both born on December 25th. It's not true for either of them, and that's just one example of how the comparison is false. So why believe it?

 

The main reason the other comparisons fail is because they don't take into account the reason for Jesus' death and resurrection. The stories of other gods dying and coming back are not only very different contextually, but they did so to benefit themselves. Jesus' death was to benefit you. The resurrection was to prove the debt was paid. A unique event backed by history.

I've looked into the extra-biblical history of Jesus, and found it lacking.  Do you refer to  Tacitus?  His history is widely acknowledged as having been corrupted in translation and transcription.  At the least, Tacitus wrote 80 years after Jesus's alleged ministry, and his notes on the christians were tangential.  Let's grant that there were Christians, as there certainly were. 
That's all Tacitus recorded.

 

I record at this moment that there are Scientologists.  Does that make Scientology valid?

 

What is it about December 25 that makes it luscious to religious writers?  Is it because that is the day when the sun obviously begins to appear longer in the sky?  Oh, what a shocker!  An astronomical reference to the gods!  You say it's not true to either of them, I'm eager to hear your evidence of another date for their births.  More eager to hear of your references for such.  I suspect that both myths are astrological in their essence, and that there is no compelling evidence to the contrary.

 

The short answer is that Christianity co-opted the Winter Solstice as Jesus' birthday, as it was already a celebrated holiday.  I imagine you know this.  Same with Easter, filtered through the Passover tradition.  It's a Lunar astrological holiday.  Fine.  Mazeltov.  Enjoy.  It's the Spring Festival, let's all hunt eggs and wear fancy clothes.  I'm all for it.

 

DF

I've looked into the extra-biblical history of Jesus, and found it lacking.  Do you refer to  Tacitus?  His history is widely acknowledged as having been corrupted in translation and transcription.  At the least, Tacitus wrote 80 years after Jesus's alleged ministry, and his notes on the christians were tangential.  Let's grant that there were Christians, as there certainly were. 
That's all Tacitus recorded.

 

That's not true. Tacitus described Christians as those who believed in a superstition based on a guy that Pontius Pilate had executed. It significant because Tacitus was not a Christian, but he is confirming the existence of not only Pilate, but Jesus as well. It's also significant because 80 years after Jesus was executed, people were still willing to die horrible deaths at the hands of Nero for their belief. If Jesus never existed and nothing extraordinary happened afterward, there would be no reason to risk one's life.

 

Plus, The Annuls of Rome is a very valuable historical resource when it comes to learning about ancient Rome. It has not been acknowledged as being corrupted by any historian worth his weight in salt. The translation we have is not based on one single work passed down, but a collection of pieces of documents cross referenced with each other for accuracy. Any corruption or mistranslation would be easy to spot by scholars using this method.

 

I record at this moment that there are Scientologists.  Does that make Scientology valid?

 

No. Tacitus writing about Christ doesn't validate Christianity either. However, it does provide historical evidence that a man named Christ existed and His execution led to the beginning of Christianity.

 

What is it about December 25 that makes it luscious to religious writers?  Is it because that is the day when the sun obviously begins to appear longer in the sky?  Oh, what a shocker!  An astronomical reference to the gods!  You say it's not true to either of them, I'm eager to hear your evidence of another date for their births.  More eager to hear of your references for such.  I suspect that both myths are astrological in their essence, and that there is no compelling evidence to the contrary.

 

December 25th is not mentioned anywhere in the Bible. There is absolutely nothing historically suggesting that Horus was born on December 25th. That's just one example of how the theory doesn't work. It's been largely rejected by historians and academics.

 

The story of Jesus' birth mentions that shepherds were watching their flock at night. That usually happens during warmer months. There is debate as to whether it was in the spring or fall, but it's generally agreed that it wasn't late December. As for Horus, there is no mention of date in the story of his birth, only that he was born to Isis after Osiris was murdered. Very different than the Nativity story.

 

So to believe the Jesus/Horus theory is to believe things that evidence proves incorrect. So why believe it?

It's also significant because 80 years after Jesus was executed, people were still willing to die horrible deaths at the hands of Nero for their belief.

 

*******************************************************************************************************************

 

And they were willing to do horrible things to non-believers or people that believed differently than they did. Why is it that christians never want to talk about that?

Originally Posted by Jennifer:

That's exactly right. The Bible does not say how many wise men there were, just that there were wise men. There could have been two or twenty.

 

If you've seen the movie "Zeitgeist" which popularized the Jesus/Horus comparison, you'll remember that this is one of the claims made. Both Jesus and Horus were visited by three kings. As you pointed out, that's not in the Bible.  It's also not part of the Horus mythology.

