Jesus/Krisna/Horus etc

Jello
Posts: 223
Joined: 2007-06-19
User is offlineOffline
Jesus/Krisna/Horus etc

I was wondering what people here thought of the link between Jesus, pagan sun worship and astrology?

Wish in one hand, shit in the other, see which one fills up first.


Rook_Hawkins
RRS CO-FOUNDER
Rook_Hawkins's picture
Posts: 1322
Joined: 2006-02-11
User is offlineOffline
Mrian now it's your turn. 

Mrian now it's your turn.  You claim you've been studying this subject for 24 years (as old as I am) and that you are certain that Moses and Jesus are midrash from Krishna in the Vitas.  Here are my questions again: 

1.) What evidence do you have of Jewish settlements in India?  What archaeological finds have been presented for this fact?  Example:  We have inscriptions and dedications in stone and marble and granite in Alexandria, Rome, Syria, and Cyrenaica.  Alexandria has the highest concentration of evidence of Jewish life.  Outside the Ancient Near East, we have found settlements in Italy, Greece and that is it.  Please consult J.M.G. Barclay's, Jew's in the Mediterranean Diaspora: From Alexander to Trajan (1996).  

2.) Evidence at one of these other Jewish locations, especially Alexandria where papyrus was found and made in great numbers (hence why we have so many manuscripts from Egypt), where the Vitas have been found.

3.) Please show some level of sociological assimilation or acculturalization where the Jews have lost some of their cultural distinctiveness to the Hindu religion, or the following of Hindu religious practices, such that we see with Orpheus and Orphic traditions (i.e. Poems written in Hebrew to Orpheus, or mosaics in Jewish synagogues of Orpheus - we should see poems or literature written of Krishna in Hebrew, or some sort of art or grafitti in Jewish living areas dedicated to Krishna)

4.) Evidence of earlier usage of Vitas before the Gospels, or Paul, where Jews have bveen accustomed to such things.

5.) Similarity in languages must be established.  Is there evidence that Jews even would understand the Vitas if they read them, or would have been in a position to transliterate the language into Hebrew or Greek in a manner which would allow one to show a common link between the Vitas and the Gospels in the original langauges (not the english summerizations).    

 

If you cannot show any of these, there is no way for you to establish a connection between Krishna and Jesus/Moses.  All you have are pretty irrational speculations based on your desire to show something - and nothing that would ever be taken seriously, and it shouldn't.  Historical research is done on a scientific level, especially on observation and induction.  Such a claim, as you are making, would require a very large amount of archaeological and sociological data of which I know you have none.

In fact we have the opposite.  Of the many non-biblical Jewish writers we know of, none discuss or refer to any Hindu god, nor do they refer to dealing with Hindus, or having ever read the Vitas.  We have a large, and a very loud, argument from silence on your part.  

Also, on the idea of Plato, once more, we have evidence from Diogenes Laertius, a historian of good calibre from the period, who wrote, "And she became the mother of Plato by her husband Ariston, Plato being the sixth in descent from Solon."  (Lives and Opinions of Eminent Philosophers, III.I)  Plato was not a virgin-birth either.  Nor was he considered to be the son of God.  I grow very tired of having to keep making you both look bad, but this Acharaya S fanboy thing has to stop.  You have to read other books...apparently you both haven;t, and are just making things up as you go along, or are both too intellectually lazy to adequately do the research yourselves, and are just depending on her to do the work for you - which she won't, because once again, she is sloppy.

Atheist Books, purchases on Amazon support the Rational Response Squad server, which houses Celebrity Atheists. Books by Rook Hawkins (Thomas Verenna)


Mriana
Mriana's picture
Posts: 53
Joined: 2007-10-18
User is offlineOffline
1. It's Vedas not Vitas.

1. It's Vedas not Vitas. There is the Gita and then there are Vedas.2. I do believe I went over that with you and said you will find the answer in more details in Gavin Flood's book, which incidently is one of the text books we are using in my Hinduism class- at a SECULAR university.  I am not going to rewrite his book just to please you.  I suppose you question your college text books in this manner too?3. I already told you that I discussed the midrash idea with Bob.  There is another source for you, esp if you know him as you say you do.  I am uncertain as to whether or not you understand what a midrash is, even though I explained that to you too, much less if you really do know Bob.Again, midrashes are sections of larger stories taken from one culture and adapted to another.  They don't necessarily have the names of the original characters when set to a particular culture.  IE the Babylonian creation and flood stories, not to mention Mesopotamian story of Tiamat and Marduk being like God and Lucifer.  They are very much similar, only they have different characters and place so the culture they are written for can relate to them.  See Victor Matthew's book I referred too on these, unless you prefer I spoon feed you what he says, after I get up in the morning.4.  I have a son who is six years younger than you are and I will tell you the same thing I told him all his life- "I told you where you can find the answers in even more detail, so you can get the answers.  I'm not going to do all the work for you.  One can not learn unless they use the resources available to them."Needless to say, he has this way of impressing his own teachers with what he has learned, along with his resources.  So, far I'm not impressed with what you have given me by way of information, which is negligable.  I'm not even sure if you want to do the foot work or have ALL the answers spoon fed to you.  Almost as bad as an Evangelical Fundamentalist, IMO.I would think someone who was a "Myth Buster" would say things that are more impressive and knowledgeable, even to a non-theist.  I found Kelly and Brian more impressive, even extremely empressive actually, when they were debating those Creationists- Kirk Cameron and what's his name.  Of course, that stupid Crocaduck really discredited Kirk and what's his name.  :roll:

Mriana

"Sometimes in order to see the light, you have to risk the dark." ~ Lois Smith as Iris Hineman in The Minority Report


Mriana
Mriana's picture
Posts: 53
Joined: 2007-10-18
User is offlineOffline
BTW, just what are your

BTW, just what are your creditials as an ancient text expert?


Rook_Hawkins
RRS CO-FOUNDER
Rook_Hawkins's picture
Posts: 1322
Joined: 2006-02-11
User is offlineOffline
WHy do you go off into

WHy do you go off into tangents about non-sequitors?  We are not talking about anything other than your claim that the Gita and the Vedas are influencial to the Jewish culture, which inspired the Jesus story.  Stop going into bizzare tangents and ignoring the subject.  When you find the answers to those problems posed, then we'll talk.  Until then you haven't a leg to stand on.  Bob would agree with me, and I doubt very highly that he really believes that Krishna influenced Jesus' legend.  Bob is a genuinely nice guy, and he is very open minded (sometimes, I think he needs to reign in a bit) - he is too "oh yes it's very possible" instead of "well it's possibly but highly improbable."  Your case is highly improbable.  It's near impossible.  And I think you need to re-evaluate it.  Saying that isn't close-minded.  It's just a fact.  Blog entry coming.

Atheist Books, purchases on Amazon support the Rational Response Squad server, which houses Celebrity Atheists. Books by Rook Hawkins (Thomas Verenna)


Mriana
Mriana's picture
Posts: 53
Joined: 2007-10-18
User is offlineOffline
You obviously do not know

You obviously do not know what midrashes are, because if you did, you'd understand this by now.  I told you once again what is was, gave you two more examples of midrashes AND explained why you don't see Krishna's name in Hebrew writings.  You do see a form of it in the Greek writings though, thus why we had Christos and Christ.I even told you that in Flood's book Aryans traveled to the Indus (it was not called India in BCE) from the Middle East.  Now IF you were reading anything I said, which I don't think you are and you knew your map, you'd know Israel is part of the Middle East.Also if you read in Moses (Exodus to be exact), people were visiting them from the far corners of the earth and the Pharaoh was sending people out to visit them.  They were no as isolated as you want to believe.You also dodge the question:  What are your creditials for being an ancient text expert?

