C
Cat_Herder
Guest
Did Julius Caesar really exist? Please provide any proof.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
- Status
- Not open for further replies.
R
Rascalking
Guest
Simply put, denial that Jesus existed is so marginal that no one who dare to argue it in the real world.
S
StrawberryJam
Guest
This is not the best argument in defense of your God who came in the flesh to man.Simply put, denial that Jesus existed is so marginal that no one who dare to argue it in the real world.
It may work for some people some of the time, but as time goes on less and less will fall for this logical fallacy.
Arguments such as this are trying to convince using the very weak basis that, lots of people are doing it, and have done it so it must be good or true.
This is not a good argument for Jesus.
H
Historicity
Guest
Mithra of PersiaHow many other “godmen” exist that meet these criteria? It seems pretty obvious this list was inducted from the specifics of the New Testament into a vague archetype…of which Jesus seems to be the only example.
Moreover, most of these are a stretch. Jesus began his ministry at age 30 because of zodiac movements? Did Jewish culture embrace the Western zodiac at all?
Feel free to back this up with links to real sources.
Dionysus/Bacchus
Krishna
Horus/Osiris of Egypt
Mithra of Persia
Zoroaster/Zarathustra
All similar religious figures to Jesus
H
Historicity
Guest
There is much more evidence from Caesar’s reign, including his writing and writings about him(during his lifetime), than the figure of Jesus.Did Julius Caesar really exist? Please provide any proof.
All of the earliest documents that refer to Jesus are not eye-witness accounts and were written after his death. I don’t think this is an accurate comparison. Socrates might have been a better choice.
S
Spirithound
Guest
This point is predicated on December 25th being the actual historical, and (most importantly,) faithfully-kept birthday of Jesus. The truth is, the Church did not even celebrate Christmas for several centuries. And, as with other feast days, such as the Transfiguration, the Assumption of Mary, and the Baptism of Jesus, it doesn’t matter whether we are using the same day as it actually happened. What is important is that we are celebrating the event. The second problem is the very concept of “the actual day”. As Jews, Jesus, Mary, and the early Christians would have used the Jewish calendar, with no regard at all to what day the Roman calendar says it is. So I would say it is entirely acceptable to say that the Church took a pagan holiday and gave them an important Christian concept to celebrate instead.Code:* The sun "dies" for three days on December 22nd, the winter solstice, when it stops in its movement south, to be born again or resurrected on December 25th, when it resumes its movement north.
Ok, now which is it? When we watch the sun going down into the water, is it dying, or is it walking on the water?Code:* The sun "walks on water."
No, the Apostles represent the 12 Tribes of Israel.Code:* The sun's "followers," "helpers" or "disciples" are the 12 months and the 12 signs of the zodiac or constellations, through which the sun must pass.
Except that by Jewish reckoning, the sun is not at its zenith at 12:00. They started counting the time at sunrise.Code:* The sun at 12 noon is in the house or temple of the "Most High"; thus, "he" begins "his Father's work" at "age" 12.
Ok, but Jesus’s ministry lasted for 3 years. The sun does not stay in a sign for 3 years, or 3 days, but around 30 days. This would make a rather cumbersome equation, don’t you think?Code:* The sun enters into each sign of the zodiac at 30°; hence, the "Sun of God" begins his ministry at "age" 30.
These last two are a little confusing because they are using two different metaphors to represent his age. It really looks like somebody is stretching their limits to create parallels.
Finally, we do have documents from the first and second centuriest AD, and there is not a word about this astrological stuff. For all appearances, these Early Church Fathers (St. Clement of Rome, St. Ignatius of Antioch, St. Polycarp, etc.) were faithful Catholics. Frankly it prompts the huge question of WHY? If Christianity were built upon pagan concepts, why not be open about it? Paganism was doing just fine for centuries before and after Christianity hit the scene; there was certainly no stigma about it.
C
Cat_Herder
Guest
For Caesar we have mostly imperial Caesar-worshiping chroniclers who wrote hundreds of years after the fact (e.g. Appian). For Jesus, setting aside the Christian sources, there are Roman and Jewish sources who wrote within 100 years of the crucifixion.There is much more evidence from Caesar’s reign, including his writing and writings about him(during his lifetime), than the figure of Jesus.
This is true of Caesar as well unless you want to allow writings ascribed to him to count, in which case you have to count the Gospels for Jesus, as both are dictations of the words of the subject written by scribes who worshiped the subject.All of the earliest documents that refer to Jesus are not eye-witness accounts and were written after his death.
