[Martyn*]

It is my view that the people who wrote the Christian Gospels were Hellenized Jews, who took Jewish motifs and blended them with Greco-Egyptian ones. The background of Christianity can only be understood within the milieu of Greco-Roman culture. But the impact of ancient Egypt on Greco-Roman culture is well attested.

In the first century, Christianity had to compete with two important religious cults: Mithras and the cult of Isis. They both exploded on the scene well before Christianity ever came about. Both these cults were mystery religions. Mithras offered eternal life. Isis bore a child, Horus, who would defeat the evil serpent king and become saviour of the human race offering eternal life. horus was the reincarnation of the god Osiris, who was the god of the resurrection for at least 3000 years in Egypt. The cult of Osiris crept into Greek culture about 300BC and fused with the cult of Dionysus. As in the story of Dionysus, the god (Osiris-Dionysus) was born of a virgin, was attended (like the god Tammuz, another name for Osiris) by wise men or shepherds, was betrayed, and died as a sacrifice.

In the cult of Osiris many of the traits were transmitted to the Greeks and passed down. In funerary inscriptions Osiris, for example, as he was for 3000 years, was known as the 'mummified one', or 'the coffined one'. Osiris was the first king to be mummified in ancient Egypt and it was by this that the tradition of mummifying their kings began. In inscriptions the word for 'mummified' is the same word for 'annoint': Kers-t which is related to the word Kar. In Greek kar or ker is related to 'black' or 'dead' (note: kreas 'flesh') and is often a variant with 'sark' as in sarcophagus. All these terms are related to the cult of the dead, and are related to Osiris.

Source: http://books.google.co.uk/books?id=t...yptian&f=false

The word 'Christ' means 'anointed' in Greek, and is properly related to the Egyptian Kers-t. In Hebrew this is translated to 'Moschiach' which means messiah.



Osiris was the original Christ. He was the god who was bertrayed, who died, was resurrected and came back as the Christ. But perhaps, you might ask, that the gospel writers did not have Osiris in mind but related their Christ to the anointed Davidic Messiah?

Whilst that may be true, it is missing the point. The gospels are syncretistic. It is the Jewish messiah meets the god of the dead. Proof of this can be seen in the story of the raising of Lazarus found in the gospel of John, in which Jesus raises the mummified Lazarus from the dead. Actually, the story is the Jewish version of the Horus legend where Osiris (Lazarus) is brought back from the underworld by Horus in the scene of the book of the dead known as the Ka embrace. The soul of Osiris (the mummified king) is released by Horus, and both father and son reunite as one soul. In the gospels the secret to the word 'Christ' is related in Matthew 26 v 12:

When she poured this perfume on my body, she did it to prepare me for burial.

Jesus is Osiris, or at least that's how the Hellenized Jews who wrote the Gospels portrayed the Davidic Messiah.

[aljolson]

Well if all this is true, and I have no reason to doubt your knowledge of Egyptian history, then it really blows the OT out of the water. I am going to do a little reading up on what you have to say, as it sounds like a compelling argument.

[Mazzini]

What do all the other Egyptian gods do then?

Ancient Egyptian religion = polytheistic

Christianity = monotheistic

[E.Blackadder]

(Original post by Mazzini)
What do all the other Egyptian gods do then?

Ancient Egyptian religion = polytheistic

Christianity = monotheistic

well the claim is they borrowed one story, not all of them. what the other gods are doing is irrelevant, it only matters what osiris was doing.

[Martyn*]

(Original post by Mazzini)
What do all the other Egyptian gods do then?

Ancient Egyptian religion = polytheistic

Christianity = monotheistic

Paganism is not just polytheistic, it is also monotheistic, henotheistic and monolatric. Judaism was polytheistic and henotheistic at first, but then it marched towards a strict form of monotheism, perhaps as a remnant of what began in Egypt with monolatry. The progression towards strict monotheism from polytheism, henotheism and monolatry took a long time. With regards to Christianity, it was certainly monotheistic, but Christianity was varied at first and the belief that God dwelt within (and that the many gods were just manifestations of the one true God) would have struck a cord with the polytheism of the ancient world.

