It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

'Jesus NEVER existed': Writer finds no mention of Christ in 126 historical texts and says he was a

page: 40
94
<< 37  38  39    41 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Nov, 8 2014 @ 01:00 PM
link   

originally posted by: gort51
a reply to: Mr Mask

Mr. Mask...I understand your conviction to the scriptures....but please dont for one second believe that Mary, the WIFE of Joseph, was a virgin..


Um...I'm not religious nor am I a man of any faith.

I simply dislike seeing "history" mangled by 90 year old hoaxes that have been debunked for almost 100 years.

MM




posted on Nov, 8 2014 @ 01:12 PM
link   

originally posted by: windword



Again...Isis in the Isis Myth had sex to get pregnant.

What don't you get?


What? Why do you think this? There is no legitimate mythology that portrays Isis having sex. She was worshiped as "The Great Virgin". There is no denying this. It written all over the pyramid and temple walls. Mary, the mother of Jesus was NOT the first mythical virgin! Isis was!




So wait...you are arguing about Isis...and you are unaware of how she got pregnant? Sex with a golden phallus that she crafted and attached to the resurrected body of Osiris?

In the myth- she took the limbs and parts of Osiris and put them together- then used magic to bring him back to life, then created a golden penis (cus his penis was thrown in the Nile) and she had sex with him to get pregnant.

If you are baffled and unaware of this simple (and most famous) part of the myth...you are not equipped to have this discussion at all.

As for proving to you that the Mary-Isis connection has been debunked and is laughed at by ALL scholars today was done when i linked you to one of the world's most prolific scholar's PDF on the matter. It was a long and detailed PDF archived in in a legitimate academic website for educational purposes...yet...like I said you would...you ignored it for Youtube nonsense trying to recycle debunked garbage from Gerald Massy from the late 1800s...

This is the problem we are facing. Most people get their education from Youtube videos...and in turn they form a broken world view based on hoaxes, lies and stupid inventions of whimsical fallacy.

I shared three academic papers with you that should set any child straight on this...as a grown person you are still asking for proof WHILE sharing debunked nonsense that historians have laughed at for almost 100 years.

See the problem here?

Isis had sex with Osiris to have Horus. Its the Isis Myth and its very well documented.

Try academic sources...seriously...just try it...see where you arrive when you cut Youtube from your educational process and replace it with peer reviewed data that is supported by proper research from experts.

You may be shocked.

MM



posted on Nov, 8 2014 @ 01:16 PM
link   

originally posted by: windword
a reply to: Mr Mask

What does any of this have to do with the topic or any of the evidence that I provided? Where did I quote Massey?

At any rate, please attack the evidence provided, not the source.



i've attacked the sources and the "evidence" you have provided. Each time I have linked you to an academic website with an expert authoring it.

You have endlessly quoted Massy...he is the only person this garbage info you are sharing comes from. Him and now those who recycled his crap for books and vids.

Everything you hear on this matter that leans towards your conclusion is re-used nonsense first introduced by Massy. And I think the wiki on Massy ends with a nice little bit of info in saying-


Christian theologian W. Ward Gasque, a Ph.D. from Harvard and Manchester University, sent emails to twenty Egyptologists that he considered leaders of the field - including Kenneth Kitchen of the University of Liverpool and Ron Leprohan of the University of Toronto - in Canada, the United States, Britain, Australia, Germany and Austria to verify academic support for some of these assertions. His primary targets were Tom Harpur, Alvin Boyd Kuhn and the Christ myth theory, and only indirectly Massey. Ten out of twenty responded, but most were not named. According to Gasque, Massey's work, which draws comparisons between the Judeo-Christian religion and the Egyptian religion, is not considered significant in the field of modern Egyptology and is not mentioned in the Oxford Encyclopedia of Ancient Egypt or similar reference works of modern Egyptology.[8][unreliable source?] Gasque reports that those who responded were unanimous in dismissing the proposed etymologies for Jesus and Christ, and one unspecified Egyptologist referred to Alvin Boyd Kuhn's comparison as "fringe nonsense."[8][unreliable source?] However, Harpur's response to Gasque quotes leading contemporary Egyptologist Erik Hornung that there are parallels between Christianity and ancient Egypt,[9] as do the writings of biblical expert Thomas L. Thompson.[10]

