20 remarkable simarlarities between Horus and Jesus.
Is this just an amazing coincedence or something else entirely?
http://atheistempire.wordpress.com/2007/01...-cult-of-horus/

Many other historical 'messianic' figures also share these attributes-including Mithras:
http://www.near-death.com/experiences/origen048.html
http://www.tektonics.org/copycat/mithra.html

Cheers Karl

Maybe they are just different interpretations of the same person.??:confused:

yeah i talked about this in the "Did jesus even walk the earth" thread jesus is a myth based of pagan sun worship.

Indeed. And it is not only Jesus that is based on pagan stuff.
Almost every "christian" holyday's is based on pagan ones. See my thread "Pagan cristmas" for example.

The reason for this, is because they had to make the coming generations of pagans they had turned "get used to" christianity. So by adding vital parts of pagan belief into christianity, it became something new, yet still having some of the ancient mythology intact.

Jesus is hardly a myth and history will bare that out. The lives of all truly great men are wrought with grandiose claims of power..the reason being that humankind hardly finds humility, compassion and self-sacrifice as traits worthy of idolization and immortalization..we'd rather bow at the feet of Superman than a humble man.

history is written by those who hung the heroes.

True as that may be, still don't change the fact that most of the christian holydays and general "lore" comes from pagan religions older then when Jesus supposedly walked the earth

No, it wasn't a statement meant to change that fact.

That's interesting. Very interesting indeed.

I like that quote,never heard it before but its pretty much on the money:)

Your right,I also remember reading somewhere that,after 'borrowing' all the major dates from Paganism(Saturnalia,Easter etc..) the Pagan new year (April 1st) was then turned into a symbol of ridicule by the church in the form of April fool's day.
With regard to the thread,many other 'messianic' figures in history also share the same attributes ie:
Born of a virgin
Born on 25th december
Had 12 disciples
Performed miracles like walking on water
Was crucified
After 3 days was ressurected
And more

This is all apparently allegorical symbolism from Pagan sun worship.
Other figures in history to have these same characterisitcs include:
Horus
Mithras
Dionysus
Quetzlcoatl
Heracles
and many others

Cheers Karl

Wodan -

What Christian holidays, other than Christmas, are you talking about? I may be ignorant, but isnt Christmas and Easter the only Christian holidays? And seeing that Easter is the celebration of Christ's resurrection, I dont see how that was copied from pagan religions.

This isnt a surprise or new. Most of Jesus' life events are.. well..made up. And there IS a strong case, though not definitive, that Jesus was not real.

But moving on.. the epistles of Paul ..written soonest after Jesus' death.. mention almost known of the famous episodes of his life. Tom Flynn and Robert Gillooly have shown how ALL the essential features of the Jesus legend, from the virgin birth, the veneration by kings, the miracles, the execution and resurrection.. they are all borrowed from other religions already in existence at the time in the Mediterranean and Near East. If I remember correctly its Matthew who writes a gospel doing his best to get things to match old testament propheyc and LUke who wants to adopt things to fit in Gentiles, so he includes all the important aspects of pagan (particularly Hellenistic) religions.

Quetzlcoatl was not said to have been born on Dec. 25th.. or of a virgin.. or to have been executed or resurected or any of those things. He belongs FAR FAR outside the Middle East set of religions..

Easter is a time of rebirth and resurrection. It was first celebrated by the pagans around the vernal equinox, welcoming spring.

http://www.history.com/minisites/easter

The name Easter comes from a pagan figure called Eastre (or Eostre) who was celebrated as the goddess of spring by the Saxons of Northern Europe. A festival called Eastre was held during the spring equinox by these people to honor her. The goddess Eastre’s earthly symbol was the rabbit, which was also known as a symbol of fertility. Originally, there were some very pagan (and sometimes utterly evil) practices that went along with the celebration. In our day, Easter is almost a completely commercialized holiday, with all the focus on Easter eggs and the Easter bunny being remnants of the goddess worship.

http://www.gotquestions.org/easter-origins.html

I was going to say... and just forgot.. even if you didnt know its history..wouldnt you just sort of GUESS that Easter was connected to something else..not Jesus?

