It is currently Sat Mar 25, 2017 11:22 pm

All times are UTC - 5 hours [ DST ]




Forum locked This topic is locked, you cannot edit posts or make further replies.  [ 44 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3
Author Message
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Thu Jul 17, 2008 10:09 am 
Offline
Site Admin
User avatar

Joined: Sat Aug 26, 2006 9:24 pm
Posts: 5205
Location: 3rd rock from the sun
Why don't you answer the Zeitgeist Challenge?

They have absolutely no intention of ever being honest about it or paying up. If they ever actually read Acharya's books they would realize that their challenge has already been met.

Here's a video providing an example of the utter lies of the Chris white & Keith trash CULT:

History Rewritten? Horus and the Twelve "Disciples"



Here's a thread addressing Keith: Keith "Truth" is a useful idiot

Here's one addressing Chris White: Zeitgeist, History Rewritten - Chris White Debunked

Here's one addressing a guy who calls himself KingDavid8: Jesus & Horus Parallels and KingDavid8.com Exposed

Chris, Keith and KingDavid8 are fundy Xian extremists out to shore-up their faith and euphoria AT ALL COSTS - even if it means being dishonest and smearing others in favor of Christian bigotry. Even decent more honest Christians are embarrassed by other extremists like these guys.

'Zeitgeist Refuted' by Elliot Nesch, Debunked
viewtopic.php?f=19&t=3063

Acharya's response was taken from the blog:

"ZEITGEIST, Part 1" Debunked? NOT!"
http://tbknews.blogspot.com/2008/04/zei ... d-not.html

Also, I'll include the video here:

"ZEITGEIST, Part 1" Debunked/Refuted? Acharya Responds



Acharya's response:

Quote:
"In the first place, I am under no obligation to answer anyone's "challenge." Secondly, the individuals involved in this particular endeavor, along with their followers, have been very impolite and obnoxious, libeling me with all manner of vile epithets and proving themselves entirely unworthy of response. Thirdly, these individuals are biased Christians who are not experts in comparative religion and mythology, know very little about the subject and know almost nothing about my work, but are nonetheless dishonestly presenting themselves as "experts" on me and my work. These are not credible and credentialed individuals upon whose endeavors I need to waste my own time and efforts. I am not inclined to trust the integrity of such dishonest characters who are going against their own religion by bearing false witness against me, which they have repeatedly done with their libelous, slanderous and hateful comments.

Moreover, in reality I have repeatedly addressed these ZG debunkers, in this blog as well as in my video on the subject. Their response has been to slander and libel me further as well as to spend more time demonstrating that they know very little about the subject matter and even less about my work. Again, these are not credible people with integrity. I understand that people whose feelings are hurt by the information I disclose will lash out and grasp anything they can to cling to discredited beliefs, but desperately following such characters who are being mendacious about their credentials and expertise, and who continually slander and libel decent and honest human beings, is really not the answer.

Furthermore, I answered whatever facts among their abundant non-facts and mistruths this so-called challenge may have produced before it was even issued, in my previous books, especially in Suns of God as well as Who Was Jesus? I also have hundreds of articles and other writings on my websites, in my groups and on my forums. These individuals would not know that fact because, even though they dishonestly pretend otherwise, they do not know my work at all.

These individuals need to be challenged themselves to admit to their many mistakes, as well as their vicious campaign of hatred, calumny, slander and libel, which is a mark of a truly low character and which is nothing new but has plagued Christianity from the very beginning. In the meantime, my latest book Christ in Egypt: The Horus-Jesus Connection thoroughly addresses all of the Horus commentary in the ZG movie. I would not expect these individuals to be honest enough to admit that their challenge is met, however. One would hope, nevertheless, that someone in the believing corner has more class, integrity and honesty to deal maturely and with common decency than do these particular individuals. It is frankly appalling and dismaying to consider that there are others who actually give credence to these individuals, but such is religious indoctrination that it creates disturbed and unbalanced people - as we see abundantly all over the internet, unfortunately.

In any event, my book Christ in Egypt is my main response to all criticisms concerning the Horus-Jesus connection in Zeitgeist, and, once it comes out, unless detractors have read it and can offer a mature critique devoid of dishonesty, libel and personal attacks, we should not be concerned with their opinions."

Zeitgeist Part 1 & the Supportive Evidence

The New ZEITGEIST Part 1 Sourcebook with transcript, sources and images

Zeitgeist Challenge Forum Thread here

Rebuttal to Dr. Chris Forbes concerning 'Zeitgeist, Part 1'

_________________
Astrotheology.Net
Mythicists United
Did Moses Exist? The Myth of the Israelite Lawgiver
Christ in Egypt: The Horus-Jesus Connection
2015 Astrotheology Calendar
Astrotheology Calendar Special
Stellar House Publishing at Youtube
The Mythicist Position


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Jul 18, 2008 2:14 pm 
Offline
Site Admin
User avatar

Joined: Sun Aug 06, 2006 4:09 pm
Posts: 2142
"Krishna and Buddha have nothing to do with Jesus"

This post is in response to the claim that the Jesus story has "absolutely nothing to do with Krishna or Buddha." As we can see, this assertion is based on ignorance of the scholarship within academic circles both in the U.S. and Europe, which I believe I demonstrated quite abundantly in my book Suns of God: Krishna, Buddha and Christ Unveiled.

Nevertheless, many more sources of this material can be found, for example the following...

In the chapter entitled, "Infancy Parallels" in his book Buddha & Christ: Nativity Stories and Indian Traditions, volume LX of the scholarly series Studies in the History of Religions, published by the academic publisher E.J. Brill in 1993, professor at the University of Notre Dame Dr. Zacharias P. Thundy writes:

"It is possible that Matthew incorporated elements from the Krishna story into the Buddhist story and judaized his version in order to proclaim the superiority of Jesus as the leader and king of the new religious movement." (123)

From this discussion it is obvious that those who are making such claims about Krishna and Buddha having nothing to do with Jesus have not studied the issue in depth and do not know what they are talking about, as mainstream scholarship has repeatedly examined this issue over the past centuries. Indeed, these "Big Three" have been the basis of much study within the field of comparative religion and mythology. The blithe dismissal of this massive body of work is the mark of a rank amateur.

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

Image


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Mon Sep 29, 2008 12:53 pm 
Offline
Site Admin
User avatar

Joined: Sat Aug 26, 2006 9:24 pm
Posts: 5205
Location: 3rd rock from the sun
Is Acharya S / D.M. Murdock "Anti-Religion"?

Acharya responds:

Quote:
Hi there -

Well, it seems some people were pretty amazed by my last message, in
which I clarified that I am not "anti-religion," per se, but that I "love
religion."

One person asked, "What's to love?" Another individual thought I was
backing down from my long-held position of being a fierce critic of
religion.

Not to worry! I will NEVER stop criticizing the depraved aspects of
religion. But, again, I am not "anti-religion" in that I want it all
stamped out and banned.

As I have explained many times over the years, I have been fascinated
with the world's religions since I was very young. I have dedicated my
life to studying religion - and exposing BOTH the good and bad aspects
of it. In short, one generally does not dedicate one's life to
something one hates. (Obviously, a case could be made for various
occupations.) Hence, I say I love religion, because it fascinates me as the most
profound mental exploration a human being can engage in.

I thought I would pass along a "little" side project I've been working
on, while I'm finishing up my book "Christ in Egypt," that illustrates
my passion - and LOVE - for religion. Call it MYTHOLOGY, if that makes
you feel better!

On my forum, I have been discussing various ancient Egyptian hymns and
spells, including this lovely prayer to the Sun:

You are the light, which rises for humankind;
the sun, which brings clarity,
so that gods and humans be recognised and distinguished
when you reveal yourself.
Every face lives from seeing your beauty,
all seed germinates when touched by your rays,
and there is no-one who can live without you.
You lead everyone, because they have a duty to their work.
You have given form to their life, by becoming visible.


(Dr. Jan Assman, "Egyptian Solar Religion of the New Kingdom," 78.)

Now, THIS is what I love about religion - the beauty, poetry and grace.
There is much more of the same, as well as other passages from the
Egyptian texts that reveal religious and spiritual concepts found in the
later Christianity, on my forum -

Egyptian Solar Hymns and Poetry

Go take a look!

Not all nonbelievers hate religion

_________________
Astrotheology.Net
Mythicists United
Did Moses Exist? The Myth of the Israelite Lawgiver
Christ in Egypt: The Horus-Jesus Connection
2015 Astrotheology Calendar
Astrotheology Calendar Special
Stellar House Publishing at Youtube
The Mythicist Position


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Mon Jan 05, 2009 10:51 pm 
Offline
Site Admin
User avatar

Joined: Sat Aug 26, 2006 9:24 pm
Posts: 5205
Location: 3rd rock from the sun
Do atheists disagree with Acharya's basic premise?

Well, many atheists and theists have appreciated Acharya's work for a variety of reasons over the years. Atheists who've actually studied Acharya's work obviously are more qualified to comment on it over those who have not; I've seen a few atheists make disparaging remarks about Acharya's work only to find out later they've never even read it! So, they're just regurgitating trash they've read on the net without ever checking first. On top of that, I've seen some theists hold those anti-Acharya atheists up as authorities on Acharya's work in attempts to "debunk" her work. Now, that is a wonderful display of a hypocritical double-standard - Do these theists then also agree with atheists that Jesus/God never existed? LOL! They obviously aren't thinking things through very well.

The thing is, most theists tend not to believe in all gods. They only believe in their particular god and holy texts while holding an atheistic position towards all other possible gods and claiming theirs is the "*ONLY* one-true God."

However, atheists who represent large groups &/or organizations of non-believers and assorted Freethinkers have made interesting comments that are right in line with Acharya's views:

Ellen Johnson President of "Atheists Americans," said on Larry King:

“The reality is there is not one shred of secular evidence there ever was a Jesus Christ. Jesus Christ and Christianity is a modern religion. And Jesus Christ is a compilation from other gods: Osiris, Mithras, who had the same origins, the same death as the mythological Jesus Christ." King paused reflectively and then replied, “So you don’t believe there was a Jesus Christ?” Ellen responded, "It is not what I believe; there is no secular evidence that JC, Jesus Christ, ever existed.” http://y-jesus.com/is-jesus-a-myth-as-a ... -claim.php

That's essentially Acharya's basic premise on one level. Here's more:

"The Winter Solstice ... signals the return of the sun, and we think there should be some acknowledgment that Christians really ‘stole’ the trimmings of Christmas, and the sun-god myths, from pagans.”

