Ending the Myth of Horus

Posted by Consigliere on Monday, January 10, 2005 at 06:43 AM. Read 65987 times. Tags:
{name} pic

[Editor’s Note: It was my intent to have a reply ready before posting this, but I’ve found myself putting it off due to a busy weekend so I’m going to go ahead and post it as is. I’ll address it properly in the comments as soon as I have the opportunity though I’m sure there are several regulars who will probably be more than capable of addressing it first.]


I’ve heard repeated here several times that Horus, an Egyptian god, is carbon copy of Jesus.  The obvious implication by those that have made this statement is that Jesus is a copycat version of an earlier Egyptian deity.  The purpose of this entry is to disembowel that proposition once and for all.   

When I first heard that Horus was the inspiration for Jesus several years ago, I didn’t give it much credence because I couldn’t establish any source material for the claims.  I still can’t, but the internet is as adept at allowing anybody and everybody to pass on misinformation. 

Upon further research, I’ve concluded that this theory originated with Gerald Massey, an English poet, born 1828, died 1927.  He published primarily poems, but had an interest in Egypt.  He parlayed that interest in Egypt into several books and lectures in which he set forth the proposition that Horus was in essence the first Jesus, and Jesus was a cheap imitation.  The primary basis for his writing is the Egyptian Book of the Dead.  This is available on-line and you can easily look it up to read it yourself.  Be forewarned that forced reading of this would be an extremely efficient form of torture. 

It should be noted that Massey’s actual proposition was that Jesus was a copycat from more than just Horus.  According to Massey, Jesus was a compilation of an innumerable number of Egyptian deities.  There were over 2,000 deities who had every human and godlike characteristic one can think of, excepting Superman’s power to stop a speeding bullet.

Since Massey, there is a dearth of anybody with any credentials that has adopted a straight Horus=Jesus theory.  There is a one individual that has adopted some of Massey’s thoughts and incorporated them into a book-The Christ Conspiracy.  This appears to be the basis for the claims that I see.  The author is Acharya S.  Her website is http://www.truthbeknown.com  I note that Richard Price, a noted Christ Myther, and one that I take much more seriously then Acharya, said the following:

“Those of use who uphold any version of the controversial Christ Myth theory find ourselves immediately the object not just of criticism, but even of ridicule. And it causes us chagrin to be lumped together with certain writers with whom we share the Christ Myth butt little else…..

His other criticism, like mine, is that she uses very dated sources (19th Century) who were in Price’s words “eccentrics, freethinkers, and theosophists.“

Les, I am using your post from 1/3/05 as an example of the claims because you carry more credibility than most. That said here are the claims and what I have found:

Claim #1-Horus and Jesus are born from a virgin. 

Horus’s mother is Isis.  Isis was married to Osiris.  We do not know for what length of time, but presumably the marriage was consummated.  Whether it was or wasn’t doesn’t matter though.  After Osiris is killed, Isis puts him back together again (he was hacked into 14 pieces) except for his penis which was tossed in a river or a lake.  Iris fashions a substitute penis for him, humps him and here comes Horus.  There is nothing virginal about that.

Claim #2-Both Horus and Jesus were born to a Mary and Joseph. (Seb)

As noted Isis is Horus’s mother’s name not Mary.  In addition, Seb is not Horus’s father, Osiris is.  Seb is Osiris’s father.  Further, Seb is a distinct name from Joseph.  Putting them side by side does not make them synonyms, and that appears to be what was done here.

Claim #3-Both were born of royal descent.

This is accurate.

Claim #4-Both births were announced by angels and witnessed by shepherds. 

I can find nothing that mentions that the birth of Horus was announced by an angel or witnessed by shepherds.  I have found that Horus was born in a swamp, which is a pretty unlikely place for shepherds.  In addition Acharya mentions that Horus was born in a cave.  Massey makes no mention of this, although he does represent that Mithra was born in a cave. 

Claim #5-Both were heralded by stars and angels. 

There is no star that heralded Horus’s birth nor is there any angel announcing it.  Archarya in a footnote in The Origins of Christianity indicates that that there are three stars named the three kings in Orion and then relates this to the birth of Jesus.  When we look to the stories regarding Horus, we find no star or angel announcing his birth.  To the extent that Acharya S relies upon Massey and Massey relies upon what is depicted in the panels at Luxor see (from an atheist) further regarding virgin birth and pronouncement by angels http://www.frontline-apologetics.com/carrier_luxor_inscription.htm 

Claim #6-Both had later visitors (Horus-3 deities and Jesus-3 wisemen.) 

There is no indication that there ever were 3 wisemen.  The bible never mentions the number of wisemen, nor is there any document that reflects 3 deities at the birth of Horus.  See the website referenced in Claim #5.

Claim #7-Both had murder plots against them. 

There is mention that Seth did want to kill Horus, and Herod wanted to kill Jesus.  so this is accurate.

Claim#8-Both came of age at 12, were baptized and their baptizers were executed. 

