Ending the Myth of Horus

[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.

1,015 thoughts on “Ending the Myth of Horus

  1. Virgin or not?

    So, when the Bible says Mary was a virgin, we assume for purposes of that story that she was.  When the Egyptian text says Isis humped Osiris after affixing a penis on him, we assume for purpose of that story that she did.  In comparing the 2 stories, which is our purpose here, we find that Mary is alleged to be a virgin and that Isis was not.  That is not a similarity.

    I don’t think I will rely on what the bible says and then in turn us that to direct a discussion.
    There are too many words that have been translated more than once, and very few translations are useful, literal translations.
    I don’t think we have a reliable way of knowing the true intent of the writer who refered to Mary as a ‘virgin’, IF in fact that was the case. I also feel rather certain that a virgin birth is not possible. 
    I just imagine that if the day should ever come that we are found and studied by the beings of another world, we’re going to look so foolish putting forth that some little human on this little planet is a “saviour” of any kind.
    Worse yet, that we put a sliver of ‘faith’ in superstitious writings and the fallible humans who manufactured them.

  2. actually I dont have to back up shit, just like you dont, You cant back up anything pertaining to your little sun god, NOTHING, yet demand absolute proof to the contrary, like i said before not going to happen, and even If I do its not going to matter one tiny bit is it?

    OK, lets work this from a different angle to see if I can get either of you to realize where I see these similarities, many of them absolutely identical, and you do not. Some are similar in theme.
    Number one, most all of these Pagan rituals, rites, celebrations and such are ALL virtually the same because they are all stemming from the same ideas simply passed down generation to generation from one culture to another from region to region, they are mainly Oral Traditions as told from the Elders, or the self proclaimed Shamans, Priest, or whatever alleged holyman.

    Some of the information that I have gathered throughout the years would take me forever to try and hunt it all down and present it in a coherent fashion, and lets be honest here its not like its going to make a damn bit of difference anyway you know as well as I do that if you WANT to believe that Christianity is what you think it is, then that’s what its going to be regardless of whatever information is presented, that’s just the nature of the Beast, as you see when you are talking about something like “Faith & Belief” and invisible deities that can do anything anytime anywhere all with the wave of his magic wand then obviously there is no cracking that nut with any amount of valid evidence, logic & reasoning dont even come into play.

    So having said that I will start by saying this, what I have FAITH & BELIEF in is tangible, it can in most cases be tested, many times from various sources, not just one, is based solely on Nature and the laws that govern it, is a product of thinking & reasoning in a logical manner.

    Yes I have faith in 100s of 1000s of Scientist that have spent tireless hours researching & experimenting presenting verifiable data to fellow Scientist so that they may review it, add to it, revise it, perfect it, or if found to be flawed reject it and debunk it. THIS does not nor can not happen with Church doctrine, any evidence to the contrary is fought against tooth & nail.
    No I do not have faith in ANY Clergy anywhere especially Christian which have for over 2000 years shown nothing but pure contempt for everyone that does not think precisely as they do, there are countless cases in history where Christians have done everything humanly possible to destroy any & everything non-Christian, they have taken over/stolen, or destroyed Pagan temples, destroyed entire civilizations, destroyed countless volumes of ancient text that is now lost forever, ALL in their unbridled fervor to squelch all possible opposition to their brand of insanity. The Christian church all along has made an art of forgery, lying, deceit, yet THIS shit is what you fall for?

    Now back to Reality, there are many many similarities between not JUST Horus & Jesus, but virtually ALL of the Sun Gods have many similarities because they are all the same entity, all virtually the same story, just changed by region, by culture, by Time, through centuries of being told through Oral tradition in many different languages.

    Take the old grade school game where the teacher whispers something in one students ear on left side of the class then says pass it on, by the time that simple sentence comes out the other side of class just a couple mins later, all speaking the same language, and just a single freaking sentence it is in the majority of attempts not even close to what the teacher said.

    Now take something as complex as Religious dogma passed down through millennia, being translated through many different languages and cultures which take what they hear and “Make it their own” with their cultural differences & beliefs.

    The ROOT of these SUN GODS come from Sumeria & Babylon through the stories of the Babylonian fertility god “Tammuz and the goddess Ishtar”. Every year Tammuz “was believed to die, passing away from the earth to the gloomy subterranean world.
    The seasonal cycle came to be connected with Tammuz’s supposed annual death and resurrection. “Under the names of Osiris, Tammuz, Adonis, and Attis, the peoples of Egypt and Western Asia represented the yearly decay and revival of life … which they personified as a god who annually died and rose again from the dead. In name and detail the rites varied from place to place: in substance they were the same.
    Many of these rites revolved around inducing the return of Tammuz from the dead. One of these ceremonies is recorded in Ezekiel 8:14, where Ezekiel saw in vision an abominable sight: women “weeping for Tammuz” at the very temple of your particular Sun God.

    As worship of Tammuz and Ishtar spread to the Mediterranean region, including the territory of biblical Israel, the pair came to be worshiped under other names: Baal and Astarte , Attis and Cybele, and Adonis and Aphrodite.

    Attis was born of a “Virgin” his mother Nana was impregnated when she placed an “Almond on her breast” (Im sure in some fantastical Christian magic wand waving you are going to tell just how this isn’t considered a Virgin either) Frankly I dont give a fuck, fact is ALL of these alleged God-Men/Sun Gods were allegedly born of Virgins as told by the believers of whatever SunGod. That is simply what was believed, it was a very common belief 2000+ years ago, especially amongst believers in Sun deities of which their Virgin mothers, Sun Goddesses, Queens of Heaven, etc were all allegories for Virgo, hence allegorically were celestial Virgins regardless whether or not they may have fucked the entire Roman Legion.

    There are so many similarities between so many of these Sun Gods there is no way any sane non-brainwashed individual can remotely deny it.
    I personally dont give a fuck what you think about the similarities between Horus/Jesus are or aren’t, Fact is they are there, deny them all you like.

    Many early Christians celebrated Jesus’ birthday on JAN-6. Armenian Christians still do. In Alexandria, in what is now Egypt, the birthday of their god-man, Aion, was also celebrated on JAN-6.

    Christians and most Pagans eventually celebrated the birthday of their god-man on DEC-25, This is because of the Winter Solstice and the relation it has to the birth, rebirth, rising again of the SUN.

    According to Christian tradition, Christ died on MAR-23 and resurrected on MAR-25. These dates agree precisely with the death and resurrection of Attis.

    Baptism was a principal ritual; it washed away a person’s alleged sins. In some rituals, Baptism was performed by sprinkling holy water on the believer; in others, the person was totally immersed, this was a PAGAN ritual LONG before Christianity ever existed.

    The most important sacrament was a ritual meal of bread and wine which symbolize the god-man’s body and blood. His followers were accused of engaging in cannibalism.

    Early Christians initiated converts in March and April by baptism. Mithraism initiated their new members at this time as well.

    Early Christians were naked when they were baptized. After immersion, they then put on white clothing and a crown. They carried a candle and walked in a procession to a basilica. Followers of Mithra were also baptized naked, put on white clothing and a crown, and walked in a procession to the temple. However, the only difference is they carried torches. Once again, this was many centuries prior to Christianity.

    At Pentecost, the followers of Jesus were recorded as speaking in tongues. At Trophonius and Delos, the Pagan priestesses also spoke in tongues: They appeared to speak in such a way that each person present heard her words in the observer’s own language.

    An inscription to Mithras reads: “He who will not eat of my body and drink of my blood, so that he will be made on with me and I with him, the same shall not know salvation.”

