Originally posted by TheCelestialHuman
1. Krishna: Krishna was born without sexual union, through mental transmission.
How cool is that and fits the pregnant from the Holy Spirit myth.
Originally posted by TheCelestialHuman
Krishna and Jesus were of royal decent.
I don't know about Krishna, but for Jesus to be of royal decent, Mary would have to be of royal decent, too, but both Evangelists, Mathew and Luke,
trace the decent line for Josef and since they report nothing about Mary's decent, Jesus cannot be of royal decent, unless you want to argue that
technically the Holy Ghost is royalty.
Doesn't surprise me at all since the ancient Hebrews were in captivity in Babylon for quite some time and many never left. And in the time of the
supposed birth of Jesus the whole area was ruled by Macedonians and the Jesus people would be acquainted with the Zoroaster myth.
3. Dionysus: He was called “King of Kings” and “God of Gods.”
Well, he could not have been King of Kings and God of Gods, that was Zeus for most of the people in ancient Greece. Of course, his followers would use
such title in their zeal to show that their God is even bigger than Zeus. Blasphemy, I say!
4. Attis: Attis was born on December 25th of a virgin.
That is probably one reason for Christianity celebrating Christmas on that day. That and another important Roman pagan festival celebrated on that
5. Horus: Only Begotten son of god, born of a virgin.
Well, seems to have most resemblance to Jesus so far, provided it can be proven to be true scientifically. Also, Egypt was quite near; traffic would
have been much easier as compared to Babylon or India. I am surprised that you included only these 5; there are many more. Also, the theory that the
myth is based on astrology - the sun (note: the sun equals son wordlplay works only in English and the Bible was not written in English) as Jesus and
the 12 zodiac signs as the disciples - is quite plausible for me.
Now, taking into account all of this information, how is it that Jesus's story is any more true than the others. The stories are strikingly
similar, especially the stories of Horus and Krishna. It seems as if The story of Jesus, may in fact be a compilation of all of these stories. Doesn't
it seem likely that the four writer's of the gospels had heard these stories and used them and the prophecies in the old testament to create this
I one word: syncretism; it means that various religious beliefs from different cultures get fused into one. Especially, when living under permanent
occupation for many centuries. It happened with the Assyrians and later with the Greek Macedonians, too.
To the Christians of ATS:
What? No love for agnostics? Does ex-Christian count?
Yeah, been there, done that and I have the scars to prove it. Of course, if am wrong and
there is a Christian God, I'll rot and burn in hell for ever and ever. I'd be in good company though, what with all the rock stars being there, not to
mention my beloved late brother who got excommunicated early in puberty.
What makes Jesus any more real than these other people?
If I had absolutely to believe in God or gods I would choose the Ancient Greek pantheon. 12 major Goods, six male and six female, and father Zeus was
such a womanizer. How cool is that
What makes your holy book anymore true than the many other holy books out there?
Nothing, but you failed to mention that this holy scripture has come down to us through translation of a translation of yet another translation.
What makes your god any more real than the thousands of other gods?
Absolutely nothing, of course. Does that make the Big Bang theory more plausible, I don't know but I kind of doubt it. See, science can tell us what
supposedly happened seconds after the bang, but about the singularity that caused it, it can tell us nothing much, since time and space did not exist
until it banged.
Which seems more plausible: God created many men, or man created many gods?
I think anthropology has solved that riddle and it's the latter. Religion developed through ancestor worship initially and evolved through syncretism
As an atheist, it is not my job to prove or disprove god, as it simply cannot be done.
But, as a theist, it is your job to show why your theism is correct.
Ok, let me get this straight: you are inviting theists to proselytize you or are you just trying to proselytize them? Both are equally non-sensical to
me. And are you an atheist or are you agnostic?
edit on 1/6/2012 by WalterRatlos because: spelling