Godmen: Jesus (the new guy on the block), Horus, Osiris, Attis, Krishna, Mithra, Dionysus. Need a Savior? Take your pick!

Need a Savior? Take your pick!

This is an Oldie but Goodie from 2011…. Happy Reading!

With the recent Storm of Religious Dialogue on my Facebook Wall (and a few other FB walls) and the Almost Rapture where, at last, we could have finally been free of some of these Fanatics in our Hair (and we also could have had quite a show watching them soar naked through our atmosphere into Heaven), I decided to break it down.

Was Jesus a real man? Who cares?

What is interesting though is that the Idea of a Saviour (like Jesus) is an old – very old – Concept.

Below I have taken a few other Godmen, provided a link of said Godmen and the parallels they have – and characteristics they share –  with Jesus.

There are many links, but I’m trying to keep it simple… if this tickles a Synapse or two, dig a little deeper and see what you come up with.

I often hear  Christians spout something like this:

“Only Jesus has the right to forgive our sins because of the price He paid & the fact that He is the ONLY risen Lord, who has conquered death”

How then do we account for these Godmen – a few who also died and were resurrected? Each of these GodMen has been a Saviour; was part of a Trinity; a couple were Hung from a ‘tree’ and died; and was Resurrected. They all had followers, most had Disciples, most had a Virgin Birth. I have 7 listed, but there are more. Lots more.

1. Horus (c. 3000 BCE): http://foreverinhell.blogspot.com/2009/03/horus-worshippers.html

2. Osiris (c. 3000 BCE): http://www.religioustolerance.org/chr_jcpa2.htm

3. Attis of Phrygia (c.1400 BCE) http://www.usislam.org/christianity/attis.htm

4. Krishna c. (1400 BCE  – possibly as early as 5771 BCE): http://www.religioustolerance.org/chr_jckr1.htm

5. Mithra of Persia c. 600 BCE:  http://www.near-death.com/experiences/origen048.html

6. Dionysus c. 186 BCE: http://www.religioustolerance.org/chr_jcpa2.htm

…and last but not least (and that’s debatable)

7. Jesus c. (4 to 7 BCE) – we don’t need to list anything here, it is all listed above with the other Godmen.

This next link gives an account of other solar gods (Jesus included) The similarities are worth pondering. Showing that there is nothing about Jesus that is ‘special’ per-se.


check out this link for other Godmen who share some of the same Jesus characteristics:


A bit on Matthew being full of BS and the mistranslation of “Virgin” and “Young Woman”:  http://www.vexen.co.uk/religion/matthew.html#virgin

Check these links out and if you would like to refute, disagree, write a rebuttal, please back them up with sources.

Have just been looking at these sources links:

Wow, this link answers a lot of questions:  http://www.infidels.org/library/modern/richard_carrier/homerandmark.html


This is a very good read: http://www.vexen.co.uk/religion/christianity_nojesus.html

Exciting Bits about Matthew:  http://www.vexen.co.uk/religion/matthew.html#virgin

I think one can still follow the teachings of Jesus without the Dogma & BS the masses have been brainwashed/indoctrinated to believe.

Peace and Much Love

I will have more links and sources up soon.

The Reaction this post made on Facebook is noteworthy… They are informative, and at the very least amusing. We have both sides of the spectrum here, two extremes battling and the funny thing is, two of them have each other blocked on FB.

I have re-posted the comments here:

Virgin Birth! Disciples! Died and Resurrected! It’s… Horus! Uhm… Krishna! …no wait… Dionysus!   Sigh.
    • Christian Lecours I pray exclusively to Viking gods now. Have you seen Thor? It’s much, much better than Passion of Christ. I guess Dionysus (Bacchus?) would
      be a blast to hang out with though. (especially at theRefuge!)Hard to decide.

    • Michele Dicks Mr.Lecours: with all due respect, good luck with that Thor worship. Did you notice in the Bible that The God of Abraham kicked the pants off of all otherforiegn Gods?

    • Jeff Evansthe best god is the one that kicks the most ass !

    • Cousin Avi‎@ Michele Dicks: Thor has a hammer. Jesus was nailed to a cross. Any questions?

    • Michele Dicks

      No Mr. Avi. No questions because the answer is clear, though not to you, apparently. Greater love has no one than this, than to lay down one’s life for his friends. Jesus Christ, willingly, laid down his life for the multitude. Thor would n…ever do that for any of his servants, he would expect them to do so for him. Jesus Christ has conquered death, by His resurrection. Thor glorifies war & death. Who then is more powerful? The wielder of death or the conqueror of death?
    • Cousin Avi

      Well, it’s an interesting question. Very much like, “Who would win a race between Superman and The Flash?” Since none of them exist in the first place, it’s rather an exercise in fantastic speculation.
      I find it interesting that you have s…uch a poor opinion of Thor. Have you spent much time studying Norse mythology? Apparently you consider yourself well versed in Abrahamic mythology. Of course, you recognize that the bible is not to be considered an authority on such things. It was written long after the alleged events by people who weren’t there, and subsequently edited, redacted, re-edited, re-redacted, rewritten, re-re-edited, translated, mistranslated, and then translated again by various councils, committees and an occasional Pope.
      Or are you one of those people who insist, “If English was good enough for Jesus, it’s good enough for me!”
      If the bible is the inerrant word of god, why did it need to be edited?
      Michele DicksKnow what, Mr. Avi? I’ve been on these roller coasters on Paul’s threads before & it’s just getting so old. It’s the same thing over & over. The thing I find that makes me not want to continue is that sooner or later, things just get ugly. believe what you want & I will do the same. Have a good one.
    • Cha L.Michele: Is this the same god that has allowed/caused/scheduled recent, past, and upcoming disasters that have, and will cause, the deaths of millions who he or she has created in his or her own image? It must be the god of Abraham who is all-loving, kind, and perfect…except for his or her need for beings to love and serve him or her.Why does this god show up in about a hundred other religions and religious texts?

    • Cousin Avi

      I’m happy to do just that, Ms. Dicks. It’s a lamentable fact that more Christians aren’t like you – keeping matters of faith where it belongs, as a matter of personal belief. Sadly, far too many of the faithful seem determined to inflict …their theological delusions on school curriculum, women’s right to choose, tests for public office, etc.
      When Christians understand why they reject all other gods, perhaps they will then understand why I reject theirs. Until that halcyon day, I consider it necessary to continue pointing out that they have no evidence and no special knowledge. Cheers.
    • Michele Dicks

      To Cha L.: You obviously still have the need to search, I’m cool where I am. Good luck with your quest for the answers to the questions you posted. I just haven’t got the time to sit & get into this stuff anymore. I’m sure you can find anot…her person who believes in Jesus & The God of Abraham to answer their stance on these questions, hopefully, from a sensible perspective for you. I just haven’t got it in me anymore. These debates go around in circles, & I have a life to run & yet, here I am again…..geez…..bye now & good luckSee More
      Yesterday at 2:07am · LikeUnlike
    • Michele Dicksit’s not resignation, Mr. Avi, it’s just time to stop beating a dead horse & wasting my time on hopeless causes….I’m sure you’ll respond to this, seeming you have the need to have the last word….& to whatever you have to say, again I say,…. whatever….