There is no indication that Horus was preaching in a temple when he was 12.  In fact, Massey indicates that Hours the child was depicted as a “weakling.”  That doesn’t jive with story of Jesus preaching in the temple.  Again this appears to have been a confabulation from Acharya and repeated by others. 

Horus was never baptized in any of the Horus stories.  In addition, Acharya mentions that John the Baptist is actually Anup the Baptizer.  This individual is never mentioned anywhere in any Horus account.  There is not even a footnote in Archaya’s on-line work The Origins of Christianity to support this.  There is nothing.

Claim #9-Both had 12 disciples. 

According to the Horus accounts, Horus had four semi-gods that were followers.  There is some indication of 16 human followers and an unknown number of blacksmiths that went into battle with him.  Horus did not have 12 disciples. Jesus reportedly did.  Acharya failed to give a footnote to support this.

Massey points to a mural in the Book of Hades in which there are twelve reapers.  Horus is not present in this scene.  For Massey to make this connection he goes to a different scene within the same mural.  In this scene there is a picture of a god whose name is the Master of Joy.  Horus is never depicted although in other murals the artists do depict Horus.  Had the artists ascribed 12 reapers in any relation to Horus all they had to do was put Horus at the scene.  They did not. 

Claim #10-Both walked on water.

Horus didn’t, or at least there is no record that I can find that he did.  Massey does not maintain that Hours did.  Massey uses wild conjecture to connect the story of fish man, Oannes, not Horus, to Jesus.  Oannes came out of the sea during the day, and went back into the sea at night.  Massey makes the two analogous because by his calculations, Jesus walked on water during the day. 

As to Acharya, she as usual provides nothing to substantiate this. 

Claim #11-Both performed miracles. 

This is true although the miracles were different in scope and nature.

Claim #12 Both exorcised demons and raised Lazarus. 

The actual claim is that Horus raised Osiris from the dead and that the name Osiris morphed to Lazarus.  It doesn’t matter because Horus did not bring Osiris back to life.  There is no mention of this in any document regarding the story.  Horus did avenge Osiris’s death, but that did not raise Osiris from the dead. 

Claim #13-Both held a Sermon on the Mount; both were transfigured on a mountain, died by crucifixion along with two thieves and were buried in tombs where they paid a quick visit to Hell and then rose from the dead after 3 days time, both resurrections were witness by women, and both will supposedly reign for 1,000 years in the Millennium.

These are the most damning claims if they were proven true in my opinion.  Yet, I can locate none of this.  No sermon, no transfiguration, certainly no crucifixion w/ two thieves, no trip to hell and no resurrection.  There was an incident in which Horus was torn to pieces and Iris requested the crocodile god to fish him out of the water he was tossed into, which was done, but that’s it.  I am at a loss to refute this because I can not find anything to support it.

Massey does compares a story about the Autumn Equinox related to Osiris, not Horus, as the symbolic crucifixion.  There is no indication that Horus is involved in any way.  There is no mention by Massey of any Sermon on the Mount.  No mention or any actual crucifixion, no two thieves, no burial in a tomb.  Massey does not maintain that anything of the sort occurred with Horus. 

In short, of the claims outlined in this entry, I find the comparison between Horus and Jesus to consist of the following: they were of royal descent, they allegedly worked miracles and there were murder plots against them. 

Comments:

Page 20 of 33 pages « First  <  18 19 20 21 22 >  Last »

GAMMAGOO United States Posted on 01/12/2008 at 02:06 AM

GAMMAGOO pic

Dude there are over a dozen of different deities that have the similar life of Jesus.

Personally I think religion is just a way to control the weak minded.

GAMMAGOO United States Posted on 01/12/2008 at 02:16 AM

GAMMAGOO pic

Oh P.S. it was Osiris who was cut into 14 pieces.  He was betrayed by his brother Typhon.

http://www.sacred-texts.com/eso/sta/sta10.htm

DeusExMachina United States Posted on 01/12/2008 at 10:46 AM

DeusExMachina pic

Again, as Consiglieri is making a universally quantified counter to an existentially quantified proposition, the burden of proof is on those making the Jesus=Horus connection, in this case you. This is just basic logic 101. It would be silly to expect a “source.“ What would this source say? “There is not Horus myth matching these claims?“ That is like you claiming that you are Santa Claus, and when I ask for proof, you asking me for citations that indicate that you are not. Not only is the burden of proof on you as the one making the substantive claim, but it is also absurd to think that anyone would bother to create a relevant citation regarding your specific claim.
That said, we BOTH cited our sources. About the only real source for such things, and the one cited repeatedly by Acharya and Massey, is the Book of the Dead. We have made it clear that NOWHERE in this text is the Jesus=Horus connection supported, and even posted citations from this text, which Jesus=Horus purveyors claim show this connection, and show that these passages do nothing of the kind.

