Freethought Nation

My Capacity for Languages

I would also like to clarify the remark that I "speak 10 languages" and other references to my linguistic skills. I do not speak all these languages. More accurately, I can speak, read and/or write to varying degrees modern Greek, French, Spanish, Italian, German, ancient Greek, Latin, Portuguese and a smattering of other Romance languages, such as Romanian, as well as bits of Sanskrit, Hebrew, Egyptian, Coptic and other languages as I come across them.

I studied French, Spanish, Italian, German, Latin and ancient Greek formally, and taught myself modern Greek, which I speak better than the rest because I spent the most amount of time in Greece. When I was in France, I could speak French fairly well, and I read French the best of these languages. I read Spanish second best, and speak it fairly well when I've been immersed in it for a certain period of time. Ditto with Italian and German.

If you were to walk up to me and speak to me in Portuguese, I would not be able to answer you, although I may understand bits and pieces. I can only read Portuguese, as I have never studied it formally, and, since I learned it on the spot as I was translating an essay into it, I would need to use a dictionary and grammar book in order to read it very well.

If I had the time, I would love to learn all the world's languages. If anyone has an immortality pill, please send it to me.

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

What about the issue of Hinduism & Krishna?



"Suns of God: Krishna, Buddha and Christ Unveiled"
http://www.truthbeknown.com/sunsofgod.htm

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

Krishna's Birthday

Over the years since I've been online and since Christ Con was published, much has been bandied about regarding the purported parallels between Christ and Krishna. When I wrote Christ Con, I was well aware that the typical encyclopedia entries and the mainstream texts regarding Krishna did not contain various aspects of his alleged life that others had claimed were indeed characteristics. In other words, I already knew the mainstream, orthodox perspective of Krishna's life long before I wrote The Christ Conspiracy. When I wrote Christ Con, I decided to include the controversial aspects asserted by non-mainstream sources in order to stir thoughtful debate.

Of course, these few characteristics were glommed onto all over the net beginning many years ago, leading me to write an entire book Suns of God: Krishna, Buddha and Christ in order to address them. As the title may suggest, I do a fairly comprehensive exploration of various aspects of the lives of these godmen, including the alleged dates of their births. In fact, there is an entire chapter in Suns of God entitled "Krishna's Birthdate," which is 17 pages long. In that chapter, I investigate where the assertion came from that Krishna was born on December 25th, as well as showing that, like Christ and Buddha, Krishna's birthday has been placed all over the calendar, largely if not entirely based on atsrotheological considerations.

In tracing the origins of the claim that Krishna was born on December 25th, I did evolve an argument that could have led some to come to such a conclusion, although this birthdate is by no means asserted within mainstream, orthodox "Hinduism," and the most common times celebrated for the nativity of Krishna occur during the summer months, i.e., July and August.

As I also explain in Suns of God, the issue of defining Hinduism is in itself a difficult one, as there is in reality no such monolithic concept. "Hinduism" is composed of numerous sects spread over a vast territory, with some extending branches back into the hoary mists of time, while others are much more recent. As such, there is no one set-in-stone biography of its various gods. In fact, in some places in India, Krishna is not even considered to be a god but a demon! Moreover, the idea that "Krishna" represents a real person who was born in one time and place is extremely sketchy to say the least - that "Krishna" is a mythical entity is another point I set out to demonstrate in Suns of God.

Hence, there is no set-in-stone birthdate for Krishna, and, interestingly, it is likely that the December 25th birthday comes from the "sleep and rise of Vishnu," the god of whom Krishna was said to be an incarnation. In the Vishnaiva mythology, Vishnu - largely a SUN god - is said to go to Sleep and to "rise" again, "coincidentally" the latter at the WINTER SOLSTICE. Hence, it would not be untruthful to say that Vishnu was "born" at the winter solstice; nor would it be outrageous to assert that Vishnu's incarnation Krishna - likewise a solar hero, I contend - was also born at that time. In any event, I make no firm conclusion as to whether or not "Krishna" was ever asserted at any point by any individual or group of his followers - of which the variety is fairly enormous - to have been born at the winter solstice. Morever, in Suns of God I emphasized that within Hinduism, as in any large religious ideology of any antiquity, there are various EXOTERIC doctrines that are not widely known to the masses. Thus, the mainstream perspective is not all-encompassing by any stretch of the imagination.

Regardless of the details, what I am attempting to trace and demonstrate is the general pattern of astrotheology and solar mythology found around the world, based on observations of the cycles of nature and the planetary bodies. As a heavily solar culture, it is evident that India would be well aware of the various movements and cycles of the sun - and would incorporate these important milestones into its religions and holidays.