    In John 6:53-54, Jesus is said to have repeated this almost verbatim “…Except ye eat the flesh of the Son of man, and drink his blood, ye have no life in you. Whoso eateth my flesh, and drinketh my blood, hath eternal life; and I will raise him up at the last day.”  Same theme obviously, just that it was attributed to Mithras centuries earlier.

    The Bible allegedly records that Jesus was crucified between two thieves. One went to heaven and the other to hell. In the Mithras mysteries, a common image showed Mithras flanked by two torchbearers, one on either side. One held a torch pointed upwards, the other downwards. This symbolized ascent to heaven or descent to hell.

    To worship Attis, a bull was slaughtered while on a perforated platform a “Taurobolium”.  The animal’s blood flowed down over an initiate who stood in a pit under the platform. The believer was then considered to have been “born again.” Poor people could only afford a sheep, and so were literally washed in the blood of the lamb. This practice was interpreted symbolically by Christians, centuries LATER.

    There were many additional points of similarity between Mithraism and Christianity.  St. Augustine even declared that the priests of Mithraism worshipped the same God as he did:

    Followers of both religions celebrated a ritual meal involving bread. It was called a missa in Latin or mass in English.

    Both the Catholic church and Mithraism had a total of seven sacraments

    Epiphany, JAN-6, was originally the festival in which the followers of Mithra celebrated the visit of the Magi to their newborn god-man. The Christian Church took it over in the 9th century.

    Without even the slightest doubt Jews picked this Oral Tradition up during their captivity in Babylon. thus is precisely the root, the true origin of Judaism.

    Celsus who lived in the late 2nd century CE complained that this recent religion of Christianity was only a “pale reflection of Pagan belief”. Celsus pointed out that Christianity copied the concepts of others. Christian “…ideas concerning the origin of the universe, etc., are common to all peoples and to the wise men of antiquity.”

    Horus said: “I have given bread to the hungry man and water to the thirsty man and clothing to the naked person and a boat to the shipwrecked mariner.”

    Jesus copied this with: “For I was an hungred, and ye gave me meat: I was thirsty, and ye gave me drink: I was a stranger, and ye took me in: Naked, and ye clothed me…” Matthew 25:35-36

    Horus: “I am Horus in glory…I am the Lord of Light…I am the victorious one…I am the heir of endless time…I, even I, am he that knoweth the paths of heaven.”

    Christian SUN GOD: “I am the light of the world….I am the way, the truth and the life.”

    Horus: “I am Horus, the Prince of Eternity.”

    Jesus: “Before Abraham was, I am” ( meaning he is eternal)

    Horus:“I am Horus who stepeth onward through eternity…Eternity and everlastingness is my name.”

    Jesus: “Jesus Christ, the same yesterday, and today and forever.”

    Horus: “I am the possessor of bread in Anu. I have bread in heaven with Ra.”

    Jesus: “I am the living bread that came down from heaven.”

    What about “Krishna”? yet another Sun God of which the Jesus MYTH was derived from.

    Krishna was born, lived and died at least 14 centuries before Yeshua.

    Yeshua and Krishna were called both a God and the Son of God. Both were sent from heaven to earth in the form of a man. Both were called Savior, and the second person of the Trinity. Both adoptive human fathers were carpenters. A spirit or ghost was their actual father. Both were visited at birth by wise men and shepherds, guided by a star. Angels in both cases issued a warning that the local dictator planned to kill the baby and had issued a decree for his assassination. The parents fled. Mary and Joseph stayed in Muturea; Krishna’s parents stayed in Mathura. Both Yeshua and Krishna withdrew to the wilderness as adults, and fasted. Jesus was called “the lion of the tribe of Judah.” Krishna was called “the lion of the tribe of Saki.” Both claimed: “I am the Resurrection.”  Both referred to themselves having existed before their birth on earth. Both were “without sin.”  Both were god-men: being considered both human and divine. They were both considered omniscient, omnipotent, and omnipresent. Both performed many miracles, including the healing of disease. One of the first miracles that both performed was to make a leper whole. Each cured “all manner of diseases.” Both cast out indwelling demons, and raised the dead. Both celebrated a last supper. Both forgave his enemies.  Both descended into Hell, and were resurrected.

    “The object of Krishna’s birth was to bring about a victory of good over evil.”  Krishna “came onto earth to cleanse the sins of the human beings.”

    Krishna was born while his foster-father Nanda was in the city to pay his tax to the king.”  Yeshua was born while his foster-father, Joseph, was in the city to be enumerated in a census so that “all the world could be taxed.”

    Krishna: “was suspended to the branches of a tree by his murderer, to which he was nailed by the stroke of an arrow into his feet” that it might become the prey of the vultures… Basically he was “crucified” in a tree.

    Yeshua’s crucifixion on a cross or stake is often referred to as being “hung on a tree:”

    Acts 5:30: “The God of our fathers raised up Jesus…hanging him on a tree.

    Acts 10:39: “…hanging him on a tree.”

    Acts 13:29: “…they took him down from the tree…”

    Galatians 3:13: “Christ redeemed us from the curse of the law, having become a curse for us; for it is written, Cursed is every one that hangeth on a tree.”

    1 Peter 2:24: “…who his own self bare our sins in his body upon the tree…”

    At least some branches of Christianity (amongst the 33,800+ of them) share the following beliefs with Hinduism.

    A future reward in heaven or punishment in Hell. Hinduism and Catholicism share the concept of Purgatory.  A day of judgment. A general resurrection. The need for repentance for sin. Salvation requires faith in the Savior. A belief in angels and of evil spirits. A past war in heaven between good and bad angels. Their religious texts talk of “the blind leading the blind,” “a new heaven and a new earth, “living water,” “all scripture is given by inspiration of God,” “all scripture is profitable for doctrine,” “to die is great gain,” etc. Fasting. Being born again.

    You can try to deny these similarities till yo are blue in the face but it is merely a fools folly.


    So just out of curiosity, are you trying to claim that “Only Your” particular Sun God (Jesus) in ALL of written history was the only one ever proclaimed to be born of a Virgin?  The only one ever to have died and resurrected? The only one ever to have claimed to be able to heal the sick cure the blind raise the dead? The only one ANYTHING actually as its quite clear that you cant list a single attribute of your particular Sun God that cant be attributed to at least one if not many other Sun Gods most of which pre-date Christianity by centuries.

    Please say that is your claim so that I might have a good belly laugh.

    Horus=Jesus, Krishna=Jesus, Osiris=Jesus, Attis=Jesus, Mithras=Jesus, and on & on & on as they are all very similar in theme & in many ways virtually Identical.

    Yet still one thing you cant do is come up with Jesus=Jesus as there was not ONE single word ever written by or about your Sun God during his alleged lifetime by anybody anywhere.

    This is not even a drop in the preverbal bucket for similarities, the very few things I listed here are the tip of the iceberg, there are hundreds and hundreds of them, Christianity is without the slightest doubt nothing but yet another version of much older Pagan Sun God worship.

  3. Adrinne:  My position is dependent only on the NT alleging that there was a virgin birth, not that there was a virgin birth.  The NT does allege that.  Your article indicates clearly that the NT alleges a virgin birth. 


    Your entire post is unrelated to this discussion.  Let me repeat again, if you want to continute to discuss this, please pick one of the alleged similarities from my original post and substantiate it with reference to original texts.  That’s all I’m asking.  Pick just one of the similarities and substantiate it.

    To All Others:

    Is there anybody out there who can step forward and substantiate any of the alleged similarities between Horus and Jesus?