Mriana

"Sometimes in order to see the light, you have to risk the dark." ~ Lois Smith as Iris Hineman in The Minority Report


Freethinkaluva
Freethinkaluva's picture
Posts: 41
Joined: 2006-06-10
User is offlineOffline
Rook,Now, I see that you've

Rook, now, I see that you've started a blog omitting the above info I shared. That's simply dishonest. You couldn't find enough character or integrity to even acknowledge it.

http://rookthehistorian.blogspot.com/2007/10/problems-with-acharya-s-review-of-some.html

That's really sad. Your blog on Acharya is a straw man. Rook you've just proven yourself worthless. You refuse to admit you made a mistake and you can't accept the fact that you don't know everything and aren't nearly as good as you'd like to believe. Make all the personal attacks and ad homs against me you wish, I don't care, I'll simply continue to provide the facts and evidence that demonstrate that when it comes to Acharya's work on mythology, astrotheology, archaeoastronomy etc. you have no clue. Not a personal attack just a simple but obvious observational fact.

I can acknowledge the info you brought back here from Suetonius. Sadly, it was irrelevant and has NOTHING to do with the evidence that was provided for you on the mythological aspects. So, you've actually further strengthened my argument that you have a glaring ignorance on mythological issues running rampant here. And it's your loss.

I notice that at your blog it says "Comments on this blog are restricted to team members.", i.e. anyone who won't contradict or question you, perhaps? You just did what you're complaining about with Acharya - that makes YOU "sloppy" doesn't it? Except that you haven't actually read Acharya's work so your not qualified to make commentary on it. Which make your grievance against her work ERRONEOUS. Such sterling scholarship there Rook. You're no scholar nor an expert. You seem to be turning into a fundamentalist militant atheist bigot. Please make the necessary adjustments like Dr. Price did.

On Richard Carrier - he makes the same mistakes and he hasn't read Acharya's work either. He can learn a lot from her, like Dr. Price did. Don't get me wrong though, I like Carrier and what he's done for atheism but when it comes to mythology, astrotheology, archaeoastronomy, Carrier is not the goto guy.

I read his book "Sense & Goodness". I found it odd that Carrier would mention the solar system & mythology etc in his book but refuse to talk about solar mythology or astrotheology etc. He plays it so safe in his book that I really didn't enjoy it much. He relies on "accepted" academia which is such a bore. He might as well just stick to encyclopedia entries. I enjoy his views on naturalism but, his book leaves a lot to be desired. He clearly has a grudge against Acharya's work he has never read. So what's his problem? Is it professional jealousy, sexism or both?

Your link to Carrier about Kersey Graves came out BEFORE Acharya wrote "Suns of God" and Carrier has never actually read any of Acharya's books. As Carrier states in the premise:

"This is a conflation of three responses which were made by Richard Carrier to feedback and e-mail involving questions about the scholarhip of Kersey Graves"

So he was merely responding to e-mails, not the book. Carrier has *NOT* performed any research to investigate where Kersey Graves and others were getting their information. Acharya has done just that. Carrier, like yourself, is not the goto guy when it comes to mythology, astrotheology. I get the sense that you have gotten your false assumptions about Acharya from Carrier and neither of you have actually read her work. So, neither of you are qualified to make commentary about it. Enjoy the "Beddru is Beddou is Buddha" article - http://www.truthbeknown.com/beddru.html

Besides, much of these false assumptions are already covered at Acharya's F.A.Q. section - http://forums.truthbeknown.com/index.php

Again, Dr. Robert Price made the necessary adjustments. He wrote a positive review of "Suns of God" and went on to write the foreword to her latest book "Who Was Jesus? Fingerprints of The Christ". Now, it's your turn. Then, Richard Carrier.

"All the gods of the Greek and Roman mythology represent the attributes of the one supreme divine power - the SUN."
~ Macrobius 400ce "Suns of God" 67-68
http://www.truthbeknown.com/sunsofgod.htm


Mriana
Mriana's picture
Posts: 53
Joined: 2007-10-18
User is offlineOffline
How dare you misquote me! 

How dare you misquote me!  Make this the property of RRS:

Quote:
When two of her fans attempted to go head to head with me in my forum, I confronted them are some of their very glaring historical inadequacies. Here is a brief list of some of these errors:

  1. Comparing Jesus to Krishna/Buddha
  2. Claiming the Moses/Jesus stories are Midrash based on the Bhagavad Gita
  3. Claiming that both Julius Caesar and Plato were both said to be born of virgins and sons of God
  4. Claiming ALL Caesars were deified
I did NOT claim anything about or say anything about Caesar, not did I claim anything about Plato.  All I said was that the Plato story maybe worth researching.  THAT is not a claim.Secondly, the midrash statement were MY own words, NOT Acharya's and came from my own studies in the college course I am taking using my own brain.  Not only that, I also asked Bob about it.  IF you really did know him, you would know about his podcast and would have heard about it and his agreeing that they ARE midrashes.  However, get this straight:  what I said was NOT Acharya's words and I take insult not only for myself, but for Acharya too.  IF I had been quoting Acharya, I would have used a quote and page number or at the vary least I would have said I was paraphrasing.  You make really make for poor scholarship yourself, you know.I do not get ALL my information from Acharya's work, which I stated quite clearly.  That was yet another misquote.Your knowledge of mythology is hardly college level.  If anything is a product of Fundamentalism and a young man rebelling against in the same, but very opposite extreme of it.You also make for very poor reporting skills.  I would not want you to interview me or anyone else.BTW, I am not a fanboy.  I happen to be female and probably close to Acharya's age or a little older.  Thank you very much.  I'm old enough to be your mother for that matter and IF I were your mother, I would be disappointed with your lack of knowledge of the various myths and alike.  I would not care if you were 24 or not, I'd still give you a shake down for stating such bogus crap if I were your mother!  Oh wait, I just did and I'm not even your mother.I think the one who needs to get their facts straight is you, Rook, because obviously people who have enough brains to read things right on this board, would know I made no claims and did not quote Acharya, but rather used my own thoughts, words, experiences, and knowledge.

Mriana

"Sometimes in order to see the light, you have to risk the dark." ~ Lois Smith as Iris Hineman in The Minority Report


Jiggs Casey
Posts: 14
Joined: 2007-10-19
User is offlineOffline
Mriana wrote:I prefer,

Mriana wrote:
I prefer, besides Price and Acharya, Karen Armstrong, Robert Funk, Joseph Hoffmann, John Shelby Spong, and others like them.  They've been on the Jesus Seminar and some maybe doing the Jesus Project, except Funk because he's dead now and Achary has never done Westar.IMO, Plato is superfulous, esp if you examine Krishna, which I have and am.  Horus is also another one to examine too IMO.