- Annie Laurie Gaylor, FFRF co-president Dec 2, 2008
http://www.ffrf.org/news/2008/reasonsgr ... adison.php

FFRF Co-President Dan Barker cites Acharya's first book in his online article: "Debunking the Historical Jesus"
http://ffrf.org/news/2006/debunkingJesus.php

Atheist Alliance International (AAI) cites Acharya's "Origins of Christianity" article in "Volume 7, Number 4, Winter 2006" issue, The "Reason for the Season."

Earl Doherty said in a positive review of "Christ Conspiracy":

"We sorely need a new History of Religions School for the 21st century, to apply modern techniques to this important ancient material. Perhaps this book will help bring that about."
http://jesuspuzzle.humanists.net/BkrvTCC.htm

FFRF contributor Barbara Walker said the following in a review of "Suns of God":

"...You deserve to be recognized as a leading researcher and an expert in the field of comparative mythology, on a par with James Frazer or Robert Graves--indeed, superior to those forerunners in the frankness of your conclusions and the volume of your evidence.

Seldom have I read a book that so delighted me, and had me nodding in agreement on every page. It is truly wonderful. It gives me hope that some day, maybe, the civilized world may grow out of its superstitious adolescence."

- Barbara Walker, The Women's Encyclopedia of Myths and Secrets
http://www.truthbeknown.com/sunsofgod.htm


"Bone-Box No Proof of Jesus"

"NB: This article was published in a three-part series in the magazine Secular Nation, at the suggestion of Dr. Robert Price, who called the series "fine articles." Secular Nation had never published a three-part article before."
http://www.truthbeknown.com/ossuary.htm

Dr. Robert Price wrote the foreword to Acharya's "Who Was Jesus? Fingerprints of The Christ" (WWJ).

And, here's a recent review of WWJ from atheist best-seller David Mills author of "Atheist Universe" - Here are a few of his comments:

"Ms. Murdock is one of only a tiny number of scholars with the richly diverse academic background (and the necessary courage) to adequately address the question of whether Jesus Christ truly existed as a walking-talking figure in first-century Palestine. This question, and many others related to New Testament reliability, are directly confronted and satisfyingly answered in 'Who Was Jesus?' I loved this book. It is absolutely superb in every way, from the eloquence of the writing to the integrity of the scholarship. This book should be required reading in every American classroom....

"My personal recommendation is that 'Who Was Jesus?' should be the first book purchased and studied by anyone, atheist or true believer, who wants to debate Jesus' existence and the Bible's veracity.... You should therefore make this book priority reading even over 'The God Delusion,' 'God is Not Great' and other excellent but, in my opinion, less important books than Murdock's....

"To summarize: D.M. Murdock's 'Who Was Jesus? Fingerprints of The Christ' is unquestionably one of the finest and most enjoyable books I've ever read."

Check out the full review here - http://stellarhousepublishing.com/david-mills-wwj.html

At Amazon and here http://www.stellarhousepublishing.com/whowasjesus1.html

Here's an examiner article about Dr. Robert Eisenman, a well-known Bible scholar, who has summarized 'The Christ Conspiracy' in the Huffington Post This means nobody can claim that "no real scholar takes the Jesus mythicist position seriously" anymore.


"I have examined all the known superstitions of the world, and I do not find in our particular superstition of Christianity one redeeming feature. They are all alike founded on fables and mythology. Millions of innocent men, women and children, since the introduction of Christianity have been burnt, tortured, fined and imprisoned. What has been the effect of this coercion? To make one half the world fools and the other half hypocrites; to support roguery and error all over the earth."

- Thomas Jefferson

"The day will come when the mystical generation of Jesus, by the supreme being as his father in the womb in a virgin, will be classed with the fable of the generation of Minerva in the brain of Jupiter."

- Thomas Jefferson, in a letter to John Adams

"... the Christian religion is a parody on the worship of the Sun, in which they put a man whom they call Christ, in the place of the Sun, and pay him the same adoration which was originally paid to the Sun."

- Thomas Paine

"Somebody ought to tell the truth about the Bible. The preachers dare not, because they would be driven from their pulpits. Professors in colleges dare not, because they would lose their salaries. Politicians dare not. They would be defeated. Editors dare not. They would lose subscribers. Merchants dare not, because they might lose customers. Men of fashion dare not, fearing that they would lose caste. Even clerks dare not, because they might be discharged. And so I thought I would do it myself."

- Robert Ingersoll

"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

However, this doesn't have to be just an atheist vs. theist either or type of issue. It's far more interesting than that. I wish more people understood that. This is why Acharya takes the Mythicist position:

"Mythicism represents the perspective that many gods, goddesses and other heroes and legendary figures said to possess extraordinary and/or supernatural attributes are not "real people" but are in fact mythological characters. Along with this view comes the recognition that many of these figures personify or symbolize natural phenomena, such as the sun, moon, stars, planets, constellations, etc., constituting what is called "astrotheology." As a major example of the mythicist position, various biblical characters such as Adam and Eve, Satan, Noah, Abraham, Moses, Joshua, King David, Solomon & Jesus Christ, among other figures, in reality represent mythological characters along the same lines as the Egyptian, Sumerian, Phoenician, Indian, Greek, Roman and other godmen, who are all presently accepted as myths, rather than historical figures."

- From Christ in Egypt: The Horus-Jesus Connection


The astrotheological myths from ancient times that Acharya's work demonstrates hold great timeless symbolic value, even today. These myths personifying natural phenomena are based on the reality of the world that surrounds us. Rather than being stuck in the neverending atheist vs. theist debate, perhaps we can understand that their underlying meaning & purpose as myths are far more useful to us and may be appreciated by all.

I trust that you too will find the mythicist position helpful in going beyond just atheism vs. theism.

:wink:

For discussion of this thread go here: viewtopic.php?f=5&t=2483

_________________
Astrotheology.Net
Mythicists United
Did Moses Exist? The Myth of the Israelite Lawgiver
Christ in Egypt: The Horus-Jesus Connection
2015 Astrotheology Calendar
Astrotheology Calendar Special
Stellar House Publishing at Youtube
The Mythicist Position


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Aug 19, 2009 10:55 am 
Offline
Site Admin
User avatar

Joined: Sat Aug 26, 2006 9:24 pm
Posts: 5205
Location: 3rd rock from the sun
Quote:
What is a Mythicist?

The Mythicist Position:

The term "mythicism" as it has come to be developed in the present day may be defined as I have done in my book Christ in Egypt: The Horus-Jesus Connection (12):
Quote:
"Mythicism represents the perspective that many gods, goddesses and other heroes and legendary figures said to possess extraordinary and/or supernatural attributes are not "real people" but are in fact mythological characters. Along with this view comes the recognition that many of these figures personify or symbolize natural phenomena, such as the sun, moon, stars, planets, constellations, etc., constituting what is called "astromythology" or "astrotheology." As a major example of the mythicist position, it is determined that various biblical characters such as Adam and Eve, Satan, Noah, Abraham, Moses, Joshua, King David, Solomon and Jesus Christ, among other entities, in reality represent mythological figures along the same lines as the Egyptian, Sumerian, Phoenician, Indian, Greek, Roman and other godmen, who are all presently accepted as myths, rather than historical figures."

The Definition of Mythicism:

A "mythicist" thus represents in part someone who perceives certain biblical characters as being mythical, the same as the gods, godmen and heroes of other cultures. In short—

myth-i-cist [mith-uh-sist]

–noun

"a person who views various figures of antiquity, including both pagan gods and major biblical characters, as mythical."

Moreover, a mythicist may also recognize the origins of these myths as being based in nature worship and what is called "astrotheology."

http://www.stellarhousepublishing.com/mythicist.html

The History of Mythicism
http://www.stellarhousepublishing.com/mythicism.html

The blog: What is a mythicist?
http://tbknews.blogspot.com/2009/08/wha ... icist.html
Quote:
"The lost language of celestial allegory can now be restored, chiefly through the resurrection of ancient Egypt; the scriptures can be read as they were originally written, according to the secret wisdom, and we now know how history was first written as mythology."

- Gerald Massey, The Natural Genesis (Vol. 2 p. 378 ff.)


_________________
Astrotheology.Net
Mythicists United
Did Moses Exist? The Myth of the Israelite Lawgiver
Christ in Egypt: The Horus-Jesus Connection
2015 Astrotheology Calendar
Astrotheology Calendar Special
Stellar House Publishing at Youtube
The Mythicist Position


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Dec 17, 2009 4:43 pm 
Offline
Site Admin
User avatar

Joined: Sat Aug 26, 2006 9:24 pm
Posts: 5205
Location: 3rd rock from the sun
I am re-posting Acharya's comment from the forum thread over to here in the FAQ's. Of course, all of this originated from Mike Licona's review of Christ Conspiracy from 2001.
Quote:
Buddhism 101 & Christian Apologists

Some years ago, a Christian apologist took short quotes from my book The Christ Conspiracy, cold-called up a few professional scholars, read these brief excerpts to them, and recorded the experts' opinions. He then published a couple of articles claiming to have debunked my book and the entire thesis that Jesus Christ is a mythical character along the same lines as the Greek and Roman gods such as Hercules and Jupiter. Since then, this handful of quotes from scholars has been used by Christian apologists and others in articles, blogs, videos and radio shows to run down my work.

As I have demonstrated repeatedly since these quotes were first bandied about, my thesis remains intact, and the bulk of my contentions have been verified by other sources. Indeed, the first thing one needs to understand about this debacle is that these detractors who are professing expertise on my work have never actually read it. This point needs to be emphasized, because the apologists are making pretenses as if these particular scholars have read my work and are experts at it. They are not. These professional scholars did not bother to check out where the brief information they were spoonfed came from; they knew nothing about my sources. They simply assumed in a kneejerk reaction that I (my sources) was completely wrong and that I therefore had "no knowledge" of the subject matter I was writing about, which was the essence of their derogatory remarks. One scholarly detractor who has never read my work nevertheless claimed I "need a course in Religion 101." As we shall see, it seems that many such scholars are in reality themselves stuck in Religion 101, not having all the pieces of the puzzle at their disposal.

In a perfect world devoid of a priori assumptions and biases, one would imagine that, upon hearing the brief - and fascinating - excerpts culled from my thousands of pages of work, a curious scholar would want to know exactly where this information came from, rather than immediately dismissing it and unprofessionally making derogatory comments about another's work they have not even read. So it often goes within the ivory halls of academia, apparently - which is one major reason I did not pursue that course to its ultimate expression. If I had gone that route, this information likely would never have made it to the masses in the way it did, with over 100 million exposures to the thesis in the movie "Zeitgeist," as a major example.

