Freethought Nation

Theists claim I am a "Christ-Myther." They claim Zeus is a myth - that makes them a Zeus-Myther. They claim that Hercules is a myth - that makes them a Hercules-Myther. They claim that Horus is a myth - that makes them a Horus-Myther.

I maintain that we are both mythicists. I just accept one more myth than theists. When they understand why they dismiss all the other Gods as myths, they will understand why I dismiss their beloved Jesus as yet, another myth.

"I contend we are both atheists, I just believe in one fewer god than you do. When you understand why you dismiss all the other possible gods, you will understand why I dismiss yours."

-- Historian Stephen Henry Roberts 1901-71

_________________
2013 Astrotheology Calendar
The Mythicist Position
Christ in Egypt: The Horus-Jesus Connection
Stellar House Publishing at Youtube

Russian Orthodoxy, you have no business coming in here telling people that they're going to burn in hell in the first place. Hell, is of course a mythological allegory, one that evolved from a simple concept that became more complex as time went on and people added more to it. Do you expect to come into this forum talking about mythology as if it were referring to hard historical fact and still be taken seriously?



You see, this is where the apologists have really screwed up. There's an age old form of apologetics that suggests that the pre-Christian Hero motifs were cause by the Devil in ADVANCE to Christ's life and ministry.

Here, you are at odds with Greek Orthodoxy. He's trying to claim that there were no pre-Christian Hero motifs, which means that Satan did not come in ADVANCE and mimic Christ before his time as you just suggested. So, once again, the old Christian apologetics and the new brand of apologetics that have come up in the post Zeitgeist era, contradict one another profoundly. There were indeed pre-Christian Hero myths about the sun as many Christians such as you R.O.C. and the early Church Fathers admit.

That means there were indeed myths about 'dying and rising' and everyone seemed to understand that in the early Christian church. Greek Orthodoxy is suggesting that these pre-Christian God-Men figures, who represented the 'sun', which obviously 'dies and rises' metaphorically, didn't actually die and rise in these pre-Christian mythologies at all. So he's saying that no one in the ancient world believed the sun died and rose and that their mythologies in no way reflect the concept.

What in the hell were these mythologies about if not the dying and rising sun?

What does the sun do?

What does a myth about the sun (Horus, Mithra etc.) suggest?

Next the modern apologists will have to start denying that the old myths are about the sun in order to avoid the obvious conclusion - that sun worship was clearly about death and rebirth.

He's pretty much screwed here. If the ancients did have sun worship based around the concept of the sun dying and rising, as we know they did, then of course their dieties that represent the sun were dying and rising God-Men which existed in the pre-Christian world and therefore Christianity is a "johny-come-lately" in terms of the concept of dying and rising...

_________________
The Jesus Mythicist Creed:
The "Jesus Christ" of the New Testament is a fictional composite of characters, real and mythical. A composite of multiple "people" is no one.

The celestial Origins of Religious Belief
ZG Part 1
Jesus: Hebrew Human or Mythical Messiah?

The Pyramids and the Temple of Luxor were built long before the Christian era of course. Have you attended any history classes R.O.C.?

The nativity scene on the temple wall of Luxor, which predates Christianity by quite some time, reads as follows:



Acharya's article - http://www.truthbeknown.com/luxor.html

Earl Doherty's thoughts -
http://home.ca.inter.net/~oblio/supp13D.htm

Now you'd like to say that Satan created the Nativity Scene at Luxor, but then that means that you admit that the Nativity Scene pre-dates the Christian era, which it does.

Greek Orthodoxy would like to claim that the Devil did not come in advance to Christ and create this Nativity Scene because there are no stories comparable to Christ until after 150 AD according his position. So, obviously, G.O. must show that the temple of Luxor was built after 150 AD and the Nativity Scene is a mock of the Christ Nativity written after 150 AD. Or, try claiming that there is no Nativity Scene on wall when there clearly is and scholars clearly discuss it.

There's no way out of this for either of you. The Christian religion is clearly a re-hash of more ancient solar mysteries, bottom line and end of story.

_________________
The Jesus Mythicist Creed:
The "Jesus Christ" of the New Testament is a fictional composite of characters, real and mythical. A composite of multiple "people" is no one.