    • Cousin Avi

      Aww…don’t be like that Ms. Dicks. You came in here blithering about how your imaginary deity could kick the ass of all the other imaginary deities. When it was pointed out that your beloved sky wizard was responsible for some pretty heinous shit – genocide, slavery, murder, incest and infanticide to name a few – you returned to that tired old John 3:16 bit.
      Of course, the POINT of this thread is that there have been MANY alleged gods who died and were resurrected, so your fantasy that Jesus was only one who conquered death is simply not true. Of course, that only makes it just like all the other claims about Jesus, and Thor, and Zeus, and Krishna.
      No doubt you do get tired of running in circles: “Jesus is the one true god!” How do you know? “Because it says so in the bible!” Why should we trust that? “Because Jesus said so!” Wash, rinse, repeat ad nauseum.
      You even stoop to the rather pathetic level of insulting my expected response, as if your condescending dismissive tone weren’t offensive on its face, especially when laced with the arrogant certainty evinced by so many of you loving Christians.
      You say “Whatever”, but like most of the things uttered by the followers of the lamb of god, you simply are not willing practice what you preach.
      In case you missed it, Cha was not asking for answers. That was rhetoric, wrapped in sarcasm, and designed to point out the stone hypocrisy of your stupid Jesus crap.
      You had suggested leaving well enough alone, but you Jesus gobblers are just not capable of that. If you want to stop beating a dead horse and wasting time on hopeless causes, put the Jesus down and find something useful to do.
      Cousin Avi‎”Whatever” in 3…2..1…

    • Michele Dicks

      blah blah blah blah,……I know that Cha wasn’t looking for answers….I know the nature of the post…. just because I am Christian does not mean that I am not capable of facetiousness. So because you are not Christian means that you can …be a rude dick & I am not allowed to retaliate because I am a Christian & would thus be called a hypocrite? You are free to abuse my character, freely, & I can not retaliate by calling a spade a spade w/out someone saying, “OH FOUL! You can’t say that, your Christian! “….. you apparently think I am simple minded. That’s too bad. Your responses are so laced with anger, why is that? I find it sad…
    • Cousin Avi

      Save the passive aggressive whining, Ms. Dicks. I never said Christians couldn’t behave like petulant, er…Dicks – I’ve come to expect it and you only confirm those expectations.
      If you were aware that Cha was being sarcastic, your faux si…ncere reply, then, is simply another example of your hypocrisy.
      If you’re not willing to stand up for your faith in a fairy tale; if you’re simply going to dismiss the objections you already know are going to come from your ridiculous claims about what a badass your Jesus is, then DON’T waste people’s time barging in to a thread about OTHER gods, yammering about how your god and ONLY your god gave his life for the multitudes.
      I most assuredly consider you simple minded. I find belief in Jesus on the one hand and the flippant dismissal of all other faith claims on the other to be a sure sign that one is dealing with, at best, a willfully blind buffoon if not an intellectually stunted blilthering imbecile.
      Of course, you would presume my dismissive attitude toward your religious beliefs must be based in anger. That’s your way of refusing to deal with the uncomfortable questions I present; how you tamp down the nagging doubt that rises when your blind faith encounters reason. “Oh, he just hates god!”
      That would be silly – hating something that doesn’t exist. What I dislike are people who join a conversation, spout arrogant certainties about things they simply CANNOT know anything about, and then when they are confronted with objections, whine up a storm, pretend they’re being attacked for their pure faith, take their ball and go home. Except YOU don’t go home. You keep whining.
      Fair enough. Whine away…but you can save expressing your phony impatience and world-weary exasperation. You called it on – suck it up and deal with it. Put on your Big Girl Jesus sandals…or simply stay out of conversations you can’t handle. But if you’re going to wade into the pool, don’t cry when you get splashed.”blah blah blah whatever” in 3…2…1…
    • Michele DicksYou are such an ass….

    • Cousin AviHow very Christian of you. Is that turning the other cheek, loving your enemy, or doing unto others? I get so confused. Of course, if you Jesus freaks ever lived up to the bullshit you quote from your book of fairy tales, the hypocrisy would be far more shocking.

    • Cousin Avi

      Oh for fuck sakes, you petulant little hypocrite…go pray, or stone something, or confess. Do some fucking thing. Your butthurt Jesus tears, delicious though they are, grow tiresome. Me and my Thor hammer are gonna go crucify another Na…zarene.
      “Why hast thou forsaken me, father?” Shut up, and stop squirming…it’ll hurt less if you just hold still.Indignant Christian outrage / passive aggressive “I pity you” bullshit in 3…2…1…
    • Michele Dickshole

      Christine PetersonCousin Avi, Your tolerance is abhorrent. Insults in a debate keep us from considering your opinion.

    • Cousin Avi

      ‎”Us?”…oh, (to coin a phrase) for heaven’s sake. Did Ms. Turn the Other Cheek recruit some help? How typical. Christian faith requires the reinforcement of the similarly deluded.
      And which arguments are you ignoring on the basis that I’…m not showing sufficient respect for your silly theology? Not to put too fine a point on it, but my “argument” is that you’re all engaged in a comforting delusion for which there is absolutely ZERO evidence; that the bible is a cobbled together work of fiction, and that anyone who actually believes it is suffering from a popular form of mental illness.
      As for tolerance, insofar as you keep your mythology to yourself, I have infinite amounts of it. The more you inflict your Jesus juice in threads about other gods – calling THEM weak, ridiculous, or false while asserting the strength, seriousness and reality of your own – I shall object. When you go further and attempt to inflict your stupid creation story in the science classroom, draft laws preventing women from controlling their own bodies, and promote intolerance of other faiths even as you demand it for your own, then a lack of tolerance on my part is the least you may expect – you’re in for a fight to the death.
      Your hypocrisy is abhorrent. Your facile and superficial religiosity is insulting. Your arrogance and condescension is nauseating. And reducing your cohort to childish name calling is such sweet reward. My schadenfreude overflows!
    • Christine PetersonI am not religious. Ihave been struggling with thisfor awhile.Its hard to feel intelligent and believe in God. But,its also something that has been taught and instilled in us since childhood. I truly want to hear both sides of the spectrum on this matter but, its hard for me to base validity on your opinion when your insulting and abhorrent..