As concerns Buddhism in specific, after being read the 18 points regarding Buddha in "The Characters" chapter of Christ Con (109-110), a Chinese professor claimed that most of them were wrong and made derogatory and hostile remarks about my person, having not bothered at all to inquire where this information came from, even though there are 21 footnotes carefully citing all my sources. Nevertheless, from what I can gather of the exchange, she immediately assumed that I had just made them all up, with no basis at all, and she then made an ad hom attack against me personally. Again, this ad hom personal attack has since been used on the internet and in writing to harass me and "disprove" the entire Jesus myth thesis.

"The Characters" - the Achilles Heel?

This entire debacle, from the scholars' remarks to the gleeful use of them to debunk me, serves to illustrate just how threatening is that one chapter in my book entitled, "The Characters." Numerous articles, videos and so on have been dedicated in the past decade since the release of Christ Con to debunking these striking parallels and correspondences between ancient gods and godmen, essentially showing how unoriginal is the Christ myth. The rest of the work, however, goes largely ignored, although I personally have developed upon several of the other aspects of the Jesus myth in my other books and writings.

Nevertheless, the fracas over these parallels reveals that they represent the real Achilles heel, so to speak, of Christian history. Even in ancient times, various important parallels were pointed out by Christian apologists themselves such as Justin Martyr and Tertullian.

In this regard, then, it is important to verify these parallels and not to rely on hostile and unprofessional reactions on the part of scholars or the unfounded contentions by biased Christian apologists. That activity is precisely what I have dedicated the past decade to doing, along with bringing out many other aspects of Christian history, comparative religion, mythology and astrotheology.

As concerns Buddhism in particular, since I wrote The Christ Conspiracy, I have also compiled much more information - it is useful for readers to realize that I provide copious quotes from an abundance of sources - on this subject demonstrating both that "the Buddha" is a patently mythical figure and that his "life" does indeed resemble that of Jesus in many pertinent aspects. A handful of the contentions in Christ Con were not entirely sustainable, although I personally did not originate them but was citing the work of others, many of whom were themselves highly credentialed - much more so, in fact, than numerous of my detractors.

Buddha's Birthdate

For example, the contention that Buddha was born on December 25th - the end of the three-day winter-solstice period - originated not with me but with a biblical scholar named Ernest de Bunsen in The Angel-Messiah of the Buddhists, Essenes and Christians. In my follow-up work to Christ Con, Suns of God, I provide a lengthy quote from de Bunsen (352-354) showing his indepth analysis of this issue, wherein he is very scholarly and scientific, not just "making things up," to demonstrate a possible astronomical basis for his contention of Buddha being born on December 25th. As part of this analysis, de Bunsen remarks, among much else:

Image

(von/de Bunsen, Ernst, The Angel-Messiah of Buddhists, Essenes and Christians, Longmans, Green and Co., London, 1880, p. 23.)

Although current scholarship ignores this debate, claiming that "the Buddha" was truly a historical figure who most definitely had a birth day, which is traditionally celebrated in April or May - based on phases of the moon, revealing its astrotheological connection - one would think that a curious individual, rather than immediately dismissing this contention because of a priori assumptions and biases, might wish to follow up with it, as I have done in Suns of God, revealing some extremely fascinating information. Moreover, as de Bunsen shows, this material is based on ancient texts as well as modern science of the time. Although he was a peer-reviewed scholar of his day, de Bunsen's work in this regard did not make it into the mainstream, for what seems to be in significant part because of a Christian bias that to this day does not want this material to surface. On the contrary, because of such bold research, 19th-centuries scholars such as de Bunsen have likewise been run down and derogated, although many of these scholars' writings on the subject produced some very important results within the field of comparative religion and mythology that have been passed along into the mainstream and become part of the field as taught widely within the halls of academia.

As concerns the birthday of "the Buddha," in Suns of God I dedicate several pages to the issue that reveal the mythical nature of the main characters of Buddhism, with "the Buddha's" birth celebrated at different times of the year in different places and eras. As I state in Suns of God (350-351):

Quote:
To reiterate, Buddha is not an historical personage whose story is concretized but, like Krishna, essentially represents a personification of the sun. Moreover, as we are not dealing with one man but numerous "Buddhas," it is not surprising to find many traditions concerning his birthday or birthdays. Indeed, as was also the case with Krishna, Buddha’s birthday falls on different days in different years and places. In Laos, a festival to commemorate the "birth story" of the Buddha called "Bun Pha Wet" is held on January 29th and other days in different villages. Sakyamuni Buddha’s birthday is celebrated on April 8th in Japan and Korea, and on May 7th in Vietnam. The birthday of "the Buddha" is often observed on May 3rd or May 7th, although the "actual day" is claimed to be May 11th as well. It is also celebrated on May 22nd in various places. In the Mahayana tradition, it was observed on May 10th in the year 2000. In the Theravadic tradition, the date was May 17th, and in the Hinayana tradition, it was the 18th of May. In 2001, Sakyamuni’s birthday fell on April 30th.

In some places and years, May 17th is the birth, enlightenment and death of "the Buddha." Within Japanese Zen Buddhism, Buddha's enlightenment day is celebrated on December 8th, "but the Festival of the Enlightenment is on December 25th." In Chinese Zen, or Ch'an, Buddha's enlightenment day is January 14th. In Tibet, Buddha's birth and enlightenment day is celebrated on June 16th.

In addition to these various celebrations are the birthdays of numerous other Buddhas: For example, February 10th is "Samadhi Light Buddha's Birthday," and September 19th is the "Burning Lamp Buddha of Antiquity's Birthday." The "Medicine Master Buddha's Birthday" is variously October 26th or November 18th. In China, February 2nd is the birthday of Buddha Dipamkara. The Amitabha Buddha of Infinite Light was born on December 12th. As we have seen, "Amitabha" is another name for Abidha, the sun god, which is appropriate for "the god of boundless light."

In Suns of God, I show that the figure depicted as "the Buddha" possesses numerous solar attributes and is likely a sun god or an epithet of the God Sun, so to speak, which I discuss in detail in my book. As we can see, within this mythical Buddhistic tradition appear pertinent solar festivities, such as December 8th being the day of Buddha's enlightenment, with the actual "Festival of Enlightenment" celebrated on December 25th. December 12th as the birthday of the Amitabha Buddha of Infinite Light is appropriate in consideration of the awakening of the sun at this time. As demonstrated in my 2010 Astrotheology Calendar, it is not only December 21st, 22nd or 25th that have been celebrated as the time of the winter solstice and the sun's returning strength but also virtually the whole of December that represents this enlightening time of the year.

Academia Drops the Ball


Without all of this information, a wave-of-the-hand dismissal of this parallel may be understandable if someone were to call you up out of the blue and read one sentence about "Buddha" being born on December 25th - understandable, unless you are a professional scholar, of course. Again, one would think that a curious scientist would want to know where this fascinating information comes from and to do follow-up research on his or her own, rather than simply providing a kneejerk, dismissive and derogatory reaction. Being just such a curious scientist in this fascinating field, I have gone ahead and done this follow-up research, providing much of it in Suns of God as well as my other books.

In the same manner, I have done likewise with other major contentions concerning Buddha and Buddhism in Christ Conspiracy, providing extensive analyses in my follow-up book Suns of God. More on the subject will also be found in my forthcoming book The Christ Myth Anthology, a lengthy excerpt of which can be found as my "Origins of Christianity" ebook online. In reality, in this "Origins" excerpt, I was able to demonstrate many of these same parallels found in Christ Con, using completely different sources, including some of the most modern scholarship in the subject.

A discussion about one of these contentions may be found in the "Origins" thread on this forum, demonstrating the degree of accuracy to which I continually strive. As we can also see from remarks there, my knowledge of Buddhism is hardly stuck in "Religion 101," as some of these scholars themselves seem to be. Indeed, in reviewing the remarks of one critic that I am completely ignorant of the subject of Buddhism, a Buddhist scholar who actually knows my work rejoined that, based on her comments, the critic herself appears to know only about the Chinese and not the Sanskrit and other Indian sources of Buddhist lore. Certainly, she does not know the sources that I have been studying and have included in Suns of God as well as The Christ Myth Anthology. For example, in my recent online article "The 'Historical' Buddha?", excerpted from Suns of God, I bring forth the scholarship of Christian missionary and scholar R. Spence Hardy, who lived in India and Ceylon/Sri Lanka and studied numerous - some 465 - Indian Buddhist texts in their original languages. My more modern sources likewise read Sanskrit, Pali and so on, and reflect the ancient Buddhist tradition of India, where Buddhism originated. Limiting oneself to just Chinese or Japanese Buddhism will not produce the same results and expertise, obviously. Hence, one ignorant of the Indian tradition may find a number of the contentions in my work on Buddhism to be unknown to him or her, causing him or her to have a dismissive reaction. It is just this sort of uninformed reaction we are seeing in these detractor articles, videos, etc., by Christian apologists.

For a few more details goto the forum thread or page 1 of this thread and scroll down until you see the quote in red by Edwin Bryant.

_________________
Astrotheology.Net
Mythicists United
Did Moses Exist? The Myth of the Israelite Lawgiver
Christ in Egypt: The Horus-Jesus Connection
2015 Astrotheology Calendar
Astrotheology Calendar Special
Stellar House Publishing at Youtube
The Mythicist Position


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Feb 12, 2010 6:42 pm 
Offline
Site Admin
User avatar

Joined: Sat Aug 26, 2006 9:24 pm
Posts: 5205
Location: 3rd rock from the sun
Does Acharya S/Murdock cite facts and evidence to support her theories?

Yes, of course. Acharya S/Murdock has written several books totaling nearly 3,000 pages of material including over 7,456 footnotes/citations to primary sources and the works of highly credentialed and respected authorities in relevant fields of study from a wide variety of backgrounds, including many Christian scholars, adding up to over 2,314 bibliographical sources. Her books also include 456+ images thus far. She works hard to substantiate her claims with credible evidence and sources specifically due to the fact that this subject is so contentious. These figures do not include any online material.

