musicwriter:


There's no original text of the bible anywhere in the world. The only thing that could be said to be original text are the Nag hamadi and the dead sea scrolls found about 1957 or there about. Indeed, they date to the first century. But before you get too excited, the biggest size, is about the size of a credit card, according to a researcher, Kenneth Humphreys. So it's not enough to use them to prove the bible was not written by Rome since it's patches here and there. Everything other manuscript in any museum, no matter how highly held by christendom is a copy of copy of copy of copy.

The rule of thumb is that any writing that's not in Hebrew or Aramaic which is the language Jesus and his disciples would have spoken is fake, fraud, scam. In fact, anything in Greek is not authentic because the supposed Jesus and his disciples were not Greeks.

There are manuscripts of the new testament dating well before Constantine ( 2nd and 3rd century especially) and they are not small. There are also Church fathers like Iraneus and Pappias who lived in the early 2nd century.
Also Jesus and his disciples spoke Aramaic and didn't claim to write anything. The manuscripts of the gospels we find from the 2nd and 3rd century ( scattered all over even to Ethiopia) are all in Greek which was a general language in the Empire and that is to be expected.
To say that because the new testament books were written in Greek by unknown authors, therefore they were created by Rome is not a strong arguement in my opinion.
Why couldn't they have been created by Hellenists of this new Jewish sect?

GeneralDae:

Also comparisons of Jesus to Mithra or Horus are usually blown out of proportion. They do not come out of scholarly circles and have been debunked many times.
There are some comparisons like baptism for instance, and of course maybe you could say virgin birth ( but even virgin birth is not in all gospel descriptions ). However I am yet to find scholarly documents or evidence( not blogs) of Mithra rising from the dead after 3 days.
Most of the mythicism comparison stories have been debunked by many scholars in the field ( both christian and non Christian) as blown out of proportion to a large extent but I wonder why skeptics keep bringing them up in their blogs without sound research of scholarship on the matter.

The problem is that the person that gave you Jesus also gave you the scholarship sorrounding it. So, it'll be difficult for you to realize there're wealth of other "scholarship" outside of your school of thought.

Caesar's Messiah is a scholarly work by Joseph Atwill.
Christianity before Christ is a scholarly work by John G. Jackson.
Jesus never existed is a scholarly work by Kenneth Humphreys.

So, what else do you mean by "scholarly" ? By the way, that word "scholarly" makes you sound irrational because you didn't need a scholarly work to believe the bible. Sorry, about that if you feel I am going strong on you but if I am wrong, answer me below.

Do you have any "scholarly" work that verified that Jesus was born by a virgin?

Do you have any "scholarly" work that verified that Jesus walked on water?

Do you have any "scholarly" work that verified that Jesus raised Lazarus from the dead?

Do you have any "scholarly" work that verified Jesus resurrected from the dead?

Is the bible itself a "scholarly" work? If yes, tell me, who peer-reviewed the bible?

If you have "scholarly" work on the character called Jesus in your bible, please share it with me and I'll gladly apologize to you and convert to Christianity.

musicwriter:


The problem is that the person that gave you Jesus also gave you the scholarship sorrounding it. So, it'll be difficult for you to realize there're wealth of other "scholarship" outside of your school of thought.

Caesar's Messiah is a scholarly work by Joseph Atwill.
Christianity before Christ is a scholarly work by John G. Jackson.
Jesus never existed is a scholarly work by Kenneth Humphreys.

So, what else do you mean by "scholarly" ? By the way, that word "scholarly" makes you sound irrational because you didn't need a scholarly work to believe the bible. Sorry, about that if you feel I am going strong on you but if I am wrong, answer me below.

Do you have any "scholarly" work that verified that Jesus was born by a virgin?

Do you have any "scholarly" work that verified that Jesus walked on water?

Do you have any "scholarly" work that verified that Jesus raised Lazarus from the dead?

Do you have any "scholarly" work that verified Jesus resurrected from the dead?

Is the bible itself a "scholarly" work? If yes, tell me, who peer-reviewed the bible?

If you have "scholarly" work on the character called Jesus in your bible, please share it with me and I'll gladly apologize to you and convert to Christianity.