    • Michele DicksOH! There you are, Mr. Avi! After your last rant, I thought you had a stroke

    • Cousin Avi

      Well, since you’re not being specific, which of my posts do you find insulting? What is it about my naked contempt for religious faith insults you? Am I supposed to treat belief in fairy tales seriously? Is that it? I haven’t called anyone names. I only commented when Ms. Dicks decided to mock my friend Mr. Lecours for stating his preference for Thor. SHE belittled his chosen theology while promoting Jesus as the one true god. If she is permitted to insult my friend, I take it as my absolute and unfettered right to expose the paucity and hypocrisy of HER alleged faith.
      One is entitled to the respect one gives, which is exactly what she got. Alternatively, one is entitled to the respect one EARNS, and in the case of the god of Abraham, I would be hard pressed to lower myself or employ sufficiently coarse language to defile and insult that rotten fucker in the manner he deserves.
      Michele Dicksblah……….blah…………*yawn*…….blah

    • Christine Peterson‎”petulant littlehypocrit”, “jesus sandals”, using someones last name in a reference to an insult. Please consider expressing yourself without aggression. I think you both have valid points but, yourself righteous attitude is not swaying me towards your point of view.

    • Cousin AviWell, Ms. Dicks, if it bores you, and not to another too fine a point on it, fuck off somewhere. No one dragged you in here, no one is forcing you to stay. Or is this some sort of semi-literate, rather dull attempt at martyrdom? Are you being steadfastly dismissive and banal for Jesus?

    • Michele DicksI was hoping that if I made you mad enough, you would pop a vein &keal

    • Michele Dicksas in die….idiot

    • Cousin Avi

      I’m not trying to persuade anyone of anything, Ms. Peterson.
      As I am growing tired of pointing out, Ms. Dicks opened by mocking my friend and asserting the truth of HER faith. She offered to quit – called it “beating a dead horse”. I AGR…EED. But she keeps coming back. And if you read the thread, it is plain that Ms. Dicks herself both began and elevated the level of condescension. “Whatever” is not a recognized form of respectful debate.
      And, as is plainly obvious, she is no kind of Christian (at least as she would have anyone define the term)…now either seriously or jokingly wishing death and again calling names. Both juvenile and pathetic. Of course, this is exactly the sort of behaviour I expect from those who claim to walk with Christ.
      While you may not find me persuasive, one would hope that such discreditable behaviour would make you think twice about accepting the vainglorious and contemptible theology that permits anyone to behave like a Dick.
    • Cousin AviCalling someone a petulant little hypocrite is not name calling if they are petulant, petty and hypocritical. Resipsa loquitur.

    • Christine PetersonWell, debates are a form of persuasion. I read debates and learn from them. But, when they become insulting no one is getting their point across. I wish to see you both debate on the issue without insults anddebauchary.Thats all.

    • Christine PetersonWe all need tolerance in co-existence. But, I love how BP’s status can create such an overwhelming surge of anger, love, pain, tears, happiness. It’s kind of cool to seeall of the emotion involved here.

      Cousin Avi

      The problem is, Ms. Peterson, that my initial position – that there is no god; that dismissing all other faiths in favour of belief in Jesus is the mark of the logically and intellectually bereft; that there is absolutely no evidence to sup…port such belief; that the bible is a book of fairy tales invented by Bronze Age shepherds; that the Christian faith is a harmful, damaging, patently evil social structure; that indoctrinating children into it is a form of child abuse – is insulting to believers on its face.
      This was never a debate. I am not seeking to resolve any question. I merely took offense at Ms. Dicks mockery of my friend’s preference for Thor and responded in kind. It has progressed from there only at her insistence.
      I say again, I am not angry and have never been angry at any point. No pain, no tears…nothing more than slight bemusement at the stamina of another believer. It always surprises me that people with so little ammunition are so determined to fight battles they simply cannot win.
    • Michele Dicks

      Ya know? Your right, Mr. Avi, I have let my feelings of disgust against you totally make me see red….And I apologize. Why? Because you are right. Ya see, the thing is, Christians aren’t allowed to let themselves be pushed over the edge. W…e are held to a higher standard than others & when we do mess up, like I so royally have, others get all excited & start with the stuff you are saying. Christ was perfect, Mr. Avi, not me. And it is much easier to let your emotions take control when sitting behind a key board, miles away from the person irritating you. I’m not perfect, by any means. No one is & Christians are not capable of being better than others, but they have a hope & belief in a God who understands this. Just because I am an utter failure does not change who Jesus was & still is. I’m sorry that my behavior has reflected on my Lord Jesus. For that I am sorry. But you have not been very nice….
    • Michele DicksAnd you didn’t just defend your friend against my callous comment. You insulted Jesus with your “nail” remark, so you were just as bad as me, no?

    • Cousin Avi

      ‎”We are held to higher standard.” A higher standard than whom? What arrogance. The ease and condescension with which you dismiss Buddhists, Jains, Hindus, Jews, Muslims…the vast majority of the human race. It is JUST this sort of arr…ogant certainty; this placing yourself on a pedestal based on YOUR particular fairy tale while dismissing all others (and in total ignorance of those faiths), that is so very galling.
      And then, after asserting that you are held to a higher standard, the eternal excuse; the perennial qualification that while your god is great, you are just a humble believer, imperfect and prone to the very sorts of conduct you abhor and castigate in others, and all without the self-awareness to be ashamed at such two-faced, hypocritical contrivance.
      Don’t apologize to me. I don’t believe it’s sincere but rather simply another form of posturing; dressing yourself up in a facade of the forgiveness and tolerance Christians love to talk about and which none of them ever really manage to achieve. Nothing more than praying loudly in public – the appearance without the substance.
      As for being NICE, the next time someone expresses faith in Thor, or Allah, or Jehovah, or Krishna, PERHAPS you won’t leap in to tell them how wrong they are and assert that YOUR god is the one true god, who because YOUR book says so, kicked the pants off all the “foreign gods” (Foreign to where, one might ask? To whom?) Perhaps when YOU treat other people’s faith with the respect you demand, you’ll find more of it coming your way. Until then, you have no right to ask anyone to be nice.
      As for “insulting Jesus” that’s YOUR perspective. Perfectly reasonable people would see it as statements of facts: Thor had a hammer. Jesus was nailed to cross. Which of those statements is not true? Which is an insult?
    • Michele Dicks