Theologian Stanley E. Porter has pointed out that Massey's analogies include a number of errors, e.g. Massey stated that December 25 as the date of birth of Jesus was selected based on the birth of Horus, but the New Testament does not include any reference to the date or season of the birth of Jesus.[11][12][13] The earliest known source recognizing the 25th of December as the date of birth of Jesus is by Hippolytus of Rome, written around the beginning of the 3rd century, based on the assumption that the conception of Jesus took place at the Spring equinox. Hippolytus placed the equinox on March 25 and then added 9 months to get December 25, thus establishing the date for festivals.[14] The Roman Chronography of 354 then included an early reference to the celebration of a Nativity feast in December, as of the fourth century.[15] Porter states that Massey's serious historical errors often render his works nonsensical, e.g. Massey states that the biblical references to Herod the Great were based on the myth of "Herrut" the evil hydra serpent, while the existence of Herod the Great can be well established without reliance on Christian sources.[11]


Please read that and stop spreading anti-history.

MM



posted on Nov, 8 2014 @ 02:24 PM
link   

originally posted by: Mr Mask

Again...Isis in the Isis Myth had sex to get pregnant.



Too many conflicting stories that i am reading and nothing that impacts this discussion - see below


Isn't all of this contained in a documentary from a few years ago that after research was quite a ways off in many segments. Especially relating to this since it is easy to debunk with web searches. Surprised these old canards get dusted off from time to time. Reminds of internet 2005. Brings back some memories though i agree - ALWAYS do your own research.


originally posted by: windword
What? Why do you think this? There is no legitimate mythology that portrays Isis having sex. She was worshiped as "The Great Virgin". There is no denying this. It written all over the pyramid and temple walls. Mary, the mother of Jesus was NOT the first mythical virgin! Isis was!



I doubt people would find this to be particularly important and another example of if something was so well known then it was well known at that time. I would be very confident in saying that the general peeps knew and how could they not know? And then with these stories you have too many recent additions that just lead to nowhere so we would conclude they were made up hundred or thousands of years later.





edit on 8-11-2014 by Harvin because: Revision



posted on Nov, 8 2014 @ 03:20 PM
link   
a reply to: Mr Mask


You people


lol!! "You People"???


think the bible is to be thrown out as 100% garbage. Nothing could be farther from the truth. The bible contains much historic writing that is unanimously considered legitmate and indisputable by mainstream historians and real scholars.

Mm. Unanimously? No. They may "legitimately" EXIST, and insofar as they exist they can not be denied, BUT (BIG BUT) - there is NO evidence that any of the "authors" were eyewitnesses, or the people after whom the Gospels are named, were really the authors.


Example- Epistles of Paul.

The Epistles of Paul (or most of them) alone are enough to give good reason to accept Jesus as being real since they are written 40 years after the death of Jesus and notably considered accurate by almost all historians.


Paul NEVER met Jesus. Ever. How are they "accurate"? No - they are a politician's writings, and he knew what he was doing. There is LOTS of evidence that Paul never met "Jesus." Neither did Constantine.



posted on Nov, 8 2014 @ 03:24 PM
link   
a reply to: Mr Mask


I simply dislike seeing "history" mangled by 90 year old hoaxes that have been debunked for almost 100 years.


"History" is written by the victors. The winners. The powerful people who want no one else to read the articles that debunk their authority. That is WHY the scrolls found in Nag Hammadi and the Dead Sea were found HIDDEN.

Sheesh. You people who don't keep up with modern investigation. Sorry you're so disappointed. It is what it is.



posted on Nov, 8 2014 @ 03:37 PM
link   
a reply to: Mr Mask



So wait...you are arguing about Isis...and you are unaware of how she got pregnant? Sex with a golden phallus that she crafted and attached to the resurrected body of Osiris?


Please provide primary evidence of this story. Can you provide a papyrus, a carving, a tablet, or hieroglyphics depicting this story? I can't find a single one.

There is no primary evidence of Isis creating a golden phallus and having sex with it. And, that is far from what the myth states.

In a ceremony, led by the god Thoth, Isis transforms into a hawk and hovers above the dead body of Osiris, where his essence arises, becoming Horus, the Light of the World, residing in the now pregnant goddess Isis.




She made light with her feathers, she made air to come into being with her wings, and she uttered cries of lamentation at the bier of her brother. 16. She stirred up from his state of inactivity him whose heart was still (i.e., Osiris), she drew from him his seed, she made an heir, she suckled the babe in solitariness,
Hymn to Osiris


There is no penal/vaginal penetration in the conception of Horus.