And who told you I believe everything in the bible?
Who is Joseph Atwill, John Jackson, and Kenneth Humphreys and when did they write? did they write within the late 20th century and the 21st century in the light of recent research? Are they particularly new testament scholars who study new testament manuscripts?

GeneralDae:

There are manuscripts of the new testament dating well before Constantine ( 2nd and 3rd century especially) and they are not small. There are also Church fathers like Iraneus and Pappias who lived in the early 2nd century.
Also Jesus and his disciples spoke Aramaic and didn't claim to write anything. The manuscripts of the gospels we find from the 2nd and 3rd century ( scattered all over even to Ethiopia) are all in Greek which was a general language in the Empire and that is to be expected.
To say that because the new testament books were written in Greek by unknown authors, therefore they were created by Rome is not a strong arguement in my opinion.
Why couldn't they have been created by Hellenists of this new Jewish sect?

Greece was also once a colonial power in that region before Rome, so Greece also colonized the Jews and like every other colonial power, they gave them a new religion or at least tried to influence their Jewish faith.

Whatever those Hellenized Jews did was the beginning of Greco-roman take over of the beliefs of original Jewish sect. Indeed, that was the beginning of the creation of Jesus!. That was the beginning of the problem!!

Note: Please keep your argument in one post.

musicwriter:


The problem is that the person that gave you Jesus also gave you the scholarship sorrounding it. So, it'll be difficult for you to realize there're wealth of other "scholarship" outside of your school of thought.

Caesar's Messiah is a scholarly work by Joseph Atwill.
Christianity before Christ is a scholarly work by John G. Jackson.
Jesus never existed is a scholarly work by Kenneth Humphreys.

So, what else do you mean by "scholarly" ? By the way, that word "scholarly" makes you sound irrational because you didn't need a scholarly work to believe the bible. Sorry, about that if you feel I am going strong on you but if I am wrong, answer me below.

Do you have any "scholarly" work that verified that Jesus was born by a virgin?

Do you have any "scholarly" work that verified that Jesus walked on water?

Do you have any "scholarly" work that verified that Jesus raised Lazarus from the dead?

Do you have any "scholarly" work that verified Jesus resurrected from the dead?

Is the bible itself a "scholarly" work? If yes, tell me, who peer-reviewed the bible?

If you have "scholarly" work on the character called Jesus in your bible, please share it with me and I'll gladly apologize to you and convert to Christianity.

Here are names of recent popular new testament professors both atheists and Christians. I cannot find the name of any of your scholars there, it means your research on the matter are either outdated or from Historians who are not specifically new testament historians.

https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&source=web&rct=j&url=https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Category:New_Testament_scholars&ved=2ahUKEwio8_PmzcHvAhXv-SoKHUD2BO0QFjABegQIARAF&usg=AOvVaw0VBubv3Y5MYbfYeCBQ63jf

musicwriter:


Greece was also once a colonial power in that region before Rome, so Greece also colonized the Jews and like every other colonial power, they gave them a new religion or at least tried to influence their Jewish faith.

Whatever those Hellenized Jews did was the beginning of Greco-roman take over of the beliefs of original Jewish sect. Indeed, that was the beginning of the creation of Jesus!. That was the beginning of the problem!!

Note: Please keep your argument in one post.

ok so who created jesus now? Romans or Greeks or both?

GeneralDae:

And who told you I believe everything in the bible?
Who is Joseph Atwill, John Jackson, and Kenneth Humphreys and when did they write? did they write within the late 20th century and the 21st century in the light of recent research? Are they particularly new testament scholars who study new testament manuscripts?

Please keep your response in one post. If you don't believe everything in the bible, you shouldn't believe anything there at all.

GeneralDae:

ok so who created jesus now? Romans or Greeks or both?

When Rome came to power and conquered the Greeks, they both ruled that region with Rome in upper hand. That's where you get Greco-Romans. They both created christianity.

musicwriter:


Please keep your response in one post. If you don't believe everything in the bible, you shouldn't believe anything there at all.

So if you don't believe everything in whatever volume of books you read, you shouldn't believe anything in part of it at all?
Even in school, do you believe everything your professor told you?
I don't understand your thinking here.

musicwriter:


When Rome came to power and conquered the Greeks, they both ruled that region with Rome in upper hand. That's where you get Greco-Romans. They both created christianity.