The Christ Conspiracy: The Greatest Story Ever Sold by Acharya S (Jul 1, 1999)
Suns of God: Krishna, Buddha and Christ Unveiled by Acharya S (Sep 1, 2004)
Who Was Jesus? Fingerprints of The Christ by D.M. Murdock, Acharya S (Nov 28, 2007)
Christ in Egypt: The Horus-Jesus Connection by D.M. Murdock/Acharya S (Feb 28, 2009)
The Gospel According to Acharya S (2009)
Man Made God: A Collection of Essays by Barbara G. Walker (2010)
Anahita: Ancient Persian Goddess and Zoroastrian Yazata (2013)
Bart Ehrman and the Quest of the Historical Jesus of Nazareth: An Evaluation of Ehrman s Did Jesus Exist? (2013)
Did Moses Exist? The Myth of the Israelite Lawgiver by D.M. Murdock/Acharya S (2014)

http://answers.yahoo.com/question/index ... 053AALwN8y

_________________
Astrotheology.Net
Mythicists United
Did Moses Exist? The Myth of the Israelite Lawgiver
Christ in Egypt: The Horus-Jesus Connection
2015 Astrotheology Calendar
Astrotheology Calendar Special
Stellar House Publishing at Youtube
The Mythicist Position


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: What is a conspiracy?
PostPosted: Mon Feb 15, 2010 2:02 pm 
Offline
Site Admin
User avatar

Joined: Sun Aug 06, 2006 4:09 pm
Posts: 2142
What is a conspiracy?

In the decade since its release, my book The Christ Conspiracy has been read fairly widely and, naturally, picked apart, although the bulk of it is ignored while a feeding frenzy has occurred around the chapter entitled, "The Characters." This ignoring of the rest of the book is too bad, since it contains a tremendous amount of very useful information that puts the "Characters" issue into perspective. It also delves into the numerous texts used in this effort, as well as many other fascinating aspects of the creation of Christianity, including identifying in detail the numerous groups and organizations involved, along with a few individuals as well.

This effort of creating a religion designed to usurp all others I have chosen to identify as a "conspiracy." Yet, the very word "conspiracy" seems to disturb some people; hence, I have created this post.

What is a conspiracy?

From dictionary.com:

Quote:
con⋅spir⋅a⋅cy

1. the act of conspiring.
2. an evil, unlawful, treacherous, or surreptitious plan formulated in secret by two or more persons; plot.
3. a combination of persons for a secret, unlawful, or evil purpose: He joined the conspiracy to overthrow the government.
4. Law. an agreement by two or more persons to commit a crime, fraud, or other wrongful act.
5. any concurrence in action; combination in bringing about a given result.

Here's another definition on dictionary.com, this time from the American Heritage Dictionary:

Quote:
con·spir·a·cy

1. An agreement to perform together an illegal, wrongful, or subversive act.
2. A group of conspirators.
3. Law An agreement between two or more persons to commit a crime or accomplish a legal purpose through illegal action.
4. A joining or acting together, as if by sinister design: a conspiracy of wind and tide that devastated coastal areas.

[Middle English conspiracie, from Anglo-Norman, probably alteration of Old French conspiration, from Latin cōnspīrātiō, cōnspīrātiōn-, from cōnspīrātus, past participle of cōnspīrāre, to conspire; see conspire.]

And here is the definition of "conspire":

Quote:
con⋅spire

1. to agree together, esp. secretly, to do something wrong, evil, or illegal: They conspired to kill the king.
2. to act or work together toward the same result or goal.
–verb (used with object)
3. to plot (something wrong, evil, or illegal).

Origin:
1325–75; ME < L conspīrāre to act in harmony, conspire, equiv. to con- con- + spīrāre to breathe; see spirant, spirit

The word "conspire" comes from the Latin conspirare, which in turn is from "con" meaning "with" or "together" and "spirare" meaning "to breathe," also related to "spirit." The prefix "con-" we find defined as:

Quote:
con-

var. of com-

Origin:
< L

com-

a prefix meaning "with," "together," "in association," and (with intensive force) "completely," occurring in loanwords from Latin (commit): used in the formation of compound words before b, p, m: combine; compare; commingle.
Also, co-, col-, con-, cor-.

So, again, "to conspire" means to "breathe together," with the original Latin word for "breathe" also related to "spirit." Whenever two or more people are breathing together - even or especially in a spiritual way - they could be said to be conspiring. In this regard, the Christian song lyric "Whenever two or more of you are gathered in my name, there is love" takes on new meaning: "Conspiring for Jesus!"

This exercise demonstrates that a "conspiracy" doesn't have to be malicious in intent, as is clear from no. 5 in the top definition - "any concurrence in action; combination in bringing about a given result." As we can see, there is nothing particularly sinister or necessarily malevolent about this definition of "conspiracy." It is simply an act with at least one other person.

In the American Heritage definition, we can pick the "subversive" or "wrongful" connotations, but not necessarily "malicious" or "evil." The legal definition in no. 3 is useful here as well: "An agreement between two or more persons to commit a crime or accomplish a legal purpose through illegal action." So, the agreement is not necessarily illegal or criminal, but the action may be. The point here is that a "conspiracy" is an "agreement between two or more persons," generally but not necessarily illicit or immoral. Indeed, we can look to the morally neutral second definition of the verb "conspire" as well: "2. to act or work together toward the same result or goal."

Was the willful creation of Christianity through human means a "subversive" act? It certainly turned out to be, as it overthrew the entire religious structure of the Roman Empire. Was it "wrongful?" Since it is patently clear through weighing all the evidence that the gospel tale falsely represents myth as history, it certainly was wrongful to depict this myth as having taken place on Earth.

Was Christianity an "agreement between two or more persons?" From any perspective, whether you believe or disbelieve the gospel tale, the creation of Christianity certainly constituted an agreement by at least two people. (If only between the Three Talking Heads of God, i.e., the Father, Son and Holy Ghost, it is still a conspiracy, especially when the word "spirit" is factored into the equation.)

Finally, the result of this agreement/conspiracy may or may not be legal, although the steps taken to get there may have been illegal. In the case of Christianity's founding, the result only ended up being "legal" after centuries of slaughter that destroyed the Pagan world and genocided millions of people. So subversive and illegal were the original Christians that they were "persecuted" or, rather, treated according to the law of the time, which did not favor the type of proselytizing found within Christianity. Hence, we have the (frequently bogus) stories of Christian "martyrdom," when in fact Christians were breaking the law with a number of their behaviors, including exposing the mysteries.

Yet, there were evidently some very powerful, wealthy and connected people involved in the creation of Christianity, although others of a similar stature fought it tooth and nail. The willful act of pushing through an illegal cult, perspective or worldview, requiring the coordinated efforts of hundreds of people and a huge amount of time and money - provided by extremely powerful people - can only be deemed a "conspiracy."

Indeed, as we have seen, "to conspire" means "to act or work together toward the same result or goal," and we know that Christianity was the result of people acting and working "together toward the same result or goal." There need not have been anything sinister, malevolent or evil about this concerted effort, which is all the word "conspiracy" need convey in this instance. But, the title "The Christ Concerted Effort" just doesn't have the same ring to it! "Conspiracy" is a perfectly good and useful word. There is no need to be afraid of it.

Without identifying the creation of Christianity as a willful "agreement between two or more persons" with a definite (and, as it turned out, subversive) purpose, result or goal in mind, we cannot truly get at the heart of the matter. The efforts of the mythicist school vis-a-vis Christianity become somewhat futile without addressing that gaping hole of "how" and "why."

After studying the subject for decades, including researching through thousands of texts, I do believe that my effort in The Christ Conspiracy is the most complete depiction of the "hows" and "whys" of Christianity's creation.

Image

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

Image


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Oct 01, 2010 1:07 pm 
Offline
Site Admin
User avatar

Joined: Sat Aug 26, 2006 9:24 pm
Posts: 5205
Location: 3rd rock from the sun
Where's the Evidence for Mythicism?

First of all, New Testament scholars have no problem accepting that Egyptian, Sumerian, Phoenician, Indian, Greek, Roman and other godmen, are all presently accepted as myths, rather than historical figures. So, they're all mythicists EXCEPT when it comes to Jesus. And where's the evidence for Adam and Eve, Satan, Noah, Abraham, Moses, Joshua, King David, Solomon as well? Christians have failed in their responsibility for providing the burden of proof. Here we are 2,000 years later and nothing has changed in that regard.

Lack of historical evidence

The evidence for a mythical Jesus begins with the Bible itself. There is no credible contemporary evidence for Jesus. What is held up as evidence is flimsy and problematic at best. Biblical and NT scholars who are also professed Christians can't even agree on evidence for Jesus. We still have no credible evidence that Mark, Matthew, Luke & John wrote the Gospels. The literary and historical evidence points to a late 2nd century creation. Justin the Martyr knew nothing about the four Gospels by those four characters in 150.

Previous mythical motifs

NT scholars fail to factor in comparative religion pre-Christian parallels and concepts that have been borrowed such as Dying and Rising Gods motifs. And they fail utterly to factor in the astrotheological aspects. They're not taking into consideration the pre-historical origins of religious concepts based in natural phenomena which have evolved over time, starting out as mythology in order to pass vital survival information onto future generations. This vital knowledge included agriculture, taking into account the movements of the sun and moon for best results in planting and harvesting, for example. Which also included the ability to create a calendar based on solstices and equinoxes i.e. Stonehenge or Germany's 7,000 year old Temple of the Sun, and countless others from around the globe.

Physical evidence

Other disciplines involved in the study of mythicism are archaeology, obviously, as well as archaeoastronomy and linguistics. All around the world we find astronomically aligned structures &/or buildings that also serve religious functions. These structures and their alignments tell a story, the elements of which are basically the mythical motifs we find in the gospel story and elsewhere. There are many other physical artifacts that reveal the pre-Christian and mythical motifs that found their way into the New Testament and other Christian texts, as well as iconography. In this regard, these disciplines show a massive amount of evidence for the mythicist position - and you can find much of it in Acharya's books.

I'd be interested to see NT scholarship step up to the plate to address the works not only of Doherty and Dr. Price but also that of Acharya S/Murdock. She has done the work NT scholars clearly have not. Acharya S/Murdock currently has five books to date with over 2,100 pages of text, including around 5,700 footnotes/citations to primary sources and the works of highly credentialed authorities from a wide variety of relevant fields, adding up to over 1,600 bibliographical sources. Her books also contain over 300 illustrations.

The fact remains that there is no requirement in NT scholarship to investigate the case for mythicism in order to get their PhD, even though the mythicist school dates back centuries and has yielded a tremendous volume of literature highly germane to New Testament studies. It may thus be a case where NT scholars are too narrowly focused on the NT but refuse to factor in pre-Christian parallels. How can we expect to find out whether or not Jesus was historical or mythical by only looking at the NT? We can't, and at this point expecting those answers to come from NT scholarship will always leave much to be desired for those who are interested in the much larger historical picture that must be taken into account.

Conclusion

It really looks like the "Occam's Razor" answer here is that the creators of Christianity borrowed from Paganism and Judaism, making several attempts at placing a mythical, pre-Christian savior godman into a historical framework. This effort to combine Judaism and Paganism eventually served as a political power-move by Constantine to unite the Roman Empire under one state religion. At the end of the day, there is no reason to believe Jesus is any more historical than Hercules.

