Ok. However there is the small matter of Jesus being identified in the Old Testament, combined with Josephus 100 or so years after Jesus' death (nevermind the new testament)...
Get's rather complicated eh?
Origins of Jesus Christ
- Thread starter Tommy Shue
- Start date
Get's rather complicated eh?
Ok. However there is the small matter of Jesus being identified in the Old Testament, combined with Josephus 100 or so years after Jesus' death (nevermind the new testament)...
Get's rather complicated eh?
Aren't we moving the goal posts? The question was asked if we'd know of Jesus without the Bible as a whole, no? Anyway, I have to admit I've always subscribed to the idea (don't mean to offend) that all the Old Testament references do not necessarily refer to Jesus of Nazareth. I appreciate that many a believer feels otherwise. I simply don't.
As for Josephus, his account is generally reckoned as roughly 90 - 100 c.e. That would make it roughly 60-70 years after Jesus' death (ca. 30 b.c.e.), not 100. Some mythicists fasten on this as a way of showing that Josephus was no contemporary of anyone around during the crucifixion. This is (as usual) wrong. Josephus was a contemporary of James, a generally assumed brother of Jesus and a man who figures in the Josephus Antiquities, and Josephus was born 37 c.e., which is actually quite close to the events he recounts, as most ancient chronicles go.
In fact, James figures in certain narrated events in Antiquities during which Josephus was already very much alive.
Sincerely,
Operacast
No, I don't think we are moving goal posts. The OT talks about a Messiahah, and then skip past the NT to Josephus, who talks about this "Jesus" who was claimed to be the Messiahah, 100 years ACE.
I think that is what I said in the first place.
And the original question asked was "If you substitute the phrase"the sky" for the word heaven(ancient Greek-hevn) does it change your perception of what was being said at that time? ".
I find that quite an astute question to ponder...a rose by any other name still smells as sweet.
As far as Jesus is concerned, it appears that even if there was nothing in scripture written about his life (specifically), there would have been for some reason, a secular note of his walking this earth, as noted by Josephus-before the Gospels were ever written.
Pretty good, for a common carpenter from Nazareth.
bob x
Well-Known Member
I've had a lot of run-ins with them on other boards. I find their approaches to things completely detached from reality; the debates get even more surreal when the other side is a hard-line Biblical literalist who also shows some detachment from reality. Then I step in and call the Jesus-myth ideology "the atheist equivalent of creation science", which usually enrages both sides.
And the original question asked was "If you substitute the phrase"the sky" for the word heaven(ancient Greek-hevn) does it change your perception of what was being said at that time? ".
I find that quite an astute question to ponder...a rose by any other name still smells as sweet.
O.K. Fair enough. -- I do have a trivial hang-up of my own here, but it's my problem, not yours
: Everyone always says "rose by any other name", for the simple reason that it's gotten proverbial. Apparently, though, this is a reading of Juliet's line that was popularized in the late 19th century in the Cambridge/Globe Shak[e]speare edition and comes from the First Quarto of "Romeo and Juliet", which later scholarship now views as a reconstruction of the play by memory rather than a transcription of the author's ms., which the Second Quarto apparently was. The Second Quarto reads "rose by any other word", which is more likely how the line first went <shrug>.Oh yes, no question.
Best,
Operacast
Dream
Well-Known Member
Maybe two people can have two different reasons for being mythicists. I didn't know there were groups of Jesus mythicists on the internet, either. Whom are you referring to? They are scuffling with literalists? Surrealists? What web sites?
The real enemy is paranoia. The human race must come to grips with its tendency towards paranoia, just like a child learns not to be afraid of shadows. Paranoia is still working in these groups that you have called 'Surrealists'. They are chasing shadows. Don't make the same mistake.
