For Acharya's Main Website, go to
TruthBeKnown.com

TBK News Table of Contents

Bookmark and Share
Join the TBK Mailing List!
Enter your name and email address below to receive news and cutting edge commentary from Acharya!

Name:
Email:
Subscribe  Unsubscribe 

Tuesday, April 08, 2008

"ZEITGEIST, Part 1" Debunked? NOT!

"ZEITGEIST, Part 1" - Debunked or Refuted? A Video Response



The intriguing internet movie "ZEITGEIST" has been an astounding hit, with over 15 million views worldwide in English and several other languages. In the past several months, there have been many claims on websites and in forums and videos all over the internet that the first part of ZEITGEIST has been "refuted" and "debunked." Contrary to these claims, the facts continue to demonstrate otherwise.

First of all, let me clarify that I was not involved in the creation of ZEITGEIST, other than providing a few images and consulting on Part 1 at the last minute, the result of which was the final, "Official" version. However, my work did serve as a significant inspiration for Part 1. I had no involvement in Parts 2 and 3, and make no comment thereupon in this article.

Because of my work's influence on Part 1 of ZEITGEIST, a number of the debunking sites have been directed largely at me and my contentions formulated over the past 15 years. While we would expect a debate as to the facts, the vitriolic and bilious nature of these refutations reflects a severe weakness of intelligent argument. Moreover, the detractors - whether theists or atheists and other freethinkers - quite often HAVE NOT ACTUALLY STUDIED MY WORK, and there has not been one "refutation" site to our knowledge that has proceeded from an informed and unbiased perspective, accurately presenting facts based on serious research. Despite pretending to be experts on the subject in general and my work in particular, none of these individuals has given any indication that he or she has read my Companion Guide to ZEITGEIST, Part 1, which already deals with a number of the facts purportedly "debunked" and which sets the tone for further discussion of the claims in ZEITGEIST. Because such individuals are not aware of the facts and evidence in my books, they apparently feel the need to attack me personally, demonstrating a lack of substance and objectivity on their part, despite their pretenses to the contrary.

It should be noted that I am not and have never been adverse to reading Christian material or factual rebuttals to my work or that of anyone else. Over the years, I have continually factored such information into my work. In reality, I was born and raised a Christian, from a family of Christians dating back many hundreds of years. My mother's family landed in America in 1630, as Puritans, and my mother was the longtime secretary, choir director and soloist of our Protestant Congregationalist church. I was also briefly a born-again Christian - I know the material very well. Who could miss Christian proselytizing? In America, it is available all over the place - in our books, newspapers, magazines, radio, TV, movies - we are inundated with Christianity. But if anyone dares to raise their small voice of objection or alternative perspective, they are beaten down with disparagement and vituperation. (Such vitriol, by the way, continues, as several people have attempted to post vicious and insulting comments here - be advised that such posts will not be passed through, but they do prove my point about religious fanaticism causing hatred and incivility towards other human beings.)

In this regard, what I am adverse to is going to a website or video and seeing or hearing libel and defamation against me, as well as the inaccurate portrayal of my work - and so far, none of the Zeitgeist-debunking material we have encountered has been free of this type of invective and abuse.

Unlike my detractors in their refutations, I do not engage in vitriol and calumny in this work. Instead, I provide FACTUAL MATERIAL from primary sources and the work of highly credentialed and qualified scholars. While it is true that ZEITGEIST does not thoroughly identify the various primary-source images it uses in its claims, the important point is that such sources do exist. Furthermore, ZG's creator, Peter Joseph, did not set out to present a scholarly documentary on the topic in the 25 minutes that comprise Part 1. Of course, those who think they can adequately cover the last 5,000 years of religious history in under 25 minutes are free to make their own video.

Despite all the efforts to refute the information and sources in Part 1 of ZEITGEIST, the bottom line will remain the same:

When the subject matter is examined scientifically and in depth, there continues to be no credible evidence for the existence of the gospel character named Jesus Christ, and the preponderance of scientific evidence points to him being as mythical a character as the Greek god Hercules and the many other deities of the Roman Empire of the time.

While people who take such a position are widely subjected to ridicule and derision, based on all the evidence this conclusion is demonstrably the most reasonable and logical. Furthermore, in a truthful world where we should not be compelled to reside in BLIND BELIEF, this perspective should be allowed to exist without its holders being derogated and abused, as well as dunned with impossibly high standards of proof, while claims in the religious arena require little to no proof at all! In addition, rather than attacking living, breathing human beings, in my work I tackle deleterious ideologies that have caused the deaths of hundreds of millions of people.

To demonstrate the utter lack of quality in the assaults on my credibility and character that somehow "prove" the existence of Jesus Christ, I have been labeled not only a "liar," "fraud" and "poor scholar," but also a "Freemason," an "Illuminati," a "CIA agent," a "Mossad agent" and a "Zionist" - utterly ridiculous notions so undeserving of dignifying that I have hitherto not addressed them. Nor am I a member of any Theosophical Society or any organization having to do with Luciferians, etc., ad absurdum - other silliness slung my way. These claims are entirely laughable, needless to say. Not to mention that these folks are BEARING FALSE WITNESS AGAINST ME, which breaks one of the 10 Commandments!

"Thou shalt not bear false witness against thy neighbour." (Exodus 20:16; Matthew 19:18)

Rather than providing credible, scientifically valid evidence and proof for their assertions, detractors thus continually engage in an endless stream of ad homs and other fallacies to distract away from the issues raised in "ZEITGEIST, Part 1." One of the contentions constantly bandied about as if it constitutes some great triumph is the notion that Jesus Christ was not born on December 25th or the winter solstice; therefore, the comparisons with other gods are inapt. The fact will remain that many millions of people over the centuries have been taught to believe that a Jewish son of God named Jesus Christ not only existed but was born on December 25th. This straw-man argument merely serves to prove our point that Jesus is not the "reason for the season." This and the equally fallacious "three kings" argument are addressed in my Companion Guide, along with much else.

What it comes down to is this - who has reason, logic and common sense on their side? The people who claim that there is an invisible Jewish guy floating all over the sky, or those who assert that this implausible figure is a myth based on previous myths? And if this story is based on myth - which logic and reason suggest it is - what were the myths? That is all I am doing with my work. No CIA, Illuminati or Mossad is necessary for an individual to have such an understanding and to attempt to share it with others. It is sheer common sense, period.

Not a few of the debunking sites rely on shallow "encyclopedia surfing" that will not reveal pertinent facts because of a well-oiled censorship machine that has been in place since long before the Inquisition and that remains to this day to a large extent - as we can see from these frantic and hysterical attempts at debunking, which rely almost entirely on ignorance based on censorial behavior by authorities over the centuries and millennia. Such censorship is responsible for a massive amount of destruction of primary sources - this shameful, deliberate devastation is what we should recall every time a debunker cries out for "primary sources!" Meanwhile, detractors themselves provide NO primary-source evidence for their own extraordinary claims. Furthermore, much of the pertinent data I provide in my books cannot be found in English but appears in other languages, such as Greek, Latin, German, French, as well as Hebrew and Egyptian, of course. Unless someone can work within these languages, he or she may never encounter this important information.

In addition, scholars in relevant fields operating within mainstream institutions themselves are frequently hemmed in by a variety of factors that will not allow them even to contemplate the data discovered through intensive research into comparative religion and mythology. In previous eras not long ago, one could not only lose one's occupation for delving deeply into the issues and having the audacity to broadcast such discoveries, but one could also be subjected to imprisonment on charges of heresy and blasphemy, among other even less savory situations. Mainstream scholars have also been urged not to "rock the boat," as well as to preserve the status quo - and their livelihoods frequently depend on conformity. Moreover, many scholars these days are so specialized that they do not cover the broad diversity of subjects involved in this particular field of research. Scholars in past eras were less specialized - and they did in fact make these connections within comparative religion, as my research demonstrates.

The Horus-Jesus Connection

Rather than relying on the typical shallow "encyclopedia surfing" of the debunking sites, or scholarship that skims the surface because of prejudices and occupational concerns, if you would like to get a taste of deeper and fascinating research on the subject that BACKS UP THE HORUS CLAIMS OF ZEITGEIST, you will want to read my ebook:

The Companion Guide to ZEITGEIST, Part 1

In this 49-page ebook, I use mostly primary sources and the work of individuals highly credentialed in their relevant fields. This ebook shows exactly where some of the most well-known claims regarding the Egyptian god Horus can be found in ancient testimonies and texts.

If you go to my Zeitgeist page, you will find a series of excerpts that reveal the quality of the material I am presenting in the Guide.

We are also working on a short video on the subject, likewise addressing whether or not ZG, Part 1 has been "refuted" or "debunked." Again, I can assure you that it has not.

In addition, I am also close to finishing a much larger work on the subject that I’ve been diligently laboring upon - Christ in Egypt: The Horus-Jesus Connection. Thoroughly covering every contention found in ZEITGEIST regarding Horus, Christ in Egypt will be well over 400 pages, with dozens of illustrations and, again, mostly primary sources and the work of highly credentialed scholars, comprising a bibliography with over 500 entries. Again, I have managed to dig up some incredibly exciting and important research!

Many of us are delighted by the amazing success of ZEITGEIST, for the major reason that it has generated tremendous interest in what I consider to be some of the most intriguing subjects on the planet - comparative religion, mythology and astrotheology - but what has unfortunately been swept under the carpet for too long, in favor of biased, ethnocentric fallacies reducing the grandeur of the cosmos to petty fish tales.

If you have an interest in the direction humanity is going, you might want to know that I believe and hope it is towards a reawakening of the HIDDEN KNOWLEDGE I and others are bringing to light regarding religion and mythology - and this new development is another major step in that direction.

The Companion Guide to ZEITGEIST, Part 1

Thanks - and enjoy!

Acharya S aka D.M. Murdock

P.S. If you would like to receive news about the forthcoming video on ZEITGEIST or about my book Christ in Egypt, please join my mailing list:

Truth Be Known Mailing List

Interested parties may also wish to peruse the FAQs at my forums.

228 comments:

1 – 200 of 228   Newer›   Newest»
asoka said...

Thank you for your diligent efforts and for your refusal to engage in ad hominem attack, preferring instead to engage the issues in a scholarly way which addresses issues and ideas.

It is a shame that so many people have been willing to do so much damage, commit so many crimes, because of a belief in a fictitious being they call Jesus.

Mriana said...

In addition, scholars in relevant fields operating within mainstream institutions themselves are frequently hemmed in by a variety of factors that will not allow them even to contemplate the data discovered through intensive research into comparative religion and mythology. In previous eras not long ago, one could not only lose one's occupation for delving deeply into the issues and having the audacity to broadcast such discoveries, but one could also be subjected to imprisonment on charges of heresy and blasphemy, among other even less savory situations. Mainstream scholars have also been urged not to "rock the boat," as well as to preserve the status quo - and their livelihoods frequently depend on conformity. Moreover, many scholars these days are so specialized that they do not cover the broad diversity of subjects involved in this particular field of research. Scholars in past eras were less specialized - and they did in fact make these connections within comparative religion, as my research demonstrates.

I know you are very right about this. Anthony Freeman was a priest in the Anglican Church UK and got the ax over something he said in his book God In Us: A Case For Christian Humanism. Thing is, it was taken out of context and that's for starters.

Bishop Spong has been called many things, even a trouble maker within the Episcopal Church, as well as received death threats, some he had to take seriously, because of the things he has said.

Tom Harpur, Anglican priest Canada, has not been well received with some of the things he has said.

Don Cupitt, also has had his share of critics with his non-realism ideas, but he, along with Freeman, are going strong in the Sea of Faith.

Bottomline, people are afraid to face the truth and realize that "God" is a human concept, along with the ideas of heaven and hell. As it says in the Humanist Manifesto II (1973): we can discover no divine purpose or providence for the human species. While there is much that we do not know, humans are responsible for what we are or will become. No deity will save us; we must save ourselves.

One of the ways we can do that and have fewer wars is to stop these god games, because there is no god who will save us from anything, esp not from ourselves. Secondly, people need to let go of that security blanket they hold on to so tightly as they look up to an invisible parental figure and stop sending adult letters to a Santa Claus god. Nothing will get better until we figure out how to do it ourselves without holding the invisible daddy's hand.

In reality, that is what all these attempts to debunk, refute, defame, libel, and alike are. It's a panic concerning the reality and truth of the matter. People don't want to face that we are alone and have only one life. When their fairytale starts to shatter, they become frighten animals and strike back at the preceived threat as they refuse to leave the Platonian cave, preferring to cower in the recesses of the cave like scared children.

For those who don't know what the Platonian cave is... well that's all the more reason to get an education. "Sometimes in order to see the light you have to risk the dark."~ from The Minority Report.S

Anonymous said...

I saw Zeitgeist last summer and really enjoyed Part I - much of it consists of conclusions that I have drawn myself after years of research in archaeology and comparative religion. And, of course, I abandoned Christianity many, many years ago, sensing that ultimately it was false. Refuted? Just by people yelling that their false god is the Only Divinity just because they wish it to be so, calling it "faith"? Blind faith in anything really scares me - how do people think the Inquisition came about? or witch burnings? (More like, helpless little old lady burnings....just because they had a knowledge of medicinal plants, in the name of the "god" of love and compassion.) No, much of what we were taught makes no logical sense whatsoever and never really did. But it makes a lot of sense from an "astrotheology" approach and explains much that has gone unexplained in our history and religion.

Kudos to you! That you've made people angry means you've touched a sore spot, and that's good. If even one of your detractors begins to THINK, then you've done your work.

Keep it up!

Anonymous said...

you wouldn't know truth if it jumped up and bit you in your ass

Mriana said...

*Mriana shakes head* Some people just can't handle the truth and so the shrieking and cowering in a corner of the cave begins. Makes you wonder if Anon2 actually read any of it.

Felicity said...

You killed my best imaginary friend.

Thankyou.
:)

best regards
Felicity

suraci said...

I've lent the DVD to a few people, and the effect has been incredible. This information seems to reverse their perceptions of religion, a good striking off point to then reconsider the rest of their world.

I've had an interest in this for some years now, and it seemed obvious to me that even if the historical Jesus did exist, he was no supernatural son of god, but a quiet revolutionary who challenged the elite Pharisees of his day, and was murdered for it. Those who challenge them these days are similarly treated, though usually they meet their end in car crashes or lonely woods.

Zeitgeist is a superb tool for challenging the ridiculous misconceptions that many people are chained down with their whole lives.

Anonymous said...

The problem I personally have with this kind of information that you are revealing to the general public is that it will only inform those who are already open to receive such information and they usually do not need this. People who are stuck in a rut of dogma and are of average and below level of intelligence will not want to change their views. They are also the majority in society. Such people need these myths to give meaning to their lives. I do agree that these myths have been abused to gain control over people and to use such people for selfish gains that have cost the lives of millions and are putting all our lives and our species as such in danger of extinction. Unfortunately we cannot change that by scientifically proving their believes wrong. This will mostly have the opposite effect and you may well find yourself and others who support you view in the same kind of danger that the character Jesus found himself in. I know you feel that you are doing society a big favor by revealing information that may be more truthful, but these ideas are not going to make fundamentalists and militant people go away or change their mind. That is one of the reasons that there were levels of initiation in many of the older religious traditions. The spiritual babies need milk. What you are providing here is solid food for spiritual adults. In todays society where there is the general belief that everybody should know everything there are many people who die of old age as spiritual babies. This is an extremely difficult situation we find ourselves in. What we as people who value truth above all else do and say during this period in our history will greatly influence the unfolding of events to come. Perhaps it is time to realize that life itself is more important that any version of truth can ever be. You are doing very good work, but you are walking on land mines and I sincerely hope you realize that and rather try to help people become better human beings from inside their favorite myths. We are in a time in history where we can wipe all of life from the face of this planet. I'm sure this is the opposite of what you wish to gain with your work. Best wishes.

Wayne said...

I too had come to similar conclusions after researching Christianity. I was raised a Jehovah's Witness, and practiced that faith for the first 30 years of my life. When I left and became a born again Christian I came to the conclusion that they're all the same, just with different little twists on their interpretations. After doing a lot of in depth research, I was able to free myself from the bondage of religion. I am so grateful that someone has taken the time and effort to document their research and present it in a way that is easy to access and understand. I have posted a link to the Zeitgeist movie on facebook, and have had a lot of people watch it. I would also strongly recommend the book "Who Was Jesus? Fingerprints of the Christ" by D.M. Murdock as well.
I have been shunned for the past 15 years by JW's and Christians for asking questions and 'rocking the boat'. Most people do not want to know the truth, and will defend their myths unto death. Keep your chin up Achira, don't let them drag you down. You are voicing what so many are feeling, and know to be true.

Anonymous said...

Since I already know Jesus as he made a journey into this world in 1963 & visited me then I already know he lived & is real. I am Native Tribal Heritage. I am not a Christian. I don't belong to any Religion. Jesus did not give any indication he came to start a new Religion as he taught his Father's Spiritual Kingdom that is not of this world, still isn't, & he didn't teach religion.

sunru said...

Hi Acharya,
I've come across 1 or 2 extremely "weak academic" refutations. Mostly from a some guy who is following the norm of "tearing" into other scholars in order to give himself rise. I found his work (if we can indeed call it that) not only without any substance at all (just basically saying..your work isn't "good enough"),but utterly disrespectful.

It says more about the sorry state of our education system where researchers (and students) feel they must discredit their superiors or colleagues through lack of etiquette and downright envy.

It is extremely easy to put the onus back onto the minor few who are up against status quo and cast any valid (and often brilliant) research aside without such a glimpse.

These same minds fought feverishly that the earth was flat or the sun revolved around the earth and the voice of reason would eventually be drowned out.

No so today!

The rest, well - Since their "primary source" is in fact the subject of such critical analysis - What more needs to be said?

Sunru

Anonymous said...

Never seen so much bullshit in my life. Jesus being compared to Horus. Have you ever read the original Bible...I suggest you pick it up its called the Greek Bible. It will open your eyes a bit. And lay off the meth...

PSIKHE said...

There's forensic proof about the existence of Jesus, yes.

The Shrouds of Turin and Oviedo.

Same guy, tortured in an unusual way by Romans and crowned.

Recent discovered plate in your neck said ABA in hebrew - FATHER.

He is Horus, and the other gods, and fullfilled all prophecies.

Peace.

Anonymous said...

Seek and Ye shall find....my own reseach, completely independent of the author, led me away from the Christian movement many years ago, though there is one aspect of Christianity that holds immense validity, and that is the mystic interpretation of the writings that merely attempt to define us as spiritual as well as physical beings. The literal interpretation cannot stand up to logical inspection. The symbol of the cross is simply an emblem defining us as both spirit and matter, and this is the message of all of the worlds great religions. Early Christians never intended the writings to be taken literally, but instead to used as a metaphor to describe life here on earth. Anyone who believes, by faith, that the was a Jesus, Aramaic, who walked the erath just hasn't done their homework, but then again, the Christian religion does not require such tedious enterprises, but relies specifically on faith, which cannot be repudiated in a logical fashion. Those that love the Church would do well to read the Story of the Inquisition, by The Freethought Press, 1928. While there are many authors who will tell us what the Christian doctrine isn't, my favorite author on the religion, Alvin Boyd Kuhn, may shed some light on what the Christian doctrine is, or at least, what it was supposed to be. What it has become is something that no faith filled believer would want to ever contemplate. It is very difficult to look in a mirror and admit that "I may be wrong". People tend to spend their time proving themselves right. True seekers of truth will take that search wherever it may lead, no matter how unpleasant. Interestingly, what many around the world understand as truth will be called "lies of the Devil" by those who live by faith in the literal meaning of their religion. I have not read Acharya's writings, except for bits and pieces of articles here and there, but have reached the same conclusions from reading the writings of many others, and I must comment to "anonymous 2" that I feel certain that truth has been biting Acharya's ass for quite some time, and that she has had the strength to turn around and look it in the face, unlike those who would live by faith in believing in fantasy. Living by faith in fantasy is certainly more comfortable than searching for truth.

Anonymous said...

God is not a jew! he is a norseman named ODIN. why is that so hard to figure out?

Anonymous said...

J.P. Holding has already debunked this garbage and pointed out the main problem with your propaganda... fallible sources! Do you have any original evidence or source material, outside of the rants of Barbara Walker or Gerald Massey, that support your claims?

Copy Cats - Comparing Osiris, Horus, and Jesus

http://tektonics.org/copycat/osy.html

Here is another good and short article by Dr. Edwin Yamauchi on...

Easter: Myth, Hallucination, or History?

Anonymous said...

"J.P. Holding has already debunked this garbage"

LOL, ROTLMAO!!! That's the funneist thing I've ever heard! Thanks for the knee-slapping laugh - that's a riot!

"Walker" "Massey" there's 2 sources what about the other 500? Many are Christian. You and JP Holding have never actually studied Acharya's material for starters.

"Suns of God" has been out for 4 years and she uses completely different sources. You nor JP & gang are familiar with her work.

What part of "FACTUAL MATERIAL from primary sources and the work of highly credentialed and qualified scholars" did you not understand? Do you even know what primary sources are? How about "facts"?

Your hero JP Holding is nothing but a loud mouth wretch.

Here are just a few links about the dishonesty of JP Holding exposing why he & his entourage cannot be trusted & why anyone claiming to hold any credibility while using him as a source can't be trusted either. Anyone who uses JP Holding as a source or reference for anything deserves absolutely no credibility whatsoever & should be humiliated & embarrassed for it.

JP Holding has no qualifications whatsoever in any Biblical field, knows no Biblical languages, and has no relevant training, yet has the temerity to presume that his OPINION is enough, and that his personal FAITH is all that he needs, to offer a vicious and vitriolic critique of credible credentialed scholars who are trained in this area of expertise. JP Holding has no training in comparative religion. No training in mythology. No training in archaeoastronomy. No training in astrotheology. Nothing relevant.

So, don't take my word for it...see it for yourself.

TEKTONICS.ORG: EXPOSED!
http://the-anointed-one.com/exposed.html

'James Patrick Holding, the Want-to-Be Apologist'
http://www.infidels.org/library/magazines/tsr/2002/4/024jph.html

JP Holding Exposed
http://the-anointed-one.com/search2.htm

'Dishonesty by Robert Turkel (J.P. Holding)'
http://www.discord.org/~lippard/turkeldishonesty.html

A Reply to J. P. Holding
http://www.infidels.org/library/modern/g_a_wells/holding.html

"Writing James P Holding Off!"
http://debunkingchristianity.blogspot.com/2006/06/writing-james-p-holding-off.html

"Prove Jesus Existed, Please!"
http://www.truthbeknown.com/holding.htm

James Patrick Holding: Another Apostate With Selective Education
http://www.darrellwconder.com/debate1.html

Do a google for JP Holding and his alt. "Sheila Rangslinger" -

"DISCLOSURE FROM ADMIN: "Sheila Rangslinger" was discovered to be a sock puppet identity created by J.P. Holding. Any statements about J.P. Holding in this post were written by J.P. Holding himself."

22

Collin said...

I'm a Master Mason, a 32nd Degree Scottish Rite Mason, am currently doing my York Rite Degrees, and a member of the Shrine.

99.999999% of Masons I have known have known would disagree with idea that Jesus did not exist.

The Jewish guys, the Muslim guys, and the Wiccan guys I know would disagree that he is either God or the Son of God.

The Christian guys (who are the vast majority) would take it as an article of faith that Jesus exists and is the Son of God. The vast majority would also consider Him part of the Trinity. There are also non-Trinitarian Christian Masons who, of course, would not.

I have never had the pleasure of meeting an atheist Mason but they do exist in the Grand Orient of France and I would imagine that they would mostly consider the whole thing a fairy tale.

Some Fundamentalsit and Evangelical Christans can not tolerate the slightest suggestion that anything about their faith might be untrue. They can't see straight when this happens. Their world is in a state of near collapse untill they confirm in their own minds that the person is an apostate heretic unbelieving satan worshing tool of evil.

Meh. To each his own. If their faith gives them comfort in this life thats fine. I just wish they would stop throwing bricks at people they disagree with. Someday their rhetoric will get some innocent person hurt or killed.

Keith said...

Both sides of any debate, always seem to claim the higher moral ground...

"Oh the other side can only attack my character, not the facts."

This is just the most juvenile form of debate there is. Here is a piece of a comment gleaned from your blog:

"People who are stuck in a rut of dogma and are of average and below level of intelligence will not want to change their views."

Tell me thats not attacking character? (Gee if I don't change my mind, then I'm stupid). Secondly if you really feel there is no intelligent literature posing a case for Christ, then you're in bondage to your own form of dogma.

For starters, check this guy out... http://www.leestrobel.com/

Anonymous said...

Primary sources? Do you read Greek,Hebrew,Egyptian,etc? When did you travel to the middle east for your research?

Anonymous said...

Jesus fulfilled Old Testament prophecies
Old Testament prophecies foretold
the life and mission of Jesus Christ
hundreds of years before He was born

There are many Old Testament Bible prophecies that foretold and foreshadowed the life of Jesus Christ. Below, we list 12 Old Testament passages and compare them to New Testament passages. The New Testament, which records the life and teachings of Jesus Christ, was written hundreds of years after the Old Testament had been written. Much of what you'll see below was taken from a book written by Grant Jeffrey, called "Armageddon, Appointment with Destiny."


Prophecies fulfilled by Jesus
More prophecies fulfilled by Jesus
Evidence for Jesus


1. The Messiah would be preceded by a messenger
Old Testament (Isaiah 40:3) says:
A voice of one calling: "In the desert prepare the way for the Lord; make straight in the wilderness a highway for our God."
New Testament (Matthew 3:1-2) says:
In those days John the Baptist came, preaching in the Desert of Judea, and saying, "Repent, for the kingdom of heaven is near."

2. The Messiah would be born in Bethlehem
Old Testament (Micah 5:2) says:
"But you, Bethlehem Ephrathah, though you are small among the clans of Judah, out of you will come for me one who will be ruler over Israel, whose origins are from of old, from ancient times."
New Testament (Matthew 2:1) says:
After Jesus was born in Bethlehem in Judea, during the time of King Herod...

3. The Messiah would come from the tribe of Judah
Old Testament (Genesis 49:10) says:
This passage talks about a ruler coming from the Tribe of Judah, one whose rule will be all-powerful:
"The scepter will not depart from Judah, nor the ruler's staff from between his feet, until he comes to whom it belongs and the obedience of the nations is his."
New Testament (Luke 3:23-34 and Matthew 1:1-16):
Here you'll find a list of Jesus' ancestors, going back to Judah, who was one of the 12 sons of Jacob. (Jacob's 12 sons were the fathers of the 12 Tribes of Israel).

4. The Messiah would enter Jerusalem on a colt
Old Testament (Zechariah 9:9) says:
Rejoice greatly, O Daughter of Zion! Shout, Daughter of Jerusalem! See, your king comes to you, righteous and having salvation, gentle and riding on a donkey, on a colt, the foal of a donkey.
New Testament (Luke 19:35-37) says:
They brought it to Jesus, threw their cloaks on the colt and put Jesus on it. As he went along, people spread their cloaks on the road. When he came near the place where the road goes down the Mount of Olives, the whole crowd of disciples began joyfully to praise God in loud voices for all the miracles they had seen

5. The Messiah would be betrayed by a friend
Old Testament (Psalms 41:9) says:
Even my close friend, whom I trusted, he who shared my bread, has lifted up his heel against me.
New Testament (Matthew 26:47-50) says:
While he was still speaking, Judas, one of the Twelve, arrived. With him was a large crowd armed with swords and clubs, sent from the chief priests and the elders of the people. Now the betrayer had arranged a signal with them: "The one I kiss is the man; arrest him." Going at once to Jesus, Judas said, "Greetings, Rabbi!" and kissed him. Jesus replied, "Friend, do what you came for." Then the men stepped forward, seized Jesus and arrested him.

6. The Messiah would be sold for 30 pieces of silver
Old Testament (Zechariah 11:12) says:
I told them, "If you think it best, give me my pay; but if not, keep it." So they paid me thirty pieces of silver.
New Testament (Matthew 26:14-15) says:
Then one of the Twelve--the one called Judas Iscariot--went to the chief priests and asked, "What are you willing to give me if I hand him over to you?" So they counted out for him thirty silver coins.

7. The Messiah would be spit upon and beaten
Old Testament (Isaiah 50:6) says:
I offered my back to those who beat me, my cheeks to those who pulled out my beard; I did not hide my face from mocking and spitting.
New Testament (Matthew 26:67-68) says:
Then they spit in his face and struck him with their fists. Others slapped him and said, "Prophesy to us, Christ. Who hit you?"

8. The Messiah would be wounded by His enemies
Old Testament (Isaiah 53:5) says:
But he was pierced for our transgressions, he was crushed for our iniquities; the punishment that brought us peace was upon him, and by his wounds we are healed.
New Testament (Matthew 27:26) says:
Then he released Barabbas to them. But he had Jesus flogged, and handed him over to be crucified.

9. The Messiah would be silent before His accusers
Old Testament (Isaiah 53:7) says:
He was oppressed and afflicted, yet he did not open his mouth; he was led like a lamb to the slaughter, and as a sheep before her shearers is silent, so he did not open his mouth.
New Testament (Matthew 27:12-14) says:
When he was accused by the chief priests and the elders, he gave no answer. Then Pilate asked him, "Don't you hear the testimony they are bringing against you?" But Jesus made no reply, not even to a single charge--to the great amazement of the governor.

10. The betrayal money thrown in the temple and given for a potters field
Old Testament (Zechariah 11:13) says:
And the Lord said to me, "Throw it to the potter"--the handsome price at which they priced me! So I took the thirty pieces of silver and threw them into the house of the Lord to the potter.
New Testament (Matthew 27:5-7) says:
So Judas threw the money into the temple and left. Then he went away and hanged himself. The chief priests picked up the coins and said, "It is against the law to put this into the treasury, since it is blood money." So they decided to use the money to buy the potter's field as a burial place for foreigners.

11. The Messiah would have his hands and feet pierced
Old Testament (Psalm 22:16) says:
Dogs have surrounded me; a band of evil men has encircled me, they have pierced my hands and my feet.
New Testament (Luke 23:33) says:
When they came to the place called the Skull, there they crucified him, along with the criminals--one on his right, the other on his left.

12. The Messiah would be crucified with thieves
Old Testament (Isaiah 53:12) says:
Therefore I will give him a portion among the great, and he will divide the spoils with the strong, because he poured out his life unto death, and was numbered with the transgressors. For he bore the sin of many, and made intercession for the transgressors.
New Testament (Matthew 27:38) says:
Two robbers were crucified with him, one on his right and one on his left.

Now what do you suppose the odds are for these twelve prophecies being fulfilled in one man's life? What are the odds of Jesus being born in Bethlehem, a little town in the midst of hundreds of towns and cities in Israel?

The prophecy of Jesus having his hands and feet pierced was written hundreds of years before the Roman Empire invented crucifixion as a form of execution.

Who would believe a King would ride into a great city on the back of an donkey? Who else would be silent and not speak a word in his own defense, after being beaten, spit upon, and having the hairs of his beard plucked from his cheeks?

The prophecy that Jesus would be born into a family from the tribe of Judah is a 12-to-1 shot because there are 12 tribes of Israel. But, as Christian scholar Grant Jeffrey figured out, for all these prophecies to come true in one man's life would be 1 chance in 10 billion times a billion. And, there are many more Bible prophecies about a Messiah that have been fulfilled by Jesus, and we have only listed 12 of those prophecies here.

Now are you starting to feel the Bible is telling the truth? Or do you think that these Old Testament Prophets just got "lucky?"


The author of this article is a moron to be honest. DO some research...

Anonymous said...

http://www.cynet.com/JESUS/Prophecy/ntquoted.htm

Acharya S said...

Anonymous said...

Primary sources? Do you read Greek,Hebrew,Egyptian,etc? When did you travel to the middle east for your research?


Actually, yes, I can manage my way in several relevant languages, including those that you mention and more.

These days we actually have things called books, photos, videos, articles, the internet, etc., from which to do our research - amazing innovations. Good thing, too, or no one, including Christian scholars and apologists, could write any kind of book or article without them.

Or are you suggesting that we discount anything coming from any scholar around the world who hasn't done all of his or her research on site?

Perhaps you are not understanding the term of "primary sources."

Acharya S said...

Actually, Jesus didn't fulfill any "prophecies." Those OT "messianic scriptures" were used as a blueprint by the creators of the New Testament.

Yes, indeed, it is much less "moronic" to believe that, rather than men taking old scriptures and myths, and creating a new story, God came down to earth as his own son through the womb of a virgin in order to fix a creation he made badly in the first place by having himself as his own son crucified by Romans and Jews.

By the way, insulting someone into absurd beliefs is probably not the most effective proselytizing method. For the rest who cannot resist attempting to insult me and any others into buying your shoddy used-religion goods, please save your fingers from typing, as your comments will likely not make it through.

For those who may be interested in the "Prophecy or Blueprint?" discussion, please see my book Who Was Jesus? Fingerprints of The Christ.

Alexandra said...

Know what your problem is? You confuse Catholicism, which is the Mystery Babylon religion, with actual Christianity.

For starters, NO ONE knows when Jesus was born! The Catholics assigned the December 25 date because Catholicism is paganism given a Christian label.

With Christianity, all you have to do is recognize you are a sinner and YOU CANNOT SAVE YOURSELF. Christ died on the cross, offered Himself as the perfect sacrifice. If you receive Him as Saviour, then you are saved.

It's the same old story...Satan accusing God of withholding knowledge and claiming "ye will be as gods." After 6000 years, people like you are STILL falling for that lie!

Mriana said...

Not just a blueprint, but midrash. IF one were to do their research, they would find similar stories, not just in the OT, but also in Krishna, Buddhaism, Horus, the Book of the Dead, and many more. The Hebrews used Assyrian, Babylonian, and many more stories as a "blueprint" for their stories.

So, as Acharya states, there was no prophesy fulfilled. It is all just rewritten stories. You don't have to take Acharya's word for it, if you don't want to do so. You can find the same or similar statements from Robert Price, John Shelby Spong, Tom Harpur, Victor Matthews, Earl Doherty and many more.

So read what Acharya has to say, follow her sources, as well as others I've listed, then follow their sources. Look at what the Jesus Seminar has to say and explore those scholars' books. You find the same thing. The Christ story is nothing new nor is it prophesy from the OT.

Acharya S said...

Alexandra said...

Know what your problem is? You confuse Catholicism, which is the Mystery Babylon religion, with actual Christianity.

For starters, NO ONE knows when Jesus was born! The Catholics assigned the December 25 date because Catholicism is paganism given a Christian label.

With Christianity, all you have to do is recognize you are a sinner and YOU CANNOT SAVE YOURSELF. Christ died on the cross, offered Himself as the perfect sacrifice. If you receive Him as Saviour, then you are saved.

It's the same old story...Satan accusing God of withholding knowledge and claiming "ye will be as gods." After 6000 years, people like you are STILL falling for that lie!


Just can't resist the insults, eh?

I guess you missed the part where I stated that I was raised a PROTESTANT, from a PROTESTANT family dating back almost 400 years, at least.

As I say, I know the material well, having read it not only in English but also much of the New Testament in the original Greek.

No one knows when Christ was born because he's a mythical figure.

Alexandra said...

"Protestantism" means nothing anymore, especially given the ecumenical movement.

The Old Testament isn't the blueprint you claim it is.

Now then--if the Exodus didn't happen, then how did those chariot wheels wind up in the Red Sea? Near Nuweiba, Egypt?

I've read where people like you have said "Jesus is mythical because his birthdate is the same as the old pagan gods." Then you turn right around and say His birthdate isn't known. Which is it?

I have not insulted you. Unless telling it like it is is an insult.

I think you need to do some actual research. I am SO sick of this "we can be our own gods" lie. I'm sick of people of your ilk spreading lies and disinformation. I'm thoroughly disgusted!

Sunru said...

Here they are en-mass
Anonymous Christian apologists jumping right in, offering absolutely nothing accept "Read the book" or you haven't understood it and "read it again" and bombard you with passages that demonstrate absolutely nothing. In turn, somehow above anything critique of such a book (re Jesus), to the point they don't have to read it at ALL.

Amazing! Such arrogance or is it?

Their psychology is absolutely parallel with other such followers of "Super Cults" and I note most recently, Islam. The same thing, when facing academic critique of their beloved "primary source" the predictable reaction is "Read the Book".
I find this actually quite interesting, it seems to be a form of collective suggestion, that you go and (re)brainwash yourself into blind servitude (once again).

After a while, collectively, seeing that your mind is beyond such and control or manipulation is proving difficult, they attack you personally - downright sadistic.