Interested parties may wish to read Suns of God.

For more on the debate about Krishna, please also see these threads:

A Debate about Horus, Krishna
Krishna Crucified?

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

For Further Information

For all topics relating to comparative mythology, be sure also to read the various threads and posts in the Comparative Religion and Mythology Forum.

In addition to my books, there are also many articles in my "Christ Conspiracy Anthology" online.

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

"Acharya's work is not scholarly."

This assertion generally comes from people who do not know my work but who are offended that I dare point out the Emperor's transparent nakedness: To wit, that there is no credible, valid scientific evidence that the fantastic gospel character named "Jesus Christ" ever existed, and that his alleged life possesses the same mythical air as that of many other gods of a wide variety of cultures, including the Greek god Hercules, as but one example.

For the most part, my critics do not know much if anything about my actual work, but they become outraged that I dare to suggest that their imaginary friend may well be that - imaginary - and that I myself do not readily and without proof believe in a Jewish guy floating around omnipresently in the sky. Most people who have actually studied my work, both in my books and online, will recognize that it is in fact quite scholarly, but that it is also readily accessible. Works that are too scholarly are entirely useless to the average person, and I am trying to reach a large amount of people, not pander to the relatively few academics, trying to impress them with my vast erudition. There are many highly scholarly works that simply sit on bookshelves and are never read - and that was the whole problem with the Christ-myth and comparative religion material. It simply wasn't being read and absorbed by the masses. In that sense, I write for the popular audience. But the idea that my work is "not scholarly" constitutes an ad hominem attack, pure and simple. One glance at my book Suns of God in particular will prove my assertion regarding the scholarly nature of my work.

In Suns of God, not only did I utilize many mainstream and authoritative sources, but I also delved into numerous languages that most of my critics cannot begin to access, including Greek, Latin, Egyptian, Hebrew and Sanskrit. In fact, judging from their dishonest assertions and assessments, I might wager that much of my work is TOO SCHOLARLY for my critics and will go over their heads. Suns of God, for instance, is not light reading.

The attack on my work that it is "not scholarly" represents a fallacious and mendacious ad hom typically used to prevent others from reading it. It is false, period.

For further evidence of my scholarship, please see the excerpts from Suns of God, including the entire Bibliography, posted online here:

http://www.truthbeknown.com/sunsofgod.htm

Please also see the Christ Conspiracy Anthology of articles posted here:

http://www.truthbeknown.com/christconspiracy.html

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

The Use of 19th Century Writings

I wanted to add to the rebuttal of the criticism of my use of writers from the 19th century. In addition to the fact that, in reality, I have studied and utilized material from the earliest times onward, one of the reasons why some of the best research and writing on the subject definitely emanated from the 18th and 19th centuries is because that was when much archaeological investigation began to be accomplished, as well as the expansion of the English-speaking empire into the rest of the world, opening up a vast array of new data.

When discussing, for instance, the Egyptian mythology as put forth by Gerald Massey, it is imperative to keep in mind that until the discovery of the Rosetta Stone by Napoleon's troops in 1799 and the subsequent translation of such by Champollion in 1822, no one could read Egyptian hieroglyphs! So, at that point, a huge amount of data previously undeciphered and unknown finally became available. To recap, before 1822 no one could read Egyptian hieroglyphs, so how would all these details come out before Massey? Sure, there were texts around in other languages, but not many, because CHRISTIANS had destroyed so much of the evidence. But, as Massey points out, where Christians were unable to destroy the hieroglyphs, they covered them up in stucco, preserving them for when the Rosetta Stone was discovered and deciphered.

We are fortunate that the 19th-century writer Gerald Massey recognized the importance and profundity of the Egyptian writings, as did E.A. Wallis Budge, a devout CHRISTIAN - and yet another writer in the 19th century - who nonetheless was floored by the similarities between the Egyptian and Christian religions, so much so that his translations are in the same pious language used for the Bible.

I don't know how we can prove Gerald Massey's case anymore than he did, with such brilliance and eloquence as to escape the average mind. I can only relish his work and state that it will likely always go over the heads of the masses, such that they will continue to toss out mindless ad homs based on ignorance or inability to comprehend.

In the meantime, please do enjoy the writings of the 19th century - a true Age of Enlightenment. See, e.g., this writing of Massey on the "crucifixion" of Horus between two "thieves."

For more information go here

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

Has Gerald Massey Been Refuted?