OperaCast, you mentioned the Dead Sea Scrolls. Since the Dead Sea Scrolls discovery there is much better understanding of the beginnings of Christianity. Critics no longer can accuse the Church of being a Zionist conspiracy. That accusation was made ridiculous by facts which eventually came to light. There is no Zionist plot. There is no reason for Christians or Jews to imagine that they are a part of something sinister. Instead, we are all part of a huge community that is striving to understand itself and to grow up. The real problem is reacting to, freezing in fear, or crying out because of shadows -- what Jesus might have been or might not be, etc.
The real enemy is paranoia. The human race must come to grips with its tendency towards paranoia, just like a child learns not to be afraid of shadows. Paranoia is still working in these groups that you have called 'Surrealists'. They are chasing shadows. Don't make the same mistake.
OperaCast, you mentioned the Dead Sea Scrolls. Since the Dead Sea Scrolls discovery there is much better understanding of the beginnings of Christianity. Critics no longer can accuse the Church of being a Zionist conspiracy. That accusation was made ridiculous by facts which eventually came to light. There is no Zionist plot. There is no reason for Christians or Jews to imagine that they are a part of something sinister. Instead, we are all part of a huge community that is striving to understand itself and to grow up. The real problem is reacting to, freezing in fear, or crying out because of shadows -- what Jesus might have been or might not be, etc.
E
eccles
Guest
I have not the time to go through all replies to see if I am supplying a similar answer, but here it is: Egyptology. Just about all of Judeo?Christianity is copied from Egyptian religious myths. Anyone familiar with those will know of Isis, Orsiris and Horus. Jesus is Horus. There is a well know image of Isis with the baby Horus and a famous painting of Mary and Jesus
HORUS
Only begotten son of the God Osiris.
Walked on water, cast out demons, healed the sick, restored sight to the blind. He “stilled the sea by his power.”
Was Crucified.
Descended into Hell; resurrected after three days.
HORUS
Only begotten son of the God Osiris.
Walked on water, cast out demons, healed the sick, restored sight to the blind. He “stilled the sea by his power.”
Was Crucified.
Descended into Hell; resurrected after three days.
Ut oh, I am getting that creeping feeling again
.I asked you on the last post to please give your references.
Quote Eccles:
You do not have the time to be honest, but you have the time to spew a bunch of nonsense.
I have information which contradicts your story along with references, but I am not going to waste my time providing them unless I see that you know what authentic references are.
This is quoted a lot, particularly from one website which makes such claims - however, I can't recall ever seeing any references to these from Egyptian texts.
I don't recall making notes on these from reading the Egyptian Book of the Dead; I don't recall Egyptians using crucifixion either.
You recall correctly. This is a pernicious urban myth that is made out of whole cloth. There is nothing remotely similar in the Horus stories, and creeps like Acharya S. have taken this baloney and run with it. It may be that -- this time -- this poster will actually give some documentation if pressed. But I would vet his sources very, very thoroughly.
No cheers,
Operacast
E
eccles
Guest
I asked you on the last post to please give your references.
SIr, you have me at a disadvantage. I just joined this Group and have not done the 10 posts necessary to include URL references or images. So at the moment I cannot satisfy your request.
I also gather that I may be wasting my time as you seem to have a closed mind about the ideas I have put forward. Are you an expert in ancient Egypt? I cannot claim any academic qualifications, but I am well read in ancient history.
SIr, you have me at a disadvantage. I just joined this Group and have not done the 10 posts necessary to include URL references or images. So at the moment I cannot satisfy your request.
I also gather that I may be wasting my time as you seem to have a closed mind about the ideas I have put forward. Are you an expert in ancient Egypt? I cannot claim any academic qualifications, but I am well read in ancient history.
E
eccles
Guest
I have done my 10 posts now, so I should be able to supply those references and picture.
Isis, Horus Mary and Jesus
Blblical Origins in Ancient Egypt:
Biblical Origins In Ancient Egypt
Isis, Horus Mary and Jesus
Blblical Origins in Ancient Egypt:
Biblical Origins In Ancient Egypt
I Googled and came up with this --
Atheistwatch: My Dialouge with Binobolumai: Jesus Myther stuff
Operacast
E
eccles
Guest
I have just read all that. I thought I might see evidence of those two guys coming to blows, or arranging for the seconds.