The celestial Origins of Religious Belief
ZG Part 1
Jesus: Hebrew Human or Mythical Messiah?

ROC, do you get the National Geographic channel? I think that was the channel. They showed the Horus nativity scene on their show concerning Horus. There are many sources that point this out to people. Where have you been?

_________________
Mriana

Nonviolence is the greatest force at the disposal of mankind. It is mightier than the mightiest weapon of destruction devised by the ingenuity of man. ~ Gandhi

Non-violence leads to the highest ethics, which is the goal of all evolution. Until we stop harming all other living beings, we are still savages. ~ Thomas A. Edison

This 3min video explains my reaction to a comment like that.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bkhQLt1vbWU

RussianChristianOrthodox, all we're trying to say is that there are myths of ancient gods that have been around for thousands of years. These myths match very closely to the stories of Jesus in the bible. How do you explain these similarities? And I don't mean 1 or 2 similarities, but hundreds.

_________________
Knowledge is Power

Can you even read hieroglyphs RCO?

_________________
http://brentoneccles.com

That u-tube video was hilarious! That's basically the mind set of these two orthodox Christians. They don't seem to understand "Who Wrote The Bible?"



It seems that a basic search of the word Osiris at dictionary.com describes this:








Obviously scholars today do indeed know that Osiris is a very famous God of resurrection. So famous, that basic dictionary entries, which reflect the common consensus of most scholars mind you, speak about the resurrection of Osiris in a very direct and unmistakable fashion.

Once again, your are completely wrong G.O. and it's because you've chosen to put your trust in these ill-conceived apologetics. The Christ myth is indeed reflecting the dying and rising God motif of antiquity and there is no escape from this fact of history.

_________________
The Jesus Mythicist Creed:
The "Jesus Christ" of the New Testament is a fictional composite of characters, real and mythical. A composite of multiple "people" is no one.

The celestial Origins of Religious Belief
ZG Part 1
Jesus: Hebrew Human or Mythical Messiah?

I'm a dying and rising deity myself.
I just rose, actually.

_________________
http://brentoneccles.com

So did Osiris as scholars seem to suggest.






It's bloody obvious that Osiris and Mithra had Nativity scenes and the like, just as the writers of the new testament gave Jesus later on down the road. The Jesus mythology was specifically designed to compete against the older mythologies. The whole notion of suggesting that there were no dying and rising saviors prior to 150 AD is indeed "PoppyCock"!

No one aside from the ill-intended Christian apologists, and fans thereof, grasping to recover from the recent onslaught of proper historical inquiry that has been gaining popularity in the world, would entertain any of this nonsense. But they're putting this sort of rubbish out there as discourse so we'll have to address it.

_________________
The Jesus Mythicist Creed:
The "Jesus Christ" of the New Testament is a fictional composite of characters, real and mythical. A composite of multiple "people" is no one.

The celestial Origins of Religious Belief
ZG Part 1
Jesus: Hebrew Human or Mythical Messiah?

I realise this might be a bit off topic and my apologies if anyone feels this way however I'd like to provide a bit of info I came across which has helped me to understand how these people (apologists, pseudo-skeptics, debunkers, mythbusters etc.) operate and what tactics they tend to employ and how to recognise and combat them. I'm a "fringe scientist" who's ideas tend to generate the same kind of response from those in mainstream physics as you are experiencing here in a religious context. Your "friends" (RussianChristianOrthodoxy and GreekOrthodoxy) here are employing many of these well known "tricks of the trade". It's known as Pathological Skepticism.

http://amasci.com/pathsk2.txt

http://www.eskimo.com/~billb/pathskep.html

One day we will all know Fearless Joy!

_________________
We have drunk the Soma; we have become immortal; we have gone to the light; we have found the gods. What can hatred and the malice of a mortal do to us now, O immortal one?
- Rig Veda

The Riddle of Resurrection: "Dying and Rising Gods" in the Ancient Near East

It is with tremendous amusement that I discover the text so heartily recommended by our erstwhile Christian apologist in reality is designed to dismantle the rather putrid work of J.Z. Smith in his facile and shallow dismissal of the concept of the "dying and rising gods."