      I don’t hold myself to a higher standard, other people do. When they know you are a Christian, as soon as you are heard to swear or slam the steering wheel & yell when someone cuts you off, they yell, ” You hypocrite! How unchristian of you…!” people don’t do that sort of thing to Buddhists & Muslims. I wasn’t saying that I put MYSELF to a higher standard, I have it done to me all the time. My apology is sincere. I’m sorry that I got so mad & took all of this so personally. Your Paul’s friend & I apologize to him as well. Your right, I was disrespectful to your friend’s admission that he prays to thor. I’m not saying this as an excuse, but I am definitely effected by the mockery of Christianity that I face on a daily basis online. As far as your statements concerning thor & Jesus, let’s be honest, your comment was designed to try to put me in my place because you were annoyed with what I said to your friend. I should of ignored it, but I took the bait. I don’t want to fight with you anymore & I’m sorry that I called you names. Can’t we just get to a point where we are not fighting anymore & try to tolerate each other? We are both Paul’s friends and I’m sure we will run into each other again. Haven’t you ever seriously had it out with someone & then called a truce? My anger has totally dissipated & I really am sorry, for the whole messy affair..
    • Cousin Avi

      I was never angry. You may expect to be mocked. Your faith posits that anyone who does not agree with you will be cast into a lake of fire for eternity. In the TOTAL absence of anything remotely resembling evidence, you assert the truth …of your mythology while dismissing everyone else’s. Some of you assert that the earth is 6000 years old. Others that the Rapture is upon us…and if not last weekend, then SOON! Various Christian sects engage in child abuse, child rape, polygamy, racism, misogyny, and demand to be permitted to inflict their dogmatic beliefs on secular government. If these things are not worthy and deserving of at least mockery, nothing is.
      Yes, my initial comment was absolutely designed to put you in your place. Clearly it failed in that regard.
      If you don’t wish to be held to higher standard than others, stop claiming special knowledge. You know nothing more about god or gods than anyone else no matter how fervently you believe that you do.
      As I have previously said, repeatedly, to the degree that anyone of any faith keeps their beliefs to themselves, I have an infinite degree of tolerance. I neither care what you believe, or that you believe it. To the degree you assert in public that you are right and others are wrong, my tolerance ebbs. And the moment anyone of any faith attempts to jam that faith into secular government, I consider that an act of war.
      I was prepared long ago to call it a day, and am now still so inclined. This tete a tete only continued at your call. And now, I bid you good morning. Please grant one courtesy: resist any impulse you might feel to pray for me.
    • Christine PetersonWell, I have learned something. I grew up with religion but it was not paramount in our house.  A lot of this I never knew. I never heard of Thor before this discussion either. So, thanks everyone for the info.

      Cha L.Christine, I grew up in a Christian household. It’s a pity that there was less information. To say that knowing of other mythological deities would have enhanced my life and intelligence would be beside the point, but the fact that other gods were evil, wrong, or fake WAS the daily point. This, I find/found disturbing.

    • Cha L.

      Michele, to derive that I need to search more is saying that you have found the ultimate truths and that I will arrive at the same place sooner or later. This, I have not taken offense at because it is the same answer I used to give when co…unseling potential Christians. It is, however, slightly laughable and technically insulting because whoever takes the time to reply to threads and debates like these should have already thought, pondered, questioned, and formed many opinions on said matter. Otherwise, it’s spewing hogwash.I am dearly close to many religious people. It’s a pity when I can’t discourse in depth with them on the subject of their faiths as they are almost literally blinded by their beliefs and yet show much insight into a great many other things. A pity.
    • Michele Dicks

      ‎@ Cha L.: Hi. You seem like a nice person & I’m sorry to get so on the defense like I do…..but considering your background, could you (seriously) please try to answer a question for me that I have been struggling with? Why do people so r…eadily embrace other gods, like thor & so wholeheartedly reject Jesus & the God who sent him? Why??? He has so much to offer us, & what do these other gods offer that makes them so appealing?
    • Cousin AviSince that was not directed at me, I shall not answer. I will, however, point out that the question is inherently biased and constructed on at least three false premises. Asking poor questions never results in good answers.

    • Michele Dicks‎@Avi: go crawl back under your rock, will ya?

    • Cha L.

      Michele: Today, people have embraced Thor as being god, or real, about as much as they have embraced Spiderman to have truly existed. The worship of Buddha, in my opinion, stems from his religion appealing to the intellect. I’d say he had m…uch to offer. Other prophets and gods have as much to offer to their followers as does the Christian gods. Every religion’s followers believe that their religion is right and that their prophets and gods ARE the true ones… etc. All things connected and stemming from religiousness isn’t all bad. Ex: temples of worship offer sanctuary, people feel better about themselves because of some deeds they have done in the name of religion.On the flip side, have you tried to consider the unimaginable damage religious fervor has done to mankind? From bringing up children to hate non-believers or to believe that they themselves, or friends, will burn in hell to horrific genocide, I stand on the side of atheism.
    • Cha L.Humanism, knowledge, experiential knowledge, awareness, the scientific method, logic (2+2=4) and open-mindedness is what I hope to stand for. HUMANISM!

    • Cha L.

      As for continuing this discussion, it’s obvious where you stand, Michele. I hope it is with me. I have books of memorized Bible verses which I could place here as a parting word, but in the wise words of Krishnamurti, “In this there is no t…eacher; no pupil…there is no leader. There is no guru. There is no master, no savior…You yourself are the teacher and the pupil; you are the master, you are the guru, you are the leader. You are everything! And… to understand is to transform what is.”
    • Michele Dicks

      Cha L.: I was raised Catholic, does that explain a lot? I don’t consider myself Catholic anymore, as a matter of fact, I have rejected many principles taught by the Catholic church. I consider myself a Christian but my sister says I still s…ound very “catholicy”..lol I don’t want to have a high & mighty attitude, but what’s the sense of believing in something at all if you can’t proclaim that it is the truth & if there are so many “faith truths” that lead to the same end, why bother with so many? It is disheartening to think that so many people who want to get to the same place can’t meet in the middle w/out wanting their beliefs to be the “right” one & I am guilty of that, I’ve learned. It feels like the foundation of my world is being shaken. The thought of there not being any truth to what I believe is enough to make me wonder what’s the sense of this life for then?
    • Kristen LeNormand AruteEveryone needs to do what I did and block Cuz Avi. It is so much more peaceful on FB without him. He is a playground bully with the bitterness of a scorned woman and the mouth of the foulest trucker. (I apologize for offending bullies, women and truckers.)

    • Kristen LeNormand AruteBear in mind that Paul says, “sic ’em” to Avi, and Avi doesn’t ask “how far” – he knows exactly what Paul means. Women should wash their hands of the two of them and their misogynistic ways.

