Freethought & Rationalism Archive

dog-on · 05-21-2008, 12:21 AM

IMO, only an apologist would deny that there was any cross-fertilization between different belief systems in the ancient world.

The Roman's, who in my opinion created Christianity as we know it today, where known to do just that.

Should it be surprising that there are parallels to other belief systems of the day?

Of course not...

Malachi151 · 05-21-2008, 05:38 AM

There are two issues here really. Parallels vs. copies.

Is the wing of a bird a copy of the wing of a bat, or are bat wings and bird wings examples of the separate evolution of similar structures?

So #1) pointing out similarities does not in any way prove dependence or influence. #2) from what I've seen, all of the claimed similarities are greatly overblown by the Jesus/Osiris parallels folks.

I can only address the claims that I've seen and the primary sources that I've read. Part of the reason for posting a list here is to have a starting point for refuting these claims.

The only thing I've seen that remotely actually looks like a possible influence is the description of the Eucharist in Didache and the death and resurrection of Osiris. That's the one and only potentially meaningful parallel that I've seen.

Much of the evidence against influence simply comes from the fact that there are other better explanations for the qualities in question.

gurugeorge · 05-21-2008, 06:34 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Malachi151

There are two issues here really. Parallels vs. copies.

Is the wing of a bird a copy of the wing of a bat, or are bat wings and bird wings examples of the separate evolution of similar structures?

So #1) pointing out similarities does not in any way prove dependence or influence. #2) from what I've seen, all of the claimed similarities are greatly overblown by the Jesus/Osiris parallels folks.

I can only address the claims that I've seen and the primary sources that I've read. Part of the reason for posting a list here is to have a starting point for refuting these claims.

The only thing I've seen that remotely actually looks like a possible influence is the description of the Eucharist in Didache and the death and resurrection of Osiris. That's the one and only potentially meaningful parallel that I've seen.

Much of the evidence against influence simply comes from the fact that there are other better explanations for the qualities in question.

The thing is, it's not the "influence" argument that's interesting, it's the "parallel evolution" argument that's interesting. There may be some cross-influences going both ways later in the development of Christianity (I think that will be widely admitted), but what's really interesting is the degree to which early Christianity may have represented one of a type of ideas that were "in the air" at the time.

dog-on · 05-21-2008, 06:41 AM

How about disproving these, Malachi?

Quote:

CHAPTER XXI -- ANALOGIES TO THE HISTORY OF CHRIST.

And when we say also that the Word, who is the first-birth 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. For you know how many sons your esteemed writers ascribed to Jupiter: Mercury, the interpreting word and teacher of all; AEsculapius, who, though he was a great physician, was struck by a thunderbolt, and so ascended to heaven; and Bacchus too, after he had been torn limb from limb; and Hercules, when he had committed himself to the flames to escape his toils; and the sons of Leda, and Dioscuri; and Perseus, son of Danae; and Bellerophon, who, though sprung from mortals, rose to heaven on the horse Pegasus. For what shall I say of Ariadne, and those who, like her, have been declared to be set among the stars? And what of the emperors who die among yourselves, whom you deem worthy of deification, and in whose behalf you produce some one who swears he has seen the burning Caesar rise to heaven from the funeral pyre? And what kind of deeds are recorded of each of these reputed sons of Jupiter, it is needless to tell to those who already know. This only shall be said, that they are written for the advantage and encouragement of youthful scholars; for all reckon it an honourable thing to imitate the gods. But far be such a thought concerning the gods from every well-conditioned soul, as to believe that Jupiter himself, the governor and creator of all things, was both a parricide and the son of a parricide, and that being overcome by the love of base and shameful pleasures, he came in to Ganymede and those many women whom he had violated and that his sons did like actions. But, as we said above, wicked devils perpetrated these things. And we have learned that those only are deified who have lived near to God in holiness and virtue; and we believe that those who live wickedly and do not repent are punished in everlasting fire.

CHAPTER XXII -- ANALOGIES TO THE SONSHIP OF CHRIST.

