The Greko Roman Christian conspiracy

Originally posted by adjensen
reply to post by begoodbees

 

Here is anti-Christian Richard Carrier's article on the subject: Kersey Graves and The World's Sixteen Crucified Saviors and a debunking of Zeitgeist, again by the anti-Christian Skeptic Project is here: Zeitgeist, the movie Debunked.

Those are non-Christian rebuttals. There are, of course, hundreds of Christian responses to those claims, but an anti-Christian, such as yourself, probably finds little credibility in them.

Carrier seems to be criticizing a certain book that is relevant to the topic but not all inclusive. As far as debunking zeitgeist goes I tried a few of the source links and some are broken, some go to amazon books for sale and some just lead to websites that have no source material of their own. Not to say that you are wrong I just am not convinced. I wish I could find some translated hieroglyphs or something of that nature to point me in the right direction.

reply to post by adjensen

What am I saying? I thought it was pretty clear, but let me repeat it. Anyone who tells you that Krishna or Horus or whoever was crucified and resurrected three days later is lying to you. Again, historical research will reveal that. Go read the article I posted that debunks Zeitgeist, because the guy did a very thorough job of both dispelling nonsense like Horus and Jesus being the same, and citing extensive sources to demonstrate his claims. I did something similar a couple of years ago, now I just point people to that article. If the Hindus don't think that Krishna was born of a virgin on December 25 and crucified, why would you take a nitwit like Achyra S's word for it?

Well, I never saw Zeitgeist, and I'm not going to rush off to watch it to debate it.

The Jesus myth is unique in many ways, granted that. But it also similar to other earlier myths, and that's a fact. Maybe Horus wasn't nailed to a cross, he supposedly died from the sting of a scorpion, but he was a mythical dying and resurrected god, among others, that preceded the myth of Jesus.

Jesus wasn't born on December 25th either, that is a blatant manipulation of Christian legend.

I don't really want to enter into a heated debate here, but it seems that you just want to flat out deny that there are familiar themes and mythologies that parallel the Jesus myth. That's just not true.

Originally posted by 3NL1GHT3N3D1
reply to post by begoodbees

 

Not fantastical if you think Romans changed the story. If they could add miracles to the story, setting and everything, then they could have changed Jesus' gender.

Jesus message of love, compassion, and forgiveness is very feminine like in my opinion, which is another reason I've come to this point. The truth requires an open mind.

If you are saying that it is a myth that was invented no that is not to fantastical, but if you are saying that it actually happened which is what I thought you meant, than that I would find fantastical.

Originally posted by adjensen

Originally posted by begoodbees
The word Easter is in relation to the pagan goddess ishtar. This is factual.

Do you think that the Bible was written in English?

Who cares what the word might be connected to in English, as it was referred to as Paschal in the original Greek and still is referred to that in the Catholic and Orthodox churches.

I believe you are missing the point. Easter and passover are not interchangeable. The word easter is not in the bible rather over time they have been made interchangeable by Christians.

www.datejesus.com...

"The name Easter comes from an ancient European goddess of the dawn called Eostre by the Anglo-Saxons and Ostara by the Germanic peoples. She is also known as Eostra, Eostrae, Eostar, Eastre, Easter, Estre, Eástre, and Austra by various European peoples. Her name means "movement towards the rising sun" and is related to the Indo-European root word Aus which means "to shine". The English words estrus and estrogen are also derived from her name. She was considered the goddess of the growing light and spring, associated with fertility and celebrated with a festival of rebirth. One story has her entertaining children by performing a trick that changed her pet bird into a rabbit. This rabbit then laid colored eggs that she gave to the children. Given the history of these ideas which date back to at least 2000 years before the Christian era, it should be no surprise that the original symbols and practices of Easter persist today, just as our ancestors once celebrated them."

reply to post by begoodbees


No, the miracles never happened, they are metaphors that can be attributed to the sun. Those and the virgin birth were added to the story by the Romans. Jesus was Mary and she was a normal woman, despite her deep knowledge and insight. She truly was an enlightened soul but that doesn't mean she could defy the laws of physics.