The Mythicist Position

Astrotheology of the Ancients

Jesus as the Sun throughout History

The Origins of Christianity and the Quest for the Historical Jesus Christ

Christ in Egypt: The Horus-Jesus Connection


_________________
Astrotheology.Net
Mythicists United
Did Moses Exist? The Myth of the Israelite Lawgiver
Christ in Egypt: The Horus-Jesus Connection
2015 Astrotheology Calendar
Astrotheology Calendar Special
Stellar House Publishing at Youtube
The Mythicist Position


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Jan 28, 2011 1:57 pm 
Offline
Site Admin
User avatar

Joined: Sun Aug 06, 2006 4:09 pm
Posts: 2142
What about December 25th and the winter solstice?

There seems to be much confusion as to why the 25th of December is considered to be the winter solstice. For example, I received the following email question:

Quote:
Subject: Winter Solstice/ Christmas Day Discrepancy
From: David L.

Hi Acharya,

...I have a question that's just come up pertaining to Christmas and the Winter Solstice, arising out of your book The Christ Conspiracy that I hope you can address as it relates synchronistically to a present dialogue I'm having with my sister, who is a born again Christian.

At the bottom of page 216, just beneath the heading "Christmas", first sentence, you appear to imply that the Winter Solstice is December 25th. Surely this is verifiably inaccurate, as any calendar will mark it as either December 21st or 22nd, depending upon the particular year in question, yes?

Meanwhile my sister has recently taken me to task on this very issue. When it is argued that Christmas is a derivative of the Pagan celebration of the Winter Solstice, she points out the discrepancy of the Solstice date with Christmas Day, as there is a 3 or 4 day difference, thus making a case for their complete differentiation.

If I may I ask, what is your response to this refutation and discrepancy?

Any information you can share would be much appreciated.

David L.

My first response is as follows:

Quote:
Most people are uninformed about ancient mythology and archaeoastronomy. For example, December 25th most certainly DOES represent the winter solstice, as it has since ancient times. That day is not a mistake. It is the end of a three-day period or triduum when the "sun stands still," which is the meaning of the Latin term "solstice."

When the sun "dies" on the shortest day, December 21 at midnight, the ancients saw that it moved very little on a sundial, from a geocentric perspective, for three days before starting to move north again, on December 24th (at midnight by Roman time-keeping). This three-day period is reflected in the myths surrounding this period, but there are also many other periods of winter-solstice celebrations throughout the month of December and into January. These facts may be procured from the "December" section of my astrotheology calendar, as well as in the calendar page for that month in my 2010 Astrotheology Calendar, which can be found here:

http://www.truthbeknown.com/first-christmas.html

Click on the image of December, which is under the section "Numerous Winter-Solstice Celebrations Globally." You will see the many celebrations that extend throughout the month - all of them represent the winter-solstice birth of the sun, including and especially December 25th. Another famous day on which the winter solstice was celebrated is January 6th, which is even farther from the day we traditionally perceive as the solstice. This modern perspective ignores the numerous ancient traditions and celebrations, even of the infamous Saturnalia, which is unquestionably a winter-solstice festival but which extends from the 17th to the 23rd of December. Some celebrations even occurred beginning in November, such as Brumalia.

Here's a direct link to the calendar, where you can clearly see these numerous winter-solstice celebrations throughout the month of December:

http://truthbeknown.com/december2010.jpg

I next received the following email:

Quote:
Hi Acharya, thanks for having responded to my winter solstice/Christmas question.

I had heard of this "3 day stand still" via Jordan Maxwell before, but I've never been able to find any corroborating evidence from scientific circles to confirm it. And our calendar simply marks the winter solstice as a one-day phenomena of the 21st or 22nd of December, depending upon the particular year in question.

Admittedly it makes sense that since "solstice" means "sun stands still", that the winter solstice, by definition, would have to be of at least two days duration, since if the sun reaches its most southerly position on the 21st (or 22nd) it wouldn't be "standing still" if on the very next day it moved back one degree in the opposite direction toward the north.

What is really bizarre to me is that there is virtually nothing on the internet about this phenomena of a winter solstice triduum. Shouldn't this fact be verifiable in scientific (astronomical) circles? Yet I can find nothing. Therefore, may I ask from what sources you derive this information that confirms the winter solstice lasting 3 days? (I only have Christ Conspiracy and Who Was Jesus?, perhaps you give references in your other books?)

Thanks for any info you can suggest to further research this. I want to get the reality of this confirmed to my own satisfaction, so that I can confidently connect the solstice-Christmas sequence to the "3-days-in-the-tomb-before-the-resurrection-of-Jesus" motif for my sister (who is a born again Christian).

Best regards,
David L.

Here is my response:

Quote:
We are not discussing an actual phenomenon, we are discussing the perception of the ancients, and the scientific evidence for this perception is the myths themselves.

In other words, we are not saying that the sun really does stand still. It's simply a motif upon which the ancients built many myths. Again, the point is not whether or not the perception is real but that the ancients did indeed perceive things that way and that the triduum period is therefore a pre-Christian motif that did not originate with Christianity - in fact, we are explaining why this three-day period exists in the mythology. I don't know how to make that any clearer.

"may I ask from what sources you derive this information that confirms the winter solstice lasting 3 days?"

Again, we are not saying that the solstice actually lasts three days in scientific terms but that the ancients expressed it this way, and that is why the word means "sun stands still." This information is in many of my writings. I also sent you the image of December from my 2010 Calendar. References to those numerous multiple-day, winter-solstice holidays are in my calendar.

Finally, David responds:

Quote:
Thank you, I was not aware you were speaking strictly from the ancients' perspective regarding the triduum. This will work. But also, surprise, surprise, I just found a single sentence at Wikipedia that seems to confirm modern day understanding of the winter solstice with that of the ancients'. It states:

"Similarly 25 December is the start of the Christmas celebration, and is the day the Sun begins to return to the northern hemisphere."

The sentence is located toward the bottom of the page under the heading "Solstice Celebrations", first paragraph, last sentence, at this link:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Solstice

Thus, since we know by Gregorian calendar reckoning that the start of the winter solstice is December 21/21, and we also know that the day the sun begins to return to the northern hemisphere is on December 25th, then by implication the sun stands still for roughly 3 days. Yippee!

Thanks Acharya, your info has helped as well as sent me looking in the right direction for a modern confirmation. This should be enough to do the job!

Best wishes,

David L.

Again, the three-day period is not "rough" but begins precisely on the winter solstice, when the sun's shadow on the sundial stops moving southward. For three days, the sun's shadow appears at about the same place at noon, for example, and then it begins to move slightly northward again on the 25th of December. Hence, the ancients thought that after the sun "dies" and "stands still" for three days it is "born again" or "resurrected" on the 25th. Note that, as it does today, the days in ancient Rome and other places began at midnight; so, the solstice begins at midnight on December 21st and ends at midnight on December 24th, exactly three days later.

Freethinkaluva adds:
Quote:
It's imperative to realize that Christmas-type celebrations in pre-Christian Pagan religion were connected to the winter solstice. Christianity has severed the winter solstice from Christmas so severely that hardly anyone today is even aware of the original connection. Christianity merely emphasizes Dec 25th, teaching people it is Jesus's birthday, while omitting the rest of the three-day mythological motif at that time. This omission is an attempt to make Jesus appear historical, obviously. But, there is another example of a triduum at Easter, from Good Friday to Easter Sunday, when they emphasize the rest of this solar motif with the symbolic death, three days in a cave, tomb or underworld, followed by the re-birth or resurrection at that time.

Other winter-solstice celebrations

It should be noted that this three-day period or triduum, while relevant to the gospel story and others concerning the resurrection of the god after three days does not represent the only winter-solstice period celebrated in antiquity to this day. While we in the West might insist that December 21st is "the" winter solstice, the Indians, for example, celebrate the winter solstice on January 14th, called "Makar Sankrati." Interestingly, the next day is celebrated by Indians as the Surya Pongal or "Sun God Day."

As I stated above, January 6th was also a popular date for the winter solstice, a date still celebrated by some parts of the Orthodox Christian Church as Jesus's birthday. Concerning this date, Christian theologian Dr. Hugo Rahner remarks:

"As to the dates, Norden has shown that the change from January 6 to December 25 can be explained as the result of the reform introduced by the more accurate Julian calendar into the ancient Egyptian calculation which had fixed January 6 as the date of the winter solstice." (Rahner, Greek Myths and Christian Mystery, 141.)

Another example of this change can be found in the myth of Dionysus, who was said to have been born on either January 5th or 6th, as was his Egyptian counterpart Osiris-Aion, but, as Macrobius relates, whose birthday was also celebrated at some point on December 25th - both of these dates represent the winter solstice.

For more information on the various winter-solstice celebrations throughout the month of December, as well as some in both November and January, see my 2010 Astrotheology Calendar, including the December month as below.

(Click to enlarge)
Image

ADDENDUM (8/21/2014)

Here's an article by a Christian apologist attempting to prove that Jesus was born on December 25th.

Quote:
Was Jesus Really Born on Dec 25? Yes – A Biblical Argument for the Birth of Christ in Late December

It is now commonly assumed that our Lord Jesus Christ was not born on December 25th. I’m going to argue that this assumption is factually incorrect, and that Christ was born in late December. First allow me to counter a three common objections to the dating of Christ’s birth to December 25.

Objection 1: December 25th was chosen in order to replace the pagan Roman festival of Saturnalia. Saturnalia was a popular winter festival and so that Catholic Church prudently substituted Christmas in its place.

Reply to Objection 1: Saturnalia commemorated the winter solstice. Yet the winter solstice falls on December 22! It is true that Saturnalia celebrations began as early as December 17 and extended till December 23. Still, the dates don’t match up.

Regarding this common misconception that this non-expert repeats, to wit that "December 25" does not represent the winter solstice, it should be recalled that the ancients perceived the solstice as a THREE-DAY period running from December 21st at midnight to December 24th at midnight; hence, "Christmas Eve" is the true birth of the sun god.

The word "solstice" means "sun stands still," and the sun was perceived as standing still not for just one day but for three or more.

As astronomer Dr. Edwin C. Krupp comments:

Quote:
"Solstice means 'sun stands still,' but the sun isn't really still at the winter solstice. It rises and sets the way it does every day. But for a FEW DAYS at the time of the solstice, the sun's walk-on is a repeat performance. If you watch the sunrise for several days in a row, both before and after the winter solstice, you notice that the rising point scarcely changes from day to day. This repetitive rising is what inspired the idea of the solstice. Because the sun runs the same race on several successive days in what the ancient Germanic peoples called the 'wet,' or winter, season, the event is called the winter solstice; it takes place on or within a day of December 21." (Krupp, Beyond the Blue Horizon, 83) (Caps emphasis added)

Thus, the START of the winter solstice period is December 21st, but the sun's "stutter step" continues for some days, until there is a noticeable turn towards the north, from a geocentric perspective. The ancients recognized the end of this "stutter step" as December 24th/25th.

