god-man quiz!!!

Originally posted by inimalist
do you have outside sources for any of these claims?

some are interesting and generally redefine a lot of what I had thought of that era.

http://www.drshirley.org/hist/hist02.html

The site above gives pretty good timelines of the existence of patriarchs(Abraham, Jacob, Joseph, Moses) and of the Israelites time within Egypt.

http://www.freemaninstitute.com/Gallery/joseph.htm

Describes the various Egyptian Dynasties the Israelites were under during the Israelite patriarch Joseph's reign in Egypt, as well as gives a picture of what is thought to be Joseph's tomb. Joseph's tenure in Egypt is probably the time when messiah/Hebrew prophecies were the most prevelant and widespread to the Egyptian people.

You can look up the Dead Sea scrolls by going to google and typing in the "book of Adam and Eve" and "Dead Sea scrolls." As stated before, the creation of the scrolls themselves is dated to about 200 BC, however, the stories and biblical works contained within them are obviously many centuries older.

The biggest problem with these theorys is the fact the the Eygptians themselves kept no records of the Jews as is recorded in the Bible.Seems very unlikely the Eygptians mention nothing of this.Many have made claims that the Greek philosophers borrowed from the Jews,but they fail to mention how Greek Philosophers could have access to Hebrew Scriptures centuries before they were translated into Greek.Aristobulus even went as far to see Plato taken Moses ideas.Josephus claimed this too.However,their's no proof of what either of them say.The first translation of the Old Testiment into Greek can be dated no earlier thatn the middle of the first century CE.Even the Old Testiment itself claims the Greeks were among those who had not heard the fame of the Lord.See Isaiah 66:19

Originally posted by mr.smiley
LOL.At least we can have a civilized debate.

Bulls were connected in sacrafice with Mithra.Mithra was a god of fertility and was also associated with war.According to the mythology of Mithra,he slayed the bull known as Geush Urvan.All plants and crops growing were atrributed to the corpse of the sacrificed Geush Urvan.

You can find plenty on this particular story but I suggest the Ultimate Encylopedia Of Mythology.

Originally posted by DigiMark007
While I actually admire the fact that you're trying to conjure up facts to refute the connection between Jesus and other dieties, it's a losing battle. It's not just Horus, and whether or not this Massey fellow is full of crap is irrelevant.

There's literally hundreds of (confirmed, factual) connections between the life and works of Jesus and "deities" that predate him by anywhere from a few decades to numerous centuries.

It's the same story. And this is FAR from the first religion forum thread to be dedicated to it.

As for calling Joe Campbell an idiot, read some of his stuff first. Until his death he was one of the world's foremost authorities on mythology and comparative religion. Discrediting him based on a line or two from an internet forum is hardly fair.

Secondly, every story I have heard so far (ie. Mithras, Horus, Osiris, Krishna, etc.) is crap and they have all been debunked. They simply don't work, if the arguments were valid they would be something more than an internet phenomenom.

Well it's more than an internet phenomenom and I have yet to see the connections between Jesus and older god-men debunked.Some claims can be disputed,but nothing has ever came up to debunk the connections between Christ and older god-men.I find more people talking on the internet about Jesus than I do Mithra.Besides,people aren't happy when their religious beliefs are put into jeopardy.It's an issue most would rather not touch.It's nothing new.Scholars have known of the obvious parelells between Christ and older Pagan prophets for quiet a long time.It's just now becoming widely known.

The similarities simply aren't strong enough. The travelling prophet that does miracles is about the only valid similarity you will see long with the old sermon on the mount, but these are nothing really to compare them by as the teachings can still be so very very different. Symbolism is universal so it is not surprising that some things are similar, but it falls apart when the meanings are so very different.

Originally posted by mr.smiley
The biggest problem with these theorys is the fact the the Eygptians themselves kept no records of the Jews as is recorded in the Bible.Seems very unlikely the Eygptians mention nothing of this.Many have made claims that the Greek philosophers borrowed from the Jews,but they fail to mention how Greek Philosophers could have access to Hebrew Scriptures centuries before they were translated into Greek.Aristobulus even went as far to see Plato taken Moses ideas.Josephus claimed this too.However,their's no proof of what either of them say.The first translation of the Old Testiment into Greek can be dated no earlier thatn the middle of the first century CE.Even the Old Testiment itself claims the Greeks were among those who had not heard the fame of the Lord.See Isaiah 66:19

The Dead Sea Scrolls speak volumes as to whom the stories originated from, despite their age. Much of the original manuscripts found within the scrolls were written in Hebrew and in Greek, which further demonstrates that many Greek philosophers had access to them.

Ancient Greece, Mesapotamia, and Egypt were very dense melting pot type areas around 1600 BC much like the US is today - and consisted of people from all geographic areas of the time. Much of Egypt was probably inundated with Israelite culture during the Hyksos dynasty around 1600BC, the dynasty in which the Israelite patriarch Joseph is thought to have reigned over much of Egypt. The Hebrew manuscripts were probably translated to Greek and other languages during this time, and passed on to the surrounding areas of Mesapotamia, Greece, and Cannan.