As for the rest, we are once again at the same juncture. You make a declarative claim, vîs-a-vîs Attis and Dionysus. As such, it is up to you to provide cites. (And of the original texts form, not simply people making the same claim.)
Apparently you arrived at your understanding of Greek mythology from one of these “Jesus=Horus” sites. Unfortunately, this information is incorrect, which is clear if one bothers to research the actual mythos. In particular, The Greeks held that Attis was begat of Nana, daughter of Sangarios. The hermaphrodite daemon Agditis had been castrated by the other gods, and his penis discarded. From it grew an almond tree. When Nana placed an almond on her chest, it disappeared into her and she became pregnant. This is barely even a superficial cognate of the Jesus myth. From there it just diverges completely. Attis was not crucified. He was either gored by a wild boar or went mad and castrated himself, thus bleeding to death, depending on your source. He was not resurrected after three days. Rather he was changed into a pine tree by a repentant Agditis, so that he would not decay. Surely you are not claiming that Jesus was likewise turned into a Christmas tree?
See:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Attis

Even your own citation fails to bear you out.
http://www.sacred-texts.com/pag/frazer/gb03400.htm

Likewise your portrayal of the Dionysus myth is fatally flawed. Dionysus was the offspring of Semele of Zeus. There is no mention in ancient texts of her virginity at the time. Another version has Dionysus born twice, of two mothers, and thus “reborn,“ but not in the context of virginity.
See, for instance:
Nonnus, Dionysiaca 24. 43 ff

I shall leave the rest of your examples to you as an exercise.

But back to the Horus=Jesus myth, here is a DIRECT citation that I can only hope will put this to rest, for good:

“Thy two sisters, Isis and Nephthys, came to thee, Kam-urt, in thy name of Kam-ur, Uatchet-urt, in thy name of Uatch-ur” . . . . . . . “Isis and Nephthys weave magical protection for thee in the city of Saut, for thee their lord, in thy name of ‘Lord of Saut,‘ for their god, in thy name of ‘God.‘ They praise thee; go not thou far from them in thy name of ‘Tua.‘ They present offerings to thee; be not wroth in thy name of ‘Tchentru.‘ Thy sister Isis cometh to thee rejoicing in her love for thee. 2 Thou hast union with her, thy seed entereth her. She conceiveth in the form of the star Septet (Sothis). Horus-Sept issueth from thee in the form of Horus, dweller in the star Septet. Thou makest a spirit to be in him in his name ‘Spirit dwelling in the god Tchentru.‘ He avengeth thee in his name of ‘Horus, the son who avenged his father.‘ Hail, Osiris, Keb hath brought to thee Horus, he hath avenged thee, he hath brought to thee the hearts of the gods, Horus hath given thee his Eye, thou hast taken possession of the Urert Crown thereby at the head of the gods. Horus hath presented to thee thy members, he hath collected them completely, there is no disorder in thee. Thoth hath seized thy enemy and hath slain him and those who were with him.“

This is from the Book of the Dead, plate XIV, (Teta, line 274; Pepi I., line 27; Mer-en-Ra, line 37; and Pepi II., line 67)
This plate predates Christianity, and is the DEFINITIVE source for statements regarding Egyptian myth.

Please refer to your “favorite spot” for more such citations that refute your claims.

Beegor Canada Posted on 01/12/2008 at 05:23 PM

Beegor pic

GAMMAGOO said:

Consigliere Good job… Not… where are your sources?  And can you explain the other deities that are similar Jesus look a-likes..

...

Dude there are over a dozen of different deities that have the similar life of Jesus.

Personally I think religion is just a way to control the weak minded.

Is it not weak minded to jump ranting into a thread without knowing what the thread’s intent is, and further, to be agressive against it simply because you don’t like what you assumed it suggests?

>>Personally I think religion is just a way to control the weak minded.

Who’s doing the controlling? If the leaders and followers are equally bumbling then it’s a case of mutual confusion, not control. Or do you think the pope has given up his own personal life just to be able to think to himself “haha, I control these people?“

The ones who stir up the religious crowds always do so from within, being ones who also believe it emphatically. So how could it be an issue of control if the enticers are the biggest victims of all?

“Personally I think religion is just a way to control the weak minded” is not a well thought out statement. In fact, one might say that it’s a weak minded statement.

P.S. This thread isn’t about arguing Christianity, so getting defensive over the dispelling of a Jesus=Horus fabrication is a false step.

DeusExMachina United States Posted on 01/12/2008 at 05:55 PM

DeusExMachina pic

Amen, Brother! (Hands waving in the air, eyes rolled up into my head.)

Bahamat Great Britain (UK) Posted on 01/13/2008 at 11:22 AM

Bahamat pic

I’d like to make known my acknowledgement and respect for all recent comments, but I don’t know quite how to say it

Gamagoo - Personally I think religion is just a way to control the weak minded.

It can be used that way, but mindstates are like viruses, and even people who don’t benefit personally out of the spread of a religion will still desire to spread it if it supports theirs. You can only be truely immune to mindstates you’ve already had, at least that’s my theory.
But religion is more than that - it’s also a theory. Even if it is a mindstate, and even if it is crippling, we still need to address all the theory side.

