steve_bnk

Well, Thor Heyerdahl proved both the Atlantic and Pacific could have been crossed by ancient boats. He crossed the Atlantic on an ancient Egyptian design.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thor_He...s_Ra_and_Ra_II
'...In 1969 and 1970, Heyerdahl built two boats from papyrus and attempted to cross the Atlantic Ocean from Morocco in Africa. Based on drawings and models from ancient Egypt, the first boat, named Ra (after the Egyptian Sun god), was constructed by boat builders from Lake Chad using papyrus reed obtained from Lake Tana in Ethiopia and launched into the Atlantic Ocean from the coast of Morocco. After a number of weeks, Ra took on water after its crew made modifications to the vessel that caused it to sag and break apart. The ship was abandoned and the following year, another similar vessel, Ra II, was built of totora by Demetrio, Juan and Jose Limachi from Lake Titicaca in Bolivia and likewise set sail across the Atlantic from Morocco, this time with great success. The boat reached Barbados, thus demonstrating that mariners could have dealt with trans-Atlantic voyages by sailing with the Canary Current..'

steve_bnk

Writers do what writers always do, use the inspiration around them and what they see and hear. Ancient Jews/Hebrews, Greeks, Roman, modern.

You only have to look at Mormanism, Scientolgy, Rosicurcians, Theosophy, and a host of modern systems that are a blend of Chrtianity, eastern tradtiions,and mysticism.

None were invented in a vacuum. The Christian writers did not write in an intelectual vacuum, they had a view, a message, a cultural context, and adapted/embellished the story to suit. Really not all that historically mysterious, sinister, or unique.

The history of it has nothing to do with issues some of us may have today with Chrtianity. Rants serve no purpose. WetherMoses existed is not the issue, the fact that the Jewish/Hebrew writes may have borrowed from existing montheism and other myths s pertinent.

outhouse

they didnt borrow montheism.

they were in fact creating another divine being to be worshipped.




if you had more historical knowledge on thi ssubject you would see when ancient hebrews worshipped something, they made it very clear what they were worshipping. You didnt have to create imaginary connect the dots.

take a volcano, did they add to yawheh to describe this natural event?? yes but thats not his foundation. a dded description of a trembling mountain whooooo

they created a new deity seprate to handle that specific topic.



jesus was built on from a Galilean traveling teacher/healer of judaism who was a mortal man who died on a cross at roman hands


had jesus cenetred around the zodiac, it would have resembled a egyptian deity or a early Sumerian deity. You know those influences the whole religion is based on. those early influences magnified and blown out of porportion by people preying on your ignorance.


this is exactly why Carrier, hates this crap, because he has to go back and retrain people and get them on a real track of history.

There is no parrallel to the zodiac with jesus at all. it only exist in modern imagination

seeker

Actually they probably did.

You want to be a bit more precise here if you are going to take people to task for a lack of historical knowledge. The fact is that archaeology suggests that Israel and Jerusalem were polytheistic up until at least the time of Josiah (the bible even mentions constant reversions to polytheism). The real likelihood is that what became Judaism had less to do with 'Ancient Hebrews' and more to do with Persians and their own version of monotheism.

This is ironic. Have you ever considered that a conquering country might graft their theology onto another deity and then present that new religion as a 'restoration of the religion of your ancestors'? Come on, is Zerubabbel leading returning exilees back to Jerusalem to teach the natives there the old ways or is he leading colonists to Jerusalem to impose a new religion on the natives?

The Cyrus scrolls read a lot like the passage in Isaiah (where Isaiah even calls Cyrus the Messiah).



Plausible but lots of things are plausible.


Actually you might want to rethink this. By the time the Christian story is being written there are any number of sun gods ranging from Mithra to Apollo that resemble Jesus. That occurs precisely because their stories are built with the same astrological template in the same way that mystery religion gods resemble each other.

The point is not that Jesus was a sun god but that the Jesus story is a construct and the creator of that story used common storytelling devices of the time including astrology.

aa5874

You have NO sources for your claim about YOUR Jesus. What book are you reading??? Please Identify your source or desist from making IDLE unsubstantiated assertions.

In the EARLIEST Codices, Jesus was the Son of God that walked on water and Transfigured.

You seem to be reading from a BLANK BOOK or reciting YOUR own imagination.

GakuseiDon

FYI: It isn't actually in the New Testament. The NT doesn't tell us how many magi visited Jesus. Also, Dec 25 isn't in the NT either.

Voice of reason

I was a bit hasty writing and not specific about the mages.

Dec 25 is not but that is when the Catholic church established his birthday why?

outhouse

you mean the switch to monotheism and strict worship to Yahweh around 622 BC during the time of second Isaiah


and yes we know it took a while for it to sink in


history is about plausibility

in this case, Hjesus has historicity, its argued and rightfully so. but the man has it.


correct and I havnt argued the possible slight influences. But as a whole, its a laughed at joke among real scholars. the joke is short lived though due to the way misinformation spreads within the ignorant.

again, if jesus was built around astrology it would be evident, the way it is within people that did worship sun gods. But the fact is, it isnt.




mythers are all shot down for the fact his story ressembles OT passages much more directly then others that may have built of judaism ;0

outhouse

early-to-mid 4th century has nothing to do with the gospels or Paul

Tom Sawyer

The Zodiac analogy does sound a bit thin. It reminds me of the Shakespeare courses where they talk about how every play he made is a deliberate indepth reference to fifteen or twenty different things.