Anyone with a rational mind is constantly given further evidence (as demonstrated by the such followers) of how diabolical and destructive these "Super Cults" are to the human mind and thus hinder the ability of our species to be able to co-exist within the natural world with any kind of stability.

Sunru

Acharya S said...

Alexandra said...

"Protestantism" means nothing anymore, especially given the ecumenical movement.

The Old Testament isn't the blueprint you claim it is.

Now then--if the Exodus didn't happen, then how did those chariot wheels wind up in the Red Sea? Near Nuweiba, Egypt?

I've read where people like you have said "Jesus is mythical because his birthdate is the same as the old pagan gods." Then you turn right around and say His birthdate isn't known. Which is it?

I have not insulted you. Unless telling it like it is is an insult.

I think you need to do some actual research. I am SO sick of this "we can be our own gods" lie. I'm sick of people of your ilk spreading lies and disinformation. I'm thoroughly disgusted!


"Ilk" is a pejorative term, so once again you feel the need to insult me into believing in spurious fairytales. As is the libel that I am "spreading lies."

I'm quite sick of this dis-ease displayed by people blinded by religious fanaticism, frankly, in which they feel the need constantly to insult, bully and badger others into the puerile, unscientific and unfounded beliefs that imposed upon them by others in the same manner, through the use of abuse and bullying. The pathology ends here.

I repeat, the Old Testament scriptures were used by the creators of the New Testament, as blueprint. Denying that fact will not make it go away.

It's quite simple - Jesus is a mythical figure, created by putting together Jewish scriptures and the writings of other cultures as well, such as the Greek myths and Egyptian religion. The sun god's birthdate was added to this mishmash at a later date, probably because adding it any earlier would have certainly given away the fictional creation.

Chariot wheels in the Red Sea would not prove the Exodus and its supernatural events any more than than old boat in the Sea of Galilee proves the existence of Jesus. I guess the numerous tombs of Osiris in Egypt prove he was a "real person" and the Lord of Resurrections, as he is called in the Book of the Dead, written thousands of years before Jesus supposedly existed?

Please do not bother to post here again if you are unable to refrain from libel and calumny simply because someone doesn't believe there is an invisible Jewish guy floating omnipresently in the sky. No matter how many insults you sling my way, I will not buy your shoddy goods.

Thank you.

Acharya S said...

Sunru said...

Here they are en-mass
Anonymous Christian apologists jumping right in, offering absolutely nothing accept "Read the book" or you haven't understood it and "read it again" and bombard you with passages that demonstrate absolutely nothing. In turn, somehow above anything critique of such a book (re Jesus), to the point they don't have to read it at ALL.

Amazing! Such arrogance or is it?

Their psychology is absolutely parallel with other such followers of "Super Cults" and I note most recently, Islam. The same thing, when facing academic critique of their beloved "primary source" the predictable reaction is "Read the Book".
I find this actually quite interesting, it seems to be a form of collective suggestion, that you go and (re)brainwash yourself into blind servitude (once again).

After a while, collectively, seeing that your mind is beyond such and control or manipulation is proving difficult, they attack you personally - downright sadistic.

Anyone with a rational mind is constantly given further evidence (as demonstrated by the such followers) of how diabolical and destructive these "Super Cults" are to the human mind and thus hinder the ability of our species to be able to co-exist within the natural world with any kind of stability.

Sunru


That's riiight. You should see the comments I refuse to post! Absolutely disgusting vitriol and hatred, simply because I don't subscribe to their sick and silly fairytales.

If I believed in Hercules, I could just as easily go around abusing everyone else who didn't believe in Hercules, call them names, suggest that they are diabolical and satanic, etc., ad nauseam.

It's a sickness. The cure is simple: Stop believing in this unscientific bilge and start seeing yourselves and others HUMAN BEINGS worthy of respect and dignity.

RELIGION = HUMAN ABUSE.

Mriana said...

It's a sickness. The cure is simple: Stop believing in this unscientific bilge and start seeing yourselves and others HUMAN BEINGS worthy of respect and dignity.

I agree and it's a shame people can't see or understand that love and compassion for their fellow human, animals, the world, and the universe is more than enough to instill moral values and alike. They don't need any religious text to do that.

Mriana said...

You should see the comments I refuse to post! Absolutely disgusting vitriol and hatred, simply because I don't subscribe to their sick and silly fairytales.

Wait a minute. They get worse than what we see here? I can't imagine any worse, even though I know it's possible. How do these people love themselves if they hate so much? I just can't see them loving themselves with such behaviour.

Anonymous said...

With a name like Acharya S you're probably a BARA BARA from Pakistan or India. So spare the lies that you're protestant. Even if you are, protestants were formed from the Rosicrucians (an occult organization with deep ties to luciferianism)..You just dug yourself a hole.

No one knows when Christ was born because he's a mythical figure. Righhhhhhht..and you were there to see it...

Plus people like you have been around since the time Christ so what you bring to the table (crap book) is nothingh new. People ahve been making many preposterous claims like you that Jesus was the sun god ra ra ra ra.....the vicious cycle continues....

Acharya S said...

Mriana said...

You should see the comments I refuse to post! Absolutely disgusting vitriol and hatred, simply because I don't subscribe to their sick and silly fairytales.

Wait a minute. They get worse than what we see here? I can't imagine any worse, even though I know it's possible. How do these people love themselves if they hate so much? I just can't see them loving themselves with such behaviour.


Are you kidding? Very vicious, hateful personal attacks using all sorts of despicable language, including one death threat. In fact, so far the Christians are proving themselves to be as bad if not worse than the Muslims in their spewing of vitriol and hatred.

Both groups, of course, serve to prove my main point about the evils of organized religion.

Like I say, it's a human-hating sickness that is leading us down the path to hellish Armageddon. Yet, we who would like to continue to live on planet Earth - indeed, to thrive! - are not allowed to have any say, or else we will be shouted down with all sorts of insults and threats.

The planet of the apes is here and now.

Mriana said...

protestants were formed from the Rosicrucians (an occult organization with deep ties to luciferianism)..

Where did you learn your history? That is absolutely not true. Try reading and researching the reformation. Protestants are actually protestors against Roman Catholic rule- AKA the Papacy. Martin Luther and the King of England are two of the most famous men of the Reformation. It has nothing to do with occult ties.

So, Acharya has not dug herself any hole AND if you did your research on her, you would not have to assume anything, but would know the truth. Your post shows an obvious lack to research and therefore you probably are not talking for yourself, but rather repeating what someone else has told you, when they probably haven't done any research either. Seems like anti-intellectualism to me. Classic Fundamgelical behaviour.

Mriana said...

Like I say, it's a human-hating sickness that is leading us down the path to hellish Armageddon. Yet, we who would like to continue to live on planet Earth - indeed, to thrive! - are not allowed to have any say, or else we will be shouted down with all sorts of insults and threats.

Well, they obviously don't love themselves either. They can't with such hatred.

Acharya S said...

Mriana said...

Acharya said...

Like I say, it's a human-hating sickness that is leading us down the path to hellish Armageddon. Yet, we who would like to continue to live on planet Earth - indeed, to thrive! - are not allowed to have any say, or else we will be shouted down with all sorts of insults and threats.

Well, they obviously don't love themselves either. They can't with such hatred.


How can they, when they've been told since birth that they are born-in-sin pieces of shit? And so are you! That's why they can write to someone they don't even know and spew such vicious hatred and bile, merely because I don't mindlessly fall in line in believing in implausible tales without any real evidence and against all natural law.

The masses are unthinking - it's very sad. They have been hoodwinked by a malicious fairytale created by a group of men for the specific purpose of raising up one particular ethnicity above all rest - and the masses fall right in line with the con job, bludgeoning others around them.

Sunru said...

With a name like Acharya S you're probably a BARA BARA from Pakistan or India.

Now thats research! Not only is it just a blatant assumption. But a lazy one at best.

So spare the lies that you're protestant. Even if you are, protestants were formed from the Rosicrucians (an occult organization with deep ties to luciferianism)..You just dug yourself a hole.

I'm sure you've offended a protestant. So much for uniting with your fellow Christians brothers in reference to the point here!

No one knows when Christ was born because he's a mythical figure. Righhhhhhht..and you were there to see it...

Not there to see him not being born? huh?

Was he born (of a virgin) or not? Make your mind up.

Plus people like you have been around since the time Christ so what you bring to the table (crap book) is nothingh new.


Yes and they did a good job of systemically lynching them all and burning their books. Something to be proud of!

People ahve been making many preposterous claims like you that Jesus was the sun god ra ra ra ra.....the vicious cycle continues....

Not really..anyhow.
The "vicious cycle" is yours. perhaps a Freudian slip? The whole point is breaking the cycle of religion and its malevolent minded hold on humanity.
Feel free to jump of the wheel or stay on.
Choice is yours, no need to get upset - shows your losing faith.
Perhaps a good thing..or bad.

Remember, we are dealing with fragile unpredictable minds.

Sunru

Mriana said...

The masses are unthinking - it's very sad. They have been hoodwinked by a malicious fairytale created by a group of men for the specific purpose of raising up one particular ethnicity above all rest - and the masses fall right in line with the con job, bludgeoning others around them.

Not just a particular ethnicity, but also a particular gender too. I think one of the first steps of ridding people of such hateful religions is to first throw out all the religious texts, and then learn to love themselves and others. Once they can love themselves, then they can love others.

Jason Gilliam said...

With a name like Acharya S you're probably a BARA BARA from Pakistan or India.

HAHAHAHA!! Oh boy what an imbecile! Acharya is a beautiful blond-haired blue-eyed white woman. If you had taken even 2 seconds to look you would have found this out very quickly. Acharya is a pen name.

An old Northern Italian Western Civilization history professor I had in college once made the following statement to me - "The masses are asses!" Oh how that insight has been proven true over and over again!

Acharya, I just want you to know that there are those of us out there who see your work for what it truly is, brilliant, vital, and very dangerous to the establishment. For a woman you've got big cohonies! ;)

Anonymous said...

Mriana said...

protestants were formed from the Rosicrucians (an occult organization with deep ties to luciferianism)..

Where did you learn your history? That is absolutely not true. Try reading and researching the reformation. Protestants are actually protestors against Roman Catholic rule- AKA the Papacy. Martin Luther and the King of England are two of the most famous men of the Reformation. It has nothing to do with occult ties.


Pfft....try expanding your mind a little and stop reading mainstream media they have your mind tied in a loop.


Its common knowledge that The Reformation has Rosicrucian Connections....

http://watch.pair.com/reformation.html

So Protestants and this bitch who wrote the book can dance in hell...

Sysop said...

Acharya is correct and has done her research well.

Xtianity is a horrendous plaque on the people is is the single biggest impediment to progress for humanity.

Our destiny is a ROBOTIC WAGELESS ECONOMY which will usher in the Age of Recreation by finally emancipating humanity from the Machinery of Economy.

Acharya is someone we have known for close to 15 years now and helping in ways that cannot even be imagined to help bring out the ROBOTIC WAGELESS ECONOMY.

http://RoboEco.com/acharya

Anonymous said...

People who "give their life" to Christ or anything else, for that matter, would do well to question every aspect of what they are giving their lives to...instead, they live "by faith". They must live by faith, for if they begin to question (and search), they may begin to find answers. A good starting point may be His Name. "Jesus"! This is so important, because the scripture says to pray "in his Name". If you do not pray in the glorious name of Jesus, you will be doomed to eternal flame. How many of you diehard christians know that the language that "he" supposedly spoke contains no J....that's right, no J. So we begin with a problem. If you are praying in the Name of Jesus, you are actually NOT using his name. Discover for yourselves what "his" name actually was said to be. Will you commit to only praying in his REAL Aramaic name in your local Church? Will you call your ministers to task for misleading you with a false name? Will you find a Church which commits themselves to praying in "his" actual name? Good luck! Yes, we are, as some suggest, all born in sin. Sin comes from Sinai, the mountain. In the ancient religions, the mountain represented the physical aspect of existence. Yes, we are all born into the physical aspect of existence. Very simple. Does that make the physical being evil? The Hindu's think so. Christians believ just as the Hindu's do and tell us not to submit ourselves to the "ways of the flesh". But here is a problem, for we are all born into flesh, or sin. Christians resolve the problem by saying that although we are all "sinners", they are "saved" and the rest of us are not. Saved from what? Eternal flames? and lorded over by an eternal Devil? According to the Christian faith, eternity implies God. Is God the Devil and the Devil God? Did God create the Devil as an eternal helpmate, who will eternaly torture those in humanity who make the big mistake of questioning the validity of this book of man, instead of living a life of unquestioning faith? Murder someone and be "saved" through grace, but question the power of this God/man Christ and be doomed to eternal Hell. I find that hilarious. Jesus as a single God/man has no validity for the majority of humanity. The God/man would seperate us and have us war on and kill each other. The God/man would make Christians "holier than thow", just as we are told the Muslims believe. They want to kill "us" and "we" want to kill them. How nice. The ancient religions all "knew" Christ. Of course, by different names, just as your Christ is named Jesus (which is NOT Aramaic). They also knew that the name didn't matter, for language and names and such are only symbols. So what did the name (symbol) mean? "Jesus" represented the animating force within us all. Very simple. We are ALL of Christ, yes even the Muslims, and the Hindu's. That is a concept that would bring the world together rather than tear it apart. We are all brothers in "Christ". "Jesus" walked on the water. Yes, the human body is primarily water, and water also represented the physical aspect of being. My Christ is walking on my water, my Burning Bush of fire (spirit) is on the mountain Sinai (Body). Yes, the saviour was born in Bethlehem, or "House of Bread", whereby the Bread represented the body (spirit) of Christ, which is born into this house (body) of life. We eat the bread (communion) because we all share in this spirit that is "Christ". The problem with all of this is that most Christians believe by faith that what was written was physically true, instead of searching for truer and deeper, more sublime meaning to all of the symbolism. We must face the fact that we are not likely to wake you from your faithful sleep, just as you cannot convince us to relinquish our search for truth and understanding. Thankfully, much of the world is awakening from the dark ages of misconception, or people like myself might be drawn and quartered for questioning the all powerful church. It hasn't been long since "Witches" were burned based on accusations of some pious Christian. Ananomous @ 4:45 AM might just be right. The sublime truths that are hidden in the Bible should not be revealed to the simple and ignorant. They will continue, unquestioningly, living in a dream world and storming off to war against "heathens" and their Pagan religions simply because their Christian leaders tell them that they must. The rest of us are destined to witness this barbarism as we search for truth which will bring peace within and peace without and brotherhood with all people around the world (except of course with those who would control everyone else). As an aside, I find it interesting that the Eastern religions are all about changing within and the Western religions are all about changing everyone else. Can any of you Christians tell us what "Christs" Aramaic name "was"?

Mriana said...

Sunru, probably the reason the anons try to lynch Acharya is because their "faith" is not as strong and secure as they like to believe.

I have a Church of Christ friend, who does know of the pagan origins of Christianity, yet she still choses to believe. I can say almost anything, that is, I can say anything respectfully to her and she will not be disturbed by it. She's unshakable.

Now these guys that come here, their "faith" is not secure, thus they threaten Acharya and alike. They are scared to death, probably because they came from one of those extremely abusive sects of Christianity and forced to go to those "Jesus Camps" as a child. They were trained to behave that way and because of it, they don't know what they really think or believe. Not only that, their education is probably not past the 12th grade or IF it is, it's from an Evangelical college and the quality of education there is poor in comparison to Secular universities.

Either way, they aren't secure in anyway shape or form and know nothing nor love or care for anyone. They don't know how. I'm convinced they don't know how.

Acharya S said...

Anonymous said...

So Protestants and this bitch who wrote the book can dance in hell...


What extraordinary displays of Christian love I've been receiving!

And the ones I'm letting pass through aren't even the worst. Every evil name in the book from the loving Christians.

How disappointing. I thought that they'd become better educated and more civilized in the past couple of decades. This is one time I will admit that I was very wrong.

Mriana said...

Pfft....try expanding your mind a little and stop reading mainstream media they have your mind tied in a loop.

Mainstream media? Common knowledge? I don't think so! You haven't been to a Secular university have you? Seems to me your mind has been filled with crap, probably by a sick person who has passed on the vile virus to you. If it was a hateful Catholic priest, I feel sorry for you and I find it really sad.

So Protestants and this bitch who wrote the book can dance in hell...

And this is why I'm not a Christian. So much hatred from the Fundamgelicals. If this is Christianity, I want nothing to do with it. What I want to know is, how can anyone dance in hell when there is no hell?

Mriana said...

How disappointing. I thought that they'd become better educated and more civilized in the past couple of decades. This is one time I will admit that I was very wrong.

Oh no, Acharya, they haven't become more educated or civilized, not the ones I know, at least. How would you like to spend some time where I live? I'm afraid you might not get out of here without being eaten alive. :(

This is what you'd be up against down here and what I called the A of G (no not atheists of Georgia, hardly, but rather your worst nightmere and mind too): http://ag.org/top/ They run this city and it's a constant battle between the Uni and them. A of G is a demonic hell on earth.

Anonymous said...

Acharya's pen name has been addressed like a decade ago and is also in the F.A.Q. section of her forum:

Why does Acharya S use a pen name?

First, many authors use a "pen name". It's very common and a big deal really need not be made of it. When it comes to religion and challenging the status-quo it may be wise to hide ones true I.D. especially if one is discussing Islam - Muslims will murder you for exposing Islam for example, remember the cartoons of Muhammad.

This is another ad hominem that they try to use against Acharya that's all. "Acharya" was chosen as a sort of joke to tease the Hindu authorities because no woman is allowed to be an "Acharya" - let alone a white woman. "Acharya" means many things - master, teacher, priest of the sun etc. I thought that she added the "S" as in, Priest-ess for even more fun - it's a mystery - oooooooh :)

Further more, there are loads of people with the last name "Acharya". The joke here is on those who take the pen name "Acharya S" so seriously. Acharya S doesn't.

22

Anonymous said...

"No one knows when Christ was born because he's a mythical figure. Righhhhhhht..and you were there to see it...

Plus people like you have been around since the time Christ so what you bring to the table (crap book) is nothingh new."

- Ever consider they may have been RIGHT? The bible wasn't anything "NEW" either as there is nothing new or original about Christianity.

It seems nobody ever saw Jesus being born as they never could get his birthday figured out.

And where is the bastard anyway? If he's alive (resurrected) then get his ass down here pronto! I'd like a word with him...

22

Mriana said...

First, many authors use a "penname".

I use a penname. Sameul L Clemons (AKA Mark Twain) used a penname, as well as many other famous authors. There are many women in the history of literature who have used pennames- even a woman who used a man's name to make it in the world of writing. Pennames are not unusual and a real non-issue when it comes to writers.

Mriana said...

And where is the bastard anyway? If he's alive (resurrected) then get his ass down here pronto! I'd like a word with him...

lol He's still floating around in space. If you hurry, you can catch the next space shuttle of earth and maybe catch him. He can't be that far out given he doesn't have a ship. He's just floating around... Oh, GET THE MAN SOME OXYGEN! Might be too late for that if he ever was alive. Guess he should have learned how to operate those turbojet boots before using them. Spock could have easily gave him lessons.

Dirk said...

The sooner the Jews, Christians and Muslims figure out they're all being played against each other like a bunch of suckers by the Elite, the sooner the world will be a much better place.

Anonymous said...

I notice, by some of the comments that were refused due to more of the same personal insults & vicious attacks addressed in the blog proving Acharya correct in her assessment, that rather than check to see if she may be right or at least onto something here, they attack her, again, without hesitation instead of taking an interest to find out why & how they've been LIED to via religious blind belief ... especially the "Abrahamic religions"

From where I stand, the world would have always been a better place without these absurd Abrahamic religions and their fundamentalist devotees as well. They seem to be an obstacle to peaceful, sustainable life to all life on planet earth. And these folks think they deserve to be "saved"? Huh! Very much the opposite.

Where could humanity have been today without this horrendous human mind enslavement called religion holding humanity back?

22

Anonymous said...

So tell me if Jesus is a myth to you how do you explain proven Jesus and Mary apparitions like Fatima, Zeitoun, Međugorje, Garabandal and the hundreds of others throughout the years. Let me guess..Sun God right?



http://www.zeitun-eg.org/stmaridx.htm

Anonymous said...

People will always have the right to believe in whatever they want. A conspiracy book won't change anything. You can try all you want but you're wasting time trying to convince others otherwise.

eurwise said...

I've just read practically all the comments and am pretty shocked at the vitriolic comments by Christians. I was a born again Christian (though NOT a happy clappy, call me middle of the road) for the past 25 years and have just started to doubt all the stuff I ingested all those years. I have a completely open mind now - the way mainstream media is pushing scary stuff at us makes me take seriously the likes of what David Icke etc is saying. I haven't read Zeitgeist yet, as I just fell upon this site from another link. I have one question though..... I have this innate sense of something final happening to this world and fast... what about the verses in Revelation where people are forced to wear the number of the beast etc etc. I live in fear of babies being microchipped and everyone being forced to use ID cards to buy stuff. Isn`t this very Revelation-like? Could there be something in all that? Could there be some in-between or are you refuting a God altogether? Are you saying that absolutely NOTHING in the bible is true? (Forgive me, I have done NO research, I'm completely new to this liberating free thinking and haven`t read anything of Archaya's YET.

Anonymous said...

Religion - Media - Banking - Organised Crime - Education - Medicine (drug co's)etc,etc,etc. - it's all contol - We are all connected to the infinite universe - all a part of everything - the GOD Force or whatever title you put on it is and always has been and always will be within you. You don't need to be TOLD by some "religious" person - It is just so simple and we have been lead down a very long garden path - but people are waking up and it seems the confrontation will get worse before it can get back to where it should be, and always was. The few in control are running scared now so they block and weave at every opportunity....

Mriana said...

Anonymous said...
So tell me if Jesus is a myth to you how do you explain proven Jesus and Mary apparitions like Fatima, Zeitoun, Međugorje, Garabandal and the hundreds of others throughout the years.


None of that has been proven. To think it has been though is only wishful thinking.

Mriana said...

the GOD Force or whatever title you put on it is and always has been and always will be within you. You don't need to be TOLD by some "religious" person

You will extremely rarely hear me say this, but AMEN! You said it! Now why can't more people figure this out?

Anonymous said...

eurwise,

I'm glad that you brought up "Revelation" We are facing what seems like 'end times' or some sort of apocalypse / Armageddon. However, it has *NOTHING* to do with the bible, or any God more like a self-fulfilling prophecy in that the devotees have made as much of it come true as they could.

The fact remains that there never was a Jesus therefore, there will be no return or second coming. These are humanity's own problems that humans created and it is humans who will have to create the solution to them.

Xians claim that everything changed with the new testament - even though it started off with god allowing the execution of his only begotten son as a blood-ritual, sacrifice & ends in "Revelation" with an apocalypse / Armageddon. The bottom line is, If you're not a believer in Jesus/Christianity, you go to hell. Religion has been used to justify war, slavery, sexism, racism, homophobia, mutilations, intolerance, and oppression of minorities. - there is no moderation there whatsoever.

Even the religious tolerance website admits that during the second coming of Christ, Christ "will exterminate one third of the earth's population in a massive genocide. It will be numerically the largest mass extermination of humans in history".

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

How is killing off all the non-believers a good thing? At the end of Revelations it becomes 2/3rds of non-believers are destroyed with the blood rising to the height of a horse's bridle. Excellent! I'm so excited - NOT!

I've read David Ickes' "Biggest Secret" and it's coming true more & more all the time. And Acharya has been right all along. This 'end time' thing is a fraud being played out not by any God, rather, by PEOPLE.

A Brief History of the Apocalypse
http://www.abhota.info/end1.htm

Enjoy the free online videos about Acharya's work - http://www.truthbeknown.com/videos.html

“When you consider that God could have commanded anything he wanted--anything!--the Ten [Commandments] have got to rank as one of the great missed moral opportunities of all time. How different history would have been had he clearly and unmistakably forbidden war, tyranny, taking over other people's countries, slavery, exploitation of workers, cruelty to children, wife-beating, stoning, treating women--or anyone--as chattel or inferior beings.”

~ Katha Pollitt

22

Mriana said...

I said it before and I'll say it again, the only god that will descend from the sky is a NUKE! UNLESS... said the Lorax.

Jason Gilliam said...

To the doubters of Acharya's work, stick this in your pipe and smoke it:

http://members.cox.net/deleyd/religion/solarmyth/christ2002.htm

Read this page Christians, if you have the courage!

"I am the light of the world" = the Sun

You worship the Sun, period. The elites know this, and they are laughing at you daily for your ignorance! ;)

Anonymous said...

Isaiah 14:12 (King James Version)

12 How art thou fallen from heaven, O Lucifer, son of the morning! how art thou cut down to the ground, which didst weaken the nations!

Isaiah 14:12 (New International Version)

12 How you have fallen from heaven, O morning star, son of the dawn! You have been cast down to the earth, you who once laid low the nations!

-----------------------------
Morning Star = Lucifer
-----------------------------

Revelation 22:16 (King James Version)

16 I Jesus have sent mine angel to testify unto you these things in the churches. I am the root and the offspring of David, and the bright and morning star.

Revelation 22:16 (New International Version)

16 "I, Jesus, have sent my angel to give you this testimony for the churches. I am the Root and the Offspring of David, and the bright Morning Star."

-----------------------------
Morning Star = Jesus (in his own words)
-----------------------------

Jesus = Lucifer

;)

That's right out of your precious "Holy" (Helios) Bible! Your savior and your villain are one and the same according to "the word of God"!

So stick that in your little Christian pipe and smoke it!

HAHAHAHAHAHAHAAAA!!

The Bible is its own worst enemy! ;)

Anonymous said...

The miracle of the Sun in Fatima was seen by almost 50,000 people. It has been documented as fact. So keep telling yourself that it hasn't been proven..if it makes you sleep better at night.

Acharya S said...

Anonymous said...

The miracle of the Sun in Fatima was seen by almost 50,000 people. It has been documented as fact. So keep telling yourself that it hasn't been proven..if it makes you sleep better at night.


There are many websites that address these claims such as:

CSICOP Fatima

Of course, the believer will not accept these analyses because they come from skeptics.

In the meantime, millions of Hindus have experienced miracles with a huge variety of gods, including Ganesha, the elephant-headed god. By this "appeal to miracle" argument, all of these gods would have to be real.

Moreover, millions of people in the ancient world also experience visions and apparitions of THEIR gods and goddesses - does that make all the pre-Christian pagan gods real? And did they all walk the earth as "real people?"

Nor do any Christian miracles prove anything beyond the mind of the beholder. If the same phenomena happened in China or India, without the cultural framework, the people would have seen something altogether different.

Acharya S said...

eurwise said...

I've just read practically all the comments and am pretty shocked at the vitriolic comments by Christians.


You should see the ones that weren't passed through! Every epithet on the planet has been tossed at me and at the people posting here who are not believers. There is an obvious concerted attempt to shut up all dissension through insults (and the occasional veiled threat).

The comments held back have been infantile as well as insulting, not only spewing hatred but also raising an endless stream of straw men by misinterpreting and misrepresenting what we have been saying, in order to knock us down.

Isn't this very Revelation-like? Could there be something in all that?

Yes, but if it does resemble anything from Revelation, it is because our leaders and powers that be have followed the Bible as a blueprint. The book has been in front of them for thousands of years - it has been all-consuming at times. Of course, The Bible has influenced policy on this planet in a major way. And that is one reason I am doing what I'm doing - to help stave of Armageddon, which is being brought to fruition not by any god in the sky but by HUMAN BEINGS and their beliefs. (So, for those who feel the need to insult me with the hackneyed nonsense of "you're part of the problem," please spare me - I am not raising up armies of believers to go off and kill and die in the name of God.)

Could there be some in-between or are you refuting a God altogether?

No, I don't refute God per se, but I do put a broader perspective on the concept. (And, yes, I do believe that people who think the character in the Bible and the Koran is the God of the cosmos have been conditioned to believe blindly and are not using their noodles.)

God is now here.
God is nowhere.

That's it!

But see here for more on the subject:

What is God?

Are you saying that absolutely NOTHING in the bible is true?

No, that would be a completely ridiculous contention. Nothing that long can be completely untrue. What I'm saying is that major figures in the Bible - such as those engaged in miraculous exploits whose "lives" oddly resemble the myths of other cultures - are mythical entities. That's all. A significant part of the rest of the Bible may be factual to some degree, but not those parts that are clearly based on the preceding myths of other cultures.

Acharya S said...

Keith said...

Both sides of any debate, always seem to claim the higher moral ground...

"Oh the other side can only attack my character, not the facts."

This is just the most juvenile form of debate there is. Here is a piece of a comment gleaned from your blog:

"People who are stuck in a rut of dogma and are of average and below level of intelligence will not want to change their views."

Tell me thats not attacking character? (Gee if I don't change my mind, then I'm stupid). Secondly if you really feel there is no intelligent literature posing a case for Christ, then you're in bondage to your own form of dogma.

For starters, check this guy out... http://www.leestrobel.com/


And yours constitutes a logical fallacy of guilt by association. That quote of yours regarding dogmatic people did not come from me but from someone who is apparently attempting, as you are, to dissuade me.

I have not said there is "no intelligent literature posing a case for Christ," so that's another straw man. What I have repeatedly stated is that there exists no credible and valid scientific evidence for the existence of the figure in the New Testament called Jesus Christ. I have worded my contention very carefully to approach the greatest degree of truth and accuracy.

I know Lee Strobel's work very well. His "evidence" for the historical Jesus does not stand up to scrutiny. Interested parties may wish to read my book:

Who Was Jesus? Fingerprints of The Christ

Anonymous said...

I am by no means claiming to be a scholar or some who holds any high credentials. But, from what I have extensively studied, most Biblical and Theological scholars do not even question the fact that most of the so-called pagan and mystery religions have actually copied or borrowed from Christian writings, beliefs, and practices.

Not in the sense that the pagan and mystery religions original texts or manuscripts where written after the Old Testament and New Testament manuscripts, we know that there are older documents and manuscripts. But, in the sense that any specific understanding or comprehension of the ideas, beliefs, and practices pertaining to them where not applied until after Christianity had already become very widespread throughout the world.

Not to mention the fact that there was virtually no means of deciphering Egyptian hieroglyphics, hieratic, or demotic until the discovery of the Rosetta Stone in 1799.

Duke University has a nice website with a collection of ancient papyri images that can be useful for research.

http://scriptorium.lib.duke.edu/papyrus/texts/homepage.html

Also, here is a somewhat older but informative article on Dating the Oldest New Testament Manuscripts.

http://scriptorium.lib.duke.edu/papyrus/texts/manuscripts.html

Simply research the individual beliefs or ideas surrounding the "resurrection" or "afterlife" and you will find a wide array of very different beliefs between all other religions and Christianity, with Christianity being the only one to be consistently logically possible according to it's doctrine and Scripture.

Mriana said...

I am by no means claiming to be a scholar or some who holds any high credentials. But, from what I have extensively studied, most Biblical and Theological scholars do not even question the fact that most of the so-called pagan and mystery religions have actually copied or borrowed from Christian writings, beliefs, and practices.

Actually, it is the other way around. They don't question that Christianity copied from other religions. The other religions are older.

Simply research the individual beliefs or ideas surrounding the "resurrection" or "afterlife" and you will find a wide array of very different beliefs between all other religions and Christianity, with Christianity being the only one to be consistently logically possible according to it's doctrine and Scripture.

That is simply not true. Christianity is very much similar to the other religions and is just as illogical and improbable. It has no consistancies and often contradicts itself. Obviously you haven't studied the subject enough, because if you had, you would have found that many scholars found that Christianity copied from Horus, Krishna, Buddha, Mithra, and many others.

Talk about dishing out misinformation!

Anonymous said...

Mriana said
"That is simply not true. Christianity is very much similar to the other religions and is just as illogical and improbable. It has no consistancies and often contradicts itself. Obviously you haven't studied the subject enough, because if you had, you would have found that many scholars found that Christianity copied from Horus, Krishna, Buddha, Mithra, and many others.

Talk about dishing out misinformation!"


LOL... and how many times have you actually read the Bible? BTW, reading it doesn't mean picking a verse here and there and comparing it to something else 100 pages away. I bet you've read a lot of other people's opinions on it though, haven't you?

Try reading this short article by Ewin Yamauchi -Ph.D., who definitely has the education and credentials to back up his research.

Jesus, Zoraster, Buddha, Socrates & Muhammad: The Life, Death and Teaching of Jesus
Compared with Other Great Religious Figures


http://www.irr.org/yamauchi.html

I still love you, and so does Jesus : )

Mriana said...

LOL... and how many times have you actually read the Bible? BTW, reading it doesn't mean picking a verse here and there and comparing it to something else 100 pages away. I bet you've read a lot of other people's opinions on it though, haven't you?

More times that you probably ever did. Not only was I raised Christian and read it straight through more than once, but I am also a student in religious studies at the local state university AND I have studied the subject most of my life and under some better known scholars, which is probably older than you are. I have children in their late teens and working on a second degree, don't confuse being a student with being young. And no, one doesn't have to believe it to study it- look at Robert Price- or consider it the literal inerrant word of God even- see Bishop John Shelby Spong. It doesn't mean they know any more or less then someone who believes and considers it the literal inerrant word of God.

I have to actually read, study, AND research the books, unlike some people. My information isn't coming from no where. Besides the Christian text, I could probably tell you more about other religious and mythological texts than you will even want to know. I've taken more religious courses then most lay people AND have studied with some of the best.

What have you done by way of studying the subject?

Yeah. That's what I thought. When you have credentials of at LEAST what I have or even more, then come debate me, but come armed with more sources than THAT. If you want to talk and discuss the subject on friendly and peaceful terms, then great, I'll gladly discuss it no matter what your credentials are.

Heck, if you had credentials like Acharya does, then I wouldn't bat an eye at you debating her, but you don't. When you have as much knowledge as my various mentors do, then I will be asking you questions, until then your single source means nothing to me.

So don't laugh until you have learned at LEAST as much about the subject as I have. One doesn't know didley until they've done REAL research and study of the subject.

Anonymous said...

I was directed to this page from the David Icke 'newspage'. Ironically, there is far more evidence for Jesus Christ than the notional reptilians!!!!

As for the Zeitgeist film itself, it doesn't represent true Christianity in the first place, but the satanic version invented by the catholic church, which was selectively copied by the protestants.
If you read any bible, you will find no reference to Jesus being born on December the 25th, there is no such thing as the trinity, they moved they day of worship from the Sabbath on saturday to sunday, they invented easter to worship their occult gods (1st sunday after 1st full moon after vernal equinox) instead of when it actually occurred (it's the passover tomorrow and we've already had easter) and much much more.

To refute Jesus and the Bible, you first have to understand the Bible. Archeology has no bearing on the matter. Anyone with half a brain can see that the book of Revelation is being fulfilled at this moment, the clock starting after the reformation of Israel.

I suggest you watch over the coming weeks and months and witness the sudden popularity of the pope - head of the false church.

Mriana said...

Anyone with half a brain can see that the book of Revelation is being fulfilled at this moment, the clock starting after the reformation of Israel.

On the contrary. Anyone with half a brain can also read the book of the Dead and the Mayan literature and read practically the same thing. They predicted similar things and all it means is that there is a coming of new age. Nothing more. No rapture or anything like that.

The book of Revelations is full of astrotheology- astrological imagry. Not only that, it is apocalyptic literature that was popular around the time it was written. The genre is doomsday literature. The Book of Revelation attributed to John is not the same John as John the Baptist or the Gospel of John. It is a different John.

An I just love this, IF anyone bothers to read it, because it gives me a chance to use my various notes concerning the book of Revelations.

It was compiled from older texts, probably The Egyptian Book of the Dead, Mithraic legend, Krishna, and other texts of antiquity. Christ is rarely used and probably interpolated long after the book was written. It is NOT a book of prophesy and the hero IS a sun god of the universe- see Rev 3:14 where the gig is up concerning Amen-Ra. It is the Egyptian god Amen/Ammon/Amen-Ra. The heroine is the moon and the other characters are planets, stars, and constellation (which ironically the bodhisattva virgin birth story of Buddha is similar with this characterization).

It was written to usher in the age of Aries and if you go back to Bishop Spong's work, you will see John the Baptist (Mark 1:1-11 and Matt 3:2) with all his hollering about the day at hand is represented by the Jewish ram's horn (the ram is aries) and he is speaking of Rosh Hashanah in Jewish litergy. The Gospels were written according to the Hebrew litergical calendar. Jesus is pisces, symbolized by the fish and ushering in the age of Pisces and John plays a duel role at this point and is aquarius.