Beegor: Or do you think the pope has given up his own personal life just to be able to think to himself “haha, I control these people?”

If he has a craving of power, then quite possibly. A craving is a mental dependancy, we are slaves to our needs… but do we necessarily need to have those dependancies?

Beegor quoting Gamagoo: “Personally I think religion is just a way to control the weak minded” is not a well thought out statement. In fact, one might say that it’s a weak minded statement.

I’d say he made an incomplete statement, not necessarily wrong in all cases, but not looking at all angles and possibilities.
If he worded it differently in terms of identifying what religion can be used for, you couldn’t really argue with it, i.e.:

“Personally I think in some cases religion can be used just as a way to control the weak minded”
(As a mechanism to work towards the true intention of gaining control)

But even so this is still only one angle of looking at what religion is and what it can do

 Signature 

You don’t need to end all existence to end all suffering

Hamish Japan Posted on 01/25/2008 at 09:35 PM

Hamish pic

It amazes me, from what I read on the first page of comments, that no one ever mentions that fact the bible, which is where Christians (TODAY) get their teaching and knowledge of who Jesus Christ is and where He came from etc, is almost 30% prophecy.

So to everyone Christian, Atheist, Agnostic or whatever is, regardless of any similarities that MAY be found authentically and accurately between the Horus and Jesus account, the Bible is the only one that has undeniable 100% accurate prophecy.

Now it doesn’t take a genius to work out that only God can manipulate future/history to fulfill his prophecies.

Furthermore let us not forget that we are talking about Horus from the Egyptian pagan religion which is predominately astrology. Does anyone remember Noah? (We’ll get to him in a minute).

Has anyone stopped to think about the fact that although Jesus Christ was come about 3000 years after the so called proven date for the myth of Horus, there are numerous accounts throughout the Old Testament, hundreds and even thousands of years that give explicit details of Jesus Christ, how he would be born, live and die etc.

For example the book of Psalms written approximately 1400 years before Christ has in chapter 22 a complete description of the death of Jesus Christ.

Furthermore Noah who lived at least 4000 years before Jesus,(1000 years before Horus) would have known the story of Jesus from both the Holy Spirit and the stars, (remember my comment above that the Egyptian religion is basically astrology). If we study the stars we actually see the biblical story of Jesus in them, (anyone who has an interest can research that themselves).

The whole story of Noah and the flood is a representation of Jesus Christ if you take the time to study it carefully you will know what I am talking about.

I think it is inaccurate, ignorant and plain arrogance to presume that the myth of Horus (I call it a myth because from what I can tell there is absolutely no recorded evidence that Horus was an actual man who lived on earth at any time), it is just a clear denial of evidence to assume that the facts of Jesus Christ are copied from a myth called Horus. T

he archaeological evidence points to the accounts of Jesus Christ as being older and more accurate than the myth of Horus.

But as Paul states in Romans 1:18-32 “The wrath of God is being revealed from heaven against all the godlessness and wickedness of men who suppress the truth by their wickedness, since what may be known about God is plain to them, because God has made it plain to them.

For since the creation of the world God’s invisible qualities—his eternal power and divine nature—have been clearly seen, being understood from what has been made, so that men are without excuse.

For although they knew God, they neither glorified him as God nor gave thanks to him, but their thinking became futile and their foolish hearts were darkened.

Although they claimed to be wise, they became fools and exchanged the glory of the immortal God for images made to look like mortal man and birds and animals and reptiles.

Therefore God gave them over in the sinful desires of their hearts to sexual impurity for the degrading of their bodies with one another. They exchanged the truth of God for a lie, and worshiped and served created things rather than the Creator—who is forever praised. Amen.

Because of this, God gave them over to shameful lusts. Even their women exchanged natural relations for unnatural ones. In the same way the men also abandoned natural relations with women and were inflamed with lust for one another. Men committed indecent acts with other men, and received in themselves the due penalty for their perversion.

Furthermore, since they did not think it worthwhile to retain the knowledge of God, he gave them over to a depraved mind, to do what ought not to be done.

They have become filled with every kind of wickedness, evil, greed and depravity. They are full of envy, murder, strife, deceit and malice. They are gossips, slanderers, God-haters, insolent, arrogant and boastful; they invent ways of doing evil; they disobey their parents; they are senseless, faithless, heartless, ruthless.

Although they know God’s righteous decree that those who do such things deserve death, they not only continue to do these very things but also approve of those who practice them.

KPatrickGlover United States Posted on 01/25/2008 at 10:48 PM

KPatrickGlover pic

Schmuck

 Signature 

(Parenthetically Speaking)

MySpace

Hamish Japan Posted on 01/25/2008 at 11:32 PM

Hamish pic

Kpatrickglover: Shmuck? I am surprised you even know how to spell it.

Call me what you want, you cannot deny truth.  You are a fool if you willingly try to deny undeniable evidence. Anyway I didn’t post my first comment to get into a debate with people who willingly deny the truth.

I was just presenting another piece of evidence for the truth of the bible and the historical account of Jesus.

