Quotes on religion and the mythical Christian solar god Jesus's association with the Sun

Yea, but did you read this and other similar writings by Frazier.

Excerpt from: Sir James George Frazer (1854–1941). The Golden Bough. 1922–About the African-Kemetic (Egyptian) goddess Isis

"…Thus chastened and transfigured she won many hearts far beyond the boundaries of her native land. In that welter of religions which accompanied the decline of national life in antiquity her worship was one of the most popular at Rome and throughout the empire.

Some of the Roman emperors themselves were openly addicted to it. And however the religion of Isis may, like any other, have been often worn as a cloak by men and women of loose life, her rites appear on the whole to have been honourably distinguished by a dignity and composure, a solemnity and decorum, well fitted to soothe the troubled mind, to ease the burdened heart. They appealed therefore to gentle spirits, and above all to women, whom the bloody and licentious rites of other Oriental goddesses only shocked and repelled.

We need not wonder, then, that in a period of decadence, when traditional faiths were shaken, when systems clashed, when men’s minds were disquieted, when the fabric of empire itself, once deemed eternal, began to show ominous rents and fissures, the serene figure of Isis with her spiritual calm, her gracious promise of immortality, should have appeared to many like a star in a stormy sky, and should have roused in their breasts a rapture of devotion not unlike that which was paid in the Middle Ages to the Virgin Mary…"

More from: Sir James George Frazer (1854–1941). The Golden Bough. 1922–On the African-Kemetic (Egyptian) goddess Isis.

" Indeed her stately ritual, with its shaven and tonsured priests, its matins and vespers, its tinkling music, its baptism and aspersions of holy water, its solemn processions, its jewelled images of the Mother of God, presented many points of similarity to the pomps and ceremonies of Catholicism.

The resemblance need not be purely accidental. Ancient Egypt may have contributed its share to the gorgeous symbolism of the Catholic Church as well as to the pale abstractions of her theology.

Certainly in art the figure of Isis suckling the infant Horus is so like that of the Madonna and child that it has sometimes received the adoration of ignorant Christians.

And to Isis in her later character of patroness of mariners the Virgin Mary perhaps owes her beautiful epithet of Stella Maris, “Star of the Sea,” under which she is adored by tempest-tossed sailors.

The attributes of a marine deity may have been bestowed on Isis by the sea-faring Greeks of Alexandria. They are quite foreign to her original character and to the habits of the Egyptians, who had no love of the sea.

On this hypothesis Sirius, the bright star of Isis, which on July mornings rises from the glassy waves of the eastern Mediterranean, a harbinger of halcyon weather to mariners, was the true Stella Maris, “the Star of the Sea.”

1 Like

At first I thought this video was strange, but after listening to the whole video it is a excellent use of satire. Funny!

2 Likes

I was just singing that the other day, for no apparent reason!

3 Likes

The song is like a audio version of a Hindu meditation symbol or chant.

Sun King…Sun King …ummmmmmm

1 Like

chgoliz seems to be referring to the song (which I don’t recognize) quoted by nimelennar, not “Sun King.”

ETA: nim’s song is from Jesus Christ Superstar.

2 Likes

Thanks, Jesus Christ Superstar.

“Jesus Christ” all women on this earth became impregnated by having sex and being impregnated by a man–or become impregnated through artificial insemination.

Yet in order to believe in Jesus Christ, one must first believe that a virgin woman on earth was impregnated by a “Superstar” supreme creator god.

And it happened twice in the Bible–John the Baptist’s mother Elizabeth was also impregnated by the Christian supreme creator god.

2 Likes

I read the whole bloody thing, and since it was the nominally “unexpurgated” version it included the parts about Christianity that are not in all versions.

Nothing you’ve posted here, or referenced, convinces me that Jesus was not a real person. You’re still basically saying that since no first-person accounts of Jesus’s life are available to you, you’re going to throw away all other evidence, and you’re choosing to pick one of the many religions that preceded and vaguely resemble Christianity and assign Jesus’s legacy to a figure from that earlier religion.

That’s fine, and I certainly don’t want to dissuade you from holding your own opinions. But you aren’t going to convince me with this line of reasoning; I’m still on board the bandwagon with most professional historians and theologians and believe that Jesus was a real live person whose legend has grown to include magical trappings in the typical way.

