Zeitgeist?

[_Some Schmo]

...but then if one can believe in religion then one can believe in this film.

It's not really a matter of believing in the film (I've seen it, so I know it exists). It's a matter of considering alternate view points. I wouldn't recommend "believing in it" as much as I would say, "it's something to think about."

by the way, if you believe in religion, you're susceptible to believing in anything that is not grounded in evidence.

[_Imwashingmypirate]

...but then if one can believe in religion then one can believe in this film.

It's not really a matter of believing in the film (I've seen it, so I know it exists). It's a matter of considering alternate view points. I wouldn't recommend "believing in it" as much as I would say, "it's something to think about."

by the way, if you believe in religion, you're susceptible to believing in anything that is not grounded in evidence.

Well obviously one knows it exists. But I am saying if it is possible for someone to accept and believe something so strange as religion, then it must surely be more logical to believe in such things within the film. Like the whole conspiracy theory.

[_dartagnan]

Please name one thing that you "know for a fact is nonsense." I'm just curious.

I can name several. In fact, I started watching the movie again and immediately remembered why I fell asleep the first time. The movie cannot even survive three minutes before the narrator starts presenting falsehoods about the so called parallels between Christ's history and the life of Horus.

Unsubstantiated nonsense:

1) "Horus was born of the virgin Isis-Meri"

No, he was not born of a virgin at all.

2) "Horus was born on Dec 25th."

No Egyptian source indicates this. As my buddy noted from his research, "The one reference I have found to a birth of Horus has him born on the 31st day of the Egyptian month of Khoiak -- the mythers have a one in 365 chance that this matches Dec. 25th!"

3) "His birth was accompanied by a star in the east, which in turn, three kings followed to locate and adorn the new-born savior."

All nonsense.

4) "At the age of 12 he was a prodigal child teacher"

A fabricated parallel with the Christ story.

5) "at the age of 30 he was baptized by a figure known as Anup and thus began his ministry."

There is no story from Ancient Egypt about any said "baptism," and certainly not by Anup.

6) "Horus had 12 disciples he traveled about with"

Egyptian religion scholars know of none of this.

7) "performing miracles such as walking on water."

Egyptian religion scholars know of none of this. In fact, one Egyptian source was he was thrown in the water. Nothing from the ancient literature suggests that he walked upon it.

8) "Horus was known by many gestural names such as The Truth, The Light, God's Annointed Son, The Good Shepherd, The Lamb of God, and many others."

More bogus attempts to fabricate parallels with the Christ story.

9) "Horus was betrayed."

Bogus.

10) "Horus was crucified."

Bogus.

11)"buried for 3 days, and thus, resurrected."

Especially bogus.

I mean what does it say about a movie when it presents this much nonsense within the first three minutes?

You see, all of the above was propagated by the idiot D.M. Murdock, who si better known as "Acharya S," a leading proponent of the Christ mythers. She has written several ridiculous books about these so called parallels but she doesn't have Egyptology behind her. The movie is based mainly on her claims and its primary source is an outdated work by Gerald Massey who claimed to have found evidence of these parallels in his translation of a document that no other Egyptologist has been able to verify. Its almost like he just made the s*** up.

Surprise.

The first few minutes of the film are refuted in this article here: http://www.tektonics.org/copycat/osy.html

[MODERATOR NOTE: Please do not use the "S" word in the Terrestrial Forum.]

[_GoodK]

Please name one thing that you "know for a fact is nonsense." I'm just curious.

I can name several. In fact, I started watching the movie again and immediately remembered why I fell asleep the first time. The movie cannot even survive three minutes before the narrator starts presenting falsehoods about the so called parallels between Christ's history and the life of Horus.

Unsubstantiated nonsense:

1) "Horus was born of the virgin Isis-Meri"

No, he was not born of a virgin at all.

2) "Horus was born on Dec 25th."

No Egyptian source indicates this. As my buddy noted from his research, "The one reference I have found to a birth of Horus has him born on the 31st day of the Egyptian month of Khoiak -- the mythers have a one in 365 chance that this matches Dec. 25th!"

3) "His birth was accompanied by a star in the east, which in turn, three kings followed to locate and adorn the new-born savior."

All nonsense.

4) "At the age of 12 he was a prodigal child teacher"

A fabricated parallel with the Christ story.

5) "at the age of 30 he was baptized by a figure known as Anup and thus began his ministry."

There is no story from Ancient Egypt about any said "baptism," and certainly not by Anup.

6) "Horus had 12 disciples he traveled about with"

Egyptian religion scholars know of none of this.

7) "performing miracles such as walking on water."