[Martyn*]

(Original post by E.Blackadder)
well the claim is they borrowed one story, not all of them. what the other gods are doing is irrelevant, it only matters what osiris was doing.

Yes that's right. To understand the Osiris cult in parallel to Christianity, it is necessary to understand it in the Greco-Egyptian context, rather than the Egyptian exclusively. The cultural background to Christianity is Greco-Roman; it is against this backdrop that Christianity is to be properly understood. Where Christianity stresses a purely Jewish character, this is a late development as a response to the accusation that a new religious cult could only be accepted if it was rooted in an older religion. At first Christianity was a new mystery religion like that of the Isis cult, which Rome tried to stamp out. The Roman rulers didn't really like these mystery religions because it encouraged its followers to meet and operate in secret. In other words: these cults were a danger to the state. This is how it happened in Christianity as well; the followers would meet in secret, sing prayers to a god not of the state, have a sparse diet without meat, etc.

[Mazzini]

(Original post by E.Blackadder)
well the claim is they borrowed one story, not all of them. what the other gods are doing is irrelevant, it only matters what osiris was doing.

And what about Dionysus? Jesus wasn't a baby when He died/was resurrected.

[E.Blackadder]

(Original post by Mazzini)
And what about Dionysus? Jesus wasn't a baby when He died/was resurrected.

i don't know anything about that story. the Jesus story probably borrowed elements from a lot of different mythologies. but my point was that it doesn't matter what Ra or Zeus were doing, it only matters what happened in the relevant stories.

personally i am not bothered either way, whether the stories are borrowed or they are original, they never actually happened. but i guess if you can demonstrate they were taken you can probably discredit them easier.

[Martyn*]

(Original post by Mazzini)
And what about Dionysus? Jesus wasn't a baby when He died/was resurrected.

I think you misunderstand. Syncretism does not work that way. Syncretisic religious cults take popular motifs and folktales and blend them together. With Christianity the followers were poor and oppressed slaves, people of the lower-social order. So, too, were the followers of the mystery religions. It is why the imperial cult of Rome tried to have them stamped out; they were too subversive. Christianity was a Jewish version of the typical subversive mystery religion. Only later were the manuscripts written in order to promote a particular type of Christianity that was against the Roman empire, and even those manuscripts are very late. The Christians used the works of Philo for his Greek philosophy, and the works of Josephus (which they preserved and interpolated) for the motif of John the Baptist. Acts of the Apostles was Jewish-Roman propaganda written by the Flavians: the Roman Piso family. Acts does not help us to trace the origins of Christianity, only its development.

The basis of the Christian gospel was to show Judaism in the manner of an Homeric epic with all the pagan motifs found in the works of Greek writers like Euripides, for example.

[aljolson]

I have just been on a site called, Truth be known, and read up on the Osirus/Jesus connection. It becomes so obvious that the Jesus myth is just that, a myth. Thanks to Martyn for showing the way to truth, through Osirus our lord.

I am not surprised the Christians have not posted on this, it's compelling evidence, for the idea I have always had that Jesus never existed.

[.eXe]

(Original post by aljolson)
I have just been on a site called, Truth be known, and read up on the Osirus/Jesus connection. It becomes so obvious that the Jesus myth is just that, a myth. Thanks to Martyn for showing the way to truth, through Osirus our lord.

I am not surprised the Christians have not posted on this, it's compelling evidence, for the idea I have always had that Jesus never existed.

LOL ahahahaha

What a complete tool. My god, you do define "sheeple" don't you.

Even atheists (yes atheists) do not argue that a person named Jesus lived. This is not religious dogma anymore, you are contradicting HISTORY.

My god, it's ridiculous how easily people's feeble minds can be swayed.