Neither Armstrong,the late Dr Funk, or Spong are , or were, Jesus Mythicists as far as I am aware of.

And although some members of the Jesus Seminar are, many are not.

 And she certainly never has done a Westar Seminar; none of their speakers use fake names and all specify their credentials.

 And regarding the original Price review of the Acharya Conspiracy book, I know he took it down ...and they are now friends....but what was inaccurate about his review and how is it relevant in a scholarly sense that they are "friends"?


Jiggs Casey
Posts: 14
Joined: 2007-10-19
User is offlineOffline
Rook_Hawkins wrote: First

Rook_Hawkins wrote:

First I agree, that Acharya is intellectually sloppy, or at least she was originally.  I think Bob Price helped her overcome a lot of these issues.  Even still, I would not recommend her books.  There are other books I would recommend before hers which are more realistic, practical and sound.  For example, in one of her books she calls Plato divine and says he was born of a virgin.  This is just silly.  Not only is it a concept derived mainly from Muslim Neoplatonists hundreds of years after Christianity has become popular, it was also something that we have evidence to contradict, especially from the very writings of contemporaries and those who would write about him shortly after.  This is just one example of the many which I could discuss. 

That doesn't mean I don't respect her as a person, and I think she is great, but there is too much of this New Age-Tarrot parroting that seems to really depress me about her work, and it's simply too unrealistic for me to buy into.  It is like the movie Zeitgeist, it's a good concept, well done, but is completely not accurate historically or theologically.  Hands down, the movie was horrendously attrocious when it came to historical matters, but was produced in a great way.  I would criticize the movie and Acharya on their research.  I don't think she is a bad person. 

 

Well said, and thorough as always comment from Rook.

I would agree with most of what Rook says, but as far as respecting her as a person...who knows?

I have no idea who she really is.


Brian37
atheistSuperfan
Brian37's picture
Posts: 13623
Joined: 2006-02-14
User is offlineOffline
Rook, I will readly conceed

Rook, I will readly conceed that one cannot make a case for DIRECT copy cat behaivor. But stories, as I have said do come from somewhere. Christianity was born out of jewdaoism and that judaoism itself, while imediatly seen as a splinter sect of something prior is still a result of other cultures and other cultures and multiple influances prior.

So even if you cant say, "A Christian went to the temple of Luxor and saw the Maddonna and Child" the fact remains that the people of anceint Egpt did mix and converse with other cultures and "mother and child" immages were popular in pagan cultures. Future cultures mixed with future cultures and generations later the details became different and a new detailed motif was built on older motifs.

I can say that about the Epic of Gelgimesh too with it's first person story and it's flood story. Even if you cant say a Christian looked directly at it and decided to copy it with new details and new names the concept was still around long before Christianity. It didnt jump directly into Christianity. It made its way into other cultures and so on and so on and got filtered into the Noah story.

It might also be like not having one circle of friends telling a story which changes by the time it gets back to the person who first told it. It might be  like multiple circles where partisipants mix, with each others circles those constant slight overlaps change to an unrecognizable end story where the core cannot be directly traced to the original story, but the obvious theme is there. 

 

It's like saying that orange soda isnt soda because it is orange missing the fact that it has the same core componants.

Orange soda might not have been invented seconds after the first soda was, but somewhere down the line multiple people built upon the origninal idea and changed it. So while you couldnt say that the makers of Coke Zero today directly witnessed the recipe being first made back then, today's Coke Zero makers, just like all soda makers, got ideas from prior soda makers even though they didnt witness the first soda being made.

Saying that Christianity is original is absurd even without a video camer a recording direct plagurism(sp). Direct pladgerism(sp) does not need to be proven to show that older elements (motifs) bits of peices of ideas morphed and changed over long periods of time filtured through multiple cultures. 

Parralles not proven to be directly copied doesnt mean they dont have merit. To me it discribes human nature. It shows that compitetion exists.

So while you rightfully point out that SOME parrelles are false because they come after the existance of Christianity, there is far to much that I have seen PRIOR where the bits and peaces indicate a long period through multiple cultures of filtration, morphing and changing. 

And there isnt always a record of these excanges. Just like posts I have made on message boards that dont exist anymore. One can only deduce that it had to come from prior cultures. The absurdity that "poof" it magically happened is well, absurd, as you would agree.

 

 

"We are a nation of Christians and Muslims, Jews and Hindus -- and nonbelievers."Obama
Check out my poetry here on Rational Responders Like my poetry thread on Facebook under BrianJames Rational Poet also on twitter under Brianrrs37


Mriana
Mriana's picture
Posts: 53
Joined: 2007-10-18
User is offlineOffline
Jiggs Casey wrote: Mriana

Jiggs Casey wrote:
Mriana wrote:
I prefer, besides Price and Acharya, Karen Armstrong, Robert Funk, Joseph Hoffmann, John Shelby Spong, and others like them.  They've been on the Jesus Seminar and some maybe doing the Jesus Project, except Funk because he's dead now and Achary has never done Westar.IMO, Plato is superfulous, esp if you examine Krishna, which I have and am.  Horus is also another one to examine too IMO.

Neither Armstrong,the late Dr Funk, or Spong are , or were, Jesus Mythicists as far as I am aware of.

And although some members of the Jesus Seminar are, many are not.

 And she certainly never has done a Westar Seminar; none of their speakers use fake names and all specify their credentials.

Reread that.  I said Acharya never did Westar.  Look up Westar.  They have the Jesus Seminar.  I did not even say Spong, Armstrong, or Funk were mythicists.  I said I prefer them and they do talk about myths.  Even Spong says the stories in the OT and NT are midrashes of previous mythical stories.

Mriana

"Sometimes in order to see the light, you have to risk the dark." ~ Lois Smith as Iris Hineman in The Minority Report


Jiggs Casey
Posts: 14
Joined: 2007-10-19
User is offlineOffline
Mriana wrote: Jiggs Casey

Mriana wrote:
Jiggs Casey wrote:
Mriana wrote:
I prefer, besides Price and Acharya, Karen Armstrong, Robert Funk, Joseph Hoffmann, John Shelby Spong, and others like them. They've been on the Jesus Seminar and some maybe doing the Jesus Project, except Funk because he's dead now and Achary has never done Westar.IMO, Plato is superfulous, esp if you examine Krishna, which I have and am. Horus is also another one to examine too IMO.

Neither Armstrong,the late Dr Funk, or Spong are , or were, Jesus Mythicists as far as I am aware of.

And although some members of the Jesus Seminar are, many are not.

And she certainly never has done a Westar Seminar; none of their speakers use fake names and all specify their credentials.

Reread that. I said Acharya never did Westar. Look up Westar. They have the Jesus Seminar. I did not even say Spong, Armstrong, or Funk were mythicists. I said I prefer them and they do talk about myths. Even Spong says the stories in the OT and NT are midrashes of previous mythical stories.

 

Reread that.  I never said you said she did.

I was pointing out why she hasn't.

And...that Jesus Mythicism is not the mainstream position among historians. 