Egyptian religion scholars know of none of this. In fact, one Egyptian source was he was thrown in the water. Nothing from the ancient literature suggests that he walked upon it.

8) "Horus was known by many gestural names such as The Truth, The Light, God's Annointed Son, The Good Shepherd, The Lamb of God, and many others."

More bogus attempts to fabricate parallels with the Christ story.

9) "Horus was betrayed."

Bogus.

10) "Horus was crucified."

Bogus.

11)"buried for 3 days, and thus, resurrected."

Especially bogus.

I mean what does it say about a movie when it presents this much nonsense within the first three minutes?

You see, all of the above was propagated by the idiot D.M. Murdock, who si better known as "Acharya S," a leading proponent of the Christ mythers. She has written several ridiculous books about these so called parallels but she doesn't have Egyptology behind her. The movie is based mainly on her claims and its primary source is an outdated work by Gerald Massey who claimed to have found evidence of these parallels in his translation of a document that no other Egyptologist has been able to verify. Its almost like he just made the s*** up.

Surprise.

The first few minutes of the film are refuted in this article here: http://www.tektonics.org/copycat/osy.html

Even if your claims regarding Horus are true (and I make no such concession), Horus was not emphasized more than Attis, Krishna, Dionysus, or Mithra was.
By saying, what they said about Horus is "bogus", (and again I make no such concession, yet) is to miss the point entirely.

I'm not prepared to defend the accuracy of the Egyptology just yet - I don't have all the research done for me - but I would caution against being too dismissive and relying on biased "reviews" (e.g "Tekton is an independent ministry. I attend a Southern Baptist church...")

[_Ray A]

I read Acharya, and though I took her seriously at first (even did a post here), I think she's a BS artist. There may be a way to connect Christianity to pagan myths, but if you examine all the evidence it simply doesn't match up. Acharya has only picked bits and pieces, mostly out of context, which is poor scholarship. And I think her ultimate motive is to get rid of Christianity, even if it means distorting or selectively quoting sources. I requested that her emails stop, but they still keep coming.

[_GoodK]

I read Acharya, and though I took her seriously at first (even did a post here), I think she's a BS artist. There may be a way to connect Christianity to pagan myths, but if you examine all the evidence it simply doesn't match up. Acharya has only picked bits and pieces, mostly out of context, which is poor scholarship. And I think her ultimate motive is to get rid of Christianity, even if it means distorting or selectively quoting sources. I requested that her emails stop, but they still keep coming.

I don't think I've seen enough evidence to make a decision regarding Christianity and it's pagan roots, but you made me think of something regarding getting rid of Christianity. Is everyone on this board either LDS or an atheist? Or are there some people here who just think that Mormonism just happens to be the wrong answer on god's multiple choice test?

[_Ray A]

I don't think I've seen enough evidence to make a decision regarding Christianity and it's pagan roots, but you made me think of something regarding getting rid of Christianity. Is everyone on this board either LDS or an atheist? Or are there some people here who just think that Mormonism just happens to be the wrong answer on god's multiple choice test?

I'm a "big tent" advocate. I think "Mormonism" is not correct on some things. Have you read Grant Palmer? I'm not a Palmer disciple, either, but I think he does make some good points. I believe, in spite of some problematic lack of physical evidences, that Christianity has a better historical foundation than Mormonism, and primarily through Paul, not Jesus, because Paul's life can be examined more throughly than Jesus' and there are archaeological evidences supporting this, which we don't find with Alma, for example. I think Mormonism is an expansion (and in some instances an "exegesis") of Christianity, and I believe that "true" Mormonism is really in the Book of Mormon - not post-BoM ideas, which has got the Church into enormous trouble. But even with the Book of Mormon I make allowances for some wrong ideas, mainly because I doubt it's historical, but mirrors Christianity in the hope of changing thinking in regard to ethical/moral/altruistic behaviour. It has "core values" which all can associate with, and polygamy isn't one of those core values, for example. In other words, Joseph created a quagmire of controversy, when he should have stopped with the Book of Mormon.

[_GoodK]

I don't think I've seen enough evidence to make a decision regarding Christianity and it's pagan roots, but you made me think of something regarding getting rid of Christianity. Is everyone on this board either LDS or an atheist? Or are there some people here who just think that Mormonism just happens to be the wrong answer on god's multiple choice test?

