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.

 

is the Jesus story just a recycled version of the Horus of Egypt?

page: 2
2
<< 1   >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Nov, 18 2007 @ 09:12 AM
link   
reply to post by yahn goodey
 


You're right! Here's a direct link, written in 1853, it spells out how the gospel was usurped and denegraded by Satan. Unsuccessfully so.

The Two Babylons.






posted on Nov, 18 2007 @ 12:11 PM
link   
reply to post by Clearskies
 


yeah, that source is far from reliable on any level. just look into the actual history and you'll realize that it's complete crap

en.wikipedia.org...



posted on Nov, 18 2007 @ 02:57 PM
link   
The NewAge relegion starts by providing all those matches between Horus and Jesus. The link below provides enough differences.
www.kingdavid8.com...



posted on Nov, 18 2007 @ 04:01 PM
link   

Originally posted by hawk123
The NewAge relegion starts by providing all those matches between Horus and Jesus. The link below provides enough differences.
www.kingdavid8.com...



Thats ridiculous the foundations of the "new age" have been around long before the bible was even conceived. Paganism is a very old old form of worship and the word "Pagan" has nothing to do with "Satan". You cant use that argument. The fact that there are some very valid similarities between Horus and Jesus speaks for its self. You ever wonder why the guy in charge of the kingdavid8 claims to be conveniently right in all his arguments ..?..makes you kind of wonder...why he is so right and we are so wrong...some his info is bogus by the way.."faith" is not "fact".

You dont seem to recognize that Horus among other Gods or Prophets sang the "love one another" song LONG BEFORE Jesus lived and before the gospels were written...Jesus was not first by any means..Just ask the Jews.

By the way the "Satan did it" excuse is a bit tiring. Sometimes It may be just better to admit its reality and fact instead.

[edit on 18-11-2007 by luxor311]

[edit on 18-11-2007 by luxor311]



posted on Nov, 18 2007 @ 09:15 PM
link   
MIMS,

This is the direct link, the other one didn't work!


Do you trust Ralph Woodrow so much that you won't even study it for yourself????

The Reverend Alexander Hislop may have made a few mistakes in archaeological interpretation, but this was in 1853!!!

The worldwide deluge happened, the destruction of Sodom and Gommorah happened! Study it without wiki.
The Two Babylons

Have a great week.



[edit on 18-11-2007 by Clearskies]

[edit on 18-11-2007 by Clearskies]



posted on Nov, 19 2007 @ 05:32 AM
link   
reply to post by Clearskies
 


um... the worldwide flood DIDN'T happen, there's no evidence for it.

i trust Ralph Woodrow because he actually realized that he was wrong after he studied everything about it.

it isn't just one or two mistakes in "the two babylons" it's just a massive complete fabrication of a myth.

so ya know, i already know of these ridiculous ideas, i've studied it, it's complete fabrication.

[edit on 11/19/07 by madnessinmysoul]



posted on Nov, 20 2007 @ 10:42 AM
link   
Will someone please inform me of a SIDE by SIDE comparison of extra-Biblical mythologies with "specific" Christian mythologies? I think the Side by Side approach would make it much clearer with what we are dealing with.
rtaylortitle@comcast.net



posted on Nov, 21 2007 @ 04:33 PM
link   
reply to post by madnessinmysoul
 


i realize i'm wasting my time to tell you that the flood of noah was worldwide but i'll give you a little bit of a hint of its spread -----the flood was not caused by the rains of 40 days and 40 nights but rather by G-D causing the earth to subside under the oceans for up to a year-----after every living creature was positively drowned They caused the earth to re-emerge above the oceans as you can read in genesis 1:9.in south america there are remains of pre-flood cities and lakes.in bolivia s.america the city of tiahuanaco is 12,500 feet high and lake titicaca is nearby the lake is saline and has salt fish species in it found in the ocean down below---------the city is hugmongeous built with stones many of which weigh 100 tons.at the present height of this city you can hardly breath the air let alone move 100 ton stones.excavations have found the remains of the cities builders most of whom appear to scientists to have drowned-----------at 12,500 ft altitude ?another book you probably wont approve of-------the ark of noah by david fasold.the ark was found in 1948 on mt. al judi in turkey .it was built with concrete covered reeds---------the cement has decomposed over the time between the flood 2451 bce and now since it has caved in like a broken egg shell.since this ships remains 528 ft long by 130 ft wide are not made of wood----------it is dismissed by the so called christian authorities-----while the muslims say it is the ark of noah--- in their koran.



