Authors of the Bible: The Greatest Plagiarism Ever Believed

a reply to: ghostrager

Was Osiris a mortal man?

As mortal as the father of Jesus.

I'm not sure what "3 kings"

Wise men, sages, kings.....whatever.....

"We Three Kings from Orient Are Bearing Gifts We Traverse Afar".........it's tradition, and it comes from the 3 "Kings" that are depicted bring gifts to Isis for her god/man child.

Holy sh##! I must be the reincanation of Jesus/Horus

Now you're getting it!

originally posted by: Ghost147
Whenever I discuss Christianity with Christians I always try and ask 'why do you believe?' To me, religion is quite evidently fictitious.

I think a much more pertinent question would be why do YOU believe what you do?

Is it because of revisionist frauds such as Acharya S and Zeitgeist?

Why are so many easily convinced by frauds like this when all of it has been proven false?

Ms. Murdock's claims are not only completely unsupported by facts, there isn't a SHRED of evidence to even suggest plagiarism.

There comes a point in time when each one of us will have to come to terms with the fact that this whole copycat argument is fallacious.

Acharya did just that only a few weeks ago when she passed away on Christmas.

Naturally, not a shred of etymological, linguistic, archaeological, literary, or historical evidence is given for these wild assertions.

www.tektonics.org...

Achayra's badly researched delusion ranks among other such nonsense as "The Davinci Code" or "Holy Blood, Holy Grail" any intelligent person who has taken a religion 101 course can shoot holes through her lies.

No serious scholar atheist or other wise has any real respect for this woman. She has been widely ignored even by the majority of anti christian atheists because her conspiracies can't possibly hold water. Achayra doesn't like Christianity so she borrows from a lot of other poor researchers to create fantasies that have no more basis in reality then Santa Claus. If you want anti christian reading pick up the Davinci code at least it was well written by some one with some thing resembling intelligence.

The Latest Lie Ever Sold

Originally posted by kallisti36
Acharya S. is not an archaeologist. Her sources are false and misrepresented. Provide a real scholar who agrees with these opinions.

This review is from: "The Christ Conspiracy: The Greatest Story Ever Sold"

Follow her sources please. How did the comparison with the mystery religions start? Did it start by the Jewish scholars who lived at the same time and would have known about these religions and were themselves trying to discredit Jesus? No, it started with an Islamic writer named Yousuf Saleem Chishti, in his book, What is Christianity? ... Where did he get this information? No one knows, he listed no sources, and none have been found.

However that didn't stop a writer in the late 1800s and early 1900s named Gerald Massey from using Chishti as his source for the same information. Who is Acharya using as her source for most of her material? Massey, who used Chishti.

"The Christ Conspiracy: The Greatest Story Ever Sold"

A humorous irony is that many atheists (including Dorothy Murdock / Acharya S.) rely heavily upon Gerald Massey, whom they claim to be a great Egyptologist. Massy is the first known to make the claim that Jesus is a copy of Horus (an Egyptian god). He also makes the connection between Jesus and 2000 other pagan gods—a so-called fact often repeated by Massy followers. The humor of this claim is that Gerald Massey was not a studied Egyptologist; he was a poet who died in 1913 and has no credentials with anyone but the atheists who cite him thinking that he was a researcher.

Gerald Massey claims to have gotten his ideas from ancient text; however, he does not cite the text he supposedly translated from. Since he appears to be the only one who found these secret texts and it cannot and has not been verified by any credible source, it does not stand as evidence but only speculation at best. Many have searched the ancient texts he studied, but none have found any evidence to support his writings. Since Massey never cited any original text, his writings show to be more of a fictional story than an attempt at translation. Yet his claims are the foundation the Christ Conspiracy stands upon.

Book Review – The Christ Conspiracy

a reply to: Murgatroid

There comes a point in time when each one of us will have to come to terms with the fact that this whole copycat argument is fallacious.

I disagree. Saying it is fallacious does not make it so, and tells me you have never truly done any comparative study. There are plenty of erroneous comparisons out there, but you can't throw them all out, just because a handful support what you want to believe. I'm not saying all, but many of todays religious beliefs are taken from beliefs much older than the religion itself.

a reply to: Ghost147

The chart is very interesting.

a reply to: Klassified

The article you linked was not very objective;

The quotes you cited came from an "anonymous poet" (no mention from what era) and from Julius Firmicus.

Julius Firmicus, did say Tammuz's death was atoning, but he lived long after Christ (while Constantine was alive), during a time when it was popular to mix Christian theology with pagan mythology.

Beyond Julius Firmicus and the "anonymous poet" there is NO original text (that I can find) linking Tammuz or Prometheus to substitutionary atoning death. Christ is unique in that aspect.

a reply to: BELIEVERpriest
That's the interesting thing about this debate. There are always plenty of sources to counter the other side, even if they are no more or less reliable than what they are rebutting. And plenty of "reputable" academic scholars on both sides too. I guess at this point in time, it really has become so muddied that the debate has become near futile.

Thanks for reminding me of that.

a reply to: Klassified

Well I enjoy the debate part when people take emotion out, as I always learn something new.