Interestingly, in consideration of the posts regarding Massey above, I have recently received the following message, which prompts me to write this defense of this brilliant and erudite scholar. The debate evidenced below is quite typical of what is happening all over the net with dishonest Christian apologists and detractors.


These remarks by an obvious Christian apologist constitute absolute nonsense - "embarassing," indeed. This "review" is more rubbish from the "Nevermind" person on Amazon, the same individual who has been attacking me and others in the mythicist school with nonsensical "reviews" that clearly demonstrate s/he has not read the works in question. My message-writer above also comments with dismay about the obvious dishonesty with which Christian apologists operate - this aptly named "Nevermind" person is one of these dishonest offenders.

Obviously, all of these detractors need to be pressed as to whether or not they have actually read and studied the works of the scholars they are ignorantly disparaging. It is the mark of a very lazy intellect to mindlessly repeat arguments such as the one above, without having investigated the matter oneself by actually reading the work in question, but since Christians are taught to surrender their will and intellect to Jesus and his priests and pastors, they quite easily do likewise when it comes to challenging matters.

Moreover, if this critic and the other detractors making such silly claims were actually to study the works of the highly intelligent Gerald Massey, I would wager they could not even comprehend every other word. These uneducated individuals would frankly be hard-pressed to understand even his overall theses.

Furthermore, this person needs to be challenged as to whether or not s/he has actually read Ronald Nash's book, because I have read his book, and I can state that Nash does not deal with Gerald Massey or Egypt at all. Nash's very shallow arguments are mainly confined to Greek philosophy, and his conclusion that Plato and Aristotle had no impact upon Christianity is simply absurd. Ronald Nash and his supporters are Christian apologists and fundamentalists; as such, their opinions are hardly unbiased.

Moreover, the assertion that "not a single biblical scholar" will touch Massey is absurd. Tom Harpur, for one, is most definitely a biblical scholar, and he certainly endorses Massey. Naturally, the harpur-ies have attacked him relentlessly, but they have not proved Massey wrong. Most of the biblical scholars are completely unaware of Gerald Massey and, in fact, know next to nothing about mythology in the first place. Most biblical scholars are therefore entirely unqualified to be making commentary or judgment about Gerald Massey's work at all.

Nor have any unnamed "archaeological discoveries" disproved the History of Religions School. Pray tell, where are these mysterious discoveries? Name them, please, and how they have debunked the extensive work of Gerald Massey.

Interestingly, detractors constantly require extraordinary proof with comparative religion and mythology, but they need NO credible and valid scientific proof to uphold their own faith. Nor do they feel the need to back up their claims such as above regarding "archaeological discoveries." Also, this person makes much of the fact that Massey wrote "long ago." And precisely how long ago was the New Testament written?

In addition, this person makes libelous remarks about the publisher of this addition, Paul Tice, whom I happen to know and who is certainly not out to "sucker" anyone. No comment, of course, is made as to the absolute pabulum put out repeatedly in the name of Jesus Christ, including the New Testament itself, which makes ridiculous claims that we are supposedly to blindly believe with no credible, scientific and valid evidence. Talk about suckers!

Christian hypocrite, step out of the glass house when you throw your stones!

When Christian apologists and other detractors actually study the works of the brilliant and erudite Gerald Massey - and can prove their study with intelligent remarks and, if possible, refutations - then I will take notice of their opinions. Until then, not.

Who Is Gerald Massey?

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

"Horus Between Two Thieves" and the Works of Gerald Massey

Much is made about the numerous correspondences determined by Gerald Massey between Horus and Jesus. Albert Churchward, inspired by Massey, repeated many of these correspondences and - voila! - today we have them zinging around the net at breakneck speed. Naturally, these numerous correspondences draw the wrath of Christian apologists and detractors, as they have since they were first published in the late 19th century.

I make no apology for using the works of Gerald Massey, who was an absolutely brilliant man and whose writings are so erudite as to be inaccessible to the masses, including many of his detractors. As is so typical, these critics, it must be emphasized, have not even studied his works but have mindlessly and dishonestly dismissed Massey with all sorts of untoward epithets that reflect more about the detractor than they do about Massey.

In order to intelligently judge this subject, one needs to keep in mind that prior to the discovery of the Rosetta Stone by Napoleon's troops in 1799 and its decipherment in 1822 by Champollion, Egyptian hieroglyphs were not translatable, and relatively little was known about the Egyptian religion. Hence, no work such as Massey's could have been produced prior to the 19th century, and the Egyptian religion is so complicated as to still be vastly misunderstood. From what I have studied of the subject, Gerald Massey has a more profound understanding of the spirituality and astrotheology being conveyed by the Egyptians than any other person who has worked on the subject. Although the famed Christian Egyptologist E.A. Wallis Budge has come under fire from the same type of unreasonable ignoramuses who do not want to admit any parallels between Christianity and the Egyptian religion, Budge too had a fine grasp of the spirituality behind said faith, and conveyed it in spiritual terms usually reserved - in a move that is completely culturally biased - for the Bible.