All of what I've stated is a very practical way of taking the known histories and dates to answer yours/others questions. If you carefully examine the dates and histories given within the information I've posted, you'll see that the evidence seems to pretty much overwhelming point to most of the messiah stories being either Israelite in origin, or related to cultures which reference Abraham as their father.

Originally posted by mr.smiley
It's nothing new.Scholars have known of the obvious parelells between Christ and older Pagan prophets for quiet a long time.It's just now becoming widely known.

Encyclopaedia articles on Leo are based upon Roscoe's Life and Pontificate of Leo X (4 vols., 1805)

This is confirmed by The Complete Plays of John Bale (ed. Peter Happe), who notes that Bale in his plays "introduced a variety of matter to satirise the Roman Church and parody its rites and customs.

In 325ad, with Emperor Constantine and the Council of Nicea, Rome metamorphosized into a new religious structure, based on the emergence of Jesus Christ, and arguably more powerful then any organized religion that had ever come before. In fact, some believe that the Church of Rome, the Vatican, is actually nothing but a transformation of older Babylonian mystery schools, and that the religious centerpiece of the Roman empire predates Rome itself; back to the time of Nebechenezzer and the Tower of Babel. Whatever the case, we know for a fact that the inner mystery religion of Rome was based primarily on the Persian and Indian sun-god Mithra, as well as gods that took dominion and rulership over each of the planets in our solar system. Mars, Venus, Saturn, Pluto, and all the rest.

It is just becoming more widely know as mr. smiley has stated.

http://www.biblebelievers.com/babylon/index.htm

Excellent book. I've read it.

Originally posted by debbiejo
Yes even Pope Leo X knew this as he is quoted "We owe all this to the fable of Jesus Christ. All ages can testifie enough howe profitable that fable of Christe."

Encyclopaedia articles on Leo are based upon Roscoe's Life and Pontificate of Leo X (4 vols., 1805)

This is confirmed by The Complete Plays of John Bale (ed. Peter Happe), who notes that Bale in his plays "introduced a variety of matter to satirise the Roman Church and parody its rites and customs.

In 325ad, with Emperor Constantine and the Council of Nicea, Rome metamorphosized into a new religious structure, based on the emergence of Jesus Christ, and arguably more powerful then any organized religion that had ever come before. In fact, some believe that the Church of Rome, the Vatican, is actually nothing but a transformation of older Babylonian mystery schools, and that the religious centerpiece of the Roman empire predates Rome itself; back to the time of Nebechenezzer and the Tower of Babel. Whatever the case, we know for a fact that the inner mystery religion of Rome was based primarily on the Persian and Indian sun-god Mithra, as well as gods that took dominion and rulership over each of the planets in our solar system. Mars, Venus, Saturn, Pluto, and all the rest.

It is just becoming more widely know as mr. smiley has stated.

http://www.biblebelievers.com/babylon/index.htm

Excellent book. I've read it.

Second, that quote is actually from John Bale's The Pageant of the Popes. That is, Pope Leo X never actually said. Bale said that Leo X said it in an antipapal treatise. Bale knew that Leo never said it, he was intentionally being a dink.

Constantine screwed a lot of things up, Hislop touches on some of them, but he overstretches.

Originally posted by Thundar
The Dead Sea Scrolls speak volumes as to whom the stories originated from, despite their age. Much of the original manuscripts found within the scrolls were written in Hebrew and in Greek, which further demonstrates that many Greek philosophers had access to them.

Ancient Greece, Mesapotamia, and Egypt were very dense melting pot type areas around 1600 BC much like the US is today - and consisted of people from all geographic areas of the time. Much of Egypt was probably inundated with Israelite culture during the Hyksos dynasty around 1600BC, the dynasty in which the Israelite patriarch Joseph is thought to have reigned over much of Egypt. The Hebrew manuscripts were probably translated to Greek and other languages during this time, and passed on to the surrounding areas of Mesapotamia, Greece, and Cannan.

All of what I've stated is a very practical way of taking the known histories and dates to answer yours/others questions. If you carefully examine the dates and histories given within the information I've posted, you'll see that the evidence seems to pretty much overwhelming point to most of the messiah stories being either Israelite in origin, or related to cultures which reference Abraham as their father.