 

Another example of how the recycled Jesus theory isn't accurate. Thanks for the link. (No BG style sarcasm meant there, I promise )

Originally Posted by Jennifer:

It's also significant because 80 years after Jesus was executed, people were still willing to die horrible deaths at the hands of Nero for their belief.

 

*******************************************************************************************************************

 

And they were willing to do horrible things to non-believers or people that believed differently than they did. Why is it that christians never want to talk about that?

What horrible things did 1st Century Christians do to non-believers?

By the very fact they called themselves christians and worshipped and did the bidding of a bloodthirsty mythical monster. Come on nash, you are kidding right? Are you going to even try to deny the murderous history of christianity??  Was what nero did a nice thing? No. Was what christians did a nice thing? No. Barbarians the lot of them, but you try to toss one a pity party. We've been over this a hundred times. All through the bible it's "kill kill, slaughter in the most horrible way, kill everyone, even babies and small children for your god".  Then-"oh isn't god so wonderful with his love and all".  Oh but christians don't do that stuff anymore. When did they stop and what stopped them? You will still hear preachers all hopped up and telling the stories about how "god" ordered and helped his followers murder others. And all the while they're doing it proudly, chest all puffed out, face all red, tears streaming down their face.

 

There will be a short intermission while all the christians ready their "you're just bitter, hate filled etc" posts.

Originally Posted by Jennifer:

By the very fact they called themselves christians and worshipped and did the bidding of a bloodthirsty mythical monster. Come on nash, you are kidding right? Are you going to even try to deny the murderous history of christianity??  Was what nero did a nice thing? No. Was what christians did a nice thing? No. Barbarians the lot of them, but you try to toss one a pity party. We've been over this a hundred times. All through the bible it's "kill kill, slaughter in the most horrible way, kill everyone, even babies and small children for your god".  Then-"oh isn't god so wonderful with his love and all".  Oh but christians don't do that stuff anymore. When did they stop and what stopped them? You will still hear preachers all hopped up and telling the stories about how "god" ordered and helped his followers murder others. And all the while they're doing it proudly, chest all puffed out, face all red, tears streaming down their face.

 

There will be a short intermission while all the christians ready their "you're just bitter, hate filled etc" posts.

Very broad statements, no specific examples. I won't say you're filled with hate towards Christianity. I will say that this post doesn't help your defense that you're not.

 

So I'll put it this way. Did Jesus ever command His followers to kill unbelievers or did He say to love them?

Originally Posted by Not Shallow Not Slim:

nash, I'll put it in the form of a question.

 

Do you believe the stories about Jesus, regarding miraculous birth, miracles, son of god, savior of mankind from it's evil nature, crucifiction, resurrection, etc. are unique, original, and true?

 

Yes or no, please.

 

DF

Don't hold your breath. Christians don't answer questions unless they asked them in the first place. To do otherwise is against their religion.

Originally Posted by Not Shallow Not Slim:

nash, I'll put it in the form of a question.

 

Do you believe the stories about Jesus, regarding miraculous birth, miracles, son of god, savior of mankind from it's evil nature, crucifiction, resurrection, etc. are unique, original, and true?

 

Yes or no, please.

 

DF

Yes.

 

Do you believe that both Jesus and Horus were born on December 25th, both had 3 kings or wise men visit them, and that Mithra was born to a virgin?

 

Yes or no, please.

Originally Posted by NashBama:

So I'll put it this way. Did Jesus ever command His followers to kill unbelievers or did He say to love them?

 

"“Whoever acknowledges me before others, I will also acknowledge before my Father in heaven. 33 But whoever disowns me before others, I will disown before my Father in heaven.

   34 “Do not suppose that I have come to bring peace to the earth. I did not come to bring peace, but a sword.35 For I have come to turn a man against his father, a daughter against her mother, 

a daughter-in-law against her mother-in-law—   36 a man’s enemies will be the members of his own household."


Nice peaceful words there, Nash.

Originally Posted by NashBama:

Do you believe that both Jesus and Horus were born on December 25th, both had 3 kings or wise men visit them, and that Mithra was born to a virgin?

 

Yes or no, please.

 

Nash, admittedly, the data is contradictory.  Some sites say yes, some say no. The same goes for Horus and a few other sun/son/gods.  I cannot find a reference that either of us would consider "definitive."  Mithras seems to have started out as the "God of Contracts."  Over a few centuries he ended up surpassing other gods, his story evolved until he was eventually held to be a Sun God.

Mithraism seemed to be a pretty big religion and most sites I see say it was major competition to early Christianity.  The Vatican is said to have been built on a Mithratic temple and so were many other early Xtian temples in the Roman empire.  