History is very clear cut on this. The fact is Isis was worshiped as a Perpetual Virgin Goddess before the Mary myth was a twinkle in Yahweh's eye! This is verified on pyramid and temple walls, in ancient writings by Plato, Plutarch, early Church fathers such as Hippolytus and countless theologians and historians.



If you are baffled and unaware of this simple (and most famous) part of the myth...you are not equipped to have this discussion at all.


Indeed. I have shown you irrefutable primary evidence from pyramid and temple walls and papyri that Isis was a venerated virgin goddess that miraculously gave birth to Horus, the light of the world. Until you can present primary proof, such a pyramid wall carving or hieroglyphics, proving your story of a golden phallus, I'm calling YOU completely ignorant on the subject.



As for proving to you that the Mary-Isis connection has been debunked and is laughed at by ALL scholars today was done when i linked you to one of the world's most prolific scholar's PDF on the matter.


You link was a Christian apologetic opinion piece. But even her opening paragraph suggests that there exists a large body of scholars who hold the opinion that Mary is an Isis knockoff. Her essay didn't convince me of anything. Care to explain what part of it convinces you?

Since you don't even believe that Mary was really a virgin, I have to wonder why and how you think the myth and veneration of the Virgin Mary happened in the first place?

According to Raymond E. Brown, a well-known Catholic theologian currently on the staff of Saint Patrick Seminary in Menlo Park, California, when asked about the origin of the virginal birth of Jesus....


[there is the] possibility that "early Christians" might have imported a mythology about virginal conception from "pagan or [other] world religions," but never intended that that mythology be taken literally. "Virginal conception was a well-known religious symbol for divine origins," explains Brown, citing such stories in Buddhist, Hindu, Zoroastrian, Greco-Roman and ancient Egyptian theologies. He proposes that early Christians "used an imagery of virginal conception whose symbolic origins were forgotten as it was disseminated among various Christian communities and recorded by evangelists.
www.simpletoremember.com...


As we can see, your claim that there was never any correlation between Isis and Mary was completely incorrect, and it continues to be evident that you do not know the subject matter about which you pretend to know.




Egyptologist Dr. Bojana Mojsov says in her book Osiris: Death and Afterlife of a God:

As the redemptive figured of the Egyptian god [Osiris] loomed large over the ancient world, Isis came to be worshipped as the Primordial Virgin and their child as the Savior of the World.

The cult of Isis and Horus-the-Child was especially popular. Hundreds of bronze figurines of Isis nursing her infant found in temples and households became models for the Christian figures of the Virgin and child.




The religion of Isis thus spread throughout the Roman Empire during the formative centuries of Christianity.The image of Horus breast feeding on his mother (pictured above left) became the iconic image of the Isis cult in Rome that then became the template for the Christian Madonna cult that can still be seen today in most all Roman Catholic Churches. The last Pharaoh Queen of Egypt, Cleopatra VII was of the family of Ptolemy and had always appeared in public clothed in a robe sacred to Isis, her head adorned with a crown of golden lily leaves. It represents a woman with a glory around her head and a babe in her arms or seated on her knee.

However, this image is no longer known as the Cult of Isis and is now part of the world’s largest religion known today as Catholicism and the her name is no longer that off Isis, but was replaced by the iconic Virgin Mary.
gnosticwarrior.com...


The fact remains that The “Jesus Christ” and "The Virgin Mary" of the New Testament remain a fictional compilation of characters, not a single historical individual. It does the previous cultures a great disservice to have their religious and mythological ideas stolen and reworked as a fictional Jewish man.
edit on 8-11-2014 by windword because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 8 2014 @ 04:01 PM
link   
a reply to: BuzzyWigs




Paul NEVER met Jesus. Ever. How are they "accurate"? No - they are a politician's writings, and he knew what he was doing. There is LOTS of evidence that Paul never met "Jesus." Neither did Constantine.


HaHa!


Not only that, but Paul claims that everything he DOES know about Christ he knows through revelation! In other words, he got his "knowledge" of Christ through the voices in his head. Hardly evidence of an historic Jesus of Nazareth.



posted on Nov, 8 2014 @ 04:57 PM
link   

originally posted by: BuzzyWigs
a reply to: Mr Mask


I simply dislike seeing "history" mangled by 90 year old hoaxes that have been debunked for almost 100 years.


"History" is written by the victors. The winners. The powerful people who want no one else to read the articles that debunk their authority. That is WHY the scrolls found in Nag Hammadi and the Dead Sea were found HIDDEN.