Oh and also, people make random connections all the time. Doesn't make them true you child.

Remember that movie with Jim Carrey called 23 or the number 23 or something like that? After watching it I too started to see 23 everywhere...just randomly and it was quite freaky at times that I could literally look at anything and come up with 23 or some random association to 23. It's just called confirmation bias and that kid martyn does it all day long posting nonsense connections like these. Managed to infiltrate your feeble mind quite easily I must say.

[Christianlady]

(Original post by .eXe)
LOL ahahahaha

What a complete tool. My god, you do define "sheeple" don't you.

Even atheists (yes atheists) do not argue that a person named Jesus lived. This is not religious dogma anymore, you are contradicting HISTORY.

My god, it's ridiculous how easily people's feeble minds can be swayed.

Oh and also, people make random connections all the time. Doesn't make them true you child.

Remember that movie with Jim Carrey called 23 or the number 23 or something like that? After watching it I too started to see 23 everywhere...just randomly and it was quite freaky at times that I could literally look at anything and come up with 23 or some random association to 23. It's just called confirmation bias and that kid martyn does it all day long posting nonsense connections like these. Managed to infiltrate your feeble mind quite easily I must say.

Hello again eXe,

Sorry for following you around lol. (After this post I have to go anyways) but I don't like or appreciate it when others call people "feeble" or other negative adjectives concerning their view on Jesus.

I am learning how to do the following, which sometimes is hard to do and I fail at, but it's great advice I think:

1 Peter 3 - http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/...+3&version=NIV
(I boldened some.)

"8 Finally, all of you, be like-minded, be sympathetic, love one another, be compassionate and humble. 9 Do not repay evil with evil or insult with insult. On the contrary, repay evil with blessing, because to this you were called so that you may inherit a blessing. 10 For,

“Whoever would love life
and see good days
must keep their tongue from evil
and their lips from deceitful speech.
11 They must turn from evil and do good;
they must seek peace and pursue it.
12 For the eyes of the Lord are on the righteous
and his ears are attentive to their prayer,
but the face of the Lord is against those who do evil.”[Psalm 34:12-16]

13 Who is going to harm you if you are eager to do good? 14 But even if you should suffer for what is right, you are blessed. “Do not fear their threats[b]; do not be frightened.”[Isaiah 8:12] 15 But in your hearts revere Christ as Lord. Always be prepared to give an answer to everyone who asks you to give the reason for the hope that you have. But do this with gentleness and respect, 16 keeping a clear conscience, so that those who speak maliciously against your good behavior in Christ may be ashamed of their slander. "

Hopefully you don't hate me for lecturing like a mother hen... it's a part of my nature. I admit, I am learning this too - to be gentle and respectful. Nobody is perfect. Regardless, I do agree with the basic message of your post - that Jesus did indeed exist. I just don't think it's good to use negative adjectives to describe somebody who doesn't have the same view, you know, or question peoples' intelligence.

Peace and God bless you

[cyfer]

(Original post by Christianlady)
Hello again eXe,

Sorry for following you around lol. (After this post I have to go anyways) but I don't like or appreciate it when others call people "feeble" or other negative adjectives concerning their view on Jesus.

I am learning how to do the following, which sometimes is hard to do and I fail at, but it's great advice I think:

1 Peter 3 - http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/...+3&version=NIV
(I boldened some.)

"8 Finally, all of you, be like-minded, be sympathetic, love one another, be compassionate and humble. 9 Do not repay evil with evil or insult with insult. On the contrary, repay evil with blessing, because to this you were called so that you may inherit a blessing. 10 For,

“Whoever would love life
and see good days
must keep their tongue from evil
and their lips from deceitful speech.
11 They must turn from evil and do good;
they must seek peace and pursue it.
12 For the eyes of the Lord are on the righteous
and his ears are attentive to their prayer,
but the face of the Lord is against those who do evil.”[Psalm 34:12-16]