Mriana
Mriana's picture
Posts: 53
Joined: 2007-10-18
User is offlineOffline
Jiggs, the similar

Jiggs, the similar mythical stories are not entirely unknown to those "Fellows" at Westar though and they have studied them or at least know of them.  In FACT, Karen Armstrong has a short book called "A Short History of Myth".  So, your statement that there are no mythicists, is not quite true.  I don't think one has to be an expert on myth to know which previous stories relate to those in the Bible.  Even Spong has studied some myths and referenced to some of the various myths occassionally in his books.  So, these stories are not unknown to them.We also don't know how many myths they, esp Armstrong, have studied.  Also, Bob Price even says there is no historical Jesus or if there ever was, he is too buried in myth to find him.  These scholars at Westar know there is very little history in the Bible and a lot, like Spong, Borg, Price, and more have called it myth.  All you have to do is read one of their books and you will find them calling the stories in the Bible myth, more than once- and that is in a single book.

Mriana

"Sometimes in order to see the light, you have to risk the dark." ~ Lois Smith as Iris Hineman in The Minority Report


Jiggs Casey
Posts: 14
Joined: 2007-10-19
User is offlineOffline
Your statement that I made

Your statement that I made the statement that there are no mythicists is false.

I said no such thing.

But rest assured, all the people you mentioned have an agenda.

You are not seriously trying to tell me this is all just about objective scholarship are you?


Freethinkaluva
Freethinkaluva's picture
Posts: 41
Joined: 2006-06-10
User is offlineOffline
I simply wanted to comment

I simply wanted to comment on the fact that in over a week, NOBODY here at RRS has had the integrity to point out the dishonesty of Rook's blog on Achayra - "Problems with Acharya S: A Review of some Claims".

Rook hasn't studied any of Acharya's work especially "Suns of God" which addresses the criticisms of "Christ Conspiracy". Which makes his very own blog on Achayra, in Rook's own words, "poor and sloppy scholarship". And it appears that nobody else here has read her work either. Therefore, they're not qualified to make commentary on it.

I just think it's sad and a monumental embarrassment to all of RRS the way Acharya has been smeared here in order to exclude a fellow Jesus Mythicist. Thanks for the stab in the back to a fellow Jesus myther. In this case, Rook is no better than GakuseiDon.

Rook has also spread his trashy smear campaign against Acharya on a blog at his myspace too.

No wonder Freethinkers can't seem to organize together, with "friends" like this, who needs enemies. Rooks charges are dishonest, fallacious and libelous. Because of his smear campaign against Acharya by Rook, I will give absolutely no support to the RRS in any way, whatsoever. I cannot support something so dishonest. An apology to Achayra is in order.

Freethinkaluva wrote:

Rook, now, I see that you've started a blog omitting the above info I shared. That's simply dishonest. You couldn't find enough character or integrity to even acknowledge it.

http://rookthehistorian.blogspot.com/2007/10/problems-with-acharya-s-review-of-some.html

That's really sad. Your blog on Acharya is a straw man. Rook you've just proven yourself worthless. You refuse to admit you made a mistake and you can't accept the fact that you don't know everything and aren't nearly as good as you'd like to believe. Make all the personal attacks and ad homs against me you wish, I don't care, I'll simply continue to provide the facts and evidence that demonstrate that when it comes to Acharya's work on mythology, astrotheology, archaeoastronomy etc. you have no clue. Not a personal attack just a simple but obvious observational fact.

I can acknowledge the info you brought back here from Suetonius. Sadly, it was irrelevant and has NOTHING to do with the evidence that was provided for you on the mythological aspects. So, you've actually further strengthened my argument that you have a glaring ignorance on mythological issues running rampant here. And it's your loss.

I notice that at your blog it says "Comments on this blog are restricted to team members.", i.e. anyone who won't contradict or question you, perhaps? You just did what you're complaining about with Acharya - that makes YOU "sloppy" doesn't it? Except that you haven't actually read Acharya's work so your not qualified to make commentary on it. Which make your grievance against her work ERRONEOUS. Such sterling scholarship there Rook. You're no scholar nor an expert. You seem to be turning into a fundamentalist militant atheist bigot. Please make the necessary adjustments like Dr. Price did.

On Richard Carrier - he makes the same mistakes and he hasn't read Acharya's work either. He can learn a lot from her, like Dr. Price did. Don't get me wrong though, I like Carrier and what he's done for atheism but when it comes to mythology, astrotheology, archaeoastronomy, Carrier is not the goto guy.

I read his book "Sense & Goodness". I found it odd that Carrier would mention the solar system & mythology etc in his book but refuse to talk about solar mythology or astrotheology etc. He plays it so safe in his book that I really didn't enjoy it much. He relies on "accepted" academia which is such a bore. He might as well just stick to encyclopedia entries. I enjoy his views on naturalism but, his book leaves a lot to be desired. He clearly has a grudge against Acharya's work he has never read. So what's his problem? Is it professional jealousy, sexism or both?

Your link to Carrier about Kersey Graves came out BEFORE Acharya wrote "Suns of God" and Carrier has never actually read any of Acharya's books. As Carrier states in the premise:

"This is a conflation of three responses which were made by Richard Carrier to feedback and e-mail involving questions about the scholarhip of Kersey Graves"

So he was merely responding to e-mails, not the book. Carrier has *NOT* performed any research to investigate where Kersey Graves and others were getting their information. Acharya has done just that. Carrier, like yourself, is not the goto guy when it comes to mythology, astrotheology. I get the sense that you have gotten your false assumptions about Acharya from Carrier and neither of you have actually read her work. So, neither of you are qualified to make commentary about it. Enjoy the "Beddru is Beddou is Buddha" article - http://www.truthbeknown.com/beddru.html

Besides, much of these false assumptions are already covered at Acharya's F.A.Q. section - http://forums.truthbeknown.com/index.php

Again, Dr. Robert Price made the necessary adjustments. He wrote a positive review of "Suns of God" and went on to write the foreword to her latest book "Who Was Jesus? Fingerprints of The Christ". Now, it's your turn. Then, Richard Carrier.

"All the gods of the Greek and Roman mythology represent the attributes of the one supreme divine power - the SUN."
~ Macrobius 400ce "Suns of God" 67-68
http://www.truthbeknown.com/sunsofgod.htm


Rook_Hawkins
RRS CO-FOUNDER
Rook_Hawkins's picture
Posts: 1322
Joined: 2006-02-11
User is offlineOffline
Enter fanboy again.  Would

Enter fanboy again.  Would you like to stop worshipping her now and perhaps answer my objections?  All you do is SPAM her stuff everywhere.  You don't resemble somebody who can be open minded, you resemble somebody who has been waxing his carrot to Acharya's photo albums.   Try thinking for yourself, you social reject.  Jeez.

Atheist Books, purchases on Amazon support the Rational Response Squad server, which houses Celebrity Atheists. Books by Rook Hawkins (Thomas Verenna)


Mriana
Mriana's picture
Posts: 53
Joined: 2007-10-18
User is offlineOffline
You're not exactly

You're not exactly open-minded either.  I tell you things that isn't Acharya's stuff, but since there is some similarity you reject, sources and all which happen to be text books (ie Krishna).  Then you go stomping off and stating things that aren't quite right either on your blogs.  Something about that makes no sense.