So, the apologist's attempt in this article at separating December 25th from the solstice is fallacious and dependent on ignorance of astronomy and mythology. The fact that Saturnalia - a winter-solstice celebration - runs for several days is evidence of this very phenomenon, in fact.

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

Image


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon May 09, 2011 2:39 pm 
Offline
Site Admin
User avatar

Joined: Sun Aug 06, 2006 4:09 pm
Posts: 2142
I recently received a request to comment on the following contentions. My response follows.

Quote:
1) Christianity and the 1st day has nothing to do with the Sun or a Sun divinity. The Jewish day we call Sunday is Yom Ree-Shon. Nothing to do with the Sun.

2) As for 'Son of God = Sun of God" you are aware that similarity only works in English aren't you?

3) The tradition that Jesus was born on December 25 emerged hundreds of years after the creation of Christianity. As you should know the gospels indicate Jesus was born in spring.

4) There is no record of any star being associated with Horus birth. Sorry.

5) None of the diety's on your list ever are recorded to have died or been resurrected, or have 12 disciples.

6) No peer-reviewed research has ever noted this, or sources provided. It is an internet myth. It belongs along with creationism as a serious suggestion.

Needless to say, this person does not know what s/he is talking about. All he has done is rip a few things out of context and, making strawman arguments, batted them around. His knowledge of the subject is shallow indeed.

1. Christianity most certainly does have much to do with the sun, and the placement of its day of worship on SUN-day has to do with Paganism, not Judaism. If it were following the Jewish calendar, the Christian holy-day would have been place on Saturn-day. These are modern "English" designations but they are based on their originals many centuries ago in the pre-Christian world. Regardless, the solar connection to Christianity does not begin or end with this most obvious aspect. The critic's glomming onto this spurious argument as if it debunks the entire body of research is a further reflection of his ignorance of the subject matter at hand.

The solar connection to Christianity has been known for centuries, as exemplified by this quote from Thomas Paine:

Quote:
"The fable of Christ and his twelve apostles...is a parody of the sun and the twelve signs of the Zodiac, copied from the ancient religions of the Eastern world.... Every thing told of Christ has reference to the sun. His reported resurrection is at sunrise, and that on the first day of the week; that is, on the day anciently dedicated to the sun, and from thence called Sunday..."

Thomas Paine, The Complete Religious and Theological Works of Thomas Paine (382)

In "Origins of Freemasonry," Paine likewise stated:

Quote:
"The Christian religion and Masonry have one and the same common origin: Both are derived from the worship of the sun. The difference between their origin is, that the Christian religion is a parody on the worship of the sun, in which they put a man whom they call Christ, in the place of the sun, and pay him the same adoration which was originally paid to the sun."

My many writings prove this connection between Christianity and the sun, including the ebook Jesus as the Sun throughout History. The knowledge of Christianity's connection to solar mythology is well understood by churchmen themselves, as they built their churches oriented to the sun and other celestial phenomena. I have recently written about this orientation in an article "Archaeologist: American churches astronomically aligned." To say that Christianity has nothing to do with the sun is frankly disingenuous and, again, ignorant. As we can see, there is simply no truth to this person's contention.

2. No one has made any claim about the words "son" and "sun" being cognates in English or any other language. The critic's remark again shows that he is very ignorant of the subject matter and is simply raising yet another straw man. You can find much about this "son-sun" debate in my "Rebuttal to Dr. Chris Forbes," as well as elsewhere, such as at my forum and in my "ZEITGEIST Sourcebook."

3. We are all well aware of the fact that "Christmas" was not overtly connected with Christ until the third and fourth centuries. However, in the New Testament, John the Baptist is represented as having been born six months before Jesus (Lk 1:36), with the adult John making the strange remark, "He must increase, so I must decrease." (Jn 3:30)

Subsequently, St. John's Day was placed on June 24th, six months before the supposed birth of Christ. John is thus the summer sun, while Jesus is the winter sun - precisely the same roles of the beheaded Anubis the Purifier and Osiris the KRST (see my book Christ in Egypt). This scripture itself is an indication that the creators of the Christian myth were aware of the Pagan solar savior's birth at the winter solstice, a festival dating back thousands of years and celebrated abundantly around the Roman Empire and beyond.

Regardless of when it was incorporated into Christianity, the fact is that Christmas is a Pagan solar celebration taken over by Christianity - a tendency that did not begin or end with this one festival. Indeed, as I say, John the Baptist's feast day was placed on the summer solstice, and, as even Wiki relates, "The Nativity of St John the Baptist is one of the oldest festivals of the Christian church."

4. This contention is absolutely false, sorry, and it reveals once again that this individual has absolutely no idea what he is talking about. I have written extensively about this subject as well, including many pages in my book Christ in Egypt, which is excerpted in my article "The Star in the East and Three Kings." A simple Google search would have revealed that fact. You can also find some of this information in my "Rebuttal to Dr. Chris Forbes," under # 10.

5. I don't know what list he is referring to, but the fact will remain that several gods and goddesses have died and resurrected. One simple myth that many people know will debunk this false contention easily: The Greek goddess Persephone or Kore is taken into the underworld, after which the earth suffers the death of winter, until she is released in the spring, bringing life and salvation back to the planet. There are many more like this one, including the constant death and resurrection of Osiris. In the writings of Diodorus Siculus from the first century BCE, Horus is depicted as being killed and resurrected, as you can also find in my "ZEITGEIST Sourcebook" or "Rebuttal to Forbes." I discuss this subject concerning the deaths and resurrections of the Egyptian gods and others extensively also in my book Christ in Egypt, in a chapter entitled "Burial for Three Days, Resurrection and Ascension."

Many ancient gods and goddesses have also had 12 "disciples," followers, helpers or were otherwise associated with the number 12. Again, I have discussed this subject in depth in my books and websites, but this individual pretending to be an expert doesn't know any of those facts. In my book CIE, I have a long chapter entitled, "The Twelve Followers." I have also created an enormous list of the 12 theme in my forum thread entitled, "The Twelve in the Bible and Ancient Mythology."

6. "No peer-reviewed research has ever noted this"

This person's writing is bad and vague, so I don't know what "this" is, but I'll assume he is referring to Jesus mythicism and the scholarship showing Jesus to be the sun. If he had actually studied the subject, he would know that MANY highly qualified scholars in a variety of relevant fields over the centuries have put forth much material on these subjects.

In fact, the issue was so popular that a number of American Founding Fathers engaged in mythicist thinking. The numerous quotations I have provided in my books in a wide variety of languages using research dating back thousands of years to the most modern research readily disprove this false contention. I have also provided more pointed articles, such as "What is a Mythicist?" and "The History of Mythicism," which demonstrate that those involved in this field have been quite erudite and credentialed.

The rest of his claim is equally false: "It is an internet myth. It belongs along with creationism as a serious suggestion." Again, only someone who doesn't know the subject matter in any significant depth would make such claims. Indeed, his remarks themselves should be classified with creationism, as they have been shown here to be false, unscientific and poorly researched.

As we can see, scanning a few encyclopedia entries and reading Christian apologist websites does not make one an expert on this subject.

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

Image


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sat Nov 12, 2011 9:24 pm 
Offline
Site Admin
User avatar

Joined: Sun Aug 06, 2006 4:09 pm
Posts: 2142
Use of the Term 'Disciple' in Comparative Religion Studies

This subject has come up in attempts to refute the correspondences between Jesus Christ and previous gods, goddesses and godmen. The use of the term "disciples" is objected to, especially in discussions of the mythical, pre-Christian motif of a god/godman/hero with 12 other figures, whether human, animal or inanimate, such as this query:

Quote:
Which is the primary source that records that Mithras had 12 disciples?

The Perso-Roman god Mithra/Mithras is depicted in a number of ancient artifacts as the central figure surrounded by 12 figures, representing the zodiac. Sometimes these figures are human, while others are animals and inanimate objects, such as we have in the popular zodiac.

Image

Since it can no longer be denied that the godman with the 12 associates is indeed an ancient pre-Christian and non-Christian motif, the attempt at splitting hairs is made in the descriptions of these various figures making up the dozen. Since the gospel story is not an exact replication of various myths - there never is exactitude when myths or legends make their way from one culture to another - apologists object to the use of the term "disciples," which can refer only to humans and which said apologists evidently believe belongs solely to Christianity.

The point of this comparison, of course, is not whether or not "the Twelve" are human beings who followed the godman around, hanging on his every word, as we imagine happened with Jesus and his dozen disciples, but that there does indeed exist a very discernible pattern within mythology of a leader with 12 "followers" or whatever one wishes to call these subordinate figures.

That being said, there is in fact nothing wrong with using the term "disciples" to describe such subordinates in the motif of the god/godman/hero and the 12. As I've posted elsewhere, we need to stop getting hung up on this word "disciple." It is irrelevant. The original Greek of the New Testament translated as "disciple" is μαθητής or mathētēs. The word simply means "a learner, pupil, disciple." (Strong's G3101) Anyone who is learning something from someone else is a μαθητής/mathētēs.

As an example, the Egyptian god Horus is repeatedly shown in artifacts and stated in texts to be involved with 12 other figures, as in this image of Horus with the 12 hours of day:

Image

If Horus is teaching his followers anything, they are his μαθητής. Even if those 12 seated in front of him are learning how to act like "hours," they are his "learners." In the following image, those 12 souls whom Horus is leading to the heavenly fields are LEARNING how to get there from him. They are his followers, pupils or disciples:

Image

Christians did not originate the word "disciple"; nor do they own it. The word μαθητής can be found numerous times in the works of Isocrates, Aristophanes and Plato, all dating to the 5th to 4th centuries before the common era.

This fuss about "disciple" is yet another strawman to distract off the real issue, which is the mythical motif of the godman and the 12 that was apparently, if not quite obviously, co-opted into Christianity. These apologists simply have no leg to stand on, so they must rely on falsehoods and strawmen, etc.

It should also be noted that, while Christian apologists clamor for "primary sources" for every contention made by mythicists and other nonbelievers, they require no such equivalent evidence to believe the supernatural and incredible gospel tale. Moreover, they are mocking us with these demands, since they know very well that much of the evidence has been destroyed - largely by Christians trying to erase non-Christian religious and mythological history from the face of the earth.

