Saint Thomas Aquinas Quiz

[QUOTE="RationalAtheist"]

I agreed. They were completely different accounts of virgin births. 

Android339

Nobody could take the account of Horus' birth and get the account of the Virgin Mary from it. No more than you could take the Virgin Mary from the account of Athena growing out of Zeus' head. Isis wasn't even a virgin, as she had also born other deific gods aside from Horus. Truly, the only way you could even get "virgin" out of the story was the fact that Isis had to put together Osiris' dismembered parts, not having sex with him. Even then, she had to magically create a golden phallus to impregnate herself with, which implies that even if she was a virgin, the golden phallus would have made her, ehh, less so. The focus was definitely not on her being a "virgin".

So, you assume that because of a loose connection (Isis did not have sex with an actual man, but impregnated herself with a golden phallus so that her husband's body parts could be put to good use), that the Virgin Mary MUST have been copied off of Isis? This is an example of believing anything to discredit a religious point of view.

Virgin births are quite rare... When you add this to the other similarities, it does makes comparison with Jesus more compelling. Have you moved away from your "blatently fallacious" argument now?

Yes, Egyptian religions preceded Judaism. You posit a very unlikely scenario: nobody in that time would just look at a picture of Horus and put it in a story without an understanding of what was actually going on. The fact that he would have had to recognize the god as Horus shows that the writer would have had an understanding of the rest of the account. I hardly doubt that Israel, conquered by Rome, would have Egyptian pictures of Horus lying around for people to steal ideas from, and if there were, there are only two scenarios. 1) They understood what it meant, and thus recognized that the 12 people in front of Horus were hours of the day (and, conversely, that there were 12 hours of night as represented by alligators), or 2) they didn't know what it meant, and thus ignored it. Seriously, if you want to make a Christ Myth theory, at least make it logical. Again, you'll have to show a bit more similarity other than the same number.

Android339

There are more than the two scenarios you describe, in that 3, they could have not understood what it meant and made an assumption, like you are.  

It doesn't scream bias when you quote a "huge amount of sources" that just so happen to be amateur Egyptologists like Massey on a forum as presented by Acharya S, a prominent Christ Myth proponent, on a forum and thread dedicated to the propagation of the Christ Myth? The forum is completely one-sided.

Android339

Now your own bias is creeping in. The thread looked at the evidence presented to discredit claims made. I really don't think you've read through it and its associated links well enough.  

 

You said that religious authors could commit the same fallacies as Massey without being ridiculed. I, conversely, showed you an example of a religious author that was ridiculed for fallacious content in his books.

Android339

I never mentioned ridicule. I was talking about objective evidence. I don't think you've established that all of what Massey said (i.e. virgin birth and 12 disciples) was fallacious yet.

[QUOTE="RationalAtheist"]

Virgin births are quite rare... When you add this to the other similarities, it does makes comparison with Jesus more compelling. Have you moved away from your "blatently fallacious" argument now?

Android339

Isis was never referred to as a virgin.

She had Horus without a natural male insemination, according to some legend. If you can't see at least some similarity here to miraculous un-fathered births, perhaps you own bias blinds you to it.

 

The "blatantly fallacious" argument was used for other similarities, such as Anup the Baptizer, although I would still use it in this case, as you seek to believe in anything that would discredit Christianity, no matter the source, as evidenced by your earlier sources of Gerald Massey.

Android339

"Blatently fallacious was used for virgin birth and the disciples. Were you a bit quick to call it there, without doing the research for yourself? This research has nothing to do with Massey. 

I am not making an assumption, as what I am saying is resulting from the statements of even the people in the very forum that you cited. You are positing a ridiculous scenario, which is an assumption in itself. Why would they take a random Egyptian image that they didn't understand, and take "12 apostles of Jesus" from it?

Android339

They didn't do that - you did. I think you mix up the claims and when they were supposed to have happened. It is plain to see 12 men standing in front of Horus. 