Moreover, the Son of God called Jesus, even if only a man by ordinary generation, yet, on account of His wisdom, is worthy to be called the Son of God; for all writers call God the Father of men and gods. And if we assert that the Word of God was born of God in a peculiar manner, different from ordinary generation, let this, as said above, be no extraordinary thing to you, who say that Mercury is the angelic word of God. But if any one objects that He was crucified, in this also He is on a par with those reputed sons of Jupiter of yours, who suffered as we have now enumerated. For their sufferings at death are recorded to have been not all alike, but diverse; so that not even by the peculiarity of His sufferings does He seem to be inferior to them; but, on the contrary, as we promised in the preceding part of this discourse, we will now prove Him superior--or rather have already proved Him to be so--for the superior is revealed by His actions. And if we even affirm that He was born of a virgin, accept this in common with what you accept of Ferseus. And in that we say that He made whole the lame, the paralytic, and those born blind, we seem to say what is very similar to the deeds said to have been done by AEsculapius.

spamandham · 05-21-2008, 07:07 AM

Is the question specifically in regards to parallels between Horus and Jesus, or is it really a broader question of parallels between Christianity and Egyptian religion?

PhilVaz · 05-21-2008, 11:21 AM

dogon << How about disproving these, Malachi? >>

No problem. I'll copy/paste part of a Catholic Answers thread on this topic:

"And when we say also that the Word, who is the first-birth 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 [or Zeus]." (First Apology, chapter 21 "Analogies to the history of Christ")

Commentary: Justin appeals to the pagans, and is saying hey, you guys already believe much of this stuff. While he includes virgin birth, crucifixion, resurrection, and ascension among these, Justin realizes neither Dionysos nor Mithras (nor any Greek/Roman god) was crucified; he also recognizes Mithras was "born from a rock" not virgin born (see below).

"And what kind of deeds are recorded of each of these reputed sons of Jupiter [Zeus], it is needless to tell to those who already know. This only shall be said, that they are written for the advantage and encouragement of youthful scholars; for all reckon it an honourable thing to imitate the gods." (First Apology, chapter 21)

Commentary: Justin notes the stories of the gods were written to encourage the youth, for everyone knows it is honorable to imitate the gods. As St. Paul said, "imitate me as I imitate Christ" (1 Cor 11:1; cf. 1 Cor 4:16; 1 Thess 1:6; 2:14; 2 Thess 3:7ff; Phil 3:17).

First Apology, chapter 22 covers "Analogies to the sonship of Christ"; chapter 23 presents "The argument"; chapter 24 "The varieties of heathen worship"; chapter 25 "False gods abandoned by Christians"; chapters 31-53 many predictions/prophecies; chapter 54 "Origin of heathen mythology."

"But those who hand down the myths which the poets have made, adduce no proof to the youths who learn them; and we proceed to demonstrate that they have been uttered by the influence of the wicked demons, to deceive and lead astray the human race. For having heard it proclaimed through the prophets that the Christ was to come, and that the ungodly among men were to be punished by fire, they put forward many to be called sons of Jupiter [i.e. Zeus], under the impression that they would be able to produce in men the idea that the things which were said with regard to Christ were mere marvellous tales, like the things which were said by the poets. And these things were said both among the Greeks and among all nations where they [the demons] heard the prophets foretelling that Christ would specially be believed in; but that in hearing what was said by the prophets they did not accurately understand it, but imitated what was said of our Christ, like men who are in error, we will make plain." (First Apology, chapter 54)

Commentary: Again, Justin is claiming the Hebrew prophets were first with their prophecies on Christ, the Greeks copied from them, inspired by the devil/demons. Justin also notes no "proof" is offered for the Greek gods, because they were not historical but myth. By contrast, Christianity is a historical religion with a historical Christ and Hebrew prophecies.

"But in no instance, not even in any of those called sons of Jupiter [Zeus], did they imitate the being crucified; for it was not understood by them, all the things said of it having been put symbolically. And this, as the prophet foretold, is the greatest symbol of His power and role; as is also proved by the things which fall under our observation." (First Apology, chapter 55)

Commentary: Here Justin notes none of the sons of Zeus (which includes Dionysos/Bacchus) were crucified. Dionysos was ripped apart by the Titans, not crucified:

"For when they tell that Bacchus [or Dionysos], son of Jupiter [or Zeus], was begotten by [Jupiter's] intercourse with Semele, and that he was the discoverer of the vine; and when they relate, that being torn in pieces, and having died, he rose again, and ascended to heaven; and when they introduce wine into his mysteries, do I not perceive that [the devil] has imitated the prophecy announced by the patriarch Jacob, and recorded by Moses?" (Dialogue with Trypho, chapter 69)

Commentary: Justin notes Dionysos was not virgin born (Zeus had intercourse with Semele, etc) and was "torn to pieces" (by the Titans), not crucified. He also notes it was the O.T. prophecies recorded by Moses that the Greeks were "imitating." BTW, the quote above is found in Flemming's "God Who Wasn't There" DVD but he leaves out (without ellipses) the phrases in bold above. I wonder why?

As for whether Dionysos was "resurrected" he was basically put back together from his "heart" and/or re-born from the "thigh" of Zeus. See my section on Dionysos and the meaning of his "dismemberment."

Justin notes that Mithras (Persian, then Roman god) was not virgin born: "And when those who record the mysteries of Mithras say that he was begotten of a rock, and call the place where those who believe in him are initiated a cave, do I not perceive here that the utterance of Daniel, that a stone without hands was cut out of a great mountain, has been imitated by them, and that they have attempted likewise to imitate the whole of Isaiah's words?" (Dialogue with Trypho, chapter 70)

Commentary: Mithras was begotten of a rock, and his myth imitates the stories found in Daniel and Isaiah. Again, Justin is saying these Old Testament prophecies came first, and were then copied by the Greeks/Romans. That's how "the devil imitated the prophecy."

We're getting a bit off topic which is Horus = Jesus or not?

Phil P

Toto · 05-21-2008, 11:35 AM

Please do not copy and paste large blocks of text that are off topic to start with.

So far, no one has addressed my question above.

Is this only relevant to the question of whether Jesus was an unimaginative plagiarism of Horus? Is that not a straw man argument?

PhilVaz · 05-21-2008, 12:24 PM

Toto << Is this only relevant to the question of whether Jesus was an unimaginative plagiarism of Horus? Is that not a straw man argument? >>

Sorry, I probably missed all the great threads on this topic, but the whole "Horus = Jesus" thing was revived on the Internet (last year) because of the "Zeitgeist" movie. Zeitgeist claims Horus = Jesus because:

(1) Horus was born on Dec 25
(2) Horus was virgin born of Isis-Meri
(3) Horus birth was accompanied by a star in the east and three kings
(4) Horus was a "solar messiah"
(5) Horus was a prodigal teacher at 12
(6) Horus was baptized at 30 by Anup the baptizer
(7) Horus had 12 disciples he traveled with
(8) Horus performed miracles
(9) Horus was called The Truth, The Light, God's Annointed Son, The Good Shepherd, The Lamb of God
(10) Horus was crucified
(11) Horus was buried for three days
(12) Horus was resurrected

None of these turn out to be true. Horus is involved with healing magic as "Horus-the-Child" (Egyptian Har-pa-khered literally "Horus-the-child"; the Greeks had Harpokrates), and Horus was a "son of god" since son of Isis/Osiris.

As for Egyptian religion and Christianity, we do have the artistic motif of the mother and child images (Isis nursing Horus, Mary nursing Jesus), and both religions have some beliefs in an "afterlife." I don't know whether you want to call that imaginative or unimaginative, but that's it for the parallels and similarities. The bogus (1) through (12) items above appear to originate in amateur Egyptologist Gerald Massey's speculative books. I really don't care about Massey however; I care about the original primary Egyptian sources on Horus, and these are: (see Oxford Encyclopedia of Ancient Egypt, volume 2, "Horus" page 121ff):

-- Plutarch's De Iside et Osiride (in Latin translation).
-- the Memphite Theology or Shabaqo Stone (generally dated as late as the New Kingdom, c. 1540-1070 BC);
-- the Mystery Play of the Succession;
-- the Pyramid Texts (from the late Old Kingdom, c. 2575-2150 BC);
-- the Coffin Texts, especially Spell 148;
-- the Great Osiris hymn in the Louvre;
-- the Late Egyptian Contendings of Horus and Seth;
-- the Metternich Stela and other cippus texts;
-- the Ptolemaic Myth of Horus at Edfu (also known as the Triumph of Horus);

These cover the conception and birth of Horus, through his childhood hidden in the marshes, his protection by Isis, his conflict with Seth and his followers, and his succession as legitimate king. Those are the sources you want to refer to and quote for any alleged parallels. I quote a couple of them in my Horus article.

The copy/paste on St. Justin Martyr was something I originally wrote, so it should be OK. I was only responding to the quotes from Justin above (who does allude to the sons of Zeus, e.g. Dionysos, etc), and what I think they mean.

Phil P

Toto · 05-21-2008, 01:04 PM

Phil - what you missed: A few of Acharya's associates, and Acharya herself, showed up here to promote Zeitgeist. The response was underwhelming, and all left in a huff as we failed to appreciate Acharya's genius.

So you are beating a dead horse if you think you need to convince anyone about Zeitgeist.

There's more that you missed, but you appear to be here to post links to your website. Could you at least answer my question?

GakuseiDon · 05-21-2008, 03:31 PM

Thanks PhilVaz, that's very useful.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Toto

So far, no one has addressed my question above.

Is this only relevant to the question of whether Jesus was an unimaginative plagiarism of Horus? Is that not a straw man argument?

I thought that the question of parallels between Jesus and Horus had been pretty much settled on this board. That's why I was surprised at your statement that "the parallels between Jesus and Horus go beyond superficial. Robert Price thinks that Horus might have been the origin of Jesus, but thinks the evidence has been lost." If you had been an Acharya acolyte, I wouldn't have cared. But since I knew you had questioned these parallels previously as much as anyone, I wondered that maybe you or Robert Price had more information.

I'm okay with "imaginative plagiarism", though only after all the parallels (superficial or beyond) between Jesus and Horus are listed and verified as existing in primary sources.

Do we have any more parallels?

05-21-2008, 11:21 AM	#16
PhilVaz Regular Member Join Date: Aug 2003 Location: St. Pete FL Posts: 216	St. Justin Martyr on pagans dogon << How about disproving these, Malachi? >> No problem. I'll copy/paste part of a Catholic Answers thread on this topic: "And when we say also that the Word, who is the first-birth 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 [or Zeus]." (First Apology, chapter 21 "Analogies to the history of Christ") Commentary: Justin appeals to the pagans, and is saying hey, you guys already believe much of this stuff. While he includes virgin birth, crucifixion, resurrection, and ascension among these, Justin realizes neither Dionysos nor Mithras (nor any Greek/Roman god) was crucified; he also recognizes Mithras was "born from a rock" not virgin born (see below). "And what kind of deeds are recorded of each of these reputed sons of Jupiter [Zeus], it is needless to tell to those who already know. This only shall be said, that they are written for the advantage and encouragement of youthful scholars; for all reckon it an honourable thing to imitate the gods." (First Apology, chapter 21) Commentary: Justin notes the stories of the gods were written to encourage the youth, for everyone knows it is honorable to imitate the gods. As St. Paul said, "imitate me as I imitate Christ" (1 Cor 11:1; cf. 1 Cor 4:16; 1 Thess 1:6; 2:14; 2 Thess 3:7ff; Phil 3:17). First Apology, chapter 22 covers "Analogies to the sonship of Christ"; chapter 23 presents "The argument"; chapter 24 "The varieties of heathen worship"; chapter 25 "False gods abandoned by Christians"; chapters 31-53 many predictions/prophecies; chapter 54 "Origin of heathen mythology." "But those who hand down the myths which the poets have made, adduce no proof to the youths who learn them; and we proceed to demonstrate that they have been uttered by the influence of the wicked demons, to deceive and lead astray the human race. For having heard it proclaimed through the prophets that the Christ was to come, and that the ungodly among men were to be punished by fire, they put forward many to be called sons of Jupiter [i.e. Zeus], under the impression that they would be able to produce in men the idea that the things which were said with regard to Christ were mere marvellous tales, like the things which were said by the poets. And these things were said both among the Greeks and among all nations where they [the demons] heard the prophets foretelling that Christ would specially be believed in; but that in hearing what was said by the prophets they did not accurately understand it, but imitated what was said of our Christ, like men who are in error, we will make plain." (First Apology, chapter 54) Commentary: Again, Justin is claiming the Hebrew prophets were first with their prophecies on Christ, the Greeks copied from them, inspired by the devil/demons. Justin also notes no "proof" is offered for the Greek gods, because they were not historical but myth. By contrast, Christianity is a historical religion with a historical Christ and Hebrew prophecies. "But in no instance, not even in any of those called sons of Jupiter [Zeus], did they imitate the being crucified; for it was not understood by them, all the things said of it having been put symbolically. And this, as the prophet foretold, is the greatest symbol of His power and role; as is also proved by the things which fall under our observation." (First Apology, chapter 55) Commentary: Here Justin notes none of the sons of Zeus (which includes Dionysos/Bacchus) were crucified. Dionysos was ripped apart by the Titans, not crucified: "For when they tell that Bacchus [or Dionysos], son of Jupiter [or Zeus], was begotten by [Jupiter's] intercourse with Semele, and that he was the discoverer of the vine; and when they relate, that being torn in pieces, and having died, he rose again, and ascended to heaven; and when they introduce wine into his mysteries, do I not perceive that [the devil] has imitated the prophecy announced by the patriarch Jacob, and recorded by Moses?" (Dialogue with Trypho, chapter 69) Commentary: Justin notes Dionysos was not virgin born (Zeus had intercourse with Semele, etc) and was "torn to pieces" (by the Titans), not crucified. He also notes it was the O.T. prophecies recorded by Moses that the Greeks were "imitating." BTW, the quote above is found in Flemming's "God Who Wasn't There" DVD but he leaves out (without ellipses) the phrases in bold above. I wonder why? As for whether Dionysos was "resurrected" he was basically put back together from his "heart" and/or re-born from the "thigh" of Zeus. See my section on Dionysos and the meaning of his "dismemberment." Justin notes that Mithras (Persian, then Roman god) was not virgin born: "And when those who record the mysteries of Mithras say that he was begotten of a rock, and call the place where those who believe in him are initiated a cave, do I not perceive here that the utterance of Daniel, that a stone without hands was cut out of a great mountain, has been imitated by them, and that they have attempted likewise to imitate the whole of Isaiah's words?" (Dialogue with Trypho, chapter 70) Commentary: Mithras was begotten of a rock, and his myth imitates the stories found in Daniel and Isaiah. Again, Justin is saying these Old Testament prophecies came first, and were then copied by the Greeks/Romans. That's how "the devil imitated the prophecy." We're getting a bit off topic which is Horus = Jesus or not? Phil P