Eventually, Jesus become the sacrificial lamb for Passover. Yet he also symbolizes the Southern Cross in the sky when he is crucified, and to the naked eye the sun appears to "stand still" for three days and then rises again (Winter Solstice). Further back in the OT Samson is symbolism of the sun also. (Many thanks to Robert Price, Bishop Spong, and Acharya for that mixture).

Back to Revelations: There is Dematria mixed into the mess also with all the sacred numerology in the text. 7 stars or spirits = 7 planets that make up the 7 days of the week. 7 sisters = the pole stars or the pleiades. The 7 sisters correlate to the 7 Hathors of the Egyptians who were 7 beings who make decrees whom the dead met on their journey through the 7 spheres of the afterlife (refers to the Egyptian Book of the Dead). 7 Hathors are also the 7 gates representing both the night hours and the 7 months of summer. 7 torches of fire or 7 branch lampstand = the sun in the middle with the moon and 5 inner planets as satellites corresponding to the days of the week.

There's more and I have 8 more pages of notes on the subject. I don't usually disabuse people of their beliefs, but if they wish to be so naive as to push the subject... Let's just say my various mentors, one of whom is Acharya, would see just how good of a student I can be.

It's all from previous mythology and alike. None of it is actual prophesy for the end of the world. Maybe the end of one age and the beginning of another, but not the Rapturists ideas. The Rapturists and alike working from an old lady's dream and not Biblical anything. The Rapture is NOT in the Bible, neither is a doomsday.

For more on my sources read Robert Price's books, John Shelby Spong's A New Christianity for a New World and Acharya's books. Maybe even throw in Tom Harpur's book The Pagan Christ while you are it, where you will get more on the Egyptian god Horus/Osiris protogenesis to the Christ myth.

eurwise said...

Thank you to Acharya and others who responded to my earlier comment. My mind is well and truly blown - all my life long beliefs (but not my moral code) are in the process of being turned about so much so that I am probably damned to hell already if you guys are wrong and the believers are right! A 'Christian' friend of mine told me that there were plenty of secular writers in the time of Jesus that wrote about his work and prove that he existed, although I have yet to come across any - do you know about these writings? I will read more of your research and links on this site but something tells me I am now on the right track. NOW.... how do we stop the baddies from continuing the countdown to Armaggedon? I don`t suppose you have any info on 2012 while you're at it do you? Thanks again for prompting me to keep looking for the REAL truth.

Acharya S said...

eurwise said...

Thank you to Acharya and others who responded to my earlier comment. My mind is well and truly blown - all my life long beliefs (but not my moral code) are in the process of being turned about so much so that I am probably damned to hell already if you guys are wrong and the believers are right! A 'Christian' friend of mine told me that there were plenty of secular writers in the time of Jesus that wrote about his work and prove that he existed, although I have yet to come across any - do you know about these writings? I will read more of your research and links on this site but something tells me I am now on the right track. NOW.... how do we stop the baddies from continuing the countdown to Armaggedon? I don`t suppose you have any info on 2012 while you're at it do you? Thanks again for prompting me to keep looking for the REAL truth.


You're welcome. No, there is not a single reference to Jesus in ANY writing from the time when he purportedly existed. For more on that subject, take a look at my video on "Who Was Jesus?"

I also discuss the purported references in Josephus, Pliny, Suetonius and Tacitus here:

Josephus
Pliny, Suetonius, Tacitus

It's a good question on how to stop Armageddon. Unfortunately, the other side to it (the Muslim world) will not be as easily dissuaded from the deleterious religious hoax, such that they will fall right in line in being one of the battle to end all battles.

We can only shout out:

DROP ALL DIVISIVE RELIGIOUS IDEOLOGIES THAT ARE LEADING TO THE DEATH OF THE PLANET.

Re 2012, well, I'm no expert on the prophecies, but I've seen many different "disaster landmarks" come and go, including Y2K.

We will be faced with increasing troubles, however--of that I am quite convinced.

eurwise said...

I have another question, and I ask as someone with a completely open mind: How do you explain Christian phenomena such as speaking in Tongues, positive answers to prayer, healing by prayer, miracles etc.... (and I'm not talking about Fatima). Do you know one thing that bothers me? How spirits never tell mediums what's on the other side? I've never known any to mention heaven or hell... ok they're in limbo, but they surely know SOMETHING? No, I'm not a crackpot, just stumbling over myself now that I have found the courage to ask questions due to my life long belief system being recently blown apart by reading and research. HELP! I want to know the truth! What on earth is happening to this world?

Anonymous said...

Acharya, D.M. Murdock, or whomever you may be, I noticed that on your "credentials" page you state that you "briefly became a born again Christian". I'm highly interested in what you consider being "born again" and also your experiences related to the event. Give us some details about your own personal experience when you were "born again" and what supposedly led you away from your faith in Jesus Christ.

Also, mriana, you claimed to have been "raised as Christian". Could you please elaborate on this and maybe describe some of your personal experiences with having been "raised as Christian"? Have you or were you ever "born again" also? If so, could you give us some details about your own personal experience?

Mriana said...

Also, mriana, you claimed to have been "raised as Christian". Could you please elaborate on this and maybe describe some of your personal experiences with having been "raised as Christian"? Have you or were you ever "born again" also? If so, could you give us some details about your own personal experience?

No, because I don't want any amatuer psychologist with no degree disecting it and coming to untrue conclusions. I do not give personal testimonies on such things, because I have never been and will never be an Evangelical Fundie. Nor do I intend to hold my testes while giving it, in part because I am not a man. However, that is where the word testimony came from.

Secondly, I don't believe in "born again" stuff. My mother maybe and has always been an Evangelical Fundamentalist, as were the rest of her relatives, but I am not, never have been, and never will be. I am a Humanist, first and foremost, who is on the Episcopal Church rolls. One can be a Humanist and attend the Episcopal Church, if they so choose- there are in fact many, starting with Robert Price. Anglicans do not believe in "born again" or "Path of Salvation" theology.

Thirdly, your ideology, which is mostly dogma, is not the end all and be all of human life. There are many other philosophies and none of them, at least those that are religious philosophy, have the one and only true religion or the one true god. Those philosophies without a deity, are no worse or better than those that do. Actually, they maybe better than those that do have a deity, who knows.

Lastly, if you read my post that follows the one you apparently read, you would see I mentioned two Angelican ministers, one a retired Bishop of the Episcopal Church, who I actually adore and hold no malice toward. The other, I do not know personally, for he is a retired Angelican priest in Canada. The dear Bishop Spong and I might not agree on everything, but I still have the ultmost respect and admiration for him.

The other, is a former Baptist minister with at least one doctrit in theology, who became a Humanist and an Episcopalian- Robert Price. I have respect for him too.

So, it's not a father issue, because if it were, then I would not look so highly to three great and very intelligent men who are theological scholars and ministers. There are others, within the Epsicopal Church, who I respect too. So, that silly theory does not apply- at least not with me.

As for my past experience with Evangelicalism as a child, it is not something I want to share with you. I've heard all the bizarre and asinine responses before. They don't hold any water, just further abuse of human dignity and disregard for a person's well-being and intellect. It's sad really that people can be so deluded with superstition and ignorance though. In the words of Bishop Spong, "If that is Christianity, I want nothing to do with it." Such as it was and has been ever since I left my mother's home at 19.

What I like about the Episcopal Church is that they do allow people to question, research, and think for themselves, unlike other churches. They also allow them to be Humanists, if they so chose. People don't have to believe that it is the literal and inerrant word of God, which ironically they do not teach that it is, because it is not and they also say so this too. As to whether or not I attend regularly or not, if at all, that too is also my business and none of yours.

Jason Gilliam said...

eurwise said...

HELP! I want to know the truth! What on earth is happening to this world?


Hello eurwise,

As a market trader of 4 1/2 years now I have spent thousands of hours researching the very question you just asked, initially with the intent of becoming a better trader through knowledge, but eventually it became an obsession of its own. I do believe I am in the position to help you answer this question to your satisfaction or at least put you on the right path to do your own research to uncover what I and others already know. If you really are interested in the cold hard truth of what is REALLY happening in the world I can help you. But I will warn you, that is a quest that is not for the faint of heart. Everything you believe is real will eventually come into question if you decide to pursue the truth. I can tell you this, almost everything you were ever told has been a lie. The history you know is full of lies, half truths, and convenient omissions. The world you live in is largely an illusion. At the heart of that illusion is religion.

If you wish to contact me you can do so through the form on my website: http://www.jasongilliam.com/contact.php

I will send you info on some of the best researchers' work. You already know of Acharya S and that is an excellent start.

Also a warning, the internet is full of great information, but it is also full of disinformation. You must scrutinize every piece of information you come by, even if that information seems convincing. Remember, if they lied to you in school, at church, on television, and in books, then the internet is by no means immune. But there are beacons of truth out there, people that have credible information backed up with primary sources and solid evidence just like Acharya.

The truth will set you free!

skullnboner said...

eurwise said... I have another question, and I ask as someone with a completely open mind: How do you explain Christian phenomena such as speaking in Tongues, positive answers to prayer, healing by prayer, miracles etc.... (and I'm not talking about Fatima). Do you know one thing that bothers me? How spirits never tell mediums what's on the other side? I've never known any to mention heaven or hell... ok they're in limbo, but they surely know SOMETHING? No, I'm not a crackpot, just stumbling over myself now that I have found the courage to ask questions due to my life long belief system being recently blown apart by reading and research. HELP! I want to know the truth! What on earth is happening to this world?

eurwise....you could answer those questions you ask for yourself, just by continuing to do the research with a skeptical focus on any claims of miracles etc. Seek and you shall find. It's your duty to yourself to seek the truth and to use your own mind, not to always have someone do it for you. You have made a good start. Yes, have an open, but critical mind always. I know you can do it. Just have faith in yourself.

skullnboner said...

Anonymous said...
Acharya, D.M. Murdock, or whomever you may be, I noticed that on your "credentials" page you state that you "briefly became a born again Christian". I'm highly interested in what you consider being "born again" and also your experiences related to the event. Give us some details about your own personal experience when you were "born again" and what supposedly led you away from your faith in Jesus Christ.

Also, mriana, you claimed to have been "raised as Christian". Could you please elaborate on this and maybe describe some of your personal experiences with having been "raised as Christian"? Have you or were you ever "born again" also? If so, could you give us some details about your own personal experience?


Anonymouse or whatever you call yourself...I would be highly interested in who YOU are...well not really. What do you claim to be and were/are you a "born again Christian"? Please tell us of your experiences! What has led you to your fate in Jesus..if such is the case? Apparently, you seem quite taken with this notion of "born again", so it must appear be something real for you.

Humor me. I am "born again" too!

RENE...wink!

Jason Gilliam said...

Anonymous said...

Acharya, D.M. Murdock, or whomever you may be...

...Give us some details about your own personal experience when you were "born again"...

Also, mriana, you claimed to have been "raised as Christian". Could you please elaborate...


Funny how someone can post anonymously and ask incredibly personal questions of people while not having the guts to show their own identity. This person obviously needs to learn some manners.

skullnboner said...

Anonymous said...
God is not a jew! he is a norseman named ODIN. why is that so hard to figure out?


I beg to differ! Thor was the big cajone. Odin sits at his right hand, he was a protector of gods and men against the forces of evil and required no sacrifices, had a big hammer, will return at Ragnorok to kill the Midgard serpent and Arthur is a popular legendary name! Well...at least we agree that God was a Norseman..hee hee!

asoka said...

I have just reviewed the comments from so-called Christians and I am shocked. Anyone who can attack another human being is not really a Christian, who I understand is a follower of Christ's teachings (as they appear in red letters in the New Testament). Jesus teaches love, including love of one's "enemies"... Jesus supposedly said: "Love your neighbor as yourself"

I was born into a fundamentalist Christian family, sent to Bible camp to memorize whole parts of the Bible, Wednesday night Bible study, Sunday morning Sunday school, Sunday evening prayer group, Bible study groups, etc. etc.

I had no idea I had been born into a "new age" sect. I had no idea Jesus is a fictitious being who never even existed until my pastor told me my best friend was going to hell because he as a Roman Catholic had been baptized by sprinkling and not immersion in water. What a sick idea! My best friend was going to burn in hell eternally for being sprinkled?

Then I discovered a "religion" much older than Christianity (one that resonates more with me) called Advaita Vedanta, which evolved out of Vedic tradition thousands of years older than Christianity and is not judgemental. And Vedanta is based on joy as a natural state and birthright... and with Vedanta it is not a crime to consider oneself a divine emanation... or to claim divine identity. Indeed, realization of a supreme nondual identity is a goal.

Tat Tvam Asi.

Mriana said...

Funny how someone can post anonymously and ask incredibly personal questions of people while not having the guts to show their own identity. This person obviously needs to learn some manners.

I agree. At least I have the guts to identify myself and many people know me even by my penname and internet handle. I'm not hiding.

Apparently, you seem quite taken with this notion of "born again", so it must appear be something real for you.

Rene, real for him could still be a delusion. Add to that, he obviously isn't paying any real attention to the posts, because IF he were, he'd see there are some religious people that I take no issues with. It's no surprise Anon hasn't done any actual and genuine research with such attention to details as s/he has displayed here. It doesn't take a slueth to figure out his/her assumptions are yet another misconception. Anon needs to WAKE UP!

Mriana said...

I have just reviewed the comments from so-called Christians and I am shocked. Anyone who can attack another human being is not really a Christian, who I understand is a follower of Christ's teachings (as they appear in red letters in the New Testament). Jesus teaches love, including love of one's "enemies"... Jesus supposedly said: "Love your neighbor as yourself"

Yes, and a friend of mine, who is Church of Christ, feels the same way about such attitudes. She knows I consider myself a Humanist (specifically a Religious Humanist, if needs clarification), but views me as more Christian than some of those who profess to be Christians.

Merriss said...

On the topic of Zeitgeist, I've got a few things to say to Acharya S. I notice you've been replying to some people, so I hope I can get a response to this.

(1) I've noticed how you've mention your companion guide many times, but honestly, if you want people to read it, you need to make it free.

(2) You also say "We are also working on a short video on the subject, likewise addressing whether or not ZG, Part 1 has been "refuted" or "debunked." Again, I can assure you that it has not." First of all, is "we" both you and Peter Joseph (the creator of Zeitgeist for those of you who don't know), and secondly, is the video going to pop up anytime soon, like, later this month?

'Cause there's obviously been a lot of controversy over Zeitgeist Part 1, and there's even been a few accusations of it being disinformation or "psy-op," and if this companion guide and the upcoming video can brush it all away, you need to make them accessible ASAP!

eurwise said...

Thank you skullnboner for your reply and encouragement to my comment.... I trust your penname has nothing to do with the Bushes Freemason Lodge? Hope not!

Acharya S said...

Merriss said...

On the topic of Zeitgeist, I've got a few things to say to Acharya S. I notice you've been replying to some people, so I hope I can get a response to this.

(1) I've noticed how you've mention your companion guide many times, but honestly, if you want people to read it, you need to make it free.

(2) You also say "We are also working on a short video on the subject, likewise addressing whether or not ZG, Part 1 has been "refuted" or "debunked." Again, I can assure you that it has not." First of all, is "we" both you and Peter Joseph (the creator of Zeitgeist for those of you who don't know), and secondly, is the video going to pop up anytime soon, like, later this month?

'Cause there's obviously been a lot of controversy over Zeitgeist Part 1, and there's even been a few accusations of it being disinformation or "psy-op," and if this companion guide and the upcoming video can brush it all away, you need to make them accessible ASAP!


"We" is a couple of friends and I, but not Peter Joseph, who, by the way, is supportive of my endeavors.

Well, there's no magic pill to brush away thousands of years of human conditioning. My forthcoming book, however, will go a long way - Christ in Egypt: The Horus-Jesus Connection.

Like everyone else who has a job, I really can't go around giving away my work for free when I actually have to function in the real world.

Sorry.

There's a tremendous amount of free material on my website at:

TruthBeKnown.com

skullnboner said...

eurwise said...
Thank you skullnboner for your reply and encouragement to my comment.... I trust your penname has nothing to do with the Bushes Freemason Lodge? Hope not!


Your welcome! My username does indeed have to do with the Bush Order of Death (people forget there are other chapters like 'Scroll and Key' etc.). However, I chose the name just to highlight it for obvious reasons of the Yale campus secret society, and beyond that, as well just for the fun of it. I am not a member of the club...just understand it's overall implications and ancient history.

You would be amazed at references attached to the 'Skull' symbol going back millenia..the obsession with it. T'would be too long to go into here. Let's just stick to the modern connotations and use of the 'Skull and Crossbones' in it's most negatory sense. I am sure everyone understands all the connotations of that symbol..har-de-har-har.

Anonymous said...

"If you read any bible, you will find no reference to Jesus being born on December the 25th"

- This demonstrates that Jesus was never the "reason for the season". Still, in Dec. of 2007 the US Congress passed resolution "H.R. 847: Recognizing the importance of Christmas and the Christian faith:

"Whereas on December 25 of each calendar year, American Christians observe Christmas, the holiday celebrating the birth of their savior, Jesus Christ"
http://www.govtrack.us/congress/billtext.xpd?bill=hr110-847

Millions have been taught to believe that Dec 25th was the birthdate for Jesus. The celebration continues around the world today. there were others dates in the past for his birth however it just demonstrates that apparently nobody witnessed his birth. maybe because he never existed.

"they invented easter to worship their occult gods (1st sunday after 1st full moon after vernal equinox) instead of when it actually occurred (it's the passover tomorrow and we've already had easter)"

- It simply demonstrates that it is based not on a real historical person but rather its astrotheological foundations of the sun and moon.

"To refute Jesus and the Bible, you first have to understand the Bible."

- I was a saved, baptized Protestant Christian for nearly 20 years. I've read the bible from beginning to end countless times. Researched it to no end. If one applies a little critical thinking instead of just blind believing, the bible quickly doesn't stand up to scrutiny. Especially the canonical gospels.

"I don`t suppose you have any info on 2012 while you're at it do you?"

- 2012 will come & go - it is the end of the Mayan calendar but the Mayans *NEVER* said it would be the end of the world. Their calendars were cyclic. The calendar simply starts its approx. 26,000 cycle all over again with the birth of a new Sun cycle. If any kind of destruction happens, it's because humans have done it to themselves. No prophecy is needed to explain it at all - only human ignorance & stupidity. What can one expect to happen when an overwhelming majority of people around the planet believe in some kind of an "end times" prophecy & their leaders, Preachers, Imams etc are all telling them the time has come? It's all B.S. it is a self-fulfilled reality hiding behind "God" as a front to B.S. people into believing it.

"(1) I've noticed how you've mention your companion guide many times, but honestly, if you want people to read it, you need to make it free."

- Acharya can give away all of her works so long as you sign a contract agreeing to pay her rent, car payment, utilities, insurance, health care and all other expenses. No problem.

Do you ask the church, Mosques and synagogues why they always need money all while being tax exempt?

22

Anonymous said...

""To refute Jesus and the Bible, you first have to understand the Bible."

- I was a saved, baptized Protestant Christian for nearly 20 years. I've read the bible from beginning to end countless times. Researched it to no end. If one applies a little critical thinking instead of just blind believing, the bible quickly doesn't stand up to scrutiny. Especially the canonical gospels."

Therein lies the problem. Protestants are just stripped down catholics. How many protestants still hold saturday as the Sabbath? None. One of the ten commandments broken. The 10 commandments weren't nailed to the cross, I expect "Thou shalt not murder" is still viewed as a valid commandment?

It doesn't matter if you read the bible twice from cover to cover or two thousand times - if you don't understand it, nothing changes.

The point I was making is that Zeitgeist only refutes a false Christianity in the first place, so whether the original is subsequently refuted is irrelevant.

I am a Christian. I submit anyone to provide biblical evidence for Sunday Worship, Jesus being born on December 25th and Jesus being crucified on the friday following a full moon after the vernal equinox. All the previous points are inventions by the satanic catholic church, and copied blindly by protestants.

The only thing that the original Zeitgeist film proves is how the satanic catholics did indeed manage to trick those thinking they were worshipping Jesus into not keeping the Sabbath (saturday) Holy, and to take part in pagan festivals.

Acharya S said...

Anonymous said...

To refute Jesus and the Bible, you first have to understand the Bible.


I agree. In order to refute Jesus and the Bible, all one needs to do is actually read the Bible. It is quite easy from there to refute Jesus and the Bible.

No mysterious and clever ability to understand is necessary to know that the Bible is full of myths and fairytales, including the character of Jesus Christ.

What ZEITGEIST shows it that the Jesus figure is predicated upon preceding mythical characters from around the Roman Empire. It also demonstrates that there is no credible and scientific evidence for the existence of the Jesus character as a "real person."

No amount of clever salesmanship or intellectual discourse is going to change those facts.

Do you wish me to dun you with rhetoric to convince to you that Hercules was the true Son of God? I could go on and on about how Hercules touched my life, how he was written about many times over the centuries, etc. Will you submit yourself to Hercules? Why not? I'm quite sure he is the savior of mankind! Have you read the Odyssey cover to cover? Do you know all of the Greek myths? How can you reject Hercules? Hercules is Lord and Savior - I should know because I follow Hercules, and in the right sect! All other sects of Hercules are completely wrong - only mine is correct. In fact, these others are diabolical. Only my beliefs are true and godly.

Do you see anything familiar here?

As did the creators of the myth of Hercules by turning the solar hero into a Greek man, the makers of Christianity simply took old myths, reworked them to revolve around a Jewish man and placed them into history.

Nothing difficult to understand about that - and you really don't need to read the Bible cover to cover, in the original Greek, or while standing on one foot reciting the Apostles' Creed. No mystical or clever, hidden understanding is needed.

Anonymous said...

"It doesn't matter if you read the bible twice from cover to cover or two thousand times - if you don't understand it, nothing changes."

- And *YOU* understand it while nobody else does? It seems you're the only one because there are around 38,000 other Christian denominations worldwide who may not agree with you.

"The point I was making is that Zeitgeist only refutes a false Christianity in the first place, so whether the original is subsequently refuted is irrelevant."

- News flash - they're all false as all of the Abrahamic religions are frauds. Therefore, your opinion is also subsequently refuted and irrelevant.

"I am a Christian. I submit anyone to provide biblical evidence..."

- Provide your evidence that Jesus existed at all - even if you could, it would be the first time in history because nobody else has ever been able to do it - not even the earliest Christians.

22

Anonymous said...

"- And *YOU* understand it while nobody else does? It seems you're the only one because there are around 38,000 other Christian denominations worldwide who may not agree with you."

I never claimed to have all the answers, but everything i've said stands. There are others, far cleverer than me such as Herbert W Armstrong who if you take the time can reveal the truth of the Bible.

"- News flash - they're all false as all of the Abrahamic religions are frauds. Therefore, your opinion is also subsequently refuted and irrelevant."

I'm surprised that anyone can claim such authority of knowledge of all Abrahamic religions. I base my claims on the basis of the understanding of one single book, the Bible. I find the arrogance of someone claiming that all Abrahamic religions to be frauds outstanding.

"- Provide your evidence that Jesus existed at all - even if you could, it would be the first time in history because nobody else has ever been able to do it - not even the earliest Christians."
A thorough understanding of the bible is all that is needed. A book is available by HW Armstrong, either as a PDF or a totally free papercopy entitled "Mystery of the Ages". If you get the time to read it, verify it's interpretation with your bible, it can answer more questions than I ever could.

Yes you read it right, a FREE book, not everyone tries to make money out of God/Jesus.

skullnboner said...

Anonymous said...
"- And *YOU* understand it while nobody else does? It seems you're the only one because there are around 38,000 other Christian denominations worldwide who may not agree with you."

I never claimed to have all the answers, but everything i've said stands. There are others, far cleverer than me such as Herbert W Armstrong who if you take the time can reveal the truth of the Bible.

"- News flash - they're all false as all of the Abrahamic religions are frauds. Therefore, your opinion is also subsequently refuted and irrelevant."

I'm surprised that anyone can claim such authority of knowledge of all Abrahamic religions. I base my claims on the basis of the understanding of one single book, the Bible. I find the arrogance of someone claiming that all Abrahamic religions to be frauds outstanding.

"- Provide your evidence that Jesus existed at all - even if you could, it would be the first time in history because nobody else has ever been able to do it - not even the earliest Christians."
A thorough understanding of the bible is all that is needed. A book is available by HW Armstrong, either as a PDF or a totally free papercopy entitled "Mystery of the Ages". If you get the time to read it, verify it's interpretation with your bible, it can answer more questions than I ever could.

Yes you read it right, a FREE book, not everyone tries to make money out of God/Jesus.


HW Armstrong...lol! FREE? Nothing is Free...you or someone else pays for it in the end and that would be the believers and even taxpayers as religious hucksters transfer people's money into their own pockets and abscond with the latter's foolish minds (well at least you can get the latter back, if you are so inclined to be independent thinking).

So..do you do any thinking for yourself apart from giving your mind away to a "Book", which you can't seem to understand by yourself? Do you let just anyone do your thinking for you, or do you consult with as many others outside of the box and develope your own opinions apart from any claimants to authority that would BIND your mind instead of freeing it?

My advice is Free..truly free. The Bible is madeup bullshit. Toss it in the dumpster. You will be better off for it. Free, Free, FREE at last to do your own thinking! Scratch one..whatever you come to think, entertain, believe...it will be all yours and yours alone. See that's a personal relationship with your SELF,doing what is natural, honest, in tune with esse of existance and perhaps you will come to share common thinking with others without some middle-man/BOOK telling you what to think, how to behave, when,where and how to wipe your butt.

Anonymous said...

LOL, It appears that 50% of the reviews of "Mystery of the Ages" by Herbert W. Armstrong are very disappointed:

"Armstrong's arrogance and self-righteous attitude permiates not only throughout this book but in his devout worshippers as well."

"Mystery of the Ages teaches a false gospel conjured up by a salesman who took doctrines form various other cults like the Jehovah's Witnesses, Seventh Day Adventists, and Mormons and created a false gospel that tore apart families, destroyed childhoods, deprived church membership of medical treatment for severe illnesses, and left many people poor and barely able to make ends meet."

"Just by reading the preface, it is clear to see that this author does not have a clear understanding of God's Word, nor of who God really is. "

"Armstrong begins the book with an abundant criticism of people who just 'accept' what they are taught throughout their lives, rather than truly thinking upon their beliefs and why they hold them. For the rest of the book, however, he makes it a point to cram beliefs into the reader's head in desperate attempt to make them believe something based on his thinking."

Your opinion does stand - as your opinion & that's all.

I find the arrogance of someone claiming that all Abrahamic religions to be frauds outstanding.

Yes, I understand, common sense evades you at every turn.

"Help you I will"

-- Yoda

Mriana said...

"Just by reading the preface, it is clear to see that this author does not have a clear understanding of God's Word, nor of who God really is. "

Who originally said this? One of the delusional anonymous people? That is a pretty arrogant statement, IMHO. Obviously you don't have an understanding of it either.

It is NOT God's word, but rather it is MAN'S word. It is NOT inspired by some deity either, but rather by MAN. Humans wrote it and were inspired by their ownselves.

Anonymous said...

I just want to drop in and add that Ron Wyatt never posited any chariot wheels to any ministry of antiquities, museum, or university from the bottom of the Red Sea.

You literally have to take his word for it. He took pictures of some coral-encrusted round-looking formations, declared them chariot wheels and claimed that he found chariot wheels and bones at the bottom of the dead sea, and that Mt. Sinai was in the middle of Saudi Arabia. The bones are also "missing" I presume.


Really, isn't it obvious he made the whole thing up? Even if there was a chariot wheel or two at the bottom of the Red Sea, would it match Egyptian Chariot wheels of the period precisely? Ships could carry chariots to other ports, so its not unthinkable that one might have sunk, but thats a moot point because we dont even have one wheel. We only have Wyatt's word which is very flimsy given his kooky record of claiming to have found all sorts of stuff (like the Ark of the Covenant for instance).

Anonymous said...

I didn't put quotation marks around this quote just above, sorry -

"I find the arrogance of someone claiming that all Abrahamic religions to be frauds outstanding."

So there have been over 10 MILLION views of Zeitgeist - it will enter into the historical record. Part 1 will put pressure in comparative religion/mythology courses to address these issues & stop omitting the astrotheological foundations of our worlds religions.

Which reminds me, in his review of Christ Conspiracy Earl Doherty said:

"We sorely need a new History of Religions School for the 21st century, to apply modern techniques to this important ancient material. Perhaps this book will help bring that about."

"Instead of mythology being a disease of language, it may be truly said that our theology is a disease of mythology" ~ Gerald Massey

"Now when the ancient Egyptians, awestruck and wondering, turned their eyes to the heavens, they concluded that two gods, the sun and the moon, were primeval and eternal; and they called the former Osiris, the latter Isis..."
~ Diodorus Siculus (90-21 BCE), Greek Historian, "Suns of God" 89


"Jesus is a mythical figure in the tradition of pagan mythology and almost nothing in all of ancient literature would lead one to believe otherwise. Anyone wanting to believe Jesus lived and walked as a real live human being must do so despite the evidence, not because of it."
~ C. Dennis McKinsey


"At Stonehenge in England and Carnac in France, in Egypt and Yucatan, across the whole face of the earth are found mysterious ruins of ancient monuments, monuments with astronomical significants. These relics of other times are as accessible as the American Midwest and as remote as the jungles of Guatemala. Some of them were built according to celestial alignments; others were actually precision astronomical observatories... Careful observation of the celestial rhythms was compellingly important to early peoples, and their expertise, in some respects, was not equaled in Europe until three thousand years later."
~ Dr. Edwin Krupp, "Suns of God" page 26
* Astronomer and Director of the Griffith Observatory in Los Angeles


22

Mriana said...

Let's not forget Tom Harpur's The Pagan Christ.

Anonymous said...

Hei Acharya.
I love your work and I see the great importance of it. I just Wanted to say keep up the great work. And I wanted to make you aware of a film by Tony Robinson
The doomsday code. He shows how people's belief in the book of revelation are making it a self fulfilling prophecy. The doomsday code can be found on Google video.
Best regards from Norway.

Anonymous said...

Let's take a look at some of the resources used in the movie that tries to debunk an entire history of Christianity in "25 minutes".

Gerald Massey - 1828-1907 - a "self-taught Egyptologist and poet" and a "Chosen Chief of the Most Ancient Order of Druids". So basically, he was a skilled writer/poet, with some informal knowledge of Egyptoloy, and a Chief Druid or occultist. No evident credentials in theology, ancient literature, or ancient Hebrew.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gerald_Massey

Acharya S - a.k.a. D.M. Murdock - is "classically educated in archaeology, history, mythology, and languages." Although... "Her formal training includes a Bachelor of Liberal Arts degree in Classics, Greek Civilization, from Franklin and Marshall College" and "attended the American School of Classical Studies at Athens in Greece". A lot of "classical" Greek stuff, but no evident credentials in theology, ancient literature, or ancient Hebrew.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Acharya_S

Albert Churchward - 1852-1925 - Had degrees in the medical field (even a Phd.) and was also a member of the Geological Society of London. Once again, no evident credentials in theology, history, ancient literature, or ancient Hebrew.
http://www.churchward.com/cw/albertc/

John Allegro - 1923-1988 - Served in the British Royal Navy and then ditched his training for the "Methodist ministry" and went on to obtain a "degree in Oriental Studies from the University of Manchester". He was a lecturer on "philology", and did a fair amount of work with the Dead Sea Scrolls. Then apparently he started "making assertions about the parallels between Essenism and Christianity", which his colleagues through "were unsupported by evidence and designed to raise his personal profile", and he "was accused of stirring up controversy at the expense of scholarship".
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_Allegro

Maxwell, Tice and Snow "That old time religion"
Jordan Maxwell - Is "a researcher and independent scholar in the fields of astro-theology, religion, secret societies, and the occult, with a focus on the foundations for modern-day religion and government.". There is no information on his formal education or any resources for his research, and the "Research" section on his website seems to be more satirical.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jordan_Maxwell
http://www.jordanmaxwell.com/bio/index.html
Paul Tice, Alan Snow - Nothing whatsoever on these dudes.

Tim C. Leedom - Not much on this guy either.
http://thereligiousdeepend.com/new/index.php?option=com_content&task=blogcategory&id=1&Itemid=27

John F. Remsburg - 1848-1919 - Another self-educated and ardent religious skeptic with no credentials on anything pertaining to history and etc.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_Remsburg
http://www.tektonics.org/qt/remsberg01.html

Irvin & Rutajit - Nothing on these dudes either, only thing found was a video titled "The Pharmacratic Inquisition", self-proclaimed scientists, freethinkers, philosphers, into shamanism and drugs.
http://www.pharmacratic-inquisition.com/main/
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Psychonaut

Earl Doherty - Supposedly has a degree in Ancient History and Classical Languages, and he was introduced to the idea of a mythical origin of Jesus by the work of G. A. Wells, who has authored a number of books arguing a more moderate form of the "Christ myth" theory. Doherty claims to have used his language skills to have studied the original-language versions of the New Testament, and to have come to "his views" through a critical analysis of these texts.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Earl_Doherty

The remainder of resources had little or no information at all about their history, education, experiences, accomplishments, or any other credentials... whatsoever.

For God so loved the world, that he gave his only begotten Son, that whosoever believeth in him should not perish, but have everlasting life. - John 3:16

Mriana said...

Let's take a look at some of the resources used in the movie that tries to debunk an entire history of Christianity in "25 minutes".

And? They apparently have more knowledge on the subject than some of the delusional and uneducated people posting here only to argue with Acharya.

I've read some of those authors, including Acharya, and they are brilliant! I would also suggest reading Victor Matthews Old Testament Parallels, Tom Harpur's The Pagan Christ, Robert Price's Deconstructing Jesus and The Incredible Shrinking Son of Man, John Shelby Spong's A New Christianity for a New World and Why Christianity Must Change or Die and lastly David Fideler's Jesus Christ: Sun of God. I have even more suggestions too, which are very informative and very educational.

They have all debunked the Christian Myth many times over and within the 50 years. No the funny thing is Jesus/Yesua which also means Joshua and was at one time a real cult, predates Xianity. The Joshua cult is the same story as the Christ myth. Now if you go into Krishna and Buddha, you will find the very same senerios in those stories too and they also pre-date Xianity.

The gospels are also stories based on the Hebrew litergical calendar. Various midrashes were created from part of the OT to form the storis in the NT. They are not prophesy, but rather more stories set to a template already established for writing stories.

Anonymous said...

Thanks anon for proving Acharya correct once more in your heavy use of shallow encyclopedia entries for your "evidence." Nice job. You've clearly not studied the "Companion guide" nor Acharya's work at all.

* Gerald Massey used the work of highly credentialed experts of his day who also peer reviewed his own work. So your ad homs won't fly. Calling him a "Druid" is yet another ad hom that has nothing to do with his credibility.

* Acharya - Can you read ancient Greek, Latin, Hebrew etc? I think that gives her a leg up on those who cannot. She uses primary sources and the work of highly credentialed scholars, as she states in her blog (which you didn't bother to read). You're attacking her personally instead of dealing the facts and evidence. Try to offer something beyond ad homs if you want to be taken seriously.

* You've provided a link to "Tektonics" after it has already been addressed earlier - maybe you weren't aware of the complete lack of biblical credentials from JP Holding who apparently doesn't know that "Tekton" in modern Greek means "Freemason" still to this day. So much for him and his sources.

Anon "The remainder of resources had little or no information at all about their history, education, experiences, accomplishments, or any other credentials... whatsoever."

- So you've attacked all of Zeitgeist's sources with a broad stroke ad hom and then provide no primary source evidence or facts of your own to counter the issues brought up in ZG as is typical and already described in her blog (which you haven't read).

While you're on the credentials kick, where are the credentials of Jesus? It seems he couldn't read, write, paint, carve - The best the bible has to offer is a mention of him being a carpenter and yet he offered absolutely NOTHING for future Christians to hold up as evidence by his own hand demonstrating his existence - he should be ashamed. If Jesus would've been a good carpenter maybe he could've built something great for King Herod with his name on it - One would think that the All-knowing God of the cosmos would've thought of that one.

And where are the credentials of his disciples and followers? Or where are *YOUR* biblical credentials?

"For God so loved the world, that he gave his only begotten Son, that whosoever believeth in him should not perish, but have everlasting life. - John 3:16"

- Prove it! Name someone who has actually obtained everlasting life! It wasn't Jesus because he's nowhere to be found. If there were anything to this - there would be folks walking the earth who would've known and met Jesus. That simply does not appear to be the case as I'm sure Christians would be trying to get it on the news like to "Tomb of Christ" crap was.