Domestic servants and houses

Revisiting the terminology for these various 12 configurations, in the case of the anthropomorphized figures we can most certainly call them "friends," "satellites," "followers," "pupils," "students" and "disciples." These 12 figures of the zodiac can also be styled "helpers," "assistants" and "servants," and this parallel jumps out when examining the entry for the word Gṛihá in the Monier-Williams Sanskrit Dictionary (631).

The entry there defines this word gṛihá, also transliterated as gR^iha or griha, thus:

Quote:
Gṛihá , m. an assistant, servant, RV, x, 119, 13;...a house, habitation, home, RV... 'house of earth,' grave, vii, 89, 1); AV.... with names of gods "a temple"... a house containing several rooms, RV; AV, etc.... a sign of the zodiac, VarBrS, vci, civ; an astrological mansion, VarBr. i, iv f...

The "RV" is the oldest Indian composition, the Rig Veda or Rigveda, while the "AV" is the Atharva Veda or Atharvaveda, both of which are conservatively dated to at least 3,000 years ago.

Putting this somewhat astonishing astrotheological description in its context of the blatant sun worship, nature worship and general astrotheology of the most ancient India texts, we can see a very interesting and relevant development of a word meaning "assistant, servant, house, temple, sign of the zodiac, astrological mansion," among others. We can see in this example how the "houses" or signs of the zodiac could be considered "assistants" or "servants."

Other translations of Rigveda 10.119.13 render gṛihá as "house" and "dwelling," rather than "assistant" or "servant," and it is not immediately evident why Monier-Williams chooses to translate it here as such. Thus, the correlation between the zodiacal "houses" and "assistants" may not seem obvious until we look up the word griha or gRha in the online SpokenSanskrit dictionary. Meanings of gRha and compounds using gRha include "home," "house," "domestic," "domestic worker," "homework" and "builder." It is in the "domestic servant" concept that we can see where the "houses" and "assistants" come together. The "builder" usage is also interesting in consideration of the carpenter motif, in which God is the "Great Architect of the Universe," likewise found in the Indian religion, as concerns the fire god Agni's solar father Tvashtar, who is the "carpenter" and "builder."

In any event, we are justified in describing the 12 figures that/who accompany a significant number of gods as "satellites," "assistants," "helpers," "servants," "pupils" and "disciples."

The bottom line is that the point of this particular comparative-religion exercise in general is to demonstrate the motif of the Twelve, regardless of what they are called. This motif is abundant throughout ancient religion and mythology, as revealed in this thread The Twelve and the Bible in Ancient Mythology and this one about Horus and the 12.

Further Reading

Our regular poster here "GodAlmighty" has also dealt nicely with this "disciples" business in another thread. Be sure to peruse that thread for the contributions of others as well, such as FTL's post here.

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

Image


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Jan 20, 2012 7:10 pm 
Offline
Site Admin
User avatar

Joined: Sun Aug 06, 2006 4:09 pm
Posts: 2142
What about Blavatsky and Theosophy?

Whenever an effective critique of religious dogma has been advanced, a defensive tactic by believers has been to smear, libel and slander the critics with all manner of personal attacks in a misguided attempt to discredit the criticism itself.

One such tactic over the centuries since Christianity was created involves calling people "heathens," "blasphemers" and "satanists." Of late, the name-calling has included "Luciferians," "Freemasons," "Illuminati," "Theosophists" and advocates of the "New World Order." Whatever the epithet, the fallaciousness and misrepresentation remain the same, often largely or entirely based on falsehoods.

This latest trend has been applied most recently to individuals not blindly believing the Christian doctrine and the gospel story of Jesus Christ, such as those who inspired and/or created the internet movie "ZEITGEIST." Since my work served as significant inspiration for the religious part of that film, detractors have chosen to obfuscate, misrepresent and lie about my work and to slander, libel and smear me personally with all sorts of vitriol and calumny, including calling me a "Satanist," "Luciferian," "Illuminati," "Theosophist" and advocate of the "New World Order."

Completely independent, not affiliated with any organization

Despite all of these attempts, the fact will remain that I am none of these things and never have been. I am not and never have been affiliated with any group, society or organization of any kind, whether religious or not. Nor do I subscribe to any doctrines or dogma prescribed by any religion, sect, cult, brotherhood, clique, faction or organization. I am a completely independent scholar who draws her material from a wide variety of sources composed over the broadest spectrum of time. In this quest, I have published several books using thousands of sources, including primary sources wherever possible in as many languages as necessary and the works of highly credentialed authorities in relevant fields. I have also utilized less orthodox sources on occasion where necessary and where important factual material could be found.

No connection to Blavatsky and Theosophy, etc.

Because of out of thousands of citations in my voluminous works I quoted the Russian mystic Helena Blavatsky a handful of times, certain individuals have attempted to deride, smear, libel and slander me and my work with the label of "Luciferian" and "Theosophist," etc. It has also been suggested that I am a member of the "Lucis Trust" established by occultist Alice Bailey during the 1920s. Again, I am not a member of any organization, group, sect or faction, and I receive no funding from any group, sect or faction.

In reality, I have never read a single sentence of Alice Bailey's works and know next to nothing about them - I had to look up the founding of Lucis Trust just now. Nor do I have any interest in the organization of Theosophy, begun by Blavatsky, and again know next to nothing about it - only bits and pieces from studying religion in general. In reality, these accusations and falsehoods appear to be the products of seriously disturbed minds who are obsessed with the occult and have far greater acquaintance with it than I do.

As concerns "Satanism" and "Luciferianism," I have no interest in Satan or Lucifer except as mythological constructs, the meaning of which is largely astrotheological and the origin of which can be found in ancient pre-Christian religions and mythologies. Hence, these slanderous and libelous allegations and labels are completely and utterly false, malicious and depraved, and should be dismissed as such. Moreover, the essence of my work long predates the founding of the "Theosophy" movement by Blavatsky and has nothing whatsoever to do with her. As noted, her work contributed nothing more than a few quotes, which represented a mere recital of facts that can be found elsewhere. For example, in The Christ Conspiracy I quote her a mere five times, out of over 1100+ citations:

Quote:
"The Baal of the Israelites (the Shemesh of the Moabites and the Moloch of the Ammonites) was the identical 'Sun-Jehovah,' and he is still now 'the King of the Host of Heaven,' the Sun, as much as Astoreth...was the 'Queen of Heaven'--or the moon." (CC, 93)

Quote:
"[Buddha] was considered the...'Good Shepherd'..." (CC, 110)

Quote:
"[Krishna] castigated the clergy, charging them with 'ambition and hypocrisy... Tradition says he fell victim to their vengeance.'" (CC, 117)

Quote:
"[Concerning Justin Martyr] Blavatsky relates, 'writing in the early part of the second century in Rome, where he fixed his abode, eager to get hold of the least proof in favor of the truth for which he suffered, seems perfectly unconscious of St. Peter's existence!! Neither does any other writer of any consequence mention him in connection with the Church of Rome, earlier than the days of Irenaeus, when the latter set himself to invent a new religion, drawn from the depth of his imagination.'" (CC, 169)

Quote:
"Luther speaks of a fish-pond at Rome, situated near a convent of nuns, which, having been cleared out by order of Pope Gregory, disclosed, at the bottom, over six thousand infant skulls; and of a nunnery at Neinburg, in Austria, whose foundations, when searched, disclosed the same relics of celibacy and chastity!" (CC, 284)

The above constitutes the entirety of material quoted from Blavatsky's books in The Christ Conspiracy, and, as we can see, it has nothing to do with the philosophy or doctrines of the Theosophical movement, whatever that might be. All of this factual material can be validated with other sources, such as: Yahweh and the Sun by Dr. J. Glen Taylor for the first quote; Sir Godfrey Higgin's Anacalypsis (I, 158) for the second part; Theodor J. Plange's Christus, ein Inder?, as cited in The American Journal of Religious Psychology and Education (349) for the second; George Reber's Therapeutae (129-130) for the third; and Luther himself for the fourth. Taylor's work is modern and is obviously not the source of Blavatsky's contentions, which appears to be Higgins's Anacalypsis and, of course, the Bible. For the fourth assertion here, Blavatsky specifically cites Reber, although a different work entitled The Christ of Paul. The third part is verified in William Howitt's The History of the Supernatural in All Ages and Nations (65), from which Blavatsky evidently drew her information, as it is nearly verbatim. Howitt's work preceded Blavatsky's by several years, and she cites him in Isis Unveiled. Howitt in turn cites Pope Gregory as quoting Luther's "Table-Talk, p. 307" for this part about the skulls of drowned babies in ponds outside of convents at Rome and Neinburg. (In my forthcoming Christ Con revision, all of the Blavatsky quotes/citations will be replaced by these sources.)

While it may be argued that other concepts in The Christ Conspiracy resemble those found in Blavatsky's writings, the fact will remain that I did not procure them from her but from earlier sources from which she apparently also drew her information, as she has done with these five quotes.

In my follow up book Suns of God, I quote Blavatsky a total of three times:

Quote:
"...the name Buddha comes from Budha, 'Wisdom, divine intelligence.'" (SOG, 336)

Quote:
"One is completely overwhelmed with astonishment upon reading Dr. Lundy's Monumental Christianity. It would be difficult to say whether an admiration for the author's erudition, or amazement at his serene and unparalleled sophistry, is stronger. He has gathered a world of facts which prove that the religions, far more ancient than Christianity, of Christna, Buddha, and Osiris, had anticipated even its minutest symbols. His materials come from no forged papyri, no interpolated Gospels, but from sculptures on the walls of ancient temples, from monuments, inscriptions, and other archaic relics, only mutilated by the hammers of iconoclasts, the cannon of fanatics, and the effects of time. He shows us Christna and Apollo as good shepherds; Christian holding the cruciform chank [crook] and the chakra [wheel], and Christna 'crucified in space,' as he calls it... Of this figure--borrowed by Dr. Lundy from Moor's Hindu Pantheon--it may be truly said that it is calculated to petrify a Christian with astonishment, for it is the crucified Christ of Romish art to the last degree of resemblance.

"As it is, Dr. Lundy contradicts Moor, and maintains that this figure is that of Wittoba, one of the avatars of Vishnu, hence Christna, and anterior to Christianity, which is a fact not very easily put down. And yet although he finds it prophetic of Christianity, he thinks it has no relation whatever to Christ!" (SOG, 249)

I also quoted Blavatsky as an observer of the brouhaha over Sir William Jones's Asiatic Researches regarding the apparent hoax perpetrated against Colonel Francis Wilford by Brahmin priests, in which she carefully cites all of material from which she draws her commentary, including not only Jones but also comparative religion scholar Dr. Max Muller, who likewise commented upon the drama shortly before Blavatsky wrote her analysis. (SOG, 209-210) Blavatsky's clear testimony regarding this important debacle is factual and highly valuable.

