This message was already posted on an Italian forum.
Christine wrote: (about Zeigeist film)
Littlejohn, I suggest you watch ZEITGEIST ADDENDUM as well, and look at the brilliant Venus project, I'm sure you will like.
ps: Zeitgeist Addendum is not about religion, but the monetary system and technology. Regarding the theories of Acharya ... honestly do not know what to think ... I did some research on the Internet about Horus and he is not exactly as described in the Zeitgeist ... but not knowing almost nothing of mythology I prefer silence....
"..I did some research on the Internet about Horus and he is not exactly as described in the Zeitgeist .."
No, indeed ... I seem that about this issue Mrs. Acharya has different ideas.... I repeat, I had not the pleasure to talk directly with her, so I do not know what to say....
In one respect, the work of Mrs. Acharya looks a bit to that of the deceased Cascioli. She, like Louis, has started from good premises, then, fatally, as a kind of professional 'distortion' (she is an archaeologist), she is 'mired' in the treacherous 'sands' of mythology, especially that which emerged from the true sands of the Egyptian deserts ....
What, in my opinion, has misled Mrs. Acharya, bringing her to insist too much on mythology, is the same reason underlying many theories of 'deniers' of a certain 'niche' of American erudite thought, namely the undeniable heathen 'savor' of many aspects of catholic-christianity (which was totally different by the Judean-Christianity). Nobody, until now, has never thought that over patristic footprint, this is also due to Jesus himself and to his being a Nazarene, a historical figure of ancient Hebraism, characterized by genuine POLYTHEISM!
Not sure what your point is littlejohn. Are you convinced that Acharya is wrong by one comment from a person who admits she's never studied the subject?
Absolutely not! ... I too, like Mrs. Christine, I had done research on the mythological figure of Horus, and even found a number of things that Mrs. Acharya said, but I had not thought that the two characters, Jesus and Horus, could be directly overlapped....
"...What has convinced you that Acharya has been misled?.."
Because Mrs. Acharya's arguments are similar to that of other 'deniers' (about the historical Jesus) with whom I collided a long time: namely the fact that Christianity has a strong heathen content and, probably, in the early Christian times it certainly should be even stronger, if Justin Martyr complained that the heathens would not accept Christianity as one of their cults .... This does not mean automatically that the figure of Jesus of Nazareth was necessarily invented, according to mythological figures to him earlier (see, for example, Horus)
"...And how is she "'mired' in the treacherous 'sands' of mythology."?..
The speech is related to that above said. Considering Jesus not historical character, the 'deniers' of mythological kind, like Mrs. Acharya, ranged long into mythological area, failing to 'dig' in the 'backyard' of the Vatican in search of buried 'skeletons': thing, this, that makes immense pleasure to the inhabitants of the 'dome'! (read you Vatican City)
Joined: Sat Aug 26, 2006 5:24 pm Posts: 4338 Location: 3rd rock from the sun
"Because Mrs. Acharya's arguments are similar to that of other 'deniers' (about the historical Jesus) with whom I collided a long time"
Are you sure? Saying 'deniers' assumes that there's something to deny and Acharya hasn't denied anything. Christians make the claim of Jesus' existence therefore, they are responsible for burden of proof, which they've failed miserably for 2,000 years. Even Christian New Testament scholars can't agree on the so-called evidence for Jesus historicity.
"Mrs. Acharya, ranged long into mythological area, failing to 'dig' in the 'backyard' of the Vatican in search of buried 'skeletons'"
Actually, she did dig at Corinth, Greece where the apostle Paul supposed was.
Are these parallels not enough?
• Horus was born on “December 25th” (winter solstice) in a manger. • He was of royal descent, and his mother was the “virgin Isis- Mery.” • Horus’s birth was announced by a star in the East and attended by three “wise men.” • At age 12, he was a child teacher in the Temple, and at 30, he was baptized. • Horus was baptized by “Anup the Baptizer,” who was decapitated. • The Egyptian god had 12 companions, helpers or disciples. • Horus performed miracles, exorcised demons and raised Osiris from the dead. • The god walked on water. • Horus was “crucified” between two “thieves.” • He (or Osiris) was buried for three days in a tomb and resurrected. • Horus/Osiris was also the “Way, the Truth, the Life,” “Messiah,” the “Son of Man,” the “Good Shepherd,” the “Lamb of God,” the “Word made flesh,” the “Word of Truth,” etc. • Horus’s personal epithet was “Iusa,” the “ever-becoming son” of the Father. He was called “Holy Child,” as well as “the Anointed One,” while Osiris was the KRST. • Horus battled with the “evil one,” Set/Seth. • Horus was to reign for one thousand years.
- The above comes from page 115 from Christ Conspiracy and 44 in Christ in Egypt. CIE is a nearly 600 page book specifically about the Egyptian religion demonstrating the above citing primary sources and commentary on them by Egyptologists and other experts.
Again, even Christian New Testament scholars can't agree on the so-called evidence for Jesus historicity.
Jesus famed far and wide:
"These "great crowds" and "multitudes," along with Jesus's fame, are repeatedly referred to in the gospels, including at the following:
- Who Was Jesus? Fingerprints of The Christ (WWJ) by D. M. Murdock page 85
"Additionally, even though many times in the gospels Jesus was claimed to have been famed far and wide, not one historian of the era was aware of his existence, not even individuals who lived in, traveled around, or wrote about the relevant areas. The brief mentions of Christ, Christians or Christianity we possess from non-Christian sources are late and dubious as to their authenticity and/or value. Nor is there any valid scientific archaeological evidence demonstrating the gospel story to be true or even to support the existence of Jesus Christ. Despite this utter lack of evidence, Christian apologists and authorities make erroneous and misleading claims that there are "considerable reports" and "a surprisingly large amount of detail" regarding the life of Jesus and early Christianity."