Besides, you should read the original to John 3:16 from the Egyptian religion several thousand years prior to Christianity. They have many references to "everlasting life."

22

Acharya S said...

Anon said...

The remainder of resources had little or no information at all about their history, education, experiences, accomplishments, or any other credentials... whatsoever.

For God so loved the world, that he gave his only begotten Son, that whosoever believeth in him should not perish, but have everlasting life. - John 3:16


And what are YOUR credentials that we should listen to you? You're just quoting someone else, reporting, like Massey did. Again, Massey used the works of highly credentialed authorities, but you assail him personally, as if he just made it all up and HE'S the last word. Applying this same method, what are YOUR credentials, since you seem to think that the person REPORTING something should have a perfect pedigree in order for us to accept his or her information? Why should we listen to you reporting that there's an invisible and immortal Jewish guy floating around in the sky? It doesn't seem at all that God "loves the world." The world is a mess! Are we supposed to just accept your word for it? No, we need a pristine pedigree, especially for such extraordinary claims!

And while we're at it, thanks for reminding me that in the Book of the Dead and other ancient Egyptian texts, HORUS is called "the beloved Son of the Father," who came to earth to provide everlasting life to all mankind. (Renouf, Book of the Dead, pp. 54, 96, etc., et al.) And, by the way, the Gospel of John is FULL of Egyptian myths and ideas.

"Such...was the character, the office, and the filiation of the great benevolent deity of the Egyptians - of Horus, Only-begotten son of his Father, the God of God, the Anointed and the Deliverer. All the Egyptian literature bore testimony to him, all Egyptian life and art was moulded by his influence."

--W.R. Cooper, The Horus Myth and Its Relation to Christianity, p. 41.

And, yes, all of these epithets and characteristics of HORUS can be found in the ancient Egyptian texts predating the Christian era by many centuries. Nevertheless, Cooper was a devout Christian, so I guess we can just take his word for it anyway.

However, "appeal to authority" constitutes a logical fallacy. Having said that, once again, in my Companion Guide to ZEITGEIST, Part 1 and in my forthcoming book Christ in Egypt: The Horus-Jesus Connection, I use mainly primary sources and the work of authorities highly credentialed in the appropriate fields, citing over 500 sources in some 1200 footnotes.

Acharya S said...

I need to add that, contrary to Anon's contention, I certainly do have credentials in "ancient literature," since those are part of the study of ancient Greece. What this means, in fact, is that I can read the original text of the New Testament. (As far as we have it, since we do not possess the originals or autographs of any New Testament text. See my book Who Was Jesus? for more on that subject.)

Interested parties may wish to see my essay on my credentials. Rigorous scholarly training is important, regardless of the field. However, I do have important credentials relevant to this field, including knowledge of not only the language of the New Testament but also the MYTHOLOGY upon which much of it is based. In other words, I am a theologian of the ancient Greek religion upon which the gospel story drew in significant part.

Mriana said...

I would also like to add, what better way to learn about the setting of the gospel stories than to be an anceint Greek student? Greek was the language the original gospels were written, not Hebrew.

Anonymous said...

The idea that the Catholic church has survived from Peter the Rock to now is a miracle in itself. There were struggles and achievements throughout the centuries but the Catholic Church is still here and that is a miracle in itself and what Jesus spoke.

The Protestants have tainted Christianity. Jesus said His Church would never teach error (John 14:26); Luther says it did teach error. If Luther is right, Christ is wrong; if Christ is right, Luther and all his followers are wrong. Luther's chief errors are contained in the following propositions: (1) There is no supreme teaching power in the Church. (2) The temporal sovereign has supreme power in matters ecclesiastical. (3) There are no priests. (4) All that is to be believed is in the Bible. (5) Each one may interpret Holy Scripture as he likes. (6) Faith alone saves, good works are superfluous. (7) Man lost his free will by original sin. (8) There are no saints, no Christian sacrifice, no sacrament of confession, and no purgatory.

During tribulation Good will triumph over evil....

The Apologetics throughout the centuries have all have one thing in common: LOVE...love of Christ. Heaven and Hell is not about God telling us we are going here and we are going there with his thunder bolt. When we die we will see Jesus in the light and if we trult devoted our lives to him we will with all our joy run up to him and hug him (we are in heaven)...or we run up to him with all our joy but think we are not worhty of his presence just yet (purgatory)..or people like Acharya who will see Jesus in the afterlife and say "Who are you?" (Hell).

So our fate rests in our hands and God gave us this choice.

Anonymous said...

Skeptics like this author fail to understand Religion. For example I remember seeing a TV show about St. Francis of Assisi and they were debating if he actually did rebuilt/reformed the church. They say "No he never built any churches. What church did he build?" What they fail to understand is that the church is built upon the spiritual not from rocks and mortar. And this is why so many people like this author go off the wrong tracks and walk in darkness....

Husky said...

Just want to say I really appreciate all your research & hard work you do for the better of us all.
Looking forward to the next project
:o)

pandira said...

William Cooper always admonished his listening audience to "read everything...listen to everyone, but don't believe anything that you cannot prove through your own research. I'm afraid that Christians, for the most part, rely soley on their Bible for the substantiation of their faith, and look no further. Talk about "walking in darkness". We know that the "Church" is the people. That's elementery. Being "on the tracks", as you suggest we stay, will clearly limit us from many wonderful vistas, and may prevent us from finding truths. Being "On the tracks" implies that we should only go where others would lead us. Open your mind, and seek truth wherever it may take you (I do understand how frightening it may be to deviate from "the tracks").
It is healthy to question everything. It is healthy to seek answers. It is healthy to study and read things that you do not agree with. I never learned anything from someone who agreed with me. Through chaos and conflict comes (r)evolutionary change. Don't be afraid. Your Christian religion is just stories. They DO mean something, but were not meant to be taken literaly. If you can discover the hidden meaning of your Bible, and stop taking it literaly, you will advance exponentialy on the spiritual evlolutionary scale, and break free from the bonds of established religion. Religion is about your personal relationship with your creator, whatever you perceive (it) to be. Why do you feel the need for an intermediary?

Alexandra said...

Thanks for bringing astrotheology to my attention. I help moderate a Christian board, and I asked an admin to add an Astrotheology section, dedicated to refuting this satanic religion.

http://thetruth11187.yuku.com/forums/91

Acharya S said...

Alexandra said...

Thanks for bringing astrotheology to my attention. I help moderate a Christian board, and I asked an admin to add an Astrotheology section, dedicated to refuting this satanic religion.


Good luck with refuting Christianity - every little bit helps!

Anonymous said...

turth be known, but yet you have not learned the truth.

Mriana said...

Alexandra said...
Thanks for bringing astrotheology to my attention. I help moderate a Christian board, and I asked an admin to add an Astrotheology section, dedicated to refuting this satanic religion.


Oh brother! *rolling eyes* Good luck with that. Maybe one day that meme will explode and a light will turn on.

MJB said...

Hi Acharya,
i do appreciate the movie zeitgeist very much.
And of course you are right about the roman church superimposing all this sun god business on the man Jesus who lived and had a message for this world.
This message was and still is peace and love. The romans tried to supress this for three hundred years, obviously unsuccsesfully, because Jesus and his message is still around. The romans used to feed christians to the lions. That is why it says in "Romans" 10:9 "confess" because being a christian was a crime punishable by death, a horrible death. You confess a crime not a religious faith or affiliation.
If you are so full of the Holly Spirit that even under the threat of certain death, you can't help youself but still tell the truth about your faith in Jesus, you will be saved. It is a promise to martyrs if you will.
Unfortunately the born again christians are exploiting this bible passage to sell salvation to the naive for ten% of their income. Saying or repeating a bible passage that you believe in Jesus Christ, without it being a crime is not a confession neither a guarantee to be saved. Sorry folks, you can'y wipe years of karma out like that. The new testament would be allot shorter if that is all it takes.
Jesus has a message that he wants you to understand and live. He wants you to be like him. He wants you to love and heal. He is not demanding to be worshipped as a deity.
Maybe that is why you are so down on christianity, because you have seen the stupid side of it first hand and of course it doesn't add up. Over the years many people have tried to take advantage of christian believers. But just like the romans couldn't eliminate them, neither will corrupt churches in his name or your movie. Trust me on this one, we haven't come this far to give up peace and love now and I will tell you why, because there is no alternative. Look around, we need peace, love and healing today maybe more than ever.
You are obviously a very educated lady, please calculate the probability of the message of Jesus the man who lived, being a myth.
Yes, you are right, the roman church Jesus, who is a composite sun god of sorts, did not exist as such, neither are the sun holidays the actual events of Jesus life. Yes, constantine was a sun worshipper who wanted more control and tried to take advantage of the true christianity of that time, because he was jeaulous. It was politics, the same game that is played today.
There was an "if you can't beat them, join them" moment there though, which is a form of surrender, if you think about it.
Something which the bible does not mention is that at the time when Jesus did die for our sinns, he healed th world. This is something that anyone who lived at that moment could feel and never forgot for the rest of their days. That love perpetuated through the generations and was undeniable then as it is now. Tell me that you truly can't feel that love Acharya. It would take a pretty bitter or afraid person I guess, but do you really want to live your life without love? I for one don't and I hope that you don't either.
Like I said earlier, I really do appreciate your hard work and I did find the movie very informative and it was time for that movie. Thank you
Acharya, Jesus lived then and he lives now, trust me on that one.
Just differentiate a little bit, it is not that hard, you'll feel better.
MJB

Anonymous said...

MJB "This message was and still is peace and love"

- Not really, that is simply the front they hide behind. In "Revelation" 2/3rds of the human population of non-believers will be wiped out. That has NOTHING to do with peace or love.

MJB "The romans tried to supress this for three hundred years"

- That's not accurate. Constantine create laws endorsing Christianity.

MJB "The romans used to feed christians to the lions."

- Everybody got fed to the lions in those days.

MJB "He is not demanding to be worshipped as a deity."

- John 3:16

MJB "Trust me on this one, we haven't come this far to give up peace and love now and I will tell you why, because there is no alternative. Look around, we need peace, love and healing today maybe more than ever."

- After 2,000, how well is that peace , love and prayer really working for you? I'd say not at all. The world today is in piss poor shape and religious devotees hold a lot of responsibility for that.

MJB "please calculate the probability of the message of Jesus the man who lived, being a myth."

- The existence of Jesus is around 99% nonexistence. We can't claim 100% due to the principles of proving a negative in this case. The probability of Jesus being a myth is 99%.

MJB "at the time when Jesus did die for our sinns, he healed th world. This is something that anyone who lived at that moment could feel and never forgot for the rest of their days. "

- That really shows doesn't it. Too bad nobody ever mentioned it.

MJB "Jesus lived then and he lives now"

- And so does the Invisible Pink Unicorn, Flying Spaghetti Monster and the Celestial Teapot.

MJB "trust me on that one"

- Right, any evidence to support your claim? No. Funny thing, even the earliest Christians couldn't ever produce evidence for Jesus either.

22

Mriana said...

Funny thing, even the earliest Christians couldn't ever produce evidence for Jesus either.

This anon has a point. There were also many sects who did not believe Jesus actually live on and walked on the earth. There was the Gnostics, Docetists, and others. For the Docetists, he only seemed to have a physical body, seemed to have walked the earth and to have suffer. It didn't actually happen. Of course the idea of God in us is not a new thing either nor is the idea that we are all Christ crucified. Neither view has an actual Jesus.

One modern day idea is that of Spong who states it was a spiritual resurrection, not a bodily resurrection.

It kind of hard to prove those things.

MJB said...

Hey, hey, hey,
there is sombody out there and I thought my post echoed into the nothingness that nihilists believe, our universe is made up of.
First of all I want to thank you for your response.
I am sensing a little resentment here, this whole blog is somewhat emotionally charged I guess.
Anony,
I would like to respond to you if that is alright.
Let's start at the top.
If revelations makes sense to you, I would like to meet you or at least explain it to me via the internet. Maybe you should write a book about, I am sure it would be a best seller and I am serious.
It doesn't say that Jesus is wiping them out. Jesus is supposed to judge the living and the dead from what I understand. Now this could mean allot of things.
We could speculate for years, but let's take this idea: the planet becomes inhabital to human life, maybe this happens on a regular basis as we orbit and cruise through our universe, human life needs to be evacuated, but there isn't room for everybody. Maybe there are limits to the capacity of evacuation and or transportation. Some sort of selection has to take place.
Maybe Jesus has been in charge of this job before and knows that the more people believe in his message of peace and love, the more people and souls he can get out faster and a whole lot easier. John 3:17
This is just one idea of what this could mean, alright. Like I said we could go on for years.

Second)
John 3:16 does not say you have to worship Jesus. It says if you are interested in everlasting life, you should check ou his message of peace and love. And if you believe in that, you shall not perish.
No demand at all, really. At least I don't see it as such.

Third)

"After 2,000, how well is that peace , love and prayer really working for you? I'd say not at all. The world today is in piss poor shape and religious devotees hold a lot of responsibility for that."

I think we are allot better of. Let me take you back in time 2000 years ago when rome was noy christian. The people who met at the nicean council were roman senators who stabbed each other in the back physically, were slave owners, practised human sacrifice, where obsessed with blood shed and raped children at dinner parties.

I think Jesus message of peace and love changed that lifestyle for true believers at least.
I'm not saying that this is not going on anymore, especially among the secular non-christian power brokers.

fourth)
I wrote calculate the probability of the message being a myth.

If we want to get anywhere with this did Jesus exist historically or not, we need to differntiate between the Jesi if you will.
There is the canonized Jesus, who is a designed, abstract model, which served the roman church in many ways. To concentrate spirituality, collect moneys, etc.
Then there is the man Jesus who walked the earth and talked to people and healed them.

Two different Jesi.

Now the third Jesus is a combination of the two aforementioned ones, which by nature never existed and yes is mythical.
That does not mean that all Jesi are mythical.
There was a "real McCoy" Jesus who walked and talked and started it all.
Oh and then there are many more Jesi than that. The ones that groups want him to be.
Like for example the zionist-christian Jesus who for some reason is anti peace and anti love, who endorses slaughtering innocent kids.

You can't blame the walking and talking Jesus for everything that people want him to be.
Please differentiate.

Last but certainly not least is his message of peace and love, which is synonimus with Jesus.

We can argue about the above mentioned Jesi and there authenticity until we are blue in the face, demanding empirical ( by the way is that roman empire-ical?) proof but that doesn't change his message, thank God.


fifth)

"- That really shows doesn't it. Too bad nobody ever mentioned it."

Absents of evidence does not proove the opposite to be true.

sixth)

"- Right, any evidence to support your claim? No. Funny thing, even the earliest Christians couldn't ever produce evidence for Jesus either."

I'm sorry, but you are contradicting yourself a little bit here. How can there be early christians if there never was an early Jesus Christ?

The way you suggest that early christians existed is also suggesting the existence of an early Jesus. Unless you are somehow suggesting mass halucinations of someone who never existed.
The latter I find a little harder to believe.

Thank you for reading my lenghty post,
may the peace and love of Jesus be with you.

ps I am not trying to provoke any non-believers here, I just thought it was appropriate to say in this Jesus centered forum

MJB

Mriana said...

John 3:16-18 is a demand and a threat, on that imposes guilt and shame. It is not something of a loving god. I've said it before and I'll say it again, IF a deity exists and IF they are worth their salt, they will look at the person's heart, not what they believed out of fear of punishment or a the desire of a reward. See the Good Samaritan- a story which was borrow from another culture. He did not do what he did in the hopes of a reward or out of fear of something. He did it purely from his heart and nothing more.

John 3:16-18 does not state any of that, but rather it is a threat of punishment if you do not believe or a promise of reward if you do believe, but it states nothing being from the heart, thus people end up believing from the mind our of fear.

John 3:16-18 "For God so love the world that he gave his only begotten son (glad it's not true, for if it was, he committed child abuse in the ultimate degree), that whoever believes in him should not perish but have eternal life. (empty promise, but works on the psychics of humans, who fear death). For God sent the Son into the world, not to condemn the world, but that world might be saved through him (what? Only Christians are saved? Sounds discriminated when there are many paths). He who believes in him is not condemned; he who does not believe is condemned already, because he has not believed in the name of the only Son of God. (non-believers are condemned? Nice. Some loving God there. Not!)

Reminds me of a story about a Native American and a priest. The Native said something like, "Those who do not know, don't go to hell, but those who know, but don't believe, go to hell." "Yes," replied the priest. "Then why did you tell me?"

Seems far better not to know and than to know and have fear imposed upon you about an afterlife that probably isn't true.

No, I have no guilt, shame, or fear because I believe that this is more than likely that this is the one and only life we get. Regardless if it is or isn't, this life is a gift and we should live it to it's fullest, not in fear, guilt, or shame. If we live it to the best of our ability, striving to be all we can be, and hopefully do something that will make life better for future generations, then we should not have any concerns. Most of all, we should not do or believe something out of fear, guilt, or shame (which many Christians deny they do, but this simply is not true) and we should do things that are for the good of ourselves and others without any expectations of reward or punishment.

The way you suggest that early christians existed is also suggesting the existence of an early Jesus. Unless you are somehow suggesting mass halucinations of someone who never existed.
The latter I find a little harder to believe.


Actually, I think s/he was suggesting the various pre-Christian cults around the time, which evolved in many Xian sects and then forced to be one due to a politcal move of Rome. At the beginning, as I mentioned before, many sects did not believe in a physical Jesus. It eventually evolved into a thought long after his supposed death, which is that of Horus, Mithra, and many others. Eventually, the Gnostics, Docetists, and alike groups were charged with heresy due to not complying with the new idea that there was once a flesh and blood Jesus.

Do some research on these pre-Roman Christianity sects and you will see at the time, before Rome imposed a physical deity idea, that these groups did not believe in such a thing. One cannot prove a spiritual deity such as that of the Gnostics and Docetists. It's is purely supernatural and that which stories are made.

Anonymous said...

"One modern day idea is that of Spong who states it was a spiritual resurrection, not a bodily resurrection."

- That's essentially what we get from the apostle Paul.

MJB, "Revelation" has been covered many times by many different people.

"Ever since Christ's death, many Christians have been expecting the second coming in their immediate future... the "real" second coming will occur later, when he returns on a horse leading an army on horseback who will exterminate one third of the earth's population in a massive genocide. It will be numerically the largest mass extermination of humans in history." "genocide"

Eventually, 2/3rds of non-believers are wiped out and this action is endorsed by Jesus/god (Muslims have similar beliefs about the end times where their savior and god are triumphant which means all non-Muslims are wiped out).

If you want to discuss "Revelation" go here -
"Revelation"

The only way Christians can claim Jesus was all about "peace and love" is by getting slippery as a snake to omit the fact that one must believe in him or be condemned:

John 3:18 "Whoever believes in him is not condemned, but whoever does not believe stands condemned already because he has not believed in the name of God's one and only Son."

Denying that Christians are to worship Jesus is just dishonest - to worship is: to honor, have reverence, submissive respect, admiration & love for" etc. When you look up "belief" in the dictionary.com it says "a religious tenet or tenets; religious creed or faith: the Christian belief." Tell Christians who go to church every Sunday that they're not suppose to worship Jesus. And one of the main reasons they so is *NOT* because of his "message of peace and love" but so they don't go to hell for all eternity.

MJB "No demand at all"?

- Your comment, MJB, is just absurd - who are you trying to fool? Geez!

And by omitting the fact that Jesus really wasn't that great of an example - "Why Jesus?"

Your attempt to explain the "Jesi" is a pathetic attempt to apologize for the fact that there is no evidence for the character known as Jesus Christ in the bible and there never has been - not even the earliest Christians could turn up any evidence.

MJB "Absents of evidence does not proove the opposite to be true."

- This comment is a fallacy. To be correct in this case the proper wording is: "Absence of evidence *IS* evidence of absence." After 2,000 years no evidence for Jesus has ever been found. Jesus/god should've thought about that ahead of time to save everyone all the trouble that has taken place. And you think god counts the hairs on your head? Geez, at some point, please a minimal attempt to get real.

I was a saved, baptized Christian for 20 years and I often remember hearing the phrase:

Hebrews 13:8 "Jesus Christ is the same yesterday and today and forever"

What a load of crap - then get him on the evening news to perform some miracles and prove himself as god and be done with it. It's the least he could do for his devotees.

This whole "end times" prophecy crap is a disgrace. It is nothing less than crimes against humanity. "The largest genocide in human history." What part of that are you not getting? And what gets me is that Christians (and Muslims) get really excited over it because they believe they will be saved. You couldn't get any more self-righteous. What a low, LOW people who believe in such nonsense - they care *ONLY* about themselves. I want no part of it. I want NOTHING to do with condemning people to their DEATH or hell for all eternity because they don't believe in some absurd story with absolutely no evidence to support its claims. Destroying those folks for that reason would be a *HELL* for ME as I would be concerned for their safety and well being.

You want to do something interesting with character and integrity? Stand up to this barbaric god of yours and tell 'em that this end times genocide prophecy will from now on be look at as evil. No good god truly in charge of everything could support such a nasty endeavor. Tell your god to go away and come back when he/she can create a better plan that doesn't involve any crimes against humanity.

MJB "Unless you are somehow suggesting mass halucinations of someone who never existed."

- Interesting you say that because there certainly were plenty of "VISIONS" throughout the bible. Geez!

22

MJB said...

Hello again,
thank you for your beautiful responses. I wish I was a faster typer. I am really slow, so I need to set time aside for this. This is good, I think we are making progress here.

In response to mriana, you had mentioned the platonic cave, which is great. It is a wonderful example of our lives. Where do you see yourself in relationship to that cave? Are you inside or at the entrance, or even outside, or are you catching glimpses of the outside?

I believe that Jesus was able to see outside of this cave and understands many more things than the person who is way back in the cave. Now instead of keeping that knowledge to himself and taking advantage of the average cave dweller, he wants to set us free with the truth.
The truth is that this cave is a prison.
There are guards which Jesus and others are able to see. These guards are using us for their purposes and rule over us with the instrument of fear, which is the opposite of love.
He also knows how to get passt those guards to freedom. It is amazingly simple.

1John 4:18
There is no fear in love; but perfect love casteth out fear: because fear hath torment. He that feareth is not made perfect in love.

In other words as long as you are afraid, you are staying in the cave and are "condemned" to that lifestyle. You will live and die in that cave over and over. This is in the interest of the guards.
You were born for so much more though.
You can and should be free and step out of that cave into a higher form of life, shall we call it heaven for now, since we don't know much about it?
Jesus is trying to put into terms that the average cavedweller understands how to get out, that is all.
If you want to stay in the cave, don't worry about what Jesus said, do whatever your little heart desires, because the guards will take care of you. They have done it succesfully for thousands of years. They got your number unfortunately, they can see you coming.

Now if you believe Jesus was merely a widespread vision early christians had, or if he walked the earth in the flesh, what does it matter?
What evidence are you guys looking for? A sandle or dna testing? I'm not sure where you guys are coming from.
As you might be able to tell, I am not a biblical scholar nor do I claim to be one or play one on tv. I am not fluent in aramic, greek and egyptian hyrogliphics, most of this information is thank God still available on the internet. It is a wonderfulm research tool.

The fact that "pagan" holidays, coincide with solar positions in the sky and that the roman church superimposed these onto the life of Jesus the man who lived, is a hundred or more years old. It is not a new discovery which you guys can take credit for. Get off of that high horse or should I say stop beating that dead horse. Most people who do just a little bit of research know this.
That is not proof that the "walking, talking Jesus" does not exist.
Again, please differentiate.

Anyway,
I think I mentioned this before but perfect love, this means throughout your being, including your heart, mriana, will get you out of there. You can only be full of love if the content of your life is love, that includes loving others.
Love is a form of energy, so is fear.
Love is a higher energy which escapes the lower energy of fear that resonates in this cave.

Now is it easy to love in an environment of fear?
Not always, that is why Jesus gave us specific instructions, which are reflected in the new testament.

Finding a sandle of his or not, the message is what always has and still is important:
peace and love as your goal in life.

I agree with Jesus,
(the Prince of Peace and King of Love Jesus is who I am referring to here)

Well, my wife is yelling at me for spending all my time on the weekend infront of the computer, so I must go now to keep the peace and love alive.

MJB

Mriana said...

MJB, I see myself as being outside the cave and no, I do not believe in a historical Jesus. I believe he is fictional. That is superfulous though. I also believe in the quote from the "Minority Report", "In order to see the light, you must first risk the dark." I have done that, but that does not mean I have stopped researching the subject.

As for 1 John, that book was written by someone other than the one attributed to The Gospel of John. It is not the same author. Secondly, John 3:16 is attributed to "Jesus", not the author who wrote The Letters of John. Thirdly, according to the Jesus Seminar scholars, over 80% that has been attributed to "Jesus" was said to not have originated with the "historical" Jesus. Exact quote from Free Inquiry Magazine, "Prospective Impact: The Jesus Project", by Tom Flynn April/May 2007 Vol. 27 No. 3 "when the Jesus Seminar finished deconstructing the Gospels, it had blacklined more than 80 percent of the "words of Jesus" as inauthentic."

In fact, if you study various religious texts, esp older ones, you will find anything from exact wording to similar statements. For example, Krishna in the Gita has a series of "I am's" much like Moses and Jesus does. Not only that, he says, "I am the beginning, middle, and end." much like we see in Revelations. Those are prime examples of what you will find if you research other religious texts, esp those older than the Bible. Go to the Code of Hammurabi and you will find the basis of the 10 Commandments. Read the Egyptian Book of the Dead and the Coffin Texts and there you will find the story of Jesus, only the name is Osiris/Horus. Check out the Buddha. Not only did both he and Krishna has a divine virgin birth, but Krishna's parents fled with him to another place, much like Moses and Jesus. BTW, only Matthew speaks of fleeing to Egypt. Now why would only one book have this if it was not a story? The reality of it all is that the Bible is just more fiction, filled with allegory. In fact, one could have a lot of fun comparing the Buddha's story to Jesus. It's all right there and very much the same thing.

In other words as long as you are afraid, you are staying in the cave and are "condemned" to that lifestyle. You will live and die in that cave over and over. This is in the interest of the guards.
You were born for so much more though.
You can and should be free and step out of that cave into a higher form of life, shall we call it heaven for now, since we don't know much about it?


Staying in the cave really means hanging onto an invisible parent figure, one in which you send adult letters to a santa claus god. That is staying in the cave, BUT if you educate yourself about mythology and other religious text, then you will leave the cave.

Heaven is here on earth. No where else and earth can be either heaven or hell, depending on what we as humans make it. This it. This is the one and only life we get and we should make the best of it. Stepping out of the cave means letting go of superstitions and educating ourselves, as well as striving to be all we can be and loving wastefully. I can appreciate the words of Bishop Spong that state we should live this life to its fullest, strive to be all we can be, and loving wastefully."

Now if you believe Jesus was merely a widespread vision early christians had, or if he walked the earth in the flesh, what does it matter?
What evidence are you guys looking for? A sandle or dna testing? I'm not sure where you guys are coming from.


You just don't get it do you? Might I suggest you read some of the books I suggested in my earlier posts (ie the second one in this blog thread), esp since you feel the need to hang onto a Christian belief. OK I listed the authors but not the books, so here is a list of their books and mind you, they are all Anglican/Episcopalian ministers:

Bishop John Shelby Spong, retired from the Episcopal Church U.S.A., books: Why Christianity Must Change or Die, A New Christianity for a New World, Born of a Virgin, Rescuing the Bible from Fundamentalism, Sins of Scripture, Resurrection: Myth or Reality. That's for starters. He not only has more books, but he has a list of essays on Beliefnet: http://www.beliefnet.com/author/author_44.html

Tom Harpur, retired Anglican priest, Canada: The Pagan Christ.

Anthony Freeman, former Anglican priest, Britian: God In Us: A Case for Christian Humanism.

Robert Price, former Baptist minister, attends the Episcopal Church, teaches and lectures on the Bible, is also a Humanist and atheist. He wrote Deconstructing Jesus, The Incredible Shrinking Man, The Reason Driven Life, among other books. He also has articles/sermons here: http://www.robertmprice.mindvendor.com/sermon.htm

Don Cupitt, Anglican priest, Britain, Religious/Christian Humanist. Wrote Radical Theology, Impossible Loves, After God: The Future of Religion, Taking Leave of God, Reforming Christianity, as well as many others. He also has an article on the Sea of Faith, UK website titled, "All You Really Need is Love": http://www.sofn.org.uk/press/aynil.html

Finally, there is Elaine Pagels, who writes about the Gnostic Gospels. She is of a different flavour than the Anglicans I listed above and even feels the Gospel of Thomas should be included in the Bible. Quite often Anglicans do refer to the Gospel of Thomas, but many also do their research on other religious texts too. It is where I got started on this journey of researching and questioning, over 20 years ago. The fact is, I am more like Bob Price, as far as belief goes, than I am to Bishop Spong.

Anyway,
I think I mentioned this before but perfect love, this means throughout your being, including your heart, mriana, will get you out of there. You can only be full of love if the content of your life is love, that includes loving others.
Love is a form of energy, so is fear.
Love is a higher energy which escapes the lower energy of fear that resonates in this cave.


Oh how little you know of my life or how much knowledge I have of various religious texts and the history of religion. It may not be as much as the previous afore mentioned theologians or even Acharya's, but it is far greater than those who are deluded with a single religion, thinking it is the one and only correct one.

As for love, it takes more than what you described. It is as the Buddhists preach, consisting of right thinking, right speech, and right action. It also takes knowing yourself and loving yourself. If you cannot love yourself than you cannot love others. It is also within a person, not external. It is the internal force that drives us to excel in life or to persever when all seems hopeless.

Here is something for you to ponder since you seem to enjoying quoting the Bible. Trying venturing out into something else, like say:

Gospel of Thomas:

(3) Jesus said, "If those who lead you say to you, 'See, the kingdom is in the sky,' then the birds of the sky will precede you. If they say to you, 'It is in the sea,' then the fish will precede you. Rather, the kingdom is inside of you, and it is outside of you. When you come to know yourselves, then you will become known, and you will realize that it is you who are the sons of the living father. But if you will not know yourselves, you dwell in poverty and it is you who are that poverty."

(77) Jesus said, "It is I who am the light which is above them all. It is I who am the all. From me did the all come forth, and unto me did the all extend. Split a piece of wood, and I am there. Lift up the stone, and you will find me there."

Or if you insist on the Bible, Corinthians 13 has no mention of God in it. Instead, it says, "the greatest of these is love."

Also chew on some of the other religious texts I mentioned too, if you're not afraid. You may find that Jesus never existed, just as many other have. It is not believing in Jesus or the god of Christianity (or any other deity) that helps us escape from the cave, or even "be saved" as so many Xians like to believe, but rather understanding the human condition.

Anonymous said...

MJB "1John 4:18 There is no fear in love; but perfect love casteth out fear: because fear hath torment. He that feareth is not made perfect in love. In other words as long as you are afraid, you are staying in the cave and are "condemned" to that lifestyle. You will live and die in that cave over and over."

- Interesting, you should heed your own comment - I think you're deathly afraid of what you will cling to if you were to realize that there's no reason to believe Jesus existed. You are afraid of what life would be like without your security blanket called Jesus. It's a very false sense of security especially when one finds out Jesus never existed. Nor was Jesus a great example for humans to live by.

"Think not that I am come to send peace: I came not to send peace but a sword." (Matthew 10:34)

"He that hath no sword, let him sell his garment, and buy one." (Luke 22:36)

"But those mine enemies, which would not that I should reign over them, bring hither, and slay them before me." (Luke 19:27)

"If a man abide not in me, he is cast forth as a branch, and is withered; and men gather them, and cast them into the fire, and they are burned." (John 15:6)

So much for peace and love from Jesus, dude!

MJB "The fact that "pagan" holidays, coincide with solar positions in the sky and that the roman church superimposed these onto the life of Jesus the man who lived, is a hundred or more years old. It is not a new discovery which you guys can take credit for. Get off of that high horse or should I say stop beating that dead horse. Most people who do just a little bit of research know this."

- LOL, You keep digging a deeper hole for yourself. If you knew anything about Acharya's work (which you clearly don't) you'd know that she has compiled a large history of solar mythology/astrotheology going back several thousands of years not just a hundred, as you claim. In Acharya's books your find information like:

"Now when the ancient Egyptians, awestruck and wondering, turned their eyes to the heavens, they concluded that two gods, the sun and the moon, were primeval and eternal; and they called the former Osiris, the latter Isis..."
~ Diodorus Siculus (90-21 BCE), Greek Historian,
"Suns of God" 89

"...All the gods of the Greek and Roman mythology represent the attributes of the one supreme divine power - the SUN."
~ Macrobius, Roman scholar around 400CE
"Suns of God" 67-68

Early Church Father Tertullian (160-220 C.E.), ironically admits the true origins of the Christ story and of all other such godmen by stating in refutation of his critics, "You say we worship the sun; so do you." (paraphrase from the Catholic Encyclopedia)
~ "Christ Conspiracy" 158

MJB "a hundred or more years old"???

- Stop, you're embarrassing yourself. You've got some studying to do my friend.

"Astrotheology of the Ancients"

"The Origins of Christianity and the Quest for the Historical Jesus Christ"

I think you'd get a lot out of "Who Was Jesus? Fingerprints of The Christ" too. Since it includes quotes by Christian authorities, apologists and evangelists, as well as New Testament scholars admitting that when it comes to evidence for Jesus, they've got NOTHING.

"I contend we are both atheists, I just believe in one fewer god than you do. When you understand why you dismiss all the other possible gods, you will understand why I dismiss yours."

~ Historian Stephen Henry Roberts 1901-71

22

Anonymous said...

MJB "What evidence are you guys looking for? A sandle or dna testing? I'm not sure where you guys are coming from."

- How about evidence that can stand up to peer review, scientific scrutiny and corroborative evidence.

BTW, None has ever existed. If you can provide it, it would be the first time in history. You would make the news big time, rightly so.

MJB said...

Well, well, well
Now please calm down everybody. I am sensing resentment here again.

Let me start by saying thank you for your coments on my post.

I would love to refrain from parabels and have a rational discussion here, the trouble is that you claim to be scientific researches, but are completely unable to differntiate. What kind of science is that?
I am not a librarian, I don't have the time to read all these recommended pieces of literature, sorry.
I wish I had the time to respond to each and everyone of you and your questions.

To the Jesus accusers
John 12:47
"And if any man hear my words, and believe not, I judge him not: for I came not to judge the world, but to save the world."

I am not a biblical scholar, but it is my understanding that the dead sea scrolls revealed to us that Jesus was an Essene.
And Essenes did have swords, you have to be crazy not to.
That is why the right to bare arms is such an important individual right.
There is nothing wrong with carrying a sword to defend yourself against attacks from people who don't believe in peace and love.
I agree with Luke there.

What I am generally gathering here is that peace and love are still wanted in whatever spiritual format you guys come up with, you just don't like Jesus as the messenger because he "never existed" and is a fraud because of that.
Fine, I personally think that not everything is lost here, at least you have the concept right. Now live by it, don't just blog about it.
Romans 13:10
"Love worketh no ill to his neighbour: therefore love is the fulfilling of the law."

John 13:35
"By this shall all men know that ye are my disciples, if ye have love one to another."

I hate to tell you, but it looks like you are still his deciples and fullfilling his law, you could have fooled me though.

I think that peace and love were not as common BC and you who are denying him now, did benefit from him (historical or mythical) in your lives.

You are not giving Jesus enough credit here I think. He has done more for you than you guys admit too.
By blaming everything bad in recorded history and your current lives on him, you don't make that undone. The credit is still due.
You don't have to be a historian to know that life before Jesus message of peace and love was not always so peaceful and lovely.
Try to prove me otherwise.

For those of you who can differntiate. Love is a form of energy which is different from and able to escape fear.
Jesus knew this and he gave you,
yes I am talking to you, specific instructions on how to generate the required "escape velocity" if you will, for your soul to reach higher ground. On that higher ground, lets call it heaven for now, you will have life evrlasting.
If this is to esoteric for you and you are not intersted in any form of afterlife. Don't worry about it.
You are leaving money on the table though because you have, as humans the ability to love. Not all intelligent forms of life have this ability. They are the guards in the aforementioned cave parabel.

So please, if you have the ability to love, please do youself a favor and try it sometime.

I personally thank Jesus for this revelation.
You should too.

In the name of Jesus, the Prince of Peace and King of Love, mythical in some dimensions, I bid you a peaceful night and a lovely day to follow.

MJB

Anonymous said...

Come on, guys! MLB's imaginary friend loves you! Why can't you just accept that?