 

I also invite you to study Horus. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Horus

But the fact remains: History records a large number of god-come-to-earth-as-a-man stories who were birthed by miraculous means.  I see tons of references to other "virgin birth" stories but none that you would even begin to accept as providential.  Most popularly, Chrishna (Hindu - sounds a lot like "Christ" no?) was born to a virgin. So was Buddah (born to "Maya").  A number of far eastern gods were born to virgins.

 

It is even recorded that Plato was believed by the populace to be a divine son of virgin named Perictione. 

 

No, you will not accept any of this as factual, of course.  You can do your own work if you truly want to know.  But you don't.  So you won't.   

Nash,

 

I'm still looking into Horus, but I'll answer your question.  It's a bit irrelevant anyway, as I'm not saying Jesus is a 1:1 ripoff of Horus.

 

The Jesus story took a bit from this religion, and a bit from that one.  The ancient Egyptians certainly believed, for example, of a judgment after death after which judgment one would live forever or endure torment.

 

Born to a virgin mother on Dec. 25?  Mithras.  See how the Jesus story borrowed from all over?

 

You'll be interested to check this out: http://www.pocm.info/index.html

 

Take a little time with this site. 

 

DF

Originally Posted by Not Shallow Not Slim:

Born to a virgin mother on Dec. 25?  Mithras.  See how the Jesus story borrowed from all over?

 

Mithra was born out of solid rock. Are you saying a rock can be considered a virgin?

 

I also did not ask if Jesus was a 1:1 ripoff of Hours. I asked a yes or no question just like you asked me. Do you belive that Horus and Jesus were both born on December 25th?

 

Information to consider, if you chose to.

 

http://www.historykb.com/Uwe/F...theist-Myth-Debunked

 

Take a little time with this site.

 

Not trying to be boorish. You're a smart guy but you're defending something that can be easily debunked.  

Originally Posted by Unobtanium:
Originally Posted by NashBama:

So I'll put it this way. Did Jesus ever command His followers to kill unbelievers or did He say to love them?

 

"“Whoever acknowledges me before others, I will also acknowledge before my Father in heaven. 33 But whoever disowns me before others, I will disown before my Father in heaven.

   34 “Do not suppose that I have come to bring peace to the earth. I did not come to bring peace, but a sword.35 For I have come to turn a man against his father, a daughter against her mother, 

a daughter-in-law against her mother-in-law—   36 a man’s enemies will be the members of his own household."


Nice peaceful words there, Nash.

Like I said before, you don't get it.

 

He's saying that Christians will be rejected for their faith, even by their own family. He isn't saying He has a literal sword, but that Christians will face a sword due to their beliefs. Which they did and still do.

 

So where in that verse does it answer the question I posed to Jenifer? Did Jesus ever command His followers to kill unbelievers or did He say to love them?

Nash,

 

Getting back to you about Horus and the Wise Men.  It's generally not accepted that wise men attended his birth, after the Jesus story fashion.

 

What's more likely is that the Wise Men story was dropped into a later Gospel to fulfill an OT prophesy.

 

The story of the Magi in the New Testament, told by Jews who had become Christians, is spun from elements in the Old Testament, which are used to prove that Jesus is the Messiah, King not only of the Jews but of the whole world. As the "messianic" passages of the Old Testament were read, they "predicted" that the non-Jewish nations of the world would come to adore the Jewish messiah (or nation) and would bring international treasures. Some of the relevant passages that were alluded to in the Magi story are Isaiah 60:5-6: "...The riches of the sea will flow to you, the wealth of nations come to you; camels in throngs will cover you, and dromedaries of Midian and Ephah; everyone in Sheba will come, bringing gold and incense and singing the praise of the Lord." Another passage is in the Psalms, 72:10-11: "The kings of Tarshish and of the islands will pay him tribute, the kings of Sheba and Seba will offer gifts; all kings will do him homage..." Other prophetic texts mention trade in incense and spices, such as Jeremiah 6:20 and Ezekiel 27:22.--http://www.pyracantha.com/Z/3magi.html

 

The story of the Wise Men occurs in only one of the four Gospels, so it's likely just an addition in a translation.  This happened a lot.  The story of the woman "taken in adultery" was added only about a thousand years ago.

 

DF

So where in that verse does it answer the question I posed to Jenifer? Did Jesus ever command His followers to kill unbelievers or did He say to love them?

 

******************************************************************************************************************

The argument is ALWAYS he didn't mean what he said. You can post passages and verses all day long and christians will still say they don't mean what they plainly say. Just like you argue that the vengeful god is in the ot, yet still cling to the parts of the ot that suit you (the you being christians as a whole).

Matthew 5:17

Add Reply

Post

Untitled Document
×
×
×
×
Link copied to your clipboard.
×