Mriana

"Sometimes in order to see the light, you have to risk the dark." ~ Lois Smith as Iris Hineman in The Minority Report


Rook_Hawkins
RRS CO-FOUNDER
Rook_Hawkins's picture
Posts: 1322
Joined: 2006-02-11
User is offlineOffline
You can't even refute my

You can't even refute my accusations.  I gave more than adequate reason to doubt Acharya's claims.  I'm not attacking Acharya's character - I'm criticising her scholarship.  There is a difference that it seems her fanboys don't necessarily get.  You're one of them who don't understand the difference. 

Atheist Books, purchases on Amazon support the Rational Response Squad server, which houses Celebrity Atheists. Books by Rook Hawkins (Thomas Verenna)


Mriana
Mriana's picture
Posts: 53
Joined: 2007-10-18
User is offlineOffline
Quote: You can't even

Quote:
You can't even refute my accusations.  I gave more than adequate reason to doubt Acharya's claims.
In your opinion.  You didn't even bother to read anything I suggested to know if I did or not.  IF you read you might know more.

Mriana

"Sometimes in order to see the light, you have to risk the dark." ~ Lois Smith as Iris Hineman in The Minority Report


Freethinkaluva
Freethinkaluva's picture
Posts: 41
Joined: 2006-06-10
User is offlineOffline
Rook_Hawkins wrote: Enter

Rook_Hawkins wrote:
Enter fanboy again. Would you like to stop worshipping her now and perhaps answer my objections? All you do is SPAM her stuff everywhere. You don't resemble somebody who can be open minded, you resemble somebody who has been waxing his carrot to Acharya's photo albums. Try thinking for yourself, you social reject. Jeez.

THANKS FOR PROVING MY POINT ONCE AGAIN, ROOK! YOU SIR, ARE AN EMBARRASSMENT TO FREETHINKERS & JESUS MYTHICISTS EVERYWHERE! 

 

"All the gods of the Greek and Roman mythology represent the attributes of the one supreme divine power - the SUN."
~ Macrobius 400ce "Suns of God" 67-68
http://www.truthbeknown.com/sunsofgod.htm


Mriana
Mriana's picture
Posts: 53
Joined: 2007-10-18
User is offlineOffline
OK all arguments aside, how

OK all arguments aside, how do you explain the similarities in Creation, First people, and flood stories of the Native Americans?  The trickster stories similar to the snake in Adam and Eve in some of those stories?  The sign for the 4 winds/directions is the cross in the N.A. culture.  The list goes on and on.  The first contact with each other that originated these stories before we, as humans, adapted them to our culture, might not have started in Egypt or India.  It could have been much earlier.Early humans were tribal in nature and travelled as a "tribe".  This is documented in the O.T., so I'm not saying anything new.  Early man explained the unexplainable supernaturally, because they were not as scientifically advanced as we are.  So, the idea of a deity is a human concept- no matter the people.  Common threads of ancient myths are solar/lunar deities.  Some tricksters were evil in nature even.If you need links to some of these N.A. myths, I'll gladly provide some, but my point is, until you understand ancient tribal cultures, you won't understand the common threads in all the more modern myths.  You can accuse me of B.S. all you want, but I truly believe until you understand these stories of ancient man, you won't get today's myths.

Mriana

"Sometimes in order to see the light, you have to risk the dark." ~ Lois Smith as Iris Hineman in The Minority Report


dbschat
Theist
Posts: 6
Joined: 2007-10-31
User is offlineOffline
proof of the resurrection?


 
i found this article on the net most interesting; while i don't agree with everyting it says, it presents a very strong proof of the resurrection of jesus. maybe you'll find it interesting too. let me know what u think. u can email me at dbsjehovah@yahoo.com
  
 
 

EVIDENCE FOR THE RESURRECTION OF CHRIST

A Challenge for Skeptics

Do not copy and paste

 

truth is what is


Mriana
Mriana's picture
Posts: 53
Joined: 2007-10-18
User is offlineOffline
I still say if you read

I still say if you read prior myths, you will find this is nothing but rewritten literature for the particular culture- in this case Christianity.  There was no historical Jesus or if there ever was, he is buried in myth.  The resurrection is nothing but rewritten mythology.  Horus and Osiris are good examples.  (BTW, I am a literary scholar and I appreciate the stories in the Bible as literature.)This is not proof of anything except that they have not done their research or prefer to think the devil got there first, which is nothing more than myth used to bury the fact that Christianity is the same sort of myth.There is no more historical value to the Christ myth than there is John Jakes North and South.Actually, Mark was written before Luke, but I will agree they were written before Acts, but this still does not prove it is not literature.  Also, the Gospels were written to the Hebrew Litergical Calendar.  The crucifixion of Christ is just literature written for Passover.  The witnesses are not qualified for anything except being able to rewrite and add to each other's stories.  Paul was never an eyewitness as he states in one of the books attributed to him.  Also, if you look closely, both Matthew and Luke say the geneologies are that of Joseph, but they are both different.I can continue, but basically this is nothing more than apologetics, as stated, to refute what others have said.  I suggest the person who wrote this, needs to read John Shelby Spong's works as well as Robert Price, Karen Armstrong, Morcus Borg, Don Cupitt, and dare I say, Acharya S.'s work too, among others.  I'd throw in Funk and Hoffmann too.

Mriana

"Sometimes in order to see the light, you have to risk the dark." ~ Lois Smith as Iris Hineman in The Minority Report


dbschat
Theist
Posts: 6
Joined: 2007-10-31
User is offlineOffline
HOW TO TELL MYTH FROM HISTORY

I appreciate u sharing ur opinion, but it harly refutes the points in the article.

i'd like to ask u, 1) what criteria do u have for determining the historicity of a person in ancient antiquity? 2) give me one single example that fits that criteria. 3) how does jesus live up to this criteria?

my point is simple, if we're going to accept the hstoricity of others besides jesus, then the evidence in support of them ought to be more extensive and weighty than that of jesus. do u agree?

1) so many people believed in him that they bothered to make thousands of copies of the records of his life. are they any competing stories besides the gospel accounts explaining how their belief in the jesus as we have him in the gospels, got started? if not, in the absence of any competing origin-of-christianity story, should i not believe the only one that exists - the gospel record?

2) why would people endure scorn, ridicule, torture and death for a lie? a myth? unless they didn't believe it to be myth; yet, if they were decieved, how were they deceived when they were so close to the time of the events mentioned, and had so many witnesses to refute that such a thing happened?

3) why don't we have records of the jewish historians refuting the christians misappropriating of their messianic prophecies in the hebrew scriptures to this mythical jesus they invented? why don't we have roman or other historians refuting these wild claims about a miracle worker who was put to deah under pilate? surely if it was a myth, would not at least one person have recorded how the chritians were inventing the biggest myth in history? why aren't they any records of this?

4) if the original group knew it was a lie, wouldn't at least one of them had squeeled? it jst seems so elaborate a deception that these men must have been of a far different calibur than most men; yet there is not a single record [unless u give me one] of any group of well learnt men forming a council to invent the character of jesus.

5) as for the myths of osiris and horus, by what criteria do u call them myths? how does jesus fit this criteria? what would be necessary to prove that osiris and horus were not myths? can the same be said of jesus?