  4. Consi,

    Perhaps you should read some John Shelby Spong.  He’s a retired Anglican bishop who has similar views to Nunya regarding the myth of Jesus and its relationship to the story of Horus.  This is not to say that Spong denies the historical Jesus and his role in modern Christianity.  It’s just that Spong believes that we filled in the fuzzy details of Jesus’ life with elements of pagan stories.  Also the inclusion of pagan mythos was probably a strategy of the early church to make Christianity more acceptable for the pagan western Europeans.  Indeed, similar inclusion of pagan aspects can be found in several Christian holidays such as Halloween.

  5. SS:

    I know what Nunya’s position is.  That is not the discussion here.  The only issue here is can the claims that Les posted, and that have been posted elsewhere here, be substantiated. 

    I don’t care whether Krishna claimed Tone Loc stole “Funky Cold Medina” from him. It doesn’t matter.  Krishna is not part of this discussion.   


  6. Consi,

    I think I was a little unclear, I was just aiming you at a source for references.  I think Spong makes many of the same claims that are being tossed around here.  Moreover, he’s quite good at citing sources, so if you look over one of Spong’s books such as Resurrection you might be able to find some specific references regarding the issues being discussed.

  7. Adrinne:  My position is dependent only on the NT alleging that there was a virgin birth, not that there was a virgin birth.  The NT does allege that.  Your article indicates clearly that the NT alleges a virgin birth

    And the BoD alleges a ‘virgin’ birth for Horus.  Either a miraculous conception, or a ‘fashioning’ of Horus from his father’s essence.

    Plutarch is the one that makes a claim for a substitute phallus, and we don’t have access to the source that he used.  We are required to ‘assume’ that he is translating accurately.  For you to insist that Nunya stick to only the NT, but that you are allowed the freedom to go outside of the original Egyptian texts seems a bit disingenuous.  Particularly if you acknowledge the Classical and Medieval tradition of manufacturing/citing authoritative sources that actually don’t exist. 

    At most, we can only assert that there are -multiple- accounts for Horus’ conception—all miraculous, and one, possibly, -virginal-.

    Let me be clear that I’m not ‘siding’ with Les, or nunya, or whoever originally presented the argumente that there was a one to one correspondence between Horus and Jesus.  I don’t personally think that position is tenable.  Other than the Greek and Roman pantheons, I don’t know of any culture that borrowed mythology wholesale from other cultures without ‘tweaking’ it to make it their own.

    In fact, I’d be shocked if there -was- a one to one Horus/Jesus correspondence.

    And even if there was a striking similarity, correlation/correspondence in myth structure doesn’t always prove cultural transmission.  If you’ve got Calad Bolg / and Caliburnus between Ireland and Wales, along with Finavair / Guinevere, and archaeological evidence of trade and intermarriage between the two cultures, that’s one thing.  I think in the case of Egyptians and Jews that the cultural transmission argument could also carry some weight, for obvious reasons.

    But there are American Indian folk tales that are structurally identical to Cinderella.  That doesn’t mean that there was some sort of cultural transmission.  It just means that people have been telling stories since at least the time when they learned to make fire—and that stories serve some sort of indispensable socio-cultural function.

    I don’t know who originally made the assertion that there was a one to one correspondence between Horus and Jesus.  Les, Nunya, whoever.  But it would seem wise to me to just shrug, and concede that a one to one relationship does not exist.

    Then any atheist who wanted to take up the discussion could move on to a more sustainable position, perhaps.  One where the OT/NT could be examined structurally, in comparison to a wide range of other mythological god/hero stories.

    In fact, while Nunya may not have done a very good job, so far, of defending a one-one Horus/Jesus equivalence, he certainly seems to be presenting a fairly reasonable case that a lot of the OT/NT language was directly ripped from other religious traditions.  The ‘prepare a seat for me’ language in the BoD might indicate nothing more than a shared linguistic tic between Jews and Egyptians, but as textual evidence, it’s a better foundation for argument than unsourced web-sites.

    But that’s just my opinion.  It’s entirely possible that I’m completely wrong.  Particularly since I’m about as good a biblical scholar as I am a brick-layer.

  8. Claim #1 Both Born of a Virgin, as Iv explained ad nausem this is a ridiculous claim in the first place for either entity, it can not be substantiated for EITHER one, thus technically they are Identical, I can substantiate it for Horus just as much as you can Jesus.
    I also fail to see how Isis “drew from him (the dead Osiris) his essence, where from she produced her child Horus. Is in your mind considered that she rode the wild pony all night.
    Many Jews, you remember them right? you know the ones whom allegedly wrote the OT/Torah/Cabal/Talmud etc of which your Sun God was based on. Well many of them believe Mary was a WHORE.
    Jesus was a bastard born of adultery.” (Yebamoth 49b, p.324).
    “Mary was a whore: Jesus (Balaam) was an evil man.” (Sanhedrin 106a &b, p.725).
    “Jesus was a magician and a fool. Mary was an adulteress”. (Shabbath 104b, p.504).

    Claim #2 Horus was born to Isis-MERI and to “Seb” as to which the connection is not the “name” but the point that both Horus & Jesus each were born of a ghost/god or had a “Heavenly father” and both had a “Earthly Father” Jesus was Joseph, Horus was Seb.
    I fail to see what you are trying to discredit here.

    #3 you agree.

    #4 “Both births were announced by angels and witnessed by shepherds”.

    I dont recall Horus being announced by angels, though he was announced by a “Bright star in the East” exactly the same as your Sun God, I dont recall Horus witnessed by Shepherds either, though he was visited by 3 Kings/Magi as it is alleged your Sun God was, the 3 Kings of course were the 3 kings on the belt of Orion for BOTH Sun Gods.
    Also The followers of Zoroaster had been told earlier that Zoroaster would incarnate again on earth and the sign would be, “a great brilliant star in the East.

  9. But that’s just my opinion.  It’s entirely possible that I’m completely wrong.  Particularly since I’m about as good a biblical scholar as I am a brick-layer.

    In that case, nowiser, you can build a wall for me any time. grin

  10. nowiser: 

    The BOD does not expressly state that Isis is a virgin.  There is a difference between a magical birth and Mary being a virgin, which the Bible does expressly state.  That said, admittedly it is possible that Isis was a virgin, unlikely, but possible nonetheless.  There is nothing to positively assert this though, unlike the Jesus story.

    Furthermore, if the scenes from the temple of Opet and Dendera are accurate, they depict Osiris lying on a funeral bier, ithyphallic. An ithyphallic Osiris requires a phallus.  Where did the phallus come from if the fish ate his? Isis put it there like Plutarch said.  There’s no other account that exists that I’m aware of that explains an ithyphallic Osiris.

    it would seem wise to me to just shrug, and concede that a one to one relationship does not exist.

    I agree. I also agree that higher ground is not far away.


    I’ve tried to emphasize the need to refer me to a source.  No citations, no response.


  11. Consig:

    Since you are so dependent on sources and “credentials”, how ‘bout providing the name of the source for your virgin story. No pseudonyms allowed and anonymous sources are obviously not to be taken seriously.

    I’m postive that if the xtian fascists did not destroy every temple and scroll they came across there would be plenty of sources to cite for the tales of the Egyptian’s gods.

  12. Spocko:

    It’s not my story or my comparison.  The comparison is being made by those who say Horus=Jesus.  I only use what texts they could possibly rely upon to make that claim. With respect to Mary being a virgin, I believe they are relying on and can find support that there is a tradition of Mary being a virgin, within Christianity, in Luke 1:26-Luke 2:7; and Matthew 1:23.

    In debunking Horus=Jesus, it’s important to note that it matters not if the Bible was a complete forgery or Gospel truth.  Those making the comparisons are relying upon it for the Jesus story. So for purposes of the comparitive analysis here so shall I, as I don’t contest the Jesus portion of the comparison. 