8 Likes

Do professorial historians agree on how cool Jesus was?

4 Likes

You have issues with the person you sourced for validation, who in fact actually refutes your claim. It is good you read the whole bloody thing because you now see it does not substantiate your claim.

Any historian who does not present primary, secondary, tertiary or radio carbon dating sources to back up the existence of Jesus is not credible… You may think and believe they are credible, but all they are is zealot and biased historians who want to believe in Jesus themselves.

Christian zealot theologians make as much sense as zealot theologians who study the existence of Santa Claus, Peter Pan, Big Foot, or my nieces favorite, The Powerpufff Girls (Bubbles, Blossom and Buttercup).

The best way to sum up zealot believers in mythical characters like Jesus and Moses–is to reference “blind faith”–you have blind faith even in the face of no evidence to prove the existence of Jesus.

No matter what evidence anyone presents to a person who has submitted to the Christian concept of blind faith–they will find someway to reconcile their belief.

An analogy of a man who has blind faith in religion: I forgot which historian said this:

A man is standing in front of a solid brick wall–and his religion (and blind faith in his religion and god) tells him there is a door in that solid brick wall. The man believes with all his heart and soul that a door is in the solid brick wall. Other people tell him “Hey there is no door in that solid brick wall, can’t you see that”

The man with blind faith goes home gets some building tools and comes back and builds a door inside the brick wall. Then he turns to the non-believers and says:

“See here is the door inside this brick wall that my religion and god said was here”

People who believe in mythical gods have to do a lot of door building-- i.e the translations are wrong, the interpretations are wrong, there is all this other mountain of evidence,(of which there is none)–no one needs primary, secondary, tertiary or radio carbon dating sources to prove the existence of an event or person, because they are not reliable compared to "magical trappings"etc…

2 Likes

So, again, what do you make of Josephus’s passage on the execution of Jesus’ brother James which occurred during Josephus’ lifetime, mentioned Jesus in passing, was something Josephus had no ulterior motive in presenting, and which as far as the MSS tradition goes is textually very reliable? How isn’t that a primary source or at worst somehow a secondary? What’s the most parsimonious account of the passage?

You’re rambling about something you know nothing about. It’s probably easy for you to imagine some conspiracy by zealot ancient historians (as weird as that idea is), but if you want to prove this, please offer evidence to back up your claim by naming some specific prominent current ancient historians who are Jesus historicists who you think are imposing their religion on history and just how they are doing so in their work. Also explain how it could be that the dominant position is both that there was some historical Jesus figure, but also that the New Testament is not at all a reliable account of his life. If they were religious zealots, it’s especially strange that the dominant view is actually completely damning to the religion they’re supposedly protecting.

5 Likes

Jesus turned water into wine–Jesus was “Way Cool”

King Missile: Jesus was way cool

7 Likes

Oh ye door builders.

You have it backwards, name some ancient historians who lived during the time Jesus was supposed to have lived who wrote anything about him.

Zealot and biased Christian scholars have been making up things to prove the existence of Jesus for years. The shroud of Jesus was a fake, they found a piece of the cross Jesus was crucified on, that was fake etc. etc. etc. .

Josephus’s so-called writings about Jesus have been debunked years ago by scholars. Josephus had a father (Mattathias) who never mentioned or wrote anything about a person named Jesus Christ.

The Jesus Forgery: Josephus Untangled

And this on James and Jesus: Oh Brother, James and Jesus box a fake

2 Likes

Well, there was an ancient historian who was born shortly after Jesus was supposed to have lived but who was alive and reported on Jesus’s brother’s execution.

Your source to “debunk” Josephus refers to the Testimonium Flavianum which I’d totally agree was heavily corrupted by later Christians. I do think that based on the early Syriac translation and more recent work done on computer-assisted linguistic analysis of the language of the passage that there are some parts that are original, but it’s a moot point. I’m not talking about the Testimonium Flavianum. I’m talking about Book 20 Ch. IX, which has not only not been “debunked,” but has withstood massive scrutiny. Linguistic analysis of the language of the passage shows it’s fully consistent with the rest of the work. How would some pig-ignorant poorly educated early Christian even manage that? Early Christians were not the cream of the crop intellectually and it showed most evidently in their abuses of Greek (the NT’s Koine is simplistic Greek with a heavy accent those writers would use, while Josephus wrote in the Attic of an educated aristocrat). While your link notes Origen doubting the TF, it doesn’t mention that Origen also cites Book 20 Ch. IX consistently with the current text.