Mary was crucified, not a man. Romans switched Mary's life with her son Jesus' name then went on to create the characters of John the Baptist and John the apostle while adding in a pagan rich nativity story to take the place of Jesus' birth in the Jordan. John was the so-called forerunner of Jesus. He was the forerunner because he was the one pregnant with Jesus.

The book of Mark is considered the first Gospel to be written. Luke, John, and Matthew came afterward. Mark 1 starts off with Jesus' baptism by John, this is actually where the baby Jesus was born, albeit with editing. All 4 Gospels contain Jesus' baptism while only 2 contain the virgin birth myth, it's a bit strange that Mark never mentions Jesus' birth don't you think? Especially since it was written first. Well, maybe he did mention his birth except it was turned into a baptism by the Romans.

Luke and Matthew both start with the genealogies of Jesus (which don't match up) then the virgin birth and THEN the baptism. This points toward tampering of the story with the virgin birth being added in completely while the baptism part was altered.

Originally posted by begoodbees

Originally posted by adjensen

Originally posted by begoodbees
The word Easter is in relation to the pagan goddess ishtar. This is factual.

Do you think that the Bible was written in English?

Who cares what the word might be connected to in English, as it was referred to as Paschal in the original Greek and still is referred to that in the Catholic and Orthodox churches.

I believe you are missing the point. Easter and passover are not interchangeable. The word easter is not in the bible rather over time they have been made interchangeable by Christians.

www.datejesus.com...

"The name Easter comes from an ancient European goddess of the dawn called Eostre by the Anglo-Saxons and Ostara by the Germanic peoples. She is also known as Eostra, Eostrae, Eostar, Eastre, Easter, Estre, Eástre, and Austra by various European peoples. Her name means "movement towards the rising sun" and is related to the Indo-European root word Aus which means "to shine". The English words estrus and estrogen are also derived from her name. She was considered the goddess of the growing light and spring, associated with fertility and celebrated with a festival of rebirth. One story has her entertaining children by performing a trick that changed her pet bird into a rabbit. This rabbit then laid colored eggs that she gave to the children. Given the history of these ideas which date back to at least 2000 years before the Christian era, it should be no surprise that the original symbols and practices of Easter persist today, just as our ancestors once celebrated them."

edit on 10-12-2012 by begoodbees because: added link

Actually the English and German words for Easter and Passover have common roots...

Easter is from the old Anglo-Saxon 'Ester'...
...the German cognate of 'Ester' is 'Ostern'.

'Ostern' is derived from the old Teutonic form of auferstehen/auferstehung...
...which means 'resurrection'.

So the English etymology of Easter is traced to the German word for 'resurrection'.

reply to post by troubleshooter


Passover is a celebration of the Jews escape from Egypt mentioned in Exodus. Passover has nothing to do with Jesus' resurrection.

Originally posted by windword
reply to post by adjensen

 

What am I saying? I thought it was pretty clear, but let me repeat it. Anyone who tells you that Krishna or Horus or whoever was crucified and resurrected three days later is lying to you. Again, historical research will reveal that. Go read the article I posted that debunks Zeitgeist, because the guy did a very thorough job of both dispelling nonsense like Horus and Jesus being the same, and citing extensive sources to demonstrate his claims. I did something similar a couple of years ago, now I just point people to that article. If the Hindus don't think that Krishna was born of a virgin on December 25 and crucified, why would you take a nitwit like Achyra S's word for it?

Well, I never saw Zeitgeist, and I'm not going to rush off to watch it to debate it.

The Jesus myth is unique in many ways, granted that. But it also similar to other earlier myths, and that's a fact. Maybe Horus wasn't nailed to a cross, he supposedly died from the sting of a scorpion, but he was a mythical dying and resurrected god, among others, that preceded the myth of Jesus.

Jesus wasn't born on December 25th either, that is a blatant manipulation of Christian legend.

I don't really want to enter into a heated debate here, but it seems that you just want to flat out deny that there are familiar themes and mythologies that parallel the Jesus myth. That's just not true.