  13. Horus = fictional character from an unknown author
    Jesus = fictional character from an unknown author

    Horus = obvious allegory of the sun’s travels
    Jesus = obvious allegory of the sun’s travels

    Horus = alleged spawn of a god
    Jesus = alleged spawn of a god


    Jesus = Horus

    Nunya has listed MANY similarities between these two fables, yet you nitpick that names are (slightly) different and some minor details have changed. So what? All plagiarists tweak the details of the story they are copying.

  14. My point exactly Spocko.

    Consig in desperation to keep his delusion alive is nit-picking every finite detail.
    For a story to be a copy does not mean it has to be absolutely identical in every possibly way, every name the same, same dates, same everything.
    That’s ridiculous, if that were so, then they would be the very same story, DOH!
    These stories were separated by over 3000 years, different cultures, different language, different social structure, yet basically the same religious beliefs in “general” its painfully obvious that Jesus is an allegory for the Sun, it is plainly stated that Horus & Ra are Sun Gods and that the entire religion is based on Astrology. Kemet is where Christians got their ” Holy Trinity” lunacy from, their belief in an “afterlife” , their so called “Ten Commandments” etc, are ALL positively Kemetic in origin.
    Without question the Bible, both OT/NT the torah, Kaballah etc. are based on Astrology.

    The facts are obvious, Jesus is positively a Jewish copy of Horus, there is absolutely ZERO doubt.

    Then when you look at the overall theme which you just listed there is no way any sane non brainwashed individual can deny it.

  15. As a side to this thread, we can also look at this in reverse, which in essence accomplishes the same task.

    Can pull the exact same Bull…..“ENDING THE MYTH OF JESUS”

    I’ve heard repeated here several times that Jesus, a Christian Sun God, is the one & only true God.  The obvious implication by those that have made this statement is that ALL other Gods are a copycat version of this deity.  The purpose of this entry is to disembowel that proposition once and for all. 
    When I first heard that Jesus was the one & only true and 100% factual God several years ago, I didn’t give it much credence because I couldn’t establish any verifiable 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 “hypothesis” originated at some point in Rome by no one really knows whom, some complete Lunatic (IF he actually existed) called Saul/Paul of Tarsus we know is responsible for spreading this extremely aggressive & debilitating Meme sometime in the Mid 1st century, Saul/Paul almost certainly suffered from Temporal Lobe Epilepsy, which explains much of his writings and delusions, he was obviously quite insane. You can view his maniacal babblings (epistles) damn near anywhere you turn, Be forewarned that forced reading of this would be an extremely efficient form of torture.

    There is very little verifiable evidence regarding this horrible Meme’s beginnings, there is one “hypothesis” about the Piso family in Rome being responsible for writing most if not all of the NT in an effort to curb religious fervor in Rome that was eroding away at Roman hierarchy, seeing as that this effort was covert in the first place, IF indeed there is any credence to it, plus the “known fact” that Christianity once unleashed made every possible effort to destroy any & all decent against it, then digging up clues to this hypothesis is sparse and takes a few leaps of “faith” in order to follow its path. Although I might add, having a little faith in something that at least makes some sense and does IF factual answer some otherwise unanswerable questions is more of a baby step of faith, as opposed to the supermanesk miraculous LEAP over the tallest tale one must perform in order to swallow the total absurdity of this alleged ‘Word of God” housed in a single Book so chock full of Contradictions & absurdities that the reader needs to shed his thinking & reasoning mind upon the threshold of its first page as you would shedding your muddy boots upon entry to your house.

    Claim#1.  Jesus was Born of a Virgin.

    There is not a single bit of verifiable evidence to support such an obviously ridiculous postulation, and amazingly this religious phenomena that was claimed by all the various 15-20 Sun Gods hasn’t happened again in at least 2000+ years.

    This claim/myth is unquestionably just an allegorical Virgin Birth describing the constellation Virgo in parable form. Unfortunately many uneducated & simple minded individuals have taken this parable as a literal biography of what they have been hoodwinked into believing is a real event.

    Claim#2. This Jesus god-man/Sun of God is the Earthly form of some supposed “Almighty Creator” whom allegedly waved his magic wand, spoke a few choice of Hebrew then magically “created” EVERYTHING, the Earth, Sun, Water, US, animals, trillions upon trillions of stars, no doubt Millions of Planets, Black holes, asteroids, comets, etc. etc. just *poof*.

    There is not one single shred of verifiable evidence that any such *magic* was the cause of anything, let alone everything.
    The basis of this “belief” comes solely from a single book whom the believers of this magic have no clue whom wrote it, as a matter of fact when anyone does honest open minded research into the true origin of this fairytale it becomes blatantly obvious that you can trace its roots to The Sumerian Tablets & Babylonian mythology.
    Some believers in this Christian Mythology take this tall tale as 100% fact & literal truth I.E. “Young Earth Creationist” which as hard as it to fathom actually believe the Earth was magically created just 6-10,000 years ago, these individuals are FUBAR, need psychiatric help & medication.
    Plus there are mountains of verifiable Evidence that clearly supports Evolution.

    Claim#3. That this alleged god-man Jesus/Yeshua/Jeshua,  The Christ, The Nazarene, “of Nazareth” etc. was sent to Earth “By HIMSELF” to walk with his children in human form & teach them, then in the end save them from themselves by “sacrificing HIMSELF to HIMSELF” to save all of mankind.

    Hmmmm well just like everything else associated with Christianity there is not one single shred of verifiable evidence of anykind written by anybody anywhere that can substantiate such a ridiculous claim.
    There is not a single word written BY or about this alleged god-man during his alleged lifetime, not a single word. Not much of a “teacher” is he? Even the fable/fairytale of Jesus mentions not a thing about his alleged life between the age of 12-30?
    There were many many so called “Messiahs” circulating around Jerusalem in the 1st century CE, just like there still are TODAY, do you actually think these nutjobs are “Jesus”?  Well THEY do!  DOH!
    There was no difference 2000 years ago except that most people back then were superstitious enough to swallow the pure deluded bullshit being spread, there are still surprisingly too many people today just that gullible & ignorant, take the Heavens Gate bunch, Jim Jones, Waco, hell for that matter every single nutcase that believes a single word Pat Robertson & his ilk spew.

    There is not a single piece of verifiable evidence to support that any such god-man ever existed.
    The name of “Jesus” itself could not possibly have existed as no such letter as “J” existed till no more than about 500 years ago, there is no way he could possibly have been Jesus of Nazareth as no such town of Nazareth even existed until at least 100+ years after his supposed death.
    The sheer lunacy of thinking that some “Blood sacrifice” “Human Sacrifice” is going to somehow “wash your sins away” is no different in anyway from such insanity as the Aztecs sacrificing to their various gods, or as many humans today still offer blood sacrifice though usually in form of a chicken.
    Then without any question the entire Bible is an Astrological Drama, with Jesus the main character as an allegory for the Sun.



    This fact just doesn’t get any plainer.

    So that puts an end to the MYTH OF JESUS

  16. The bullshit about Jezeus being born in Nazareth should be a major clue here. As mentioned above a town by this name did not exist until much later after the fable. So where did this part of the story come from? Jezeus is actually borne on the Nazaroth! This word means “the 12 signs of the zodiac”. Coincidence? I think not!