What I say about it is SO WHAT! You can argue about Jesus etc. until the cows come home. Nobody will win. Why? Because there is no hard evidence that would be accepted in a court of law. The bible as it is now cannot be proved to be a true and accurate account of the happenings at those times. Christians accept their beliefs on faith, not facts. I, with an education in Science work with proveable FACTS.
THe Bible has been miscopied, mistranslated and edited to suit the ideas of the Church Founders at Nicea in 325 CE.
I would say that this discussion is at a stalemate. I did do a post with an image and URL links. I don't know what happened to it. I'll try again.
juantoo3
....whys guy.... ʎʇıɹoɥʇnɐ uoıʇsǝnb
I understand and appreciate time contraints.
Ummm, having looked into this some for another thread I spent a bit of time on (Rome in transition, http://www.interfaith.org/forum/rome-in-transition-8875.html ) I came away with the understanding that the idea of resurrection is pretty unique to Christianity. There are Pagan variations on the theme, but as presented in the Christ Jesus story, there don't seem to be any direct comparatives.
I also want to point out that the general Pagan mythos regarding hero-gods, etc. aren't really confined to an Egyptian source. Starting with Hislop and continuing with Frazer and still others since, it can be shown that the various Pagan pantheons share pretty much the same characters and stories using different names (to be expected considering different languages). If there is a single source point beginning to the Pagan mythos, I would be inclined to believe it started with the Sumerians, which predate the Egyptians, as noted by both Hislop (The Two Babylons) and Frazer (The Golden Bough).
Yep.
Well, like the old saw says, "a little knowledge is a dangerous thing." I am not formally trained in history, from my perspective history degrees are about as useful as tights on a boar. But I do have a long standing interest in history, particularly as it applies to anthropology and the development of social structures like religion and governments, and I think I can fairly say I am pretty well read too. The more I learn, the less I seem to know.
Well, if we look at it this way, then it is no wonder there are a host of competing "experts" quoting, misquoting, and quoting each other out of context...and all of them are correct?
I know that sometimes people think I try to complicate the issue, what they fail to consider is that it *is* a complex issue, and typically "experts" get carried away with their redaction and reduction and become unnecessarily myopic in their view of the matter. A person with a preference for Greek mythology will point out the similarities with the Greek pantheon and come to the conclusion that the Greek mythos is the source of it all, definitively, I should know-I'm an expert! Then the Roman guy comes along and says the same thing...and the Persian, and the Babylonian, and the Egyptian...all of whom fail to consider that the earliest and therefore source of all western civilization and the Pagan mythologies that follow is Sumeria. It is still questionable how the Eastern civilizations- Aryans, Hindis, Chinese animists, Ainu- fit into the equation, and how much influence and in which direction it went, but Sumeria is generally recognized as the source of western civilization, agriculture, walled cities, metallurgy, mathematics, astronomy, writing and all of the other advancements that began the age of history. Everything before being considered "pre-historic," which implies the lack of writing, which implies oral mythos, and which is exceptionally tough to quantify and qualify regarding the development of the Pagan pantheon.
The one connection that appears to have an extremely long and storied association with the Pagan mythos is the Green Man or Wild Man tradition exemplified by the Mummers Play and has echos in the legend of Percival and the Greene Knight as well as the modern tradition of Santa Claus. While the Wild Man in midieval (sp?) times became associated with the Christian interpretation of Satan and the Devil, other than that the only correlation with the Jesus mythos is the rebirth, or resurrection if you will, but that is a bit of a stretch.
Well, again this is an overly simplistic view. This is not wholly untrue, but as it stands is misleading. For that matter, all sacred texts and literary treasures are subject to the problem of developing or morphing interpretations and understandings. We have a tendency to interpret old writings with modern definitions, which creates a litany of complications.