Indeed, from the outset of this book, The Riddle of Resurrection, theologian Dr. Trygge N.D. Mettinger makes it clear that he disagrees with the notion of tossing away the thesis that pre-Christian gods of old died and were resurrected, and he suggests that the field has been overpowered by Christians attempting to establish the "reality" and "superiority" of their own cult.

On the front cover page of Mettinger's book, we find the synopsis of his thesis:


Thank you, Dr. Mettinger, for proving OUR point. And he continues to do so throughout this book, in which he essentially shreds J.Z. Smith's rubbishy article in Eliade's Encyclopedia. I can also provide other quotes from this fascinating and thorough analysis, in which Mettinger handily demonstrates that significant gods such as Baal clearly DIED and ROSE.

Next time, it might be a good idea to actually read the book you are recommending and that you think proves your point. However, I submit that many of those who rattle their sabers the loudest are singularly incapable of making their way through such a scholarly and challenging text, and they definitely spend far too much time arguing above their station.

Let us continue with the dismantling of this bogus premise denying the theme of the dying-and-rising gods in the pre-Christian world by the very authority previously raised by our blind-believing cultic interloper. (Who apparently dragged in either a very poor spoofer - I was thinking about MySpace's infamous "Baptist Man," except BM is FAR more literate and clever than this more recent member of the Cult of Christian Apologetics.)

Right at the beginning, after he lays out the thesis of JZ Smith and Mark S. Smith flailing at the dying-and-rising god motif, Dr. Mettinger states:


After this remark, Mettinger spends several pages outlining the debate and introducing the various players, such as the Smiths, H.P. Muller, Frazer, Baudissin, Zimmern, Langdon, Soden, J.A. Black, de Vaux, Lambrechts, Wagner, et al. Mettinger also addresses Christian apologist Yamauchi's attempts at delineating between the pre-Christian dying-and-rising gods and Jesus Christ, of whom Yamauchi is a devout and fanatic follower.

Much of this debate centers on the dismissal and pooh-poohing of the previous dying-and-rising-god scholarship, with scholarly opinion all over the board concerning a variety of gods. Much nitpicking and hair-splitting, as well as red herrings and straw men, have been raised in this debate. While recognizing the contention that previous research favoring the thesis stems from a deluding perspective called interpretatio christiana, whereby one is incapable of seeing the data without a Christian framework, at one point Mettinger suggests that the opposite denial of the dying-and-rising-god thesis represents Christian bias.

Mettinger also brings up the recent research of Dr. S. Ribichini, who in his article in the scholarly and conservative Dictionary of Deities and Demons in the Bible or DDD remarks:


We also here the opinion of Dr. Edward Lipiński, editor of Phoenicia and the East Mediterranean in the First Millennium B.C., who "discusses Adonis in terms of a dying and rising deity..." Mettinger continues to recount about Lipinski:


Mettinger does aver that "there is a respectable research tradition that finds insurmountable difficulties for the conclusion that Adonis was a dying and rising deity." (Mettinger, RR, 33.) Yet, citing Gaster, Mettinger continues with an illuminating discourse regarding the Ugaritic god Baal:


A long discussion concerning Baal's death and "revivification" or "resuscitation" follows. Mettinger makes it clear that he is following the discomfiture of Christian scholars with using terms they attempt to claim as their own, such as "resurrection." However, the Semantic game will not suffice, since "resurrection" and "revivification" essentially mean the same thing: A return to life. Mettinger further states:


To this statement, Mettinger appends a note saying, "It seems to me that the discussion of these matters sometimes suffer [sic] from a certain (Christian) bias..." Indeed, we would submit that it OFTEN suffers from a Christian bias that attempts to assert supremacy at every turn and no matter the cost of honesty, integrity and ethics.

We also hear from the Oxford University professor Dr. John Day, who is discussed by Mettinger thus:


Oh my, I just cannot thank our apologist cult interloper for recommending this wonderful book!

And the fun and games have just begun! Having outlined the current scholarly debate, next comes Mettinger's turn to promote his own thesis as concerns the dying-and-rising gods.