6) i would encorage u to read up and carefully consider the points the article i osted make under the conspiricy/myth section. don't just do a fast knee-jurk reaction to it, but really think it through. i would be happy to read up on the books u recommended. i'll look for them on the net, but if u can send me a link, that would be appreciated, thank u.

truth is what is


dbschat
Theist
Posts: 6
Joined: 2007-10-31
User is offlineOffline
osiris, horus, not like jesus

Walk Like an Egyptian

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Comparing Osiris, Horus, and Jesus
James Patrick Holding

Do not copy and paste

truth is what is


Mriana
Mriana's picture
Posts: 53
Joined: 2007-10-18
User is offlineOffline
dbschat wrote: I

dbschat wrote:

I appreciate u sharing ur opinion, but it harly refutes the points in the article.

i'd like to ask u, 1) what criteria do u have for determining the historicity of a person in ancient antiquity?

 

You can believe the story if you like, but the Jesus is truly a man/god of myth.  We can start with the Nativity- 1.  When you told a story during that time you had to have a virgin birth story.  Pagans (rural people) loved these stories.  2.  Like we do today, they did not travel for the census. They stayed where they were.   3.  Mary was probably 8-9 months pregnant.  No man in his right mind would take a woman on a trip like that, because it was rough terrain, extremely hot, esp during the day, and there were robbers and other criminals along the way.  4.  Galilee was a hole in the wall.  It has most Galilean priest.  It was not put on the map until about the 4th century when people started making pilgramiages there.  5.  The taking and hiding the baby Jesus is a classic midrash of both Moses and Krishna.

 

Now the Gospels were written to the Hebrew litergical calendar.  (See Spong's book A New Christianity for a New World.)  Also they were written at LEAST 50 years after Jesus's supposed death.  Some scholars set the time even later for when the Gospels were written. To be honest, few people lived to be 70 or 80 years old back then in the first century.  Also, in the N.T.  the word virgin is a mistranslation of the Hebrew almah.  Almah means young maiden and is from Isaiah 7:14.  Isaiah is not prophesying anything.  He is talking about his son that will soon be born.  Ask the Bible Geek Robert Price- he has his own Sunday afternoon internet radio show ( www.biblegeek.org ).

 

The crucifixion and subsequent resurrection:   This part of the story makes for amazing drama.  Now if there had been a day where the sky suddenly went dark, why isn't that written else were?  Why aren't there Hebrew stories telling about the viel being torn?  Also, many criminals were punished and/or sentence to death in this manner around that time. There were also many Jesuses- ie Jesus Barabas, the criminal that they chose between.  The infancy of Jesus was written by a Jesus and his grandson Jesus translated it.  Jesus was a religious criminal, but the Pharisees knew Roman would not kill a man for heresy, that was the rabbis job, so they and the crowd threaten Pilate with a riot, something they knew would get Rome's attention and Pilot would be in trouble.

 

 

Lovely story, but even Bob Price in his book Deconstructing Jesus calls it a play.  He does a wonderful job of explaining this.

 

Now it takes roughly 5 days for someone to die on the cross- usually due to suffication and the pressure on the heart from hanging with arms out stretched.  Even my older son knows this.  Jesus was taken down alive.  Yes he was still alive.  The drink he was given slowed his heart and breathing.  The Roman guard, who may have been on Jesus's people's side, did not pierce the heart, but the side.  A Roman guard know that if you are hit right you can live through if given prompt care.

 

Of course, if you want to believe it is real, there is Bishop Spong's version where it is a spiritual resurrection- not bodily.  Even so, Spong does not take any of it literally- see Resurrection: Myth or Reality?

 

Not to mention there are other Pagan stories about dying and rising gods, some very much similar to JC's version.

 

Another post follows for the rest of your questions since this is so long, but if none of this causes you to have curiousity, research it more, and think for yourself, go on and believe a myth, if you like.  It's no skin off my back.  Millions of Christians do, but remember Jesus is supposedly another dying and rising god.

 

Response to #2 coming soon.

Mriana

"Sometimes in order to see the light, you have to risk the dark." ~ Lois Smith as Iris Hineman in The Minority Report


Mriana
Mriana's picture
Posts: 53
Joined: 2007-10-18
User is offlineOffline
All those myths are quite

All those myths are quite applicable to Jesus.  The story does not have to be word for word the same, for each story was adapted to the culture and it's setting.  That's the simple response, but I don't really care if you believe it or not, just remember it is not possible for a body to resurrect, unless it is not dead to begin with.  There have been many stories of people thought dead and then "came back to life".Next question:

Quote:
2) give me one single example that fits that criteria. 3) how does jesus live up to this criteria?

my point is simple, if we're going to accept the hstoricity of others besides jesus, then the evidence in support of them ought to be more extensive and weighty than that of jesus. do u agree?

I do not accept the historicity of others.  They are all stories (myths) just as the Jesus myth is.  BTW, did you look into the Mithra and Joshua cults while you were at it?  They also had influence from Roman too (Mithra) and Joshua (Hebrew cult) is another translation (Hebrew, if I recall) of Jesus.

Quote:
1) so many people believed in him that they bothered to make thousands of copies of the records of his life. are they any competing stories besides the gospel accounts explaining how their belief in the jesus as we have him in the gospels, got started? if not, in the absence of any competing origin-of-christianity story, should i not believe the only one that exists - the gospel record?

You must remember Rome was in a struggle for control.  Many people were killed in the first century- even Christian Gnostics- clear up to and after Nicene.

Quote:
2) why would people endure scorn, ridicule, torture and death for a lie? a myth? unless they didn't believe it to be myth; yet, if they were decieved, how were they deceived when they were so close to the time of the events mentioned, and had so many witnesses to refute that such a thing happened?

You must be a Christian since you want to believe it is history so badly.  Rome knew it was a myth, but what better way to control people, but through religion?  It was a mind control game as well as a battle over religion.  Many people died for other myths too.  Why would people die in the name of Allah?  It simply is something that has been drilled into people over the years, that they now believe it.  It was believe or die.  The fear was so great, the knowledge of it being a myth was buried.  If you believe the story, then, IMO, you believe in a god, because that is what the story is about- a supernatural being, in which people were forced to believe in order for Rome to have control over the masses.  Nothing more.  Same with Allah.

Quote:
3) why don't we have records of the jewish historians refuting the christians misappropriating of their messianic prophecies in the hebrew scriptures to this mythical jesus they invented? why don't we have roman or other historians refuting these wild claims about a miracle worker who was put to deah under pilate? surely if it was a myth, would not at least one person have recorded how the chritians were inventing the biggest myth in history? why aren't they any records of this?

We would have those records if those who were forced into silence were not made to recant and convert, or were killed because they didn't recant and convert.  The great library of Alexandria was destroyed and most of the evidence went with it.  Some of the evidence is concealled some where, some say under the Vatican.  However, we are finding some past evidence that something was wrong around that time- ie scrolls hidden in caves.

Quote:
4) if the original group knew it was a lie, wouldn't at least one of them had squeeled? it jst seems so elaborate a deception that these men must have been of a far different calibur than most men; yet there is not a single record [unless u give me one] of any group of well learnt men forming a council to invent the character of jesus.

They tried and were killed or threatened death.  The fear won out and people stopped talking.  The silence is what helped to bury all of it.

Quote:
5) as for the myths of osiris and horus, by what criteria do u call them myths? how does jesus fit this criteria? what would be necessary to prove that osiris and horus were not myths? can the same be said of jesus?