You don’t have to answer to me, I will not judge you, I am not the creator, but their is one who you will stand before and you will give an account of every thought you have ever had, anything you have ever done, and any word you have ever spoken, including the title you so graciously gave to me.

As it is written in Psalms 14:1 “The fool has said in his heart - there is no God.“

Les United States Posted on 01/26/2008 at 12:01 AM

Les pic

You make a lot of unfounded assertions, Hamish, which is why KPG called you a schmuck. For example you assert that…

the Bible is the only one that has undeniable 100% accurate prophecy.

Which simply isn’t true. You go one to make a number of additional assertions with no apparent basis in fact. Until you can back them up with something substantial then you’ll continue to be regarded as a schmuck.

 Signature 

Agnostics are just atheists without balls. - Stephen Colbert

KPatrickGlover United States Posted on 01/26/2008 at 01:03 AM

KPatrickGlover pic

HAMISH: Shmuck? I am surprised you even know how to spell it

And, of course, you just misspelled it.

Schmuck.

 Signature 

(Parenthetically Speaking)

MySpace

Hamish Japan Posted on 01/26/2008 at 02:11 AM

Hamish pic

I understand what you are saying now. Please forgive me for my ignorance.

Yes I did assume that the bible is the only source of complete 100% accurate prophecy. But I should have included my definition of ‘true prophecy’ in that statement, so let me give it hear.

When I say prophecy I am talking about undeniable, unambiguous accurate prophecy. I am not talking about sources that claim to be prophetical but which are actually completely vague and ambiguous and have no scientific, historical or archaeological evidence to support them such as the Qumran and Nostradamus to name but only two.

Furthermore the person who called me a schmuck has assumed (contradictory to the reasoning you gave as to why he was calling me a schmuck in the first place) that I was uneducated in what I was talking about in my first post.

That is obviously my mistake for not elaborating on my claims enough, sorry about that!

So when we compare so called prophecy to bible prophecy we find that they two completely different ball parks.

Where the Qumran has absolutely no archaeological evidence to support it, (except for claims which are pre-dated by the bible itself by at lest 700 years), and Nostrdamus is just completely vague giving no real names or dates or periods of times, the bible gives exact place names, dates, time of day, periods of time, number of people involved and even the names of the people.

1. The prophet Daniel prophesied 4 world empires and gave specific details about their characters so as to be recognisable. (History and archaeology supports this evidence).

2. The bible also prophesied that King Nebuchadnezzar would capture Israel and rule for 70 years. (History and archaeology supports this evidence).

3. It then went on to prophecy that God would use Cyrus the Great to take over Babylon and rule. (History and archaeology supports this evidence).

4. It was prophesied that Egypt would lose its power. Never to regain its status as a sovereign power again. (History and archaeology supports this evidence).

5. The city of Tyre would be destroyed and its rubble would be thrown into the sea. This is exactly what Alexander the Great did to capture the island city of Tyre, he threw the rubble of the mainland city of Tyre into the sea to build a causeway in order to get his military across from the mainland to the island of Tyre to lay siege to it. (History and archaeology supports this evidence).

6. The bible prophesied that Jesus would ride into Jerusalem on a donkey exactly 483 years after the order was given to rebuild the temple in Jerusalem. (History and archaeology supports this evidence).

7. Earthquakes, famine, war, pestilence, violent crime, youth abandonment, perversion, increase in knowledge and global travel were all prophesied thousands of years ago and are being filled before our eyes today. (The TV, newspapers and internet daily support this).

8. The New Testament writers prophesied that there would be a universal denial of a worldwide flood. (Again the TV, newspapers and internet support this).

9. The bible also prophesied worldwide media. (Thousands of years before a newspaper was even invented let alone a TV or a satellite of the internet). Today it is here.

10. Ezekiel and Jeremiah both prophesied that the nation of Israel would be captured by King Nebuchadnezzar and that he would control it for 70 years, and that Cyrus the great would then take over, and then Israel would continue to be governed by foreign countries for more than 2500 years but at the exact time God declared, he would gather the people of Israel together again and return them to their land and give them their nation and identity and independence back again. (This happened on exactly the day the bible said it would - almost 3000 years before the time - on May 14th 1948).

These are only a few prophecies out of hundreds which are mentioned all throughout the Scriptures. They are not ambiguous and have been proven true.

I could go on and on, but to be fair here are some websites for those interested on REALLY knowing the truth, rather then relying on what they THINK they know. I found these websites useful in my research and they support all of my claims given.

Hamish Japan Posted on 01/26/2008 at 02:31 AM

Hamish pic

KPG: Yes I did mispell it, it was supposed to be a joke, but I guess you like fishing ay! Anyway whatever!

By the way - I just noticed that some user named Askmit or something thinks my posts are spam and maybe that is why my list of links that I posted 4 times still has not shown up ay!

KPatrickGlover United States Posted on 01/26/2008 at 03:02 AM

KPatrickGlover pic

HAMISH: Yes I did mispell it, it was supposed to be a joke, but I guess you like fishing ay! Anyway whatever!