_________________
Why suffer from Egyptoparallelophobia, when you can read Christ in Egypt? Try it - you'll like it:

Baal Dies and Rises from the Dead

In his opus The Riddle of the Resurrection, Mettinger spends considerable time exploring the evidence for the idea that the Ugaritic god Baal - who predates the common era by millennia - died and was resurrected from the dead.

First he recounts how various scholars of recent times (Barstad, J.Z. Smith and M.S. Smith) have dismissed the dying-and-rising aspect of Baal and claimed of him merely a "disappearing" deity. Next he says:


Mettinger's work is meticulous in citing ancient primary sources, in their original languages or, rather, transliterations thereof, including as inscribed on a variety of artifacts. This work is scholarly to the Nth degree.

Continuing to examine the evidence, again Mettinger notes, "Originally Baal did die." (Mettinger, RR, 60.) And once more, he says, "Moreover, it is clear from a number of other observations that Baal is thought to have made a proper descent into the Netherworld." (Mettinger, RR, 61.) Discussing the myth further, Mettinger adds, "The reaction among the gods also amounts to a clear indication that Baal is really dead." (Mettinger, RR, 62.)

Mettinger has established that Baal certainly dies. Next, he discusses the "coming of the autumnal rains," remarking, "These rains are the reliable sign that Baal is no longer dead but 'lives' and 'exists.'" (Mettinger, RR, 63.) At this point, Mettinger concludes:


Mettinger next remarks:


It could not be any more obvious that the ancient pre-Christian god Baal dies and resurrects from the dead. It should be noted that the word in the New Testament for "resurrection" is ἀνάστασις (anastasis), which literally means "the standing up." This is the precise terminology used by the Horus-priest in the Egyptian funerary literature to raise up Osiris: "Stand up!" he shouts.

The word ἀνάστασις did not originate with Christianity, and it is by no means Christian property. Nor is it common translation into English as "resurrection" the property of Christian doctrine. The word "resurrection" can be used in any circumstance where the term ἀνάστασις or "standing up" would be appropriate, as concerns being raised from the dead. And we can see abundantly here, there were many instances of such RESURRECTION in pre-Christian times, despite the protests by the utterly uninformed.

Mettinger further explains the astrotheological or nature-worshipping meaning of the Baal-Mot myth:


Interestingly, Baal is also a healer and savior. (Mettinger, RR, 73.) Hence, BAAL IS A DYING AND RISING SAVIOR GOD, eons before the common era and the creation of Christianity.

Concerning the semantic ruse of not using the word "resurrection" - which, as we have seen, is fallacious - or saying that the god merely "descends" or "disappears," Mettinger states, "One could add that descent and disappearance are two analogous metaphors for death." (Mettinger, RR, 77.)

Regarding Baal, Mettinger concludes:


It becomes obvious later in the book that Mettinger tires of the pretext of avoiding the term "resurrection" in order to appease his Christian colleagues, et al., as over several more pages, he uses the word frequently to describe what happens to other gods, including Melqart-Heracles, the Phoenician-Greek hybrid god, whom Mettinger likewise deems as a "dying-and-rising deity."

All in all, it is evident that the illogical shift away from the "dying-and-rising-god" category to other concepts such as "birth-death-rebirth deities" is contrived and forced unnecessarily. The category of "dying and rising gods" is safe and well established, despite desperate efforts from the Christian apologist cult.

_________________
Why suffer from Egyptoparallelophobia, when you can read Christ in Egypt? Try it - you'll like it:

What a complete idiot! This cult of Christian apologetics member either didn't read Mettinger at all or came here intentionally dishonest, knowing good and well that he was giving a completely false assertion to begin with.







What a complete shut down via G.O's own recommended source material! It never ceases to amaze me.

_________________
The Jesus Mythicist Creed:
The "Jesus Christ" of the New Testament is a fictional composite of characters, real and mythical. A composite of multiple "people" is no one.

The celestial Origins of Religious Belief
ZG Part 1
Jesus: Hebrew Human or Mythical Messiah?