 

Except that the claims they "discredited" weren't the claims that I am saying. No, but there were several people in that thread that recognized the 12 people as stars, and the constellations of the hours of the day. Again, if you want to present yourself as not being bondage to bias, then please provide independent sources, as nobody in a forum as promoted by Acharya S and made with the sole intent of discrediting Christianity is going to present the other sides that they can't discredit. Your sources are especially bias-ridden because of the amateur-ish nature of the people provided.

Android339

I didn't read that "knowledge" coming from the thread. I thought it was all speculation, based on actual archaeology. Perhaps the representations in those images were supposed to be stars, but they actually were depicted as people - many times. We have learned much about Egyptology since Massey, but the representations and similarities are still striking. 

Massey did not only speak of the virgin birth and 12 disciples. Anup the Baptizer was completely fictitious, and Massey is universally regarded as having had no significant influence on the field of Egyptology considering his several factual errors most likely due to his complete lack of academic background in the subject.

You said, and I quote, "But all the religious folk can go around doing exactly the same and they can't get found out!"

Ken Ham is like Massey in that his claims are universally disregarded.

1. Horus was not born of a virgin, as I evidenced earlier, but you promptly ignored it. Isis did not have sex to birth Horus, but she 1) had given birth to earlier deific beings and 2) used a golden phallus to impregnate herself.

2. Those 12 people in front of Horus were not disciples. They were hours of the day. This is obvious when you also consider the fact that Horus was associated with the Sun, and that 12 hours of the day would thusly belong to him, and 12 hours of the night would thusly belong to his malignant brother, Set.

Android339

Ken Ham's views are not universally disregarded. Please stop with these silly argument ad populems too! Just because you think he mis-represents Christianity, does not mean others don't lap his religion up (as well evidenced by users and unions here).

There is evidence to show that Horus birth was miraculous and without a natural father. If you want to carry on splitting hairs about this similarity, you can carry on wasting both our time.

What is obvious to you is not obvious to others. I don't think it is obvious that representations or mystical numbers do or don't represent other fictitious people form later dogmas. I do know that what seems obvious now was not 200 years ago, when we knew little about ancient Egyptians. I can't trust what you say about Horus, since you are less qualified than Massey in my eyes. It seems I also can't trust many inaccurate, Christian, biased sites that have sprung up as a response to Zeitgeist. It is better to look for independent archaeological evidence for ones-self.

I do see a similarity, but the similarity is weak and isn't particularly convincing archaeological evidence that one is a result of the other.

I don't think I was a bit quick in calling it blatantly fallacious, as from my own point of view it is blatantly fallacious, but I can now see where other people would think that (given not knowing anything else about the matter), but to me these results are strongly influenced by confirmation bias.

It is plain to see 12 men standing in front of Horus, but the problem I see with this is that we don't even know if they were exposed to this picture in the first place. Not only that, but we would have to assume that they only saw half of the picture, as the other half would have thrown off the interpretation. It is a more likely scenario that the 12 apostles were more influenced by the earlier Jewish importance placed on the number 12, including the the 12 tribes of Israel. Anyway, if they were exposed to this picture, then we come up with two more issues we have to deal with. 1) If they understood the picture, then they would know that the 12 men represented hours of the day, as the other 12 alligators represented hours of the night. This makes sense because Horus represents the sun and Set, the night. Or 2) They didn't understand it, and if they did, then why did they use it? Is it more likely that the Jewish authors of the New Testament were more influenced by the Jewish 12 theme that they were all familiar with, or the Egyptian 12 theme that we don't even know they were exposed to?

It was speculation, but the opinion as stated by I believe the person who would be the most knowledgeable on the subject, the Museum Curator, recognized it as the hours of the day, and other people in the forum confirmed it as well.

I am not saying that Ken Ham is universally disregarded like Massey in that nobody believes him. Just that he is not taken seriously in the academic field he publishes in, like Massey. Of course people believe him, as I believe that people are more comfortable clinging to an educated man's views they agree with, but that goes for people of all beliefs, or lack of belief.