Your link explaining that a modern discovery of a purported ossuary of James was a fake also has nothing to do with Josephus Book 20 Ch. IX.

6 Likes

Brothers in arms? Brothers of the cloth? Oh brother, indeed.

And who attributes this ‘brotherhood’ which the scribe recorded? We must assume he had done his research, and could pick out the truth sayers from the disillusioned within a group of religiously motivated followers.

But that’s history, my friend. Would you deny Caesar? Would you deny Plato? Conspiracy!

You probably can’t even read ancient Greek!

Now on to the FSM thread, which is replete with primary sources and direct evidence compared to this… stuff.

2 Likes

That would probably depend on the historian.

2 Likes

They aren’t real?!? Is it too early for a drink?

Although I’d argue that the debate over the existence of Jesus is not the same debate as the one over his divinity. It’s entirely possible that he existed, and was not at all divine, but was made so later by the church itself.

7 Likes

The point is that neither is Jesus real.

Or,

Jesus is as real as the Powerpuff Girls (Bubbles, Blossom and Buttercup).

1 Like

You agree with the source I cited for you and admit that the Testimonium Flavianum (TF) was debunked and corrupted by later Christians.

The same source says this about Antiquities of the Jews, Book 20, Chapter 9.

"Nowhere else in his voluminous works does Josephus use the word ‘Christ,’ except in the passage which refers to James ‘the brother of Jesus who was called Christ’ (Antiquities of the Jews, Book 20, Chapter 9, Paragraph 1), which is also considered to be a forgery.

"Since Josephus was not a Christian but an orthodox Jew, it is impossible that he should have believed or written that Jesus was the Christ or used the words ‘if it be lawful to call him a man,’ which imply the Christian belief in Jesus’ divinity.

The same source I cited for you stated and showed that Josephus wrote volumes and volumes of material, yet in Antiquities of Jews he only wrote one singular, suspect and convenient part of a sentence documenting the existence of Jesus.

From the source I cited for you: The Jesus Forgery: Josephus Untangled

“Its brevity disproves its authenticity. Josephus’ work is voluminous and exhaustive. It comprises twenty books. Whole pages are devoted to petty robbers and obscure seditious leaders. Nearly forty chapters are devoted to the life of a single king. Yet this remarkable being, the greatest product of his race, a being of whom the prophets foretold ten thousand wonderful things, a being greater than any earthly king, is dismissed with a dozen lines…”

With no primary, secondary, tertiary, or radio carbon dating sources to prove the existence of Jesus, you are reduced to this one singular, suspect and convenient part of a sentence to prove the existence of your Jesus.

From: Book 20, Chapter 9, paragraph 1
.

…so he assembled the sanhedrim of judges, and brought before them the brother of Jesus, who was called Christ, whose name was James…

From: Josephus on Jesus: The Death of James

This would seem to go against any notion that Eusebius had that James’ martyrdom was the cause of the siege; it would also go against Josephus’ own (alleged) reference.

The circumstances surrounding the two accounts of James’ death are also markedly different:

James was charged and trialled by the Sanhedrin according to Josephus. In Hegesippus’ account, there was no charge, and no trial, and presumably then no Sanhedrin.

In Josephus, James “and some of his companions” were condemned, while James appears to be the only person killed in Hegesippus’ account.

Josephus states that James (and some of his companions) were delivered to be stoned; while the stoning in Hegesippus’ account is an after-thought, since the fall from the summit of the temple (perhaps some thirty metres – see Wars of the Jews Book 5, Chapter 5, Section 5) did not kill him.

Since the timing of the two events and the circumstances surrounding the events cannot be easily reconciled, I contend that the two passages refer to two entirely different events. Subsequently I conclude that the reference to Jesus, “who was called Christ” is a Christian interpolation.