In any event, as to these various correspondences by Jesus and Horus, including the motif of Horus being "crucified between two thieves," one would actually need to study the works of Gerald Massey in order to make intelligent comment on them. Merely scoffing and waving them away is not impressive, particularly since Massey utilized a vast array of sources, including the Egyptian Book of the Dead and the Zodiac of Denderah, as well as Budge's works and those of many other scholars. Massey also possessed a stunning grasp of a wide variety of disciplines, including linguistics, mythology and totemism. Until Massey's critics attain to a comparable level of erudition, their opinions are irrelevant.

In studying his works, then, we find many good reasons to accept Massey's interpretations of the difficult hieroglyphs and the profound spiritual and theological concepts they evidently convey. If, like Massey, we have a deep grasp of the astrotheological concepts that naturally developed in the ancient world based on their observations of nature, many of these correspondences become doubly sensible and meaningful. When studying Massey's interpretations of the Egyptian scriptures and the spiritual concepts they apparently convey, then, we will need to keep in mind his penetrating understanding of astrotheology, as he himself is obviously constantly aware of the astrotheological motifs of the priestly creators of the Egyptian religion. I for one see that Massey's interpretations, while likely not provable in every detail, are sound in being based on the important science of astrotheology, especially as concerns Egyptian religion.

Like the Egyptian masses, no doubt, the astrotheological meanings behind Christianity will also be lost on the majority of its adherents. Without utilizing Massey at all, I do believe that in Suns of God I made a very strong case demonstrating that astrotheology has indeed been the main motivating factor behind major religious myths and rituals the world over. This fact of an astrotheological foundation for major religious myths and rituals - so brilliantly discerned by Gerald Massey, who was far ahead of his time - is being proved on a nearly daily basis by numerous archaeological discoveries around the world.

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

What is Astrotheology and Archaeoastronomy?

i.e the sun, moon, planets, stars, constellations etc.

Some examples:

Astrotheology of the Ancients

Evemerist vs. Mythicist Position

The Solstice Project - Sun Dagger

National Geographic's "Ancient Astronomers"

National Geographic's "Nebra Sky Disc"

Archaeoastronomy Links Stone-Age Tomb Builders With Sun

Winter solstice sunrise in Newgrange 3600-3100 BC

Archaeoastronomy

Ancient Observatories Found Worldwide

Archaeoastronomy

List of archaeoastronomical sites by country

Ancient astronomy

Center for Archaeoastronomy

These concepts are nothing new:

"Now when the ancient Egyptians, awestruck and wondering, turned their eyes to the heavens, they concluded that two gods, the sun and the moon, were primeval and eternal; and they called the former Osiris, the latter Isis..."
- Diodorus Siculus (90-21 BCE), Greek Historian,
"Suns of God" 89

Early Church Father Tertullian (160-220 C.E.), an "ex-Pagan" and Bishop of Carthage, ironically admits the true origins of the Christ story and of all other such godmen by stating in refutation of his critics, "You say we worship the sun; so do you."
(paraphrase from the Catholic Encyclopedia)
- "Christ Conspiracy" 158

"...All the gods of the Greek and Roman mythology represent the attributes of the one supreme divine power - the SUN."
- Macrobius Roman scholar around 400ce
"Suns of God" 67-68

Acharya S is an independent scholar of comparative religion and mythology, specializing in astrotheological studies with a keen interest in archaeoastronomy. Acharya S examines the connections between modern religious belief and our ancient veneration for the sun, moon and other natural phenomena.

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

Horus Characteristics Found in the Zeitgeist Movie

As we know, the Zeitgeist movie has stirred up quite a debate on the net, filled with the usual fallacies regarding my work vis-a-vis the claims made in the movie. One of these erroneous claims is that I do not cite my sources, an assertion that can only be made by those who have not actually read my work, such that, once again, they cannot be deemed experts thereon. They may raise up one or two articles online, such as "The Origins of Christianity," which does not contain footnotes on every sentence, because these are generally to found in The Christ Conspiracy. I need not say that no author should be expected to reproduce his or her entire body of work online to satisfy those who are unwilling to do the research themselves.