I will definently look more into the Dead Sea Scrolls due to the fact research in them is not one of my strong points.However,James,M.Robinson,in his introduction to the Nag Hammadi Library,states the finding of the Scrolls did more to divide the theological sects.It seems as if it would have put all more into a state of one than seperation.Most authors and scholars I have read use the Dead Sea Scrolls to the advancement of their own arguements which makes it even more interesting.I will have to read more on it though.Just as anyone taking a position on anything you can always put a crack in the armor.what you speak of the Israelities seems to draw more from an influence in Zoroastrianism,seeing as how it had a profound impact upon Christianity early Christianity.At any rate,I still find it untrue that Plato would have learned from Moses due to the fact their teachings were very,very, different.and still the Bible makes the claim that the Greeks were among those who did not know the Lord.Though their is still no explanation as to why the Egptians were totaly silenent about the Jew or Moses.Nonetheless,I will research it!! 🙂

The Dead Seas Scrolls are useful, but that is it. They simply confirm many of the points of the Septugaint which was the canon used by Jesus.

That makes more sense.I will still look into them though.More seems to be made over the Nag Hammadi findings,but maybe that's just because I read more into them.

You hear about the Nag Hammadi more because it is controversial. The OT has many other things confirming it, such as the Talmud, the Masocretic text, and the Septugaint. The Dead Sea Scrolls simply add. The most significant thing about them is that the only complete scroll happens to be Isaiah and contain the suffering servant prophecy of Jesus, proving the antiquity of the prophecy.

the Talmud was based upon older writings but it wasn't written until 2oo CE.So I don't realy see the relevance their.
The Suffering Servant prophecy Of Jesus?Even though I said my knowledge on the Dead Sea Scrolls is limited,i'm willing to bet their's plenty of contraversy on whether or not it's realy talking about Jesus.

the Nag Hammadi is more controversial simply because it paints a different picture of early Christianity.One the early church tried to supress.Of course the church considers the text heresey,but anyone could see what it realy did was show early Christian beliefs were much more diverse than previously belived.

Oh don't even get me started on Isaiah. There were older pagan writings that were inserted in that book too and said to of been written by Isaiah. But I'll have to go back and look them up to quote it exactly.

Originally posted by Thundar
The Dead Sea Scrolls speak volumes as to whom the stories originated from, despite their age. Much of the original manuscripts found within the scrolls were written in Hebrew and in Greek, which further demonstrates that many Greek philosophers had access to them.

Ancient Greece, Mesapotamia, and Egypt were very dense melting pot type areas around 1600 BC much like the US is today - and consisted of people from all geographic areas of the time. Much of Egypt was probably inundated with Israelite culture during the Hyksos dynasty around 1600BC, the dynasty in which the Israelite patriarch Joseph is thought to have reigned over much of Egypt. The Hebrew manuscripts were probably translated to Greek and other languages during this time, and passed on to the surrounding areas of Mesapotamia, Greece, and Cannan.

All of what I've stated is a very practical way of taking the known histories and dates to answer yours/others questions. If you carefully examine the dates and histories given within the information I've posted, you'll see that the evidence seems to pretty much overwhelming point to most of the messiah stories being either Israelite in origin, or related to cultures which reference Abraham as their father.

Originally posted by mr.smiley
the Talmud was based upon older writings but it wasn't written until 2oo CE.So I don't realy see the relevance their.
The Suffering Servant prophecy Of Jesus?Even though I said my knowledge on the Dead Sea Scrolls is limited,i'm willing to bet their's plenty of contraversy on whether or not it's realy talking about Jesus.

the Nag Hammadi is more controversial simply because it paints a different picture of early Christianity.One the early church tried to supress.Of course the church considers the text heresey,but anyone could see what it realy did was show early Christian beliefs were much more diverse than previously belived.

And yah, definitely diverse. Christianity wasn't even just limited to the Catholics, Orthodox, and Gnostics either.

Originally posted by debbiejo
Oh don't even get me started on Isaiah. There were older pagan writings that were inserted in that book too and said to of been written by Isaiah. But I'll have to go back and look them up to quote it exactly.

I don't believe that was actually settled. 😛

I'm being presumptuous, but the dating is so close that it is impossible to tell really.

I'll give you that. It was close. 🙂

Originally posted by Nellinator
I think this is overstretching the other way, but yes, the Israelites influenced other people that were more open to change. And mr.smiley you are probably right (definitely right imo, but we'll just leave it open for giggles) that Plato didn't get anything from Moses.

I could of sworn the Greek translation of the Genesis account had the phrase "and the Lord said to Plato"(sic)...😉

Originally posted by mr.smiley
The Suffering Servant prophecy Of Jesus?Even though I said my knowledge on the Dead Sea Scrolls is limited,i'm willing to bet their's plenty of contraversy on whether or not it's realy talking about Jesus.

Isaiah 53:5-12 proves beyond reasonable doubt that the suffering servant is Jesus, as the description of the "lamb" and its suffering uncannily resemble that of his crucifixion.

I will admit that there are other verses within Isaiah which seem to be referring more to Israel as a nation, as opposed to Jesus himself. This doesn't take away from Jesus being the suffering servant any, as his sacrifice is referenced within the scriptures as being necessary in order to redeem/return Israel as being a servant/child of God.

If you have the time, I'd definitely recommend that you read the book of Isaiah, along with the books of Adam and Eve and Enoch. They're very interesting and good reads.