No personal artifacts of Jesus, no personal writings of Jesus outside the Bible, no historians, politicians, civic leaders or religious leaders who lived during the time of Jesus who wrote anything about him, no mention of Jesus Christ or his crucifixion in the Roman record.

The myth of Jesus is that of a Jewish Christian Messiah–yet Jewish theologians and the religion of Judaism does not recognize him.

Why don’t Jews believe in Jesus?

  1. CHRISTIANITY CONTRADICTS JEWISH THEOLOGY

The following theological points apply primarily to the Roman Catholic Church, the largest Christian denomination.

A. GOD AS THREE?

The Catholic idea of Trinity breaks God into three separate beings: The Father, the Son and the Holy Ghost (Matthew 28:19).

Contrast this to the Shema, the basis of Jewish belief: “Hear O Israel, the Lord our God, the Lord is ONE” (Deut. 6:4). Jews declare the Shema every day, while writing it on doorposts (Mezuzah), and binding it to the hand and head (Tefillin). This statement of God’s One-ness is the first words a Jewish child is taught to say, and the last words uttered before a Jew dies.

In Jewish law, worship of a three-part god is considered idolatry—one of the three cardinal sins that a Jew should rather give up his life than transgress. This explains why during the Inquisitions and throughout history, Jews gave up their lives rather than convert.

B. MAN AS GOD?

Roman Catholics believe that God came down to earth in human form, as Jesus said: “I and the Father are one” (John 10:30).

Maimonides devotes most of the “Guide for the Perplexed” to the fundamental idea that God is incorporeal, meaning that He assumes no physical form. God is Eternal, above time. He is Infinite, beyond space. He cannot be born, and cannot die. Saying that God assumes human form makes God small, diminishing both His unity and His divinity. As the Torah says: “God is not a mortal” (Numbers 23:19).

Judaism says that the Messiah will be born of human parents, and possess normal physical attributes like other people. He will not be a demi-god, and will not possess supernatural qualities. In fact, an individual is alive in every generation with the capacity to step into the role of the Messiah. (see Maimonides - Laws of Kings 11:3)

1 Like

O, Brother…

8 Likes

Caesar was a real person, Plato was a real person, Jesus is a mythical person and Santa Claus is a mythical person.

You probably need to familiarize yourself with what primary, secondary, tertiary and radio carbon dating sources are–and how historical events and people are proven to have occurred and exist respectively.

There are no primary, secondary, tertiary or radio carbon dating sources that validate the existence of Jesus or Santa Claus.

Do you believe in god?–the people in Africa-Kemet/Anu (Egypt/Ethiopia) did–and thousands of years before the invention of Christianity and it’s supreme creator god.

The below compilation of attributes and characteristics of a mythical monotheistic god was compiled from ancient African/Kemetic/Anu funerary, pyramid, and coffin texts by Heinrich Karl Brugsch (1827-1894 CE), a German Egyptologist and scholar.

The same characteristics can be found in the Book of Coming Forth by Day most commonly known as the Book of the Dead.

The Book of Coming Forth by Day is a compilation of ancient African/Kemetic/Anu funerary, pyramid, and coffin texts.

This reads like the Christian god–except its African and thousands of years older.

God is one and alone, and none other existeth with him—God is the One, the One who hath made all things—God is a spirit, a hidden spirit, the spirit of spirits, the great spirit of the Egyptians, the divine spirit…

…God is from the beginning, and he hath been from the beginning, he hath existed from old and was when nothing else had being, he existed when nothing else existed, and what existed he created after he had come into being. He is the father of beginnings—God is the eternal One, he is eternal and infinite and endureth for ever and aye…

…God is hidden and no man knoweth his form. No man hath been able to seek out his likeness; he is hidden to gods and men, and he is a mystery unto his creatures.… He is the king of truth, and he hath stablished the earth thereupon…

…God is life and through him only man liveth. He giveth life to man. He breatheth the breath of life into his nostrils—God is father and mother, the father of fathers, and the mother of mothers. He begetteth, but was never begotten; he produceth, but was never produced; he begat himself and produced himself, he createth, but was never created…

…God is merciful to those who reverence him, and he heareth him that calleth upon him. God knoweth him that acknowledgeth him, he rewardeth him that serveth him, and he protecteth him that followeth him.

2 Likes