As concerns the claims regarding Horus found in Zeitgeist, I need not reproduce all of the citations here either, since the movie's creator, Peter J., has done a fine job - albeit a difficult-to-read one, with the black background and white writing - in his "Interactive Transcript."

In that transcript, PJ uses not only footnotes for each relevant claim but also provides some clarifying text, citing the sources.



As you will see, I did not originate any of the germane characteristics. One of PJ's principle sources is Gerald Massey, to which the critics' attention may be directed.

When reading this type of synopsis of the myth of Horus, one needs to keep in mind that it is the contention of those who claim Jesus to be a mythical construct that bits and pieces of the myths of these various other gods were pulled out of context and woven together to create the gospel story. One does not find, for instance, this tale as above outlined in an ancient Egyptian encyclopedia. Those who have been attempting to explain the creation of the Christ myth have been back-engineering the story. In other words, in explaining the various mythical motifs utilized in the gospel story, some have retold the story utilizing the original god or gods, in a gospel-like manner.

Let us take some examples. When it is said in the paragraph above from ZG that Horus was "crucified," it was not part of his myth that he was held down and nailed to a cross. Rather, Horus is depicted in cruciform, with his arms outstretched, as we find in images, and as Egyptologist James Bonwick says, "With outstretched arms he is the vault of heaven." (Egyptian Belief and Modern Thought, p. 157) What comparative mythologists and Jesus mythicists are claiming is that these various mythical motifs already in existence as being revered long prior to the Christian era, such as the god with outstretched arms, were utilized in the weaving of the Christ myth . We are not necessarily stating that the Christians took an already fully formed myth and simply scratched out Horus's name and wrote in Jesus. There is no doubt that these mythical motifs were combined with Jewish scriptures, rendering a unique telling of the tale in the gospel story. However, the preceding mythical motifs remain and are real, and were commonly known enough prior to the creation of the Christ myth that they were quite likely utilized therein.

It is a bit misleading, therefore, to say that Horus was "crucified," as the word "crucified" invokes the image of a man being held down and nailed to a cross. However, one could say of the "God Sun" that "he" was crossified, at the vernal equinoxes - and that motif, we contend, is at the basis of the gospel "crucifixion."

Although not found in Zeitgeist, the same can be said of the "two thieves" motif not only in the gospel story but, oddly, in images of the Aztec god Quetzalcoatl, as interpreted by Lord Kingsborough in his monumental study Antiquities of the Mexicans, which I quote in significant part in Suns of God. (Anyone interested in this subject matter is highly encouraged to obtain and read my book.) Concerning this "two thieves" motif in the Horus myth, Gerald Massey says the following.



Note that in his depiction of "Horus on the cross," Massey did not say that Horus was thrown down to the ground and nailed to a wooden cross. Again, what we find are ancient depictions of the god in cruciform, with arms outstretched such that his body forms a cross. In some instances, however, the god was attached to a cross of some sort. In any event, what we find in pre-Christian times is a reverence for the image of a god or goddess in the form of a cross - and that is the germane point.

Likewise, as I point out in Suns of God, pp. 269, et seq., the "thieves" part of the astrotheological mythology relates to the nightly stars, which were perceived to "rob" the light of the sun. Recognizing this motif in solar mythology, Massey has attempted to explain the presence in Egyptian art of two of these "night-sky" or "lunar" thieves as surrounding the soli-lunar Horus.

Regarding the solar motifs of the "crucifixion" and "two thieves," in Suns of God I write:



Rather than simply debunking the motifs because of the way they are reconfigured within Christianity, critics need to recognize that these motifs existed, that they were revered in the ancient world, particularly by the priesthoods that created such myths, and that anyone wishing to enter the profitable religion business would need to incorporate them into their myths, as we contend was done with the gospel story.

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

Horus and Anup the Baptizer


The claim that John the Baptist is a mythical motif essentially the same in significant aspects as "Anup the Baptizer" in the Egyptian mythology emanates from Gerald Massey. However, Massey himself did not make up this contention; he merely highlighted the connection between the Egyptian and Christian religions, utilizing "Christian" terminology to describe what he found in the ancient Egyptian texts and monuments.