Sheesh. You people who don't keep up with modern investigation. Sorry you're so disappointed. It is what it is.


1) history is not written by victors. That is an overly used meme and a popular halmark saying. Nothing more. History is written and recorded by cultures and people. Then it is researched and debated and ultimately agreed upon or debated by academia. "History is written by the victors" is nothing more than a flowery phrase most people jump to to understand a rigorous process far more complex.

2) Up to date research and consensus says Jesus was a real (non-magical) living person. The only people contesting this are pseudo-history spreading hacks and hucksters. You will be hard at work search for a group of legitimate historians who find the Historic Jesus to be a hoax or invented person.

"People who keep up with modern investigation walk away knowing Jesus was most likely a real person. Those arguing this is false are usually the same types. "people who get most education from Youtube, hoaxes and hack books that are not respected in any circles of academics".

You seem to think modern investigation is revealing something new...that Jesus was never a real man. The truth is this has been settled for most historians (as in almost 100% of them) for many decades now.

No new research, findings or ideas have lessened this in the last 100 years. It has only strengthened the legitimate existence of the man.

Anyone telling you otherwise is someone adopting outdated nonsense from a handful of debunked sources that have no place in academia.

MM



posted on Nov, 8 2014 @ 05:12 PM
link   
a reply to: windword

Look at the sources you are using to debate history. Seriously...you are using Gnosticwarrior as a valid place to get information on history? Wow.

And you can't find evidence of the Isis myth involving Isis having sex to make Horus?

That is because you keep following nonsense Youtube and blog reports. The images you even show are not accurately described by you. You are regurgitating pseudo-history from the 20s.

Here is a history expert with legitimate credentials explaining the Isis myth to you while giving you direct acidemic sources.

www.academia.edu...

Again notice the source vs your Youtube silliness.

Start at page- 473.

Get educated by real academic sources...maybe then you won't debate silly things like the details of the Isis Myth that are clearly explained in almost all mentions of the myth from wiki to academic sources.

MM



posted on Nov, 8 2014 @ 05:15 PM
link   

originally posted by: windword


The fact remains that The “Jesus Christ” and "The Virgin Mary" of the New Testament remain a fictional compilation of characters, not a single historical individual. It does the previous cultures a great disservice to have their religious and mythological ideas stolen and reworked as a fictional Jewish man.


And as always- this blatant claim comes under a long series of misinterpreted images falsely labeled to help sell a hoax-riddle book on a subject that historians have painstakingly explained otherwise.

Sorry bro...Expert Historians trump "handful of idiots on Youtube echoing debunked hogwash from the late 18000s".

MM



posted on Nov, 8 2014 @ 06:51 PM
link   
Actually in Plutarch's account of the Osiris myth, Isis, using magic, resurrected Osiris and fashioned the gold phallus. Older accounts of the myth say the penis survived the dismemberment of Osiris. Either way Isis had sex with Osiris.



The cohesive account by Plutarch, which deals mainly with this portion of the myth, differs in many respects from the known Egyptian sources. Set—whom Plutarch, using Greek names for many of the Egyptian deities, refers to as "Typhon"—conspires against Osiris with seventy-three other people. Set has an elaborate chest made to fit Osiris' exact measurements and then, at a banquet, declares that he will give the chest as a gift to whoever fits inside it. The guests, in turn, lie inside the coffin, but none fit inside except Osiris. When he lies down in the chest, Set and his accomplices slam the cover shut, seal it, and throw it into the Nile. With Osiris' corpse inside, the chest floats out into the sea, arriving at the city of Byblos, where a tree grows around it. The king of Byblos has the tree cut down and made into a pillar for his palace, still with the chest inside. Isis must remove the chest from within the tree in order to retrieve her husband's body. Having taken the chest, she leaves the tree in Byblos, where it becomes an object of worship for the locals. This episode, which is not known from Egyptian sources, gives an etiological explanation for a cult of Isis and Osiris that existed in Byblos in Plutarch's time and possibly as early as the New Kingdom.[42]

Plutarch also states that Set steals and dismembers the corpse only after Isis has retrieved it. Isis then finds and buries each piece of her husband's body, with the exception of the penis, which she has to reconstruct with magic, because the original was eaten by fish in the river. According to Plutarch, this is the reason the Egyptians had a taboo against eating fish. In Egyptian accounts, however, the penis of Osiris is found intact, and the only close parallel with this part of Plutarch's story is in "The Tale of Two Brothers", a folk tale from the New Kingdom with similarities to the Osiris myth.[43]