    • Kristen LeNormand Arute

      With that being said, I am eager to dissect the list. Let me start by saying that Jesus predicted in Matthew 24:24 and Mark 13:22 that there would be false gods. So it’s no surprise that there are lots of other dying and rising god claims… in other religions. The vast majority of critical scholars have abandoned the idea that the story of the resurrection of Jesus was borrowed from pagan mythology. Check out resurrection specialist Gary Habermas’ website. He says that he can count on one hand the number of scholars who have written the 2000+ books on the subject who attribute the resurrection to mythology. http://www.garyhabermas.com/
    • Kristen LeNormand Arute

      ‎”First, the claims of Jesus as a myth or an exaggeration originated in the writings of 19th century liberal German theologians. Their claim was essentially that Jesus was nothing more than a copy of the widespread worship of dying and risi…ng fertility gods in various places—Tammuz in Mesopotamia, Adonis in Syria, Attis in Asia Minor, and Osiris in Egypt. None of these works ever advanced in the realm of academia and religious thought because their assertions were investigated by theologians and scholars and determined to be completely false and baseless. It has only been in the late twentieth and early twenty-first century that these assertions have been resurrected, primarily due to the rise of the internet and mass distribution of information that has no historical foundation or accountability.”
    • Kristen LeNormand Arute

      • Horus was born to Isis; there is no mention in history of her being called “Mary.” Moreover, Mary is our anglicized form of her real name ‘Miryam’ or Miriam. “Mary” was not even used in the original texts of Scripture.
      • Isis was not a vir…gin; she was the widow of Osiris and conceived Horus with Osiris.
      • Horus was born during month of Khoiak (Oct/Nov), not December 25. Further, there is no mention in the Bible as to Christ’s actual birth date.
      • There is no record of three kings visiting Horus at his birth. The Bible never states the actual number of magi that came to see Christ.
      • Horus is not a “savior” in any shape or form; he did not die for anyone.
      • There are no accounts of Horus being a teacher at the age of 12.
      • Horus was not “baptized.” The only account of Horus that involves water is one story where Horus is torn to pieces, with Isis requesting the crocodile god to fish him out of the water he was placed into.
      • Horus did not have a “ministry.”
      • Horus did not have 12 disciples. According to the Horus accounts, Horus had four semi-gods that were followers and some indications of 16 human followers and an unknown number of blacksmiths that went into battle with him.
      • There is no account of Horus being betrayed by a friend.
      • Horus did not die by crucifixion. There are various accounts of Horus’ death, but none of them involve crucifixion.
      • There is no account of Horus being buried for three days.
      • Horus was not resurrected. There is no account of Horus coming out of the grave with the body he went in with. Some accounts have Horus/Osiris being brought back to life by Isis and going to be the lord of the underworld.
    • Kristen LeNormand Arute

      But what does history say about Mithras?• He was born out of a solid rock and not from any woman.
      • He battled first with the sun and then a primeval bull, thought to be the first act of creation. Mithras killed the bull, which then became the ground of life for the human race.
      • Mithras birth was celebrated on December 25, along with Winter solstice.
      • There is no mention of him as being a great teacher.
      • There is no mention of Mithras having 12 disciples. The idea that Mithras had 12 disciples may have come from a mural in which Mithras is surrounded by twelve signs of the Zodiac.
      • Mithras had no bodily resurrection. The myth is told that Mithras completed his earthly mission then was taken to paradise in a chariot, alive and well. The early Christian writer Tertullian did write about Mithras believers re-enacting resurrection scenes, but he wrote about this occurring well after New Testament times, so if any copycatting was done, it was the cult of Mithras copying from Christianity.
    • Kristen LeNormand Arute

      More examples can be given of Krishna, Attis, Dionysus and other mythological gods, but the result is the same. In the end, the historical Jesus as portrayed in the Bible is thoroughly unique. The claimed similarities are greatly exaggerate…d. Further, while belief in Horus, Mithras, and others pre-dated Christianity, there is very little historical record of the pre-Christian beliefs of those religions. The vast majority of the earliest writings about these religions is dated to the third and fourth centuries A.D. It is illogical and unhistorical to claim the pre-Christian beliefs in these religions (of which there is no record) were identical to the post-Christian beliefs in these groups (of which there is record). It is more historically valid to attribute any similarities between these religions and Christianity to the religions copying Christian beliefs about Jesus and placing those attributes on their own gods/saviors/founders in an attempt to stop the rapid growth of Christianity.
    • Kristen LeNormand Arute

      ‎”While much has been written on this topic, no work from antiquity has more evidence with respect to historical veracity than the New Testament. The New Testament has more writers (nine), better writers, and earlier writers than any other …document from that era. Further, history testifies to the fact that these writers went to their deaths for claiming that Jesus had risen from the dead. While some may die for a lie they think is true, no person dies for a lie they know to be false. Think about it—if someone was about to crucify you upside down, as happened to the Apostle Peter, and all you had to do to save your life was renounce a lie you had knowingly been living, what would you do?”
    • Kristen LeNormand Arute

      ‎”In addition, history has shown that it takes at least two generations to pass before myth can enter into a historical account. Why? Because eyewitnesses can refute error put in print. Those living at the time could refute the errors of th…e author and expose the work as being false. All the Gospels of the New Testament were written during the lifetime of the eyewitnesses, with some of Paul’s epistles being written as early as 50 A.D. That early dating acts as a key protective mechanism against any falsehoods being accepted and circulated.”
    • Kristen LeNormand Arute

      ‎”In conclusion, the claims that Jesus is nothing more than a myth, a copy of mythological gods, originated from authors whose works have been discounted by academia, commit logical fallacies that undermine their veracity, and cannot compar…e to the New Testament Gospels which have withstood nearly 2,000 years of intense scrutiny. The alleged parallels disappear when they are compared with the original historical texts. Similarities between Jesus and the various mythological gods can only be argued for by employing selective and misleading descriptions.”
    • Kristen LeNormand Arute‎”Jesus Christ stands unique in history, with His voice rising above all false gods and continuing toask the question that ultimately determines a person’s eternal destiny: “Who do you say that I am?” (Matthew 16:15)”

    • Michele Dicks

      ‎@ Paul: here is an example of my prayer being answered…….I prayed for God…(God the Father, of Jesus) so there is no miss-understanding….I prayed for Him to please send me the information I needed to explain the claims you made about these historical godmen. I prayed for clarity & understanding. I prayed for peace & truth in this matter which disturbed me, because I had no knowledge of any of it…..And I know you won’t see it this way….but he sent Kristen as an answer to this prayer…I know he did. He knew just the right way to help me…& He did. She doesn’t know this ( now she does ) but she answered an urging from the Holy Spirit to step in & address this issue…..I am so grateful to her for being my friend. Only God could know how much this means & proves His reality to me. The response is so precise & blatant, I can not miss it….That is how most miracles are, Paul. Only very clear to the person they are meant for. God does this for a reason. He wants us to believe by faith & trust in Him, not by scholarly proof…Kristen answered this matter on your level, maybe so that one day, you will come to believe again? Maybe….:)
    • Michele Dicks