It should not need to be explained that the term "Anup the Baptizer" does not appear in pristine English in any ancient Egyptian text. The English language did not even exist at the time. This phrase constitutes an extrapolation regarding a duty held by the Egyptian god Anubis, which was to "baptize" or "purify" Horus in the "divine pool." When analyzing this situation, it is critical that we keep in mind the context in which the Egyptian religion was largely changed into Christianity. Anubis was one of the most popular gods of the Roman Empire at the time Christianity was beginning to be formed. The creators of Christianity were quite aware of the various popular gods around them, and they knew well that in order to usurp the followers of these gods' religions, they would have to incorporate many of their aspects, attributes and rituals into Christianity. This usurpation - which is a common characteristic of the priesthoods developed over a period of thousands of years - revolved significantly around the Egyptians deities Osiris, Isis, Horus, Anubis and others, although these four certainly were major players in the forefront of the religious mind of the time. As such, we would expect to find them prominently represented in a serious religious movement of the day. Indeed, we can readily detect in the composite figure of Osiris/Horus the character of Jesus Christ, and in the figure of Isis - identified with the VIRGIN MOTHER Neith - the character of the Virgin Mary. It is preposterous to suggest that the creators of Christianity were completely oblivious to these figures, Osiris being one of the most popular gods in human history and especially all around the Mediterranean at that time. Moreover, Osiris was the LORD OF THE RESURRECTION - are we truly supposed to believe that any educated person could not see the similarities between the Egyptian godman and Jewish one? Especially in light of the fact that there were many thousands of Jews, Hebrews and Israelites in Egypt, dating centuries prior to the Christian era?

Thus, I state definitively that in order to comprehend how the Egyptian religion - and others - influenced Christianity, we need to have a strong understanding of the milieu and the context in which Christianity sprang up. Without such an understanding and such knowledge, one will not be able to comprehend - indeed, one will likely become hostile and belligerent, if past experience is any indicator - how the Egyptian religion became Christianized. In other words, the general ignorance of the environment and atmosphere of the era is a major factor in the objections of detractors.

While I cannot go into great detail here, let us proceed with one brief analysis of how Anubis was apparently morphed in the fictional character of "John the Baptist," who is in reality a composite figure of not only Anubis but also Oannes, the Babylonian water god. (For more information on that subject, please see my book Suns of God.)

"Anup" is another name for Anubis. In chapter 97/XCVII of the Egyptian Book of the Dead we find the following:


Here Horus is approaching the "staff of Anubis" at the boat, asking for purification and exaltation in the "lake of propitiation" and "divine pool."

It is evident why Massey made the connection between Horus approaching Anubis/Anup for water purification and Jesus approaching John for baptism. There are other characteristics of Anubis that factor into this comparison which I will be exploring in more detail in my upcoming Companion Guide to ZEITGEIST, Part 1.

Here is another response on this subject:

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

Horus and Isis-Meri

Over the centuries, a number of individuals have brought to attention the obvious correspondences between the Christian Madonna and Child and the images of the great goddess Isis holding and suckling her babe, Horus. There are many pre-Christian images of Isis in this "Madonna and Child" pose, and it has been asserted by not a few and quite logically that the Christian iconography is directly based upon this extremely popular Egyptian image.

Moreover, it has been asserted that the two Divine Mothers even shared the same name, with Jesus's mother named "Mary," of course, while Horus's mother possessed the epithet of "Meri." Aside from the fact that there have most definitely been pre-Christian goddesses named "Mari," such as on Cyprus (See, e.g., Robert Graves, White Goddess, p. 326, Farrar, Straus, Giroux, 1966), this epithet "Meri" in Egyptian simply means "beloved" or "delight," and it would quite likely have been applied many times to Isis at some point in the history of her long reverence by millions of people around the Mediterranean.

Indeed, in one of the epithets of a Ptolemy, we find a reference to "Horus, son of Isis, beloved." The word for "beloved" here is "meri." It is unclear exactly who is being called "beloved," Horus, Isis or the Ptolemy, but it certainly could be Isis, and, again, it is likely Isis was at some point or another described as "beloved" or meri.

In the cartouches of the Egyptian kings we also find a reference to "Kiseres, living forever, of Ptah and Isis beloved," the latter two words being "Auset meri," Auset, of course, meaning Isis.

Both Ra and Amen had the epithets attached to their names: Ra-Meri or Meri-Ra and Amen-Meri or Meri-Amen, meaning "beloved of Ra" or "beloved Ra" and "beloved of Amen" or "beloved Amen."

According to Charles Finch, Isis was called "the beloved of Horus," or Meri-f-u.

In The Contemporary Review under the entry for "Miriam" - the Jewish name for Mary - de Rouge says it is derived from "probably the Egyptian Meri-(t)," meaning, "beloved, a woman's name..." Since the name Miriam in Hebrew is said to mean "rebellion," this last point is debatable, as is frequently the case within the field of etymology.