A final difference in Plutarch's account is Horus' birth. The form of Horus that avenges his father has been conceived and born before Osiris' death. It is a premature and weak second child, Harpocrates, who is born from Osiris' posthumous union with Isis. Here, two of the separate forms of Horus that exist in Egyptian tradition have been given distinct positions within Plutarch's version of the myth.[44]


I did find this:


One ambiguous spell in the Coffin Texts may indicate that Isis is impregnated by a flash of lightning,[40] while in other sources, Isis, still in bird form, fans breath and life into Osiris' body with her wings and copulates with him.[34]

The source on Wikipedia says, "Pinch, 2004". No idea who that guy is.

The majority of source material by which historians and Egyptologists used to piece together the Osiris Myth indicate that she had sex to conceive.



Parts of the myth appear in a wide variety of Egyptian texts, from funerary texts and magical spells to short stories. The story is, therefore, more detailed and more cohesive than any other ancient Egyptian myth. Yet no Egyptian source gives a full account of the myth, and the sources vary widely in their versions of events. Greek and Roman writings, particularly De Iside et Osiride by Plutarch, provide more information but may not always accurately reflect Egyptian beliefs. Through these writings, the Osiris myth persisted after knowledge of most ancient Egyptian beliefs was lost, and it is still well known today.

en.wikipedia.org...

Sorry for only linking to Wikipedia. I didn't really feel like digging through the Book of the Dead or the like, for more direct sources.
edit on 11-8-2014 by WakeUpBeer because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 8 2014 @ 07:42 PM
link   
a reply to: Mr Mask




Look at the sources you are using to debate history.


Once again, you're attacking the source and NOT the evidence. AND, by the way, my sources are primary sources, like the pyramid and temple walls, stelles and papyri.

Where is your PRIMARY evidence that backs up these claims that Isis got pregnant from a fake phallus?

Even so, what difference does it make, she was still venerated as the Perpetual Virgin. It's all magic! Just like the Virgin Mary is magic too. In fact the conception of Jesus was JUST LIKE Horus', only opposite. The Holy Spirit, that is depicted as a bird, hovered of the Virgin Mary, imbuing the essence of "The Light of the World" into Mary. And then, she was miraculously pregnant.

Isis was/is The Great Virgin. Period. It doesn't matter if you think think she was riding a golden phallus like a stripper pole, she was worshiped a the Virginal Mother of God and Queen of Heaven. This is verified by Plato and Plutarch. Denying this is more than silliness, it trollery!



The images you even show are not accurately described by you.


Rubbish! Please DO enlighten us as to their true meaning! And please also show us PRIMARY EVIDENCE of Isis and her golden phallus. Otherwise, you're bloviated opinions are meaningless tripe, just like your most recent source!




Again notice the source vs your Youtube silliness.

Start at page- 473.


What a bunch of apologetic rationalization of a personal biased opinion that isn't rooted in any historical Egyptian source!

Once again, the 1st video confirms the Catholic use of the Isis icon in the Virgin Mary, and the 2nd was a picture montage, as a picture paints 1000 words.

You haven't addressed even a fraction of the evidence that I've presented from scholarly sources and you haven't presented any evidence or thoughts of your own, either.

You have yet to answer my question of why you think Christians would have a myth about a virgin giving birth to their new God, and where you think the Trinity originated?????



a reply to: WakeUpBeer




Actually in Plutarch's account of the Osiris myth, Isis, using magic, resurrected Osiris and fashioned the gold phallus.


What Plutarch actually said:


The traditional result of Osiris's dismemberment is that there are many so‑called tombs of Osiris in Egypt;89 for Isis held a funeral for each part when she had found it. Others deny this and assert that she caused effigies of him to be made and these she distributed among the several cities, pretending that she was giving them his body, in order that he might receive divine honours in a greater number of cities, Band also that, if Typhon should succeed in overpowering Horus, he might despair of ever finding p47the true tomb when so many were pointed out to him, all of them called the tomb of Osiris.90

Of the parts of Osiris's body the only one which Isis did not find was the male member,91 for the reason that this had been at once tossed into the river, and the lepidotus, the sea-bream, and the pike had fed upon it;92 and it is from these very fishes the Egyptians are most scrupulous in abstaining. But Isis made a replica of the member to take its place, and consecrated the phallus,93 in honour of which the Egyptians even at the present day celebrate a festival.
penelope.uchicago.edu...*/A.html


According to your source:


This episode, which is not known from Egyptian sources, gives an etiological explanation for a cult of Isis and Osiris that existed in Byblos in Plutarch's time and possibly as early as the New Kingdom.