It's easy to assert this, but there is no evidence. It could also be that jesus existed but not all stories about him are true. That's a more logical stance. Maybe christianity existed from the jews but some parts of it have been corrupted.

GeneralDae:

So if you don't believe everything in whatever volume of books you read, you shouldn't believe anything in part of it at all?
Even in school, do you believe everything your professor told you?
I don't understand your thinking here

Wasn't the bible supposed to be from God? If you could indeed find something inside that you can't believe, it means it was created by infallible man not God.

There's nothing special or holy or spiritual about the bible. It's an ancient work of imperial powers to rule their citizens by keeping their heads cool.

musicwriter:


Wasn't the bible supposed to be from God? If you could indeed find something inside that you can't believe, it means it was created by infallible man not God.

There's nothing special or holy or spiritual about the bible. It's an ancient work of imperial powers to rule their citizens by keeping their heads cool.

What is bible? there are 66 different books there and who told you they weren't created by fallible men? When did God start writing books?
I don't know if the books are special or created by imperial powers to rule their citizens. That is your opinion and the burden of proof is on you.

GeneralDae:

It's easy to assert this, but there is no evidence. It could also be that jesus existed but not all stories about him are true. That's a more logical stance. Maybe christianity existed from the jews but some parts of it have been corrupted.

You cannot find the truth about christianity within christianity. So, are you ready to read books outside of christendom where you'll find the truth?

Of course, there would've been thousands or even millions of people called Jeshua (original Jewish name for Jesus, which just means God saves) but the Jesus character in your bible did not exist. That's certain. It's a fictional work copied from ancient pagan gods. Example and since you like mentioning early church fathers, here is what early church father St. Augustine said "the same thing which is now called Christian religion existed among the ancients. They have begun to call 'Christian' the true religion which existed before."

So, an honest early church father opened up the truth. I challenge you to go and find out more about the "true region which existed before" but now called Christianity.

musicwriter:


You cannot find the truth about christianity within christianity. So, are you ready to read books outside of christendom where you'll the truth?

Of course, there would've been thousands or even millions of people called Jeshua (original Jesus name for Jesus, which just means God saves) but the Jesus character in your bible did not exist. That's certain. It's a fictional work copied from ancient pagan gods. Example and since you like mentioning early church fathers, here is what early church father St. Augustine said "the same thing which is now called Christian religion existed among the ancients. They have begun to call 'Christian' the true religion which existed before."

So, an honest early church father opened up the truth. I challenge you to go and find out more about the "true region which existed before" but now called Christianity.

I am ready to read all books and I've been doing that for some time. My question to you is: Are you open to new information that differs from your ideology and beliefs?

I never said there weren't many people called Yeshua. This statement of yours adds nothing to the debate.
Josephus speaks of James the brother of Jesus and Paul in Galatians also speaks of this same particular jesus calling him christ as did Josephus. It means paul and Josephus were likely speaking of thesame Jesus and James, or isn't it more logical to infer that rather than conspiracy theories without proof?

I don't care what the name of the religon of Jesus is called, what I am almost certain of is that there was a Jesus and a religion built after him, and no it wasn't created by Rome. The new testament as a whole doesn't come across as what ancient Romans can create, this is why I'm asking for your evidence that they did and you've given me nothing so far as proof.

GeneralDae:

I am ready to read all books and I've been doing that for some time. My question to you is: Are you open to new information that differs from your ideology and beliefs?

I never said there weren't many people called Yeshua. This statement of yours adds nothing to the debate.
Josephus speaks of James the brother of Jesus and Paul in Galatians also speaks of this same particular jesus calling him christ as did Josephus. It means paul and Josephus were likely speaking of thesame Jesus and James, or isn't it more logical to infer that rather than conspiracy theories without proof?

I don't care what the name of the religon of Jesus is called, what I am almost certain of is that there was a Jesus and a religion built after him, and no it wasn't created by Rome. The new testament as a whole doesn't come across as what ancient Romans can create, this is why I'm asking for your evidence that they did and you've given me nothing so far as proof.

If you want to find the answer to that question, I said you should go and find out what St. Augustine meant when he said "the same thing which is now called Christian religion existed among the ancients. They have begun to call 'Christian' the true religion which existed before."