I'm not at all surprised to hear about similarities between Christ and pagan gods (especially Tammuz). It is to be expected if you believe there is a Christ and Anti-christ (Gen 3; Seed of Eve vs seed of Satan). Personally, I believe Tammuz is Apollyon/Nimrod, and that he is the son of Satan. Its possible that Satan conspired to have Christ nailed to the tree out of vengeance for the death of his own son Horus/Tammuz/Prometheus...that is if you believe such things, anyways.

However, for me the deal breaker is the substitutionary atoning death. Until we can find a primary source dating from before Christ that specifically mentions substitutionary atonement, I'll hold to my belief; 'Christ is God, Christ in unique.'

originally posted by: Ghost147

originally posted by: BELIEVERpriest
a reply to: Ghost147

Which one of those gods died as a substitutionary atonement for our sins?

Prometheus
Horus
Dionysus
Mithra

Nearly half of the gods listed in the OP died for the sins of humanity.

Show me pre-christian primary sources that indicate substitutionary atoning death. Ugaritic psalms, poems, anything.

a reply to: BELIEVERpriest

How about child sacrifices to Moloch?

I thought it was pretty common knowledge that many Paleolithic era and Mesolithic era societies commonly sacrificed some person or some animal to appease an angry god.

Scapegoating is a matter of Hebrew Law. The "Jesus died for you sins" ideology is just another version of scapegoating.

a reply to: Ghost147

Did any of those saviors teach Freedom to humanity? Did they teach that God is kind even to the evil and unthankful (Luke 6:35-36) like Jesus Christ did or did they teach of an angry controlling god?

Did they teach to turn the other cheek and to put down the sword instead of fighting in wars or did they teach that violence is sometimes ok?

Jesus brought a new view of God than known before (Luke 6:35-36, Matthew 5:44-46) unfortunately even many who call themselves "Christian" reject the God as taught by Christ.

a reply to: windword

You know full well that isn't what I mean. I'm talking about the voluntary death of a god.

a reply to: BELIEVERpriest

I'm not sure that's what the gospels depict, but men and women die everyday for altruism, even altruistically going to war for a "cause". I fail to see how Jesus was any different or more altruistic than any man, or woman, who would give up their life for another.

a reply to: windword

Jesus accepted the title, "Lamb of God who removes the sins of the world", from John the Baptist. That's a little more profound than your average run-of-the-mill altruism.

a reply to: BELIEVERpriest

There was never any need to be murdered by an unruly crowd or sacrificed like a Passover Lamb to remove the sins of the land.

Zachariah 3
Then he showed me Joshua the high priest standing before the angel of the Lord, and Satan[a] standing at his right side to accuse him. 2 The Lord said to Satan, “The Lord rebuke you, Satan! The Lord, who has chosen Jerusalem, rebuke you! Is not this man a burning stick snatched from the fire?”

3 Now Joshua was dressed in filthy clothes as he stood before the angel. 4 The angel said to those who were standing before him, “Take off his filthy clothes.”

Then he said to Joshua, “See, I have taken away your sin, and I will put fine garments on you.”

The angel of the Lord gave this charge to Joshua: 7 “This is what the Lord Almighty says: ‘If you will walk in obedience to me and keep my requirements, then you will govern my house and have charge of my courts, and I will give you a place among these standing here.

8 “‘Listen, High Priest Joshua, you and your associates seated before you, who are men symbolic of things to come: I am going to bring my servant, the Branch. 9 See, the stone I have set in front of Joshua! There are seven eyes on that one stone, and I will engrave an inscription on it,’ says the Lord Almighty, ‘and I will remove the sin of this land in a single day.

a reply to: windword

Zech 3:8 “‘Listen, High Priest Joshua, you and your associates seated before you, who are men symbolic of things to come: I am going to bring my servant, the Branch.

Joshua believed in the symbol of things to come, the Branch. Joshua's sins were removed because he had faith in the coming Lamb of God.

a reply to: BELIEVERpriest

No, his sins were removed because the Angel of Lord was able to and did remove them. Not because Jesus dies later on in the New Testament.

a reply to: windword

The Angel of the Lord was a Christophany. Joshua was a symbol for Jesus the branch, who had the very same name as the High Priest Joshua. Jesus in now the High Priest.

a reply to: BELIEVERpriest

Says you. There is no Jewish tradition that calls for or prophecises a dying God.

More Paganism.

God does not need a human sacrifice to Love or forgive you. Nor does God need you to do a cannibal ritual of pretending to eat the human sacrifice's body with bread or pretend to drink his blood with wine.


If God is Love, then God already Loves you. Love does not hate, Love Loves.

Jesus is not similar to Pagan gods but people who see him as a human sacrifice to please some angry god, make him sound similar to many gods, including the dragon that Aztecs worshipped and gave human sacrifices to in order to please him so they won't get his wrath.

originally posted by: windword
a reply to: BELIEVERpriest

Says you. There is no Jewish tradition that calls for or prophecises a dying God.

Three High Holy Feasts per year (Passover, Pentecost, and Atonement) say you're mistaken. Anyways, the Jews missed the boat. That's why the Temple fell in 70 AD. Their own Law warned that they would fall and lose God's presence if the remained apostate.