    Nazareth is very closely worded to Nazaroth which in Hebrew is “the twelve signs (of the zodiac).” The root verb nazar means to “surround” as in the twelve constellations of the zodiac which pass overhead each night, thus surrounding the earth.[22] Job is reminded of his human limitations and the celestial astrological power of Yahweh, when the latter speaks to him from a raging desert whirlwind:

      Canst thou bind the sweet influences of Pleiades, or loose the bands of Orion? Canst thou bring forth Nazaroth in his season?[23]

    This theory is supported by the evidence that the inhabitants of Qumran by the Dead Sea, who Pliny referred to as Essenes, used a solar-based calendar, rather than the traditional lunar-based Judaic calendar. Pliny the Younger reported in a letter to the emperor Trajan in 112 CE that “Christians appear to be harmless people who meet at daybreak and sign hymns to the honor of the Christo quasi deo (the Christ as if he were a god).”

    The Virgin Birth and Childhood Mysteries of Jesus

    While I’m at it, here’s another excellent site to peruse…
    The Jesus Heist

    As crazy as all this mythology stuff is, it’s still fun to read about!

  17. Spocko:

    Nunya has listed MANY similarities between these two fables,

    I would agree.  The only problem is that is all we have.  We have “Nunya On Egyptian Mythology.”  Well, in actuality we have “Acharya on Egyptian Mythology as Repeated by Nunya.”  If Nunya gave us the comparison between Horus and Jesus, and then cited us to a source that actually confirmed what he says, his claim most assuredly would deserve to be taken seriously.  Instead, all it is parrot posting.

    Time and again, I’ve asked for Nunya to reference the sources for the comparisons he makes.  He can’t do it because he simply trolls the Net, finds some article and regurgitates it here.  I’ve not seen anything from you in this respect either.  Giving us the scholarly equivalent of “Nunaya, Nunya, go, fight, win. Yea, Nunya” does not provide substantiation. It is what it is: cheerleading. 

    If you want to establish the claim that the Jesus story is a copycat of the Horus story, approach it in a serious manner so that what you say will be taken seriously.  Set forth the similarities between the two, and document for us a source that will substantiate the alleged similarity. 

    I maintain it can not be done.  The fact that nobody has done it, lends credence to my position.


  18. Consig I dont simply “Troll the Net” Iv forgotten more about this subject than you will ever know, as Iv stated Iv studied this crap for many years, I have over 80 Books in my Library downstairs regarding religion & its origins.
    Iv heard of this Acharya person, I have no books of hers, I think I read one maybe 2 very sparse websites associated with her Book and that’s it.
    What Iv seen of hers seems to be more of promoting sales of her Book than anything else, although she does seem to have a handle of the subject. and your allegation that she is about the only one is easily debunked there are hundreds of Authors that have written about this.

    Tim Freke, Tim Leedom, Helen Elerbe, Earl Doherty, Robert Price, Ruth Green, Joseph Wheless, Bill Jenkins, Elaine Pagels, Lynn Picknet, Michael Baigent, just to name a few.

    Oh and actually Iv listed several sites that have “confirmed what iv said” so has Spocko, you just deny what the sites confirm. LOL

    But that’s besides the point, FACT is Iv have more than amply shown several very close similarities, many of which you even agree with, though the most damning ones are the ones you simply refuse to acknowledge, which is the absolute FACT that the Bible is positively an Astrological Drama, written in the Pagan passion play form, you refuse to even acknowledge this for the obvious reason that you know once you do, GAME OVER, your little deity is a SUN GOD, and there is no denying it at that point.

    Time & time again Iv told you that you will never get the source you are looking for, even if I were to produce it you would deny it outright just like you do the Astrological origins of the bible.
    Funny thing is the Bible itself which BTW is your ONE and ONLY “source material” very clearly proves itself to be Astrological in Origin.

    Personally I dont give a shit, in my opinion you have been completely OWNED in this “argument”, you try desperately to Nit-pick your way out, but you are not fooling anyone but yourself.

    The FACT that you constantly refuse to acknowledge the Astrological origins of the Bible, which are irrefutable, lends credence to my position.

    Horus = Jesus

    Mithras = Jesus

    Apollo = Jesus

    Krishna = Jesus

    They are ALL Sun Gods, all extremely similar in many ways.
    The most damning is the FACT that Jesus=Sun God.
    Just like Horus = Sun God.

    So Im still waiting on YOUR “source” stating that Jesus=Jesus. LOL   You have ZERO.

    So to YOU there is no correlation between Horus & Jesus, what similarities exist are in your mind superficial at most so you can go on believing in your chosen little sun god, there is nothing Astrological about the Bible or Torah, etc.

    That is what’s called “Cognitive Dissonance” it is not that the information is not there, its just that you refuse to acknowledge it to protect your obsession.

  19. If anyone is interested in learning more about this subject the best starting place would be here…


    elwed: there’s a good “side-by-side” in the appendix too

    Massey is a little long-winded and it took some time to read but it was well worth the effort. Personally, I’m convinced beyond a shadow of doubt (and not from this one source alone) that the xtians are worshipping Horus (the Sun) and they don’t even know it. What a funny bunch of monkeys we are!

  20. I TOTALLY agree with Jesus = Horus = Sun God.  I have a BA degree in Church Music, minor in Christian Ed, dad is an evangelical minister, I used to be in the church until 10 yrs ago.  Then I RESEARCHED the ORIGINS of all major religions – and WOW, what I found out!!!  It is TOTALLY TRUE that all christianity REALLY goes back to worship of the sun in the sky – and all the allegorical stories about planets, stars, etc. are ALL from ancient astrology and are parallelled throughout christianity.  My whole religion must MELTED AWAY (thankfully!).  My dad says my “homosexuality” must be the reason I have rebelled, but I tell them, no, it was just the CATALYST that got me to LOOKING DEEPER into why I could not rationalize my NATURAL ORIENTATION to christianity.  WOW – did I ever found out.  I did not PLAN ON becoming an atheist/freethinker – it was the NATURAL RESULT of LEARNING AND DISCOVERY!  Thanks for listening!  Steve in Pensacola at SunMostHigh@aol.com.

  21. NUNYA:  Hmmmm well just like everything else associated with Christianity there is not one single shred of verifiable evidence of anykind written by anybody anywhere that can substantiate such a ridiculous claim.
    There is not a single word written BY or about this alleged god-man during his alleged lifetime, not a single word.

    I’m a bit late catching up on this one, but I was surprised no one challenged this statement.  It has been established that the Jewish historian Josephus made note of the existence of a real person named Jesus, and told of Jesus being put to death by crucifixion. It does not qualify as “during his alleged lifetime,” but it does have the distinction of being the only extra-biblical reference to Jesus, and a pretty solid one, given the reputation of Josephus for accuracy.

    About this time there lived Jesus, a wise man, if indeed one ought to call him a man.  For he was one who performed surprising deeds and was a teacher of such people as accept the truth gladly. He won over many Jews and many of the Greeks. He was the Messiah. And when, upon the accusation of the principal men among us, Pilate had condemned him to a cross, those who had first come to love him did not cease.  He appeared to them spending a third day restored to life, for the prophets of God had foretold these things and a thousand other marvels about him.  And the tribe of the Christians, so called after him, has still to this day not disappeared.
                          – Jewish Antiquities, 18.3.3 §63

    There have been challenges to this document, but they are seriously lacking in merit.  More information is available at this outlink from the Josephus homepage:


  22. And a link right back at you:


    Despite the best wishes of sincere believers and the erroneous claims of truculent apologists, the Testimonium Flavianum has been demonstrated continually over the centuries to be a forgery, likely interpolated by Catholic Church historian Eusebius in the fourth century. So thorough and universal has been this debunking that very few scholars of repute continued to cite the passage after the turn of the 19th century. Indeed, the TF was rarely mentioned, except to note that it was a forgery, and numerous books by a variety of authorities over a period of 200 or so years basically took it for granted that the Testimonium Flavianum in its entirety was spurious, an interpolation and a forgery. As Dr. Gordon Stein relates:

    “…the vast majority of scholars since the early 1800s have said that this quotation is not by Josephus, but rather is a later Christian insertion in his works. In other words, it is a forgery, rejected by scholars.”