Eggs.. Rabbit.. NO symbology at all about resurrection...

I believe the evidence supports, rather than discounts, his evidence. As for the rest, no debate there.

Actually, I'd be interested in hearing what evidence exists that strongly refutes the existence of the historical Jesus?

Its not a an area Im overly familiar with.. and like I said few consider it conclusive.. but there are no documents surviving from when Jesus should have been alive that list him. Falvious Josephus, born around the time of Jesus, wrote a history that has one passage mentioning Jesus but appears to most historians to be a latter addition, as it appears completely out of context. We have 40 Roman historian accounts of the first 2 centuries f\of the CE..that dont mention Jesus. The Talmud says that Jesus lived in the 2nd century BCE..

And so on. None conclusive..but enough that some people classify Jesus as a legend... a piecing together of stories. Even some of the Gnostics didnt believe Jesus was a historical figure.

Robert Price wrote that.. to put it simply..just as we dont consider Hercules a historical figure, but rather a Heroic Archetype.. so should we not consider Jesus historical.

Personally? Im not sure and not really bothered either way.

Anyone read 'Seven Ancient Wonders' by Matthew Riley? Its a work of fiction (and a great one at that) but he did do a very good job of connecting the Catholic church with the Cult of Amun Ra (Obelisks, halos, all the other sun-worship imagery). Made me think a bit anyway. Not that im against the church or anything, but i love a good theory

I would not expect to see many...if any documents...pertaining to Jesus that were written while he was alive. For one, his teachings were heretical and anything pertaining to him during his life would have likely been passed on orally out of fear. Second, he was possibly poor and, even if literate, writing materials were the reserve of those able to afford them. I really wouldnt expect to see anything other than, perhaps, a few official records, if such were even recorded or survived...such as census, birth, death, marriage. I doubt that he owned property so that would exclude any land titles. He may have been married. Other than those few things, the only other record that I could conceive of would be a record of his execution and there is some reference that such a record did actually exist.



Only certain parts of that text is considered to be interpolations. It seems that Josephus did write about Jesus, though the praise is likely a interpolation, in passing. Additionally, Josephus made a passing reference to Jesus in Antiquities that is generally considered authentic by scholars, that is "so he assembled the sanhedrin of judges, and brought before them the brother of Jesus, who was called Christ, whose name was James." Regardless, the point is that Josephus probably acknowledged a man named Jesus.




The Roman historian Tacitus wrote in Great Fire of Rome (112 CE) "Nero fastened the guilt and inflicted the most exquisite tortures on a class hated for their abominations, called Christians by the populace. Christus, from whom the name had its origin, suffered the extreme penalty during the reign of Tiberius at the hands of one of our procurators, Pontius Pilatus," and, as I read, most scholars believe the text to be authentic. I dont consider it unusual, nor particularly strong contradictory evidence, that very little mention is made of this man Jesus during his lifetime nor in the few centuries after by either Jewish or Roman historians as he was considered a heretical jew "whose name would be blotted from history" and christianity as a fringe cult by the Romans. He would have hardly seemed worth the attention.





No, nothing conclusive either way. But, clearly, in the absence of an outright denial of this man's existence during or shortly after his purported lifetime...whether by followers or critics..and in light of the references to his historical existence, albiet scant from secular sources...whether one ascribes to the Christian faith or not...it seems more plausible that hundreds of followers would not have suffered such persecution and death during and immediately after the imaginary life of an imaginary man that they believed to be the Messiah.



Price seems to be interjecting personal beliefs into a subject matter that should remain objective.



One needs not to be personally bothered either way. I'm merely discussing religious history from an objective point of view. Surely you can appreciate that....