Rome didn't create christianity from scratch. They edited and influenced the original Jewish writings to create the religion now called Christianity. That's what St. Augustine is telling you above!! The true religion existed before Christianity which is but a Roman copy of ancient beliefs!! I didn't say so, it's your church father St. Augustine himself. Again, go and find out what's that true religion that existed before christianity. In doing so, you'll discover the truth yourself.

musicwriter:


If you want to find the answer to that question, I said you should go and find out what St. Augustine meant when he said "the same thing which is now called Christian religion existed among the ancients. They have begun to call 'Christian' the true religion which existed before."

Rome didn't create christianity from scratch. They edited and influenced the original Jewish writings to create the religion now called Christianity. That's what St. Augustine is telling you above!! The true religion existed before Christianity which is but a Roman copy of ancient beliefs!! I didn't say so, it's your church father St. Augustine himself. Again, go and find out what's that true religion that existed before christianity. In doing so, you'll discover the truth yourself.

Give me a link to the full text and quote from Saint Augustine. It is most likely that you misunderstood him because Saint Augustine never implied or asserted that Jesus didn't exist.
Even from your quote, it seems to me he is saying what we know as christianity in terms of the moral teachings and some of the doctrines also existed among the ancients. He is not saying Jesus and early new testament characters didn't exist.
You say Rome didn't create christianity from scratch but Amujale(the op) is not implying that and he is only just arguing for black power (which is good), but he doesn't seem to know what he is talking about.
As for your statement about Rome creating some parts of the doctrines of the present day Religion, I agree this may be true, but it happened at a later time most certainly from the evidence so far.

GeneralDae:

Give me a link to the full text and quote from Saint Augustine. It is most likely that you misunderstood him because Saint Augustine never implied or asserted that Jesus didn't exist.
Even from your quote, it seems to me he is saying what we know as christianity in terms of the moral teachings and some of the doctrines also existed among the ancients. He is not saying Jesus and early new testament characters didn't exist.

St. Augustine is simply saying that the belief around a deity such as Jesus wasn't new. There were other "messiah's and saviors" before anybody heard of Jesus. Indeed, the full quote ends with something like "existed among the ancients and was never not". Simply google the quote and it'll take you to so many sources. Or read it in Christianity before Christ by John G. Jackson.

musicwriter:


St. Augustine is simply saying that the belief around a deity such as Jesus wasn't new. There were other "messiah's and saviors" before anybody heard of Jesus. Indeed, the full quote ends with something like "existed among the ancients and was never not". Simply google the quote and it'll take you to so many sources. Or read it in Christianity before Christ by John G. Jackson.

I have read a lot of Saint Augustine and even his critics would not accuse him of saying Jesus never existed.
What he is saying there of course is that other messaiahs and deities existed before Jesus, which we all know and is nothing new.
That doesn't counter the fact of the existence of Jesus or the christianity Augustine himself believed in.

GeneralDae:

I have read a lot of Saint Augustine and even his critics would not accuse him of saying Jesus never existed.
What he is saying there of course is that other messaiahs and deities existed before Jesus, which we all know and is nothing new.
That doesn't counter the fact of the existence of Jesus or the christianity Augustine himself believed in.

Bro. you're not yet ready for your freedom. But I hope some day you will.

St. Augustine never said Jesus didn't exist. He was doing a hard-sell to unbelievers trying to get them understand that Jesus was no different from the other pagan gods they already believed. The people St. Augustine was talking to already knew that Horus was born by a virgin before Jesus, Horus had 12 disciples before Jesus, Horus did miracles like healing the sick, raising the dead, feeding the poor before Jesus, Horus was crucified on the cross before Jesus, Horus resurrected from the dead before Jesus. Etc.

St. Augustine was a kind of asking the people; if you believe in Horus, why not believe in Jesus? And the people would have, of course, replied him; why do we need to believe in Jesus when we already have Horus?

So that's why St. Augustine would say that. When the British got to India, the Indians ask them similar question; why do we need to believe in Jesus when we already have two people in India (Buddha and Krishna) who had same qualities before Jesus?

musicwriter:


Bro. you're not yet ready for your freedom. But I hope some day you will.