      Especially with that very last quote from scripture. “Who do YOU say that I am”….I know that that was for me….I felt it pierce my heart…Any doubt that was haunting me has been washed away….My Lord didn’t let me flounder for long. He… saved me…Yes, my faith was tested. And when I faltered, my Lord “put His hands under me”…& gave me what I needed . This faith I have, that is solid as a rock, came from Him, you see…not of myself. And He will not let it be taken from me…When it was threatened, He intervened & put a stop to the threat…..amazing…..Why would I not want to worship a God who saves me from falling? Who always watches over me & keeps me in the palm of His hand? Anything of this world can be taken from me, & it is no big deal….sometimes He lets this happen. But to allow me to be taken from Him? Things (people) who belong to Him, He will never allow to be taken from Him. If you give yourself up willingly, that is different. But He knows the heart of a person. When your heart cries out for help, he gives it….I know….& that can’t be taken from me
    • Boston PaulMichele, this is not prayer being answered, Good Woman. This is not a miracle. This was to be expected. This is like flushing and praying for it to go down…The ‘got questions’ is a Christian website… Ms. Arute is using the Bible to defend the Bible.No one needs to block Cousin Avi. Michele, you handled him just fine. Ms.Arute was not accustomed to being ripped apart and hersnootiness did not work with him… scroll down my wall and you will see what took place, if it is not there, I will reproduce it for you.I will review your comments, Ms. Arute, thank you for taking the time to post them.

      Cha, thank you too for your posts. They were refreshing.

      The comments here were so good, I am going to make them part of this post I put up on my blog.

      Kristen LeNormand Arute and Cousin Avi since you cannot read what the other has posted, you can go here:


      Keep em’ coming and a friend of mine Sean Luo posted this today:

      ~A monk is met by a man, he does not know, who immediately starts hurling a continuous barrage of insults at him. The monk keeps his silence until the screaming man exhausts himself. Then the monk asks him: “If you offer me a gift and I do not take it, to whom does the gift belong?” The man responds: “It would still belong to me.” So the monk tells him: “I do not take your insults.”~

      Y’all take it from there.

      Peace and Lots of Secular Human Earthling LOVE!

The URI to TrackBack this entry is: https://bostonpaul.wordpress.com/2011/05/23/godmen-jesus-the-new-guy-on-the-block-horus-osiris-attis-krishna-mithra-dionysus-need-a-savior-take-your-pick/trackback/

RSS feed for comments on this post.

19 CommentsLeave a comment

  1. The Facebook bullshit posted above is part of the reason why I don’t bother with Facebook. I’m kind of surprised you do, Boston Paul, as it is really just Big Corporate Media hell bent on privatizing the Internet.

    • Indeed, it is a like/hate relationship I wade through with Facebook.

      Do you have any links on FB’s Privatizing the internet?.

      • I don’t think any such links exist as it’s more paranoia than anything – the usual thing that happens when any company gets bigger than people are comfortable with. I spent the better part of a decade in internet marketing and working closely day to day with Google, Facebook, Twitter and the like. As much as I dislike a lot of their policies and am opposed to capitalism (the reason I’m no longer in that industry!) I can safely say that the hysteria surrounding these companies is nothing more than that.

        In fact Facebook is less harmful than most companies. It’s free and it provides a great service to a lot of people. They pay for the masses of staff and server space by allowing advertisers access to the data you post. If you don’t want that data mined then you simply don’t have to enter it. No-one forces you to put your work history, address, phone number, email address, photos, anything up there. If you do then you should be aware of the terms and conditions but most people are simply too lazy to read them so I have very little sympathy in that regard.

        (And as much as I’m no Google fanboy I got to visit their European HQ in Dublin a few times – holy crap, what a place! Games rooms, ball swamps, Segways, giant Haagen Dazs freezer, it was like Xanadu. They tried to poach me once and I was a hair’s breadth from going with it…)

      • Also, as you can see here Facebook actively supports net neutrality – the opposite of privatising the net – and criticises the Google/Verizon alliance for not going far enough with their proposals http://mashable.com/2010/08/11/facebook-net-neutrality/

      • Paranoia? In an era when the US gov’t publicly admits to intercepting 1.7 billion personal communications every day and where Rupert Murdoch hacks the cellphone of anybody he feels like, there’s no such thing as paranoia. A statement might be incorrect, but nothing can truly be dismissed as “paranoid” anymore. The question is no longer “Would they ever do such a thing?” The real question is now “Can they?”

        In fact Facebook is less harmful than most companies. It’s free and it provides a great service to a lot of people.

        If by “free”, you mean the costs are well hidden (ie corporate espionage upon citizens) and, if by “great service”, you mean “giving losers a way to waste their lives (and electricity) gossiping and pretending they aren’t friendless losers”, then just maybe. Mind you, from what I’ve seen of Facebook, “free” is about what it’s worth. Just like Paris Hilton is famous for being famous, Facebook is popular primarily for being popular.

        They pay for…staff and server space by allowing advertisers access to the data you post.

        Oh, but all that spying is for the purposes of advertising? Well, that makes it perfectly acceptable then! What would people say if the phone company recorded every phone conversation over their service and sold it to any corporation interested? Why is it fine because it’s done via the computer? People used to go to jail for shit like this. Today they become billionaires.

        Advertising is not benign. It’s what “glamming” is for vampires. They glam you, then you “let” them suck your blood. Zuckerberg is just a vampire pimp. His “less harmful” company assists more harmful corporations in their efforts.

        For some reason, the Bill Hicks phrase “If you work in marketing or advertising, kill yourself” comes to mind. I only wish more people took that advice. Instead, people actually encourage these marketing parasites into every element of their existence.

        If you don’t want that data mined then you simply don’t have to enter it

        First, that just isn’t (or at least wasn’t) true. Facebook’s 2010 Terms included the right to add to their “profile” on you anything they find via 3rd parties like newspapers, blogs and other Facebook users. And they hold onto that file on you like it was a piece of Jesus’ cross.

        However, “not going on it” is exactly what I recommend to everyone, but even that doesn’t fully protect you. There are so many losers on Loserbook with time to kill & space to fill, many act as “slant drillers” for data mining companies by posting pictures and comments about you without your permission, or even knowledge. What Facebook does (or will someday do) with that stuff is not even remotely under your control.