Horus' birth was weird, that is correct, but Isis was never referred to as a virgin. She was, in fact, a goddess, and had given birth to other deific children. I'm not so much splitting hairs as it seems you are clinging to this one similarity that is hardly significant in that it requires emphasizing something that wasn't really meant to be emphasized. Indeed, for the New Testament authors to get the idea of "virgin mother of God" from Isis would require some real overthinking. Indeed, the theory by skeptics that most people accept isn't this highly questionable one, but that the authors of the New Testament mistranslated the prophecy in Isaiah that said the Savior would be born of a young woman, which could also be translated virgin. This is a more acceptable scenario.

Christians are not the only ones who believe that Zeitgeist is bunk. Domatron23 has also expressed his disdain for this video of conspiracy theories. It is best to look at independent sources for archaeological evidence, but that goes for you, as well. Perhaps I, a Freshman at IU, is less qualified than Massey, but the 20 leading archaeologists who denounced Massey's work (along with the rest of the Egyptological academic field) are more qualified than Massey. They both share a degree of bias, but if you want to discount one person's work because of bias, that requires that you do it on the other person as well.

Android339

I didn't use an argument ad-populem. I used the argument that some (not even many, more, or most) people believe Ken to disprove your assertion that he was "universally ridiculed".

I don't rate Massey either. I know I've said this many times, but you do keep going on about it. My evidence that supports assertions about virgin births and 12 followers comes independently of him, on further research. I do get what the Egyptians representation could have meant, honestly. You make assumptions about what people chose to include in the bible thousands of years ago. Don't you think at least some of it was legend and folk-lore?

Perhaps I was unclear in my wording, but I did not mean to say that nobody believes him. I mean to say that he is largely unaccepted by the academic community in the field of which he has published.

Android339

Are you saying there are fewer American creationists than evolutionists? I think I have stats that contradict that. 

Well, like what? The similarities as you have presented them are vague and clinging to them represents a confirmation bias, but if you can prove that the New Testament authors actually copied this one bit, or at least show how this copying is more logical than what I have presented, then it's clear that the similarities are coincidences.

Android339

You picked out three that were supposed to be untrue, while there are other similarities between the stories of Horus and Jesus besides those three. If you say that there are no similarities, does that mean you have rejection bias? I don't think it is clear that these things are coincidences at all. Your view may (and must, because of your faith) differ. Your refusal to entertain the thought of inherited tradition infers a greater assumption than the thought that the Christ myth (just like many other Christian institutions) is possibly borrowed from prior faiths.

I'm not sure why you bring that up. How does it relate to what we are talking about? Even if it was legend and folklore, it is clear that it is more logical that the New Testament authors drew from the Old Testament their numbers, including the gratuitous use of the number 7, than it is to believe that they took their numbers from ancient Egypt.

Android339

It may be hard for you to believe, but I see the picture for what it looks like. What about the authors of the Old Testament? Could they have got their inspiration from the Egyptians?

I said nothing of the sort. I said that he is largely unaccepted by the academic community in the field of which he has published. I would appreciate it if you would stop imagining things and applying them to me. I don't know if this is some psychological game you play with yourself, or what, but I would not like to participate.Android339

I told you I had no idea who he is. I also have no idea what academic community you refer to when you talk about the field he published in". So I ASKED you what you meant - so I could understand your meaning. I wanted to know what you meant by unaccepted. I think you protest becuase you can't back up your Ken-hate with any facts.

I did not say there are no similarities. I said that the similarities which you claim are significant are, in reality, of no importance, as they don't show at all that one was copied from the other. It is pretty clear that these are coincidences, as it should be apparent to anyone that Jewish New Testament authors would first be influenced by the teachings by which they were raised. Namely, Jewish teachings, which also hold the number 12 to be symbolic (12 tribes of Israel). In fact, your insistence on saying that because there are two things with the same number it proves that one was copied off of another is a ****c example of confirmation bias. Specifically, a biased search for information. What is more likely? Jews being influenced by Jewish teachings, or Jews being influenced by Egyptian teachings?Android339

If they are of no importance to you, then fair enough. Others can see similarities even if you blind yourself to them. I am not saying anything certain here as you suggest I am, but I am seeing similarities between faiths. I'd expect the Jewish faith to have grown out of previous folk law from around the area - that sounds far more likely.

know you see the picture for what it looks like, but that, well, proves nothing. And I don't think they got their inspiration from the Egyptians, but considering there were many Old Testament authors who decried the idea of incorporating pagan beliefs, some may have slipped in. I would ask for some evidence before I believe a baseless assertion, however.Android339

If the assertion is baseless, then there is no evidence to support it. But the evidence that supports Horus and Jesus having similar stories (just like Jesus and other religions) is there, as you've seen. 
 