    So well understood was this fact of forgery that these numerous authorities did not spend their precious time and space rehashing the arguments against the TF’s authenticity. Nevertheless, in the past few decades apologists of questionable integrity and credibility have glommed onto the TF, because this short and dubious passage represents the most “concrete” secular, non-biblical reference to a man who purportedly shook up the world. In spite of the past debunking, the debate is currently confined to those who think the TF was original to Josephus but was Christianized, and those who credulously and self-servingly accept it as “genuine” in its entirety.

    To repeat—and I will be repetitious, because this spurious Josephus claim needs to be put to rest once and for all—this passage was so completely dissected by scholars of high repute and standing—the majority of them pious Christians—that it was for decades understood by subsequent scholars as having been proved in toto a forgery, such that these succeeding scholars did not even mention it, unless to acknowledge it as false. (In addition to being repetitious, I will also provide numerous quotes, because a strong show of rational consensus is desperately needed when it comes to matters of blind, unscientific and irrational faith.) The scholars who so conclusively proved the TF a forgery made their mark at the end of the 18th century and into the 20th, when a sudden reversal was implemented, with popular opinion hemming and hawing its way back first to the “partial interpolation theory” and in recent times, among the third-rate apologists, to the notion that the whole TF is “genuine.”

  23. Elwed beat me to it. We’ve been over the Testimonium Flavianum before here on SEB. It’s been beaten to death a few times now.

  24. Les: gotcha!

    I am not invested either way, but I can see how the absence of primary non-Biblical sources documenting Jesus as an actual historical figure could get an apologist’s knickers in a twist.

    Come to think of it, it’s been a while since the last Nunya sighting…

  25. I am not invested either way, but I can see how the absence of primary non-Biblical sources documenting Jesus as an actual historical figure could get an apologist’s knickers in a twist.

    Your statement of opinion comes across as though it’s fact and not theory.  But theory it is, and the posted link and information come from a source with an axe to grind, so what else would anyone think except that they are simply grinding an axe?

    As acknowledged even by proponents of the forgery theory, the style and vocabulary of the passage is essentially that of Josephus (cf. the studies employing the Rengstorf concordance and the TLG database). Thus, an imitator must have made a substantial effort to create something Josephus might have written. This effort by the imitator would have been hindered, not aided, by taking passages from Luke as a model, as this would add a foreign voice to the text. Since the proposed imitator wished people to mistake the passage for a Josephus original, it would have been perverse to employ a text that would undermine this goal—indeed, it is such foreign elements that have caused scholars to suspect a forgery.  http://members.aol.com/FLJOSEPHUS/question.htm#us

    There are many other reasons it is accepted as genuine:  It is found in all surviving manuscripts; uoted in full by Eusebius, c. 324 CE; vocabulary and style are generally consistent with that of Josephus; no other passage in the Antiquities has been seriously questioned, so the burden of proof is on the skeptics.  So far, they have been unconvincing.

    Especially when they quote other skeptics for their “proof.” 

    (Not that I don’t at least find the skeptics interesting reading—I have a few oddities on my shelf, like Darrow’s Infidels and Heretics and A.N. Wilson’s God’s Funeral.  I digest such books, but I don’t just swallow them whole.)

  26. Your statement of opinion comes across as though it’s fact and not theory.  But theory it is, and the posted link and information come from a source with an axe to grind, so what else would anyone think except that they are simply grinding an axe?

    And you and your sources have no axe to grind?

    You are free to be convinced by whatever floats your boat. I for one couldn’t care less if Jesus was an actual historical figure or if Jesus is a carbon copy of Horus or whoever.

    Having said that, let me tell you why I am not persuaded by your reply.

    It is found in all surviving manuscripts

    Early Christians stand accused of destroying a large number of inconvenient documents and forging others. All surviving, eh.

    quoted in full by Eusebius, c. 324 CE

    Wasn’t that the very guy accused of forgery? Anyway, whatever he quoted a couple hundred years after is hearsay and not the least bit convincing.

    vocabulary and style are generally consistent with that of Josephus;

    If true, a somewhat careful forgery…

    no other passage in the Antiquities has been seriously questioned,

    If so, it is one of the more important passages allegedly written in the Antiques and of course it is seriously questioned.

    so the burden of proof is on the skeptics

    There are two different matters to be proven. First, the veracity of the passage itself. Second, is the passage a forgery or not.

    I have said it before and I’ll say it again – I don’t care if Jesus was a historical figure or not, but if he was, he received substantial after-market upgrades.

    In closing, believe what you will.

  27. Mxyzptlk writes..

    Your statement of opinion comes across as though it’s fact and not theory.  But theory it is, and the posted link and information come from a source with an axe to grind, so what else would anyone think except that they are simply grinding an axe?

    Please explain how the site in question has an axe to grind. I’m curious as to what your theory is.

    There are many other reasons it is accepted as genuine:  It is found in all surviving manuscripts; qouted in full by Eusebius, c. 324 CE; vocabulary and style are generally consistent with that of Josephus; no other passage in the Antiquities has been seriously questioned, so the burden of proof is on the skeptics.  So far, they have been unconvincing.

    Especially when they quote other skeptics for their “proof.

  28. Yeah I should be, but I’m stressing too much over not getting the best of the possible jobs today. Can’t get the brain to shut down long enough to go to sleep. Perhaps I’ll give it another try in a couple of minutes…

  29. Mxyzptlk (great handle, btw)

    I concur… and further apologize for the thread drift. However, in the interest of the education of the comically (heh) ignorant, an excerpt from The Many Faces Of… Mxyzptlk

    Superman has faced many enemies throughout the years. Some have challenged him on a physical level, some on a mental level. There is one foe, however, who has challenged his patience more than anything else. The mischievous Imp from 5th Dimension known as Mr. Mxyzptlk has annoyed, confounded and confused The Man of Steel for decades, usually in the name of a good laugh. This devilish, magical prankster can appear on Earth once every 90 days, playing jokes and causing trouble on an epic scale, until Superman can outsmart him (which usually involves tricking him into saying his name backwards) and send him back to his own dimension. Sound crazy? That’s exactly the point.

    Hmm… I suppose a bit of Supes isn’t entirely off-topic here, what with his Sun-generated god-like powers and being one of those Sons come to Earth to “save” man and all… wink

  30. Have you even fully read the pages you’re using to back up your claims? I have, the author states that the Testimonium Flavianum is, at best, partially the work of Josephus with some interpolation by Christians at a later date. Further more he asserts that it’s not a first hand account on the part of Josephus, but an account taken from an unknown Christian manuscript which also ended up being the basis of a very similar passage in Luke:

    Oh, yes, I’ve read it, but I can’t say I agree with you on where he landed with it.  On his summary page of the issue, a chronology is listed detailing what various scholars have done with the question.  It’s easy to see what direction he goes, because for the most part, he simply reports “scholar X gave opinion Y.”  But with some of them, additional comments indicating his support of certain details, establishes his direction:

      Paul Winter argues that there are just three interpolations in the TF, and the rest is genuine. “He was the Messiah” and “if indeed he can be called a man” are considered most suspect, as is the latter section describing the resurrection and the prophecies. This identification of the interpolations becomes a popular view (reiterated by John Meier, 1991).