13 Who is going to harm you if you are eager to do good? 14 But even if you should suffer for what is right, you are blessed. “Do not fear their threats[b]; do not be frightened.”[Isaiah 8:12] 15 But in your hearts revere Christ as Lord. Always be prepared to give an answer to everyone who asks you to give the reason for the hope that you have. But do this with gentleness and respect, 16 keeping a clear conscience, so that those who speak maliciously against your good behavior in Christ may be ashamed of their slander. "

Hopefully you don't hate me for lecturing like a mother hen... it's a part of my nature. I admit, I am learning this too - to be gentle and respectful. Nobody is perfect. Regardless, I do agree with the basic message of your post - that Jesus did indeed exist. I just don't think it's good to use negative adjectives to describe somebody who doesn't have the same view, you know, or question peoples' intelligence.

Peace and God bless you

Are you on TSR's proselytisation committee or something?

[aljolson]

(Original post by .eXe)
LOL ahahahaha

What a complete tool. My god, you do define "sheeple" don't you.

Even atheists (yes atheists) do not argue that a person named Jesus lived. This is not religious dogma anymore, you are contradicting HISTORY.

My god, it's ridiculous how easily people's feeble minds can be swayed.

Oh and also, people make random connections all the time. Doesn't make them true you child.

Remember that movie with Jim Carrey called 23 or the number 23 or something like that? After watching it I too started to see 23 everywhere...just randomly and it was quite freaky at times that I could literally look at anything and come up with 23 or some random association to 23. It's just called confirmation bias and that kid martyn does it all day long posting nonsense connections like these. Managed to infiltrate your feeble mind quite easily I must say.

Not by any means am I "sheepie", I have always stated that their is no proof of this "Jesus" character. If feeble can be bandied around, you should direct it at the people who believe in myths, without ever looking for evidence to support such beliefs. I was taught throughout my childhood about this myth of christianity if I was "sheepie, surely I would be a feeble-minded, God fearing, followthe leader christian. I can be proud that as I search for truth, I look at all the evidence. Yes I have read the bible many times.

Oh by the way could you show me this historical evidence for "Jesus", I keep asking for it but no-one has yet come up with it, is it such a big secret.

[aljolson]

(Original post by cyfer)
Are you on TSR's proselytisation committee or something?

I think there is a conspiracy by evangelical christians to target this room, I saw this type of thing in the 70's, when a lot of "born again" zealots were spreading their poison to targeted groups. Cherry picking Biblical quotes to suit, My mate got collared by them, went from a great bloke to an absolute arse hole.

[cyfer]

(Original post by aljolson)
I think there is a conspiracy by evangelical christians to target this room, I saw this type of thing in the 70's, when a lot of "born again" zealots were spreading their poison to targeted groups. Cherry picking Biblical quotes to suit, My mate got collared by them, went from a great bloke to an absolute arse hole.

LOL you confused me more than the original person I quoted.

[Mazzini]

(Original post by Martyn*)
With Christianity the followers were poor and oppressed slaves, people of the lower-social order. So, too, were the followers of the mystery religions. It is why the imperial cult of Rome tried to have them stamped out; they were too subversive.

Why did Rome adopt Christianity as the official religion later then?

[Martyn*]

(Original post by Mazzini)
Why did Rome adopt Christianity as the official religion later then?

It is complex, but it could have been because of conversion, and because it preserved a sort of vitalism which it took from the Greeks and from the Jews. Christianity retained in a single sythesis all the elements of Greco-Roman culture too.

[AmyJ]

(Original post by cyfer)
Are you on TSR's proselytisation committee or something?

On it? She is it.

[.eXe]

The bible isnt just a religious book you know. Its also a historical text.

Why can proof of jesus not be taken from the bible? The bible contains multitudes of things that are know to be historically accurate. Why is it that soon as it comes to jesus, everyone starts making gibberish pagan connections?


Posted via TSR iPhone App