By the way - I just noticed that some user named Askmit or something thinks my posts are spam and maybe that is why my list of links that I posted 4 times still has not shown up ay!

Gotcha. You’re not the complete idiot that your drivel makes you out to be, you just have a weird, misunderstood sense of humor.

I’ll rephrase my earlier judgment…

Fucking Schmuck.

 Signature 

(Parenthetically Speaking)

MySpace

Bog Brother United States Posted on 01/26/2008 at 08:29 AM

Bog Brother pic

I am not talking about sources that claim to be prophetical but which are actually completely vague and ambiguous and have no scientific, historical or archaeological evidence to support them such as the Qumran and Nostradamus to name but only two.

I hadn’t gotten a good laugh yet this morning until I read that.  And I love your “And History and Archeology support that!“ claims Hamish.  They are just so…non-vague and unambiguous.  Good job Schmuck!

 Signature 

I will not attack your doctrines nor your creeds if they accord liberty to me. If they hold thought to be dangerous - if they aver that doubt is a crime, then I attack them one and all, because they enslave the minds of men.

-Robert G. Ingersoll

zilch Sweden Posted on 01/26/2008 at 09:07 AM

zilch pic

Sorry to break the news, Hamish, but the Biblical prophecies are bunk.  They fall more or less into two categories of bunk:

1) You say: “Now it doesn’t take a genius to work out that only God can manipulate future/history to fulfill his prophecies.“  That would make J.K. Rowling God, then, since She predicted in Book Four of the Harry Potter series that either Harry Potter must kill Lord Voldemort, or Voldemort Harry.  Lo and behold, Harry outhexes Voldemort in Book Seven.  It doesn’t take a rocket scientist to figure out that the authors of the New Testament knew the Old Testament prophecies, and wrote the New Testament to fit those prophecies.  This includes the hilarious mistranslation of Hebrew “alma”, meaning “young woman”, from Isaiah, into Greek “parthenos”, meaning “virgin”, making the Virgin Birth a necessity to fulfill Scripture.  Since there is no source outside the Bible for any of these prophecies, then it is rather simple-minded to declare them as a case of successful prophecying.

2)  The other cases of “prophecy” rely on exactly what you complain about with Nostradamus: if you decide after the fact that there were “four world empires”, or that May 14, 1948, was important, it’s childsplay to massage the Bible to produce that stuff.  Much harder, and more impressive, would be to come up with prophecies before things happen- say, a date for the nuclear destruction of New York city.  Needless to say, nothing of the such has ever been squooshed out of the Bible.

But I’m sure this message is falling on stony ground.  Belief trumps reason.  That’s okay- just don’t convince yourself that you need to kill for Jesus, and everything is hunky-dory.

 Signature 

You were born.  And so you’re free.  So happy birthday.
- Laurie Anderson

Les United States Posted on 01/26/2008 at 12:40 PM

Les pic

I’ll give Hamish points for being amusing. I like how he tried to play off his misspelling of schmuck by claiming it was an attempt at humor. An argument undermined by the fact that he apparently doesn’t understand the difference between “here” and “hear” as in the following quoted sentence:

But I should have included my definition of ‘true prophecy’ in that statement, so let me give it hear.

Incidentally, Hamish, I wasn’t calling you ignorant for claiming the Bible is full of “true prophecy”, though that doesn’t help, I was calling you ignorant because it was clear from your comments that you don’t know what the theory of evolution actually means or, for that matter, what the word “theory” actually means. You hit us with the old, and false, misstatement that “theory” means something that is UNproven, which is not what the word theory means. At least, not in the scientific sense of the word.

That’s part of what makes you ignorant and unqualified to even discuss the theory of evolution or any other theory for that matter.

 Signature 

Agnostics are just atheists without balls. - Stephen Colbert

Les United States Posted on 01/26/2008 at 12:43 PM

Les pic

You can tell I’m not awake. I’m merging our multiple True Believers into a single entity. Hamish wasn’t the one talking about evolution. That was ‘the dude.‘

Eh, after awhile they all start to sound the same.

 Signature 

Agnostics are just atheists without balls. - Stephen Colbert

MisterMook United States Posted on 01/26/2008 at 05:46 PM

MisterMook pic

It’s almost like they’re all reading the same books and listening to the same centrally appointed and trained pedagogues, huh?

Hamish Japan Posted on 01/26/2008 at 05:52 PM

Hamish pic

I won’t even bother replying to bogbrother;

To Zilch’ please provide some evidence of your claim that ‘any’ bible prophcey has been debunked by any ‘credible’ source. As far as I know there have been many attempts, but none successful.
Prophecy is something that is described ‘before’ the events, not after, like J.K.Rowling does… oh yeah and they have to be actual ‘REAL’ events, not ficticious.
Yes the New Testament writers all knew how to speek Hebrew (they didn’t speak Greek did they) so you are right they must have known all the Old Testament prophecies in a foreign language and then written their statments to match, oh yeah and then they willingly died for what they knew they were lying about. Nice one!
Don’t worry I don’t plan on killing for Jesus, that would contradict his teaching right. Anyone who claims to kill for Jesus or for God is not killing for the God of the bible and is far from being Christian.