One standard test I like to present, because it befuddled me for the longest time, is the meaning of the word "divers" as found in the KJV Bible. This was before I found the value of the Strong's Concordance and other reference materials. Considering the aqualung was not invented until WWII, it didn't make any sense to me why this word would be included in a translation from 1600 AD, and it sure didn't make any sense in context. Do you happen to know what the word "divers" means in the Elizabethan English of the KJV? Historians with the best intensions often forget to look at these things in the context of the era in which they were written, rather than imposing their modern assumptions, creating a new but false set of problems.
At Nicea the canon was more or less solidified, I think Revelations and a couple other NT books were included a bit later. There certainly are a significant number of extra-Biblical texts that survive that were not included, and interestingly there are some that were included in the 1611 KJV that have since been dropped, called the Apocrypha. But there are other apocryphal books, and it can be confusing if one simply uses the term "Apocrypha" without specifying OT, inter-Testament, or NT. Another anomaly is the inclusion of Sirach in the Catholic Bible with a determined exclusion in the Protestant Bible. A couple of simple references:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Books_of_the_Bible
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Biblical_canon
This is also a good place to note that Brian hosts a wonderful collection of extra-Biblical and apocryphal texts here at Interfaith.org. Another resource I have in my library is called "The Lost Books of the Bible and the Forgotten Books of Eden"
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Lost_Books_of_the_Bible
I would note that earlier in the discussion it seems some labor under the impression that the Dead Sea Scrolls relate to Christianity and Jesus, and that is simply not so. The DSS are texts by the Essenes, who were a separatist sect of Judaism proper, and not Jesus nor any of the apostles or any other associates can be shown to be directly affliliated with the Essenes, although there are quite a few so-called scholars out there that do "matter-of-factly" give that impression. This and more is covered at length in the Rome in transition thread.
You are correct that there is an academic stalemate...it is a complex issue that has multiple influences, as well as home-grown organic influences, and is usually aggravated exponentially by hyper-inflated egos and academic stubborness.
Last edited:
Interesting website. Is this your website ? There is no information about the organization sponsoring the site.
The only OT link that I believe exists relates to Joseph, who became an advisor to the Pharoah. The rest are fiction. So that makes you a fiction writer !!
I will admit that looking at some of these questions from a scholarly perspective could be interesting. I see no indication that is your approach.
juantoo3
....whys guy.... ʎʇıɹoɥʇnɐ uoıʇsǝnb
Isis, Horus Mary and Jesus
Hislop in particular showed the "Madonna with child" was a very ancient theme, predating Egypt. The Madonna theme was frequently associated with the Heavenly Mother, and frequently was cast as being pregnant as a virgin. The Sumerian version included Semiramis as the mother, Cush as the father, and Nimrod (remember him from Genesis?) as the child who becomes the husband of his mother (after Cush either runs off or is banished).
This is the same Nimrod and Cush:
emphasis mine, -jt3
Other extra-Biblical sources claim that Shem killed Nimrod and cut him into 13 pieces, and scattered the pieces across the known world. I have read a few different names being used for Shem, and at least one Egyptian version of the myth has Nimrod's phallus being entombed in a pillar in a pharoah's palace before it is found and liberated by his mother / wife. It may take me some time to dig this one back up, but I thought it a rather strange interpretation of the myth.
Last edited:
Juan, you are right, the Sumerian linkages are the more important ones. Egypt played a role in the politics that led to the fall of the First Temple. Assyria and Babylon were in that mix as well. Much later historically.
juantoo3
....whys guy.... ʎʇıɹoɥʇnɐ uoıʇsǝnb
Something I feel is important to note, is the distinction between mythos and "fact." Because we are dealing with the historical development of mythos, and mythos are by nature ethical stories not intended to be historical fact, it is easy to convolute fact and fiction and get really lost in the process. Genesis does not have to be a factually true historical recitation to be a mythically valuable and culturally significant ethical text. The Epic of Gilgamesh isn't historically accurate either, yet from an historic and anthropological perspective it is still a mythically valuable and culturally significant ethical text.