The academic community as a whole. There are more American scientists of Biology who believe in evolution than believe in creation, even if a majority of Americans believe in creationism.

Android339

Sure there are, but biological scientists represent a miniscule percentage of the total population of the USA. They certainly are not his intended audience, as you might be suggesting. I maintain that this sword does not cut both ways. St Tomas Aquinas had a silly miracle, Ken can say some crazy stuff and no-one can fault them because their arguments are not evidentially based, like scientific ones. 

 

I see the similarities, but the scenario you present is simply not as logical as the one I have presented. That is to say, the New Testament authors would be more influenced by the teachings of the Jews by which they were raised than by the teachings of the Egyptians of which they would be unfamiliar. It is thus more logical to assume (as in cases of history we must always make some assumptions) that their use of the number 12 is taken from their Jewish teachings, and not foreign Egyptian ones.

Android339

What scenario are you suggesting? - I didn't think I made one. I think there could have been many scenarios, but you don't seem to think there could have been any. I'd say its more logical to retain possibilities than reject them all for no good reason.

The evidence shows that the stories of Jesus was influenced primarily by the teachings of the Jews, and while there are certain similarities, this is not particularly convincing evidence that such Egyptian influence trumped Jewish evidence. Given the evidence, we only see that there are similarities, but none of which logically leads to the assumption that one was copied from the other.

Android339

What evidence is this? I think there is plenty of evidence that shows similarities between Jesus myths and many other faiths. I see your certainty that there was no transfer as jumping to a conclusion without reviewing all the available evidence.

[QUOTE="RationalAtheist"]

Sure there are, but biological scientists represent a miniscule percentage of the total population of the USA. They certainly are not his intended audience, as you might be suggesting. I maintain that this sword does not cut both ways. St Tomas Aquinas had a silly miracle, Ken can say some crazy stuff and no-one can fault them because their arguments are not evidentially based, like scientific ones. 

Android339

I meant the perspective of the academic community, not the total population, so there we are at a misunderstanding of one another. People can fault Ken Ham because of his faulty science (he once stated that a light year does not mean that the light has taken a year to get to us, just that "it's really far away"), no matter what their background. People accept Massey as well, without thinking, just as they do Ham, and that is all I am asserting.

Are you including religious academia in your community? People can fault the bible because of its faulty science, but that does not stop people believing faiths. People would soon stop believing Massey if you could provide superior evidence that showed his was not good. Science is not all about the "people", like religion is. Science is about discoveries. 

I am not rejecting the possibilities for no good reason. I am rejecting them because there is a more logical scenario, and that is that the New Testament authors (on the position that it was made up), wrote of the 12 apostles due to the influence of Jewish teachings, and not foreign Egyptian teachings. This seems the most logical to me, in any case.

Android339

I think you've applied your own sort of logic to that huge assumption you made, seemingly on the basis of this little piece of evidence and while disregarding all the other evidence from Egyptian and Arabian archaeology too. Surely you could only reach such a definite conclusion once you've exhausted all the available historical data (an increasingly huge amount) and discounted all other possibilities.

The fact that there are 12 tribes of Israel in the Old Testament, and other Jewish uses of the number 12, presents a stronger link than 12 hours of the day in front of Horus in Egypt. It seems to me that the similarity which is strongest is between the 12 apostles and the 12 tribes of Israel in Judaism. How is taking it from Egypt more logical than taking it from native Jewish teachings?

Android339

Where did those Israeli twelves come from? Didn't the Egyptians invent the 12 hour day? If you are willing to accept the disciples were made up based on figures from the old testament, why not also on other myths from old religions?