      Feldman writes: “The most probably view seems to be that our text represents substantially what Josephus wrote, but that some alterations have been made by a Christian interpolator.” (p. 49, Loeb edition)

      In a startling find, Shlomo Pines publishes citations of the TF appearing in Arabic and Syriac works of the 9th-10th century. These quotations substantially resemble our current Testimonium, but do not have two of the most suspicious phrases: “he was the Messiah” and “if indeed he can be called a man”. Pines suggests these editions may have used an authentic, uninterpolated version of Josephus’ work.

      John Meier studies the question again, repeats support for Winter’s view. This work is influential among contemporary scholars, including John Dominic Crossan and John O’Connor-Murphy.

      G. J. Goldberg identifies a regular series of correspondences between the TF and the Emmaus narrative of Luke. He argues these are so close the two must have been derived from a common source, a Christian document now lost.
      Moreover, the correspondences are not plausibly what would be expected of a Christian forger, nor can later interpolations have been made or the relationship between the texts would have been destroyed.
      The significant variations between the two texts is that the Luke texts have neither the phrase “if indeed he can be called a man” nor “he was the Messiah” at appropriate locations, in accordance with the Arabic version published by Pines (1971) and verifying the speculations of Winter.
      However, both texts contain the resurrection and the prophecy in parallel locations and with unusual overlapping vocabulary, again in accordance with the Arabic version, but in disagreement with the speculations of Winter, Meier, and others.
    The questions raised by scholars are answered, from the perspective of this theory, on the Questions page.

    In other words, his whole rationale for the discussion seems to be an evaluation of the “new evidence.”  And the new evidence seems to confirm, in his opinion, a direction already supported by a growing number of scholars, that the piece has literary and stylistic patterns that give substantial confirmation to Josephus as author.  The main interpolated material, apparently, involves two phrases, “if he can indeed be called a man” and “he was the Messiah.”

    And I hope you have not overlooked my earlier comment acknowledging that the date given to the passage is 93 C.E., placing it in a time not contemporary with Jesus.  That gives a little bit of leeway for speculation by those who want to knock its value for giving extra-biblical authenticity to an actual human historical person named Jesus.  There are some also who would like to claim that Josephus’ use of a Christian document in discussion of the matter gives less credence, since it is not Josephus saying it.  But the author has also covered that ground, when he mentioned the tendency of Josephus to seek out original sources for authentication purposes.  The fact that he sought out the piece he uses tends therefore to give more historical significance to his inclusion of it, not less.  Even in our times, the researcher who seeks out original documents is considered more reliable than one who does not, verdad?  In doing so, Josephus has provided a document that not only places Jesus within extra-biblical historical accounts, but is also perhaps with even more accurately pinpointed dating than is possible with the canonical Christian documents. 

    The greatest single barrier to denial of the existence of the actual historical Jesus, of course, is the death of the martyrs.  Many people are willing to die for a cause they believe in, but there are very few who, if involved in fomenting a belief they know very well to be untrue, will persist in it till their very deaths.

  31. The greatest single barrier to denial of the existence of the actual historical Jesus, of course, is the death of the martyrs.

    Sigh. Okay, I’ll bite: which martyrs are you talking about?  Of course, you must mean martyrs who claimed to have know Jesus personally, and are documented elsewhere than in the Bible.  Not that the existence or non-existence of Jesus is anything other than a mildly interesting historical footnote- I’m fairly certain Mohammed and L. Ron Hubbard existed, but that doesn’t make Islam or Scientology more likely to be true…

    And what about that Shroud of Turin?

  32. Nevermind, folks, Mxyzptlk has made it clear he/she/it can’t answer simple questions. No point in even engaging this idiot any further.

  33. Nevermind, folks, Mxyzptlk has made it clear he/she/it can’t answer simple questions. No point in even engaging this idiot any further.

    So exactly what do you propose I should do with a non-question like “What about the Shroud of Turin?”

    If my answer seems vague to you, then consider the question.  Until I can pierce through the vague fog and find out what he wants to know, I can’t give any definitive answer. 

    I answered your own assertions above, time 10:27 a.m., and the response I get is that I’m an idiot who can’t answer questions?

    And the only followup I get from anyone else is to totally ignore the rest of what I had to say and sidetrack onto the one unrelated comment found in the last two lines of my post?

    If you really think you can convince anyone of that, obviously you believe there’s more than one idiot here.

  34. Zilch: “Mxyzptlk (great handle, btw), do you believe in the Shroud of Turin too?”

    Zilch: “And what about that Shroud of Turin?”

    Mxyzptlk: “Yeah, what about it?”

    Les: “Mxyzptlk has made it clear he/she/it can’t answer simple questions.”

    Mxyzptlk: “So exactly what do you propose I should do with a non-question like “What about the Shroud of Turin?

  35. Point taken.  I missed the first reference, making the second question one of those wide-open spaces genre, which I never try to address without specifics.

    With the additional info, I think a simple “no” is all that’s necessary.  Certainly it was a thing I followed with some interest, but not something I ever saw as an issue my faith would rise or fall on.

  36. M:

    I was all excited when I saw that this thread was resurrected. smile  I mean no offense in my response here, but you make a mistake in your offensive. The mistake is switching the topic to one in which you have the burden.  On the subject that started this thread, the folks making the affirmative statement—Les, Nunya and Spocko had the burden.

    They failed to carry the burden at all.  The thread stood as a testament to that.  You will notice a very telling fact—Les, who is not shy, but is respectable in his claims, failed to come to Nunya’s and Spocko’s defense in the thread.  To Les’s credit, he has also stopped making the Horus reference since this thread.

    Recommendation for any further posting on this site:

    Make sure your sources are solid and insist on the same.
    Don’t ever mistaate a fact.
    Be fair in granting them an inference when one can be fairly drawn.
    Always make sure Elwed and zilch (they are a pretty good tag team and have a good sense of humor) don’t get the burden of proof confused. They will switch it on you let them.

    Other than that, I think that we likely agree on much.  There aren’t many posters of a similar persuasion, so nice to see ya. smile

  37. Always make sure Elwed and zilch (they are a pretty good tag team and have a good sense of humor) don’t get the burden of proof confused. They will switch it on you let them.

    Can you prove that, consi?  You are the one making the claim- the burden is on you raspberry

  38. Consi – now, now.

    Historical documents are a bit like witnesses in a trial of a crime committed a really long time ago.

    Are the witnesses who they say they are? Are they reporting an eyewitness account (primary sources) or hearsay (secondary sources)? Do they report the truth as they saw it at the time? Do they report the truth, nothing but the truth, and all of it?

    And like in a jury trial, it doesn’t matter who has the facts and the law on his side, but who the jury believes.

    I have said before that it is of no particular interest to me if Jesus was an actual historical figure; that doesn’t put me above expressing grave doubts about Christian historical claims.

  39. Historical documents are a bit like witnesses in a trial of a crime committed a really long time ago.

    We agree. smile  I was telling M he shouldn’t have undertaken a proposition for which he had the burden of proof, the existence of Jesus.  It makes for a very long endeavor.

    Having said that, I would maintain, and properly so, that once M established that there were historical documents, and there clearly are, that established Jesus’s existence.  There would be in effect a presumption of the veracity of the documents, until evidence to the contrary is submitted to the “jury.”  The burden then shifts to Les and Co. to establish by a preponderance of the evidence that the historical documents were forged or altered. That is much more than just casting about speculation that the documents might or could have been forged.

    As a result, I think in the last discussion we had even zilch admitted that in all likelihood there was most likely a historical Jesus.  He took issue with the possibilities of the liberties taken by some of the biblical authors, and that is fair.    I know of no evidence that could carry the burden on that point.

  40. Can’t we just get back to Horus?

    As far as the TF is concerned, there are a couple of related questions to settle. Who wrote the passage in question, when was it written, and is it a primary source? None of the answers is of particular interest to me.