Plutarch was talking about celebrations and wives tales from which the contemporary customs and festivals were derived. Plutarch is not giving an account of the conception of Horus here.



edit on 8-11-2014 by windword because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 9 2014 @ 02:06 AM
link   
a reply to: windword

Again.

Historians teach that Isis had sex.

You also seem to misunderstand the word "virgin" used in ancient Egypt has a literally different meaning.

Lastly- I have linked you to no less than 4 academic sources that line-for-line have debunked your pseudo-history and even directed you to sources to show you where your "theory" comes from (along with why modern History experts laugh at your information).

There is zero reason to trust a single thing you say. You can't even find the popular academic evidence that shows plainly Isis had sex with a fashioned phallus attached to a resurrected body...and this is the BASICS of the Isis myth...I mean gee wiz man...you can't even find what wiki and highschool text books offer you on a spoon...

I rest my case here one last time.

Your theory comes from a drunk from the 20s who is laughed at by all historians. Isis was not a virgin. And Jesus (in the eyes of modern history) was most likely a real living (non-magical) man.

All your Mary, Isis, Horus nonsense is a joke to historians. One that has been debunked and destroyed decades before you were even born. You are putting your eggs in a basket considered "nutty" by any and all educated peoples.

You are a victim of pseudo-history promoted first by a madman with little education and eventually sold as snake-oil by youtube idiots and hack book writers. Your argument has no place to sit in proper academics.

Go ahead...post more images and attach false ideas to them based on youtube and blogs. Go ahead shake your first at historians and peer reviewed research. Go ahead.

fact remains...you are resting on a foundation of laughable nonsense that no real historians support in the slightest. And never will...because its hogwash.


End of story.

MM
edit on 9-11-2014 by Mr Mask because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 9 2014 @ 04:11 AM
link   
a reply to: Mr Mask




Historians teach that Isis had sex.


You do understand that Isis was a Celestial Goddess and not a real live flesh and blood person, don't you? This isn't a biology lesson, it mythology! The Hymn to Osiris, which I have linked and quoted twice now, tells a different story, and there's no golden phallus.

Repeating an ignorant bald face lie again and again doesn't magically make it true. You have presented NO evidence whatsoever for your tiresome twaddle. Your only argument is your whiny pathetic plea to logical fallacy, the appeal to authority. You have nothing, not one piece of hard evidence that depicts Isis and any wild semblance of vaginal penetration.

Confirmation denial, at it finest!

You sources are tacky Christian apologetics who can't get vaginae out of their minds, insisting that the Virgin Mary was the real deal, while Isis was a masturbating witch. In fact, the two stories of miraculous conception are, in reality, nearly identical. Both Isis and Mary are impregnated by a holy spirit that's depicted as a bird.



I rest my case here one last time.


So, Okay. You done? Good. Put up or Shut up! So far, you have done neither. Present your evidence or leave the thread with your delusional troll trophy. The way you claim some obscure and deluded victory dance, one would think that those giant Egyptian obilisks weren't representative of Osiris' phallus at all, it's really yours! Eh?



Your theory comes from a drunk from the 20s who is laughed at by all historians.


Wearisome! Off topic dodgery!

I have no idea who you're talking about. I have represented no one's 'theory'. Everything I've posted is based on my decades of research. I don't really care that you mock that. I care that you're interested in promoting lies, ignorance and confusion. And I wonder why you insist on engaging in such trollish behavior?



Go ahead...post more images and attach false ideas


I'll just post this image for you, as a finally parting gift. It fits your logical fallacy mantra, to a tee!







edit on 9-11-2014 by windword because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 9 2014 @ 01:07 PM
link   

originally posted by: windword

You sources are tacky Christian apologetics who can't get vaginae out of their minds, insisting that the Virgin Mary was the real deal, while Isis was a masturbating witch.


Again wrong. I am quoting and linking leading historians on the subject. Academic links. You are spreading Gerald Massy's nonsense. Someone who is laughed at by Academia for being overly speculative, uneducated in Egyptology and unable to read Hieroglyphics. He is the Stichin of Egyptology and a joke in the eyes of all experts.