Obviously a Christian because of all this denial.  Anyway...  Jesus fits because a midrash doesn't follow word for word with just people and places changed.  Some myths are mixed into it also.  They overlap and form a new story, with the writer adding his own touch here and there.  Mark wrote first, but it wasn't good enough for Luke, so he added a pagan virgin birth story, which were very popular stories around that time and makes for a nice play.  Also, we don't know when the character was actually born.  The story does not give us that.  It could have been June for all we know, but earlier converts, such as Constentine, wanted to keep some of their pagan practices and how better to get pagans to convert is you allow them to keep some of their rituals.  December 25 was the Winter Solstice or Yule.  Remember the Yule log?  It came from the pagan practice of burning a Yule log all night long night before.  The Christmas tree is also pagan.  Easter is a pagan holiday also.  It goes on and on.  There are many books on this, even Karen Armstrong's books.  She even has a book called the Short History of Myth.

Quote:
6) i would encorage u to read up and carefully consider the points the article i osted make under the conspiricy/myth section. don't just do a fast knee-jurk reaction to it, but really think it through. i would be happy to read up on the books u recommended. i'll look for them on the net, but if u can send me a link, that would be appreciated, thank u.

I have spent years reading up on this subject- a good 20 years or better.  It's not just a knee jerk reaction.  I would advice you to do more research into this.  IMHO, if I am forced to believe this myth, I might as well believe in an anthropomorphic Zeus-like deity.  I don't, but if you insist I believe it, then OK I'll start saying my prayers to the invisible man in the sky, because to believe the Christ myth as true and not a story, is the same as believing in God.

Mriana

"Sometimes in order to see the light, you have to risk the dark." ~ Lois Smith as Iris Hineman in The Minority Report


Mriana
Mriana's picture
Posts: 53
Joined: 2007-10-18
User is offlineOffline
Again, midrashes are not

Again, midrashes are not word for word the same as other stories.  It takes part of a text and makes a parable out of it.  It could be from the Torah or other text.  The crucifixion is a midrash in that it is not only for Passover to Christian Jews, but it also come from other sources in the Torah.  This does not mean it cannot come from sources outside the Torah.  In fact, they sometimes do.  Even the story of Moses is a midrash from other sources and applied to the Hebrew culture.http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Midrashhttp://www.myjewishlearning.com/texts/Midrash/PrimerMidrash.htm#List of midrashes:  http://www.huc.edu/midrash/So, here Krishna has a whole list of "I am".  I see no reason why other cultures could not have done the same.  The Code of Hammurabi is a list of laws, some of which the Jews obviously borrowed in their Deuteronomy book.  Even the Egyptian Book of the Dead has similar laws and alike too.  The Jews could have very well borrowed from both and adapted it to their culture.  This does not mean it is word for word the same though.  It can't be since one is for one culture and another is for another. BTW, I do not understand how you cannot see any of the similarities of the various myths when they are glaring you in the face. Esp now that you know what a midrash is. Jesus in nothing but a rewritten myth to fit a culture.BTW, I meant what I said, IF the Bible is true, as you all propose, then I say you all are Christians and if the RRS Christians insist I'm not being rational and the Bible is history, then I might as well become an Evangelical Fundamentalist Bible thumping literalist Christian- something I've never been in my life.  I was an Episcopalian at one time, but once I saw it as more mythical literature, I quit believing it and stop going to church, but if I'm wrong about all this then I'll get back on my knees and pray the invisible anthropomorphic Zeus-like deity forgives me.

Mriana

"Sometimes in order to see the light, you have to risk the dark." ~ Lois Smith as Iris Hineman in The Minority Report


dbschat
Theist
Posts: 6
Joined: 2007-10-31
User is offlineOffline
historicity of others compared to jesus

u say u do not accept the historicity of others. so don't u believe that manetho, josephus, alexander the great, or nero existed? if not, i respect ur right to stick to whatever criteria u use, if u have any.

but if u do accept the historicity of these persons, i merely ask, based on what do u accept their historicity, and how does that compare to jesus?

i can make replies to all sorts of arguments u raise against why u don't find the gospel story believable; but it seems to me that these objections look more like excuses to escape the question of what determins historical truth from fiction, rather than genuine answers to my questions.

all i want from u is one example; unless u take the extreme view that we cannot know for sure if anyone in antiquity really existed. to take such an extreme view seems more of an admission that jesus did exist than an argument against him.

do have a nice day.

truth is what is


Mriana
Mriana's picture
Posts: 53
Joined: 2007-10-18
User is offlineOffline
I could as you the same

I could as you the same questions.  Do you believe Hercules is historical?  What about Clark Kent?Actually, they are not excuses.  There is no bases to think Jesus was real.  The story is nothing more than a story like John Jakes North and South.However, IMHO, anyone who believes the Jesus story is true then they should believe John Jakes's books are historical too.  That and they are definitely Christians, not atheist.  There is no rational reason to believe Jesus ever exist.  Even Robert Price say he's too buried in myth to find a real man, if there ever was.

Mriana

"Sometimes in order to see the light, you have to risk the dark." ~ Lois Smith as Iris Hineman in The Minority Report


dbschat
Theist
Posts: 6
Joined: 2007-10-31
User is offlineOffline
Mriana wrote: I could as

Mriana wrote:
I could as you the same questions.  Do you believe Hercules is historical?  What about Clark Kent?Actually, they are not excuses.  There is no bases to think Jesus was real.  The story is nothing more than a story like John Jakes North and South.However, IMHO, anyone who believes the Jesus story is true then they should believe John Jakes's books are historical too.  That and they are definitely Christians, not atheist.  There is no rational reason to believe Jesus ever exist.  Even Robert Price say he's too buried in myth to find a real man, if there ever was.

really? there exists a script for the actual invention of clark kent, official documents stating that its a movie, an invention of the imagination, a cartoon; documentaries on how the actor played the role. long from now, superman will leave behind much evidence that he was nothing more than a myth to his inventors, but how does jesus compare? 1) was he ever copyrightes? 2) was anybody from antiquity interviewed about how they came up with jesus? 3) who took the credid for the christ myth, and who ever claimed that he was a myth before modern times?

many today say that santa claus is not real, just as they do superman! also, 4) there is no religion of people willing to die in the name of clark kent; for who would give their lives for something they know to be a lie? 5) many books exist saying that superman/clark kent is just a piece of novel writing; where did anyone in ancient times say that of jesus? josephus even disputes that manetho mentions a fictitious character is his line of egyptian kings, are there any examples of anyone from such times doubting that jesus was real?

as for hercules, 1) the bible clearly distinguishes its record from myths/fables 2 pet 1:16-18, even sayng that they were eyewitnesses. do any writers of antiquity claim to have been an eyewitness to hercules? 2) jonra of hercules' stories match Lk 1:1-5? 3) who are known to have been hercules' followers? where are they now to testify to the origins of their religion? did anyone die for him? 4) there are thousands of mss and fragment of the bible, handwritten, preserved by meticuous copyists, how many do u have for hercules? 5) are the mss of hercules written as close to the time of the pesumed events as the bible mss? 6) did the writers of the hercules' account admit their mistakes, record their own gross shortcomings, how they were reproved, etc, showing thier honesty, that they were honest? no, what i said of jesus cannot be said of hercules!

i know of no evidence that many people were ever deceived into believing that hecules was real nad started to follow him; if jesus is a myth, how did the first group of christians become decieved into believing in him when so many witnesses were around to say 'No! Nobody ever did such things in our city!' Over and over, the gospel repudiate the idea that it was a myth, so how did it get to be this way?