St. Augustine never said Jesus didn't exist. He was doing a hard-sell to unbelievers trying to get them understand that Jesus was no different from the other pagan gods they already believed. The people St. Augustine was talking to already knew that Horus was born by a virgin before Jesus, Horus had 12 disciples before Jesus, Horus did miracles like healing the sick, raising the dead, feeding the poor before Jesus, Horus was crucified on the cross before Jesus, Horus resurrected from the dead before Jesus. Etc.

St. Augustine was a kind of asking the people; if you believe in Horus, why not believe in Jesus? And the people would have, of course, replied him; why do we need to believe in Jesus when we already have Horus?

So that's why St. Augustine would say that. When the British got to India, the Indians ask them similar question; why do we need to believe in Jesus when we already have two people in India (Buddha and Krishna) who had same qualities before Jesus?

That's what I'm saying. Give me the link to the full quote of this discussion of Saint Augustine with the people or any scholarly work that tells us that Horus was crucified on a cross and rose from the dead after 3 days.
This is not believable, because during the era of the Horus myth in Egypt and Krishna myth in India there was no such thing as crucifixion on a cross. This is why I say until we see the full text of what Augustine and the people were discussing, we cannot take your conclusions as factual. There is likely a misunderstanding or quote out of context.
Also John F Kennedy and another American president ( forgotten the name) were similar in many ways, does it mean both never existed, so why can't Jesus and Buddha be similar(besides Buddha was not even born of a virgin, nor was he baptized, crucified, or ressurected).
Think about it, skeptics say Jesus alone is similar to Horus, Mithras, Krishnna, Buddha, etc. and the Romans who created Jesus seemed to know about all these gods from far and wide, isn't that laughable?

GeneralDae:

That's what I'm saying. Give me the link to the full quote of this discussion of Saint Augustine with the people or any scholarly work that tells us that Horus was crucified on a cross and rose from the dead after 3 days.
This is not believable, because during the era of the Horus myth in Egypt and Krishna myth in India there was no such thing as crucifixion on a cross. This is why I say until we see the full text of what Augustine and the people were discussing, we cannot take your conclusions as factual. There is likely a misunderstanding or quote out of context.
Also John F Kennedy and another American president ( forgotten the name) were similar in many ways, does it mean both never existed, so why can't Jesus and Buddha be similar(besides Buddha was not even born of a virgin, nor was he baptized, crucified, or ressurected).
Think about it, skeptics say Jesus alone is similar to Horus, Mithras, Krishnna, Buddha, etc. and the Romans who created Jesus seemed to know about all these gods from far and wide, isn't that laughable?

I told you already that Rome also had their version of a resurrected savior called Mithra. The Greeks also had their version of a resurrected savior called Dionysus. So, it wasn't a new concept to them.

Everything about Jesus was copied from older saviors believed for thousands of years before Rome and Greece came to power. But it wasn't used to enslave people.

Example; the saying "I am the way, the truth and life. No one cometh to the father except by me" was first claimed by the African God-son called Horus here in Africa and it was documented in papyrus (ancient books) over 5,000 years before anybody heard of Jesus. This's why the older books have to be outlawed by Rome once the bible was written.

There were older saviours before Jesus's supposed time. All the bible quotes were actually copied from older sayings by older saviours, such as Zoroaster, Horus, Mithra, Buddha, Tammuz, etc. Do unto others as you'll have them do unto you, reap what you sow, love thy God your God, thou shall not kill, thou shall not lie, come to me all ye that labour, I am the way the truth and life, love thy neighbour as yourself, No one cometh to the father except by me, etc, were copied from older saviours into the bible and Koran.

Everything from the bibles concept of heaven, hell, resurrection are all found in the book of coming forth by day and night a.k.a the book of the dead. In the below drawing (attached) made several thousands of years before anybody heard of Jesus, an African God-son Horus (the resurrected son of God Osiris) is seen holding a cross while taking a dead man through the gate of hell. The emblem of cross signified SALVATION before Jesus!!.

Before anybody heard of Jesus, we already had an emblem of a cross in Africa called ankh and it meant SALVATION or ETERNAL LIFE. But they've lied to you that the cross originated from Christianity and that Jesus is the way. If Jesus is real; how come there was already a cross signifying RESURRECTION before anybody heard of Jesus?