As is also common with gods and goddesses, and especially in the Egyptian religion, gods and their epithets are frequently interchangeable with one another, representing the ultimate oneness expressed in ancient Egyptian spirituality. For example, from the Papyrus of Ani, in the chapter of the "Deification of the Members," we find the following: "The head of this Meri-Ra is the head of Horus... The eyes of this Meri-Ra are the eyes of the Great Lady," i.e., Isis. Thus, it could be said that Meri-Ra is equivalent to both Horus and Isis.

Furthermore, in the funereal archaeology of Egypt we do find the hyphenated epithet "Auset-meri," which is "Isis beloved."

Even Egypt itself is called Ta-Meri - "beloved land."

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

Isis and the Virgin Mary, et al.

Here is a quite a series of admissions by famed Egyptologist E.A. Wallis Budge, a sincere Christian.


Essentially what Budge is saying that is precisely what Massey, who based some of his work on Budge, also asserted: To wit, much of the Christian religion and tradition is a direct life from the Egyptian religion.

Budge states definitively that "partheno-genesis" - virgin birth - was known in Egypt centuries prior to the Christian era, specifically in connection with the goddess Neith. Neith is a prehistoric Egyptian goddess who gives birth to the sun god Ra, as Isis gives birth to the sun god Horus. In fact, Isis is a later form of Neith, the two combined as "Isis-Neith" or "Neith-Isis." Interestlingly, Budge names Neith and Isis as among the goddesses who are "names of the Sky, especially at sun-rise and sun-set." (Budge, A Guide to the First and Second Egyptian Rooms, p. 2 (1904))

Budge continues, by saying:


On p. 4, Budge also states that Ptah-Seker-Ausar - Osiris - equal the "triune god of the resurrection." Osiris is the son of Seb and Nut (p. 5) and the brother of Set. Concerning Osiris, Budge states:


The god of darkness, Set, is the opposite of not only Osiris but also Horus, who is both the sun god and the "son of Isis," the two being both separate and confused as one. (p. 6)

Demonstrating the interchangeability of Osiris and Horus, the four gods Amset, Hapi, Tuamutef and Qebhsennuf are the sons of either Horus or Osiris (p. .

Naturally, the Egyptians believed in a "future life," and described heaven thus:


Note that the Hebrew word for "peace" is salem, as in Jeru-salem, the heavenly version of which is described in the book of Revelation (Rev. 21:2, 21:10)

Here we have validations of a number of germane assertions made by comparative mythologists, including Massey and me, by a respected, devout Christian Egyptologist.

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

Horus and the Twelve

As is the case with the other main characteristics of Horus that have been associated with Jesus, the claim that Horus had 12 "disciples" has been assailed because it cannot be easily found in encyclopedias, to which detractors run in their haste to find debunking material. It appears necessary to repeat continuously that searching through encyclopedias will not yield satisfactory results when it comes to "deep research," particularly since until lately most of the encyclopedias in English were written and edited by Christians who would hardly be keen on including obvious parallels to Christ in their various entries on gods and men.

Moreover, flipping through encyclopedias will not make an expert of anyone, so be wary when you read these hasty rebuttals from fervent believers - they are generally entirely inadequate, representing a cursory scan by those who are clearly not experts. They may sound impressive at first to the untrained eye, because many people won't even do the 10 minutes' work that these "experts" have put into their research. Nevertheless, with serious, time-consuming research digging into long-forgotten and buried archives, most if not all of these shallow encyclopedia-rebuttals can be put to rest, as demonstrated in my previous posts.

Again, the claim that Horus was never associated with 12 individuals, whether or not we call them "disciples," is another of these erroneous assertions based on encyclopedia-scanning.

In the first place, the association of Horus the sun god with "the Twelve" has been solidly demonstrated by a fairly recent find of a Horus temple with 12 rooms in the Sinai desert, as I discuss on p. 106 of Suns of God. Interestingly, the original article I read regarding this find years ago disappeared off the net, and I've been able to find no information about the temple since then. I still have the original article downloaded to my computer, however, and here it is:


In any event, the association of Horus with 12 gods does not begin or end with this temple find.

In The Gods of the Egyptians Or Studies in Egyptian Mythology (86), respected Christian Egyptologist E.A. Wallis Budge relates the following:


In reality, the configuration of 12 individuals, whether gods or men, can be found abundantly in Egyptian texts, as evidenced by the Book of Hades as well. In Records of the Past, vol. 10, Egyptologist Eugene Lefebure describes scenes from the tomb of Seti I:


This last "god leaning on a staff" is, as in the other scenes, Horus. Regarding these scenes, Massey remarks:


As we can see, once again Gerald Massey's work has proved itself to be on solid ground.