Did you read the skeptic's article on Zeitgeist? If not, please do, as you will see that it is true that the story of Jesus is not a simple regurgitation of numerous earlier (and later, in some cases -- Mythra, for example, was changed after Christ to be closer to him, though Murdoch represents the opposite.)

For example? "Horus - he was a mythical dying and resurrected god" -- no, he was not. Horus didn't die:

Also lacking is any evidence that he was betrayed by Typhon. In fact, Horus never died, at any time, he later merges with the sun god, Ra -- but never dies and certainly never is crucified, and therefore could not have been buried for 3 days and resurrected. If you want to look it up yourself, you can find documentation of Horus and Isis and Osiris here [6] and here [7].

Footnote 6: www.earth-history.com...
Footnote 7: Isis and Osiris

Originally posted by 3NL1GHT3N3D1
reply to post by troubleshooter

 

Passover is a celebration of the Jews escape from Egypt mentioned in Exodus. Passover has nothing to do with Jesus' resurrection.

The first Christians thought so though... " For even Christ our passover is sacrificed for us:" 1 Cor 5:7

Originally posted by begoodbees
I wish I could find some translated hieroglyphs or something of that nature to point me in the right direction.

You apparently didn't look too hard in those sources that I gave you:

Number six is what you were looking for: LEGEND OF THE BIRTH OF HORUS, SON OF ISIS AND OSIRIS

reply to post by adjensen


Jesus never truly died, he just went to Hades to spread the gospel there, right? How could Jesus ever die anyways? Don't you believe he is eternal?

Originally posted by 3NL1GHT3N3D1
reply to post by troubleshooter

 

Passover is a celebration of the Jews escape from Egypt mentioned in Exodus. Passover has nothing to do with Jesus' resurrection.

Did you miss the fact that Jesus and the Apostles were in Jerusalem to celebrate the Passover, and that the prisoners on the crosses were killed early and buried hastily to avoid having to do so on the Passover Sabbath? Or that the women went to the tomb as soon as the Passover Sabbath was ended?

Originally posted by 3NL1GHT3N3D1
reply to post by adjensen

 

Jesus never truly died, he just went to Hades to spread the gospel there, right? How could Jesus ever die anyways? Don't you believe he is eternal?

The incarnated Jesus could, and obviously did, die.

Originally posted by 3NL1GHT3N3D1
reply to post by adjensen

 

Jesus never truly died, he just went to Hades to spread the gospel there, right? How could Jesus ever die anyways? Don't you believe he is eternal?

His body died and His body was resurrected...
...what you suggest, happened to His soul and spirit it seems.

reply to post by adjensen


But Jesus is eternal so how could he have died? Dying implies without life. If Jesus is eternal then how could he have lost his life? Jesus' spirit is what matters not his body.

Originally posted by adjensen

Originally posted by 3NL1GHT3N3D1
reply to post by troubleshooter

 

Passover is a celebration of the Jews escape from Egypt mentioned in Exodus. Passover has nothing to do with Jesus' resurrection.

Did you miss the fact that Jesus and the Apostles were in Jerusalem to celebrate the Passover, and that the prisoners on the crosses were killed early and buried hastily to avoid having to do so on the Passover Sabbath? Or that the women went to the tomb as soon as the Passover Sabbath was ended?

You're right, my mistake.

reply to post by charles1952


Paul was a spy against the true teachings:

reply to post by sk0rpi0n


Skorpion,

ISLAM IS ANOTHER TOPIC, , but its all connected, divide and control. You know that only one person was the stone, no one else, so you know who the stone represents in the KAABA that they KISS??

reply to post by begoodbees


You are right, no documents exist before 100AD, even in other religions Books before JESUS DOES NOT EXIST, so the Holy Roman Empire which controlled the world could have manipulated all the religions in the world and even pagan religions so they all sound alike. Its all a big game to them. DIVIDE AND CONTROL.

Thanks for you post, most of what you have written is TRUE. VATICAN HIDES THE TRUTH,

reply to post by adjensen


Romans were smart, reason they created Christianity, why not control your enemies, you know how many wars because of religion, its very good business for currupt politicians and the church leaders from every religion. Divide and control