And if you don't, he'll continue to insult you anyway!

Ah, the sale of shoddy religious goods appears to be falling through...

Alistair Wiseman said...

Hi there. I too was redirected to here from the David Icke site, something which might cause a few chuckles and a few raised eyebrows, but nevertheless served me well enough to lead me to a point where everyone else who reads this has also ended up!

I can't help but think that the point that is being missed in all this is the message that, us, human beings, have been force-fed for thousands of years the idea that we need a God figure in order to vindicate our own existence.

At first, Gods were created out of superstition, if we do not understand something, then our instinct tells us we should fear it. Hence Sun gods, thunder gods etc.

Fear then and now has an incredible hold on us, look at our irrational everyday fears of spiders, or fear of needles, or of heights. Phobia's are created by our own minds, and the power these hold over us can lead to reactions which would happily be classed as examples of temporary insanity.

Inside ourselves, we all know we are going to die. Our parents are obviously far more aware of this than we are when we are infants, but their fear leads them to beliefs which have been handed down through the millennia in such a way that indoctrination is almost inevitable, so that on some level, the idea of death is not an absolute idea of the cessation of the self.

This notion, that humans fear death, and that they also feared things like the Sun, merged throughout cultures the world over, so that they became intertwined. The next logical leap was that, to offer yourself to the one, might stay the hand of the other.

Needless to say, history shows this staying of death did not happen all that often!

However, not to be deterred, somewhere alone the lines, certain people, in a sudden fit of reasoning amidst irrationality, put two and two together, and thought, "If I can come up with a viable and reasonable sounding set of rules, based on these fears, I can control these people." Enter the start of organised religions. Whether or not the instigators of this actually believed they were doing the right thing, I.e. this way of living will lead to the peoples salvation, is really irrelevant. What it did do, is create uniform, which in turn became a belief for the masses.

The thing was, it was still blindingly obvious that people were still ending up just as dead, irrespective of their beliefs, so somewhere along the way an idea of an afterlife came about. Therefore the afterlife was introduced as a powerful tool in the religion in that, this was the reward for following the rules! And so it remains today.

The thing is, we live now in a time where superstition should really be dismissed as exactly what it is, an irrationality and therefore not able to have power over us, yet the world is an example that this is not happening.

We are born/brought into a world that is completely submerged in the need to vindicate each individuals own existence. The individual can not just exist because he/she does. Oh no. Arrogance born from our superior intellect tells us that we could not possibly be like all the other life forms on the planet, oh no, we have to have been created for a purpose. And so because of this "superior intellect", ironically, we, as a culture, as the masses, chain ourselves up in dogma and archaic superstition, while others dictate to us what it is we have to do, to validate ourselves, to vindicate ourselves, rather than actually loving who we are simply because we are. And of course, this opens up the general masses to manipulation and control.

In truth, there is one saying throughout religious beliefs which really does teach what in my opinion is the right way of life. "I am that I am". The ability to love who you are simply because "you are" has been taken from us, initially through superstition and ignorance, and now through the subsequent phobia imposed through the thousands of years where "primal man's fears" have become "man's primal fears" due to an existence that now requires a validation from a God of some sort, any God will do, as long as there is a way of life attached to it which will in some way guarantee passage into the next world. Because we need a "next world". Because if there isn't one, then we are not as superior as we thought. We are in fact, just creatures on a planet like all the other ones, who rather than rejoicing in the life we were given, chose to build ourselves a cage and allowed others to place a lock upon it, making us not unlike some of the other animals that exist nowadays no longer in the wild, but because of humans actions, only in cages themselves. We, however, have the ability to manifest our own key. We just need to put aside our predispositions, our prejudice and fears, and trust and have faith in the one tangible palpable existence we have unique access to. Ourselves.

Mriana said...

And Essenes did have swords, you have to be crazy not to.
That is why the right to bare arms is such an important individual right.


First of all the Constitution has nothing to do with this. It is a godless document. Our forefathers wanted it that way. They wanted a "Wall between Church and State", not have the country ran by any particular religious view.

I don't have the time to read all these recommended pieces of literature, sorry.

You have time to blog and evangelize though? *Mriana shakes head* Too bad. You might learn something if you did.

I hate to tell you, but it looks like you are still his deciples and fullfilling his law, you could have fooled me though.

You know, we could also be the disiples of Buddha too. That verse is not exclusive.

I think that peace and love were not as common BC and you who are denying him now, did benefit from him (historical or mythical) in your lives.

Ibid. You see, in BCE the Buddha was saying the same thing.

For those of you who can differntiate. Love is a form of energy which is different from and able to escape fear.

See the Tao, also written BCE.

You don't have to be a historian to know that life before Jesus message of peace and love was not always so peaceful and lovely.
Try to prove me otherwise.


Read the stories of Krishna, also created BCE. The Gita has a fine example of this. Arjuna had to go to war. It was his duty, but he knew he would probably killing those he loved in battle. Krishna comes along to tell him he is a warrior, therefore it was his duty to fight in battle, even if he does kill those he loves. Before it was over with, Arjuna finds out that Krishna is Vishnu incarnate, sames as Christ is God incarnate and that Krishna/Vishnu was the beginning, middle, and end. What the Gita is, is a version of Revelations, only less graphic and with less allegory.

Jesus knew this and he gave you,
yes I am talking to you, specific instructions on how to generate the required "escape velocity" if you will, for your soul to reach higher ground. On that higher ground, lets call it heaven for now, you will have life evrlasting.


Are you sure this energy is not the Tao? I'd check it out before you become so certain. As for heaven, are you sure it's not Brahmin, Nirvana, Buddha heaven, or again, the Tao? And everlasting life, could it be reincarnation? When you get down to it, God and heaven are human concepts and they vary depending on who you are talking to, even among Christians.

If this is to esoteric for you and you are not intersted in any form of afterlife. Don't worry about it.

That's not esoteric. It's exoteric. If you don't know what this means, find a good dictionary and not a dictionary of the Bible.

you have, as humans the ability to love. Not all intelligent forms of life have this ability.

This is BS. You obviously have not raised other animals. Humans are animals, but they are not the only ones with the capcity to love- see other apes- ie chimps and gorillas. Koko, a gorilla who talks like deaf humans, wanted a kitten. She got one and truly loved it. No, she did not kill it. It got outside and was ran over. She didn't take to well to a new kitten at first, because it was not the same, but eventually she loved another.

Cats and dogs can love too. Love is not exclusive to the human ape.

So please, if you have the ability to love, please do youself a favor and try it sometime.

I think you are misconstruing love here. The problem is, we have been exposed to the esoteric, while you have had only the exoteric. We are only wanting to share the esoteric with you and everyone else so that you can see above it all and realize that it wasn't what you thought it was.

IF there is a god, you cannot label it. It is formless and genderless. It is not love, for that is a human emotion. It can manifest itself as that, but again, that manifestation is only part of the human condition. There is no word for it and any word we give it is only a human concept, not a god or even Jesus.

Anonymous said...
Come on, guys! MLB's imaginary friend loves you! Why can't you just accept that?

And if you don't, he'll continue to insult you anyway!

Ah, the sale of shoddy religious goods appears to be falling through...


Anon, have a little compassion. He is unable to see above it all and under the delusion that he has been exposed to the esoteric, when in fact he has only been exposed to a bunch of neurochemicals, thinking that the feelings resulting from those chemicals was a deity. He's mistaking that which is lobe for Jesus/God (ie Krishna/Vishnu).

Maybe one day, when he decides to educate himself and take some time to read and learn something, he will understand. Only then he will be able to see above it all and say, "Well, it's not what I thought it was, but I now know what it is not." The esoteric and gnosis go together quite well.

Once he realizes that Jesus never existed, he will be shocked and stunned. Once he recovers, he will either move on to glean further knowledge or he will run back into his cave due to the fear of his new revelation.

BTW, MJB, I am a religious scholar, a novice, maybe a little better than that, but I'm modest, even so I am a religious scholar. Many religious scholars, due to their studies, don't believe in a real Christ, Krishna, Buddha, Horus, Mithra, etc, yet they do study the subject in depth only to find that a belief in a deity is only a human concept. Of course, they might not admit to not believing though, because they have a different definition, yet can still bring it down to the common people in their words. In otherwords, they water it down and simplify it for the Vulgar.

Acharya S said...

If Jesus is God, why does he need weapons? Can't he supernaturally protect himself and his followers against a few bandits and Romans without knives and swords?

If Jesus can't even do that, how can he possibly be in charge of the cosmos?

I smell a fish story here...

Mriana said...

Alistair Wiseman said...

I can't help but think that the point that is being missed in all this is the message that, us, human beings, have been force-fed for thousands of years the idea that we need a God figure in order to vindicate our own existence.

At first, Gods were created out of superstition, if we do not understand something, then our instinct tells us we should fear it. Hence Sun gods, thunder gods etc.


That's exactly what I've been trying to say when I say God is a human concept.

The thing is, we live now in a time where superstition should really be dismissed as exactly what it is, an irrationality and therefore not able to have power over us, yet the world is an example that this is not happening.

Unfortunately.

Because if there isn't one, then we are not as superior as we thought. We are in fact, just creatures on a planet like all the other ones, who rather than rejoicing in the life we were given, chose to build ourselves a cage and allowed others to place a lock upon it, making us not unlike some of the other animals that exist nowadays no longer in the wild, but because of humans actions, only in cages themselves.

Personally, I don't have a problem with being related to other animals on this planet. Sometimes cats and dogs are better behaved than humans. They don't care what you believe as long as you love them, feed them, care for them, etc. Even deer are more peaceful and if you take our direct relatives the gorillas and the chimps, they sometimes appear more intelligent than us. However, I'm not as willing as Jane Goodall to give up technology and go live with them. lol I just don't view us as superior though, except in the size of our brains. Then again, I sometimes jokingly say I was raised by my childhood pets, so I have a different view of animals than most people.

We, however, have the ability to manifest our own key. We just need to put aside our predispositions, our prejudice and fears, and trust and have faith in the one tangible palpable existence we have unique access to. Ourselves.

Amen sister! lol

Mriana said...

Acharya S said...

If Jesus can't even do that, how can he possibly be in charge of the cosmos?


*Best Hindu accent* Oh no no, Acharya, Brahma is the cosmos and therefore is in charge. It was all alone, so it split in two, became male and female. They made passionate love and gave birth to the universe.

*Dropping fake accent* OUCH! That could hurt! As if real childbirth isn't painful enough, Brahma's wife had to give birth to all sorts of HUGE rocks, some of them hot as hell and flaming fireballs!

Alistair Wiseman said...

Sister? Alistair is a man's name!! Grrr...! lol However.. thanks for the posting of my comments and thoughts

Mriana said...

Alistair Wiseman said...
Sister? Alistair is a man's name!! Grrr...!


oops! Sorry. :(

However.. thanks for the posting of my comments and thoughts

You're welcome.

Acharya S said...

Mriana said...

Alistair Wiseman said...
Sister? Alistair is a man's name!! Grrr...!

oops! Sorry. :(

However.. thanks for the posting of my comments and thoughts

You're welcome.


I think Alistair may have confounded us, Mriana. It was I who posted his "comments and thoughts," while you responded to them.

You're welcome, Alistair.

:)

Mriana said...

I think Alistair may have confounded us, Mriana. It was I who posted his "comments and thoughts," while you responded to them.

Yes, it does get pretty confusing sometimes. It's not always easy to tell who is who or who is what.

MJB said...

Alrighty then,
I am hearing some questions here, which I will be glad to answer the best I can for you.
Thank you for keeping this thread going here.
It seems to be the consensus here in this blog that people who believe in Jesus are just "too afraid" to give him up and ultimately are afraid of death. Jesus denial on the other hand is a life altering intellectual achievement which spiritually sets you free.
I beg to differ. I have had a near death experience and can tell you first hand that it was the best feeling I ever had. If you have read some of the reports, I'm here to tell you, it's exactly like that. There is a white light which draws you in, your whole life runs like a very fast slide show infront of your eyes. The feeling is that of absolute and perfect harmony as you are ascending through a tunnel toward that light.
I was fully prepared to kiss this life good by and move on, I didn't want to go back. A voice explained to me that my mother and sisters would be devastated and that I have to go back. And so it happened that I went back into my body. Now I know exactly what you are thinking and want to tell me in a condescending fashion: It was all in my head neurons were all firing at the same time, hormones released, etc. Talk about BS.
And here is the proof which you are so eagerly awaiting. I saw myself from above, looking down on me, from probably about ten feet high. I saw the doctor, my girl friend, my best friend and the nurse trying to hold my legs down since I was shaking, due to an anaphylactic shock. When you are inside your body looking through your two eyes there is no way that you can see youself as clear as day from a birdseye perspective. Sorry mainstream media and so called experts, not doable.
What have I learned from that.

1)you have a soul, which is able to leave your body. This soul is still totally you. It was me up there nobody else, I recognized everything, just like when I was back in my body.
This soul is your essence, which can travel in space and time and yes can be reborn, just like the Essene believed, by the way.
Your soul wont change until you are incarnated into a differnt life and you gather more experiences. But even after a few lifetimes you are still very recognizable.

2) Death is an awesome experience which nobody needs to be afraid of, except for those who are unable to travel in the "light of love and perfect harmony" because their souls degraded into a resonance body for wavelenghts and frequencies which are too low and different from the light of love.

Now this is my own theory and personal belief, so please don't demand references.

I can quote some verses out of the NT though:


Luke 11;35
See to it, then, that the light within you is not darkness.

John 1:8
He himself was not the light; he came only as a witness to the light. (I picked this one for Acharya who believes that Jesus is the sun)

1John 2:9
Anyone who claims to be in the light but hates his brother is still in the darkness.

Anyway the verses about light in the NT are very beautiful to me. And I could quote more.

So anyway, I am neither afraid nor in the dark, thank you, for the record.

1John 4:18
There is no fear in love. But perfect love drives out fear, because fear has to do with punishment. The one who fears is not made perfect in love.

Ok,
there was a question about the tao and it possibly being love.
Love is part of the tao, because the tao describes the ebb and flow of all energy as a whole in the cosmos. Chi is the energy in forms of life, so a more specific energy. Love is the highest of the energies of life, so part of chi but not equal to, just like it is part of tao but not equal to.
I hope this makes sense.

Why was Jesus not able to supernaturally defeat the romans?
Because he didn't come here to be a warlord to dish out destruction.

It is kind of common to believe that Jesus is like the mythical comic book character superman.

There are two forces in this universe:

constructive

and

destructive

Jashua, the Essene was constructive.

Like the buddists say: the gods can't see evil.

When you live in the light and people call you the Prince of Peace and King of Love, you just don't have that much experience in the dark craft of killing and destruction. It's not part of your daily routine. Not "your cup of tea".

That is probably why the Essenes were eventually defeated by the romans.
Warfare was not there focus and purposein life.

Second, where does it say that Jesus is in charge of the cosmos?

The cosmos is electromagnetic, as you can see in the breathtakingly beautiful pictures of nebulas from space telescopes. We are also electromagnetic energy, actually one big bundle of it.

If you look at the anatomy of an atom. You will find that there are neutrons and a protons in the center and electrons, which don't have any mass orbit around them. Now in chemistry class we are lead to believe that the electrons are really close to the nucleus. Newsflash: they are not. 99.9 percent of the atom is empty space in which electrons orbit and by doing that they build and charge an electomagnetic field.
Now since we are made up of atoms, that means we are 99.9% electromagnetic energy.
This means we don't live in a bubble and have only this one life and everything is a human experience. far from it. our past, future and preent are all connected and our lives are connected, that why it doesn't make sense not to love yourself and your neighbor because you would only end up hurting youself and making everybody miserable. so please love each other, like Jesus suggested. He knew what he was talking about.
By the way all the answers to your questions are within you.
Just shine a little light on them and you will find them.

Luke 17:21
nor will people say, 'Here it is,' or 'There it is,' because the kingdom of God is within you."

Peace, Love and Light

MJB

Mriana said...

I have had a near death experience and can tell you first hand that it was the best feeling I ever had.

As someone with a degree in psychology, I can tell you that your brain was not near death. Neither were you. Your brain is attached to your body and you were still alive enough to be saved. It was just your mind reacting to what was happening to you and purely psychological. It was not heaven or anything like that.

Those who believe in heaven see it as that and those who believe in something else, like the Shinto spirit world, see it as that. Buddhists see it as Buddha paradise. It all depends on your religious upbringing and is all psychological because your brain is still functioning. The light is a chemical reaction in your brain and is preceived only by the beliefs you hold. Much like a dream.

Now I know exactly what you are thinking and want to tell me in a condescending fashion: It was all in my head neurons were all firing at the same time, hormones released, etc. Talk about BS.

We, as humans, only wish it were BS. Sorry to say, that IS exactly what it is. Neurochemicals in the brain and nothing more. That was one of many areas of study I had in aquiring a degree in psychology. Once one studies it, they can understand better what is happening in the brain, during such times.

And here is the proof which you are so eagerly awaiting.

That is not proof of anything and who said I was eagerly awaiting it? Again, once one has studied the brain, they have a lot more knowledge, scientific knowledge as to how it functions. The proof is in the science, not in the preceived experiences of people. The preceived experiences is also explainable by one's background and varies on the individual and their personal beliefs, not reality.

there was a question about the tao and it possibly being love.

I didn't ask a question. Seems to me you either misunderstood or chose to not understand. Seems to me you need to do indepth research on religion and psychology.

The brain is connected to the body and vise versa. We cannot separate the two and once the brain ceases to function, that is it. There is no mind/body dualism.

Love is part of the tao, because the tao describes the ebb and flow of all energy as a whole in the cosmos. Chi is the energy in forms of life, so a more specific energy. Love is the highest of the energies of life, so part of chi but not equal to, just like it is part of tao but not equal to.
I hope this makes sense.


lol Seems to me you really need to study the Tao more.

If you look at the anatomy of an atom. You will find that there are neutrons and a protons in the center and electrons, which don't have any mass orbit around them. Now in chemistry class we are lead to believe that the electrons are really close to the nucleus. Newsflash: they are not. 99.9 percent of the atom is empty space in which electrons orbit and by doing that they build and charge an electomagnetic field.

ROFL! What is this? Creation Science? Honestly, this is not REAL science, but rather psuedo science. Please, besides showing love to your fellow man, get a REAL education. I find it very sad that people only have a just enough education to screw with the facts and not an actual comprehension of what really happens.

Try exploring http://www.sciam.com/ They even have a section on "Mind and Brain" too.

Alistair Wiseman said...

mjb said


I have had a near death experience and can tell you first hand that it was the best feeling I ever had. If you have read some of the reports, I'm here to tell you, it's exactly like that. There is a white light which draws you in, your whole life runs like a very fast slide show infront of your eyes. The feeling is that of absolute and perfect harmony as you are ascending through a tunnel toward that light.
I was fully prepared to kiss this life good by and move on, I didn't want to go back. A voice explained to me that my mother and sisters would be devastated and that I have to go back.


I don't mean to burst the bubble there but, if, as you say, you left your body, then everything else has to be incorrect. To see things, you need eyes. Eye's are physical receptors of reflected light. None corporeal entities wouldn't have them. The same goes for ears and hearing a voice. You need an eardrum as a receptor, and a selection of vibrations at a certain frequency, to constitute spoken communication. These are all physical actualities.

The fact is, that no matter how condescending the doc's words might sound, especially to someone who's "experienced" something they deem to be different, they were doubtlessly correct. The detachment you felt is simply a creation of the mind, not unlike those created by people who acquire segmented multiple personalities through trauma, only this is a temporary detachment, while the body recovers and protects the mind from shock. The mind and body are clever things, and although shock can kill, it can also be your saviour. Curiously, in this scenario, it's illusion of having taken spirit form from "death" and then returning to "resurrect" you, maybe allows the term "saviour" to be applied in more than one sense!

Acharya S said...

I just want to interject that I have a different take on mystical experiences, including NDEs, of which I have had a number myself. (I was deathly ill for a significant while once.) I have also had "visions" of "gods" such as "Jesus," "Krishna" and "Buddha."

I do not at all dismiss such experiences as "mere chemistry," although I will agree that everything in the cosmos is essentially a "chemical reaction." The point is, however, that these experiences can be very real in that they are formative; they have an effect on one's psyche. They can motivate behavior. They can change a person utterly.

My take is, however, that even if one has these experiences, one's self-awareness and wisdom dictates that such experiences do not define the "ultimate reality" as it occurs to everyone on the planet or in the cosmos. The "white light" experience, for example, may be "universal" in the sense that it happens to many people - and it certainly has a basis in reality in the sense that it can be a formative experience. Again, I do not dismiss these experiences.

Nevertheless, to claim that such experiences prove the reality of cultural artifacts solidly founded upon planet Earth - such as ethnic, gendered or anthropomorphized faces and forms placed on the Ineffable is sheer folly. Indeed, it is the mark of arrogance and unenlightenment.

In other words, if you have an experience - a vision or "meeting," for example - with a "being," chances are you will put your own cultural conditioning on that entity and then claim that "Jesus" or "Krishna" or "Buddha" are "real." To insist that this experience defines the ultimate reality is arrogant to the point of megalomania. The fact will remain that you have merely - and here that term is appropriate - had an experience within your own limited cultural and personal framework. It is not universal at all. If you had been born 2,500 years ago and had the same experience, you would not have "seen" Jesus at all. You would have interpreted the experience through your then-current cultural framework. If you were in Greece, for instance, you may have thought you "saw" or "heard" Zeus or Hercules. If you were in Egypt, it would likely be Osiris or Isis. Today, if you were in the outskirts of India, you may interpret the entity as Krishna or Ganesha, but surely not Jesus, where he probably would never have been heard of (yet).

Not understanding these facts but conceitedly insisting that your individual, culturally conditioned experience is "the ultimate truth" or that your "pet" god is subsequently proved to be real is not enlightened but is ignorant, because you have not the wisdom to consider that it may very well be mere cultural conditioning. You have never evidently truly considered what I've outlined here as to the reality of the world, which means that your perspective isn't even close to being "universal."

Moreover, visions and the like do not prove that any of these fantastical entities - Jesus, Krishna, Buddha, etc. - have ever truly walked the earth. Such experiences do not at all serve as scientific evidence of such assertions. The fact will remain that, when these stories and traditions, these myths and religious ideations, are investigated scientifically, there remains no credible and valid scientific evidence that they ever took place on planet Earth. Your euphoria simply does not count as "scientific proof."

Mystical experiences are not a problem unless the experiencer is not wise enough to understand the totality of the experience. Then such experiences can be perilous in that they create dogma and intolerance, as well as arrogance, conceit and megalomania.

And it is by precisely this mechanism that many divisive and fascistic religious ideologies have come to be formed - with hideous and decidedly untruthful results.

Mriana said...

Acharya, I'm not saying NDE are not real to the one who preceives them or don't have an effect on the person, I'm just saying they are chemical reactions in the brain. I think I also mentioned that people preceive them according to their religious beliefs.

IF I were to have a NDE, it would probably be very different from most people's, in that I have always "felt" something within myself, nature, animals, even people that has no form, mass, or gender. I don't think it would be a light. If anything, even though it has not been my culture, but given my lifetime concept of "god", it might be very similar to the description Taoists or Shintos give, because that is approximently the closest description of what I perceive that I have found so far. It cannot be physically touched or seen, only a "sixth sense" so to speak picks up on it and has an unusual warmly cold affect (yeah, sounds weird, but I can't find the words for that sensory perception, but it is not negetive. Rather pleasant. Almost like yin/yang, so to speak, hitting you all at once.) and sometimes gives the feelings of transcendence. The Tao is the closest I have come to said experiences, which words cannot do justice, in my life. It is not visually, audially, tactially, olfactorily, tastingly (if that's a word) tangible. It's almost like the wind or to borrow Hebrew words: ruach and nephesh. You can only experience it via it's effects on nature, animals, and humans (including self).

Mind you though, I was repelled by the frightening behaviour of evangelicals and abused by their beliefs as a child, thus I gravitated to the warmth and love of my pets and nature. It was and is innate to me, thus I have not and cannot impose my own views on my children or others concerning my concept of a deity and at times, my views do come across as very atheistic, when in fact, I cannot truly consider myself an atheist, although I get along well with atheists, most of the time.

Thus, I do not believe any NDE I might ever have, would take on any tangible form, like others have experienced, yet it would be very real to me. However, neuro-science explains all these perceptions very well and is indeed, perhaps the reality behind it all, for we are all part of nature and in the end our bodies and brains return to the earth to nourish it. Beyond that, I would never venture to guess any form of an afterlife, for even that is only a human concept and the reality of it is beyond any human concept, IF there is such a thing as an afterlife.

Thus, any single human created religious text is inadequate and is only a human concept. Which brings us right back to people letting go of such texts and return to their own innate perceptions of the possibilities, without putting any words to it. IF there are no words for such experiences, then what is there to fight over? IF we can accept scientific discoveries of both nature and the human brain, then maybe we can come to a better understanding of our innate feelings and senses.

IF that makes any sense at all. I think, science could one day very well stumble upon what the very essence of that experience, which is probably the most very basic chemical found in everything that is within the universe. The source that triggered all life that we know and preceive with our senses, which some attribute to God, instead of "god".

That sounds crazily mystical, but through everything I have studied, it is the best conclusion I can comprehend on a human level.

Anonymous said...

Acharya - that was a fantastic post regarding NDE's. Thanks for posting that. I couldn't agree more.

MJB, throughout your posts here you've repeatedly admitted you're not a biblical scholar, you don't speak/read any ancient languages, you have no formal biblical training to speak of on & on it goes. You have no training in comparative religion, mythology, astrotheology, archaeoastronomy, archaeology - nothing relevant.

Yet, you have yourself convinced that you are an authority on the issue. It amazes me how you have the temerity to presume that that your OPINION based in EUPHORIA and FAITH are all that you need to critique credible credentialed scholars who are well trained in this area of expertise. Your continued belief in your imaginary friend Jesus only demonstrates your total lack of critical thinking.

Your only tactic here is to omit factoids already given to you i.e. that Jesus really wasn't a great example, and that even top Christian authorities well trained in biblical sciences admit that when it comes to evidence for Jesus, they've got NOTHING. You simply omit that and continue to repeat the same errors that are continually repeated for centuries now, making yourself look foolish.

You've been shown contradictory scripture showing Jesus was about anything but peace or love, you deny it. You can't accept the fact that there has never been any *real* evidence for Jesus, you deny it. MJB, you're simply in denial and you don't even know it. You're certainly free to enjoy your imaginary friend to your hearts content but don't be surprised when folks who are not crazy aren't interested.

You probably don't even know who actually wrote the Gospels or when they enter the historical and literary records.

Besides, if Jesus/god were so great than it is totally un-necessary to destroy 2/3rds of the human population as described in "Revelation." It is absurd and demonstrates what Acharya just mentioned perfectly as "Revelation" was written by a person who was having an out of body experience or vision. Suddenly we have all non-believers condemned to death and hell for all eternity.

What a great god that one is...couldn't think of anything more interesting than crimes against humanity (ROLLING EYES IN COMPLETE DISGUST)

22

MJB said...

Good evening to all that dwell here.
I would like to thank everyone for the lenghty comments on my last post.
I can't help but feel that we are sharing here.
I also would like to clarify and touch on a few things of course Time is of the essence, so I will try to keep it to the point.

Let's start with alister, I am so glad you decided to join us. You are thinking and I appreciate that.

You are absolutely right about the hearing. I did not have hearing while I was outside of my physical body. I remember vividly, that as I found myself back in my body, my hearing came back. I could here the doctor talking about my bloodpressure and that I was stabilizing. Good point you are paying attention.
The sight however, I had as clear as day. No doubt about it.
I am glad that you are all familiar with nde's. Like I said before, I read the attempts at explaining it. And they always ice-skate big circles around the birdseye perspective. rather impressive ice-skating and tap-dancing, some with talent others without.
Telling me that I saw my physical body from 10' above looking down on it, and this is all happening in my head, sounds like crazy-talk.
I'm sorry but you don't need a degree in library science to figure that one out.

I also do believe I was misunderstood. I did'nt mean for this to be proof of the existence of Jesus. Just proof of the existence of an essence which is still unmistakenly you, that lives on after you leave your physical body behind. It is also commonly referred to as "the soul"

Since this nde, it was a given to me, not a hypothetical, which I had to read volumes on and long lists of footnotes about.
There is a soul my friends, nothing to be afraid of.
The soul as a given, reincarnation presents itself as a strong case.
Not inconceivable at least.
To me the universe is not mythical, it is as real as you and me. Like Acharya said a chemical reaction. I would like to add on to that, electromagnetical.

Alister, you mentioned non-corporal entities. That is a step in the right direction.
Just because we are now in the flesh, doesn't mean that this is our only exisetence.

Acharya, I am sorry to hear about your deathly illness. I am hoping that you are better now.
Your nde's I would personally be interested to hear about. I understnd that it is a personal matter and would completley understand if you don't want to share it here.
I have one question for you. Maybe you can answer it for me openly or in form of a code if you don't want the world to know:
How tall was Jesus in your nde would you say?

a) 5'-6'

b) 6'-7'

c) 7'-8'


I will understand your response, however you present it.


Back to my nde, it was not euphoria, because that is an incarnate experienc. When there is no more effect of gravity and atmospheric pressure working on your body, you are completly pain free, which in itself is very nice for a change. The terms absolute harmony, at peace with the world, the feeling of being loved, and without any fear, come to mind. Not so much a euphoria which builds up, peaks and declines. It was steady and drawing you in.


Mriana, it is nice to see the softer side, which was previously well guarded.
I see you with your left hand still on the cave wall. I don't want to say that you are not able to see and that is why you are doing that, but I also see you looking at the cave opening with your eyes wide open and great expectations. I'd say you are moving in the right direction.

Crimes on humanity, United Nations anony, you have so much fire in your belly, you could power a medium sized town with that. It would be nice to see that energy in a more constructive, creative way. For example, if you can explain revelations to non-library scientists like me, i would appreciate it, I am the first one to admit that I am not able to decode allot of it.

In general I am gathering that allot of emphasis is on science here in this blog, but isn't that just a snapshot of human development? It changes every day.
Today coffee is good for you, tomorrow it is bad. Today butter is bad for you tomorrow it is good.
The academic, scientific process is always behind the highly dynamic, deloping zeitgeist. It is easier for those that are searching the truth to just open your third eye.

By the way contrary to popular belief, I am not here to evangelize. I am here because I am a seeker of the truth.
That is what I personally would like to talk about.Incarnate or esoteric truth, to me there is no difference.

The truth will set you free my friends.

I just don't understand why Jesus,
a fellow truth seeker is getting such a bad rap here, for no fault of his own.

It is time for me to say good bye for now.

May the Peace and Love of Jesus shine as Light inside you.

MJB

Mriana said...

Telling me that I saw my physical body from 10' above looking down on it, and this is all happening in my head, sounds like crazy-talk.
I'm sorry but you don't need a degree in library science to figure that one out.


No, you need a doctrit in neuroscience to fully comprehend it.

Mriana, it is nice to see the softer side, which was previously well guarded.
I see you with your left hand still on the cave wall. I don't want to say that you are not able to see and that is why you are doing that, but I also see you looking at the cave opening with your eyes wide open and great expectations. I'd say you are moving in the right direction.


I seriously doubt what you are saying, because I do not ascribe to any religious text and the Xian text is not the only one, nor is it the right one. One can be spiritual without believing in the god of religion- any religion- nor do they have to be Xian either. IMHO, one is fully out of the cave once they realize that no religious text is the word of God, but rather the word of man and was inspired by man, not a god. When they are capable of ascribing to their own spirituality and not someone elses.

My eyes are very wide open and I know what god is not. It is not the god of religion that is for sure. It seems arrogant for one to tell another if they are or are not out of the cave, based on their own opinions and judgement. It, IMO, is a sign of a deluded and arrogant mind, which is not an enlightened one, nor is it out of the cave. Once one is out of the cave, they won't have any religious delusions.

In general I am gathering that allot of emphasis is on science here in this blog, but isn't that just a snapshot of human development? It changes every day.

The problem with religion is that it does not change in light of new information. Science doesn't chage as often as every day, but it does change when new information is found- information that is substantiated by empirical testing. Religion doesn't test or question anything and one is forced to believe something that is contrary to reality.

By the way contrary to popular belief, I am not here to evangelize. I am here because I am a seeker of the truth.

You are not seeking truth. You are in fact evangelizing and pimping your Jesus. IF you were seeking truth, then you would not be imposing your Jesus on everyone. That is what offends me most about your comments, along with the deluded arrogance in your posts that is seriously lacking in truth.

May the Peace and Love of Jesus shine as Light inside you.

We have already shown you some of the things that shows Jesus is NOT peace and love, but you continue to give spoon-fed deluded replies. As for the light inside- well this just goes right back to the sun worshipping belief. We don't need another sun god. What we need is real truth, not deluded force fed religious creeds. Science has more truth to it than any single religious book.

Mriana said...

Mriana, it is nice to see the softer side, which was previously well guarded.

BTW, I was not letting my guard down to you or showing you a softer side. I don't see you as deserving "the softer side" of me as you call it.

You see, Acharya doesn't impose her personal spiritual views on anyone. She does not impose any religious ideology on anyone either. Rather she "teaches" the truth behind it all and IF you have studied religions as long as I have, you would see she is right. BTW, the title 'Acharya' comes from Hinduism and means spiritual teacher, Guru, and alike. However, she does not teach by 'telling' people what they should believe, but rather she points in a direction she wishes others to look and explore for themselves. She is open to questions and willing to answer them, but not open to assualts be they verbal or physical. She is not against people researching, questioning, or checking out many sources besides her own.

This is true teaching and actual revealing of truth. Telling a person that they should believe in an actual historical Jesus in NOT revealing truth nor is it allowing for anything else, but rather force feeding people to believe as you believe, which is very offensive. Such attitudes are not worthy of any "softer sides", but rather a wall of seperation to guard against such things as an "Inquisition".

Anonymous said...

All of you here trying to prove Jesus didn't exist are effing morons.

First off give me solid HISTORICAL PROOF that Jesus was in fact a mythical person made from multiple myths and legends (Horus, Mythias, etc..)...the HISTORICAL is obviously in bold. Go see if you can prove that, if you can I will abandon Christianity....

Second, why is it that in the Muslim Surah's Jesus is actually acknowledged as the "son of the living father-God"....why is it also that in the Koran , it is Jesus not Muhammad who will come back again during the 2nc Coming? Why not Muhammad?

Thirdly, people wouldn't just make up a religion on a mythical person. Jesus lived and lives on. He had such a huge impact on this earth that his word is echoed throughout the 4 corners. The Shroud of Turin was at first discredited by the Jews in th 70's as being only 600 years old, but closer and newer scientific research has been proven that the grass and fibers found on the cloth where in fact from the era of Jesus. There are countless other historical artifacts that prove he existed not to mention miraculous (church of the Holy Schulpure where Jesus was born has miraculous ligths during Easter).

And finally, It is interesting that when people seek historic and scientific proof of Jesus, they immediately discount the Bible as a reliable source. If we look at the Bible simply as a historic document, it should be among the most reliable on record compared with others. Historians routinely cite Herodotus as a key source of information. He wrote from 488 B.C. to 428 B.C. and the earliest copy of his work comes from 900 A.D. (1,300 years later). There are only eight known copies of his work. By contrast, the New Testament of the Bible (with all its information about Jesus) was written between 40 A.D. and 100 A.D. The earliest known copy is from 130 A.D. and there are 5,000 known copies in Greek, 10,000 in Latin and 9,300 in other languages. Still, to put to rest the notion that there is no historic and scientific proof of Jesus outside the Bible, we may look to Jewish historian Flavius Josephus and to Roman historian Carius Cornelius Tacitus - both well known and accepted.Tacitus, in writing about accusations that Nero burned the city of Rome and blamed it on Christians, said the following:
". . .Nero procured others to be accused, and inflicted exquisite punishment upon those people, who were in abhorrence for their crimes, and were commonly known by the name of Christians. They had their denomination from Christus (Christ, dm.), who in the reign of Tibertius was put to death as a criminal by the procurator Pontius Pilate. . . .At first they were only apprehended who confessed themselves of that sect; afterwards a vast multitude discovered by them, all of which were condemned, not so much for the crime of burning the city, as for their enmity to mankind. . . ." (Tacitus, Annals, 15, 44).

Anonymous said...

Historical Jesus: The True Record
The “Historical Jesus” movement holds that the Gospels were fabricated or seriously distorted as the stories of Jesus evolved into the late 1st or early 2nd century. However, this theory is not supported by the evidence. Time and again the New Testament writers claim to be eyewitnesses to the facts, giving detailed geographic, political and cultural details to bolster the record. All of the manuscript evidence presented above is dramatic, because it establishes that basic Christian doctrine developed far too quickly for a myth to intervene and distort the historical record, especially when so many witnesses were still alive to contradict the alleged errors or myths.