        But the concept of “not going on it” misses my original point altogether. Not using Facebook (etc) is slowly becoming less of an option. Facebook already controls a lot of Internet activity directly and that position leverages even more influence. Unrelated content reserved for Facebook users is becoming a trend. For example, many corporations have “Facebook only” contests. My favourite TV show (& its cast) has NO on-line presence outside of Facebook. Another example is the very “anti-privatisation” link you provided. Like an increasing number of non-Facebook websites, that website does not let you post comments without logging in with a Facebook or Twitter account. The overall effect is to herd people towards the exploitation that comes with membership.

        Just like with Walmart, what a major industry player like Facebook does sets the standard for others. If all services on the Internet follow suit, then where do you go avoid corporate spying? At some point, what you can do without a Facebook (etc) account will be very limited. Eventually, corporate key-logging will become so normalized the “choice” will be to unplug altogether, or get data mined with every keystroke or mouse click.

        “If you do then you should be aware of the terms and conditions but most people are simply too lazy to read them so I have very little sympathy in that regard.”

        Just like you should have very little sympathy for anyone in Africa who is starving. Didn’t they read “We reserve the right to let you starve!” in the Terms & Conditions for being downloaded on planet Earth? It’s their own damn fault! It’s just like those folks who park their cars on the street and then complain when they are stolen. Why should you feel sorry for people who expect so much as to walk the streets, or surf the web, without being victimized? People deserve whatever they get for expecting better.

        “They deserved it because they’re stupid” is the justification of every criminal sociopath. You either side with their victims, or you side with the perpetrator. Sounds like you’ve worked with these perpetrators before, so you’re sympathies aren’t surprising.

        While it may hold weight in the so-called justice system, the Terms & Conditions argument is such UTTER BULLSHIT it could fertilize every farmer’s field on the planet for a decade. More Liechtensteiners know the intricacies of baseball’s Balk Rule than the number of people who have read and fully understood the Terms & Conditions of a piece of software. Nearly all of these things are 173 pages long and written in Beothuk by vermin who trick people for a living (aka lawyers). Most importantly, they usually include the phrase “We reserve the right to, at any time and without any warning or notification, change our Terms & Conditions to whatever the fuck we want.” It’s a virtual blank cheque.

        But if you don’t agree to the Terms & Conditions first, you don’t get to use the product. What incentive is there to do anything but click “Yes” to some bullshit you can’t bother reading, wouldn’t understand anyway and that could change at any second, in the naive hope nothing bad will happen?

        The reality is there is nothing REMOTELY resembling a legitimate contract or even “informed consent”. Think of it like Statutory Rape where the person is incapable of properly consenting, but they go along with it because they were offered candy or a Hannah Montana DVD in exchange for “doing something nice for me”. Whether they consented or not, or even enjoyed it or not, the perpetrator still gets charged. Coincidentally, Facebook is alleged to have over 7.5 million members under age 13, a violation of its own terms.

        The bottom line is that you just don’t get rich by offering “great services for free”. It’s the single fastest way to go broke unless you’re being devious, or doing below-board things like data mining. And once you make millions that way, the only thing you think about is how to get even richer by being even more devious. It’s a very slippery slope. Literally any action can be rationalized if there’s profit in it.

        The rationalization process works so well, even outsiders with nothing to gain economically and who dislike capitalism are willing to rationalize the concept of selling intimate details on people. I honestly don’t see much difference between what Facebook does and other “free” games/programming on the Internet that are just Trojan Horses for spy/malware. Facebook is just high-end, capitalist, malware with amazing PR and much bigger profits.

      • ”Facebook actively supports net neutrality – the opposite of privatising the net – and criticises the Google/Verizon alliance for not going far enough with their proposals”

        That might be only because the name is the Google-Verizon Alliance and not the Facebook-Verizon Alliance. Google is a Facebook competitor and dreams of ultimately replacing or absorbing them. Any alliance between Google and a company like Verizon should make Facebook very nervous.

        If you think for one minute that Zuckerberg’s “commitment” to Net Neutrality is worth the paper it’s not written on, then you are one naive motherfucker. You probably also think that the top priority at Google is riding the world of evil. With supposedly over 500 million accounts, Zuckerberg has essentially created the world’s largest private spy organization. Do you think he’s above telling a feel-good lie for public consumption? Depending on who you believe, the guy’s entire empire was (SPOILER ALERT) the result of stealing it from people who trusted him!

        Even if the opinion is honestly held, such a commitment to Net Neutrality is merely a snapshot in time, a Term & Condition to be changed at will. You see, Havard Boy only owns 24% of his own company and can be jettisoned at any time. But he already has an exit strategy. Within a couple of years, he’ll have succeeded in fluffing his company’s value to even more ludicrous levels with the help of well known corporate good-guys, Gold Mansacks. They have a quasi-legal shell game that avoids the ultra-minimalist regulation of the SEC. Any company with 500 shareholders has to disclose stuff Mr Radical Transparency doesn’t want people to see. Mr Radical Transparency goes to great lengths to keep his company private at the exact same time that he sells your privacy to anybody with a chequebook. His privacy is important. Your privacy is his product. And that’s what most people fail to grasp. Selling details about you is the only way Facebook makes money.

        Gold Mansacks helps keep Mr Transparency’s secrets secret and gives him thousands of select investors. One might even call it a kind of Pyramid Scheme. When his over-hyped company finally does issue an official IPO, the resulting feeding frenzy will make him and his first-level investors rich enough to buy Africa, no matter how unsubstantiated the riches are (See: Enron, Pets.com, etc, etc, etc) Two years from now, Harvard Boy might just be a PR figure in his own company. Rest assured, if Facebook falls out of fashion, he’ll have long since cashed out. So, even if his feelings on Net Neutrality are 100% real, his opinion is worth next to nothing in the long run. The minute Facebook Inc has something to gain from the Net not being Neutral, they will seek to make it so. Count on it.

        But NONE of what I’ve written here is terribly relevant to my initial comment “Facebook is just more Big Media hell bent on privatizing the Internet”. Net Neutrality is just ONE route to privatization.

        While unjustifiably popular, Loserbook is just one piece of the media pie. It, and all the Big Media players, want to slowly corral all Internet traffic into space controlled by them so they can gather more information on you. Facebook has essentially said as much.

        Collectively, they want independent activity to be reduced to the same fringe groups that were on the Internet 20 years ago. They want a modernized version of the way the old TV landscape used to be, a handful of players with an oligopoly. The difference is that you watched the TV and the TV didn’t watch you. They want you on their property for a reason.

        And here are just the first 4 links that turned up in a search:





  2. On a related note it’s worth reading Karen Armstrong’s A History Of God for an overview of how Christianity morphed from a polytheistic religion typical of the area into the monotheistic monstrosity we all know and love today. I don’t normally like her as she takes a strongly pro-religious stance but this book is worthwhile as she leaves the special pleading largely on the back burner. There’s a great 2-part synopsis of the main points on YouTube, will link to it when I get back home. The central theme is that the Christian deity is an amalgamation of several local gods, much as JC is a mish-mash of previous myths and legends although she doesn’t delve into that.