Les - have you ever heard of a ‘typo’ it is where someone who is typing makes a mistake by hitting the wrong key… I wasn’t playing off my spelling mistake on the word ‘schmuck’ it was supposed to be a joke. However the word ‘hear’ as you mentioned was a typo but I am sure if you read through all my posts you will find more mistakes. In fact I am sure you will probably find gramatical errors too. YOu then go on to accuse me for something I had never done (evolution) oh but then you cover it so it is ok for you to make mistakes but not anyone else right. Talking to you guys is like talking to a double sided brick wall, , meaningless and a waste of time no matter what side you are on.

Believe what you want to believe - hey you are all scientists with so much expertise in all fields of science and history so you must all be right ay!. The world ans right now is proving you wrong everyday but you are so arrogant you don’t even see it.

Oh well - I won’t wast my time anymore, enjoy your laugh from the stupid (schmuck) Christian who doesn’t know anything because he doesn’t believe in evolution which is an unproven theory.

If you do believe in evolution then you believe that ‘nothing’ exploded and made everything, and you come from a rock… hahahahaha….. and you think Christians believe in fairy tales.

OK then!

Bog Brother United States Posted on 01/26/2008 at 06:09 PM

Bog Brother pic

Don’t worry I don’t plan on killing for Jesus, that would contradict his teaching right. Anyone who claims to kill for Jesus or for God is not killing for the God of the bible and is far from being Christian.

Ah yes, of course.  Anyone who kills for Jesus is not a true Christian.  You know this because why?  And Hamish, you are refusing to reply to my earlier comment because you really don’t have anything to defend your claims against what I said, so kiss my ass.

 Signature 

I will not attack your doctrines nor your creeds if they accord liberty to me. If they hold thought to be dangerous - if they aver that doubt is a crime, then I attack them one and all, because they enslave the minds of men.

-Robert G. Ingersoll

Hamish Japan Posted on 01/26/2008 at 06:55 PM

Hamish pic

Bogbrother

I didn’t reply to your first comment because you’re an idiot and should go back to the bog where you obviously came from.

Now you are accusing me of not being able to defend myself about what you said.

No! You didn’t actually say anything that warranted defense. You basically just repeated what I had already said, you truly are a schmuck!

As for your stupid comment…

‘Ah yes, of course.  Anyone who kills for Jesus is not a true Christian.  You know this because why?‘

I know this because it is what Jesus taught, idiot! He told us to love our enemies, to feed and clothe them, to turn the other cheek etc, kinda contradicts killing someone don’t you think.

Like I said before, my new favorite word,

SCHMUCK!

Oh an Mr. Mook using big words doesn’t make you sound smart it just means you know how to use a dictionary.

Point in case;

ped·a·gogue     (pěd’ə-gŏg’, -gôg’)   
A schoolteacher; an educator.
One who instructs in a pedantic or dogmatic manner.

You guys all sound the same too, maybe you are all reading the same book huh?

You all seem to like quotes, so heare are some for you all;

“The fool has said in his heart their is no God.“
(God - creator of the universe)

“Claiming to be wise they became utter fools.“
(Paul - an apostle of Jesus Christ)

“He who kneels the most, stands best.“
(D.L. Moody)

“I know men and I tell you that Jesus Chirst is no mere man.“
(Napolean Bonaparte)

“Let men of science and learning expound their knowledge and prize and prove with their researches every detail of the records (scriptures)which have veen preserved to us from those dim ages. All they will do is fortify the grand simplicity and essential accuracy of the recorded truths which have lighteed so far the pilgimage of men.“
(Winston Churchill)

“God if you are there, strike me dead.“
(Benito Mussolini) Anyone remember how he died?

“As by this theory innumerable transitional forms must have existed, why do we not find them embedded in countless numbers in the crust of the earth? The number of intermediate links between all living and extinct species must have been inconceivably great.“
(Charles Darwin - One of only two intelligent things he ever said).

“We do not know one millionth of one percent about anything.“
(Thomas Edison)

“I never thought much of the courage of a lion tamer. Inside the cage he is at least safe from people.“
(George Bernard Shaw).

“The New Testament is the very best book that ever was or ever will be known in the world.“
(Charles Dickens)

“The Bible is the best book in the world. It contains more than all the libraries I have ever seen.“
(John Adams)

“The salvation of a single soul is more important than the production or preservation of all the epics and tragedies in the world.“
(C.S. Lewis)

m.wael alkel Cyprus Posted on 01/26/2008 at 07:20 PM

m.wael alkel pic

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kCiStLKzivM
I haven’t laughed like this in a long long time , please take a minuet to listen to the up coming Einstein, he even made the peanut butter theory so tiny and unimportant.
m.wael alkel

Patness Canada Posted on 01/26/2008 at 07:51 PM

Patness pic

There’s a lot of very bad arguments you are making, here, Hamish - and I’ve refrained from entering this on the fear that I will do no good, but…

On God, Jesus, and Christendom

One cannot deny that aspects of any work of culture (literature, as the Bible is) can be taken out of the context in which they are presented. But a look at the Old Testament, taken alone, shows a God who condones war for certain groups of people (his people), and actually provides for those who are bloodthirsty and vicious, who desire to kill, out of defense or not. It takes people like that to make war. Yes, the teachings of Jesus contradict that - but most people who identify themselves as Christians, and who are motivated by Biblical scripture, do very un-Christian things. The quote you post by C.S. Lewis is an excellent example of this - trivializing all the terrible things in the world, regardless of whether we are at fault for them or not, because spreading Christianity (remember, Christ is the only vehicle to the Kingdom of Heaven) is a more important mission. It’s bad advice, of course, but anyone who takes it uncritically (as people who are raised into their religions are wont to do) will likely regard it as true. And go on to do terrible things in the name of (a subset of) the teachings of their religion.

For this reason it is imperative that we disrespect authorities on a matter, and give their positions no more weight than evidence for their claims provides us. This is why we have science.

I mean you no disrespect here, but I can tell you’re scientifically illiterate, so let me try to distill this issue to it’s core:

It is unwise to believe to be true that which has not been provided for by evidence that is free of our desires. I mean this to say that it is in all of us - Les, you, or I - to believe what we would prefer to be true rather than what evidence would indicate. This is dangrous; it makes us gullible, and we must fight it. This is why good science is important; it grounds us. It specializes in seperating our wants and desires from what is actually true, and therefore, dares to confront and correct us. If we want the truth, we must rely on as much evidence as possible.

So, insofar as prophecies go, one could like to believe that the New Testament was true - that John was written by the John of the same book, that Mark was written by Mark, etc. and that all were honest.

Perhaps they were not. Perhaps they were written by others who called themselves John and Mark, even though these were not their real names - like authors today use pseudonyms. If this were the case, then perhaps they were wrong in their accounts, and, like us, merely accepted what had been told to them, regardless of whether it was accurate or not. You’ve played the phone game - you know how easily even good stories get taller with the telling.

Without having evidence that sits outside our personal opinions to guide us, who would be to say who was correct and who was not? Sure, we might prefer to believe we are right - but if we are wrong, the comfort of our mistake can only last so long. If you are right, I’m going to burn in hell. If I’m right, you’re making yourself gullible, prone to being used and abused, and will find comfort in the religion that allowed you to bring great harm to yourself and others. If you’re right, Jesus was a miraculous, supernatural birth from a pure woman who’d never known a man’s touch, and if I’m right, a Jewish whore lied. Which is more likely?

This is how it is with Biblical prophecy. It’s possible that all the predictions were made, but if I’m right and, as there is today, the church then was riddled with as many liars and cheats as any government, church, or corporation in the world today, then they’d have just as likely rewritten history to conform to prophecy. For that matter, how many others might have come before Jesus, who preached the same message, but were killed sooner, as he was? How many other people met the same criteria for a Messiah?

And this is why we demand evidence of you, and not the other way around. There are many, many possibilities. Science and evidence gradually whittle away almost all of those possibilities, and provide us with the peace of mind that yours is not so unreasonable.

And as far as evolution goes - the way in which the word theory is used in science is radically different than the way that we tend to use it in a day to day sense. Those who believe evolution is a lie are almost exclusively religious - and their blending of the two uses of the word theory is a deliberate and shameful attempt to lie to people to support their own beliefs. And people like you need to call out your “authorities” and shame them for pulling that sick stunt.

You deserve the truth as much as anyone else. All I’m saying is, there’s more to the truth of things than what’s in the Bible. To see the whole picture, you need to recognize lies and the liars who tell them from all around you.

I have a favorite professor who describes getting a University education as such:

Half of everything is bullshit. Education means knowing which half is which.

 Signature 

The Kidney Punch Of Legendary Peace

I acquire no understanding of myself except as I take account of objects, of the surroundings. I do not think unless I think of things — and there I find myself. - Bruce Lee

Bog Brother United States Posted on 01/26/2008 at 08:00 PM

Bog Brother pic

Boy howdy Hamish! You sure showed me! Don’t mistake my discontinuing to argue with you as you winning, I just don’t want keep it up because I would get better results from beating my head against the wall. At least with the wall I’d eventually pass out and the headache would subside while I was unconscious.

Don’t worry though, I’m laughing at you, not with you.

 Signature 

I will not attack your doctrines nor your creeds if they accord liberty to me. If they hold thought to be dangerous - if they aver that doubt is a crime, then I attack them one and all, because they enslave the minds of men.

-Robert G. Ingersoll

Page 20 of 33 pages « First  <  18 19 20 21 22 >  Last »

Name:

Email:

Location:

URL:

Smileys


Remember my personal information

Notify me of follow-up comments?

Submit the word you see below:


<< Back to main