My choice of Caesar was deliberate, because Jesus took down Caesar’s empire. Explain THAT.I don’t think this is an accurate comparison. Socrates might have been a better choice.
E
edward_george
Guest
Similarity means what then? And why should we believe you on this claim? Once again, you have provided no legitimate academic sources. You made the claim, and so the burden of proof is on you. Tell me how Jesus is similar to them. Tell me what significance that ought to have. Show me real evidence that Christianity copied its doctrines from these religions. If the claim that you’re making is so true, then you should have no problem finding an abundance of legitimate, honest academic research demonstrating that. You came on here and made a claim, and told us to give you historical evidence, and you are failing to do so yourself.Mithra of Persia
Dionysus/Bacchus
Krishna
Horus/Osiris of Egypt
Mithra of Persia
Zoroaster/Zarathustra
All similar religious figures to Jesus
-ACEGC
H
Historicity
Guest
Similarity meaning the story of Jesus is largely plagiarized and puts borrowed concepts of other prior religions to use.Similarity means what then? And why should we believe you on this claim? Once again, you have provided no legitimate academic sources. You made the claim, and so the burden of proof is on you. Tell me how Jesus is similar to them. Tell me what significance that ought to have. Show me real evidence that Christianity copied its doctrines from these religions. If the claim that you’re making is so true, then you should have no problem finding an abundance of legitimate, honest academic research demonstrating that. You came on here and made a claim, and told us to give you historical evidence, and you are failing to do so yourself.
-ACEGC
E
edward_george
Guest
And your proof of this is? Correlation does not prove causation, my friend, and similarity of belief does not imply “plagiarism.” You still have not produced a shred of historical evidence. Please, do you have any academic sources which demonstrate your claims that Jesus’ historical existence is doubtful, and that the story of Jesus was fabricated based on other religions? (The latter seems dubious at best because some of those religions would not have been accessible to those in the Middle East who supposedly “made up” the story of Jesus)Similarity meaning the story of Jesus is largely plagiarized and puts borrowed concepts of other prior religions to use.
Please answer my question. Where are your sources?
S
StrawberryJam
Guest
This could appear on the surface as a selling out of the truth, in order to gain members in it.QUOTE=Spirithound;7365836]This point is predicated on December 25th being the actual historical, and (most importantly,) faithfully-kept birthday of Jesus. The truth is, the Church did not even celebrate Christmas for several centuries. And, as with other feast days, such as the Transfiguration, the Assumption of Mary, and the Baptism of Jesus, it doesn’t matter whether we are using the same day as it actually happened. What is important is that we are celebrating the event. The second problem is the very concept of “the actual day”. As Jews, Jesus, Mary, and the early Christians would have used the Jewish calendar, with no regard at all to what day the Roman calendar says it is. So I would say it is entirely acceptable to say that the Church took a pagan holiday and gave them an important Christian concept to celebrate instead.
The Sun is not going down into the water, the Sun is dying, the Sun is not walking on water.Ok, now which is it? When we watch the sun going down into the water, is it dying, or is it walking on the water?
Anything goes when it comes down to it. A day to us is not a day to God, but could be. It’s pretty open on interpretation and as a result, is really meaningless.Ok, but Jesus’s ministry lasted for 3 years. The sun does not stay in a sign for 3 years, or 3 days, but around 30 days. This would make a rather cumbersome equation, don’t you think?
.These last two are a little confusing because they are using two different metaphors to represent his age. It really looks like somebody is stretching their limits to create parallels
As if the metaphor that grows into allegory is not “stretching”
It may come to a shock to you to realize that Catholics don’t have a problem with this.Finally, we do have documents from the first and second centuriest AD, and there is not a word about this astrological stuff. For all appearances, these Early Church Fathers (St. Clement of Rome, St. Ignatius of Antioch, St. Polycarp, etc.) were faithful Catholics. Frankly it prompts the huge question of WHY? If Christianity were built upon pagan concepts, why not be open about it? Paganism was doing just fine for centuries before and after Christianity hit the scene; there was certainly no stigma about it.
The Magi found Jesus after searching harder for him than those who were not searching him.
paganism is just a part of the normal things explainable. Social evolution.
H
Historicity
Guest
I’ll make them smaller, but are these not reputable enough?Please answer my question. Where are your sources?
Had to delete paste of sources, too many characters. You can find them at the bottom of the article.
hubpages.com/hub/Jesus-and-the-Astrological-Zodiac
I’m by no means implying this is all correct and I’d be a hypocrite in doing so, I’m simply looking for others to help me with finding possible inaccuracies in works such as this.
If it counts for anything, I have not watched zeitgeist.