    • I have a few problems with Karen Armstrong as well.

      But ‘History of God’ was a good read.

      Looking forward to seeing the link!

      • This is it http://youtu.be/MlnnWbkMlbg

        The guy who uploaded it used to be heavily into Christianity, I forget which brand, and he’s done a few others about his deconversion which are all worth watching. Oh, and you should check out Thunderf00t’s videos if you haven’t seen them. His ‘Why do people laugh at creationists?’ series is just wonderful.

  3. f you read the actual texts with the filter of Christian apologetics like Kristen appeals to above,

    That should be WITHOUT the filter. Argh.

    • What do you mean, Michael?

      • When you come to the texts in the New Testament, you carry around a whole interpretive apparatus in your head that explains to you what is going on and adds things to the text that aren’t there as well as interprets what is there.

        For example, if you picture Jesus’ crucifixion, you probably picture it taking place on a hill, and it is difficult to read the story in Mark and realize that the writer of Mark never says it takes place on a hill.

        Again, consider the centurion who bursts out when Jesus’ dies — surely this man was the son of god! 2000 years of belief shapes our reading; we read that as the centurion confessing to Jesus’ godhood. But any Greek lit scholar will tell you that you could read it the other way, as sarcastic mocking — ‘yeah, he was the son of god, and I’m julius caesar!’ There is no objective way to choose between those readings, pick the one you like.

        In the case of the epistles of early Christianity, because we carry around the unconcious assumption of Jesus’ historicity, we read the texts against that background. You have to work hard to notice that, for example, 1 Clem has a long discussion of jealousy and betrayal but never instances any of the jealousy and betrayal in the Jesus stories such as Judas or the Jewish leaders who envied Jesus.

        2000 years of apologetics is very effective.


  4. Yes, BP, the whole god-man thing is important because it shows broad cultural themes and archetypes around the eastern med, not because Jesus is a copy of Mithras or Horus. The sites that list the parallels are bogus, don’t rely on them.

    Jesus likely formed out of the cross-pollination of Roman mystery religions which in turn were influenced by popular versions of eastern and egyptian gods, much as today westerners take up a version of hindu or taoist religion that is not much like the original — said cross pollination taking in existing Jewish tendencies to create intermediary figures between humans and god which by the time of Jesus’ invention had become a full blown “two powers in heaven” concept (see the work of Alan Segal). It is found in the bible, in Psalm 110, for example — not a coincidence that Ps 110 was popular among early Xtians. This was also fed by gnosticism, with its two-god system. Early Christianity was a syncretic religion that borrowed its practices and beliefs from the religions around it, just as the Jewish elites had brought back their one-god belief from Babylon before.

    The early Christians rather resembled the Taipings, who were led by Hong Xiu-quan, the Younger Brother of Jesus. James The Brother of Jesus was likely the first visionary, and like the Taipings, Christians were authenticated by a vision of Jesus (hence Paul: “have i not seen Christ?” in his debates with the Jerusalem circle). If you read the actual texts with the filter of Christian apologetics like Kristen appeals to above, you will soon realise that in no early text, including Acts, is James ever treated with the reverence due Jesus’ surviving and most important brother. Indeed, in all his debates with James Paul never has to explain to his audience why he doesn’t accept the authority of Jesus’ brother.

    Once you realize that Jesus was a vision given to the early Christians and later historicized in the struggles between the varios early Xtian groups, much becomes clear. For example, when you look at the early Christian epistles, there is a total lack of reference to Jesus’ alleged life on earth. Paul does not know any gospel stories. Moreover, he never has to discuss Jesus as a real human. In 1 Cor 7 Paul offers a discussion of marriage, but never one refers to Jesus’ marital state! When you consider that Muhammed is normative for muslims or joseph smith for mormons, how come the founder of the faith’s marriage is not normative for Xtians? Similarly in Romans Paul says Xtians should obey the duly constituted authority, without having to apologise for the fact that such authority executed Jesus. Again and again this pattern emerges — Jesus’ life on earth emerges only in the second century and there is much confusion about it.


  5. Nice post, nothing new to us seasoned skeptics but still fun to be reminded of. I agree with Cousin Avi’s comment though, likening it to a Superman vs Flash argument (although at least the creators of that myth are still around and confirmed that the Flash could beat Superman in a race!). I feel arguing about the details of deities is pointless in the absence of proof off existence in the first place. That’s why it fucks me off royally when religionists complain that atheists don’t pay attention to ‘sophisticated’ theology. Well theologise all you want but the real world doesn’t care how many angels can fit on a pinhead 🙂

  6. A load of tripe from a sniping coward – too chickenshit to face the utter dismantling her pathetic references to scripture, in support of scripture, would obtain.
    Anyone who calls names from behind cover, makes accusations without giving opportunity to confront those claims, and relies on the shoddy scribbling of phony “scholars” desperate to prop up their predetermined conclusions…the method speaks for itself and to the character of anyone who would employ such discreditable tactics.
    Of course, this should surprise no one. It is merely standard operating procedure for Christians and a fine example of the arrogance, condescension, unwarranted certainty, and contemptible tactics inherent in those who presume to KNOW the mind of god.
    Nothing more to offer than “The bible is true because it says it’s true.” As if no one else had ever died for their faith. The arrogance is immeasurable; the self-satisfying nature of it all is plain to see for any thinking person not blinded by dogma and a desperate need to feel comforted by imaginary sky wizards.
    Pathetic in all respects and unworthy of attention.

    • Perhaps faith is ultimately ego-driven; belief in oneself and one’s opinions. In that context, religious faith is just faith in oneself via belief in one’s religious opinion. Mine is good because I’m good. Yours is wrong/bad because it’s yours and it isn’t the same as mine.

      The “Mine vs Yours” difference goes a long way in explaining how one can “prove” one’s religious arguments by putting faith in the arguments of one’s own religion and, at the same time, discounting or negating the religion of somebody else as “misguided superstition”, even though both the claims and the evidence for them are very similar.

      Maybe the accusation that Atheism is a religious belief is a subconscious recognition that all religious arguments are ultimately built on that belief belonging to you. I believe it because that’s what I believe.

  7. The simple response to this argument is that these links don’t exist. The websites you posted from and their claims are not known by any scholars, in any peer-reviewed work, or can be found in any sources. It is, well, almost entirely made up. Please look at any serious atheist website on this. Try Richard Carrier for example. Sorry. But part of being free-thinking is to look at our sources, and even ones we WANT to be true.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: