Roger Pearse

I wonder what examples there are of this?

All the best,

Roger Pearse

robto

I'm not going to spend my hard-earned money buying the e-book, but here's what I could find about Horus being born on Dec. 25 on the website:
OK. First of all, the passage is from Plutarch, who lived in the 1st-2nd century AD. So we aren't talking ancient Egyptian texts here.

Next, note that "Dec. 25" has been elided and replaced with "the winter solstice", a much more general term. Since the actual date of the solstice depended not only on which calendar you were using, but WHEN you were using it (the ancient calendars were not as accurate as ours, and astronomical events changed dates over the centuries), it's term that could refer to lots of different dates.

Next, we only read that Horus was born "about the winter solstice". Not necessarily ON the solstice. But it gets worse. Here's the passage in its original context:
(Emphasis added.)

Aha! Horus/Harpocrates's birth wasn't celebrated in winter at all, but at the spring equinox!

Now, I'm no classics scholar, and I haven't looked into this passage other than reading it through just now. But there is obviously more going on here than a simple birth on the winter solstice. It seems he is first born "imperfect and premature", but his real birth came later, or some such thing. At any rate, it is simply false and misleading and crummy scholarship to pull such a quote out of context and use it back up the claim that "Horus was born on Dec. 25."

No WAY I'm spending good money on that ebook.

Toto

Acharya claims Neith of Sais was a virgin mother who gave birth to the sun, citing Plutarch and others.

She also notes that all of the Egyptian gods and goddesses borrowed characteristics from each other. And it is well known that these gods evolved or shape shifted through time.

This site seems to think that Neith was a War Goddess before becoming a creatrix: This page describes Nit as "the womb of creation from which everything was born."

If you are into grand themes, this might be enough of an association - world mother giving birth to everything through parthenogenesis turns into a simple peasant virgin giving birth to the savior. But I don't see the intermediate steps. The birth narratives in the gospels seem to derive more from Jewish scripture, but perhaps you can argue that they resonated with people who were used to festivals celebrating a virgin goddess who gave birth to the sun.

Dave31

robto in the quote you cited:

You glossed over "about the time of the winter solstice she gave birth to Harpocrates" WHY?

It looks like you searched for the first thing you could to refute the concept of Horus being born on Dec 25th or the winter solstice without even realizing it says just that in the previous sentence you emphasized. Talk about "false and misleading and crummy scholarship" - Geez.

These types of complaints represent why this information never quite comes out of the basement. People are too quick to make assumptions without even studying to work. They use a quote or excerpt from the advert/promo page and base their entire conclusion on a snippet or two from that. Then, go further to accuse the author of "false and misleading and crummy scholarship" without taking any responsibility for their own.

It's impossible to find an Egyptian hieroglyph that says "December 25th" when the Gregorian calendar wasn't implemented until 1582 CE. There is the Julian which placed the winter solstice on Dec. 25th. The variety of calendars can confuse the issue, that's why the focusing on the winter solstice and/or the vernal equinox etc, may be easier.

Another thing to remember is that we're not talking about real historical people here with set-in-stone biographies, rather, we're talking about mythological characters sometimes with a variety of versions at different time periods throughout the several thousand year history of Egypt.

If you want more info or details, STUDY THE WORK. This seems like a new concept in this internet age.

Dave31

Roger give the Companion guide a good going over.

mg01

Not to stir the pot any more than is already happening, but as an outsider to this thread I can help but wonder if all this discussion isn't being lost in the details. All I see over and over are references to celebrations relating to deities coinciding with astronomical events. Does this not suggest that this was a common thing to do? It may be an intresting exercise to try and date who referenced what first, but what does that really say? Identifying the first recorded instance of something says nothing about how old the tradition is, particularly when relating to deities who are recognized to have existed for centuries earlier. Also what does it matter whether it says Dec 25th, or Dec 21st, or the 15th or Melquart? If the context refers to the solstice then we know what they were talking about. How is a 1st century Jew in palistine expected to recogize what Dec 25th is? If it was importantant enough at the time, why didn't Luke tell us the date? Obviously these are the kinds of things that can't be formized until the necessary systems they rely on exist.

Maybe I'm just missing the point, wouldn't be the first time. I don't claim to think that Acharya is right on all issues (or any for that matter), nor am I trying to rant. I'm just trying to figure out what exactly is the point of all this discussion. Maybe that's my problem.

Dave31

Hello mg01

What's the point of this thread?

The Zeitgeist Movie has now had over 15 million views worldwide in several languages. Part 1 used Murdock's work as a source. People were interested in more information about the Horus-Jesus connection so she wrote an e-book.

Scroll down to view the "ZEITGEIST, Part 1" video
http://www.truthbeknown.com/videos.html

The original post asks, "What are your thoughts after reading this e-book?"

"The Companion Guide to ZEITGEIST, Part 1" e-book
http://www.stellarhousepublishing.com/zeitgeist.html

You may enjoy these:

"The Christmas Hoax"
http://www.truthbeknown.com/christmas.htm

"Astrotheology of the Ancients"
http://www.truthbeknown.com/astrotheology.html

Amaleq13

Yes.

Nothing but it is new information to enough that they are apparently willing to accept all sorts of claims connected to it regardless of how poorly researched they might be.

It might help to think of it as an ad campaign for a particular viewpoint.

Dave31

Not much of an ad campaign when it's been given away for free for the most part.

mg01, here's the full movie and official website: http://www.zeitgeistmovie.com

Amaleq13

It is trying to "sell" an idea, Dave.