    To the best of my shallow knowledge about Christianity, this is the only non-Biblical reference to a historic Jesus that is claimed to be a primary source. Small wonder that it is interpreted to death by Christians and others alike. And of course, even if it was written by whom apologists claim, the veracity of the passage remains to be shown.

    I’ll simply side with zilch, except that I’m not convinced that some kind of historical Jesus existed. You would think that he would have raised enough of a stink to be documented far and wide by non-Christians, but that doesn’t appear to be the case.

  41. con:

    Do not confuse boredom with capitulation!


    Flavius’ account proves nothing whether he wrote it or not. He was born decades after the alleged Jesus character lived and died and he cites no source. In other words, this is hearsay – not an eyewitness account. The first to say that Flavius’ wrote this account of Jesus was Eusebius. What can we make of a man who writes…

    “We shall introduce into this history in general only those events which may be useful first to ourselves and afterwards to posterity.”
    —Eusebius, Ecclesiastical History

    and how ‘bout the title to this chapter in Praeparatio Evangelica

    “How it may be Lawful and Fitting to use Falsehood as a Medicine, and for the Benefit of those who Want to be Deceived”

    —Eusebius, Praeparatio Evangelica

    Pitiful, yes? End of story if you ask me. Funny that the xtians latch onto this tiny mention of Jesus in Antiquities but don’t bother with the many references to Hercules! If Flavius’ paragraph on Jesus proves “His” existence then why not Hercules too? The Herc’s tale should sound a bit familiar to you; born of a god and a mortal woman, Hera wanted him dead (hmmm – Hera/Herod?, nah), he traveled the earth helping folks out and performing miraculous deeds, dies and rises up to “heaven” (Mt Olympus) to become a god himself.

    Why are there no eyewitness accounts of this Jesus guy anyway? Not one. The earliest writings, the epistles and so-called gospels, were all written decades (or centuries) after the tale and not only are they not eyewitness accounts but they are riddled with inconsistencies and contradictions. None of the authors of the epistles even describe Jesus as a human being at all!

    It sure seems odd to me that such a famous dude like Jesus would have been written about extensively by folks, outside of the Bible, that lived during his time! If we are to believe that the Bible relates the truth then Jesus was not some obscure fellow but known by many, king or peasant. “Matthew” tells us that “there followed him (Jesus) great multitudes of people from Galilee, and from Decapolis, and from Jersulaem, and from Judaea, and from beyond Jordan” and that even Herod “knew of the fame of Jesus” (Matt 4 & 14). “Luke” says that there grew “a fame abroad of him: and great multitudes came together to hear…” and an “innumberable multitude of people… trode one upon another.” Luke 5 & 12. “Multitudes” are supposed to have known of him, chief priests and scribes, “those abroad”, folks of all sorts followed him around.

    Yet, given these “truths”, no believer questions the fact that there is nothing written about this Superman anywhere outside the anonymous penpals in the Bible! Herod kills every child in Bethlehem, indeed a horrible crime, but why do we have no “news reports” about this? SuperJebus brings the rotting dead up from the grave, heals the blind, heals lepers, croaks and pops out of the grave himself and no one bothers to jot down so much as a footnote!

    There were many brilliant scholars who should have written about such a great and famous man if, indeed, Jesus lived and did all that we are told. Philo Judaeus comes to mind, he wrote detailed descriptions of the events of the Jews that occurred in the same area, but makes not one mention of the “godchild”. Nothing from Pliny the Elder or Seneca or anyone else for that matter.

    I will never accept hearsay, anonymous or otherwise, as evidence for anything. Give me verifiable eyewitness accounts by noted scholars and I’ll consider it.

    “We have to accept somewhat looser standards. In the legal profession, to convict the defendant of a crime, you need proof beyond a reasonable doubt. In civil cases, a preponderance of the evidence is sufficient. When dealing with the Bible or any ancient source, we have to loosen up a little; otherwise, we can’t really say anything.”

    —David Noel Freedman, Bible Review magazine (1993)

    The originator of this thread basically sets up a false dichotomy and straw-man argument and then proceeds to tear it apart: The story of Horus must be exactly the same as the Jesus mythos or any of its similarities must be ignored completely.

    Clever plagiarizers modify the story they copy. Osiris/Horus was only the beginning of a very long list of religions that all bare similar traits. Check out Mithra, Prometheus, Hermes, Perseus, Apollonius, Dionysus, Bacchus, Attis, Zoroaster, Zarathustra, and who knows how many others and see if you don’t catch a bit of Déjà Vu.

    “…all served as pre-Christian sun gods, yet all allegedly had gods for fathers, virgins for mothers; had their births announced by stars; got born on the solstice around December 25th; had tyrants who tried to kill them in their infancy; met violent deaths; rose from the dead; and nearly all got worshiped by “wise men” and had allegedly fasted for forty days.”

    —Patrick Campbell of The Mythical Jesus

    “When we say that the Word, who is first born of God, was produced without sexual union, and that he, Jesus Christ, our teacher, was crucified and died, and rose again, and ascended into heaven; we propound nothing different from what you believe regarding those whom you esteem sons of Jupiter (Zeus).”

    —Justin Martyr to the “Pagans” [First Apology, ch. xxi]

    The pre-xtian cult of Mithra had a deity of light and truth, son of the Most High, fought against evil, presented the idea of the Logos. Pagan Mithraism mysteries had the burial in a rock tomb, resurrection, sacrament of bread & water (Eucharist), the marking on the forehead with a mystic mark, the symbol of the Rock, the Seven Spirits and seven stars, all before the advent of xtianity.

    In the book The Jesus Puzzle, the biblical scholar, Earl Doherty, presents not only a challenge to the existence of an historical Jesus but reveals that early pre-Gospel Christian documents show that the concept of Jesus sprang from non-historical spiritual beliefs of a Christ derived from Jewish scripture and Hellenized myths of savior gods. Nowhere do any of the New Testament epistle writers describe a human Jesus, including Paul. None of the epistles mention a Jesus from Nazareth, an earthly teacher, or as a human miracle worker. Nowhere do we find these writers quoting Jesus. Nowhere do we find them describing any details of Jesus’ life on earth or his followers. Nowhere do we find the epistle writers even using the word “disciple” (they of course use the term “apostle” but the word simply means messenger, as Paul saw himself). Except for two well known interpolations, Jesus always gets presented as a spiritual being that existed before all time with God, and that knowledge of Christ came directly from God or as a revelation from the word of scripture. Doherty writes, “Christian documents outside the Gospels, even at the end of the first century and beyond, show no evidence that any tradition about an earthly life and ministry of Jesus were in circulation.”

    When one takes the time to investigate all of these fantasy stories one cannot help but see the thread of truth in the evolution of the gods, unless you have your eyes and mind squeezed tight with the blindfold of “faith”.

    A historical Jesus may have existed, I’ll grant that, maybe based on an actual human being even though his true history was lost. We do have an tremendous evidence supporting the evolution of the Jesus mythos. Practically every detail in the gospels occurred in pagan and/or Hebrew stories, long before the invention of xtianity. We simply do not have a shred of evidence to determine the historicity of this “Jesus Christ” character. This is merely evidence for the belief of Jesus.

    Damn, it’s almost 5:00! I better shut up and hit the sack!


    Totally off topic but everyone should read this!

  42. The writer did not set up a false dichotomy unless one uses a very loose standard for a false dichotomy.

    Spocko said: “…all served as pre-Christian sun gods, yet all allegedly had gods for fathers, virgins for mothers; had their births announced by stars; got born on the solstice around December 25th; had tyrants who tried to kill them in their infancy; met violent deaths; rose from the dead; and nearly all got worshiped by “wise men

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.