Baedeker's Egypt: Handbook, p. 275, also describes scenes from the Tomb of Sethos I (Seti I) aka Belzoni's Tomb at Thebes:


As we can see, Horus is firmly associated with 12 gods, who could be deemed his "helpers." The symbolism represents, of course, the sun with the 12 constellations of the Zodiac as "companions."

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

Gerald Massey's Reliability

There is a great deal of misinformation online from the poorly informed about the brilliant self-taught lay scholar Gerald Massey, who famously wrote volumes about the comparisons between Christianity and the Egyptian religion. In the first place, Massey was raised a Protestant compelled to memorize entire sections of the Bible, so he was extremely knowledgeable about it.

Moreover, Massey was extremely careful about the sources he used in his works about Egypt and its relationship to Christianity. In his studies - which included learning the Egyptian hieroglyphs himself - Massey used the works of the translator of the Rosetta Stone, Champollion, as well as those by Dr. E.A. Wallis Budge and Sir Peter Le Page Renouf, both of whom were Keepers of the Egyptian Antiquities at the British Museum. Massey further studied the work of famed Egyptologist Sir William Flinders Petrie, and he also used the work of Sir Norman Lockyer, the famous royal astronomer who was friends with Budge and knew Egypt very well. Massey also studied the work of Reverend Archibald Sayce, professor of Comparative Philology at Oxford, as well as that of Sir James Frazer, although he did not agree with their conclusions. Massey further cited the work of Francois Lenormant, professor of Archaeology at the National Library of France whose father was also an archaeologist and Egyptologist.

He further relied HEAVILY on the work of Dr. Samuel Birch, who was a famous archaeologist Egyptologist and Keeper of the Department of Oriental Antiquities in the British Museum.

Dr. Birch was also the founder of the very prestigious and influential Society of Biblical Archaeology, to which belonged many notables in the fields of archaeology, Assyriology, Egyptology, etc. Much of this eye-opening work on comparative religion, in fact, emanated from this august body of erudite and credentialed individuals. Birch held many other titles and honors, including from Cambridge and Oxford Universities. His numerous works on Egypt are cited to this day in scholarly publications.

In the "Introduction" to his book Natural Genesis (p. viii), Massey wrote:

"The German Egyptologist, Herr Pietschmann...reviewed the 'Book of the Beginnings'... The writer has taken the precaution all through of getting his fundamental facts in Egyptology verified by one of the foremost of living authorities, Dr. Samuel Birch, to whom he returns his heartiest acknowledgements."

Obviously, Massey has been minimalized and vilified, probably because of his conclusions. He certainly was QUALIFIED and CAREFUL about his scholarship - talk about PEER REVIEW! And over his fairly long life and esteemed career, Massey gained such notoriety as to be in contact with, and addressed by, a number of these individuals, who truly represent the heyday of Egyptology. Unlike these erudite and credentialed "peers," who frequently came from wealthy, well-educated families who could afford education and who were highly connected into society's elite, Gerald Massey had no such privileges, born into abject poverty from which he barely escaped in adulthood, after slaving as a child-laborer in England's factories. In fact, Massey was so poor as he was growing up, virtually the only book he owned was the Bible, which he learned thoroughly. He also taught himself to read, as he received almost no formal education. Still, Gerald Massey was able to overcome all of these profound handicaps in order to become recognized widely within his lifetime.

It is evident that people just DO NOT KNOW what they are talking about when they vilify and dismiss Gerald Massey. In fact, those who are going about dismissing his work with commentary about him not being "reliable" have rarely read his works and do not know the extraordinary sources he did rely upon, such as Budge, Renouf, Sayce and Birch.

Contrary to the popular disparagement, which seems to be based purely on his conclusions that Christianity is a fictional rehash of the Egyptian religion, the work of Gerald Massey is HIGHLY reliable--and respectable.

Also, as concerns the Society of Biblical Archaeology, much of the work that Massey brought to light can be found in its journals and transcripts of meetings. For example, prior to Massey's great works on Egypt was published the work of the young scholar W.R. Cooper, in which he dared to reveal the comparisons between Christianity and the Egyptian religion. Budge himself followed suit with numerous eye-opening and startling statements about Christianity so resembling the Egyptian religion as to be its fulfillment!

It is obvious that during this era the discussion of the Egyptian religion upon Christianity was extremely popular and very important. What has happened since then, with the deliberate suppression of this material by ridiculing such brilliant and courageous men as Gerald Massey, is a travesty and an embarrassment to the modern educational system.

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