W
Windfish
Guest
Unfortunately, Historicity, you have been persuaded by the lunatic fringe on this topic - these are people who deny the existence of Jesus and who argue for these hopelessly debunked pagan parallels. Even atheists have debunked and distanced themselves from all of this, but the myths still persist because people have such a prejudice and bias.
There is more historical data on Jesus of Nazareth than for any other person in antiquity, a fact that is made all the more astonishing when you consider that he was not a political or military leader (the usual figures documented in history). He is a real historical person documented by Roman, Jewish, and Christian sources, and the pagan parallels are ALL bunk. Every. single. one.
Recommended reading:
Shattering the Christ Myth
The Gospel and the Greeks
The Jesus Legend ← fantastic, absolutely fabulous book
Jesus Outside the New Testament
It is an exploded theory that never had any substance in the first place. I recommend the above books if you are really interested in the topic.
There is more historical data on Jesus of Nazareth than for any other person in antiquity, a fact that is made all the more astonishing when you consider that he was not a political or military leader (the usual figures documented in history). He is a real historical person documented by Roman, Jewish, and Christian sources, and the pagan parallels are ALL bunk. Every. single. one.
Recommended reading:
Shattering the Christ Myth
The Gospel and the Greeks
The Jesus Legend ← fantastic, absolutely fabulous book
Jesus Outside the New Testament
It is an exploded theory that never had any substance in the first place. I recommend the above books if you are really interested in the topic.
D
derekohachey
Guest
I’ll make them smaller, but are these not reputable enough?
Had to delete paste of sources, too many characters. You can find them at the bottom of the article.
I would check out the sources listed at the bottom of the article. A quick browse brings up some red flags:I’m by no means implying this is all correct and I’d be a hypocrite in doing so, I’m simply looking for others to help me with finding possible inaccuracies in works such as this.
If it counts for anything, I have not watched zeitgeist.
Most of these guys wrote from the 19th century or early 20th century and the scholarship is outdated. The “modern” folks that this article does quote like Acharya & John Jackson usually quote from these 19th century folks as if they were legit, but do not attempt to validate their scholarship.[S14] - Massey, Gerald.: The Historical Jesus and the Mythical Christ, The Book Tree, . Page 39-40 [S15] - Septehenses, Clerk De.: Religions. of the Ancient. Greeks, p. 214. [S16] - Doane, Thomas.: Bible Myths and Their Parallels in Other Religions, p. 327-328 [S17] - Massey, Gerald.: The Historical Jesus and the Mythical Christ, The Book Tree, . Page 40 [S18] - Hall, Manly P.: The Secret Teachings of All Ages, 1928. Page 53-56 [Chapter 7: “Isis, the Virgin of the World”] [S19] - Massey, Gerald.: The Historical Jesus and the Mythical Christ, The Book Tree, . Page 12-13
BTW, if you have not checked out Zeitgeist, I suggest you arm yourself with a bowl of popcorn and that you watch it. You will see that “Part one” is pretty much the same as the article you quoted. There is also a PDF on the Zeitgeist web site that goes into more detail, but once you look through the fancy multimedia display and as you begin to examine the sources and the reasoning applied, you will see the fallacies that are there. Please reference my earlier post for practical examples.
Hope this helps, yours in Christ,
Derek
W
Windfish
Guest
I also recommend these books to fellow Catholics. Ever since the Da Vinci Code, people have become pretty loony about Christian history, so it’s best to edify and educate yourselves. The first book, in particular, is just a straight-forward handbook that goes through all these “pagan parallels.” The reality is that most of them only surface hundreds of years after the Gospels when Christianity was catching the world like a wild fire, so that it was the pagans that copied Christianity! Not the other way around! And this is exactly what we would expect - pagans copied their myths from each other all the time, and Jews in the 1st century would simply have no concept of these pagan myths in addition to having a militant aversion to all things pagan influencing their beliefs and practices.Unfortunately, Historicity, you have been persuaded by the lunatic fringe on this topic - these are people who deny the existence of Jesus and who argue for these hopelessly debunked pagan parallels. Even atheists have debunked and distanced themselves from all of this, but the myths still persist because people have such a prejudice and bias.
There is more historical data on Jesus of Nazareth than for any other person in antiquity, a fact that is made all the more astonishing when you consider that he was not a political or military leader (the usual figures documented in history). He is a real historical person documented by Roman, Jewish, and Christian sources, and the pagan parallels are ALL bunk. Every. single. one.
