Is Bill Maher serious?

[_GoodK]

TO BOTH SIDES: Can everyone agree with that last sentence, or is it flawed in some way?

Shades, you are absolutely correct, as usual. I couldn't agree more.

You, sir, are a gentlemen and a scholar.

[_Dr. Shades]

Shades, you are absolutely correct, as usual. I couldn't agree more.

You, sir, are a gentlemen and a scholar.

Wow, thank you, but I'm not worthy! :-)

[_marg]

Marg follows GoodK and says he didn't really mean what he said, but as I understand it, the Horus/Jesus connection is given attention in his upcoming film. This wasn't a slip of the tongue. He knew what he was saying and he did so to silent the religious majority who hold Christ dear to them. He ended up looking like a rabid moron, which is quite fitting.

That's not what I said kevin but it's par for the course coming from you to misrepresent intentionally what others say. And yet, you have the benefit of being able to respond with time, able to reread what someone writes unlike the situation Maher was in with live t.v. while others were interrupting him and ready to cut him off. Anyhow I just saw the movie and it seemed to me that when it came to this part which is your focus, I believe other prophets were mentioned before Horus. Horus was not singled out, nor was it pointed out (from what i can remember)that Horus was exactly the same as Jesus in all respects. As the various prophets or mythical characters were mentioned what was similar in their story to Jesus's was pointed out by flashing on the screen in writing...things like date of birth, virgin mother, resurrection. Whether those were true or not I don't know. I do think it highly likely that a good proportion were.

Overall I liked the film. It was kept lighthearted and simple which I think is important. Many of the other consciousness raising endeavours such as books by Hitchens, Harris make the topic complicated. Religion would never have appealed to the masses if it was difficult to understand, so I think likewise to reach atheists and liberal religionists there needs to be a simple approach offered as well.

[_Jersey Girl]

Here's a nice link for Horus/Jesus parallels from Religious Tolerance.org for anyone who wants to explore these.

http://www.religioustolerance.org/chr_jcpa5.htm

[_GoodK]

Here's a nice link for Horus/Jesus parallels from Religious Tolerance.org for anyone who wants to explore these.

http://www.religioustolerance.org/chr_jcpa5.htm

From page 2 of this thread:

http://www.religioustolerance.org/chr_jcpa5.htm

:)

[_dartagnan]

Kevin: Marg follows GoodK and says he didn't really mean what he said.

Marg: That's not what I said kevin but it's par for the course coming from you to misrepresent intentionally what others say.

LOL! "Intentionally" misrepresented!

You said, and I quote,

He made a mistake saying Horus is an exact same story as Jesus. He may have meant that Jesus is a compilation of various pagan myths going back 1,000 years.

Your argument is clearly that what Maher said on the View isn't what he meant, because of two possible reasons. 1. He made a mistake saying it or 2. He meant something else. Now you're ignoring what you just said and attacking me? Don't tell me, you're voting Obama, right?

You said what you said, and it is about the only defense one can take of Maher in this situation because he is clearly wrong. Trying to fabricate this excuse about him being talked over by women won't wash because there is no subsequent qualifier that could have removed the word "exactly" which was spoken before they interrupted him.

Whether those were true or not I don't know.

But don't worry, neither does Maher.

I do think it highly likely that a good proportion were.

The parallel game has been used and refuted for a long time now. This is nothing new. It is standard Zeitgeist material.

Overall I liked the film. It was kept lighthearted and simple which I think is important.

Oh I'm sure you loved it.

Many of the other consciousness raising endeavours such as books by Hitchens, Harris make the topic complicated.

Actually they oversimplify it. That's something Trevor and I agree on.

Religion would never have appealed to the masses if it was difficult to understand

Then you obviously don't know much about religion or theology. Maher simplifies it in his uneducated way by saying things like, "Back then they didn't know where the sun went at night so it is easy to be religious then." LOL. As if that were all it boiled down to. That and the recreation of religion in the image of older "myths."

[_marg]

Kevin: Marg follows GoodK and says he didn't really mean what he said.

Marg: That's not what I said kevin but it's par for the course coming from you to misrepresent intentionally what others say.

LOL! "Intentionally" misrepresented!

Yes Kevin, you must realize it will then be a chore for anyone to correct your misrepresentations.

You said, and I quote,

He made a mistake saying Horus is an exact same story as Jesus. He may have meant that Jesus is a compilation of various pagan myths going back 1,000 years.

Your argument is clearly that what Maher said on the View isn't what he meant, because of two possible reasons. 1. He made a mistake saying it or 2. He meant something else. Now you're ignoring what you just said and attacking me? Don't tell me, you're voting Obama, right?