Also...I have not (nor will I) show any evidence of Historians demanding Mary was real.




So, Okay. You done? Good. Put up or Shut up! So far, you have done neither. Present your evidence or leave the thread with your delusional troll trophy.


I have put up. I put up four long PDF papers on the subject by four different certified Historians who are considered experts on this area of study. I have also posted quotes from leading historians that say directly the garbage you are sharing is Massy's work and how history as a whole sees Massy (a drunk joke who was uneducated in all of these subjects, including being unable to read the very texts and images he based his theory off of).

You have posted Youtube videos that out right lie and/or invent nonsense. You are using the regurgitated works of Gerald Massy (a joke).




Wearisome! Off topic dodgery!

I have no idea who you're talking about. I have represented no one's 'theory'. Everything I've posted is based on my decades of research.


If you have spent decades researching...yet only echo the exact words of Massy (like most youtubers and hack authors stealing his work) I must question your research abilities.

You seem lost when you say "Isis shows no sign of making a phallus and having sex with it" but then regurgitate Massy's twisted and flawed speculations based in nothing but drunken guesswork on his behalf.

How is it you fail to understand the basics of the mainstream understanding of The Isis/Horus myth- acting shocked ands confused over its most known details- yet seem so righteously assured in your "research" when it is 100% Massy's nonsense?





I'll just post this image for you, as a finally parting gift. It fits your logical fallacy mantra, to a tee!










1) You are posting nonsense. I have link your to almost half a dozen leading historians that explain this to you clearly. I even searched the PDFs manually to tell you what pages you should read. You have failed to do so and return with more false images and pseudo-history pulled from Massy's drunken speculations.

2) You are not to tell me to "STFU". That is what you have resorted to to defend your Youtube/Blog/Massy hogwash? In the face of all my evidence I painstakingly searched FOR YOU while you remain lazy and attached to a buffoon's drunken work? How rude.

3) Exposing liars, hoaxes, nonsense, pseudo-academia etc etc...is not trolling sir. There is a reason all of mainstream history laughs at the nonsense you are posting. Its because it has one source. One source that has been mocked, dismantled and destroyed by real research from real experts.

4) Nice image...I guess this is where I am called a man of faith again? Seems to be the last ditch effort of all people who are drinking the Massy Koolaid.

Keep taking wild swings at sounding educated on this. I have clearly shown your sources and the holes in them. I have shared academic papers ON TOPIC and directly exposing the nonsense flooding this thread. I have shown research, evidence and solid sources.

You still are unaware where your little "theory" comes from (shockingly). I also do not appreciate you "acting" like you have done decades of research WHILE pretending to not know Massy. Not one historian has come to the conclusions Massy has. None can since he lied and invented much of his work.

Yet...you have spent decades researching...come to all of his unique conclusions on your own...and never have crossed Massy's work? Hahahahahahaha...sigh.

I dunno about Satan's slave...but I sure am not "Logic's fool"

MM
edit on 9-11-2014 by Mr Mask because: (no reason given)

edit on 9-11-2014 by Mr Mask because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 9 2014 @ 01:38 PM
link   
Most importantly- the thing ignored by most "Jesus mythists" is this.


There are thousands of accounts giving exact details of the life of jesus all within 30 years of His crucifixion. In the following 100 years after His death- there are thousands of references to Jesus and the writers of the New Testament.

NOT ONE single living scholar in the field of history has ever published a single peer reviewed work disputing the existence of Jesus.

The garbage of "Mythicism" is highly ridiculed and unsupported by modern historians. The idea that Jesus did not exist was only popular for less than 40 years at the turn of the 20th century.

Since then- Most historians (as in almost all...almost 100%...even the most skeptical liberal historians) have admitted that Jesus was a real person.

There is not one current credible scholar who claims otherwise.

Smoke that. Deal with that. Trust that and accept that...or blindly ignore Academia as a whole and worship the made-up nonsense of Massy.

Academic consensus does not even waste time looking at Jesus mythicism for it has all been debunked and discredited for decades and decades. Its hogwash created by an idiot (Gerald Massy) and/or stolen/resurrected by a new wave of snake oil selling hucksters for the modern/growing "gullible-people market".

nail...coffin...or is it nail...wrist?


MM
edit on 9-11-2014 by Mr Mask because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 9 2014 @ 01:39 PM
link   
double post.
edit on 9-11-2014 by Mr Mask because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 9 2014 @ 11:08 PM
link   
a reply to: Mr Mask



You are spreading Gerald Massy's nonsense. Someone who is laughed at by Academia for being overly speculative, uneducated in Egyptology and unable to read Hieroglyphics. He is the Stichin of Egyptology and a joke in the eyes of all experts.


LOL! Wow dude! You really have it hard for this Massey guy! Too bad, he sounds like a fun guy. But, alas, I've never heard of him or read any of his books. Maybe, during Massey’s rise to fame and popularity, I was too busy studying Plato, Pythagoras and Plutarch. I dunno, maybe it was while I was reading "Isis Unveiled", Madam Blavatsky’s tome, Robert Grave’s “The White Goddess” or Manly P Hall’s “Secret Teachings of All Ages”, studying the Kabbalah or the Tao Ti Ching......

You’ve repeatedly stated in this thread that you’re a non-believer and that you’re not a scholar or an historian. I believe you. It’s hard to imagine that you even have ANY academic education. You don’t make a point, present a paper or win debates by telling people to go read this and that. You use citations and quotes that are in context to what’s being discussed or debated and explain why this material contradicts that material being presented.

I’ve gone through all you posts in this thread. And, I gotta say, most (90%) of it is heckling, appeals to authority and unsubstantiated claims. You’ve thrown out some links, and like I said, you’re saying, “Here, go read this.”

Two of links you offered were criticizing a book called “Zeitgeist”. I have never read it, so the articles are meaningless to me. If there was something in there that you wanted to point out to me, you should have cited it, and argued on behalf of the authors evidence. But you did not.

Then, you linked me to an article criticizing Massey’s work, but again, since I’m unfamiliar with his work, the article was useless to me. So, once again, if there was something of importance to my evidence, you should have cited it.

You linked me to a woman’s paper, that was obviously a student paper and that readily admitted several times that respected scholars had debated the links between Isis and Mary and the debate rages on. It seems you didn’t read that part, because you continue to claim that no scholars question the mythology.

In the end, her opinion was unconvincing. I would, however, still like to know why and how it convinced you, and why you think the early Christians needed to adopt a virgin mythology.

Finally, I’ve already addressed your link to that crass article about vaginae and phalli that DO NOT exist in the Egyptian primary sources, such as at Isis’ temple at Abydos, the Hymn to Osiris, stelles, wall carvings and it DOES NOT represent the priimary Egyptian mythology.

Now, as far as the mythological character of Jesus Christ, no matter how you spin it, he didn’t exist. Christ wasn’t his name in life, if he existed at all, and he wasn't bestowed with the title “Christ” until well after his supposed death.

So ,we're looking for Jesus of Nazareth. There were lots of random guys named Jesus, and some special guys named Jesus in those days, but NONE that fit the bill for the supposed life that the biblical Jesus led.

There were, during the 1st century, before and after, cults that called their initiates “Christ”, and were called Christians. This is why early followers of Paul didn’t want to be associated with Christians, and referred to themselves as Nazarenes. And that puts into question all historians that complained about Christians in the 1st and early 2nd century.

Other than Josephus, which is a known forgery, there is no evidence outside of the Bible that corroborates one Jesus of Nazareth.

Belief in Jesus is a matter of faith, not fact. Jesus won't have it any other way!


nail...coffin...or is it nail...wrist?


Not even in your wildest dreams!

More Scholars Who Doubt the Existence of the Biblical Jesus

ETA:





edit on 9-11-2014 by windword because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 10 2014 @ 11:55 AM
link   
a reply to: Mr Mask


Then it is researched and debated and ultimately agreed upon or debated by academia.


Mmmhm. Riiight. And that's exactly what happened with the Council that Constantine convened to decide "what would be in the Bible".

Sorry - but it's not just a "meme". History IS written by the victors. Why do you suppose the Texans are trying to erase "evolution" from text books (which the whole country uses as a rubric for text books) and replace it with "God" this, and "God" that, and Creationism?

Right now, the holy texts ARE being researched and debated - but people still dis the Jesus Seminar as poppy-cock.
Right now, the Nag Hammadi texts are under scrutiny to UPDATE the so-called "Holy Texts".

Denying that the Bible needs updating is just...well...silly. Stubborn, and silly. Most of it is hogwash. In My Opinion.

edit on 11/10/2014 by BuzzyWigs because: (no reason given)



new topics

top topics



 
94
<< 37  38  39    41 >>

log in

join