Anonymous said...

I think the problem with America and Americans is their interpretation of what a Christian really is. The problem is Evangelism and Fundamentalist America. Its killing the true meaning of Christianity and I don't like it. I suggest that the author and all the other skeptics should turn off their Evangelical channels in disgust and read the Bible by themselves...

Anonymous said...

THE TOP TEN ARCHAEOLOGICAL DISCOVERIES FOR EXCAVATING JESUS
By John Dominic Crossan and Jonathan L. Reed
BeliefNet
Wednesday, September 24, 2003

http://secure.agoramedia.com/index_jesus3.asp?promo=6F4BA31E-7423-4988-8D79-
4CDAD7A09F2A&email=

The top ten archaeological discoveries involve both specific objects and
general places. The first five items listed are specific objects -- with
direct links to gospel texts -- that also encapsulate major aspects of their
contemporary worlds. The next five are pairs. In each case the tandems point
to a specific phenomenon more visible in the pairing than in either one
alone: the Roman-Herodian kingdom atop the Jewish homeland, the urbanization
of Galilee, Jewish resistance to Rome, Jewish village life, and especially
Jewish religion as indicated by purity observances. The last item is a set
whose importance is internally and externally cumulative. The set's
significance arises not from any single example or even from any single
category alone, but from the number of cases in each category and from those
categories combined.


1. THE OSSUARY OF THE HIGH PRIEST JOSEPH CAIAPHAS

http://inside.bard.edu/religion/facultyproj/temple/image_collection/imagea5.
htm

In November 1990, construction workers building near a water park in the
Peace Forest, south of Jerusalem's Old City between the Haas Tayelet and Abu
Tor, broke through a burial cave sealed since the Roman war in 70 C.E. On an
otherwise ornately decorated ossuary, a box hewn of soft limestone in which
bones of the deceased were reburied after the flesh decomposed, the name
Caiaphas was crudely scratched in Aramaic. His name, and the names of family
interred with him, make it clear that the small shaft tomb was the family
resting place for the high priest Caiaphas, mentioned by name in Mathew 26
and John 18 for his role in the crucifixion. This is a direct link to the
gospel stories of Jesus' execution.


2. THE INSCRIPTION OF THE PREFECT PONTIUS PILATE

http://www.kchanson.com/ANCDOCS/latin/pilate.html

In 1962 Italian archaeologists, clearing sand and overgrowth from the ruined
theater at Caesarea Maritima, longtime seat of Roman power on the eastern
Mediterranean shore, uncovered an inscription bearing the name of Pontius
Pilate. Turned upside down and reused in the theater's renovation in the
fourth century C.E., it was hidden and preserved up to the present. The
Latin inscription boasts that Pilate had dedicated a Tiberium, a public
structure built in honor of the Roman emperor Tiberius, just as the city
itself had been built to honor his predecessor, Caesar Augustus. The
inscription settled scholarly quibbles over Pilate's exact title and ruling
authority by naming him a perfect rather than an inferior procurator, but
was more celebrated as the first physical witness to such a prominent New
Testament figure.


3. THE HOUSE OF THE APOSTLE PETER AT CAPERNAUM

http://www.bibleplaces.com/capernaum.htm

Octagonal ruins on land in Franciscan custody at Capernaum were first
discovered in 1906. It was the Byzantine church converted from "the house of
the chief of the apostles" written about by ancient pilgrims. From 1968 to
1985 the Franciscan archaeologists Virgilio Corbo and Stanislao Loffreda
worked in and around that octagonal structure and excavated its complex
layers. An octagonal church was built in the fifth century C.E. atop a house
church dating to the fourth century, which lay atop a simple courtyard house
initially constructed in the first century B.C.E. Striking examples of
Christian invocations in Aramaic, Hebrew, Greek, Latin, and Syriac had been
scratched into the plaster of one room as early as the second century C.E.
Because it lacked any domestic artifacts and had been replastered several
times, the first generations of Christians must have deemed the room of some
significance. The excavator's conclusion: It was the house of the apostle
Peter.


4. THE FISHING BOAT FROM THE SEA OF GALILEE

http://www.mfa.gov.il/mfa/go.asp?MFAH0gc00

Severe droughts in the mid-1980s caused a dramatic drop in the Sea of
Galilee's water level. When it was at its lowest level in January 1986, two
members of Kibbutz Ginnosar noticed the outlines of boats buried in the mid
of the newly uncovered shore. The water and mud preserved the boat for the
Israel Antiquities Authority archaeologists, but once it was exposed,
conservators raced against time and the rising waters to save it. An
improvised dike and water pumps held off the rising tide, and a plaster
casing then floated the boat ashore. Today the 8-by-26-foot boat lies in a
climate-controlled facility at the kibbutz. Pots and lamps within the boat
dated it to the first century C.E., and the carbon-14 dating on the wooden
planks confirmed that date. It was a boat from the time of Jesus, the type
commonly used for fishing or crossing the lake. It could certainly hold
thirteen people. It is now usually called the "Jesus Boat".


5. THE SKELETON OF THE CRUCIFIED YEHOCHANAN

http://www.tfba.org/finds.php

In June 1968 Vassilios Tzaferis of the Israel Antiquities Authority
excavated some burial caves northeast of Jerusalem, at a place called Givat
Hamivtar. Within the necropolis, a first-century C.E. rock-hewn family tomb
with five ossuaries was discovered, one of which contained the bones of two
men and a young child. The right heel bone of one of the men, 5 feet, 5
inches tall and in his mid-twenties, had been pierced by a 4-1/2 inch nail.
A small wooden board had been nailed to the outside of his heel to prevent
him from tearing his leg off the nail's small head. But the nail had bent as
it was hammered into the hard olive-wood upright of the cross and could not
be easily removed after his death, so it and wooden board were still
attached to his body when taken off the cross. His arms had been tied, not
nailed, to the crossbar and his legs were not broken. Contrary to common
practice, his body was allowed off the cross for proper family burial. The
ossuary contained the name of the deceased, Yehochanan (Hebrew and Aramaic
for John), the Crucified Man.


6. CAESAREA MARITIMA AND JERUSALEM: CITIES OF HEROD THE GREAT

Over twenty years of excavations at Caesarea Maritima
http://digcaesarea.org/ and more than that around the Temple in Jerusalem
http://www.bibleplaces.com/southerntm.htm have unearthed enough artifacts
to fill museums and tax the storage capacities of the Israel Antiquities
Authority. The most striking finds, however, are the enormous monumental
structures built by Herod the Great (37-4 B.C.E.), the architectural legacy
of his kingdom building. Caesarea Maritima, on the one hand, was transformed
from a tranquil beach without a natural harbor or fresh-water source into
the eastern Mediterranean's busiest and most modern port. Adorned with a
magnificent temple housing statues of the emperor Augustus and the goddess
Roma, the city itself was named in honor of Caesar. At Jerusalem, on the
other had, Herod beautified and expanded the Jewish Temple. He made the
Temple Mount the largest monumental platform in the Roman Empire; and with
massive finely cut and carefully squared stones, striking porticoes, and
decorated columns, he made what ancient eyewitnesses describe as the most
beautiful structure ever seen. These joint projects show both his loyalty to
Rome and his dedication to the Jewish God, but above all else they were a
tribute to himself and his kingdom.


7. SEPPHORIS AND TIBERIAS: CITIES OF HEROD ANTIPAS

SEPPHORIS:
http://www.centuryone.org/sepphoris-site.html

TIBERIAS:
http://digtiberias.org/excavation.htm

Like his father, Herod Antipas rules as a client of Rome (4 B.C.E. - 39
C.E.), not as a king, but as an inferior tetrarch, and not over all the
Jewish homeland, but only over Galilee and Perea. Like his father, he built
cities, but neither on the scale nor with the grandeur of his father. Herod
Antipas was neither as rich nor as powerful as Herod the Great. But he
urbanized Galilee with the building of Sepphoris and Tiberias, the latter
named in honor of the Roman emperor. Although Tiberias today is a sprawling
seaside resort that permits only limited excavation, the ancient ruins of
Sepphoris lie uninhabited and have been excavated by as many as four teams
over the past decades. Spectacular discoveries such as a Roman-style
theater, a massive underground aqueduct, and the Dionysiac mosaic,
discoveries from throughout the Roman period, raise the question of the
extent to which Antipas had earlier imposed a Greco-Roman architectural
veneer onto the life of the Jewish population, and the impact of his kingdom
building in Galilee. Sepphoris was, after all, only 4 miles from Jesus'
hometown, Nazareth.


8. MASADA AND QUMRAN: MONUMENTS OF JEWISH RESISTANCE

MASADA:
http://www.busstop.org/birthright/09/image27.htm

QUMRAN:
http://www.loc.gov/exhibits/scrolls/intr.html

Two sites off the remote and desolate western shore of the Dead Sea
excavated in the 1950s and 1960s, respectively, bear witness to Jewish
resistance against Rome in the first century C.E Masada, a clifftop
fortress-palace built by Herod the Great, was taken over by the Jewish
Sicarii at the beginning of the revolt in 66 C.E and fell to the Roman
legions some four years after the Temple's destruction in 70 C.E
Archaeology's discovery of Roman siege works and the Jewish historian
Josephus's story of the Sicarii's suicide vividly illustrate their violent
resistance to Roman domination. A monastery complex built by a Jewish sect
atop a marl terrace, Khirbet Qumran preserves the ruins of a different kind
of resistance, communal and nonviolent, where withdrawal, study, and purity
were weapons against foreign influences and moral decay. Both sites are
monuments of Jewish resistance.


9. GAMLA AND JODEFAT: FIRST-CENTURY JEWISH VILLAGES IN THE NORTH

http://faculty.smu.edu/dbinder/gamla.html

Two villages, one atop a knoll in Lower Galilee, and the other atop a ridge
in the Golan Heights to the east, were destroyed by Roman legions in 67 C.E
and lay buried and undisturbed until Israeli archaeologists excavated them
this past century. Aside from confirming their catastrophic ends as recorded
by Josephus, Moti Aviam at Jodefat and Shmarya Gutmann at Gamla exposed
frail defenses and unearthed daily life in these two Jewish sites. Neither
sites are mentioned in the gospels, so no commemorative church, monastery,
or shrine was ever built on top of either of them. This ironically,
preserved until now an archaeological snapshot of Jewish life.


10. STONE VESSELS AND STEPPED, PLASTERED POOLS: JEWISH RELIGION.

Stone vessels of varying shapes and sizes, carved or lathe-turned from soft
white chalk stone, along with stepped and plastered pools chiseled into
bedrock, called miqwaoth (singular, miqweh) and referred to in this book as
ritual baths, are both found wherever Jews lived in Galilee as well as
around Jerusalem in Judea. These particular items signaled Jewishness to
their contemporaries and identified them as a distinct people. Both stone
vessels and ritual baths are connected to Jewish purity concerns. Neither of
these artifacts is prominent in the gospels, although stone vessels are
mentioned anecdotally in the story of the wedding in Cana (John 2:6). But
their prevalence in the archaeological layers of that era tells us much
about what was taken for granted in the gospels concerning Jewish religion
and Jewish distinctiveness at the time of Jesus.

Those ten discoveries, and all others yet to come, must be placed in their
total archaeological environment. Remember, sometimes a find becomes a great
discovery through the items found nearby, a tiny bronze coin beside it, or
several sherds of broken pottery beneath it. Such apparently valueless
items, within their full comparative charting alongside all other ancient
coins and ceramics, date the item in question and put in a context that
makes it not just one more discovery, but one of the top ten for the moment.

OBVIOUSLY THERE"s NO PHYSICAL PROOF OF JESUS SINCE HE RESURRECTED...BUT THE AUTHOR MAY AS WELL CLOSE THIS PAGE. SHE'S BEEN PWND.

Anonymous said...

The evidence for the existence of Jesus is incontrovertible. Even His enemies agree. The Jews made reference to Him in their Talmud, a companion to their Scriptures. The Jewish historian Josephus, an eyewitness to these things, wrote about him. So did Mohammed when writing the Koran. According to a Time magazine cover story Buddhist documents contain reference to Him.

Scholars who've set out to prove once and for all that Jesus didn't exist have been forced by the evidence to change their minds, often becoming believers in the process. The most famous of these are C.S. Lewis, Josh MacDowell and Simon Greenleaf, a legendary Harvard law professor who "wrote the book" on admissible courtroom evidence. Applying his own rules to the gospels, he concluded that Jesus had to have existed.

There are over 5000 historical source documents to support the validity of the New Testament, much more than any other ancient book. All the Gospels were published within the lifetimes of eyewitnesses, and yet there's no record of anyone ever refuting their veracity.

The Romans tried for 250 years to stamp out Christianity before accepting it as their state religion. By that time the New Testament had been a published fact for two centuries.

The Bible recounts a 6000 year history of God first saying He'll do something and then doing it. We call it prophecy, and the secular history books are full of proof of its validity. He did this so that you and I could be absolutely certain of His existence, if we just took the time to look for Him.

And most obviously of all, the Creation shouts evidence of His existence. Even good science agrees that this could not have happened spontaneously.

But let's disregard all that. If I'm wrong and Jesus didn't exist, all I've done with my life is try to live a little better, helping out some others now and then, and when I die I'll go to the destiny that was always mine.

But if you're wrong, when you die you'll learn that you could have had an eternal life of joy and happiness, and missed out simply because you refused to look into it.

Psalm 53 begins, The fool says in his heart, "There is no God." Saying something in your heart means saying it from an emotional perspective. Even a fool can't deny God on a logical basis. The evidence for His existence is simply too overwhelming.

Mriana said...

Anonymous said...
All of you here trying to prove Jesus didn't exist are effing morons.

First off give me solid HISTORICAL PROOF that Jesus was in fact a mythical person made from multiple myths and legends (Horus, Mythias, etc..)...the HISTORICAL is obviously in bold. Go see if you can prove that, if you can I will abandon Christianity....


I have not personally tried to prove the non-existance of Jesus directly, but since you are asking for information I'll point you to something interesting. While you may not call it solid proof, I'll repost what I posted on CFI:

Since I’m studying for a final that includes the Buddha, here’s a run down of comparasions at my fingertips (From A Concise Introduction to World Religions: 1. he sits in the heavens where he waits until the earth needs a new buddha. (Yes, you could argue the last line makes it null and void if you want, but when the time is right, according to the Rapturist, Jesus sits up there until the time is right to return- paraphrasing. Not much different in my opinion.)

Comparing his birth 2. The night he was a born, a bright light illuminated the world, marking the holy event. 3. Both are conceived miraculously without sexual intercourse. (Here again it mentions the king had taken a vow of celibacy). 4. Both infants are born outside a house- Buddha in a grove and Jesus in a stable. 5. I’ve mentioned the bright light already, but they also both had sages foretell the infants’ future greatness. 6. In both cases the births are announced by angels.

Childhood into adulthood:

1. Few events are recorded (no big deal really) 2. The impresses his first teacher with his knowledge, Jesus impresses the rabbi at the temple with his knowledge/wisdom 3. When he’s 30 he begins a journey, which leads him to eventually gain disciples and teaching others. 4. He sits under a bodhi tree (wilderness for Jesus) Mara, the lord of death, plays a role not unlike that of Satan in Christianity. Mara attempts to tempt the Bodhisattva (eventually Buddha) to give up his mission. Mara tempts him with aspects of what the Christians refer to as sins, and finally offers to grant him any worldly wish. Doesn’t work of course. This continues for a month (Jesus’s 30 days and 30 nights) until the Bodhisattva works a miracle: the earthquake drives Mara away. 5. there was a night with three watches (Jesus in the Garden) and the third was just before dawn where he reaches total insight (Jesus reached insight before the night was over too).

OK you are getting the idea here and probably will brush it off, but be that as it may, my questions still stand: Why not one of the other greats of lore? Why Jesus, esp when many of the stories have the same outline/template?

I posted something similar on Acharya's board too concerning the Buddha. You can read the Acts of Buddha for a lot of this info too.

Second, why is it that in the Muslim Surah's Jesus is actually acknowledged as the "son of the living father-God"....why is it also that in the Koran , it is Jesus not Muhammad who will come back again during the 2nc Coming? Why not Muhammad?

Obviously you have not actually read the Quran to see it is a bastardization of Hebrew literature.

Thirdly, people wouldn't just make up a religion on a mythical person.

Yes they would and have many times over. Let's take the story of Isis and Horus, which is another template of the Jesus story. Isis and Horus never really lived, yet they made a religion around them along with others in the story. Even Native Americans have stories about mythical characters in their Creation/first man stories. Even they know these people were never ever real, but of myth. It s a bit naive to think humans would not make up a religion around a myth, when it has happened many times over in human history.

There are countless other historical artifacts that prove he existed not to mention miraculous (church of the Holy Schulpure where Jesus was born has miraculous ligths during Easter).

The Buddha preformed a few miracles of his own- ie an earthquake. Horus did too (see the The Coffin Texts and The Egyptian Book of the Dead. Let's not forget the Norse gods, which have similar templates too.

And finally, It is interesting that when people seek historic and scientific proof of Jesus, they immediately discount the Bible as a reliable source. If we look at the Bible simply as a historic document, it should be among the most reliable on record compared with others.

It's not. There are many historical errors and even supposed history not recorded else where, not even among the Hebrews. See this article for a whole lot more info: http://www.americanhumanist.org/humanism/thebible.html (Specifically the section, which is in bold, called: Inaccurate Statements About History).

I am sadden when people delude themselves so much in because they desire so much to believe in a "saviour". If they were to do some actual research and study of even current religions, they would see Christianity isn't much different from other religions, not even their main people of worship. Even a research concerning Vishnu and Shiva would point to a remaking of stories, and even a combination of stories.

Mriana said...

Anonymous said...
Historical Jesus: The True Record
The “Historical Jesus” movement holds that the Gospels were fabricated or seriously distorted as the stories of Jesus evolved into the late 1st or early 2nd century. However, this theory is not supported by the evidence.


Yes, a thorough research of various religions, both past and present can show this. It might not be supported by convincing evidence, esp nay-sayers who cling to the story of Jesus, but the sad fact is, it is a remake of many pervious stories. The geographical info is not entirely accurate either.

I suggest that the author and all the other skeptics should turn off their Evangelical channels in disgust and read the Bible by themselves....

Let me add that it would be beneficial to read other religious texts too. Not just the Bible.

I'm not an archeologist, so I'll let Acharya deal with the so called archeological findings. I am a novice religious scholar, as I said somewhere before and that maybe a bit modest.

Scholars who've set out to prove once and for all that Jesus didn't exist have been forced by the evidence to change their minds, often becoming believers in the process. The most famous of these are C.S. Lewis, Josh MacDowell and Simon Greenleaf, a legendary Harvard law professor who "wrote the book" on admissible courtroom evidence. Applying his own rules to the gospels, he concluded that Jesus had to have existed.

C. S. Lewis was never truly an atheist nor was he an actual scholar of religion. He was an apologist, but not an actual religious scholar. Every one you listed was never a religious scholar. They may have been a scholar of mythology or other fields, but in the end, after they converted, they adhered to the Christian text, not ever venturing out to study other current religious texts.

OBVIOUSLY THERE"s NO PHYSICAL PROOF OF JESUS SINCE HE RESURRECTED...BUT THE AUTHOR MAY AS WELL CLOSE THIS PAGE. SHE'S BEEN PWND.

You don't have to yell and no she has not been PWND (whatever that means). See Bishop John Shelby Spong's book (since you seem to rely solely on theologians) The Resurrection: Myth or Reality. He attempts to show it was not a reality, but rather a spiritual resurrection. Even he sees it as myth, but one that can be influentual in people's lives. In that book, he even discusses or at least mentions the previous myths with resurrected deities. He's not oblivious to them and neither is Tom Harpur, another Anglican.

Josephus was never an eyewitness and neither was Mohammud. Things were added to Josephus work to cover the fact that Jesus was never an actual person. Mohammud came 500 years AFTER Christianity.

But if you're wrong, when you die you'll learn that you could have had an eternal life of joy and happiness, and missed out simply because you refused to look into it.

Acharya and I have never refused to look into it. In fact, we've both done a lot of research and study- her more so than I have. Regardless, I am not worried, because any deity worth it's salt will look upon the heart, not what they believed with their mind because they were told to believe or else. I live my life in ways to better myself and doing good, kind things with compassion for others. I do not do these things in expectation of a reward or punishment. I do them from the goodness of my heart out of compassion for others (including animals). Even the Good Samaritan did similarly. He did not help the other person in any expection of reward or punishment, completely and solely out of the goodness of heart.

I am no better or worse than the man in that story and IF the god you speak of is worth its salt, it will see that. IF it is truly male, than forgive the desexing of it, but IMO, IF there is a god, it has no gender or even form what so ever. I truly believe if you were to research other religions, you will find not only is your god not the true god, for there are many even today, but it is not necessarily the right god. I believe you will find that the idea of god is truly a human concept and nothing more.

Mriana said...

Here is one more thing to consider for those of you who truly believe the Jesus story is not a myth:

I have shown the outline of the Buddha story. Buddhists acknowledge the mythical story about the Bodhisattva/Buddha is a myth, but there was also a real Buddha. The miraculous story about the Buddha is a mythicalization of the actual Buddha, according to them. OK there have been many men with the title of Bodhisattva and Buddha. That is not deniable, so there might have been a great man with that title.

Given the myths have the same outline, it would not hurt to consider the fact that there have been many Jesuses. That is a fact. Jesus, like Joshua, means the saviour. It is a title. Like wise, Christ, Kristo/Christo(s), Krishna is 'the anointed'. It is a title. Regardless of what you want to believe, there is a more than likely possibility, that the story you know about Jesus, is actually a mythicalization of man that was thought to be great and started a new religious movement, much like the founder of Buddhism- Shakyamuni Buddha. Buddha was not his real last name, but a title. The thing is, if that happened to the founder of Christianity, we will never know the truth of his life, because people have chosen the mythical version because it is more amazing than the actual truth.

This is not a denial of a man behind the story, but pointing to a senerio like the Buddha. Any number of the actual Jesuses (for simplicity and a means to share see: http://www.jesusneverexisted.com/surfeit.htm There is a list of Jesuses there, not to mention Jesus Barrabas, and the Jesus who wrote "The Infancy of Jesus" and his grandson Jesus translated.

IMHO, it is worth considering the good possibility that the story of Jesus is a mythicalization of one or all of the other Jesuses or even a person who wasn't even actually named Jesus using the template of other mythical characters and the reality of his (whatever the name was) life is far less impressive, even to start a new religious movement. Thus, what you know is not the actual truth of any real man, but a means to impress people, esp Pagans and alike group, to join the new cult, which eventually became a movement of force (see Rome, burning of Alexandria, Inquisition, Crusades, etc), which eventually buried a lot of info and led to what many believe today and with the use of many apologists brushing off the fact that all the other myths have the same templates, with various excuses, such as "The devil beat God to it to fool us." *rolling eyes* Such statements are bogus and impose great superstition in order to keep people from even questioning the religion and its texts.

Anonymous said...

Are Jesus and Buddha Brothers?

If so, there’s a serious family feud.

"When you are a truly happy Christian, you are also a Buddhist. And vice versa." So concludes best-selling author and Buddhist monk Thich Hhat Hanh near the end of his popular book Living Buddha, Living Christ.

Some Catholics agree. For example, Jesuit Father Robert E. Kennedy, a Roshi (Zen master), holds Zen retreats at Morning Star Zendo in Jersey City. He states on his web site: "I ask students to trust themselves and to develop their own self-reliance through the practice of Zen." The St. Francis Chapel at Santa Clara University hosts the weekly practice of "mindfulness and Zen meditation." Indeed, the number of Buddhist retreats and workshops being held at Catholic monasteries and parishes is growing.

Similarly, controversial New Testament scholar Marcus J. Borg writes in Jesus and Buddha: The Parallel Sayings, "Jesus and the Buddha were teachers of wisdom," contending that "wisdom is not just about moral behavior, but about the ‘center,’ the place from which moral perception and moral behavior flow." Jesus and Buddha proclaimed a "world-subverting wisdom," Borg writes, "that undermined and challenged conventional ways of seeing and being in their time and in every time." He notes that both men spoke about "the way" and concludes, "Thus both were teachers of the way less traveled. ‘Way’ or ‘path’ imagery is central to both bodies of teaching."

But are these two "ways" really as compatible as Hanh, Kennedy, Borg, and others believe? What similarities and differences are there between the historical persons and teachings of Jesus and Buddha? Can we agree with Hanh that people should be able to have "both the Buddha and Jesus within their life"?

Buddhism Boom

Buddhism is the fourth largest religion in the world, with about 370 million adherents. Although less than 1 percent of Americans identify themselves as Buddhist, interest in this ancient belief system is growing. There are more Buddhist texts in major bookstores than works dedicated to Islam or Hinduism, and there has been a steady stream of articles and books by and about the Dalai Lama in recent years.

Since the 1960s, the influence of Buddhist thought in some Catholic circles has become increasingly evident. After the Second Vatican Council’s call for respectful interreligious dialogue, many Catholics—including some priests and religious—fully embraced the study of Buddhism. Much was made of the "common characteristics" of Catholicism and Buddhism, particularly in the realm of ethics. External similarities (including monks, meditation, and prayer beads) seemed to indicate newly discovered commonalties between the followers of Christ and Buddha. While some edifying dialogue took place, some Catholics mistakenly concluded that Buddhism was just as true as Christianity and that any criticism of Buddhism was merely "triumphalistic."

Today it is not uncommon for Catholic retreat centers to offer classes and lectures on Zen Buddhism, Christ and Buddha, and even "Zen Catholicism." Their bookstores feature titles such as Zen Spirit, Christian Spirit: The Place of Zen in Christian Life; Jesus and Buddha: The Parallel Sayings; and Going Home: Jesus and Buddha As Brothers, wherein comparisons are made between Christian and Buddhist mysticism, at times suggesting that the two are essentially identical in character and intent.

As one self-proclaimed "Christian Buddhist," John Malcomson, explains, "People often ask me how I could think of myself as a Christian Buddhist. The simple answer is that I don’t see God as separate from me." Rather, he states, "God is within me as God is within all things."

Open-Minded Alternative?

Malcomson is just one of a growing number of Christians drawn to Buddhism. In Crossing the Threshold of Hope, John Paul II notes, "Today we are seeing a certain diffusion of Buddhism in the West." What makes this diffusion possible, and why is Buddhism attractive to so many?

Buddhism offers spiritual vitality in the midst of the emptiness of secular life, gives the promise of inner peace, and meets the desire for an explicit moral code. In his classic study Buddhism: Its Essence and Development, Edward Conze writes, "To a person who is thoroughly disillusioned with the contemporary world, and with himself, Buddhism may offer many points of attraction, in the transcending sublimity of the fairy land of its subtle thoughts, in the splendor of its works of art, in the magnificence of its hold over vast populations, and in the determined heroism and quiet refinement of those who are steeped in it."

Another appeal is the non-dogmatic and ostensibly open-minded character of Buddhism. For those who reject the dogmatic, objective claims of Christianity or hold that Christianity should avoid an "exclusive" approach to truth, Buddhism offers an easier alternative. Buddhists teach that they do not practice a religion, a philosophy, or a type of science but rather a way of life that cannot be explained by or contained within any categories used in traditional Western thought. What makes Buddhism so "open-minded," though, is that its teachings are deliberately ambiguous.

Put another way, Buddhism transcends notions of "religion" or "belief" and so can appear compatible with Christianity. In an interview with Beliefnet.com, the Dalai Lama stated, "According to different religious traditions, there are different methods. . . . For example, a Christian practitioner may meditate on God’s grace, God’s infinite love. This is a very powerful concept in order to achieve peace of mind. A Buddhist practitioner may be thinking about relative nature and also Buddha-nature. This is also very useful."

In other words, Christianity and Buddhism are two ways to the same end; Jesus and Buddha are two enlightened teachers who help man to that end. Or, as a reader on a Christian discussion forum stated, "Buddha was just a philosopher who urged men to be selfless. Jesus was just a philosopher who urged men to be selfless. Love is just another word for selfless." Such easy parallels between Christ and Buddha, unfortunately, are misleading and distort the teachings of Christ.

Buddha Basics

Buddha (c. 563–c. 483 B.C.), born Siddhartha Gautama, was the son of an Indian king. Around the age of thirty, he left his privileged life in court to become an ascetic and spent several years traveling and meditating on the human condition, considering especially the reality of suffering. One day, meditating beneath a bodhi tree, he became enlightened (buddha means "enlightened one") and afterward began to teach his dharma, or doctrine, of the Four Noble Truths.

The Four Noble Truths are these:

1. Life is suffering.
2. The cause of suffering is desire.
3. To be free from suffering, we must detach from desire.
4. The "eight-fold path" is the way to alleviate desire.

The eight-fold path consists of right views, right intentions, right speech, and right actions along with livelihood, effort, mindfulness, and concentration.

The final goal of Buddhism is not merely to eradicate desire but to be free of suffering.

Buddha also taught the "three characteristics of being":

1. All things are transitory.
2. There is no self or personality.
3. This world brings only pain and suffering.

Based on these characteristics, Buddhism asserts that to accept the existence of anything is to give birth to its opposite (e.g., love and hate, joy and fear, etc.), which results in the duality of "good" and "bad." Nirvana—literally, "extinguishing a flame"—is the extinction of self and the escape from the cycle of reincarnation.

While Buddhism allows belief in an afterlife, such an allowance is called upaya, an expedient means to a real end. Upaya allows belief to exist as a means to an end; all belief, including that of Buddhism, is merely a construction. According to the logic of upaya, Christianity is allowable as a stage toward spiritual progression, leading eventually to the extinction of self, or nirvana.

The term dharma is difficult to define. One meaning implies the teachings of Buddha or doctrine/law. Ultimately, though, all dharma is provisional; it is simply a means that is without real meaning. Peter Harvey, in his Introduction to Buddhism, says that "one dharma cannot ultimately be distinguished from another: the notion of the ‘sameness’ of dharmas. Their shared ‘nature’ is ‘emptiness’ (sangata). As the Heart Sutra says, ‘Whatever is material shape, that is emptiness, and whatever is emptiness, that is material shape.’" In other words, dharma is itself illusory.

Sometimes it is said that Buddhism is atheistic, yet Buddhism is not interested in the question of God, so it is more accurate to describe it as practically atheistic or simply agnostic. Buddhism "works" whether or not there is a God. A Buddhist allows others to believe in God or gods, but such beliefs are merely convenient means to the final end, which has nothing to do with God or gods.

"God is neither affirmed nor denied by Buddhism," wrote the Trappist monk Thomas Merton in Mystics and Zen Masters, "insofar as Buddhists consider such affirmations and denials to be dualistic, therefore irrelevant to the main purpose of Buddhism, which is emancipation from all forms of dualistic thought." This is captured well in the sutras (scriptures), which state that to escape desire one must "not become attached to existence nor to non-existence, to anything inside or outside, neither to good things nor to bad things, neither to right nor wrong." In Buddhism, all distinctions must be extinguished; even enlightenment has no definite nature.

What’s the Purpose?

Despite many external similarities, Buddhist meditation and contemplation is quite different from orthodox Christianity. Buddhist meditation strives to "wake" a person from his existential delusions. "Therefore, despite similar aspects, there is a fundamental difference" between Christian and Buddhist mysticism, writes Pope John Paul II. "Christian mysticism . . . is not born of a purely negative ‘enlightenment.’ It is not born of an awareness of the evil that exists in man’s attachment to the world through the senses, the intellect, and the spirit. Instead, Christian mysticism is born of the revelation of the living God" (Crossing the Threshold of Hope).

The Buddhist mystic seeks absorption into an impersonal whole, looking to rid himself of desire and suffering. The Christian mystic, on the other hand, desires neither the loss of personality nor an impersonal oneness with all but a deep and abiding communion with the Triune and personal God.

Jean Cardinal Daniélou, known for his study of Eastern religions, explains in God and the Ways of Knowing that "mystical knowledge partakes in the life of the Trinity. It is the realization by man of his deepest being, of what God meant to achieve in creating him."

For the Christian mystic, there is an object (the loving and merciful God) and a growth in the salvific life of grace, leading to everlasting life. On the other hand, the Buddhist sutras state that the "categories of everlasting life and death, and existence and non-existence, do not apply to the essential nature of things but only to their appearances as they are observed by defiled human eyes." Buddhism resists existential possibility; Christianity affirms it.

Catholics believe that the Church is the Bride of Christ, the seed of the kingdom of God, and the conduit of God’s grace and mercy in the world. Buddhists believe that church, or sangha, is in the end upaya—nothing more than the expedient means to final extinction.

Rather than the Beatific Vision, Buddhist teaching holds that non-existence is the only hope for escaping the pains of life.

The Catholic Church teaches that although suffering is not part of God’s perfect plan, it can bring us closer to Christ and unite us more intimately with our suffering Lord. Buddhism teaches that suffering must be escaped from; indeed, this is a central concern of Buddhism. Christianity is focused on worshiping God, holiness, and the restoration of right relationships between God and man through the work of Jesus. The Buddhist, on the other hand, is not concerned with whether or not God exists, nor does he offer worship. Instead, he seeks his own nirvana.

Catholicism believes that truth, and the Author of truth, can be known rationally (to a significant yet limited extent) and through divine revelation. In contrast, Buddhism denies existential reality; nothing, including the self, can be proven to exist. As the dharma states: "Things are like illusion; they can be said neither to be existent nor non-existent."

Attracting Hungry Souls

Fr. Romano Guardini, in his classic work The Lord, stated his belief that Buddha would be the greatest challenge to Christ in the modern age. Such an assertion may appear somewhat exaggerated in our age, but Buddhist teachings seriously threaten Christianity’s central doctrines. Because it appears to be peaceful, non-judgmental, and inclusive, its appeal undoubtedly will continue to grow. Buddhism’s refusal to articulate dharma in logical ways and its comfortable insistence on a relativistic approach to knowledge and truth makes dialogue quite difficult. Because it offers a spirituality that is ostensibly free of doctrine and authority, it will attract hungry souls looking for fulfillment and meaning. "For this reason," the Holy Father states, "it is not inappropriate to caution those Christians who enthusiastically welcome certain ideas originating in the religious traditions of the Far East."

Vatican II’s Nostra Aetate (Declaration on the Relationship of the Church to Non-Christian Religions) says, "Buddhism, in its various forms, realizes the radical insufficiency of this changeable world; it teaches a way by which men, in a devout and confident spirit, may be able either to acquire the state of perfect liberation or attain, by their own efforts or through higher help, supreme illumination." It continues, noting that "the Catholic Church rejects nothing that is true and holy in these religions" and believes that other religions, in certain ways, "often reflect a ray of that Truth that enlightens all men."

But the document also insists that the Church "proclaims, and ever must proclaim Christ ‘the way, the truth, and the life’ (John 14:6), in whom men may find the fullness of religious life, in whom God has reconciled all things to himself" (NA 2). While the Council noted that Buddhism may contain a "ray of Truth," it did not endorse appropriation of Buddhist beliefs into Christian practice. Rather, the Council insisted that non-Catholic religions can be fulfilled only through the truths held exclusively by the Catholic faith.

The perennial teachings of the Catholic Church and the Buddhist sangha are inherently incompatible. Whereas God remains completely other, distinct from his creation, higher Buddhist discourse rejects the possibility of any such duality. There can be no Creator/creature distinction in Buddhism.

From an apologetic perspective, dialogue with a Buddhist is hindered almost from the start, as the two great philosophical tools of Christianity—ontology and epistemology—are discarded in Buddhist discourse. That is, if existence itself is untenable, how can creation be proven? If creation is untenable, how can God be proven to exist? So it is vital when entering into dialogue with a Buddhist to understand Buddhist objections to Christian beliefs. In the end, we should remember that the Council of Nicaea taught that men must have one thing before truly becoming a member of the body of Christ: faith.

Shortly before the Holy Father’s visit to St. Patrick’s Cathedral in 1979, the Dalai Lama was greeted there. A monsignor in the receiving line recalls his encounter with the Buddhist patriarch: The Dalai Lama approached him, gazed into his eyes, and queried, "Father, do you know the difference between you and me?"

"No, Your Holiness," replied the monsignor.

"You believe in a personal God," the Dalai Lama observed, "and I do not."

This, above all, marks the difference between Christians and Buddhists. Beyond the rhetoric of "peace," "compatibility," and "the way," there remains one profound difference between Buddha and Jesus: Jesus is God; Buddha is not.