I'm a "big tent" advocate. I think "Mormonism" is not correct on some things. Have you read Grant Palmer? I'm not a Palmer disciple, either, but I think he does make some good points. I believe, in spite of some problematic lack of physical evidences, that Christianity has a better historical foundation than Mormonism, and primarily through Paul, not Jesus, because Paul's life can be examined more throughly than Jesus' and there are archaeological evidences supporting this, which we don't find with Alma, for example. I think Mormonism is an expansion (and in some instances an "exegesis") of Christianity, and I believe that "true" Mormonism is really in the Book of Mormon - not post-BoM ideas, which has got the Church into enormous trouble. But even with the Book of Mormon I make allowances for some wrong ideas, mainly because I doubt it's historical, but mirrors Christianity in the hope of changing thinking in regard to ethical/moral/altruistic behaviour. It has "core values" which all can associate with, and polygamy isn't one of those core values, for example. In other words, Joseph created a quagmire of controversy, when he should have stopped with the Book of Mormon.

Do you believe Christianity is literally true, or just useful?

[_dartagnan]

Even if your claims regarding Horus are true (and I make no such concession), Horus was not emphasized more than Attis, Krishna, Dionysus, or Mithra was.

Horus is the primary parallel used by Acharya in her book so it is no coincidence that the film kicks off with an attempted demonstration that connects the life of Horus to that of Jesus. It is a lame duck attempt that only fools the gullible. I mean good grief, just email any professor of Egyptology and ask him if any of these claims can be reasonably attributed to Horus. He was born from a virgin, walked on water, crucified, resurrected after three days? Give me a break. These idiots cannot even substantiate that he was resurrected at all, so where do they get the detail of "three days"? They invent it from their need to create a parallel the same way LDS apologists invent parallels between the Book of Abraham and the "ancient world."

By saying, what they said about Horus is "bogus", (and again I make no such concession, yet) is to miss the point entirely.

I think you're missing my point. The movie cannot even get basic facts right in the first few minutes. It doesn't even ease you in with a few truths before sneaking in falsehoods. It just starts ramming the falsehoods right down your throat from the get-go. Again, I count at least 11 lies that were so important to the author that they needed to be used as the opening. And if they lie this much about the Horus parallels, I have no doubt they'd lie equally about the other gods. They are using the same source, after all.

I'm not prepared to defend the accuracy of the Egyptology just yet

Neither are they. So what does that say about the film?

I would caution against being too dismissive and relying on biased "reviews"

Give me a friggin break. This movie is biased what's biased. It is produced by the same crackpot mythers who have been refuted time and time again.Since they are the ones making claims about alleged parallels with Christ and other gods, they are required to substantiate them. Did you see the "source" page of the transcript? Massey and Acharya represent about 50% of the whole. Is that real scholarship? It is pretty much a condensed version of her book.

"Tekton is an independent ministry. I attend a Southern Baptist church...

Uh, excuse me but this website is run by JP Holding, who is one of the finest apologists online and a personal friend of mine. He tackles claims and addresses their veracity. He deals with arguments and cuts through the fat. He is more familiar with the relevant scholarship than anyone affiliated with this stupid movie. He asks the mythers to back up these parallel claims with something solid. Can you do it? Because they certainly can't. This is why their "source" page doesn't even include page numbers. They're perfectly aware of their deception and hope nobody actually tries to look up what they're claiming.

Do you believe Christianity is literally true, or just useful?

I think these arguments that Jesus never really existed and that the entire faith was borrowed from pagans, is becoming increasingly untenable.

[_Ray A]

Do you believe Christianity is literally true, or just useful?

It is no doubt "useful". My "problem" is that having read some of the greatest minds and thinkers on this subject, I am, at least, persuaded that it has enormous appeal as an ethical and moral guide, which most of us don't, and can't meet, but makes complete sense as an "ideal" for happiness, to at least strive for. There can be nothing objectionable in what Jesus taught, as a moral guide, though we may take a lifetime to achieve it, in theory.

Is it fiction? I doubt it. One has to weight the pros and cons here. While there is scant evidence for Jesus, one has to weigh the much firmer evidence for disciples like Paul, and others who proclaimed his life and ministry. That, coupled with the timeless content and appeal of the gospels, I think, has to amount to something. It's not "hard evidence", but, in my opinion, it does amount to something significant which we cannot casually dismiss with flippant alternative theories beause we don't like it, as Achy seems to do, with an agenda. And that's what I'm concerned about - what are you (anyone) looking for in the "historical Jesus"? The facts, or "smooth things"? If I concluded that it was all a fraud, which I haven't, I'd shout it from the rooftops. I am really not confident to do that, because I prefer to keep my mind open, until I'm certain it's all a fraud, which I'm not.

I adhere to no religion, no not even Mormonism.

Maybe JAK can convince me otherwise :) I'm open on ALL questions.