I voted yesterday for Harper in an early vote. There's a Canadian election going on right now. First of all I acknowledged Maher was wrong saying Horus is the "exact" story to Jesus. I explain the context in which he made his remark, that is he was being interrupted by 4 women, rushed for time and within that environment "he may have meant" and then I explain why I think he "may have meant" which was because he also mentions 2 other god/prophets, Krishna and Mithra (I believe). Why mention others if his sole focus was that Horus was exactly the same as Jesus? He may have meant to say that in ancient god/man mythical stories there are some "exact" characteristics, which by the way is how it comes across in the movie. I asked you in a previous post to give me the names of any scholars who argue the Jesus story had no significant similarities to any previously known pagan god/man myth stories such as as virgin birth, resurrection from death, redeemer of man's sins. The intended main audience for the Jesus story were pagans who were familiar with stories of men being gods, so isn't it understandable where that notion came from and why it was used by the Gospel writers?

You said what you said, and it is about the only defense one can take of Maher in this situation because he is clearly wrong. Trying to fabricate this excuse about him being talked over by women won't wash because there is no subsequent qualifier that could have removed the word "exactly" which was spoken before they interrupted him.

There is no reason why this would be an important issue to Maher for him to lie about. And why lie when he knows whatever he says can and will be scrutinized? As well, whether the Jesus story shared only some significant similarities to various god/man myths versus one myth Horus being exactly the same story doesn't make any difference to a nonbeliever. It wouldn't even be important to a non believer whether none of the other myths shared any similarities to the Jesus story. But if they do it's easy to understand why that would be.

I do think it highly likely that a good proportion were.

The parallel game has been used and refuted for a long time now. This is nothing new. It is standard Zeitgeist material.

You've not convinced me. I asked for some scholars who have refuted that the Jesus's story evolved from various pagan myths and you've provided no names for me to look into.

Religion would never have appealed to the masses if it was difficult to understand

Then you obviously don't know much about religion or theology. Maher simplifies it in his uneducated way by saying things like, "Back then they didn't know where the sun went at night so it is easy to be religious then." LOL. As if that were all it boiled down to. That and the recreation of religion in the image of older "myths."

When you quote Bill Maher above is it a quote or is it a misrepresentation of something he said? I'd like you to actually quote, then I'll evaluate what he says. because otherwise I don't trust what you say is accurate. As far as what I meant, the movie format of interviewing common people and keeping the concepts simple to understand is likely to reach a larger audience who will remember more than the books by the highly educated such as from Hitchens, Harris or even Dawkins which frankly are rather difficult to digest. As far as how the church has presented religion, for most of the centuries in Christianity the masses were not expected to read the Bible in fact it was only allowed to be in latin for quite a time so that only priests and church could interpret it for the masses. Concepts as an example such as heaven and hell are simple to teach, simple to understand and memorable.

[_dartagnan]

Yes Kevin, you must realize it will then be a chore for anyone to correct your misrepresentations.

There is no misrepresentation, as you even admit below.

I explain the context in which he made his remark, that is he was being interrupted by 4 women, rushed for time and within that environment "he may have meant" and then I explain why I think he "may have meant" which was because he also mentions 2 other god/prophets, Krishna and Mithra (I believe).

Which is what I said. Your argument is that he was wrong technically, but you excuse him because he was a victim of circumstance. Those dastard women made him misspeak. In other words, for you Maher doesn't really believe what he technically said. That's essentially what I said your position was and now you're doing all sorts of back flips to suggest I'm misrepresenting you.

This is pointless because I haven't a doubt in my mind you're theonly person who believes this. Your subsequent apologetic and psychoanalysis of Maher's other comments don't change the fact that he was wrong. And I'm not interested in a drawn out debate over the Christ myth horse crap because it has been hashed out before here to no avail. People like you will believe what you want in spite of the evidence, and so will Maher. There is no point trying to convince you of anything.

[_marg]

Kevin do you think that no part of the Christ story is a myth? which likely evolved from various pagan myths? Do you disagree that there were pagan myths involving god/men, involving virgin births of these men, involving resurrection of dead people, involving god/man redeeming man's sins all myths existing prior to the story of Jesus? Do the scholars you accept refute that pagan myths involving those themes existed?

by the way as far as you misrepresenting me you said my position is that Maher didn't really mean what he said. That's not my position, first I acknowledged he mispoke and was in error. When I say he "may have meant" it means I'm leaving open the possibility that he didn't mean what he said, but I'm not sure, nor saying that is the case he actually may have meant what he said. Besides deliberately lying about facts your position for him, he may have been misinformed, or he may have due to the circumstances said something he didn't really mean. He may have known for a fact Horus is not "exactly" the same story as Jesus but that there are some "exact" themes not only common to horus but common to other pagan myths previous to the Jesus story. I too don't want to drag this out.

[_dartagnan]

Correlation doesn't equal causation and the Christ mythers have a tendency to oversimplify and exagerrate the extent of these "parallels." That's what's been shown beyond a doubt and is epitomized with pseudo-scholarly presentations like Zeitgeist and now it appears Religulous. You're trying to lure me into a debate when I already told you I've been there, done that. In fact, I think you were involved in it. Check the archives here. Right now I have more important matters to attend to.