Anonymous said...

Catholicism believes that truth, and the Author of truth, can be known rationally (to a significant yet limited extent) and through divine revelation. In contrast, Buddhism denies existential reality; nothing, including the self, can be proven to exist. As the dharma states: "Things are like illusion; they can be said neither to be existent nor non-existent."

Anonymous said...

I started reading about Buddhism, and it makes a lot of economic and political sense, but not religious sense, to me.

Was it responsible for a lot of the culture of the Far East, or was it a response to the existing culture of the Far East? It involves an entire mapping of the brain differently from Western thought. I think it has some good points, but I wouldn't abandon Christianity for it. It's good that it makes people think abstractly and logically, but I'm sure it's over a lot of people's head out there.

Mriana said...

Can we agree with Hanh that people should be able to have "both the Buddha and Jesus within their life"?

I'm not sure if I would put it that way, but I find there is some good in all religious, but those outside the Abrahamic religions come a little closer to my concept, except they don't quite hit the bull's eye though. However, while I have no actual argument with Buddhists' ways, I find Humanism more fulfilling for me. One reason is because I am allowed to question things, be skeptical, and alike. I am free to explore the human condition, including all religions, without ascribing to any of them or even believing in a religious deity. I can incorporate any idea into my life that I feel is a worthy one. One cannot pick and chose as a rule in various religions.

Basically, I've thrown out any one single religious text and wrote my own (mentally), with the focus on the human using reason, love, and compassion. Thich Nhat Hanh might not disapprove too much esp since the main focus is love for my fellow human. However, IF the Catholics really are trying to ascribe both in their philosophy, then they might be one to something a little better than what was in the past, but there is that one little issue that you mentioned (two if you count an afterlife), that could be their stumbling block concerning incorporating Buddhist ideas.

It's good that it makes people think abstractly and logically, but I'm sure it's over a lot of people's head out there.

Very true and when you get into The Fundamental Wisdom of the Middle Way, which is Nagarjuna's Mulamadhyamakakarika, it gets even worse when it comes to comprehending. I had to do a presentation of that book and it about drove me nuts. IMHO, it is illogical, but I still had to do the presentation. The Dao would have been easier, but that is yet another religion.

MJB said...

Hello again my dear friends,

I took a day off yesterday, because I got home late.
As I am returning, I feel that this blog took a turn in the right direction.
Nevertheless I want to give thanks to:
Acharya, who is so kind as to publish our posts and enabel this engament.

mriana, for finally making room in her life for Jesus. I will elaborate on that some more.

the anonymous christian cavalry that descended in on this blog like a group of angels.

I started to feel like Wellington in the battle of Waterloo, just before the Prussian cavalry regiment under general von Bluecher arrived there.

Movin along, mriana, allow me to clarify my interpretation of the platonic cave.
We are all as incarnate human beings inside the cave and have a rather limited perception of universal truth.
Of course are we explaining everything in our terms, including God.
Our incarnate limitations however do not define the limit of universal truth.
Truth does not end in your skull, it transcendents it.

So by saying that God is "only" a human concept, you are putting limits on God, while at the same time still acknowleging God.

We live in a very small pocket of the universe, which doesn't mean that we are insignificant by no means.

Check out this you tube video:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mcBV-cXVWFw

Of course everything we talk about has to be somehow related to the human form, but to say that everything begins and ends with the human form, including God, is jumping to conclusions.
To say that GOD is a human concept is not all wrong though.
Allow me to elaborate:

When trying to connect the human and the godly at a distance, we can rely on a principal which might be foreign to some, because it is not part of any academic curriculum.

It is the principal reflected in fractal geometry.
When you begin to examine patterns that occur in nature, you find that the pattern stays the same from a smaller to a larger succesion.
This is universally true and means that what is true on a small scale here on earth is also true throughout the universe.
So to say "God is a human concept" does not exclude a God outside of humanity or inside humanity for that matter.

Now, the sandals on the ground, real McCoy, one and only, true and original, abused by many, and wrongfully accused and blamed for many wrongs, Jashua, the Essene, genius also commonly referd to as Jesus by true believers and deniers, knew this.

Maybe he learned about this principal in Asia as Ralph Ellis is suggesting while he was traveling to and from there between ages 13 and 30.

He took the teachings of Buddah and took them one step further though, why?
He started differntiating energies in relation to the human form.

There is a third eye in the middle of your head which can see the energies of life as colors of light.
You might have heard, that there are people who can see and read your aura, which is your electromagnetic field.

This third eye is not open in all humans, because they are not using their whole brain capacity.

In some humans the gelatenous third eye is covered with gunck, which could be due to poor nutrition, or smoking, or unclean blood, viruses, bacterial, mold, fungus and parasite infection.

This might be why the Essene, whom were trying to access the Kingdom of God from within, were vegetarians and believed in colon cleanses, which by the way I am not experienced with and don't see happening to me anywhere in my near future.

This also explains the power of healing, attributed to the Essene.
Most deseases are a result of an energy misalignment, as the eastern medical teachings reveal.

The misalignment, due to physical or emotional causes creates an area that is insufficently supplied with life energy and can be attacked by previously mentioned infectious deseases, if present in the body.
So take care of your bodies for they are a temple, my fiends.

1Co 6:19

Do you not know that your body is a temple of the Holy Spirit, who is in you, whom you have received from God? You are not your own;



The sandals on the ground Jesus third eye was clean and he was able to open it and see very well with it.
After differentiating the forms of energies which humans can receive, resonate in and transmitt; he put them in a hierarchy in accordance to reaching what he refers to as his Father, who is LOVE. This highest and purest form of energy can be seen as LIGHT and is the most desirable form to resonate in for humans, because we are creatures of Love.
That is where we are at home, no matter where we appear physically in the universe.

Jesus, the sandals on the ground Jesus, knew this as well.
And I know it because of him.

1John 4:19

We love because he first loved us.



mriana
Back to Jesus, the man that you allow to exist briefly while formulating your arguments.

I know this is hard for you non-natural scientists, but we need to differntiate once more, hopefully for the last time in this debate.

The "historical" Jesus needs to be differntiated for the sake of calming down the temperaments which flare up and rage here and around the world.

The "roman church canonized version" of Jesus is historical fact and well documented, so part of our history, and rightfully called the "historical" Jesus.

This "roman church canonized" Jesus becomes larger every year, as we add years to our history. To many this snowball effect means that he is becoming more real than the "sandals on the ground" Jesus every year. True, from a historical perspective-


This "roman church canonized version" of Jesus is not to be confused with the "sandals on the ground" Jesus who lived 2000 years ago, and over time, historically speaking, in comparison becomes less real over the years.


Please lets not fall into this trap.

The devil is in the details my friends.

I am a firm believer of the "sandals on the ground Jesus" who actually lived and loved and explained universal truth in vocabulary that is tangible to humans, yet true in time and space.
He did this because he wanted to set us free from the yoke of fear and darkness and show us a brighter future which all along has been our home, LOVE. He is trying to show us the way home.
So do yourself a favor and leave the light on for him, so that he can see you when he comes back in our time of need.

Eph 3:19

And to know the love of Christ, which passeth knowledge, that ye might be filled with all the fulness of God.

May the Peace and Love of Jesus be with you all-


MJB

Acharya S said...

You're welcome.

However, perhaps you did not see the video just posted to this blog.

Nothing has changed, and no amount of mind-numbing pabulum will suffice to alter the facts that there is no credible, scientific evidence that the character in the New Testament called "Jesus Christ" ever existed as a real person, while the preponderance of the evidence points to him being as mythical a figure as the Greek god Hercules.

For more information, see my books:

The Christ Conspiracy
Suns of God
Who Was Jesus?
The Companion Guide to ZEITGEIST

And my articles:

The Christ Conspiracy Anthology

Cheers.

Mriana said...

mriana, for finally making room in her life for Jesus.

I don't think you understand or even comprehend.

mriana
Back to Jesus, the man that you allow to exist briefly while formulating your arguments.


No, I didn't. That was your misconception of what I was talking about, as well as your desire and imagination.

So by saying that God is "only" a human concept, you are putting limits on God, while at the same time still acknowleging God.

You do not understand,for I do not anthropomorphize or apply any emotion to it. What I feel cannot be put into words and cannot be incapsulated into a mythical character, for it is not Jesus or any god of religion. It is not God, at least not as you know it. "god" (lower case is intentional) is a descriptive word I put on it, but it is not God nor is it Jesus, Buddha, Krishna, Brahman, the Dao, or any other incarnation that is human made.

Of course everything we talk about has to be somehow related to the human form

No IT does not, for IT is not human or humanoid.

So to say "God is a human concept" does not exclude a God outside of humanity or inside humanity for that matter.

IT is neither inside or outside of humanity. In fact, everything you have said is deluded. IT is in the human, in nature, and in every animal, but IT is not that person or animal, but part of every living thing in the universe, but not God. You have no comprehension of what I am saying and won't until you drop the religious text(s) to describe "god" (again intentional) and the anthropomorphasizing there of, as well as realize that anything you use to attempt to describe such a thing is only a human concept of it and not the reality of it. Thus is the human concept. You cannot use religious texts to describe it for to do so is to place a human concept on it. Even the use of "god" is still placing a human concept on it, because human words are far too inadequate to label what I mean. I said that many times in my post, but apparently you missed that.

For all we know, it is a chemical reaction that science has yet to discover, probably one that is triggered in the brains of all living creatures by an external source, such as the love and compassion of a pet, friend, or family member.

No, this is not hostility, this is just saying you have no comprehension of what I was trying to communicate and such is the problem of Einstein or Sagan's "god" because it is not God and even they blatantly said that too.

"It was, of course, a lie what you read about my religious convictions, a lie which is being systematically repeated. I do not believe in a personal God and I have never denied this but have expressed it clearly. If something is in me which can be called religious then it is the unbounded admiration for the structure of the world so far as our science can reveal it."
[Albert Einstein, 1954, from "Albert Einstein: The Human Side", edited by Helen Dukas and Banesh Hoffman, Princeton University Press]"

"I believe in a Spinoza's God who reveals himself in the harmony of all that exists, but not in a God who concerns himself with the fate and actions of human beings." Telegram to a Jewish newspaper, 1929; [pg.147, Calaprice]. (Spinoza believed the more one studies and understands the universe the better one understands God)

"The idea that God is an oversized white male with a flowing beard who sits in the sky and tallies the fall of every sparrow is ludicrous. But if by God one means the set of physical laws that govern the universe, then clearly there is such a God. This God is emotionally unsatisfying... it does not make much sense to pray to the law of gravity. [Carl Sagan]"

"Anything you don't understand, Mr. Rankin, you attribute to God. God for you is where you sweep away all the mysteries of the world, all the challenges to our intelligence. You simply turn your mind off and say God did it. [Dr. Arroway in Carl Sagan's Contact (New York: Pocket Books, 1985), p. 166.]"

Even they were misunderstood and thought to be religious, no matter how many times they tried to explain what they really meant, for words cannot do it any justice. I do not believe in a creator deity or one that intervenes in human affairs or is apart from it nor do I believe in a heaven or hell, for it is all right here on earth. That is the beauty of a planet that "recycles" for the irony of it all is that we do return to the earth only to be regenerated into something else, such as a plant. No, not reincarnation, but rather we feed off the earth and in return we nurish it and whatever cells that various plants, bugs, and animals can feed off of become a part of them. So, upon our death, we give back what we have taken from the earth. This is scientific, not supernatural or mythical.

Nothing has changed, and no amount of mind-numbing pabulum will suffice to alter the facts that there is no credible, scientific evidence that the character in the New Testament called "Jesus Christ" ever existed as a real person, while the preponderance of the evidence points to him being as mythical a figure as the Greek god Hercules.

I second that.

MJB, Matt Dillahunty once said on a recent podcast that if you cannot say yes to the question, "Do you believe in God?" then you are an atheist. Even if one were to say, "Define God." that disqualifies them from being a theist right there because they cannot answer yes. I cannot answer a simple infactic yes, because what most people believe as being God, I do not. Even if it is the concept of love, I still have to qualify it, which in Matt's opinion, still disqualifies me.

No, I do not consider myself a true atheist nor am I a theist, but I am a non-theist or preferably a Humanist for it describes what I do believe.

"The question [Do you believe in God?] has a peculiar structure. If I say no, do I mean I'm convinced God doesn't exist, or do I mean I'm not convinced he does exist? Those are two very different questions. [Dr. Arroway in Carl Sagan's Contact (New York: Pocket Books, 1985), p. 168.]"

You would have come closer if you compared what I said to the Dao, rather than your Jesus. That is harder for me to refute, but that does not mean there are reasonable sayings and allegorical stories within the Buddhist and Christian texts, as I mentioned before. There are also unreasonable ones in the Christian texts and there are illogical ones within Buddhist texts, but neither are describing a real person in their stories. IF you had read all my posts, then you would have realized that what I was saying was not Xian doctrine nor was it God, esp not your God and to think your way is the only way and the right way is to cling to a delusion. To think what I was saying was Jesus or even relating to the Bible is a misconception, for that is only a human concept.

No, what is needed is an education in science, not psuedo-science, as well as a comprehensive study of ALL religions for future generations to realize there is no God, at least not the one depicted in religious texts and they should be taught much like Aesop's Fables, for that is what they are, but even Aesop's fables have some value to them. However, the dog and the bone is just an allegorical story. There is a profound use of allegory not only one in the Bible, but also in Daoist stories. The only difference is that Daoists admit that their stories are allegorical and not reality, yet teach a lesson: see the Emperor Chaos and his friends- Change and Dramatic- in The Book of Chuang Tzu.

No, we love because it is a human emotion and part of the human condition, not because of some anthropomorphical deity, esp not one with a gender and even a eunich is a gender.

Oh last thing:

The devil is in the details my friends.

There is no devil. That is superstitious bunk.

"Evil is real, but an external being who causes it is a human projection of part of our own reality into the external world of being. The devil is an excuse, someone to blame, part of the system of control that religious institutions set up to keep themselves dominant.

Belief in an external devil has done more harm than we can imagine. Executing the witches of Salem, Massachusetts, is only one of them.

It is time for the human race to grow up and let go of these childish ideas." ~ Bishop John Shelby Spong, retired Episcopal priest


Now if you want me to listen to you, try talking more realistically and not superstitiously. I would sooner listen to the dear bishop than superstitious flap-trap such as yours that does not know the difference between superstition and truth.

It would do you good, esp since you are not ready to let go of your security blanket, to read Bishop Spong's books. Then maybe you will be able to undelude yourself and move on to books such as Acharya and Robert Price's. However, I can't expect you to educate yourself, just from reading at your posts and I find that dreadfully sad, esp where you use your own words instead of quoting.

Anonymous said...

Love the new video!

Who is that at time 2:42 ish? Is it? ... *IT IS* "GreNME" ... Encyclopedia Man!!!

LOL, ROTLMAO!!!

MJB said...

Good evening to all.
Acharia, thank you for your response.
miriana, thank you for sharing.
I can't help but feel that your categorical Jesus denial does not come across as mechanical anymore.
Your posts seem more inspired and I for one love that.
Acharya I just watched your latest video as recommended and have a comment on the absents of historical commentary.
Jesus was considered crazy and criminal by the jews and romans.
Historians don't keep track of crazy criminals until they have an army and start killing people.
If someone today would proclaim he is the jewish messiah or christ, he would end up in a mental hospital. Well, they didn't have those back then so they lynched him to death.
Even today, know I of no historians keeping track of insane criminals.
Unless, like I said they are in charge of a military force and engage in military warfare.
Plus most people were illiterate then and didn't travel much.
It wasn't the information age they lived in. Keeo that in mind.

After watching the movie i checked out your site a little bit and read "the gospel according to Acharya and the Who is God? article.
For starters nobody ever told me that God was a white male with a long white beard except for in cartoons.
I agree with you on the tao approach to the cosmos, like my last posts reflect.

I do believe that Buddah understood the electromagnetic nature of the universe, which Jesus might have learned on his travels to the East.

Buddah arrived at Peace.

Jesus arrived at Love.

I want to ask you another question:
Do you believe that Jahweh of the old testament and the Father of Jesus are the same God?

Love Peace Light

MJB

Mriana said...

I want to ask you another question:
Do you believe that Jahweh of the old testament and the Father of Jesus are the same God?


You still don't get it do you? What you are doing is ascribing a human concept to something that has no words for it, thereby putting it into your little box. It is beyond any words or any concept a human can give it.

I do believe that Buddah understood the electromagnetic nature of the universe, which Jesus might have learned on his travels to the East.

Sigh. You still have no comprehension. The Buddha you speak of, was not a real person and the Jesus in the Bible is also a mythical person. Neither one were an actual person. Any person behind the finding of either religion did not not have such an inflated life. I think you completely miss the allegory in both and I seriously doubt you have studied any Buddhism at all, IF you did, you would probably know how to spell Buddha.

IF you have ever studied any religions beyond the Abrahamic ones you would know that Buddhism does not consider the gods important, the Dao is non-theistic, Shintoism is yet another concept... The list goes on and a true scholar of religion eventually learns that the various religions are human concepts- this includes the gods, an afterlife, creation, etc. A closer inspection of them one finds they are all full of astrotheology, esp their virgin birth stories. The Dao is even more evasive and elusive concerning any deity, in fact, Lao Tzu even said it was indiscribable. Hindus even say Brahman is indescribable. For one to truly understand, they know that all religions, including Christianity, are human concepts. As I said, to place such concepts on it, is to place it in one's little box, instead of comprehending the reality of it. You cannot even call it love, for that is a human emotion as well as a human concept. We don't need to place superstition or a mythical religious text on what we don't understand or comprehend.

Anonymous said...

LOL, I love how Christians try to be soooo friendly pretending to be happy to have a discussion or debate yet, all of their anti-Zeitgeist websites like preventing truth decay(PDT) and everything it links to and many others *NEVER* allow comments.

PDT is so bad that the guy won't even post a link to any of Acharya's material so folks can make up their own minds. I brought that up to the guy months ago and he refused to post any links or mention any other books of hers beyond "Christ Conspiracy." He posts links to an assortment of vicious attacks smearing her and her though. The guy at PTD is simply another dishonest Christian. They don't want to debate the facts & evidence. They just want to frame it in their own very dishonest way.

I've posted the video/blog at a few forums and it was deleted right away. It seems to have hit a nerve with all of the ANTI-ZEITGEISTERS.

Our side, Acharya's side, are not afraid of an honest discussion of the facts and evidence while the religious side know they are facing complete embarrassment.

These Christians and ANTI-ZEITGEISTERS are an embarrassment to an enlightened humanity. Once again, making their best attempt to hold humanity hostage to the lies and fraud in order to keep us from progressing forward. As per usual.

22

MJB said...

Happy Mothers day mriana,
thank you for your post.

Let me try to summarize where I am at here. I am trying to test your theories for the sake of truth here, so please bear with me. I know it is hard, not just for you though.
I would like to find some common ground here if that is ok.
As I mentioned earlier, I am here because I am seeking the truth.

John 8:32
And ye shall know the truth, and the truth shall make you free.

I believe that Jesus was not talking about the flavor of the day truth that an everchanging scientific process comes up with, but eternal truth, which does not change, rings true, stays true and doesn't start and end in a humans skull.
The sandals on the ground Jesus was a teacher of that truth.
A fellow truth seeker can recognize that.

science changes

eternal truth does not


Trying to arrive at truth through a scientific process is therefore silly.

A philosophycal approach makes a lot more sense here, I would say.

Now given Acharyas background as a trench master archeologist, which by the way sounds pretty adventurous and fun, she is looking for an artifact which proves beyond a doubt that the new testament Jesus lived. Ok lets say you find something or nothing, it wont tell us anything about the intentions of the editors of the new testament. In her latest video, it dates the first written gospels back to at least 150 years AD.
Let's not forget that romans were running the show and that they fed christians to the lyons. Having gospel writings in your home, was probably reason enough to persecute you.

We agree that the charcter named Jesus Christ in the new testament never walked the earth.
I think we know he is a composite sun good of sorts which is the prevailing Jesus we know and talk about.
We are still in agreement, I think we covered that.
But as any archeologist knows, one single find can change everything.
Like the rosetta stone, the gilgamesh, the emerald tablets, etc.

Here is the question for you though:

Can we rule out the existence of a man who lived 2000 years ago and was a seeker and teacher of eternal truth; an enlightened man who tought : love your neighbor and had a following?

This is not unconceivable by any means.

As long as we can't rule this out without a doubt, what gives us the right to categorically deny that man's existence?

Does a narrative change over 150 years? Let's see, let me think about that, uhh, maybe?

Yes I'd say the narrative changed and of course, we don't know who and what the intentions of the editors were.

So did that Jesus Christ of the new testament walk the earth?
I'd say probably not.

Now as an eternal truth seeker, looking at this, we don't have to rely on the archeological discoveries of artifacts, scientific process and the historical record, because we know both are liable to change at any moment.

We look at the content of the message and analyze that.
Sure the preponderance of the aforementioned "evidence" can be taken into account, but over time from an eternal truth perspective, it is irrelevant.

That is why I mentioned earlier what is the probability of that message of peace love and light to be false?

I tested your theory on that message and came to the conclusion that it is eternal truth.

Let me elaborate.
From what I am gathering, you are saying that the message is pure fiction designed to a nats ass, by the controllers of man kind simply to control us more and better than before.

There is truth in that, we are agreeing partially as far as the roman church goes.

The question remains, why would the controllers give us the information to set ourselves free if there intent is the opposite?

Why are the guards throwing us the keyes to get out?
Now the sandals on the ground Jesus knew they would try to change his word, because he could see through the schemes that were and to this day are affecting human kind, therefore he chose his words very carefully and spoke only eternal truth, because he knew that the devil was in the details, so to speak.
This eternal truth echoes through space and rings true inside or outside our skulls, planet, solar system, galaxy, deep space and universe.
Humanity is part of this eternal truth.
So saying God is only a human concept is not eternally true.
It is only true in ego-centric individuals.
And achording to Acharya the ego is equal to satan.

I will continue at a later time.
Must go now.

For now,
may the eternal truth, tought by the Son Of Man set you free.

MJB

Anonymous said...

MJB "As long as we can't rule this out without a doubt, what gives us the right to categorically deny that man's existence?"

- Nice straw man fallacy, set 'em up so you can knock 'em down.

MJB "Now as an eternal truth seeker, looking at this, we don't have to rely on the archeological discoveries of artifacts, scientific process and the historical record, because we know both are liable to change at any moment."

- That's always a possibility but at this point 2,000 years later, there's *STILL* no evidence for Jesus. However, there is evidence that suggests the gospels stemmed from previous myths.

MJB "The question remains, why would the controllers give us the information to set ourselves free if there intent is the opposite?"

- Acharya is not a controller nor have we been "given" the info or the "keys". It has been a lot of very hard work. We finally have the freedom to discuss the facts and evidence on these issues (to a certain degree) where not long ago there existed heresy and blasphemy laws for challenging religious dogma. If there were any truth to the Jesus story there would be no reason implement censorship or to fear any critical thinking on the subject.

Thanks to Acharya and others making the connections with very hard to find records (many times in other languages) we can re-count the story from a historical perspective. Of all the gods, saviors etc. Jesus is just one of them. There's no reason to believe he ever existed no matter how hard you try to come up with excuses to believe it. Do you just want to believe in Jesus because you fear going to hell for all eternity? Yeah, that one used to scare me into believing too. However, there is no Satan nor is there a hell where dead people go to get their soul tortured. It's absurd, it's the adult version of Santa Claus. George Carlin said it best.

I enjoy the part in Naked Truth where he says:

"The ancient Egyptians believed that as long as the sun came up everyday there'd always be life on earth. Therefore, quite logically, the sun became the representation for everlasting life.

Put it another way, if the sun comes up everyday, food will grow. If food grows people can live and can reproduce. So that when you die, your son can carry on and when he dies, his son can carry on and so forth. So that as long as the sun, the light of the world, comes up everyday, there will be everlasting life on earth.

So quite logically, every major religion and mystic belief features the SUN as its principle and most important feature."

"The Egyptians said that the SUN of god, the light of the world, represented EVERLASTING LIFE ON THE EARTH.

The eternal message is simply that so-long as the SUN continues to rise, every morning, and is born again or resurrected 3 days after the winter solstice (the darkest day of the year) every year, the will be everlasting life on planet earth. Not for me, not for you, but for your son/daughter & their kids etc.

22

Mriana said...

First off, MJB, your eternal truth does not change in light of new information. The reason why science changes is because new information comes in that explains things better. Evolution has not actually changed that much though. Science is not silly, it is knowledge. Religion is not philosophy. It is superstition to explain what one is not able to explain without the use of imperical testing. Science dares to test things. IF there was not science, we would still be believing in volcano gods and thinking we are have no relationship to anything on earth.

The fact is, we are related to everything on earth, including and esp. gorillas and chimps. It would be silly not to think we weren't. Evolution has proven we are even related to pigs, via DNA. One could get a heart transplant from either another ape, like say a chimp, or even a pig.

If we relied on religious text, we would still be in the darkages and dying from disease that we blamed the devil on, when in fact there are no demons that cause illnesses, not even mental illness.

As long as we can't rule this out without a doubt, what gives us the right to categorically deny that man's existence?

Blind faith in not knowledge. It's stupidity. Would you go on blind faith that a stranger would pay you back $500? I don't think you would, because you know it would be stupid to trust a stranger. Doubt, questioning, and research is the beginning of knowledge.

IF we did not question what the OT says about bats, we'd still be believing they were birds! When in fact, science has discovered they are mammals, much like we are. We are mammals too, not birds. Is there any human today who is ignorant enough to think bats are birds? I seriously doubt it, unless they are toddlers just learning about the world.

From what I am gathering, you are saying that the message is pure fiction designed to a nats ass, by the controllers of man kind simply to control us more and better than before.

No she is not. What she is saying is that these stories existed before anyone ever manipulated them to fit the Judeo-Christian culture. If you were to do some research, and even read her books, you would find that even the Egyptian and Babylonian, not to mention many more, had the same template. Only the names, places, and cultural aspects have changed.

You really should read the Acts of Buddha, stories of Krishna, and if you can get your hands on them READ The Egyptian Book of the Dead and The Coffin texts. It would not hurt you to take some time after work to read these things for to not do so is to live in ignorance, IMHO. Here's a book for you by a professor of relgion that I know personally: Old Testament Parallels by Victor H. Matthews. In it he shows the stories from Assyrian, Babylonian, Egyptian, etc cultures in which the Old Testament stories originated. One can go from there and find that the NT parallels other stories before it's time.

And achording to Acharya the ego is equal to satan.

According to Acharya, satan is a myth that relates to previous stories. In fact, you can find the story about the battle between Lucifer (who is not satan, but rather "light barer") and Yahweh in the Enuma Elish Stories (note the name Elish). While the stories in Genesis are not dependent on any one story from those in the surrounding area, you can find this one in the story of Tiamat (divine patron of salt water)and Marduk (divine patron of the storm, as well as divine patron of Babylon and he steps forward as divine warrior to fight for supremacy).

In fact, the two creation stories in Genesis come from Babylonian and Egyptian. This brings us right back to the Egyptian "Hymn to Ptah" and Hymn to Ra. Gilgamesh (Babylonian/Nineveh) has a flood story, which you find basically the same story as Noah. In fact, Judaism was once a polytheistic religion and actually had male and female deities. The Ten Commandments, as well as other laws in the OT originated with the Code of Hammurabi.

That is not even touching on Acharya's work even. The truth is that the stories of both Old and New Testaments came from previous stories and never really happened. You can say, "Na-uh! You're wrong!", but I have studied this for over 20 years now. IF you really want the truth, stop clinging to your security book and venture into actual study and research. You are not going to find the truth in one little book called the Bible.

Mriana said...

If there were any truth to the Jesus story there would be no reason implement censorship or to fear any critical thinking on the subject.

The truth has nothing to fear from critical inquiry. IF the story of Jesus were the absolute truth, than those with "religious authority" would have never banned questioning it in the first place!

"The Egyptians said that the SUN of god, the light of the world, represented EVERLASTING LIFE ON THE EARTH.

The story of Horus, as well as other Egytian stories, are so much like the Bible that they are sometimes indiscernable. I have gotten my hands on just enough of those stories, that it's mind boggling.

Acharya S said...

Mriana said...

The story of Horus, as well as other Egytian stories, are so much like the Bible that they are sometimes indiscernable. I have gotten my hands on just enough of those stories, that it's mind boggling.


Let's not forget this jewel of an insight, from Marcus Eli Ravage, who wrote "A Real Case Against the Jews" for Century Magazine:

"Our tribal customs have become the core of your moral code. Our tribal laws have furnished the basic groundwork of all your august constitutions and legal systems. Our legends and our folk-tails are the sacred lore which you croon to your infants. Our poets have filled your hymnals and your prayer-books. Our national history has become an indispensable part of the learning of your pastors and priests and scholars. Our kings, our statesmen, our prophets, our warriors are your heroes. Our ancient little country is your Holy Land. Our national literature is your Holy Bible. What our people thought and taught has become inextricably woven into your very speech and tradition, until no one among you can be called educated who is not familiar with our racial heritage.

"Jewish artisans and Jewish fishermen are your teachers and your saints, with countless statues carved in their image and innumerable cathedrals raised to their memories. A Jewish maiden is your ideal of motherhood and womanhood. A Jewish rebel-prophet is the central figure in your religious worship. We have pulled down your idols, cast aside your racial inheritance, and substituted for them our God and our traditions. No conquest in history can even remotely compare with this clean sweep of our conquest over you."

Get it? By usurping the gods of other cultures - "borrowing" their myths and reworking them to revolve around themselves - Jews were able to convince billions of people that their tribal god is the God of the cosmos, that their tribal writings are "God's Word," that they are "God's Chosen People," that their nation is "the Holy Land" and that "God's Son" is the Jewish messiah!

Nice scam. Too bad so many otherwise intelligent people still fall for it.

Anonymous said...

Did Jesus Really Exist?

By Paul L. Maier, The Russell H. Seibert Professor of Ancient History, Western Michigan University

"No, he didn't!" some skeptics claim, thinking that this is a quick, powerful lever with which to pry people away from "the fable of Christianity." But the lever crumbles at its very first use. In fact, there is more evidence that Jesus of Nazareth certainly lived than for most famous figures of the ancient past. This evidence is of two kinds: internal and external, or, if you will, sacred and secular. In both cases, the total evidence is so overpowering, so absolute that only the shallowest of intellects would dare to deny Jesus' existence. And yet this pathetic denial is still parroted by "the village atheist," bloggers on the internet, or such organizations as the Freedom from Religion Foundation.

The Internal Evidence

Aside from the many Messianic predictions in the Old Testament, not one of the four Gospels or the 23 other documents in the New Testament would make an ounce of sense if Jesus had never lived. Did the whole cavalcade of well-known historical personalities in the first century A.D. who interacted with Jesus deal with a vacuum? Did Herod the Great try to terminate an infant ghost? Did the Jewish high priests Annas and Caiaphas interview a spirit? Did the Roman governor Pontius Pilate judge a phantom on Good Friday, or Paul and so many apostles give their lives for a myth?

No one doubts that the above names are well known from both sacred and secular sources, as well as archaeological evidence, and are therefore historical. The same is clearly true of Jesus of Nazareth. But why, then, is Jesus not permitted the "luxury" of actually having lived as did the rest of these? Why the double standard here?

From the internal, biblical evidence alone, therefore, Jesus' existence is simply categorical. And yet there is an abundance of additional extrabiblical information on this question.

The External Evidence: Christian

Another long paragraph could be devoted to writings of the early church fathers, some of whom had close contact with New Testament personalities. Jesus' disciple John, for example, later became bishop of the church at Ephesus. One of his students was Polycarp, bishop of Smyrna, and a student of his, in turn, was Irenaeus of Lyons. The centerpiece in all of their writings was Jesus the Christ ("Messiah").

Apart from such living personal links to Jesus, both geographical and temporal tangencies appear in Justin Martyr. Born of pagan parents around A.D. 100 in Nablus (between Judea and Galilee), Justin tried and abandoned various philosophical schools until he found in Christianity the one true teaching. As a native of the Holy Land, Justin mentions sites associated with Jesus, such as the Bethlehem grotto in which he was born, and even such details as Jesus working as an apprentice carpenter in the shop of his foster father Joseph, where they specialized in producing such agricultural implements as yokes for oxen and plows.

External Evidence: Jewish

The Jewish rabbinical traditions not only mention Jesus, but they are also the only sources that spell his name accurately in Aramaic, his native tongue: Yeshua Hannotzri—Joshua (Jesus) of Nazareth. Some of the references to Jesus in the Talmud are garbled—probably due to the vagaries of oral tradition—but one is especially accurate, since it seems based on written sources and comes from the Mishna—the earliest collection of writings in the Talmud. This is no less than the arrest notice for Jesus, which runs as follows:

He shall be stoned because he has practiced sorcery and lured Israel to apostasy. Anyone who can say anything in his favor, let him come forward and plead on his behalf. Anyone who knows where he is, let him declare it to the Great Sanhedrin in Jerusalem.

Four items in this statement strongly support its authenticity as a notice composed before Jesus' arrest: 1) The future tense is used; 2) Stoning was the regular punishment for blasphemy among the Jews whenever the Roman government was not involved; 3) There is no reference whatever to crucifixion; and 4) That Jesus was performing "sorcery"— the extraordinary or miraculous with a negative spin—is quite remarkable. This not only invokes what historians call the "criterion of embarrassment," which proves what is conceded, but accords perfectly with how Jesus' opponents explained away his miraculous healings: performing them with the help of Beelzebul (Luke 11:18).

Moreover, the first-century Jewish historian, Flavius Josephus, twice mentions "Jesus who is called the Christ" in his Jewish Antiquities. In the second of these, he tells of the death of Jesus' half-brother James the Just of Jerusalem (20:200). And two books earlier, in the longest first-century non-biblical reference to Christ, he tells of Jesus midway through his discussion of events in Pontius Pilate's administration:

At this time there was a wise man called Jesus, and his conduct was good, and he was known to be virtuous. Many people among the Jews and the other nations became his disciples. Pilate condemned him to be crucified and to die. But those who had become his disciples did not abandon his discipleship. They reported that he had appeared to them three days after his crucifixion and that he was alive. Accordingly, he was perhaps the Messiah, concerning whom the prophets have reported wonders. And the tribe of the Christians, so named after him, has not disappeared to this day. (18:63)

This is the recent, uninterpolated text that replaces the traditional version which, unfortunately, had suffered early interpolation. For a more detailed evaluation of Josephus and his references to Jesus, please see my separate article on Josephus in this series.

External Evidence: Secular

Cornelius Tacitus, one of the most reliable source historians of first-century Rome, wrote in his Annals a year-by-year account of events in the Roman Empire under the early Caesars. Among the highlights that he reports for the year A.D. 64 was the great fire of Rome. People blamed the emperor Nero for this conflagration since it happened "on his watch," but in order to save himself, Nero switched the blame to "the Christians," which is the first time they appear in secular history. Careful historian that he was, Tacitus then explains who "the Christians" were: "Christus, the founder of the name, had undergone the death penalty in the reign of Tiberius, by sentence of the procurator Pontius Pilatus" (15:44). He then goes on to report the horrors that were inflicted on the Christians in what became their first Roman persecution.

Tacitus, it should be emphasized, was not some Christian historian who was trying to prove that Jesus Christ really lived, but a pagan who despised Christians as a "disease," a term he uses later in the passage. Had Jesus never even existed, he would have been the first to expose that pathetic phantom on whom such cultists placed their trust. Were no other references to Jesus available, this passage alone would have been sufficient to establish his historicity. Skeptics realize this, and so have tried every imaginable means to discredit this passage—but to no avail. Manuscript analysis and computer studies have never found any reason to call this sentence into question, nor its context.

Gaius Suetonius Tranquillus also recorded events of the first century in his famous Lives of the Twelve Caesars. He, too, regarded the Christians as a sect "professing a new and mischievous religious belief" (Nero 16) and doubtless cited "Christus" as well, spelling his name "Chrestus" (Claudius 25). That the vowels "e" and "i" were often interchangeable is demonstrated by the French term for "Christian" to this day: chretien.

Pliny the Younger was the Roman governor of Bithynia—today, the northwestern corner of Turkey—and about the year 110 he wrote the emperor Trajan (98-117 A.D.), asking what to do about the Christians, a "wretched cult" whom he mentions eight times in his letter. Christ himself is cited three times, the most famous instance referring to Christians "...who met on a fixed day to chant verses alternately among themselves in honor of Christ, as if to a god..." (Letter No. 96). Trajan's response, interestingly enough, suggests that Christians not be hunted out. (Ibid., No. 97). But again, if Christ were only a mythical character, these hostile sources would have been the first to emblazon that fact in derision.