 

truth is what is


Mriana
Mriana's picture
Posts: 53
Joined: 2007-10-18
User is offlineOffline
Yes, I'd say I'm talking to

Yes, I'd say I'm talking to a Christain and it has become a circular argument.


dbschat
Theist
Posts: 6
Joined: 2007-10-31
User is offlineOffline
running again?

running again?

why is it that u go all round about to avoid giving me one example that fits ur criteria of a historical person?

i named king alexander the great, josephus, etc, but u refuse to tell me if these men really existed and why u do or don't believe that they did. why? could it be that to answer that question would actually prove the existence of jesus?

1) if these men did exist [manetho, thucidides, nero, trajan, pliny, josephus, aristole], then so does jesus, for the evidence of their existence is no more than his.

2) if u argue that they did not exist, then u have to go to such an extreme in order to deny jesus existence, that it actually proves his existence. for it leaves us without any criteria for establishing historical truth fro fiction.

3) in other words, what is a historical person? if u have no criteria, then ur saying that u can accept the existence of manetho no matter how little the evidence is in support of his historicity, and reject the existence of others no matter how much proof their is of their reality! how infair and unrealistic! were that attutude taken into legal affairs in court, on what life would be for those seeking justice in the legal system! it seems like u would reject all of history just to prove that one man did not exist!

this dialog between me and u is like u trying to prove to a man that u are a female; and after showing all ur evidence he still doesn't believe, so u ask him, 'well, what evidence do u want? how do u tell a female when u see one?' and he goes all around the bush giving reasons why ur proof doen't convince him - u could have fabricated this, and lied about that, etc; but if he provides no criteria for establishing his view, what would u think? please mriana [i love that name, mriana] stop beating aabout the bush, and either give me ur 1) criteria 2) an example) 3) a comprison to jesus, or 4) admit that u have no criteria, and r just going by what ur gut tells u at the time.

truth is what is


Mriana
Mriana's picture
Posts: 53
Joined: 2007-10-18
User is offlineOffline
OK if that is your

OK if that is your assumption, then, since Lincoln existed then so did Orie Main and all the rest of the characters in North and South.  Just because one man existed does not mean they all did. It's just a story.There is more evidence that Aristotle existed then Jesus.  It is not an extreme when you can actually see that a story cannot be true.  How can Joseph (Jesus's father) have two different geneology. Both Matthew and Luke state their geneology is that of Joseph's.  It is not possible.  Nor would a man take his wife on such a trip.  Since they did not travel for the census, then you know it's bogus.Why don't you pose these questions to Robert Price.  He too said  the same things.  Pose them to Spong, Borg, and Cupitt for that matter.The same thing can be true of you trying to prove you are male.  But thing is, I don't have to prove anything concerning myself being a female.  I know what I am.  You point is nothing but drivel and strawmen.

Mriana

"Sometimes in order to see the light, you have to risk the dark." ~ Lois Smith as Iris Hineman in The Minority Report


every name (not verified)
Posts: 4294964979
Joined: 1969-12-31
User is offlineOffline
animism

true or not Jesus exists as a belief in millions of peoples hearts and minds and as such is now part of the animistic resonance. Jesus is a technique to forgive oneself and love again. Hence if u believe it you are saved and it worked for you. If you dont then its your own problem to find your own way to love. If you can love anyway then you dont need it. If we love we are all together. If you don't or can't love then you are seperate and alone. Heaven and hell.

The Universe is a word and god is a word. Call it what u like its just semantic differences. No one knows what it is but it is where you are and where u were created. Do you at least believe that? do you believe in your own consciousness? God/universe made man/woman and man made religion. Its all made up. Its all techniques... Love is all you need cause life is empty and pointless without it.

Bless you all

 

 

 

 


Gods Child (not verified)
Posts: 4294964979
Joined: 1969-12-31
User is offlineOffline
Jesus

A Good site to learn about Jesus and Esoteric Christianity: www.learngnosis.com


JesusNEVERexisted
Superfan
JesusNEVERexisted's picture
Posts: 693
Joined: 2010-01-03
User is offlineOffline
Apotheon wrote: The pagan

Apotheon wrote:

 The pagan "copy-cat" theory is not promoted by scholars, but by atheists who are not concerned with objective historicity, but with their agenda. These links shread their arguments.

 

http://www.christiancadre.org/ topics/historicaljesus.html

http://www.bede.org.uk/price8. htm

http://www.tektonics.org/jesusexist/jesusexisthub.html
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v =15vgqDurL6U

LOL...it doesn't matter! Jesus is a PURELY concocted god and you cannot deny there are at least some similarities between Jesus and many other gods BEFORE him.

What Christians like you just don't understand is Jesus is simply Palestinian mythology just like you have Egyptian mythology, Sumerian mythology, Greek mythology, etc. There is absolutely no more historical corroboration of Jesus than any other god! No eyewitness accounts or even contemporary accounts! All references to Jesus are simply theology in a book! It's why your mythical Jesus never comes back because he was never here to begin with! No rational person could  possibly believe any being could come back like that anyway. It breaks the laws of traditional physics and back then they didn't even know what physics was! They were TOTALLY ignorant!

No one has the slightest physical evidence to support a historical Jesus; no artifacts, dwelling, works of carpentry, or self-written manuscripts. All claims about Jesus derive from writings of other people. There occurs no contemporary Roman record that shows Pontius Pilate executing a man named Jesus. Devastating to historians, there occurs not a single contemporary writing that mentions Jesus. All documents about Jesus came well after the life of the alleged Jesus from either: unknown authors, people who had never met an earthly Jesus, or from fraudulent, mythical or allegorical writings.

 

 

 

Click here to find out why Christianity is the biggest fairy tale ever created!! www.nobeliefs.com/exist.htm www.JesusNEVERexisted.com


JesusNEVERexisted
Superfan
JesusNEVERexisted's picture
Posts: 693
Joined: 2010-01-03
User is offlineOffline
every name wrote:true or

every name wrote:

true or not Jesus exists as a belief in millions of peoples hearts and minds and as such is now part of the animistic resonance. Jesus is a technique to forgive oneself and love again. Hence if u believe it you are saved and it worked for you. If you dont then its your own problem to find your own way to love. If you can love anyway then you dont need it. If we love we are all together. If you don't or can't love then you are seperate and alone. Heaven and hell.

The Universe is a word and god is a word. Call it what u like its just semantic differences. No one knows what it is but it is where you are and where u were created. Do you at least believe that? do you believe in your own consciousness? God/universe made man/woman and man made religion. Its all made up. Its all techniques... Love is all you need cause life is empty and pointless without it.

Bless you all

 

Yeah, Jesus exists in the hearts of millions and that's the ONLY place he exists! The ONLY reason people believe Jesus ever existed is because of MARKETING and FORCE not because of actual evidence!!

Click here to find out why Christianity is the biggest fairy tale ever created!! www.nobeliefs.com/exist.htm www.JesusNEVERexisted.com