As in The Christ Conspiracy, in these three quotes from Blavatsky in Suns of God there is nothing here remotely resembling any religious beliefs or doctrine having to do with the Theosophical movement. None of my other works utilize Blavatsky at all, and it is obvious that my work does not rely on her to any extent whatsoever.

Blavatsky an evemerist

Moreover, to my knowledge Blavatsky was an evemerist, which means she believed Christ to have been a "real person," in this case an "enlightened master" of some sort. In the meantime, I am a mythicist whose studied opinion is that the figure of "Jesus Christ" in the New Testament represents a compilation of characters, mythical and historical, rather than a single historical person. Hence, Blavatsky and I utterly disagree in our main premises - we are not alike at all, and the comparison between us is completely fallacious. In this regard, as demonstrated in my ebook Jesus as the Sun throughout History, in no way, shape or form did Blavatsky originate the comparison of Christ with the day star. Indeed, the identification of Jesus with the solar divinity originates in the Bible itself, at Malachi 4:2, in which the coming messiah is rendered the "Sun of Righteousness."

Because I have not studied Blavatsky's organization at all, I do not know its doctrines other than what I just stated, but I do know that my work is being misrepresented by those attempting to smear, libel and slander me in order to shore up their faith at all costs, including lying, thus breaking the Ninth Commandment:

Quote:
"Thou shalt not bear false witness against thy neighbour." (Exodus 20:16)

The origin of 'theosophy'

I cannot tell you what "Theosophy" meant to Blavatsky, et al., because I do not know and am not interested in it at all. I can tell you that the term "theosophy" did not originate with Blavatsky but dates back to antiquity, in the Greek word theosophia. We find Latin literature from the 17th century using this term "Theosophia," such as by Joannis Perigaud. There are many other books in various languages published before 1850 - before Blavatsky - that use the word theosophia. Again, the term has been used since antiquity:

Quote:
The word "theosophia" appeared in both Greek and Latin in the works of early church fathers as a synonym for "theology"

This word theosophia simply means "wisdom of God." Hence, it is possible for anyone who seeks the wisdom of God to be labeled a "Theosophist," including Christians, as we can see.

All these people are Theosophists?

Also, if quoting or mentioning a person means that we subscribe to that individual's ideology or are members of his or her group, faction, clique or cult, then all Christians who quote the Koran or discuss Mohammed in reality must be Muslims. In addition, in the case of Blavatsky, the following scholars, scientists and other prominent figures must be deemed "Theosophists," according to such faulty logic, since they quoted, mentioned, knew or were influenced by her:

General Abner Doubleday, founder of baseball. According to Block, Doubleday was a "prominent member" and one of the "early officers" of the Theosophical Society. (Block, 35)
Lewis Carroll
Sir Arthur Conan Doyle
Albert Einstein (Amico, 81)
Thomas Edison. According to Block, Edison was a member of the Theosophical Society. (Block, 297)
Dr. Garrett G. Fagan, associate professor of Classics and Ancient Mediterranean Studies and History (Fagan, 44, 118, 348)
Dr. Kenneth L. Feder, professor of Anthropology at Central Connecticut State University (Feder, 218)
Kahlil Gibran
Gandhi
Dr. Jane Goodall
Dr. Erik Hornung, professor emeritus of Egyptology at the University of Basel, (Hornung, 116, 121, 142, 143, 144, 145, 147, 151, 183)
Henry Miller (Miller, 164)
Maurice Maeterlinck, Nobel Prize laureate (Carter, 30)
Maria Montessori (1870 –1952)
Elvis Presley
Dr. Michael Shermer (Shermer, 11, 31, 205, 219, 245, 307)
Dr. Charles D. Smith, professor of Near Eastern Studies, University of Arizona (Smith, 127)
D.T. Suzuki
Kurt Vonnegut
Henry Wallace (1888 –1965), Vice President of the United States

Adding to this list, Dr. James J. Preston, professor of Anthropology and chairman of Religious Studies at the State University of New York (Amico, 80-81), cites the following individuals as having been influenced by Blavatsky:

L. Frank Baum
Joseph Campbell
T.S. Elliot
E.M Forster
Sigmund Freud
Paul Gauguin
James Joyce
Carl Jung
D.H. Lawrence
Jack London
Gustav Mahler
Jean Sibelius
Thornton Wilder
William Butler Yeats

While a number of these individuals clearly were Theosophists, as known members of Blavatsky's Theosophical Society, many others were not, even if known to have been influenced by her work or that of the Theosophical Society. Some, obviously, have nothing whatsoever to do with Blavatsky's Theosophy, merely mentioning her, quoting her, writing biographical material concerning her or, indeed, debunking her. To lump all these individuals together under the label of "Theosophists" would represent egregiously poor scholarship. Yet, such egregiousness is what is precisely the case with the unscholarly and unscientific tactics used by Christian apologists and others.

Sources

Amico, Eleanor B., ed., Reader's Guide to Women's Studies, Routledge, 1997.
Block, David, Baseball before we knew it, University of Nebraska, 2005.
Carter, Steven R., James Jones: An American Literary Orientalist Master, University of Illinois, 1998.
Fagan, Garrett G., ed., Archaeological Fantasies: How Pseudoarchaeology Misrepresents the Past and Misleads the Public, Routledge, 2006.
Feder, Kenneth L., Frauds, Myths, and Mysteries: Science and Pseudoscience in Archaeology, McGraw-Hill, 2008.
Hall, G. Stanley, ed., The American Journal of Religious Psychology and Education, I, Louis N. Wilson, MA, 1905.
Howitt, William, The History of the Supernatural in All Ages and Nations, II, Longman, Green, 1863.
Hornung, Erik, The Secret Lore of Egypt, tr. David Lorton, Cornell University Press, 2002.
Miller, Henry, The Air-Conditioned Nightmare, New Directions, 1970.
Reber, George, Therapeutae: St. John Never in Asia Minor (1872), Kessinger, 2003.
Shermer, Michael, The Skeptic Encyclopedia of Pseudoscience, I, ABC-CLIO, 2002.
Smith, Charles D., Islam and the Search for Social Order in Modern Egypt, State University of New York Press, 1983.
Taylor, J. Glen, Biblical Archaeological Evidence for Sun Worship in Ancient Israel, Sheffield Academic Press, 1993.

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

Image


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Apr 30, 2012 10:43 pm 
Offline
Site Admin
User avatar

Joined: Sat Aug 26, 2006 9:24 pm
Posts: 5205
Location: 3rd rock from the sun
Over 80 Rebuttals to Bart Ehrman's Anti-Mythicist Book 'Did Jesus Exist?'

In his attempt to debunk the case for mythicism regarding Christianity's savior, Jesus Christ, Dr. Bart Ehrman directed his attention to the works by Acharya S, Earl Doherty, Dr. Robert Price, Frank Zindler, George A. Wells and others. Unfortunately, Dr. Ehrman appears not to have actually read some of the books for himself as he made several sloppy and egregious errors and/or misrepresentations of the arguments put forth by the mythicists he was addressing, and instead may have relied upon assistants to provide a type of "cliff notes" for Ehrman to address. These sloppy, egregious and biased errors have put Dr. Bart Ehrman's reliability and credibility into question. Dr. Robert Price, a biblical scholar with two PhD's has said that Ehrman's book is a "hack job."

Here is a forum thread with Acharya's rebuttals so far to Ehrman's critique of her book, along with the responses of others:

Forum thread: Bart Ehrman's Book 'Did Jesus Exist?'

Freethought Nation Blogs by Acharya addressing Dr. Ehrman's book DJE:

Blog: The phallic 'Savior of the World' hidden in the Vatican

Blog: The phallic 'Savior of the World' at the Vatican revisited

Blog: Bart Ehrman caught in libel and lies?

Blog: Bart Ehrman errs again – this time about virgin births

Richard Carrier caught Bart Ehrman in a lie

Forum post related to the blogs above

Does Josephus prove a historical Jesus?

Does early Church father Justin Martyr quote the gospels?

Bart Ehrman: 'Mythicists' arguments are fairly plausible'

The "No Serious Mythicist Scholar" Fallacy

The Mythicist Challenge Petition Draft

Religion and the Ph.D.: A Brief History

The Son-Sun pun strawman

Councils for God and the development of the biblical canon: Another response to Bart Ehrman

Here's a blog by Freethought Nation guest-writer and fellow mythicist Frank Zindler, editor of American Atheist Magazine and Director of American Atheist Press, rebutting the "historical" Jesus of Bart Ehrman's rendering in his recent book 'Did Jesus Exist?':

Jesus of where? A response by Frank Zindler to Bart Ehrman

Many responses by Earl Doherty to Bart Ehrman may be found HERE for convenience. The End of an Illusion: How Bart Ehrman's "Did Jesus Exist?" Has Laid the Case for an Historical Jesus to Rest [Kindle Edition] by Earl Doherty

More links for responses to Ehrman by mythicists

You will find many more links in the forum thread linked above.

Rene Salm has also posted this list on his website: Over 80 Responses to Bart Ehrman, which includes responses by Dr. Robert M. Price, Kenneth Humphreys, Frank Zindler, G. A. Wells and many more.

NEW BOOK RESPONSE TO BART EHRMAN:

[Paperback] Bart Ehrman and the Quest of the Historical Jesus of Nazareth: An Evaluation of Ehrman's Did Jesus Exist? by authors D.M. Murdock/Acharya S, Robert M. Price Ph.D. (Editor), Frank R. Zindler (Editor), Earl Doherty, Richard Carrier Ph.D., René Salm and David Fitzgerald

[Kindle Edition] Bart Ehrman and the Quest of the Historical Jesus

Image

The new forum thread for the book response to Bart Ehrman

New blog: New book about Bart Ehrman and the Christ myth!

The Nazareth / Bethlehem Debate

The Mythicist Position video:


_________________
Astrotheology.Net
Mythicists United
Did Moses Exist? The Myth of the Israelite Lawgiver
Christ in Egypt: The Horus-Jesus Connection
2015 Astrotheology Calendar
Astrotheology Calendar Special
Stellar House Publishing at Youtube
The Mythicist Position


Top
 Profile  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Forum locked This topic is locked, you cannot edit posts or make further replies.  [ 44 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3

All times are UTC - 5 hours [ DST ]


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest


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

Search for:
Jump to:  
Truth Be Known | Stellar House Publishing
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group
Live Support