Europeans succeed in hijacking your original African spiritual system and giving you one designed in their image. You no longer have any recollection of your ancient spiritual system because they've set the meaning and context for God in your head. But you don't realize he who sets the context for God, sets your spiritual truth.

Now, let's return to the story of the dead man and Horus....

Fortunately, the dead man made it through the gate of hell and Horus is seen taking him to the father (Osiris/God) on his throne because it was said that he (Horus) is the way, the truth and life. No one cometh to the father (Osiris) except by him. This's where the bible authors copied the concept.

Its in drawing for all to see!!

The scenario I narrated above could be seen in the attached picture and can also be viewed in the 2 short video clips below.


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yxm4D0GDod0


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pu80lggYeYs

musicwriter:


I told you already that Rome also had their version of a resurrected savior called Mithra. The Greeks also had their version of a resurrected savior called Dionysus. So, it wasn't a new concept to them.

Everything about Jesus was copied from older saviors believed for thousands of years before Rome and Greece came to power. But it wasn't used to enslave people.

Example; the saying "I am the way, the truth and life. No one cometh to the father except by me" was first claimed by the African God-son called Horus here in Africa and it was documented in papyrus (ancient books) over 5,000 years before anybody heard of Jesus. This's why the older books have to be outlawed by Rome once the bible was written.
Also in terms of the teachings of Jesus which you say are copied from Horus, Buddha, etc
Give me the original quotes of these gods similar to that of Jesus. You don't just claim things.
Do unto others what you want them to do unto you wasn't copied from older fables, it is a unique version of the golden rule which Jewish rabbi Hiliel ( who lived 100 years before Jesus) taught, but both he, Buddha, Confucius, etc didn't state it thesame way. There are other claims you made which on close scrutiny is likely also blown out of proportion, but I don't have the time now.

There were older saviours before Jesus's supposed time. All the bible quotes were actually copied from older sayings by older saviours, such as Zoroaster, Horus, Mithra, Buddha, Tammuz, etc. Do unto others as you'll have them do unto you, reap what you sow, love thy God your God, thou shall not kill, thou shall not lie, come to me all ye that labour, I am the way the truth and life, love thy neighbour as yourself, No one cometh to the father except by me, etc, were copied from older saviours into the bible and Koran.

Everything from the bibles concept of heaven, hell, resurrection are all found in the book of coming forth by day and night a.k.a the book of the dead. In the below drawing (attached) made several thousands of years before anybody heard of Jesus, an African God-son Horus (the resurrected son of God Osiris) is seen holding a cross while taking a dead man through the gate of hell. The emblem of cross signified SALVATION before Jesus!!.

Before anybody heard of Jesus, we already had an emblem of a cross in Africa called ankh and it meant SALVATION or ETERNAL LIFE. But they've lied to you that the cross originated from Christianity and that Jesus is the way. If Jesus is real; how come there was already a cross signifying RESURRECTION before anybody heard of Jesus?

Europeans succeed in hijacking your original African spiritual system and giving you one designed in their image. You no longer have any recollection of your ancient spiritual system because they've set the meaning and context for God in your head. But you don't realize he who sets the context for God, sets your spiritual truth.

Now, let's return to the story of the dead man and Horus....

Fortunately, the dead man made it through the gate of hell and Horus is seen taking him to the father (Osiris/God) on his throne because it was said that he (Horus) is the way, the truth and life. No one cometh to the father (Osiris) except by him. This's where the bible authors copied the concept.

Its in drawing for all to see!!

The scenario I narrated above could be seen in the attached picture and can also be viewed in the 2 short video clips below.


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yxm4D0GDod0


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pu80lggYeYs

I never said the cross originated from christianity, the cross originated about 400 years before christianity and was not in existence wen the myth of Horus and Krishnna were created which were about 1000 years plus prior.
Almost every myth or story that skeptics bring as examples of copying cannot be traced to the original but usually reinvented after the facts, if not I challenge you to give me original manuscripts or examples of Horus, Mithras, Buddha, etc being crucified, and then dying and rising after 3 days. When you check, it is usually not part of the original myth of these various fables or it is usually overblown to make it seem like it's similar to Jesus, that's why present day scholars in the field after studying the matter, hardly take these claims seriously.
As for Horus as the way, truth, and life, I am ready to accept that the version of John 14v6 could be copied from it but I want you to give me the link to the original Horus myth, then your story would be more authentic to me than that of other skeptics.

musicwriter as for the quotes or teachings of Jesus which you gave e.g Do unto others what you would have them do unto you, that teaching is called the golden rule, it was not copied from old gods but rather a repetition of the teaching of Hiliel ( a Jewish rabbi) which Jesus reversed to make it more actionable. The Hiliel version is what was common in all religions and fables.