Recommended reading:
Shattering the Christ Myth
The Gospel and the Greeks
The Jesus Legend ← fantastic, absolutely fabulous book
Jesus Outside the New Testament
It is an exploded theory that never had any substance in the first place. I recommend the above books if you are really interested in the topic.
Sadly, these myths continue because people cling on to their biases despite the evidence.
H
Historicity
Guest
Thank you for the links and what would be some examples of atheist debunked writings?Unfortunately, Historicity, you have been persuaded by the lunatic fringe on this topic - these are people who deny the existence of Jesus and who argue for these hopelessly debunked pagan parallels. Even atheists have debunked and distanced themselves from all of this, but the myths still persist because people have such a prejudice and bias.
There is more historical data on Jesus of Nazareth than for any other person in antiquity, a fact that is made all the more astonishing when you consider that he was not a political or military leader (the usual figures documented in history). He is a real historical person documented by Roman, Jewish, and Christian sources, and the pagan parallels are ALL bunk. Every. single. one.
Recommended reading:
Shattering the Christ Myth
The Gospel and the Greeks
The Jesus Legend ← fantastic, absolutely fabulous book
Jesus Outside the New Testament
It is an exploded theory that never had any substance in the first place. I recommend the above books if you are really interested in the topic.
W
Windfish
Guest
Check out Tim O’neil, a notable atheist. He compares Jesus Mythers to Holocaust deniers.Thank you for the links and what would be some examples of atheist debunked writings?
But there are many more articles in the blogosphere and videos on YouTube done by atheists that have the intellectual courage to denounce this garbage.
It is a hard myth to drop, and when they do drop it, they still have some of it spill over into their vague and ignorant distrust of the Gospels.
S
Spirithound
Guest
Dear friend, you’ve done nothing but bolster my position. Thank you.
[/quote]
It could, but it is still truth.[This could appear on the surface as a selling out of the truth, in order to gain members in it.
But I was addressing the specific claim in the OP that the sun walked on water.The Sun is not going down into the water, the Sun is dying, the Sun is not walking on water.
Interpretation by the human should be more systematic. If you want to attribute the parallels to God, that’s fine, but you’re still attributing them to GOD. I just feel that this parallel is unreasonably opaque for a human to make.Anything goes when it comes down to it. A day to us is not a day to God, but could be. It’s pretty open on interpretation and as a result, is really meaningless.
I don’t even know where to begin addressing this specifically…As if the metaphor that grows into allegory is not “stretching”
It may come to a shock to you to realize that Catholics don’t have a problem with this.
The Magi found Jesus after searching harder for him than those who were not searching him.
No shock, but I’m mystified as to what you mean. Are you giving evidence on my behalf? Paganism is the status quo; there would be no need to historicize Jesus unless he were real. Everyone was happy being Pagan.paganism is just a part of the normal things explainable. Social evolution.
[/quote]
R
rjparson
Guest
None of these meets all the weird criteria for a zodiac-godman you listed earlier.Mithra of Persia
Dionysus/Bacchus
Krishna
Horus/Osiris of Egypt
Mithra of Persia
Zoroaster/Zarathustra
All similar religious figures to Jesus
Some of them, like Mithra, have been intentionally coopted to replace, not absorb, paganism (the celebration of Christmas in December).
Others, like Horus and Krishna, have no other similarity to Jesus than their status as gods/men.
To be honest, all of your sources remind me of those chain emails that try to prove some mysterious connection between JFK and Abraham Lincoln because such-and-such have the same number of letters, etc.
A
Abyssinia
Guest
What we have concerning Jesus is actually impressive. We can start with approximately nine traditional authors of the New Testament. If we consider the critical thesis that other authors wrote the pastoral letters and such letters as Ephesians and 2 Thessalonians, we’d have an even larger number. Another twenty early Christian authors and four heretical writings mention Jesus within 150 years of his death on the cross.Did Jesus really exist?
Please provide any proof
Moreover, nine secular, non-Christian sources mention Jesus within the 150 years: Josephus, the Jewish historian; Tacitus, the Roman historian; Pliny the Younger, a politician of Rome; Phlegon, a freed slave who wrote histories; Lucian, the Greek satirist; Celsus, a Roman philosopher; and probably the historians Suetonius and Thallus, as well as the prisoner Mara Bar-Serapion. In all, at least FORTY-TWO authors, NINE of them secular, mention Jesus within 150 years of his death.
Here is a list of the comaprisons between Jesus and the pagan figues. You will see, you make no comparisons between them:
thedevineevidence.com/jesus_similarities.html
Here is a list of modern historians, some of them are atheists on the historicity of Jesus:
bede.org.uk/price1.htm
- Status
- Not open for further replies.