posted on Nov, 21 2007 @ 05:00 PM
link   
The Jesus story is an amalgamation of a lot of old stories, possibly including the Horus tale, although certainly without the dismemberment and necrophilia. It's got a good chunk of Mithaism in it, and was spun as much as possible to conform to a variety of stories and prophecies from the Old Testament.

The central gist of the story, that we should be excellent to each other, is lost on a lot of people who are more interested in magic, revenge and apocalypse.



posted on Nov, 22 2007 @ 04:39 AM
link   

Originally posted by syrinx high priest
the crucifixion is mentioned in roman history texts, so I believe there is at least a basis for some of the story.


No it isn't.

But,
much later, some Roman writers do mention Christian beliefs - that is NOT evidence for Jesus.

There is no historical evidence for Jesus at all.
None.



Originally posted by syrinx high priest
...the immaculate conception


Hmmm...
I think you just confused the Virgin Birth with the Immaculate Conception.



Originally posted by syrinx high priest
but I feel it is fact he lived in Jerusalem, and was crucified


It's not a fact at all.
Why do you feel it is?


Iasion


[edit on 22-11-2007 by Iasion]



posted on Nov, 22 2007 @ 02:05 PM
link   
Haru “Horus” is symbolic of the Rising Son.
Jesus is also symbolic of the rising son.
Jesus was the son (sun) who died (set) on the cross by crucifixion and he will resurrect (rise) according to the Christians.

When the son came down and apparently sets or dies into the darkness and he raises or resurrects back to life.

It is the story of the Christian’s God Jesus.
What religious fanatics don’t realize is that if the sun shuts down that would be the end of life as you know it.

This is what Egipt teaches about the sun:
If I say I worship the sun, people say oh that’s sun worship.
I know that.
The reason why I say worship the sun, s-u-n and laugh at you who worship the son, s-o-n is because my sun is an obvious provider.

If my sun doesn’t come up in the morning, we can chalk it.

Jesus (the son) went to sleep 2,000 years ago, has not gotten up yet, and you all are still doing fine.
Yet you are still waiting for your son to rise.
If my sun doesn’t rise each day, it’s over for Jesus and you.
Now with this reasoning, I can live without your son.
Can you live without your son?
Can you live without my sun?
The answer is simply NO.

If you look throughout Egyptian history, you see that many of the characteristics of Horus existed long before 2,000 years ago, and parallels that of Jesus of 2,000 years ago. For instance it is said:

Jesus performed the miracle of turning five loaves of bread in one case and seven in another to feed the many multitudes of people.
This ties in with Horus who makes seven loaves of bread for Osiris to live by.
Yashua is in the desert and being tempted by the Devil, who said to him, “If he was the son of God, turn a stone into bread.”
The stone of the desert is symbolic of Set.

As the child Horus comes to the Earth, then enters matter or becomes flesh.
He is born as the word of his father who becomes Seb, who consort is Nu whose other name is Meri.
Which is the same as Jesus coming down to Earth as the word of God in the flesh having and adopted father of Joseph (Seb) and Mary his mother.
Jesus said “I and the father are one.

He that seeth me, seeth him that sent me.”
Horus is the father seen in the son.
Jesus claims to be the son in whom the father is revealed.
Horus was the light of the world.

The light that is represented by the symbolic eye.
The son of salvation.
Yashua is called the ‘Good Sheperd’ with the lamb or kid on his shoulder. Horus was the good shepherd who carries the crook upon his shoulder.

Jesus is called the Lamb of God, the bread of life, the truth and the light. Horus is called the Lamb of God, the bread of life, the truth and the light.

Jesus was baptized by John the Baptist.
Horus is was baptized by Anupp the Baptizer.

Jesus was born in Bethlehem, the ‘House of Bread.’
Horus was born in Annu, the ‘Place of Bread.’