05-21-2008, 12:24 PM	#18
PhilVaz Regular Member Join Date: Aug 2003 Location: St. Pete FL Posts: 216	Horus = Jesus? Toto << Is this only relevant to the question of whether Jesus was an unimaginative plagiarism of Horus? Is that not a straw man argument? >> Sorry, I probably missed all the great threads on this topic, but the whole "Horus = Jesus" thing was revived on the Internet (last year) because of the "Zeitgeist" movie. Zeitgeist claims Horus = Jesus because: (1) Horus was born on Dec 25 (2) Horus was virgin born of Isis-Meri (3) Horus birth was accompanied by a star in the east and three kings (4) Horus was a "solar messiah" (5) Horus was a prodigal teacher at 12 (6) Horus was baptized at 30 by Anup the baptizer (7) Horus had 12 disciples he traveled with (8) Horus performed miracles (9) Horus was called The Truth, The Light, God's Annointed Son, The Good Shepherd, The Lamb of God (10) Horus was crucified (11) Horus was buried for three days (12) Horus was resurrected None of these turn out to be true. Horus is involved with healing magic as "Horus-the-Child" (Egyptian Har-pa-khered literally "Horus-the-child"; the Greeks had Harpokrates), and Horus was a "son of god" since son of Isis/Osiris. As for Egyptian religion and Christianity, we do have the artistic motif of the mother and child images (Isis nursing Horus, Mary nursing Jesus), and both religions have some beliefs in an "afterlife." I don't know whether you want to call that imaginative or unimaginative, but that's it for the parallels and similarities. The bogus (1) through (12) items above appear to originate in amateur Egyptologist Gerald Massey's speculative books. I really don't care about Massey however; I care about the original primary Egyptian sources on Horus, and these are: (see Oxford Encyclopedia of Ancient Egypt, volume 2, "Horus" page 121ff): -- Plutarch's De Iside et Osiride (in Latin translation). -- the Memphite Theology or Shabaqo Stone (generally dated as late as the New Kingdom, c. 1540-1070 BC); -- the Mystery Play of the Succession; -- the Pyramid Texts (from the late Old Kingdom, c. 2575-2150 BC); -- the Coffin Texts, especially Spell 148; -- the Great Osiris hymn in the Louvre; -- the Late Egyptian Contendings of Horus and Seth; -- the Metternich Stela and other cippus texts; -- the Ptolemaic Myth of Horus at Edfu (also known as the Triumph of Horus); These cover the conception and birth of Horus, through his childhood hidden in the marshes, his protection by Isis, his conflict with Seth and his followers, and his succession as legitimate king. Those are the sources you want to refer to and quote for any alleged parallels. I quote a couple of them in my Horus article. The copy/paste on St. Justin Martyr was something I originally wrote, so it should be OK. I was only responding to the quotes from Justin above (who does allude to the sons of Zeus, e.g. Dionysos, etc), and what I think they mean. Phil P

Thread Tools	Search this Thread
Show Printable Version	Search this Thread: Advanced Search

05-21-2008, 12:21 AM	#11
dog-on Veteran Member Join Date: Jun 2006 Location: The Netherlands Posts: 3,397	IMO, only an apologist would deny that there was any cross-fertilization between different belief systems in the ancient world. The Roman's, who in my opinion created Christianity as we know it today, where known to do just that. Should it be surprising that there are parallels to other belief systems of the day? Of course not...

05-21-2008, 05:38 AM	#12
Malachi151 Veteran Member Join Date: Jul 2003 Location: Colorado Posts: 8,674	There are two issues here really. Parallels vs. copies. Is the wing of a bird a copy of the wing of a bat, or are bat wings and bird wings examples of the separate evolution of similar structures? So #1) pointing out similarities does not in any way prove dependence or influence. #2) from what I've seen, all of the claimed similarities are greatly overblown by the Jesus/Osiris parallels folks. I can only address the claims that I've seen and the primary sources that I've read. Part of the reason for posting a list here is to have a starting point for refuting these claims. The only thing I've seen that remotely actually looks like a possible influence is the description of the Eucharist in Didache and the death and resurrection of Osiris. That's the one and only potentially meaningful parallel that I've seen. Much of the evidence against influence simply comes from the fact that there are other better explanations for the qualities in question.

05-21-2008, 07:07 AM	#15
spamandham Contributor Join Date: Mar 2004 Location: Dallas, TX Posts: 11,525	Is the question specifically in regards to parallels between Horus and Jesus, or is it really a broader question of parallels between Christianity and Egyptian religion?

05-21-2008, 11:35 AM	#17
Toto Contributor Join Date: Jun 2000 Location: Los Angeles area Posts: 40,549	Please do not copy and paste large blocks of text that are off topic to start with. So far, no one has addressed my question above. Is this only relevant to the question of whether Jesus was an unimaginative plagiarism of Horus? Is that not a straw man argument?

05-21-2008, 01:04 PM	#19
Toto Contributor Join Date: Jun 2000 Location: Los Angeles area Posts: 40,549	Phil - what you missed: A few of Acharya's associates, and Acharya herself, showed up here to promote Zeitgeist. The response was underwhelming, and all left in a huff as we failed to appreciate Acharya's genius. So you are beating a dead horse if you think you need to convince anyone about Zeitgeist. There's more that you missed, but you appear to be here to post links to your website. Could you at least answer my question?

Freethought & Rationalism Archive

The archives are read only.