The Death and Resurrection of Melqart-Heracles

That's right, Tat, this book is one of the greatest gifts I could have ever received. Rather than bolstering their preposterous claims, Mettinger completely dismantles the fallacious contentions of the Cult of Christian Apologetics ringleader J.Z. Smith regarding the dying-and-rising-god mytheme. Note that Mettinger also shyly adds that he believes this nonsensical (my word) stance is based on a Christian bias, which we here can readily see from this entire thread and which consists of denials, dismissals, omissions and outright falsehoods by the cult members.

In any event, Mettinger proceeds to demonstrate that the hybrid god Melqart-Heracles, as well as his separate parts, also was a dying-and-rising god.

The god Melqart is essentially Phoenician, and he was assimilated to the Greek god Herakles/Heracles/Hercules centuries before the common era. Melqart, in fact, is another Baal, which means "Lord," and his name is also transliterated as Melkart, which is a combination of the word "Melek" or "Molech," meaning "king," with the word for "city." In any event, Melqart is called the "Tyrian Herakles," after the Phoenician city of Tyre.

In a section entitled "1. References to the Death of the Deity," Mettinger first discusses the death of Hercules, whose bones were said to be at the city of Gades (modern Spanish city of Cadiz). Mettinger quotes the Greek writer Athenaeus (c. 200 CE) as relating the following from Eudoxus of Cnidus (4th cent. BCE) concerning Herakles/Hercules:


Mettinger next remarks:


We thus possess two citations that this Herculean death and resurrection was recorded at least as early as the fourth century BCE. Hence, the entire notion that there are no dying-and-rising gods before the middle of the second century is false, period. Let us hear no more such nonsense and lies from the cult of Christian apologetics.

Continuing, Mettinger recounts the story related by Diodorus Siculus during the first century BCE that Hercules died by fire on a pyre:


Let us hear no more nonsense and lies from the cult about there being no pre-Christian ascension to heaven.

In concluding this section, Mettinger remarks:


As a meticulous scholar using whatever primary sources he can find in as many original languages as he can read, Mettinger examines the evidence of Hercules being resurrected and concludes:


Mettinger also says:


Mettinger reiterates:


Mettinger also cites the notion of a bodily resurrection as found in the Hebrew Bible (Isa 26:19; Hos 6:2), indicating a Semitic tradition that surely was not exclusive to the Jews. Indeed, Hosea 6:2 says:


This passage sounds quite like what happens in the Egyptian religion - and it also could be claimed to have been used as a BLUEPRINT in the creation of the Christ myth. The most illogical and unscientific perspective would insist that this concept of death and resurrection could only be found within the Jewish religion/tradition, and that it was fulfilled as prophecy in a "historical Jesus." Reason and logic dictate otherwise.

Mettinger also discusses the hieros gamos or "sacred marriage," saying, "We know that features of the hieros gamos sometimes occur in connection with deities who are believed to die and return to life." (Mettinger, RR, 95.) That sounds like a whole lotta dying-and-rising gods!

After examining the evidence specifically as it concerns the Phoenician god Melqart, Mettinger concludes:


And in another reiteration - leaving no room for doubt as to his position, which he and I believe has proved - Mettinger states:


A "stock theme" would indicate that this god's death and resurrection was commonly known and celebrated, long before the common era and the allegedly existence of Jesus Christ.

Indeed, Mettinger proceeds to offer up quite a list of where this death and resurrection were celebrated, indicating a fairly impressive popularity for this pre-Christian dying-and-rising god motif:


As we can see, despite the falsehoods of the Cult of Christian Apologetics, there were dying-and-rising gods all over the place, and Jesus Christ is but a johnny-come-lately in a long line.

Next time: Adonis.

_________________
Why suffer from Egyptoparallelophobia, when you can read Christ in Egypt? Try it - you'll like it:

When I read how some people deny the truth of the data it baffles me in many ways. I think one of the more troubling aspects is the fact that they have to face themselves in the mirror; do they feel a sense of a job well done because they didn't 'give in' to another point of view?
If thats the case then the psychological prejudice runs far deeper and is, to me anyway, a sociopathic tendency more than any academic rivalry, does anyone agree?
I feel a sense of frustration for sure but I'm confident that one day the proof will just be too much and these religious zealots will be seen in the same light as Flat-Earthers.