Jesus the Christ.
Horus the Krist.


The star in the east that indicated the birthplace of Jesus.
The star, as announcer of the child Horus.

The blind man given sight by Jesus.
The blind mummy made to see by Horus.

Jesus walking on water.
Horus walking on water.

THE LIST GOES ON AND ON.
This is just to give you clear overstanding that the Jesus of your bible came from the Egyptian diety of Horus, and Christianity came from the various stories from Egypt.

The story was just reiterated as most stories in your bible are.

They are stories from old tablets such as the Enuma Elish, and the Giglamesh Epic.
The names were just changed, in different cultures.

In fact, the names of the bible aren’t even names, they are titles.
For example the story of Abraham, Sarah, and Hagar in the bible is just the story of ANU, Antum, and Iyd in the Enuma Elish.

The story of Cain and Abel in the bible is just the story of Osiris and Set in the Egyptian records.



posted on Aug, 14 2008 @ 05:23 PM
link   
As to the point that the Christ story was originally written in the stars:
The statement: the three stars of Orion’s belt are the three kings. They align once a year with Sirius and point, at that time to the sun rise on Dec. 24th. This is the Biblical story of the three kings that follow the star in the east to find the sun( Son) of god. . I must admit, it sure sounds cool, until you look at the facts, which are incorrect on EVERY point:.
1. The three stars on Orion’s belt were only known as the Three Kings after the middle ages (as far as I can uncover on the internet). Even if they were known by that name, there were NEVER three kings that journeyed to find the Christ child. The Bible speaks of MAGI that went in search of the Christ. No number was ever stated. There could have been 50 of them for all we know. The term Magi most likely refers to what we know as astrologers, or people who read signs from the stars. This is the farthest thing from kings.
2. A star can not align with three other stars once a year. Stars are so far away that their movement is so slight that it can only be observed over a long period (years) and even then not by the naked eye (There is no proof of telescopes that long ago) . Planetary movement can be perceived by the naked eye, but not star movement. Sirius and the stars in Orion’s belt are STARS, which to us STAY aligned (in reality, Sirius has never been align with these belt stars, only approximately). So there could NOT have been this abnormal alignment of the stars to signify some spectacular event that would spur these Magi to look for the Christ. So the star in the east spoke of in the Bible must be something else entirely, most likely, a supernova or something along this line, that could appear in the sky all at once and thus appear as a spectacular astrological event.
3. While I have not researched the fact that these stars point to the sun rise on Dec 24th, it is irellavent because anyone who has watched the stars will attest, the stars rotate throughout the night. They may point to the sunrise at one point during the night, but only for a few minutes. So to make a big deal about this alignment pointing to the sunrise on a certain date seems pointless to me. Besides this fact, Christ was most probably NOT born on Dec 24th, Dec 25Th or anywhere near that date. The Bible does not give the day that Christ born. The only indication is to the fact that it was during the census counting, which normally occurred in the spring time, when it was easier to travel. But even this is a guess. So the entire basis of the stars pointing to this very sunrise date as the means to tie ancient astrology symbolism to the story of Christ is baseless.

This entire story of Christ in the stars appears to me to only be nothing more than a fantastic creation in the minds of those who want to discredit Christianity. For more on this topic, see this discussion forum:
cs.astronomy.com...



posted on Aug, 14 2008 @ 06:46 PM
link   
Hi!

There are lots of resources out there that debunk the 'copycat' theory. Here is a brief overview:

tektonics.org...

There are no serious academicians or scholars that subscribe to this theory. There are no peer reviewed studies that forward this theory. Pretty much the only place that you will see it discussed is on sites like this, the books and sites of new age adherents and in Christian rebuttal sites.

There is a reason why academia ignores the topic.

I encourage anyone who is interested in the topic to do their own research and not blindly follow anyone on either side of the argument. If a site can't provide original sources for their claims they should be taken with a huge grain of salt.

Many of the claims are made through byzantine twists of logic or selective use of facts. The most important step (imho) is to ignore appeals to authority (such as Price or Acharya S) and simply ask what the sources are for their claims and then go check out those sources.

Eric



new topics

top topics



 
2
<< 1   >>

log in

join