- WWJ page 257
"One would naturally expect that the Lord Jesus Christ would be sufficiently important to receive ample notice in the literature of his time, and that extensive biographical material would be available. He was observed by multitudes of people, and his own followers numbered into the hundreds (1 Cor. 15:6), whose witness was still living in the middle of the first century. As a matter of fact, the amount of information concerning him is comparatively meager. Aside from the four Gospels, and a few scattered allusions in the epistles, contemporary history is almost silent concerning him."
- Merrill C. Tenney
- "Who Was Jesus? Fingerprints of The Christ" (WWJ) 85-86
* Dr. Tenney is a conservative evangelical Christian who was a professor of Theological Studies and the dean of the school of Theology at Wheaton College. Tenney was also one of the original translators of the NASB and NIV editions of the Bible.
"...there are very few sources for knowledge of the historical Jesus beyond the four canonical Gospels. Paul and Josephus offer little more than tidbits. Claims that later apocryphal Gospels and the Nag Hammadi material supply independent and reliable historical information about Jesus are largely fantasy. In the end, the historian is left with the difficult task of sifting through the Four Gospels for historical tradition."
- John P. Meier
- Who Was Jesus? Fingerprints of The Christ, page 86
* Dr. Meier is a Catholic University New Testament professor, Catholic priest and monsignor
"The only definite account of his life and teachings is contained in the four Gospels of the New Testament, Matthew, Mark, Luke and John. All other historical records of the time are silent about him. The brief mentions of Jesus in the writings of Josephus, Tacitus and Suetonius have been generally regarded as not genuine and as Christian interpolations; in Jewish writings there is no report about Jesus that has historical value. Some scholars have even gone so far as to hold that the entire Jesus story is a myth…"
- The Universal Jewish Encyclopedia (v.6,83) - "Who Was Jesus? Fingerprints of The Christ" (WWJ) 84
"Apart from the New Testament writings and later writings dependent upon these, our sources of information about the life and teaching of Jesus are scanty and problematic"
- F.F. Bruce, "New Testament History" (163) founder of the modern evangelical movement
- "Who Was Jesus? Fingerprints of The Christ" (WWJ) page 84
"The gospels are in fact anonymous"
- Dr. Craig L. Blomberg
- WWJ, page 60
"The Gospels are neither histories nor biographies, even within the ancient tolerances for those genres."
- Dr. John Dominic Crossan
- WWJ, page 24
* Dr. Crossan is a major figure in the fields of biblical archaeology, anthropology and New Testament textual and higher criticism. He is especially vocal in the field of Historical Jesus studies
"...Christian scholars over the centuries have admitted that ... "there are parallels between the Mysteries and Christianity"1 and that "the miracle stories of the Gospels do in fact parallel literary forms found in pagan and Jewish miracle stories,"2 "...According to Form Criticism the Gospels are more like folklore and myth than historical fact."3
1. Metzger, HLS, 8.
2. Meier, II, 536.
3. Geisler, CA, 320.
- Who Was Jesus? page 259
Prior to the end of the second century, there is no clear evidence of the existence of the canonical gospels as we have them.
"The Canon: A Second-Century Composition
"...With such remarkable declarations of the Church fathers, et al., as well as other cogent arguments, we possess some salient evidence that the gospels of Luke and John represent late second-century works. In fact, all of the canonical gospels seem to emerge at the same time—first receiving their names and number by Irenaeus around 180 AD/CE, and possibly based on one or more of the same texts as Luke, especially an "Ur-Markus" that may have been related to Marcion's Gospel of the Lord. In addition to an "Ur-Markus" upon which the canonical gospels may have been based has also been posited an "Ur-Lukas," which may likewise have "Ur-Markus" at its basis.
"The following may summarize the order of the gospels as they appear in the historical and literary record, beginning in the middle of the second century:
1. Ur-Markus (150) 2. Ur-Lukas (150+) 3. Luke (170) 4. Mark (175) 5. John (178) 6. Matthew (180)
"To reiterate, these late dates represent the time when these specific texts undoubtedly emerge onto the scene. If the canonical gospels as we have them existed anywhere previously, they were unknown, which makes it likely that they were not composed until that time or shortly before, based on earlier texts...."
Who Was Jesus? Fingerprints of The Christ contains commentary from the following Christian authorities, apologists and evangelicals, as well as New Testament scholars:
* John Ankerberg * Craig L. Blomberg * F.F. Bruce * William Lane Craig * John Dominic Crossan * Bart Ehrman * Norman Geisler * Gary Habermas * Josh McDowell * John P. Meier * Bruce M. Metzger * J.P. Moreland * Ronald H. Nash * Lee Strobel * Merrill C. Tenney * Ben Witherington * Edwin Yamauchi * And more!
Who Was Jesus? Fingerprints of The Christ also includes a Foreword by Dr. Robert M. Price!"
Who was Jesus? (WWJ) is perfect for the believer and non-believer alike!
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 2 guests
You cannot post new topics in this forum You cannot reply to topics in this forum You cannot edit your posts in this forum You cannot delete your posts in this forum You cannot post attachments in this forum