GeneralDea:

I never said the cross originated from christianity, the cross originated about 400 years before christianity and was not in existence wen the myth of Horus and Krishnna were created in their which were about 1000 years plus prior.
Almost every myth story that skeptics bring as examples of copying cannot be traced to the original but usually reinvented after the facts, if not I challenge you to give me original manuscripts or examples of Horus, Mithras, Buddha, etc being crucified, and then dying and rising after 3 days. When you check, it is usually not part of the original myth of these various fables or it is usually overblown to make it seem like it's similar to Jesus, that's why present day scholars in the field after studying the matter, hardly take these claims seriously.
As for Horus as the way, truth, and life, I am ready to accept that the version of John 14v6 could be copied from it but I want you to give me the link to the original Horus myth, then your story would be more authentic to me than that of other skeptics.

You're being shown evidence all the time but your religious dogmatism isn't allowing you to think, not even to examine something given you.

In the picture attached in the last post and also in the second video you can see Horus shown holding a cross. The cross already signified RESURRECTION in ancient Egyptian religion about 5, 000 years before your Jesus. In the second video given earlier, the event drawn in the picture was thoroughly explained by the attendants at the British museum. And no, the story of Horus was at least 5, 000 years older than any Jesus. Again, there were so many such saviors and messiahs in ancient time.

Your early church leaders were aware of that fact and indeed used it to encourage unbelievers to believe in Jesus just as they believed the older saviors. Another early church father, Justin Martyr, said "And if we even affirm that he (Jesus) was born of a virgin, accept this in common with what you already accept of Perseus."

Perseus was another ancient virgin born messiah who died and resurrected before anybody heard of Jesus. What else do you need to wake up?!!

musicwriter:


You're being shown evidence all the time but your religious dogmatism isn't allowing you to think, not even to examine something given you.

In the picture attached in the last post and also in the second video you can see Horus shown holding a cross. The cross already signified RESURRECTION in ancient Egyptian religion about 5, 000 years before your Jesus. In the second video given earlier, the event drawn in the picture was thoroughly explained by the attendants at the British museum. And no, the story of Horus was at least 5, 000 years older than any Jesus. Again, there were so many such saviors and messiahs in ancient time.

Your early church leaders were aware of that fact and indeed used it to encourage the older saviors. Another early church father, Justin Martyr, said "And if we even affirm that he (Jesus) was born of a virgin, accept this in common with what you already accept of Perseus."

Perseus was another ancient virgin born messiah who died and resurrected before anybody heard of Jesus. What else do you need to wake up?!!

Sorry these are not strong enough evidences to.prove that Jesus was created from Horus. It is more reasonable to believe that a jew was crucified by Romans since this happened all the time in first century judea than to believe the Horus conspiracy. Virgin birth was common in ancient mythology but it was not a central focus of all christian authors. Matthew(or Author of Matthew) got his version from his interpretation of Isaiah's prophecy( Isaiah 9v6), not Perseus.
Can you give me the texts from ancient Egyptian religion mentioning cross? not videos but links to read them from a scholarly source.

GeneralDae:

Sorry these are not strong enough evidences to.prove that Jesus was created from Horus. It is more reasonable to believe that a jew was crucified by Romans since this happened all the time in first century judea than to believe the Horus conspiracy. Virgin birth was common in ancient mythology but it was not a central focus of all christian authors. Matthew(or Author of Matthew) got his version from his interpretation of Isaiah's prophecy( Isaiah 9v6), not Perseus.
Can you give me the texts from ancient Egyptian religion mentioning cross? not videos but links to read them from a scholarly source.

In the papyrus drawing (made before Jesus) which is now in the British museum, Horus is seen holding a cross, which signified RESURRECTION in ancient Egyptian religion. Again, the museum attendant explained the drawing in the second video. Or read it in the BOOK OF THE DEAD by Wallace Budge.