Other ancient secular sources, such as Theudas and Mara bar Serapion also bear witness to the historicity of Jesus. But any further evidence clearly comes under the "beating a dead horse" category so far as this article is concerned. Nothing more is necessary in view of the overpowering evidence that Jesus of Nazareth was no myth, but a totally historical figure who truly lived. Skeptics should focus instead on whether or not Jesus was more than a man. That, at least, could evoke a reasonable debate among reasonable inquirers, rather than a pointless discussion with sensationalists who struggle to reject the obvious.

Acharya S said...

Did Jesus Really Exist?

By Paul L. Maier, The Russell H. Seibert Professor of Ancient History, Western Michigan University

"No, he didn't!" some skeptics claim, thinking that this is a quick, powerful lever with which to pry people away from "the fable of Christianity." But the lever crumbles at its very first use. In fact, there is more evidence that Jesus of Nazareth certainly lived than for most famous figures of the ancient past.


I disagree. I've addressed these contentions in my books and articles. It is these claims that can be shown to "crumble at their very first use." They all sound so convincing at first to the uninitiated, but they completely fall apart when inspected scientifically. Again, after all is said and done we remain with mummified mythology being palmed off as history.

But, don't let me beat a dead horse, as I've already demonstrated these facts quite thoroughly here:

The Christ Conspiracy
Suns of God
Who Was Jesus?

The Christ Conspiracy Anthology

Those who continue to try to "prove" a historical Jesus using these fallacious arguments would do well to read the counterarguments presented in my work, if they wish to appear informed. Otherwise, this will indeed be "a pointless discussion with sensationalists who struggle to reject the obvious."

The obvious, of course, being that we are dealing with a mythical figure.

Mriana said...

If anyone needs more than just Acharya's books, here something to add to her stuff: http://www.astraeamagazine.com/book_txt.php#osman

Christianity: an ancient Egyptian religion
Egyptologist Ahmed Osman contends that the roots of Christian belief spring not from Judea but from Egypt. Comparing the Old Testament with ancient Egyptian records, he shows that major characters of the Hebrew Scriptures and major tenets of Christianity--the One God and the Trinity--are Egyptian in origin.


You can listen to his interview there or download it on zip by going to the zipped MP3 in the drop down menu, Radio section of http://www.astraeamagazine.com/ .

Anonymous said...

There is so much proof that the historical Jesus actually lived. In fact Christianity is the only evidential, historical religion in the world.

For more watch these youtube videos:

Jesus: Evidence- Historical proof 1 & 2

http://youtube.com/watch?v=A2TjQqdRg5U
http://youtube.com/watch?v=pvdg5KBlHCY

Anonymous said...

You can listen to his interview there or download it on zip by going to the zipped MP3 in the drop down menu, Radio section of http://www.astraeamagazine.com/ .

[sarcasm]Wow ! A great "neutral" source, especially one that promotes "new religions"[/sarcasm]

Acharya S said...

Anonymous said...

There is so much proof that the historical Jesus actually lived. In fact Christianity is the only evidential, historical religion in the world.


Actually, no, there is no credible and valid scientific proof that Jesus Christ ever existed, and the preponderance of evidence points to him being as mythical a character as Hercules.

The above statement apparently needs to be repeated as often as the first comment by Anon here, which remains incorrect, regardless of how many times it is said.

The contentions in these videos have already been demonstrated by me and others to be worthless as "proof" of the existence of Jesus Christ.

Without knowing the mythology of other cultures from the "known world" of the time, one cannot readily see the mythical precedents upon which Christianity is so patently founded. And most of the individuals involved in Christian apologetics are not adequately educated as to the ancient pre-Christian religion and mythology to know what they are looking at.

Check out THESE videos:

The Christ Myth

And, by the way, Islam makes the same claim to being the "only true religion..." Do you believe that?

Mriana said...

Anonymous said...
There is so much proof that the historical Jesus actually lived. In fact Christianity is the only evidential, historical religion in the world.

For more watch these youtube videos:

Jesus: Evidence- Historical proof 1 & 2

http://youtube.com/watch?v=A2TjQqdRg5U
http://youtube.com/watch?v=pvdg5KBlHCY


It ceases to amaze what people base their belief that there is a historical Jesus. They never do their own research or question what evangelist say, they don't think for themselves, but allow themselves to be spoon-fed without questioning... Basically they run around spouting off what their church minister wants them to believe and take him out his word because he refuses to be questioned. This show a lack of knowledge and a lack of desire to do research and think for oneself. They study nothing on the scholarly level, but take an apologic hellfire and damnation preacher's word for it and cave to the mental mind-control of these men. They allow themselves to be scared into believing a myth, "just in case" and think they know it all based on what a hellfire damnation minister says. Seems stupidly naive to me.

Yes, I watched and listened and I don't stammer when someone says "There is overwhelming evidence that he existed" because there isn't any overwhelming evidence. The evangelist in the video immediately used 27 stories he called books. That is NOT historical, but rather mythological. IF one would stop listening to ministers like this, got off their butt and did their own research, read other texts, esp Egyptian, Babylonian, Assyrian, etc AND thought for themselves they would know this.

One of the greatest experts? Prof Simon Greenly. PLEASE! I hate to tell you this, but that "greatest expert" bit is made up. I have spent over 20 years studying this, 30 if you count all the apologists I was fed as a teenager, and I have yet to run into such a name. I still peak in and check out what apologists are saying every now and then. They have not changed very much.

The Testamony of the Evangelist from what this man said is BOGUS! See none of them are eyewitnesses and the names are not of the authors who wrote those books. IF you must have a Christian scholar/minister to back this up, check out Spong, like I said before, as well as Marcus Borg (who is mid-way between Spong and apologists, but far from apologists). These documents have not been in the hands of the Church for more than 2000 years. They have not lasted 2000 years. So what if the law says we have to prove it to be false, you won't believe it anyway and none of it supports the scriptures. Besides that, any number of the scholars I mentioned, including Acharya, can show forgeries and have.

This guy says a lot of nothing and shows no actual proof. He is expecting you to take him at his word, which is wrong. You can't take him at his word because you have not done your own research to even know that he knows what he's talking about, which he doesn't. To do this, you have to read more than just apologists, you have to read other sources too or you will get more GIGO (garbage in, garbage out).

There is no REAL mention that Jesus existed outside the Bible. You are being TOLD who said what, but have you actually read, research, and studied their works? Probably not. Pagan writers? Hate to say it, but Christianity is Pagan too.

All these people have before them is their Bible and they are being told what other sources say, but they can't read them for themselves. He is BSing them. They need to go out and do their own research.

I can show you so much literary tools being used in the texts as well as make references of how it is rewritten text. Raising of the dead? You can see the OT and see that it is rewritten. JC's ascention is the same thing as Elijah and Elisha.

The section of Josephus has been proven to be a forgery. This evangelist read the actual forge text. Again you are believing what you are being told and not doing your own research. It is an interpolation and this guy knows nothing because he does not want to believe the evidence. He wants to believe a myth and he wants you to believe it too, no matter how much brainwashing, denying you the right to question what he says, etc it takes. Have him show you the evidence he speaks of. It's not there.

This guy has shown no evidence that Jesus is not a myth or a fable. He is not giving you any facts nor is he allowing you to question and do your own research. IF he was allowing you to do so, then he would give you more resources than what he is giving you and suggesting you go out there and check it out for yourself. He doesn't do that.

Do your own research and think for yourself.

Mriana said...

[sarcasm]Wow ! A great "neutral" source, especially one that promotes "new religions"[/sarcasm]

New religions? I listened to the audio tract that I mentioned and there was no mention of new religions or support of any in that audio. It was nothing but facts straight up without the promotion and any new religions. *rolling eyes*

Anonymous said...

Apollo is the sun god, Jesus is the son God....

If you can't differentiate between the 2 then there must be something seriously wrong with your head...

Anonymous said...

Stop reading in to Egyptian mythology. It seems it's the fad Jesus theory of the day. Popular amongst atheists. how hypocritical is that on their part, claiming they don't believe in god and they using the same mechanism to argue their point.

Anonymous said...

I believe that all religious imagery emanates from, evokes, and points back to an unconscious energy source within us. The similarities from one distant culture to another are just too striking to dismiss as coincidence, so that really gives us a dilemma. Either all of these are proof of several deus ex machina cameo appearances in the real-time "plot" of history, or none of them are.

Once you get into comparative mythology, it quickly becomes apparent that these recurrent symbols and story motifs are neither original nor culturally transmitted. Otherwise, we would have to concede that somehow or other the Mayans and the Iroquois heard, copied and adapted the story of the virgin birth and the resurrection about 1500 years before the birth of Jesus.

Anonymous said...

Some notes on alleged parallels between Christianity and pagan religions
And, a proof that Winstin Churchill did not exist!
"Justin Martyr"

(The author is a historian based at one the world's leading universities. He specialises in and is currently developing a publication record on ancient and modern myth.)

An argument frequently advanced against Christianity runs roughly like this: there are many features of Christianity that resemble features of other religious, particularly ancient pagan religious; therefore, Christianity has copied those features; therefore, Christianity is not true. It is the purposes of these notes to establish that this argument rests upon unwarranted premises and that its logic is fallacious.

1. Do many features of Christianity resemble features of other religions?

Obviously, on one level the answer has to be 'yes'. Christanity posits the existence of a personal god who takes an interest in humanity. It teaches that the individual does not cease to exist after biological death. It has a series of sacred texts which are used as a guide to doctrine and ethics and play an important role in public worship. The pre-Reformation branches of Christanity, moreover, have priesthoods, a developed theology of sacrifice and strong sacramental and ritualistic traditions.

Recognising this, however, doesn't get us very far: very many religions across human time and space exhibit and have exhibited the same characteristics. What we need are specific parallels in matters of detail. To meet this challenge, non-Christians generally advance two sets of parallels, which are not necessarily mutually incompatible but do not go particularly naturally together.

The first involves the construct of the dying-rising god. A full scholarly study of the history of this concept has yet to be written, but suffice it to say here that it was popularised by the Scottish anthropologist Sir James Frazer in the late Nineteenth and early Twentieth Centuries. Frazer believed that primitive peoples linked the annual cycles of agriculture with 'corn spirits' (a concept which he borrowed from the German scholar Mannhardt). In its developed form, the theology of these primitive agriculturalists posited that the corn spirit died and was reborn annually, typically in the form of the divine king in whom it was incarnated. Frazer believed that the religions of the ancient Near East provided several examples of dying-rising gods who had emerged from primitive belief-systems similar to these, most notably Attis, Adonis and Osiris.

Frazer's theory is loaded with problems. Whole papers, even books, criticising his theory have been written, and nowadays it is extremely difficult to find any recognised, reputable anthropologists who will accept it even in a modified form. Here are some of the major difficulties with it:
1. Frazer's sources were frequently inaccurate or irrelevant, or else he interpreted them in tendentious ways.
2. Frazer himself subscribed to discredited nineteenth-century ideas such as the evolutionist model of human societal development (which has nothing to do with the theory of biological evolution and is today firmly rejected by experts) and the notion that present-day primitive tribesmen can be studied as a means of finding out what things were like at the dawn of civilisation.
3. Evidence which has emerged since Frazer wrote has not merely failed to back up his hypotheses: it has fatally undermined them. For interesting critiques of Frazer's work, see e.g. Sir Edmund Leach's articles in Daedalus 90 (1961) and Current Anthropology 7 (1966); also (in much greater detail) J.Z.Smith, 'The Glory, Jest and Riddle', Diss. Yale 1969 (by one of the greatest living historians of religion).

The greatest problem with Frazer, however, is that construct of the dying-rising god is simply a fantasy. The distinguished scholar J.Z.Smith, a man who most certainly cannot be regarded as a defender of Christianity, wrote an important article for Mircea Eliade's 'Encyclopedia of Religion' (New York 1987) in which he took every alleged example of a dying-rising god and showed that none of them actually fit the category. (My own researches lead me to believe that the Phoenician god Melqart, whom Smith does not discuss, is the one exception - but he *is* very much the exception.) Certainly, Frazer's star witnesses of Attis, Adonis and Osiris suffer from the fatal flaw in each case of dying and then failing to be resurrected.

Even if Frazer and his followers were right about the dying-rising god, the relevance to Christianity would be doubtful. The Christian story makes no connection whatever between Christ and the agricultural year or the rhythms of the natural world. Moreover, Frazer's followers who elaborated his work with particular reference to the ancient Near East made it clear that their dying-rising gods and kings were tightly enmeshed in a series of bizarre annual rites with no conceivable parallels in Christianity.

The second 'copycat' model advanced by sceptics involves the prototypical schemas of the life of the hero sometimes drawn up by scholars.

The sceptic will typically appeal to the work of Lord Raglan, even though it's now 70 years out of date and a number of different schemas have since been proposed. There are serious problems with Raglan: in order to get mythical figures to fit his schema, you often have to cheat quite blatantly; and, in any case, real-life historical figures such as Hitler and Napoleon fit the pattern just as well as the ancient heroes whom he adduced.

In general, the 'monomyth' schemas are of limited usefulness. They prove a certain amount about the patterns followed by the lives of heroes in different cultures, but they don't prove very much, and what they do prove isn't always very comforting to the sceptic.

To begin with, if one puts all the schemas that have been proposed together and looks for common elements, the results that emerge are often vague or unhelpful. For instance, the hero will typically have a miraculous conception or birth - but it's hardly legitimate to compare the story of the virgin birth recounted in the Gospels with (say) Zeus' rape of Leda in the form of a swan simply because both involve some sort of supernatural element. What such 'similarities' boil down to seems to be the earth-shattering revelation that supernatural things happen to supernatural figures, which is essentially a tautology.

Secondly, where hero-stories do concur, they often concur in ways which question the utility of applying them to the story of Jesus. Incest and parricide are recurrent themes of the schemas, for example, as is the link between the hero and kingship (you can get out of this by suggesting that Jesus was the heir of King David, or that he heralded the Kingdom of God, but this is just the sort of cheating that drains the schemas of their credibility). Even Raglan's schema falls down on this point, most obviously because Jesus didn't marry a princess (a motif which appears in other schemas too).
2. Even if they exist, what do the parallels prove?

Many non-Christians seem to believe that, in order to be true, Christianity must be unique. This is utterly fallacious - if anything, the precise opposite is the case. If Christian doctrine were strange and deviant and had no similarities at all to that of other religious systems, it would be *more* likely to be a weird, aberrant construct, not *less*. To take one obvious example, a simple and economical explanation for the widespread human tendency to posit supernatural figures who, like Christ, mediate between man and God, is that humans correctly realise that we *do* need such a mediator. (Hence, ironically, some of the scholars most eager to prove the existence of dying-rising gods in the ancient Near East and elsewhere were *Christians*. One thinks here especially of the scholars behind the three volumes of essays 'Myth and Ritual' (Oxford 1930), 'The Labyrinth' (Oxford 1935) and 'Myth, Ritual and Kingship' (Oxford 1958).)

Points of contact between Christianity and other religions are damaging to Christianity's truth claims only if actual borrowings can be proven - not if the parallel features have simply sprung from the same psychological source common to all humans - that is, from the innate religious instinct which Christians regard as a gift of God.

I cannot think of a single case in which Christianity can be shown to have borrowed a core doctrine from another religion. This does not include minor borrowings which everyone admits, such as the dating of Christmas to 25th December (an old Roman sun-festival), or the use of holy water and incense in worship, or the wearing of wedding rings, or dedicating churches to named saints (just as pagan temples were dedicated to different deities). In such cases, the borrowings were not clumsy or furtive: rather, they were deliberate and unashamed. A good example is the Pope's use of the old Roman chief priest's title 'Pontifex Maximus', a title which the Christians deliberately appropriated to emphasise that their religion had defeated and replaced Roman paganism.

Conclusion

None of the attempts made by sceptics to demonstrate that Christianity is false because it contains alleged pagan elements is credible or convincing. There are admittedly many good arguments against Christianity, but this simply isn't one.

Winston Churchill as a Raglanian hero

The purpose of these notes is to establish that the career of Sir Winston Churchill contains multiple features which correspond with suspicious closeness to Raglan's schema of the life of the hero, and hence that he is probably a fictitious personage.

Let us take Raglan's motifs one by one.

1. The hero's mother is a royal virgin

Churchill's mother was Jennie Jerome, a prominent member of American high society: a quasi-princess. Her father was Leonard Walton Jerome, a wealthy financier.
2. His father is a king and
3. often a near relative of the mother, but

Churchill's father was Lord Randolph Churchill, an extremely prominent aristocrat and politician. He was descended from the Dukes of Marlborough and hence a member of one of the best-known most illustrious noble dynasties in Britain. He could not have been made the son of a king, since at the time of his birth Britain was ruled by a female monarch, the great Queen Victoria.
4. the circumstances of his conception are unusual, and
5. he is also reputed to be the son of a god

Churchill's mother was allegedly a serial adulterer, and her admirers are known to have included such illustrious figures as the future King Edward VII. Though historians have avoided suggesting that Winston was a bastard, doubts have certainly been expressed concerning the paternity of his younger brother Jack. An earlier version of the story may have been less circumspect.
6. at birth an attempt is made, usually by his father or maternal grandfather, to kill him, but
7. He is spirited away, and
8. Reared by foster-parents in a far country

Churchill's relationship with his father was cold, and he was treated with unusual violence by his teachers (father-substitute). He was sent away from home to several private boarding schools and colleges; even before that, he is believed to have been much closer to the nurse to whom he was entrusted than to either of his natural parents. We may also note that as a youth he worked abroad for some time as a journalist and soldier in South Africa, Sudan, Cuba and elsewhere.
9. We are told nothing of his childhood, but

It is a notorious fact that the only period of Churchill's life which ever receives any attention is his late adulthood, from the 1930s to the 1950s, though a few stories exist concerning his conduct in the First World War and his activities as a war reporter in the Boer War.
10. On reaching manhood he returns or goes to his future kingdom.

After the Boer War, Churchill's series of exiles ended and he settled down in Britain for good.
11. After a victory over the king and/or giant, dragon, or wild beast
12. He marries a princess, often the daughter of his predecessor and
13. becomes king

Churchill's return to Britain was followed closely by his entry into politics. His 'victory' may plausibly be identified with his exploits in South Africa, which first thrust him into the limelight (he received a hero's welcome after his escape from an Afrikaner concentration camp). His marriage in 1908 to Clementine Ogilvy Hozier, an aristocratic princess-figure, coincided precisely with the first peak of his political career: from 1906 onwards, he began to receive a series of high-profile government jobs, notably that of Home Secretary in 1910-11.

Churchill's second phase of political success came from 1940 onwards, when he served as Britain's wartime Prime Minister. During the 1930s, he had struggled at length with the metaphorical beasts of Nazism and Communism.
14. For a time he reigns uneventfully and
15. Prescribes laws but

Churchill did just this, serving with distinction as a government minister for several years from 1906 to 1915. Later, his first term of office as Premier (1940-1945) was distinguished both by Britain's victory over Nazi Germany and by the passage of a series of important legislative measures such as the 1944 Education Act, which laid the foundations of Britain's modern school system.
16. later loses favor with the gods and or his people and
17. Is driven from from the throne and the city after which
18. He meets with a mysterious death
19. often at the top of a hill.

After a series of military failures, notably the disastrous Dardannelles expedition in 1915, for which he was held responsible, Churchill was sacked as First Lord of the Sea in 1915 and resigned from the government altogether shortly afterwards. This series of events is suspiciously paralleled by his subsequent ill-starred involvement in the Russian Civil War and the Anglo-Irish War, which was followed in 1922 by his departure from Parliament.

Later in his life, Churchill's second term as Prime Minister (1951-1955) is generally regarded as a failure both because of his irresolute economic policy and his abortive attempt to end the Cold War through a peace conference. Though he was not actually killed nor defeated at the polls, he did suffer a stroke at around this time, and his departure from the political stage was earnestly sought for and welcomed when it came.
20. his children, if any, do not succeed him.

Churchill's son and heir Randolph was not half the man that his father was. He attempted to follow a political and literary career like that of his father and failed miserably.
21. his body is not buried, but
22. nevertheless he has one or more holy sepulchres.

Churchill's grave at Woodstock is still an object of veneration.

The duplication of several motifs leads one to suspect that more that one version of the Churchill myth circulated, and that the several were combined by a relatively late redactor. The necessity of fitting so many events into a single lifetime has meant that Churchill has been given an implausibly eventful career and a suspiciously long life, especially given his liking for cigars and brandy (he was allegedly born in 1874 and died in 1965). Incidentally, any politician who really had won a world war for Britain would without doubt have been offered a peerage, perhaps even a dukedom. That Churchill is said to have died 'Sir Winston' is deeply suspicious.

Anonymous said...

Acharya are you a member of the female Masonic fraternity?

Acharya S said...

FYI, the endless stream of messages with links to old "debunking" articles that have already been addressed and refuted have been rejected. The people who have written such articles are not educated in comparative mythology and do not know what they are talking about, no matter how many times their articles are circulated around the net.

I address the infantile LIBEL of whether or not I am a Freemason in my video attached to this blog post. Are you aware that TEKTON means "FREEMASON" in modern Greek? Perhaps you have tethered your horse to the wrong side of reality.

Anonymous said...

"Anonymous said...

Some notes on alleged parallels between Christianity and pagan religions
And, a proof that Winstin Churchill did not exist!
"Justin Martyr""

whoa - DUDE!

Are you trying to bore us to death with stupid Christian spam?

Mriana said...

Acharya S said...
FYI, the endless stream of messages with links to old "debunking" articles that have already been addressed and refuted have been rejected. The people who have written such articles are not educated in comparative mythology and do not know what they are talking about, no matter how many times their articles are circulated around the net.

I address the infantile LIBEL of whether or not I am a Freemason in my video attached to this blog post. Are you aware that TEKTON means "FREEMASON" in modern Greek? Perhaps you have tethered your horse to the wrong side of reality.


Taking a study break (two religion finals back to back tomorrow) only to find a lot of spam added to your blog. It would seem they are clinging harder to their security blanket and attempting to maker their tantrum a little louder thinking they will be heard above and dispite all the actual evidence against what they are saying. *Mriana shakes head and sighs*

Mriana said...

Are you trying to bore us to death with stupid Christian spam?

I think they are. It's a form of a temper tantrum, because they know they've lost against knowledge and that their superstitions cannot hold up to the real truth. They don't want to face the light. It might blind them. *rolling eyes*

MJB said...

Good evening my friends,

Thank you for the comments on my last post.

If we can agree that we are looking or seeking the truth here on "truth be known", I am convinced that we shall find it.

Mt 7:7
Ask, and it shall be given you; seek, and ye shall find; knock, and it shall be opened unto you.

I know this to be true.

Let's pick up where I left off.

mriana
"First off, MJB, your eternal truth does not change in light of new information."

Your point being? Are you saying we are in agreement here?


Acharya,

"Get it? By usurping the gods of other cultures - "borrowing" their myths and reworking them to revolve around themselves - Jews were able to convince billions of people that their tribal god is the God of the cosmos, that their tribal writings are "God's Word," that they are "God's Chosen People," that their nation is "the Holy Land" and that "God's Son" is the Jewish messiah!

A few questions come to mind here, if you could please clarify:

1)You are clearly putting the stylus in the hands of the jews.
Is this applicable to the new testament only or the old testament as well?

2)If the jews were the ones that wanted billions to believe in their tribal God, why the "sun God" detour, if they were trying to get people away from that kind of God?

3)Why are they blaming themselves and thereby harvesting the wrath of these billions? How does that benefit them or their tribal God?

4)Why do todays jews not believe in Jesus as their messiah if that was the plan?

5)How were they able to influence roman and greek history writers, who were clearly neither jewish nor christian, to go along with these schemes?


I find it more plausibel what Ralph Ellis and many others have to say: that canaan was part of the egytian empire for the longest time and that the jewish Abraham was Pharao Amenemhet I., Jacob was Pharao Yakubher, Pharao ThutmoseIII was Moses, Pharao Siamun was King Solomon, King David was Pharao PsusennesI., etc.
Since the hebrews are a tribal people, over time, the names and identities changed here and there.

Since the egyptians kept detailed historical records, the old testament, is not so much fiction then, but based on actual persons and events.

Now if they , according to your theory, designed the new testament around the prophecies of the old testament, why would they have included passages like these?:

John 8:42-45

"Jesus said unto them, If God were your Father, ye would love me: for I proceeded forth and came from God; neither came I of myself, but he sent me. 43 Why do ye not understand my speech? even because ye cannot hear my word. 44 Ye are of your father the devil, and the lusts of your father ye will do. He was a murderer from the beginning, and abode not in the truth, because there is no truth in him. When he speaketh a lie, he speaketh of his own: F19 for he is a liar, and the father of it. 45 And because I tell you the truth, ye believe me not."

What sense would it make to call their father the devil, who "has no truth in him", if they are trying to sell a religion to billions?

I'm sorry I am not following here, please explain.

To the anony who posted Paul L. Maier, thank you, that makes more sense to me.

At least from a "scientific" probability perspective.

Well, I will leave it at that for tonight and want to ask eveyone to find the truth in them.

May Yeshua Hannotzri help you in that process.

May the Peace and Love of Jesus be your Light-

MJB

Mriana said...

mriana
"First off, MJB, your eternal truth does not change in light of new information."

Your point being? Are you saying we are in agreement here?


Obviously you don't get it. It has nothing to do with what you are saying or what I'm saying. IF you had read the whole thing you would get it. Guess you still think a bat is a bird if you reject science. If it had not been for science people would still be thinking that a bat is a bird, just as the Bible says.

However, you did prove one thing, you don't read everything in people's posts and you probably believe the Bible is the only knowledge you ever need, which makes you ignorant. Not stupid, just ignorant, because you don't know any better. Now if you knew better, then that would be stupidity. Thing is, you have the sad lot in life of ignorance. :( A mind is a terrible thing to waste. The problem is, I don't think you want an real education, which is even sadder.

Since the egyptians kept detailed historical records, the old testament, is not so much fiction then, but based on actual persons and events.

This is a fallicy. Horus and Osiris were not real people and the Egyptian scholar will even state that. Even the Jews, and I know a Jewish Rabbi who happens to be female, who will state as much, admit Moses was not real or at least not the one depicted in the Bible.

At least from a "scientific" probability perspective.

What you are doing is not scientific proceedure. What you are doing is starting with the assumption that a bat is a bird and trying to find everything that supports that idea. "Bat flies therefore it is a bird" and everything you find that supports that you say confirms it. Science does not work that way. It starts out with a hypothesis "Are we the center of the universe? Does everything revovle around the earth?" There are no preassumptions and it does not go by anything that supports the idea that we are the center, even if the Bible says we are the center and everything revovles around the earth. What is discovered is the opposite idea of the Bible and we revolve around the sun just as everything else does. Then the results are tested again. If it continues to be the same answer, it becomes theory, much like the Theory of Gravity. A theory in science is a fact that has been proven via tested again and again, with the same results. Not something that is plausible or just an idea.

That is the simplest way of explain it and still keep it as accurate as possible. The Theory of Evolution is a fact based on what we know through repeated tests that come out with the same results, just as the theory of gravity is a fact. Don't take my word for it though. Test it yourself and find out what happens when you jump from a tree or even a mountain. Oh and do take a safety precautions when you do it. The result could be quite painful, if not deadly.

As for the bat being a mammal, well it gives birth just as humans do and suckles it's young, just as humans do. Birds do not. The DNA of a pig, also a mammal, has been tested over and over again, only to find that we are related and could potentially receive an organ transplant from them or even have one made via stem cells from a pig.

Sadly, the Bible doesn't teach you any of that and most of its so called science is inaccurate. Not only that, any science that is based upon the Bible is scientifically inaccurate. The reality is, chimps, apes, and humans have a common ancestor. Man was not made before the other apes, for we are apes, but started evolving about the same time. So, a better reason to take care of your brother the chimp or gorilla, is not because the Bible tells you to, but because there is a 97% genetic relationship, we are all part of the ecosystem, and if they become extinct, esp. along with all the other animals, the potential for man to become extinct is even greater. If their food source is destroyed, ours soon will be too, because our diets are quite similar. Their environment is our environment, destroy that and we will all die.

The Bible doesn't tell you that, because humans did not understand this when it was written. No, it is says we have dominion over everything on the earth and people take that to mean we can use it however we want to use it, even though science has news that is contradictary to that idea. Ah, but of course, this probably makes you think you are one step closer to your god returning. Sorry to disappoint you, but the reality is that earth will be a barron wasteland much like Mars. What was once streams, will just be distant memories with some evidence that there once was rivers and streams- just like Mars.

It would be better if you got your head out of fiction and into the real world, because anything that you say is science in the Bible, is actually pseudo-science and can be debunked and refuted with real science. The same with the so called history you ascribed to from the Bible. It's psuedo-history, which you would know if you had read that link I posted a while back. The same thing applies to Ramses II and Moses- wrong Ramses for starters, but don't let historical facts outside the Bible set you straight.

Mriana said...

Mt 7:7
Ask, and it shall be given you; seek, and ye shall find; knock, and it shall be opened unto you.

I know this to be true.


BTW, how do you know this is true? Is your deity an adult santa claus? Reality check: Did that little girl, who died of Diabetes get will with the sole treatment being prayer by her parents? If it was God's will that the little girl died, instead of answering the parent's requests that she live, what sort of deity is that?

No, reality is that the parents were stupid. Not ignorant, but stupid. Insuline, discovered by medical scientist, was and is the only treatment currently to treat diabetes and prevent diabetic comas which can lead to organ failure and eventually death. The kidneys stop cleaning the blood, which causes infections, which in turns destroys internal organs and causes them to stop functioning. Eventually, they lose limbs, esp legs, and if they can still urinate, their urine turns black. Eventually, they have a diabetic coma, organs fail, and they die. Asking God, any god, to heal a child and cure them, without any medical treatment is foolish and the prayer request is bound to fail.

So, no. Asking and you shall receive is not true. I'm sure those parents had a ton of faith and asked their god to cure their daughter with only prayers. Sadly, their prayer failed and they did not get what they asked for. What they got was a dead daughter and their other children taken from them because of their stupidity.

Anonymous said...

Even secular scholars have rejected the idea of Christianity borrowing from the ancient mysteries. The well-respected Sir Edward Evans-Pritchard writes in Theories of Primitive Religion that “The evidence for this theory… is negligible.”

“The first real parallel of a dying and rising god does not appear until A.D. 150, more than a hundred years after the origin of Christianity. So if there was any influence of one on the other, it was the influence of the historical event of the New Testament [resurrection] on mythology, not the reverse. The only known account of a god surviving death that predates Christianity is the Egyptian cult god Osiris. In this myth, Osiris is cut into fourteen pieces, scattered around Egypt, then reassembled and brought back to life by the goddess Isis. However, Osiris does not actually come back to physical life but becomes a member of a shadowy underworld…This is far different than Jesus’ resurrection account where he was the gloriously risen Prince of life who was seen by others on earth before his ascension into heaven.” –Dr. Norman Geisler

“Not one clear case of any alleged resurrection teaching appears in any pagan text before the late second century A.D., almost one hundred years after the New Testament was written.” –Dr. Gary Habermas

Anonymous said...

Zeitgeist on religion is full of half-truths, lies, and few truths. I will try to focus on the inaccuracies based off of the Old Testament. I have tried to show its a lie and debunked - but please do your own research too.

Sadly deceptive and convincing, but fraught with logical issues.

Summary:

1). Bet Lechem is a real place.
2). The deities compared to Jesus are twisted or lies.
3). The number 12 may be in the Bible, but definitely not where they say.
4). Ages are only sourced one time in Job falsely.
5). Why the Golden Calf was a calf.
6). Explains why Egypt had 3 similar laws.
7). 4 characters similar to Moses either dont exist or come after. India, Greek etc…
8). Judaism has relatively nothing in common with the things they state about Egypt except circumcision etc….

Additional Notes: The Three Kings (Orions belt) are called that LONG after Jesus.

You can agree with the conclusions still, but the logic is fraught with lies and half-truths.

Acharya S said...

Anonymous said...

Even secular scholars have rejected the idea of Christianity borrowing from the ancient mysteries. The well-respected Sir Edward Evans-Pritchard writes in Theories of Primitive Religion that “The evidence for this theory… is negligible.”

“The first real parallel of a dying and rising god does not appear until A.D. 150, more than a hundred years after the origin of Christianity. So if there was any influence of one on the other, it was the influence of the historical event of the New Testament [resurrection] on mythology, not the reverse. The only known account of a god surviving death that predates Christianity is the Egyptian cult god Osiris. In this myth, Osiris is cut into fourteen pieces, scattered around Egypt, then reassembled and brought back to life by the goddess Isis. However, Osiris does not actually come back to physical life but becomes a member of a shadowy underworld…This is far different than Jesus’ resurrection account where he was the gloriously risen Prince of life who was seen by others on earth before his ascension into heaven.” –Dr. Norman Geisler

“Not one clear case of any alleged resurrection teaching appears in any pagan text before the late second century A.D., almost one hundred years after the New Testament was written.” –Dr. Gary Habermas


Yes, we've heard the drill many times before. These secular "scholars" are not specialized in the fields of comparative religion and mythology. Simply because someone is a secularist or atheist does not make them all-knowing, but that's a nice idea.

Norman Geisler and Gary Habermas are fervent Christian apologists. As such, they will deny anything that contradicts the received gospel history. The New Testament was not written during the first century - there is absolutely no evidence of that claim. The rest of these contentions are addressed in my writings and elsewhere.

Christianity is a mythical rehash of preceding concepts found around the Mediterranean and beyond.

Acharya S said...

Anonymous said...

Zeitgeist on religion is full of half-truths, lies, and few truths. I will try to focus on the inaccuracies based off of the Old Testament. I have tried to show its a lie and debunked - but please do your own research too.


Obviously, we disagree, but, yes, please do your own research, rather than believe Christian apologists who insist that the extremely flawed Bible is the "Word of God" and that there is an invisible Jewish guy omnipresently floating around in the sky.

Mriana said...

Anonymous said...
Even secular scholars have rejected the idea of Christianity borrowing from the ancient mysteries.


This is not true. In fact, if you read my post concerning what I quoted about the Jesus Seminar was from Free Inquiry Magazine. I documented that right in my post.

If you listen to any Secularist podcasts you would know they talk about this often and have not rejected it. In fact, if you go to Minnesoat Atheists, you will see Bob Price talks about this topic and quite often says, "If there ever was an historical Jesus, he's too buried in myth to find". Other Secularist groups have talked about this topic without rejection in recent years too.

If you frequent such podcasts and magazines, as I do, you would know, this simply is not true.

Anonymous said...

There is proof that the new testament was written in the 1st century A.D.:

http://www.carm.org/evidence/textualevidence.htm

Anonymous said...

The Dead Sea Scrolls is one proof that the New testament was written in the 1st century, in fact right after Jesus resurrected:
Christian connections

Spanish Jesuit José O'Callaghan has argued that one fragment (7Q5) is a New Testament text from the Gospel of Mark, chapter 6, verses 52–53. In recent years this controversial assertion has been taken up again by German scholar Carsten Peter Thiede. A successful identification of this fragment as a passage from Mark would make it the earliest extant New Testament document, dating somewhere between 30 AD and 60 AD. Opponents consider that the fragment is tiny and requires so much reconstruction (the only complete word in Greek is "και" = "and") that it could have come from a text other than Mark.

Robert Eisenman advanced the theory that some scrolls actually describe the early Christian community, characterized as more fundamentalist and rigid than the one portrayed by the New Testament. Eisenman also attempted to relate the career of James the Just and the Apostle Paul / Saul of Tarsus to some of these documents.

Acharya S said...

There's no "proof" on that page that the New Testament was "written" in the first century.

Did you even read that page or understand it?

There is no credible and valid scientific evidence that the New Testament as we have it existed before the end of the second century. The Rylands fragment likely dates to that time.

See my book Who Was Jesus? for more information.

Acharya S said...

The Dead Sea scrolls do not provide any proof of the existence of the New Testament or of Jesus Christ. On the contrary, they demonstrate a pre-existing sect that was changed into Christianity, without any need for a "historical Jesus."

Thiede's work has been shown to be in error, as the fragment he uses is likely not even from the gospel of Mark.

I know Dr. Eisenman and his work. Neither he nor it demonstrate the existence of the New Testament in the first century or that Jesus Christ was a historical figure.

«Oldest ‹Older   1 – 200 of 228   Newer› Newest»