Jesus is not real. It's a fictional character superimposed on ancient gods who were also said to have died and resurrected.

musicwriter:


In the papyrus drawing (made before Jesus) which is now in the British museum, Horus is seen holding a cross, which signified RESURRECTION in ancient Egyptian religion. Again, the museum attendant explained the drawing in the second video. Or read it in the BOOK OF THE DEAD by Wallace Budge.

Who invented the cross?
Probably originating with the Assyrians and Babylonians, it was used systematically by the Persians in the 6th century BC. Alexander the Great brought it from there to the eastern Mediterranean countries in the 4th century BC, and the Phoenicians introduced it to Rome in the 3rd century BC.
In all the gospel stories(especially in Mark, the earliest gospel), the cross in the teachings of Jesus was a symbol of burden which we must carry, it was oppression rather than a symbol of eternal life.
Only later in the writings of Paul especially, did cross become somewhat of a symbol for eternal life and the catholics later exagerrated these writings making it similar to that of the Egyptians which you talk about here. But cross as a form of crucifixion was not known until 6th century BC.

GeneralDae:


Who invented the cross?
Probably originating with the Assyrians and Babylonians, it was used systematically by the Persians in the 6th century BC. Alexander the Great brought it from there to the eastern Mediterranean countries in the 4th century BC, and the Phoenicians introduced it to Rome in the 3rd century BC.
In all the gospel story, the cross in the teachings of Jesus was a symbol of burden which we must carry, it was oppression rather than a symbol of eternal life.
Only later in the writings of Paul especially, did cross become somewhat of a symbol for eternal life and the catholics later exagerrated these writings making it similar to that of the Egyptians which you talk about here. But cross as a form of crucifixion was not known until 6th century BC.

Where did you copy that from? Even as your account of the origin of the cross isn't accurate but at least you see that the cross predate Jesus. Therefore, the christian cross and the story of Jesus in your bible is plagiarism. It's fake!!.

Jesus is not an original story. It's plagiarism.

musicwriter:


Where did you copy that from? Even as your account of the origin of the cross isn't accurate but at least you see that the cross predate Jesus. Therefore, the christian cross and the story of Jesus in your bible is plagiarism. It's fake!!.

Jesus is not an original story. It's plagiarism.

I never claimed the cross was invented in the time of Jesus, I said it was invented 400 years prior way after the Horus and Krishnna myths. Read my answers again.

GeneralDae:

I never claimed the cross was invented in the time of Jesus, I said it was invented 400 years prior way after the Horus and Krishnna myths. Read my answers again.

And I told you the cross is at least 5, 000 years older than the Jesus story. The proof is in the Ani papyrus sitting in the British museum which I attached earlier. There's no other image of a cross any where in the world that's older than that of ancient Egypt.

musicwriter:


And I told you the cross is at least 5, 000 years older than the Jesus story. The proof is in the Ani papyrus sitting in the British museum which I attached earlier. There's no other image of a cross any where in the world that's older than that of ancient Egypt.

So how does this prove that Jesus crucifixion was copied from this ankhi in ancient Egypt rather than he being crucified in first century Judea by Romans? Also cross in Mark's gospel was not interpreted as a symbol to eternal life as in ankhi, but it was seen as oppression which it was to first century jews.
Also cross used to crucify was invented by the Babylonians 400 years before Jesus.
In the gospels, Jesus never stood to intercede with cross as in the ankhi story, rather he was crucified with it, and no where in Christian text is he holding it before God in heaven to bring eternal life, so your ankhi story does not correlate with that of Jesus which was about physical crucifixion ( a common practice of the Romans on criminals)

musicwriter, if Romans want to invent a religion, they would not invent a man dying on a cross, rather he would look very much like your ankhi story where he carries the cross to make intercession for eternal life before God like in your video, but we do not find this in the bible, rather we find that he was crucified.
To be crucified in the ancient world of Rome was the worst death given to slaves only, so much so that a Roman citizen was never to be crucified. Wouldn't it then be stupid to invent a religion where the hero was crucified? Think about this.
Isn't this why Paul said dying by crucifixion was foolishness to the gentiles and weakness to the jews? can't you see it was a barrier to the message of the early christians?